Introducing ACA 1221 Low Cost Accelerator At AmigaKit.com

[roy bates]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

i really don't understand what all the fuss is about... hardware manufacturers have been doing this sort of thing since forever. AMD, Intel &c all do it, it's called "product binning". When they introduce a new line of CPUs, they haven't designed and made different ones to run at different speeds. They produce loads all the same and then see how fast they will go, because manufacturing is always a bit unpredictable and sometimes chips have faults. Sometimes features that don't work properly are disabled. AMD's triple core CPUs were really quad-cores with one of the cores disabled. Sometimes it hasn't anything to do with the manufacturing, sometimes they just sell fast chips as slow ones, or perfectly functional quad cores as triple cores, just to fill the demand for parts in that performance bracket and hence maximise their sales. They know that there are people who will pay silly prices for the fastest thing there is, and that there are people who are happy with a budget PC.

Sometimes you can identify the good overclockers by batch number, because a batch of fast CPUs has been sold as slow CPUs for essentially no technical reason. You can also get motherboards with "core unlocker" functionality in the BIOS, so if you have a triple-core CPU you can get a fourth core "for free" if you're lucky.

There's nothing mysterious or new in any of this. And the idea that it is terrible to buy something "crippled" is quite irrational... you pay how much you think it's worth to get something that does so much. Why does it make any difference if there's some extra silicon on the board or not? It's not sitting there bad-mouthing you behind your back.

because ,it doesn't do that much more spec wise?
basically paying to enable extra memory thats already there for you,is irrational?
because its there and not "doing"anything that it should out the box

who is going to overclock a low spec 020 card?

i dont really see what your trying justify here.

its like saying you bought a car that can have four wheels,but you only get the fourth one if you pay extra to drive it away?

do you still think buying something crippled is irrational?

[Mrs Beanbag]

loaded language like "crippled" isn't going to convince me of anything... you pay for what you think the functionality is worth. what is physically there is of no importance at all. it's only what it DOES that matters.

it's not irrational. it is perfectly standard practice throughout the whole of the technology industry and has been since forever. (in fact it is not just the technology industry, but because you can't "see" what the hardware can do they have a lot more freedom to do it.)

If you think €57 is a fair price for 16MHz and 9Mb, then pay that much and get that much. If you think €107 is a fair price for 28MHz and 63Mb, then pay that much and get that much. It's as simple as that.

It especially makes sense because the actual components cost pennies compared to the R&D and the tooling. The one-off costs dwarf the per-unit costs for small runs of anything, so it becomes even more important that you maximise volume.

[MrFluffy]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

i really don't understand what all the fuss is about... hardware manufacturers have been doing this sort of thing since forever. AMD, Intel &c all do it, it's called "product binning". When they introduce a new line of CPUs, they haven't designed and made different ones to run at different speeds. They produce loads all the same and then see how fast they will go, because manufacturing is always a bit unpredictable and sometimes chips have faults.

Thats not the same case here though is it? With o/c in general knowing you may or may not be lucky with no guarantees its going on. Parts binning is production tolerances and some of the batch sample tests being out of spec for the higher grade stuff, and its a game of chance if the more out of spec parts will perform to the faster spec and you pays your money and takes your chances. You can't return that silicon because it failed to perform faster or with more cores than the manufacturer guarantees, your taking a chance and owning the risks if it doesnt work trading off the risk against cost savings for living on the edge a little. For their part, the manufacturer gets to backfill production demand of the lower spec by slipping in the faster surplus units at no extra real risk to themselves, and saves having rupture of stock and lost sales.

In this case, the sillicon is known to have the extra capability onboard already in advance. So it is known crippled by the locking firmware or you would have to perform hardware changes to upgrade.

If your ok with that philisophically then fine, but maybe its why people are making a fuss about it.

[roy bates]

Originally Posted by eXeler0

@roy_bates
Is this really something worth getting upset with? Frankly, I dont see the problem.
First of all, Jens said its an "experimental feature", this unlock thing. If it works well. he will use it in future products, if not well, then this may be the first and the last card with that feature.

You are saying that why not sell the damn thing fully unlocked for €40 more.. well by doing that, he is removing choice for some ppl. Why would that be better than having the option to buy something affordable and unlock at a later date (like when they have €40 lying around or something)?
And the way I see it, its fully possible for a retailer to sell a "unlocked" edition for the €40 more where they already put the unlock code in for you.

Personally, I totally get why Jens is doing this, I dont always agree with how he does things (Amiga reloaded, anyone? :-) ), but this one seems like a concept worth testing and I see no real reason to complain.

im not getting upset.

if they had forty euros lying around they can afford to buy it full on,cant they?

its an opinion,silence can be taken as acceptance....as in,saying nothing.
and if its accepted then whats next,unlockable motherboards thats crippled in some way for retro computers? hmm.
feeling the way for what i wonder? for a bit of extra cash...when its already there...
like,or dont like...its a crappy idea but if you like it fair enough.
i dont live in a world of likes alone ,like facebook,so here i am in an open forum.
expressing my opinion.

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by MrFluffy

Thats not the same case here though is it? ... its a game of chance if the more out of spec parts will perform to the faster spec and you pays your money and takes your chances. ... In this case, the sillicon is known to have the extra capability onboard already in advance.

If your ok with that philisophically then fine, but maybe its why people are making a fuss about it.

Yep, i'm perfectly fine with paying my money and NOT taking any chances. This, to me, like buying a known good overclocker (which you can sometimes tell from batch numbers)

@roy_bates: don't buy it if you don't think the price is fair for what you get. simple as that. personally i'm happy for any marketing strategy that gets the per-unit cost as low as possible.

[Schoenfeld]

Originally Posted by ovale

The unlock code entitle you to a replacement in case it should not work on your card.
Is it correct?

Not entirely. The license code allows you to use the feature "forever". Should it turn out to be instable, the warranty extends to the license only: You get a return code, the card "answers" with a confirmation code, and once I have that, I can give you your money back. This is the "safeguard", in case your ten trial runs of unlimited time were not used properly for testing (that's "ten times power-up", and while the unit has power, it'll run at all speeds you want it to).

Originally Posted by modrobert

IMHO, the reason this type of licensing is a bad idea for ACA-1221 is because I want Jens to get paid for his work, rather than having some 'keygen' appear in the near future. At the same time it would be great fun to try and code such a tool...see my point?

...so if you successfully hack it, you'll contact me instead of publishing everything you've found? That would be true hacker ethics!

Originally Posted by roy bates

i dont need the after sales gloss rubbish for something thats already there,just crippled so i cant use it unless i pay more for the privilege.

This train of thoughts seems pretty similar to hopping on a bus and refusing to pay, because it's driving my direction anyway. Try to explain that to the person that wants to see your ticket...

Originally Posted by ovale

So the savings comes from standardization, less testing, ability to use 2nd choice memory. Then it is just a game of probablity and product placement.

This is plain wrong. Memory is fully tested and guaranteed. It's just the CPUs that are rated 16.67MHz, so they *may* not work at higher speeds. Memory is brand new. The refund system also works on memory, but that's just for completeness. It is not a requirement.

Originally Posted by Arnie

Would it make a cheaper upgrade for ACA500 owners?

Yes, that's why I started to design the ACA1221.

Originally Posted by Paul_s

Something I was wondering... what happens if the end user has paid the 40 euros to unlock the card... you then decide to add the RTC option... the RTC option then detects Jen's birthday and it disables the card asking you to pay another 40 euros (i.e. subscription!?)

That would be plain illegal. Besides, the CPLDs and the EEPROM don't know about the current time and date. No matter how hard I'd try, there is no way to get this information into the part of the design that checks licenses.

Jens

[roy bates]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

loaded language like "crippled" isn't going to convince me of anything... you pay for what you think the functionality is worth. what is physically there is of no importance at all. it's only what it DOES that matters.

it's not irrational. it is perfectly standard practice throughout the whole of the technology industry and has been since forever. (in fact it is not just the technology industry, but because you can't "see" what the hardware can do they have a lot more freedom to do it.)

If you think €57 is a fair price for 16MHz and 9Mb, then pay that much and get that much. If you think €107 is a fair price for 28MHz and 63Mb, then pay that much and get that much. It's as simple as that.

It especially makes sense because the actual components cost pennies compared to the R&D and the tooling. The one-off costs dwarf the per-unit costs for small runs of anything, so it becomes even more important that you maximise volume.

what is there is important,you pay for what is there...are you blind?
if its already there and you paid £57 for it what do you think its worth
and if its already there,why would it be worth more?

i think you get my point...that wasnt a very good argument that you came up with really was it?

no,its not standard practice...

[roy bates]

"This train of thoughts seems pretty similar to hopping on a bus and refusing to pay, because it's driving my direction anyway. Try to explain that to the person that wants to see your ticket..."

erm,what?

i pay for a ticket to get to the destination whatever that may be...not part way to be kicked off by the fat controller" after seeing the ticket i paid for in advance"?

whats your point?

sorry,i dont come here for riddles.and it wont make me like the idea any better

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by roy bates

what is there is important,you pay for what is there...are you blind?
if its already there and you paid £57 for it what do you think its worth
and if its already there,why would it be worth more?

yes, indeed, and my hard drive is also already there. so i should not have to pay anything to get software to put on it? so that i can actually USE my computer?

no.. it is perfectly reasonable to buy a computer without software, and then pay more later to buy software so you can do things with your computer that you couldn't do before. because someone has spent time and effort developing the software.

you seem to be stuck in some bizarre mindset where physical objects have some inherent value based on their potential, rather than their actual functionality.

so maybe i should buy a block of marble and demand that an artist carve a statue out of it, and i won't pay him any more because the statue was already there inside it.

[Schoenfeld]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

so maybe i should buy a block of marble and demand that an artist carve a statue out of it, and i won't pay him any more because the statue was already there inside it.

*far* better explanation than my bus ticket example. Thanks for that.

Jens

[MrFluffy]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

so maybe i should buy a block of marble and demand that an artist carve a statue out of it, and i won't pay him any more because the statue was already there inside it.

Bad analogy. Its like buying a statue a artist has carved, but its been encased in resin for all but one part, so you know theres something inside there already and know its already been carved out but having to go buy the liquid to disolve the resin to be able to see it completely.

Better now?

[modrobert]

Originally Posted by Schoenfeld

...so if you successfully hack it, you'll contact me instead of publishing everything you've found? That would be true hacker ethics!

No, that would be blackmail, even if it were never meant as such.

How about selling a full version of ACA-1221 which doesn't require any license handling at all at the highest price, just flash it without license code during production, and in parallel you sell the low price version with license handling.

I think the online retailers can deal with two versions of ACA-1221 in their systems, and both sides of this argument gets what they want.

[roy bates]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

yes, indeed, and my hard drive is also already there. so i should not have to pay anything to get software to put on it? so that i can actually USE my computer?

no.. it is perfectly reasonable to buy a computer without software, and then pay more later to buy software so you can do things with your computer that you couldn't do before. because someone has spent time and effort developing the software.

you seem to be stuck in some bizarre mindset where physical objects have some inherent value based on their potential, rather than their actual functionality.

so maybe i should buy a block of marble and demand that an artist carve a statue out of it, and i won't pay him any more because the statue was already there inside it.

more riddles?

i buy software all the time..its just not crippled before i put ON my hard-drive..nor do i pay for someone else to put it there.

understand now?
i know its there,so its function is to work...to be disabled and enabled for a price is a no no.

its up to you if you if buy a marble block isnt it?

like its up to me if i buy this card,which,is what we are talking about,isnt it?
and no,its NOT bizarre to expect hardware thats already there to be enabled...your bizarre mate if you dont.
and no again,there value means nothing,but since it already has price tag on it with value not set by me,how much do you think its worth...thats what im saying.

i couldnt care less if the card was another 40 euros to enable it all,the point was why not just add the extra 40 and be done with it in the first place?instead of twiddling the thumbs together thinking about what its worth to enable it?
then finding out how many had it done for future refrence for future hardware...as a test feeler?
the fact it already has a price tag,usually means thats what the person was happy to sell it for? or did i just miss something?

you might not of read that part though.

yes,its choice...
and i dont come here that often,so,i made the choice to comment and to not like the idea.

[MrFluffy]

Originally Posted by modrobert

No, that would be blackmail, even if it were never meant as such.

How about selling a full version of ACA-1221 which doesn't require any license handling at all at the highest price, just flash it without license code during production, and in parallel you sell the low price version with license handling.

I think the online retailers can deal with two versions of ACA-1221 in their systems, and both sides of this argument gets what they want.

Even better, give it two distinct model codes, so we can see in years to come which version we'll be buying secondhand when the drm systems have been shut down to enable the extra bits, and people can decide if they want to buy the crippled version or the full one, and the second hand values can reflect this properly.

[Predseda]

Jens, if I install basic ACA1221 (unlocked) to A1200, how much the system will be improved? I will get 9MB of Fastmem, beside this is there any other advantage to plain unexpanded A1200? I mean difference of EC020 vs 020 etc. If I do not want to use additional clockports, RTCs, unlock ACA in the future and so on, just what is the power difference between A1200 and A1200 equipped with ACA1221?

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by MrFluffy

Bad analogy. Its like buying a statue a artist has carved, but its been encased in resin for all but one part, so you know theres something inside there already and know its already been carved out but having to go buy the liquid to disolve the resin to be able to see it completely.

Better now?

Pretty sure there already exists this sort of thing in the Tate Modern... and if not, it is a brilliant idea!

Originally Posted by roy bates

i couldnt care less if the card was another 40 euros to enable it all,the point was why not just add the extra 40 and be done with it in the first place?instead of twiddling the thumbs together thinking about what its worth to enable it?

Because then fewer people would want to buy it, which means fewer units would be sold, which means the cost per unit would be higher. Because there are up-front costs as well as per-unit costs.

Ok let's put the riddles aside and make it straightforward.

You are saying you don't want to pay £57 for something that has £57 worth of functionality because it could be worth £90 instead and you wouldn't mind paying that much for £90 worth of functionality. Even though you will actually be able to do that.

[Thorham]

I don't like those unlock features because software can permanently change how hardware works. What if something goes wrong?

[wmsteele]

Another 'wonderful' piece of Amiga hardware, wont be sampling any of the upgrade delights that come with this.

Have already fallen fowl to iComp beta hardware ... finished IndivisionAGA Mrk2 firmware anyone (I've been waiting so long now I actually don't care anymore)... what about a fix for the RapidRoad driver lockups (yip I did buy another one after the fiasco with the first, more fool me), crippled ACA500 with its 2mb memory, we did try and tell you.

Oh and lets not forget the Apollo design purchase, thanks so much for saving us and 'shelving the world's worst Amiga products' (YOUR OWN WORDS), you've made some real stinkers yourself.

[Amiga1992]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

Because then fewer people would want to buy it, which means fewer units would be sold, which means the cost per unit would be higher.

This is the assumption I don't agree with. The lower price doesn't necessarily mean more people will buy it, since the "bare bones" model is so basic.

[Retrofan]

Originally Posted by Thorham

I don't like those unlock features because software can permanently change how hardware works. What if something goes wrong?

Warranty?