In article <5f9e831e-95a6-4fd6-bfd6-3703de254c17n@googlegroups.com>,
RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:

> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208

first of all, the 'subscription insanity' was not started by photoshop.

second, what people don't realize is you only need to subscribe for a
couple of months in the winter.

nobody needs heated seats the rest of the year, especially in the hot
summer months.

On 2022-07-18, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <5f9e831e-95a6-4fd6-bfd6-3703de254c17n@googlegroups.com>,
> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
>
> first of all, the 'subscription insanity' was not started by photoshop.
>
> second, what people don't realize is you only need to subscribe for a
> couple of months in the winter.
>
> nobody needs heated seats the rest of the year, especially in the hot
> summer months.

It seems insane to me that people would need to pay to use a feature
that they have already bought.

In article <slrntdat0l.drn.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
<u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
> >
> > first of all, the 'subscription insanity' was not started by photoshop.
> >
> > second, what people don't realize is you only need to subscribe for a
> > couple of months in the winter.
> >
> > nobody needs heated seats the rest of the year, especially in the hot
> > summer months.
>
> It seems insane to me that people would need to pay to use a feature
> that they have already bought.

i expect bmw to backtrack on it, just like they did with apple carplay.

On 2022-07-18, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrntdat0l.drn.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
><u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
>> >
>> > first of all, the 'subscription insanity' was not started by photoshop.
>> >
>> > second, what people don't realize is you only need to subscribe for a
>> > couple of months in the winter.
>> >
>> > nobody needs heated seats the rest of the year, especially in the hot
>> > summer months.
>>
>> It seems insane to me that people would need to pay to use a feature
>> that they have already bought.
>
> i expect bmw to backtrack on it, just like they did with apple carplay.

It reminds me of the DivX fiasco.

In article <slrntdavcp.hf9.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
<u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> >> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
> >> >
> >> > first of all, the 'subscription insanity' was not started by photoshop.
> >> >
> >> > second, what people don't realize is you only need to subscribe for a
> >> > couple of months in the winter.
> >> >
> >> > nobody needs heated seats the rest of the year, especially in the hot
> >> > summer months.
> >>
> >> It seems insane to me that people would need to pay to use a feature
> >> that they have already bought.
> >
> > i expect bmw to backtrack on it, just like they did with apple carplay.
>
> It reminds me of the DivX fiasco.

that was a self-destructing disc, a very different concept.

Am 18.07.2022 um 16:54 schrieb Incubus:
> On 2022-07-18, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <5f9e831e-95a6-4fd6-bfd6-3703de254c17n@googlegroups.com>,
>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
>>
>> first of all, the 'subscription insanity' was not started by photoshop.
>>
>> second, what people don't realize is you only need to subscribe for a
>> couple of months in the winter.
>>
>> nobody needs heated seats the rest of the year, especially in the hot
>> summer months.
>
> It seems insane to me that people would need to pay to use a feature
> that they have already bought.

I wouldn't mind paying less for a camera, if the manufacturer disabled
features I don't need.

For instance, the new OM-1 comes with a great bird recognition AF, which
however I don't need. If the camera cost 200-300 Euro less with this
bird AF disabled, it would be great (for me).
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article <NogBK.612892$83a5.19304@fx05.ams1>, Alfred Molon
<alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> I wouldn't mind paying less for a camera, if the manufacturer disabled
> features I don't need.

many companies do that, not just camera makers.

the original canon rebel was essentially a 10d with various features
disabled in firmware and sold for a cheaper price. there were hacks to
flash it to enable them.

long ago, there was a cd-rom burner that had two versions, one a little
faster and more expensive than the other. it turned out that the
hardware was identical for both, with the only difference being
firmware. some people bought the cheaper model and flashed it.

sometimes it's done in hardware. a lot of products have the same logic
board, but the various buttons and switches found on the higher end
models are omitted on the lower end models. some people have upgraded
their devices by soldering the necessary buttons and switches and
drilling holes in the case, although it doesn't look quite as nice.

On 19/07/2022 2:41 am, nospam wrote:
> In article <5f9e831e-95a6-4fd6-bfd6-3703de254c17n@googlegroups.com>,
> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
>
> first of all, the 'subscription insanity' was not started by photoshop.
>
> second, what people don't realize is you only need to subscribe for a
> couple of months in the winter.
>
> nobody needs heated seats the rest of the year, especially in the hot
> summer months.

And maybe they only need to subscribe to windscreen-wipers when it's
raining. Or the horn when somebody is obstructing the roadway ....

geoff

On 19/07/2022 5:04 am, Alfred Molon wrote:
> Am 18.07.2022 um 16:54 schrieb Incubus:
>> On 2022-07-18, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> In article <5f9e831e-95a6-4fd6-bfd6-3703de254c17n@googlegroups.com>,
>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
>>>
>>> first of all, the 'subscription insanity' was not started by photoshop.
>>>
>>> second, what people don't realize is you only need to subscribe for a
>>> couple of months in the winter.
>>>
>>> nobody needs heated seats the rest of the year, especially in the hot
>>> summer months.
>>
>> It seems insane to me that people would need to pay to use a feature
>> that they have already bought.
>
> I wouldn't mind paying less for a camera, if the manufacturer disabled
> features I don't need.
>
> For instance, the new OM-1 comes with a great bird recognition AF, which
> however I don't need. If the camera cost 200-300 Euro less with this
> bird AF disabled, it would be great (for me).

The camera wouldn't have cost them any less to design/build/distribute,
so what would that say about their business/profit model ?

geoff

In article <ecCdnTqylOzDVUj_nZ2dnUU7-bGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, geoff
<geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> And maybe they only need to subscribe to windscreen-wipers when it's
> raining.

exactly. why should someone who lives in the desert pay for something
they'll never use? those who live in wet climates can pay extra.

> Or the horn when somebody is obstructing the roadway ....

yep. why should someone who lives in a rural area, where there may not
be another vehicle for miles, pay for something they'll never use? on
the other hand, the stereotypical new york city driver would get their
money's worth, unless it's billed per use.

On Jul 18, 2022, nospam wrote
(in article<180720221729058965%nospam@nospam.invalid>):

> In article<ecCdnTqylOzDVUj_nZ2dnUU7-bGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, geoff
> <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
>
> > And maybe they only need to subscribe to windscreen-wipers when it's
> > raining.
>
> exactly. why should someone who lives in the desert pay for something
> they'll never use? those who live in wet climates can pay extra.
>
> > Or the horn when somebody is obstructing the roadway ....
>
> yep. why should someone who lives in a rural area, where there may not
> be another vehicle for miles, pay for something they'll never use? on
> the other hand, the stereotypical new york city driver would get their
> money's worth, unless it's billed per use.

I wish I could subscribe to my car’s engine. Most cars spend a lot of time
parked in the garage.

In article <0001HW.2886204903E7703630F4E138F@news-us.newsgroup.ninja>,
Bill W <nothing@nowhere.com> wrote:

> >
> > > And maybe they only need to subscribe to windscreen-wipers when it's
> > > raining.
> >
> > exactly. why should someone who lives in the desert pay for something
> > they'll never use? those who live in wet climates can pay extra.
> >
> > > Or the horn when somebody is obstructing the roadway ....
> >
> > yep. why should someone who lives in a rural area, where there may not
> > be another vehicle for miles, pay for something they'll never use? on
> > the other hand, the stereotypical new york city driver would get their
> > money's worth, unless it's billed per use.
>
> I wish I could subscribe to my car¹s engine. Most cars spend a lot of time
> parked in the garage.

that's why car makers switched to electronic fuel pumps and fuel
injection. it was a long term strategy.

mechanical fuel pumps and carburetors could not support such a plan.

On Monday, 18 July 2022 at 18:58:22 UTC+1, nospam wrote:
> In article <NogBK.612892$83a5....@fx05.ams1>, Alfred Molon
> <alfred...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I wouldn't mind paying less for a camera, if the manufacturer disabled
> > features I don't need.
> many companies do that, not just camera makers.
>
> the original canon rebel was essentially a 10d with various features
> disabled in firmware and sold for a cheaper price. there were hacks to
> flash it to enable them.
>
> long ago, there was a cd-rom burner that had two versions, one a little
> faster and more expensive than the other. it turned out that the
> hardware was identical for both, with the only difference being
> firmware. some people bought the cheaper model and flashed it.
>
> sometimes it's done in hardware. a lot of products have the same logic
> board, but the various buttons and switches found on the higher end
> models are omitted on the lower end models. some people have upgraded
> their devices by soldering the necessary buttons and switches and
> drilling holes in the case, although it doesn't look quite as nice.

We have that with our oscilloscopes, all the hardware is there, but if you want the function generator
enabled it's £300 and they send you a small file that you download to a SD card insert it and upload the code and it enables the function generator.
Also upgraded a network anaylizer to more functions that cost nearly £3000 again just a file to enable the extra functions.

On 19/07/2022 9:29 am, nospam wrote:
> In article <ecCdnTqylOzDVUj_nZ2dnUU7-bGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, geoff
> <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
>
>> And maybe they only need to subscribe to windscreen-wipers when it's
>> raining.
>
> exactly. why should someone who lives in the desert pay for something
> they'll never use? those who live in wet climates can pay extra.
>
>> Or the horn when somebody is obstructing the roadway ....
>
> yep. why should someone who lives in a rural area, where there may not
> be another vehicle for miles, pay for something they'll never use? on
> the other hand, the stereotypical new york city driver would get their
> money's worth, unless it's billed per use.

Long straight roads. Steering wheel only occasionally required.

geoff

Am 18.07.2022 um 22:56 schrieb geoff:
> On 19/07/2022 5:04 am, Alfred Molon wrote:
>> Am 18.07.2022 um 16:54 schrieb Incubus:
>>> On 2022-07-18, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>> In article <5f9e831e-95a6-4fd6-bfd6-3703de254c17n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
>>>>
>>>> first of all, the 'subscription insanity' was not started by photoshop.
>>>>
>>>> second, what people don't realize is you only need to subscribe for a
>>>> couple of months in the winter.
>>>>
>>>> nobody needs heated seats the rest of the year, especially in the hot
>>>> summer months.
>>>
>>> It seems insane to me that people would need to pay to use a feature
>>> that they have already bought.
>>
>> I wouldn't mind paying less for a camera, if the manufacturer disabled
>> features I don't need.
>>
>> For instance, the new OM-1 comes with a great bird recognition AF,
>> which however I don't need. If the camera cost 200-300 Euro less with
>> this bird AF disabled, it would be great (for me).
>
> The camera wouldn't have cost them any less to design/build/distribute,
> so what would that say about their business/profit model ?

Things are not always priced according to cost. Sometimes they are
priced according to customer perceived value. For instance two flights
to reach a destination together are often cheaper than a direct flight.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On 2022-07-18, Alfred Molon <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Am 18.07.2022 um 16:54 schrieb Incubus:
>> On 2022-07-18, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>> In article <5f9e831e-95a6-4fd6-bfd6-3703de254c17n@googlegroups.com>,
>>> RichA <rander3128@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
>>>
>>> first of all, the 'subscription insanity' was not started by photoshop.
>>>
>>> second, what people don't realize is you only need to subscribe for a
>>> couple of months in the winter.
>>>
>>> nobody needs heated seats the rest of the year, especially in the hot
>>> summer months.
>>
>> It seems insane to me that people would need to pay to use a feature
>> that they have already bought.
>
> I wouldn't mind paying less for a camera, if the manufacturer disabled
> features I don't need.

That would create a market for third party (read: "hacked") firmware.

> For instance, the new OM-1 comes with a great bird recognition AF, which
> however I don't need. If the camera cost 200-300 Euro less with this
> bird AF disabled, it would be great (for me).

Realistically, it doesn't affect the cost of manufacture and in the
camera market, the more features you can throw at the consumer the
better.

On 2022-07-19, geoff <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
> On 19/07/2022 9:29 am, nospam wrote:
>> In article <ecCdnTqylOzDVUj_nZ2dnUU7-bGdnZ2d@giganews.com>, geoff
>> <geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
>>
>>> And maybe they only need to subscribe to windscreen-wipers when it's
>>> raining.
>>
>> exactly. why should someone who lives in the desert pay for something
>> they'll never use? those who live in wet climates can pay extra.
>>
>>> Or the horn when somebody is obstructing the roadway ....
>>
>> yep. why should someone who lives in a rural area, where there may not
>> be another vehicle for miles, pay for something they'll never use? on
>> the other hand, the stereotypical new york city driver would get their
>> money's worth, unless it's billed per use.
>
> Long straight roads. Steering wheel only occasionally required.

You've just described the Dodge Charger.

In article <m%sBK.419903$70_9.131138@fx10.ams1>, Alfred Molon
<alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Things are not always priced according to cost. Sometimes they are
> priced according to customer perceived value.

perceived value is normally how something is priced.

> For instance two flights
> to reach a destination together are often cheaper than a direct flight.

airline pricing is extremely complex. there is no single price for a
given flight, and you mean non-stop. a direct flight means there can be
a stop but you don't switch planes.

In article <slrntdd1ec.77e.u9536612@localhost.localdomain>, Incubus
<u9536612@gmail.com> wrote:

> > I wouldn't mind paying less for a camera, if the manufacturer disabled
> > features I don't need.
>
> That would create a market for third party (read: "hacked") firmware.

it did when canon did it.

there's also a huge market for third party firmware in various network
routers.

Am 19.07.2022 um 12:22 schrieb Incubus:
>> I wouldn't mind paying less for a camera, if the manufacturer disabled
>> features I don't need.
> That would create a market for third party (read: "hacked") firmware.

It would be some activation code uniquely tied to the serial number of
the camera being activated.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus 4/3 and micro 4/3 cameras forum at
https://groups.io/g/myolympus
https://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article <R6BBK.571902$i8Z9.35156@fx09.ams1>, Alfred Molon
<alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >> I wouldn't mind paying less for a camera, if the manufacturer disabled
> >> features I don't need.
> > That would create a market for third party (read: "hacked") firmware.
>
> It would be some activation code uniquely tied to the serial number of
> the camera being activated.

in the past, it's been a hacked firmware that replaces the existing
firmware.

On Tuesday, 19 July 2022 at 11:52:57 UTC+1, nospam wrote:
> In article <m%sBK.419903$70_9....@fx10.ams1>, Alfred Molon
> <alfred...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Things are not always priced according to cost. Sometimes they are
> > priced according to customer perceived value.
> perceived value is normally how something is priced.
> > For instance two flights
> > to reach a destination together are often cheaper than a direct flight.
> airline pricing is extremely complex. there is no single price for a
> given flight, and you mean non-stop. a direct flight means there can be
> a stop but you don't switch planes.

I don't know if you know of ryan air an Irish airline company but if yuo want food you have to pay extra for it,
also only small hand luggage is 'free' anything else is extra. There was talk about charging extra if you were heavier than
a 'standard' person, which makes sense and could be done by paying for total weight of yourself plus luggage.

In article <799a8d1b-c345-48e2-9871-e9f5783f8e04n@googlegroups.com>,
Whisky-dave <whisky.dave@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Things are not always priced according to cost. Sometimes they are
> > > priced according to customer perceived value.
> > perceived value is normally how something is priced.
> > > For instance two flights
> > > to reach a destination together are often cheaper than a direct flight.
> > airline pricing is extremely complex. there is no single price for a
> > given flight, and you mean non-stop. a direct flight means there can be
> > a stop but you don't switch planes.
>
> I don't know if you know of ryan air an Irish airline company

i do.

> but if yuo want
> food you have to pay extra for it,

most airlines charge for food, unless in first/business class.

> also only small hand luggage is 'free' anything else is extra.

most airlines charge for checked bags. some charge for carry-on luggage
larger than a handbag or purse.

> There was talk
> about charging extra if you were heavier than
> a 'standard' person, which makes sense and could be done by paying for total
> weight of yourself plus luggage.

there was talk about charging to use the loo.

On 20/07/2022 1:12 pm, nospam wrote:
> In article <799a8d1b-c345-48e2-9871-e9f5783f8e04n@googlegroups.com>,
> Whisky-dave <whisky.dave@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Things are not always priced according to cost. Sometimes they are
>>>> priced according to customer perceived value.
>>> perceived value is normally how something is priced.
>>>> For instance two flights
>>>> to reach a destination together are often cheaper than a direct flight.
>>> airline pricing is extremely complex. there is no single price for a
>>> given flight, and you mean non-stop. a direct flight means there can be
>>> a stop but you don't switch planes.
>>
>> I don't know if you know of ryan air an Irish airline company
>
> i do.
>
>> but if yuo want
>> food you have to pay extra for it,
>
> most airlines charge for food, unless in first/business class.

None that I've ever been on (lots).

>
>> also only small hand luggage is 'free' anything else is extra.
>
> most airlines charge for checked bags. some charge for carry-on luggage
> larger than a handbag or purse.

None that I've ever been on. Extra for more pieces or over weight
allowance is usual.

>
>> There was talk
>> about charging extra if you were heavier than
>> a 'standard' person, which makes sense and could be done by paying for total
>> weight of yourself plus luggage.

I think I'm standard. Opinion of others often seems to differ ....

> there was talk about charging to use the loo.

How about more for a shit than a piss ? Or per length of toilet-paper
(or toilet-tissue for yanks).

geoff

In article <t8udnYZJy8QR9kr_nZ2dnUU7-XednZ2d@giganews.com>, geoff
<geoff@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >> but if yuo want
> >> food you have to pay extra for it,
> >
> > most airlines charge for food, unless in first/business class.
>
> None that I've ever been on (lots).

it's been common for roughly 20 years in economy/coach on most
airlines. snacks, such as a cookie or a couple of pretzels, might be
free.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buy_on_board>
Starting in 2003, many United States air carriers began eliminating
free meal services in economy classes on North American flights and
replacing them with buy on board services. In the 2000s US Airways
(now part of American Airlines) briefly charged for soft drinks, but
then reversed course. By 2009, many US carriers had established
buy on board as part of an à la carte pricing movement
....
...As of 2017 only 6 out of the 21 most popular airlines in Europe
offered complimentary inflight food and drink. KLM, Lufthansa, Swiss,
Austrian, Air France, Alitalia and TAP Portugal all continued to
offer free snacks and beverages on their short-haul flights.

menu & prices:
<https://www.united.com/ual/en/us/fly/travel/inflight/dining/economy/men
u.html>
<https://www.alaskaair.com/content/travel-info/flight-experience/main-ca
bin/food-and-drink>

> >> also only small hand luggage is 'free' anything else is extra.
> >
> > most airlines charge for checked bags. some charge for carry-on luggage
> > larger than a handbag or purse.
>
> None that I've ever been on. Extra for more pieces or over weight
> allowance is usual.

depends on the airline and fare bucket. basic economy has the most
restrictions.

<https://customersupport.spirit.com/en-US/category/article/KA-01157>
Current bag prices are available here. One personal item that fits
in the smaller sizer box (like a small backpack) is included with
your ticket. Another personal item or anything larger like a standard
carry-on or checked bag will need to be paid for.

<https://www.allegiantair.com/baggage-1>
Every passenger can bring One Free Personal Item
Your Personal Item (like a purse, briefcase, or a small backpack)
must be stored completely underneath the seat in front of you.

You can purchase One Carry-On Bag per passenger
Your one Carry-on Bag (such as a roll-aboard or garment bag) must
fit in the overhead bin.

You can pre-purchase up to 4 Checked Bags per passenger

<https://www.flyfrontier.com/travel/travel-info/bag-options/?mobile=true>
... Carry-on bags must fit in the overhead bin. Carry-on bag prices
vary based on when you purchase and are non-refundable.

FRONTIER Miles Elite members and passengers who purchased THE WORKS
always receive a free carry-on bag in addition to their personal item.

<https://www.united.com/ual/en/us/fly/travel/baggage/carry-on.html>
If you're traveling on a Basic Economy ticket, you can only bring one
personal item on board. There are some exceptions, which we list
below.

If you bring a full-size carry-on bag to the gate, you'll need to
check your bag. You'll also have to pay the applicable checked bag
fee and a $25 gate handling charge. To keep it simple at the gate,
you'll need to pay by credit card.

> > there was talk about charging to use the loo.
>
> How about more for a shit than a piss ? Or per length of toilet-paper
> (or toilet-tissue for yanks).

byotp.