- This topic has 5 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Action: Request a ChangeStatement: for Falcon, since his IE keeps crashing trying to post this link, post this link in a relevant section of the forums and get to yapping about it:linkage: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10129438-92.html?tag=mncolthe story’s about Microsoft getting a patent for metered computer use altogether. Not internet, not WoW, just turning the #$*& thing on. I think y’all will see the implications.Now Falcon is going to bed and enjoying his new year
This would be no different than existing rental options where people pay x-amount per month and simply return it after a year of use and swap for another.
For example, the average gaming computer that maintains top of the line status costs about $1000 per year, such as spending $2000 on a custom built computer that can still play top of the time games well for 2 years. This is about average if you use top of the line parts when building. So instead of spending $1000 year on a computer that devalues you can spend that same amount on a machine that gets upgraded to newest status every year.
I think this would be extremely bad for custom builders, but for everyone else it might actually be a benefit, depending on the costs.
eh, Ima just run with this post/reply stuff here so i don’t repost… moveth the thread if you so desire.
(I’ll stir the pot more (with honest opinions) to hopefully kick off a good vibrant debate on the subject)
MasterP said:
This would be no different than existing rental options where people pay x-amount per month and simply return it after a year of use and swap for another.For example, the average gaming computer that maintains top of the line status costs about $1000 per year, such as spending $2000 on a custom built computer that can still play top of the time games well for 2 years. This is about average if you use top of the line parts when building. So instead of spending $1000 year on a computer that devalues you can spend that same amount on a machine that gets upgraded to newest status every year.
I think this would be extremely bad for custom builders, but for everyone else it might actually be a benefit, depending on the costs.
ah, but QUITE a few people that I know (including myself) don’t have the budget to perpetually put even $200/year into a computer… the suggested rate in the article was $1/hour for a standard model computer, which I translate to easily vacuuming $2,000 (40hrs/week x 50weeks/yr x $1/hour) out of my wallet annually. at that rate, geez, I’ll buy a friggin IBM Blade Center and add onto that for a few years and be cheaper and have a whole heck of a lot more computer at the end of it all. the super-basic package was suggested at $0.80/hour, which is still $1,600.
Now, to some gamers that cycle through $3,000 rigs annually, sure this might be a deal. However, either they better set their rates much lower or they’re going to destroy the market for Windows PC’s, and give a huge golden gift to tech support companies. I would even predict a resurgence in the “antique” computing markets (Win98 and earlier) accompanied with a surge of newly found Linux users. Myself, I’m still rocking some old pentium 1 and pentium 2 systems with Win95 and Win98, i’ve decommissioned my baby I hand-built and brought to WCU, and for school and performance uses I’m running a $400-$500 rig (it made an appearance at my most recent lan, no gfx adapter but a decent discounted AMD Athlon X2 5000+ that can barely game, but compiles faster than I’ve ever seen before)
(/stir)
there’s nothing but dial-up and jacked-up monopoly-priced satellite internet out in them thar caves, boy… maybe someday when I get a job and can afford an apartment… though I may make an attempt for some LAN action, I do have wheels
COME back and play CS!
- The forum ‘Request A Change’ is closed to new topics and replies.