Alright, can someone explain what the fuss is with software locked features/performance in CPUs, cars, etc?



You know your CPU silicon costs pennies to make right? You're paying for R&amp;D and their profits, not for physical product. 



If the company spends an extra few bucks per CPU to later let you pay to use it all, what's wrong with that? All I see here is upside because the alternative is you pay the same as before but with no way to unlock.



Why do people feel like they're owed performance that they haven't paid for, but have no issue when that performance is withheld at the factory instead of by firmware/software?

>>93164741 (OP)

It's honestly not bad, but the problem is manufacturers and software companies are asking full price for locked down stuff. They don't even try to make it cheaper and that already loses all advantages the model could have.

>>93164741 (OP)

>>93164741 (OP)

It's backward, corrupt and retarded. You make stuff, but it can't be used, which means that most of that effort and resources get wasted.

but it's pure upside for the consumer

at least try to argument your shit you mongrel

>2+2=5

Not only it's nonsense, it implies there is a cartel or a monopoly of sone kind, otherwise it should be easy for the competition to destroy such a company by selling non-disabled products.

>>93164741 (OP)

There are multiple things, as a start there is the problem with the software, it has to enforce the lock and unlock process somehow and to make it harder to crack it will be some online service, total BS in my opinion, not every component has to communicate with the world, just increases complexity and security concerns.

Additionally, some things get more expensive just by integrating these "features" the companies will put R&amp;D into this crap, and integrate connectivity features in devices that are normally not connected like heated seats in a car... and looking at the future, your toaster has to be connected to Wi-Fi for the extra crispy mode you have to pay extra, including Wi-Fi will make the toaster more expensive in the first place.



But the biggest bummer is not even mentioned by you, it is not a single payment, like an upgrade or something, it will be a service that has to be paid monthly. There will be no option to permanently unlock all features, so you will never fully own the device you are using (in a mid/ large business environment it doesn't matter and actually makes sense to rent/ lease equipment, as you don't bind as much capital into a device, for private and small business use it is just total BS).



I get why companies do that, and it makes sense from a business perspective to have a more continuous revenue stream. As a consumer, I don't like it and I will try to avoid these things for as long as possible, and if enough people do that, it will force every company in non-monopolistic industries to rethink their model.

This is a good thing since it means that manufacturers will sell expensive hardware cheaper, assuming that consumers will pay their subscription, and we can take advantage of that, just like unlocking Celerons into Xeons, Phenom II X2s into X4s, and HD 6950s into 6970s.

why do they even sell it? all this stuff should be rented and returned to manufacture after usage.
