Neither... Rather than have so many different models of machines
as in the past, they came up with the "semi-brillant" idea of
charging for the processing power used. This did in fact result in
"fewer" models but added confusion for the users by creating a very
complex method of charging for "processing power".

You now have a simple line of three machines(in the case of the 8xx
family)
that have "many" variations of processing power. In order to "inforce"
the
rules of "usage", the CPW restrictions came into play.

If there was a serious intent to charge more money, that worked, but to
push people in other directions, nope, I don't believe so....

They ain't that smart in marketing.....


Now.. isn't that nice and clear ???


Adam Lang wrote:
>
> So is the interactive "tax" a way for IBM to get money or a way for IBM to
> push people off the other technology?
>
> I am not starting a flame war.  Just straight out curiosity.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.