So we all (MYSELF INCLUDED) want to buy at absolute lowest price. When these Jet DC's were bought, I'm willing to bet they weren't the most expensive to purchase. As for "throw away", has anyone complained about their DC failing? As for upgrading computers, do remember the world before the 286 processor? Every new machine meant having to buy new soft ware. Has some one asked Jet to replace a DEFECTIVE part, or asked for an upgrade instead. Jet has offered the upgrade, but not at the price point some consider to be fair. That is their RIGHT as a business (to make a profit.) Sometimes, price out buying your car one piece at the time. I take a "brand name prescription" that is over $1000 (one thousand dollars) per month, that I am sure it only costs pennies to produce. But this drug maker invested both time and resources to develop this drug, and thus are entitled to a profit. Either accept what you have, or sell it at a loss (remember you have had the enjoyment of use which does have value), and buy a newer machine. Profit isn't a dirty word.
Hopefully I don't regret jumping into the fray, but heregoes:
1)
Not all of us are driven by the bottom dollar. I am regularly willing to pay a modest premium (say 10-20%) to purchase locally and I seldom purchase the cheapest tool (or much else) -- I usually aim for middle-of-the-pack or better. To me, saving money on junk is money wasted, not saved. Good tools may not be cheap, but for me they, and my workshop, are also my physical therapy and even quality tools are cheaper than real physical therapy.
2)
I'm not sure what computers you were buying back in the 80's but the 80286 ran what the 80186 (yes, there was such CPU) ran, which more than happily ran what the 8086 ran -- same went for the 80386, 80486, Pentium P5, Pentium II, Pentium III, and so forth. As for Commodores (of which I still own many), My C128 could run the same software as my Plus/4, which could run the same software as my C64, which could run the same software as my Vic-20. There is some real truth to your comments back in the 70's, but by the 80's you generally only *had* to invest in new software if you either 1) changed between vendors (e.g. Commodore, Atari, Apple, Adam, Tandy Radio Shack, Texas Instruments, etc.) or 2) wanted new features not available in the older software. In fact, my C128 was even backward compatible with the original cassette drive of my Vic-20 as well as the 1541 floppy drive that was a later upgrade to the Vic-20. There were also a number of computers of that era that ran CP/M, many on Z80 CPUs, that could share software between different platforms and manufacturers and were very much the precursors to the modern IBM PC and Compatibles in many respects.
(My goodness, have I ever dated myself now! I might as well throw in that, as a teenager, I ran an RBBS-PC BBS back in the late 80's to early 90's as well. I run all my own servers these days, but even so I really miss those days with my BBS!)
3)
Yes, No, and Maybe on the Pharmaceutical Industry. I pay nearly half what you are paying for
GENERIC morphine (you don't want to know what brand-name goes for) -- and I'm pretty certain the pharmaceutical industry did not have to invest much into inventing a medication that has existed for thousands of years! They also invest a great deal in thwarting our Patent system and interfering with the legitimate manufacture of generics which, frankly, borders on something between collusion and criminal in my book. We, as Americans, pay far more for
any given medication than
any other nation on this Earth.
The above said, I do believe that, yes, a vendor has the right to do pretty much whatever they want with their product. However, that attitude of treating nearly everything as expendable and eliminating reasonable upgrade paths is a very real symptom of nearly everything that is wrong and broken in our modern global economy. I don't have an issue with any company earning a fair and honest profit, but I do have an issue with the often pervasive attitude that profit is all that matters and that civic responsibility has no place in the modern world.
The reason the OP is so annoyed with Jet is because Jet chooses not to sell an upgrade part that is, for all practical purposes, a bolt-on upgrade so far as anyone can discern. IMHO, this is a fair criticism and no wrong has been committed by stating this opinion. Others are, obviously, welcome to disagree, but that does not invalidate the OP's stated position.
PS - Junquecol, please know that none of the above is directed at you personally -- I just take issue with the examples you are citing. Like the OP, this subject is one of those that hits a nerve with me as well, just for slightly different reasons (I don't own a Jet DC, but I do hope that Jet might reconsider their stance).
