low-end octane2? (was: Re: [rescue] octane question)

[Julius Sridhar]

On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Kurt Huhn wrote:

> > OK, this would fit better if it weren't MS, but I just think it's funny
> > when people complain that making things easy or accessible reduces their
> > value.
> >
>
> Why funny?  It's true, if you think about *value* in the monetary sense.
>
> Think about how much more valuable you'd be if you didn't have to compete
> with evey MCSE boot-camp graduate out there?  If a company can get a freshly
> certified MCSE for $35k, or pay a good sysadmin (who knows windows, unix,
> and mac) twice that - the powers that be (fincance dept mostly) will opt for
> the cheaper alternative.  Now the actual sysadmins have to reduce their
> salaries to that level - and MCSE boot-campers are seen as *actual*
> engineers, even though they couldn't design a quality system to save their
> jobs...

How about someone looking for an admin for their UNIX house?

> To remove ourselves from the computer industry:
> Professional photographers used to get paid big bucks for family portraits,
> and there weren't a whole lot of them.  Olan Mills comes to mind, but that
> was 20 yrs ago.  The whole family used to got Olan Mills for a family
> portrait once a year, and it *cost*.  We were happy to pay it though,
> because quality was always incredible.  Now, Wal-Mart has a photo studio in
> every (or most) store.  It cost my wife a grand total of $12.95 for an
> entire package (like 35) of different sized photos to get christmas pictures
> of the kids.  Quality sucked, but hey, it only cost $12.95!  Who the hell is
> going to go to a professional photographer and pay ~$60 there?

What about someone looking for a quality picture?  Professional
photographers are still around.

> Automotive:
> It used to be that Automobiles were reserved for the extremely wealthy.  The
> common man wlaked, or used public transportation (if it even existed).
> Henry Ford developed methods to mass produce automobiles, reducing costs,
> and making *many* of them in a very short period of time.  He was able to
> amortize the costs of tooling and materials over a much shorter time period,
> and offer his cars for sale at much lower prices.  The common man was
> finally able to affor a car - imagine how much more valuable cars would be,
> were it not for the innovation of Henry Ford.

And, yet, there are still cars only affordable by the wealthy.  And yes,
there is a difference.

> Electronic Devices:
> Digital Cameras come to mind.  5 years ago, how many people could afford a
> digital camera?  Now, you can get one for under $100.  Even my *kids* have a
> freaking digital camera - it says "Barbie" on it, and picture quality
> couldn't be much worse, but it only cost me *twenty* dollars!  They're
> everywhere, and they aren't as valuable as the y used to be.

But, you can still spend $2000 for an Olympus E10, or $20,000 for a
Hasselblad 500ELD with a digital format.

Peace...  Sridhar

> If something is easier or more available, by default it becomes less
> valuable and less expensive.  There are, of course, other definitions to
> "value" - and mine view is very narrow (as it pertains to money) - but that
> was the point of my original statement anyway.
>
> Kurt
> _______________________________________________
> rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue