Let's say that tomorrow the tiny island country Chiperia decides to use the Radeon 9200 as its national currency. To increase its nation's money supply, it offers $1 million U.S. dollars for each Radeon 9200 chip.
"Smart money," such as myself, logs on to HP/C's web site and begins buying Presario x1000s en masse b/c they are advertised to include the Radeon 9200. Once the machines are delivered, I feverishly rip out the Radeon chip from the laptops and book a first-class plane ticket to Chiperia.
After standing in line for two days at Chiperia's Central Bank (by this time, the news has broke), I get to the front of the exchange window -- only to be turned away because the supposed Radeon 9200 in my x1000 notebooks is really a 9000. To the central bankers of Chiperia, the Radeon 9000 is worthless.
The flawed assumption made by HP and ATI is that customers who specifically selected the Radeon 9200 for their x1000 notebook did so to get the "performance" of the Radeon 9200. Because the 9000 allegedly delivers the same performance as the 9200 in the x1000's Centrino environment, the companies assumed it would be acceptable to customers to use the 9000 instead (w/o telling them, of course). To make that assumption, however, HP and ATI would need to know why I purchased my x1000 and what I intended to use it for. In the absense of such knowledge, all that HP and ATI can reasonably assume is that I specifically selected the Radeon 9200 because I wanted the actual Radeon 9200 chip. Indeed, I might have quite legitimately purchased my x1000 for the advertised parts inside -- to sell at a huge profit to the central bankers of Chiperia. Just because I buy a computer doesn't mean that I intend, necessarily, to ever turn it on and use it.
This, to me, is a clear case of false advertisement, borne by a poor business decision, based on narrow and untenable assumptions.
Let's say that tomorrow the tiny island country Chiperia decides to use the Radeon 9200 as its national currency. To increase its nation's money supply, it offers $1 million U.S. dollars for each Radeon 9200 chip. "Smart money," such as myself, logs on to HP/C's web site and begins buying Presario x1000s en masse b/c they are advertised to include the Radeon 9200. Once the machines are delivered, I feverishly rip out the Radeon chip from the laptops and book a first-class plane ticket to Chiperia.
After standing in line for two days at Chiperia's Central Bank (by this time, the news has broke), I get to the front of the exchange window -- only to be turned away because the supposed Radeon 9200 in my x1000 notebooks is really a 9000. To the central bankers of Chiperia, the Radeon 9000 is worthless.
The flawed assumption made by HP and ATI is that customers who specifically selected the Radeon 9200 for their x1000 notebook did so to get the "performance" of the Radeon 9200. Because the 9000 allegedly delivers the same performance as the 9200 in the x1000's Centrino environment, the companies assumed it would be acceptable to customers to use the 9000 instead (w/o telling them, of course). To make that assumption, however, HP and ATI would need to know why I purchased my x1000 and what I intended to use it for. In the absense of such knowledge, all that HP and ATI can reasonably assume is that I specifically selected the Radeon 9200 because I wanted the actual Radeon 9200 chip. Indeed, I might have quite legitimately purchased my x1000 for the advertised parts inside -- to sell at a huge profit to the central bankers of Chiperia. Just because I buy a computer doesn't mean that I intend, necessarily, to ever turn it on and use it.
This, to me, is a clear case of false advertisement, borne by a poor business decision, based on narrow and untenable assumptions.
Slashdot Mirror
"Smart money," such as myself, logs on to HP/C's web site and begins buying Presario x1000s en masse b/c they are advertised to include the Radeon 9200. Once the machines are delivered, I feverishly rip out the Radeon chip from the laptops and book a first-class plane ticket to Chiperia.
After standing in line for two days at Chiperia's Central Bank (by this time, the news has broke), I get to the front of the exchange window -- only to be turned away because the supposed Radeon 9200 in my x1000 notebooks is really a 9000. To the central bankers of Chiperia, the Radeon 9000 is worthless.
The flawed assumption made by HP and ATI is that customers who specifically selected the Radeon 9200 for their x1000 notebook did so to get the "performance" of the Radeon 9200. Because the 9000 allegedly delivers the same performance as the 9200 in the x1000's Centrino environment, the companies assumed it would be acceptable to customers to use the 9000 instead (w/o telling them, of course). To make that assumption, however, HP and ATI would need to know why I purchased my x1000 and what I intended to use it for. In the absense of such knowledge, all that HP and ATI can reasonably assume is that I specifically selected the Radeon 9200 because I wanted the actual Radeon 9200 chip. Indeed, I might have quite legitimately purchased my x1000 for the advertised parts inside -- to sell at a huge profit to the central bankers of Chiperia. Just because I buy a computer doesn't mean that I intend, necessarily, to ever turn it on and use it.
This, to me, is a clear case of false advertisement, borne by a poor business decision, based on narrow and untenable assumptions.
After standing in line for two days at Chiperia's Central Bank (by this time, the news has broke), I get to the front of the exchange window -- only to be turned away because the supposed Radeon 9200 in my x1000 notebooks is really a 9000. To the central bankers of Chiperia, the Radeon 9000 is worthless.
The flawed assumption made by HP and ATI is that customers who specifically selected the Radeon 9200 for their x1000 notebook did so to get the "performance" of the Radeon 9200. Because the 9000 allegedly delivers the same performance as the 9200 in the x1000's Centrino environment, the companies assumed it would be acceptable to customers to use the 9000 instead (w/o telling them, of course). To make that assumption, however, HP and ATI would need to know why I purchased my x1000 and what I intended to use it for. In the absense of such knowledge, all that HP and ATI can reasonably assume is that I specifically selected the Radeon 9200 because I wanted the actual Radeon 9200 chip. Indeed, I might have quite legitimately purchased my x1000 for the advertised parts inside -- to sell at a huge profit to the central bankers of Chiperia. Just because I buy a computer doesn't mean that I intend, necessarily, to ever turn it on and use it.
This, to me, is a clear case of false advertisement, borne by a poor business decision, based on narrow and untenable assumptions.