Quote:
Originally posted by Ron Mummert
If they made a car that would be simple to work on and made sense we wouldn't be able to afford to buy it after they compensated for all the service money they'd lose in the deal.
|
Bingo, Johnny - American econonics 101.
I wonder what that Epson printer that was virtually given away would cost if the ink cartridges sold for the two bucks they're actually worth?
Ron. [/B][/QUOTE]
Ah, yes...the American economics conspiracy theories. We get 'em, too.
'But it only costs you $1 to stamp out those DVDs - why are you charging me $50 for it?'
Because the content cost us millions to make, genius.
Making a car like the SVX and then also making sure that everything was user-servicable is bad for a few reasons. First of all is the idea of making to car user-servicable - the vast majority of users don't know which way to hold a screwdriver.
Then there's the simple matter of adding that extra layer of complexity to the design process.
'Hey, nice engine. Please make it perform the same, but move the spark plugs to a more convenient location.'
DOH!
The last point I'll make is actually related to the first. If somebody at home isn't qualified to service something, but it's convenient for him to do, the problem is that he might try it. Then he breaks the car, hassles the manufacturer for a free replacement, the manufacturer gets a bad rep...etc, etc...
That's not a reason for making something difficult to work on so much as it is a reason for not bothering to make it easy to work on.
Just because a design or a product has a drawback, like adjustments that are difficult to reach, doesn't mean that those drawbacks were intentional.