Printable View
So people who overclock, talk about overclocking, teach others how to overclock a 3000+ part to perform as a 3500+ part are in no way harming the manufacturer. There is no lost revenue to consider?
That is why both AMD and Intel cpus are unlocked...
EDIT: Dullard warning-the last sentence is slightly sarcastic...
Improving the performance of something you legally own is not immoral.
Taking something you do not legally own & use it is not moral.
And that's that.
Quote:
Originally posted by MrDigital
Should we consider ordering a small drink at McDonald's and then going back and getting 4 refills theft as well?
Yes
Why didn't we buy the large drink instead of the small?
Because youre a crook?
It isn't theft if you are allowed to do it.
If my neighbors wife "allows" me to get some backdoor action, that don't make it right...
-MrD
But you'll note that officially, neither manufacturer thinks that's stealing. Certainly it voids the warranty, but the official reason is to prevent people from reselling a cheaper chip as a more expensive one. That IS illegal, and damages the manufacturer's reputation, so Intel and AMD object to it.Quote:
Originally posted by gurutoo
So people who overclock, talk about overclocking, teach others how to overclock a 3000+ part to perform as a 3500+ part are in no way harming the manufacturer. There is no lost revenue to consider?
That is why both AMD and Intel cpus are unlocked...
EDIT: Dullard warning-the last sentence is slightly sarcastic...
Nah "That's That" don't fly, that's just your puny opinion.Quote:
Originally posted by Matt_E
Improving the performance of something you legally own is not immoral.
Taking something you do not legally own & use it is not moral.
And that's that.
Good point- yet the question remains - is the loss of revenue from overclocking harming the manufacturers?Quote:
Originally posted by masteraleph
But you'll note that officially, neither manufacturer thinks that's stealing. Certainly it voids the warranty, but the official reason is to prevent people from reselling a cheaper chip as a more expensive one. That IS illegal, and damages the manufacturer's reputation, so Intel and AMD object to it.
Sorry, Gurutoo, I just don't follow how messing with a piece of hardware that's yours to do with as you please, is in any way immoral.
I am starting to get the feeling this "Immoral OC'ing" argument was brought up to somehow legitimize software piracy.
You are aware that both AMD and Intel license out their goods to a select few companies, right?Quote:
Originally posted by gurutoo
So people who overclock, talk about overclocking, teach others how to overclock a 3000+ part to perform as a 3500+ part are in no way harming the manufacturer. There is no lost revenue to consider?
That is why both AMD and Intel cpus are unlocked...
EDIT: Dullard warning-the last sentence is slightly sarcastic...
If they were so concerned about this "lost revenue" they speak of, they would do more than simply lock a couple of features. They would shun motherboard manufacturers and chipset manufacturers that offered overclocking features. They wouldn't comment on news that someone just made 4, 5, 6ghz overclocked on one of their CPU's, which they always do. They wouldn't send out UNLOCKED CPU's to places like Tom's Hardware with the specific idea that they will be overclocked to show off performance.
You're off-base with the overclocking = stealing idea. Not even the companies making the chips believe it's stealing. It *can't* be stealing if you're *allowed* to do it.
-MrD
Think of it like this: if you buy a car that gets 24MPG and you put in an additive that lets you get 30MPG, is that stealing? Technically, you're running the automobile more efficiently which usually means a higher price tag.
No different than buying a CPU and getting a really nice cooling system to clock it higher.
A company only garauntees that their product runs at the specifications they provide. Anything more than that rides on the consumers shoulders.
Hahahahahaha...send me some of that additive, will ya?
Yes, MrDigital, I've heard of licensing agreements.Quote:
Originally posted by MrDigital
You are aware that both AMD and Intel license out their goods to a select few companies, right?
If they were so concerned about this "lost revenue" they speak of, they would do more than simply lock a couple of features. They would shun motherboard manufacturers and chipset manufacturers that offered overclocking features. They wouldn't comment on news that someone just made 4, 5, 6ghz overclocked on one of their CPU's, which they always do. They wouldn't send out UNLOCKED CPU's to places like Tom's Hardware with the specific idea that they will be overclocked to show off performance.
You're off-base with the overclocking = stealing idea. Not even the companies making the chips believe it's stealing. It *can't* be stealing if you're *allowed* to do it.
-MrD
Of course they send unlocked chips to TOM'S...you state the obvious.
YOU try and get one...they don't sell them though now do they?
What you are seeing is the same people who bash and judge software pirates have no problem paying for a "small" coke and re-filling it 4 times...Quote:
Originally posted by Matt_E
Sorry, Gurutoo, I just don't follow how messing with a piece of hardware that's yours to do with as you please, is in any way immoral.
I am starting to get the feeling this "Immoral OC'ing" argument was brought up to somehow legitimize software piracy.
Because it ain't wrong if it's "allowed"...gimme a break.
Are you for real? If they didn't want you to refill your drink, why would they put the machines out where people serve themselves? And put big signs up that say "FREE REFILLS!"?Quote:
Originally posted by gurutoo
What you are seeing is the same people who bash and judge software pirates have no problem paying for a "small" coke and re-filling it 4 times...
Because it ain't wrong if it's "allowed"...gimme a break.
No, guru, it's not wrong if it's allowed. What's so hard to grasp about that concept?
If I'm GIVING AWAY SOMETHING, are you going to say "gimme a break" when someone comes and takes whatever it is I'm giving away?
-MrD
That's something totally different. You're buying something in addition to the car, and all you're doing is installing a new engine that you bought.Quote:
Originally posted by MrDigital
How on earth is it immoral? Is buying a car and swapping the engine immoral? Is buying ANYTHING and improving performance on it immoral??
-MrD
So, it's unanimous then?
Neither AMD nor Intel suffer any harm/loss from the overclocking of low-end parts-ie no revenue is lost by them?
It's ok because you bought it...
Oh, I see.