RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] computer and car prices (was Re: [MLUG])

[Michael <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

> What of comparative advantage and competition? What would make a Chevy
> different from a Ford? One manufacturer (or all manufacturers using the same
> parts) does not foster competition. No competition fosters stagnation and
> inefficiency and lack of innovation.

You can have standards without killing competition. What is the difference
between a Gateway and a Alienware PC? The parts look damn similar but one
is the most popular brand and the other looks cool, is cheaper, and better
made. Just because parts go together in a standard way doesn't mean they
are the same part.

> Now some standards based on safety would be good. But wait - there's a ton
> of those.
> 
> Since everyting tends to work closely with one another virtually everything
> would have to be identical. I mean - what if Chevy's alternator for the
> cavalier is slightly larger and shaped differently that the alternator from
> a Ford escort?

That's exactly my bitch. Like in Jenn's Civic the water bottle cost a
fortune to replace when the auto-parts store had one for like $10. There
was no reason for it to be non-standard but because of their design
decisions the cheap part was impossible to use. If there is nothing to be
gained by breaking a standard then don't break it.

What does the customer gain by having the Chevy's alternator slightly
larger and shaped differently than the Ford's? Both travel down the
highway with people inside and probably get similar gas milage (neither is
one of these high-effeciency cars) and both are limited in how fast they
can go by the speed limit.

Also why do they have to put a new model out every single year usually
with some part incompatibilities? Why not release a new model every five
years that has been engineered better with as much standardized parts as
possible? If the old standard doesn't work then define a new
standard. That doesn't mean that every company, every model, and every
year should be a new standard.

> See - we have PCI slots. Automakers don't have that. Standardizing on a
> block doesn't exactly work or scale well and again, back to a lack of
> competition. Anyway . . . there's my econ kicking in.
> 
> -- Brent
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: EMAIL:PROTECTED
> [mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Michael
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 1:25 AM
> To: EMAIL:PROTECTED
> Subject: Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] computer and car prices (was Re:
> [MLUG])
> 
> 
> > Here's a really brilliant idea:  Make car bumpers of a uniform height so
> > that whenever cars bump, their bumpers do the bumping.  The government
> > could mandate a standard.
> >
> > Good idea?  It's at least 25 years old.  I remember seeing a rerun of a
> > part of an old "60 Minutes" episode where they advocated for a standard
> > bumper height.  The evidence was overwhelming that it was a good idea.
> > Our government has been totally unable to make any progress on this issue,
> > as far as I can tell.
> 
> The really sad thing is that car makers couldn't agree on this sort of
> thing themselves? It'd save lives and be quite simple to implement in new
> cars but it hasn't been done. Sure the government could force them to do
> it but they shouldn't have to. We really need a sort of standard car.
> Standard parts, standard saftey features, etc. Sort of what PC-compatible
> is to computers. Isn't the point of mass-production to use the most
> standard parts you can so they'll be cheap?
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php
> 
> Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php
> 
> Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/
> 

--
To unsubscribe, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/