<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Blind to Bargains, part deux</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salas.com/2007/05/31/blind-to-bargains-part-deux/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salas.com/2007/05/31/blind-to-bargains-part-deux/</link>
	<description>Some stuff I just figured out</description>
	<pubDate>Tue,  6 Jan 2009 23:26:44 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Brad Andrews</title>
		<link>http://www.salas.com/2007/05/31/blind-to-bargains-part-deux/comment-page-1/#comment-2637</link>
		<dc:creator>Brad Andrews</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 14:39:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salas.com/2007/05/31/blind-to-bargains-part-deux/#comment-2637</guid>
		<description>The number of hours it took to create something is irrelevant.  It is how useful it is and how many competitors it has.  I will almost always use the most cost effective item.

Even hardware faces this, though not as much since it is harder to duplicate.  I can't see paying that much for a keyboard either, especially when my preferred split keyboard is quite inexpensive these days.  (And I have several regular keyboards sitting around.)

Hardware does have a "touch and feel" element missing from the more ethereal software, and that will always make us more likely to pay for it.

But people need to discard the notion that the number of hours making a product makes it more valuable.  Except in rare "artistic" things, a long time of production is a detriment rather than a benefit.

Brad</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The number of hours it took to create something is irrelevant.  It is how useful it is and how many competitors it has.  I will almost always use the most cost effective item.</p>
<p>Even hardware faces this, though not as much since it is harder to duplicate.  I can&#8217;t see paying that much for a keyboard either, especially when my preferred split keyboard is quite inexpensive these days.  (And I have several regular keyboards sitting around.)</p>
<p>Hardware does have a &#8220;touch and feel&#8221; element missing from the more ethereal software, and that will always make us more likely to pay for it.</p>
<p>But people need to discard the notion that the number of hours making a product makes it more valuable.  Except in rare &#8220;artistic&#8221; things, a long time of production is a detriment rather than a benefit.</p>
<p>Brad</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
