Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 15:45:29 -0600 From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> Cc: "Mike Meyer" <mwm@mired.org>, <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com>, <chat@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Feeding the Troll (Was: freebsd as a desktop ?) Message-ID: <15369.20345.689585.495352@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <000a01c17ab0$266fabd0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <000301c17a40$8fc78dc0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> <010d01c17a44$98b491e0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C08A204.3CA7014C@mindspring.com> <002e01c17a5f$f2b34040$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> <000c01c17a7c$4de06710$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <15369.53.739857.967952@guru.mired.org> <000a01c17ab0$266fabd0$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Anthony Atkielski <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> types: > Mike writes: > > On the other hand, I can see where Microsofts > > business practices have cost me money. > No more so than a jillion other companies. When you buy a recent PC with a > genuine Intel processor, for example, you give several hundred dollars of pure > profit to Intel. Yes, but I'm buying Intel products. MS's business practices cost me money even though I *don't* buy their products. > > In Microsofts case, their basis for their monopoly > > was telling IBM they had something they didn't, > > then turning around and buying it from someone > > else for a fraction of it's real value. > No, that is ancient history, and no longer has any effect on Microsoft's > position today. Apple had much greater advantages at one time, and that didn't > prevent it from practically going bankrupt. That's sort of like saying that the spread of Christianity during the middle ages has no influence on it's popularity today. In other words, it's utter hogwash. History creates the present. If IBM had bought the OS outright - which they wanted to do - instead of licensing a version from MS, the IT world would be a completely different place today. > > That put them in a position of dominance, and > > they have been using that position illegally > > ever since. > No. There is absolutely no way that something that trivial can have more than > the most ephemeral effect in the IT industry. Even a huge advantage may mean > nothing six months down the road. You have to make good decisions every day, or > you lose. Much of the perceived competitiveness of Microsoft comes from their > understanding of this reality. You cannot sit on your laurels in IT. Being the default OS on the first desktop computer acceptable to the IT industry is hardly "trivial". I've never argued that MS made bad business decisision. Making sure they - and not IBM - owned the rights to the OS was one of their good decisions. It gave them a position of dominance in the industry. They have continued to make good decisions on a regular enough basis to have not lost that dominance. Not all of their decisions have been good ones, and not all of them have been legal ones. But they've done the right thing more often than their competition, which is why they are still dominant. All of which has absolutely *nothing* to do with the quality of their technology, except that they keep plugging away until they reach "good enough" and then stop, which is a good business decision. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15369.20345.689585.495352>