From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 17 13:40:46 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.enteract.com (mail.enteract.com [207.229.143.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75CAF37B8A0 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2000 13:40:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Received: from shell-1.enteract.com (dscheidt@shell-1.enteract.com [207.229.143.40]) by mail.enteract.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA76308; Mon, 17 Apr 2000 15:39:25 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 15:39:25 -0500 (CDT) From: David Scheidt To: David Schwartz Cc: J McKitrick , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: M$ anti-trust case In-Reply-To: <000001bfa8a9$33133760$021d85d1@youwant.to> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 17 Apr 2000, David Schwartz wrote: > > > Actually, anything MS does to make Windows worse, less competitive, or less > useful helps the consumer as it encourages other companies to develop > alternatives and superior products. Bullshit. That would be true if there a *competitive* market. If there excessive, artificial barriers to entering the market, you don't have proper competition. In that case, the clearly inferior product can dominate the market. > So long as nobody intervenes to force consumers to buy products they don't > want or props up products that the free market tried to squeeze out, > consumers will always win. The problem occurs when sore losers decide to > keep up a fight that the market doesn't want. Or they don't get into a fight that market would want, because they can't. Regards, David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message