Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 13:25:30 -0700 From: "Joseph M. Scott" <jmscott@ainet.com> To: Atipa <freebsd@atipa.com>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why we should support Microsoft... Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980518132530.00890cd0@mail.ainet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980518105723.3796A-100000@altrox.atipa.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I will try to make this rather short in an hope this topic won't get too out of control. Between my economics and business law classes this semester the things that I've learned from them would make at least one of your statements not quite right. "economic Darwinism" as it were doesn't have do so much with how good the product is as much as it is getting people to buy. Having a good product makes it easier to sell, but that shouldn't be considered the end of the story. I used OS/2 for awhile, I found it to be a much better product, but that didn't change things. Now I've been using FreeBSD for awhile and found it to be ( A WHOLE BUNCH ) better product. Will that change things? I don't know, but I don't believe it's entirely accurate to say that "economic Darwinism" consists on which product is better. M$ is good at selling product, they were also lucky with timing of a product. "economic Darwinism" should consist of these elements as well, if it's a term that's going to be used. This is also nothing new ( the government going after M$ ). The government has gone after companies for years ( good ol' Sherman AntiTrust act and friends ) for a variety of reasons. Some times it was handled for better, sometimes for worse. The company being investigated can also have a big impact on the outcome. I think it was Alcoa who managed to make a pretty could setup for itself, gov't came in and said we don't think this is a good thing. ( If I'm remembering this right ) Alcoa took a very decent approach, worked with the gov't to find a solution that was fair to Alcoa and the consumers. I don't think M$ has taken that approach, at least not from what I've seen. I don't claim to be an expert in any of these fields ( I suppose none of us are ), merely trying to find a good approach that gives the best results possible. Anyway, I was going to try and make this short :-) Joseph Scott jmscott@ainet.com At 11:23 AM 5/18/98 -0600, Atipa wrote: > > ><Puts on flame-retardant asbestos suit> > >I know I am going out on a limbe here, but I do not think the Justice >Department should make any decisions on the software industry, and I think >Microsoft should be allowed to ship whatever the hell it wants. > >We are told that this is a free, capitalistic country, but now they want >to say it is just sort-of capitalistic? That you can make all the money >you want, until you make too much? What kind of crap is that? > >I belive in economic Darwinism; that is to say, good products flourish and >poor products wilt away. The consumer ultimately decides what sells and >what doesn't, and not the providers. If Win98 stinks, I hope it dies and >forces MS to make better products. But who am I to say what they should or >should not try to do? > >Adding insult to this whole situation are the demands of the US >Government. Now these are plain silly, and I applaud Bill Gates for >telling them where to go with their suggesions: > > * That Microsoft disable their browser, and _all_available_means > of accessing it. This is _almost_ reasonable, but I can > understand the common vision of PC's as extensions to the > Internet. To make a browser part of an OS seems like a really > cool idea to me. Now I do agree 100% that other browsers should > be able to operate in the new environment (eg, no MS booby traps > or proprietary mumbo jumbo to prevent competition) > > * If MS does include a browser, they must also provide all > competing products as well. Can you say horse<dung>? That is > entirely ludicrous. To paraphrase Bill Gates, "It is like having > to include 2 cans of Pepsi in every Coke six pack." Amen. > As I said, take off the restrictions and let the best product > win. As consumers, _WE_ are the ones getting hosed in this > ordeal, not Microsoft. > > * MS must modify their "Window Manager" so that OEMs and > competitors can customize their visual. How would all the > developers of FreeBSD feel if I took a FreeBSD release, changed > the GUI a bit, and called it AtipaOS? You would feel smited. > Also, the continuity of the UI is the only thing that makes > supporting this crap OS possible. If everyone had their own > interface, providers would have a bear of a time giving > accurate, detailed instructions. > >We must take a stand, and tell the Justice Deptartment to bugger off. They >do not understand the software industry, they are setting a horrible >precendent, and depriving the American people of free choice. > >They are ruining a good, competitive environment by degrading the efforts >of the front runner, instead of promoting the laggers. We are all losing >out. > >The issue to me is not whether or not Win98 is good or bad, the issue is >freedom. I support Bill Gates in this issue, and hope you will as well. >Hopefully, this product will fail all on its own, and open the doors to >good programmers all over the world, without US ecomonic intervention. > >I hope you all can see through this junk. Liberty must be preserved. Let >the best products win, and let MS die on its own two feet. > >Kevin > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message > > 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?3.0.5.32.19980518132530.00890cd0>