Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

internetworkers - Re: The list isn't blowing up yet?

internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Michael S Czeiszperger <czei AT webperformanceinc.com>
  • To: "InterNetWorkers" <internetworkers AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: The list isn't blowing up yet?
  • Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 15:53:35 -0400


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 07 September 2001 03:30 pm, you wrote:
>> Can you elaborate on the part about putting the free version of my
> software on everyone's desktop? If you're referring to "enhancements"
> added to the operating system, then I'm all for it. A car manufacturer
> has the ability to add whatever they want to their vehicles regardless
> of whether they produce it or want to purchase it from a third-party.
>

[...] Large discussion of car dashes removed.

> Oh NO! Company Y goes out of business! Boo-hoo! That's competition
> but a mass following of CompanyA cars develops into a cult lambasting me
> and my company. Nevermind that any other company would and does do the
> same thing every day.
>
The difference is that in your example Company A isn't a monopoly, so if
people want to buy a car without a dashtop Jesus they can't. Microsoft not
only bundles, they use exclusionary licensing to force all of their partners
to block customer's access to the competition.

Microsoft is doing the same thing that Kodak tried to do when they tried to
forbid drugstores from carrying other types of film.

Other companies do have policies that allow for cooperation. With Sun, for
example, you can purchase Java from any numbers of vendors. If you don't like
the Sun version, you can buy it from IBM or HP. If you don't like Intel
chips, you can purchase compatible AMD chips.

> If I produce a product, what obligation do I have to not enhance it or
> add features?
>
Of course. The problem is MS isn't content to let their products compete on
their merits, instead relying on their monopolistic control over the
distribution channels, and enfluence with "channel partners" to make sure
that customers can't purchase alternatives.

When picking technologies, companies should ask themselves whether they want
to invest in something that is available from a sole source, putting them at
the mercy of a single vendor, or whether they want to invest in technologies
that can be obtained from a number of competitors, which keeps down costs and
encourages innovation?

- --
Michael S Czeiszperger
czei AT webperformanceinc.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.8

iQA/AwUBO5klv1gOl/a4Fw2AEQKoowCdHtyLkzySvQbN3VHtgkBfcCYMgbYAoP5F
LHdXhmUQezUby3hz0tloUnTo
=ScX7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page