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

[Edward Wesolowski <ids AT idisplay.com>]

Michael:
No question in my mind that MS standardization has created a market for 
PC's where there was none, made work, helped personal and corporate economies.
Sarnoff/RCA NTSC television comes to mind. There were many competing 
companies prior to NTSC standards. ("Never Twice The Same Color" has been 
in place since about 1940.)
>However.... what's good for the monopoly isn't necessarily good for the 
consumer,
I wonder if we'd have television without Sarnoff (called ...brilliant 
businessman, visionary, pathological liar, etc.) Broadcasters & 
manufacturers are marketing digital HD. (I wish I could afford a 52" plasma 
screen and a digital HD receiver!) but is it just introduction of a better 
technology?
>I think that it is more than possible for thousands (if not millions) of
>email/web-only computers to be sold at a price < $200, possibly much less.
I'd like to think the "marketplace" was as clean and as "on the side of the 
angles" as some might believe, but I tend to see it as more complicated 
than that. A better device, a market without weird/artificial "barriers to 
entry" (bring on anti-monopoly regulations...), like my friend said, "in 
your dreams!"

Ed W.

> At 12:44 PM 3/20/02 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
> > >Now, please tell me why it would be evil for me to do a business deal which
> > was good for both of
> > >our shareholders and our employees, who, mind you, are individuals like you
> > and I right here in the
> > > triangle? Why would it be newsworthy if my partner sent around a memo
> > saying they wanted an
> > > exclusive?
> >
> > I certainly would agree that MS has made absolutely brilliant business
> > decisions throughout its history.
> > I also attest that they make world-class software that is best-of-breed in
> > many markets. As someone
> > that has served as a Microsoft Press Technical Editor, ASP developer *as
> > well as* a published book
> > author on programming in Java and the development lead on several Java
> > projects (including J2EE
> > projects), I'd like for you to believe that I've immersed myself in both
> > religions before coming to this
> > conclusion.
> >
> > However.... what's good for the monopoly isn't necessarily good for the
> > consumer, which is the
> > reason for anti-monopoly laws.
> >
> > Now, I don't buy the argument that having a single OS with the kind of
> > marketshare dominance that
> > MS has is necessarily bad for the consumer. Consider organizations that have
> > to support
> > dozens if not hundreds and thousands of desktops -- life is easier if they
> > can standardize on one
> > platform. To make this argument, I think you would also have to conclude
> > that the VCR market
> > was better when the consumer had to make the frightening choice between VHS
> > and Beta at
> > a time when VCRs weren't so cheap and a VCR purchase was a major household
> > expense.
> >
> > ....and monopolies aren't necessarily all bad -- when is the last time you
> > rode an elevator that
> > wasn't made by Otis? Did you still get where you were going?
> >
> > But... when a monopoly stifles innovation, then the problems emerge. If you
> > are a MS employee
> > or an MS shareholder, then all is good, at least for the near term. Maybe
> > even for the long term.
> > I certainly won't begrudge anyone that has found the magic formula to reach
> > financial independence
> > early.
> >
> > And in this particular context, if Dell looked at the entire Linux market
> > and said, "Screw that! That's a horrible
> > business to be in!" then I'm a-okay with the whole situation. However, if
> > that decision was even partially
> > made b/c their monopoly business partner applied pressure that carries force
> > b/c of their monopoly
> > position, then MS is being a bad monopoly.
> >
> > The implication of this behavior? The market doesn't work. The retailing and
> > distribution of computers
> > has long since reached maturity. I guess I *could* go try to sell Linux PC's
> > but it simply isn't the way that
> > I want to spend my days -- even if I did become successful, then Dell,
> > Compaq/HP, etc. would just swoop
> > in and take away my entire business b/c I couldn't compete with their
> > economies of scale.
> >
> > Such are the problems of entering mature industries.
> >
> > So the retail desktop market is really left to just a couple of players. Is
> > there a viable and sizable market
> > for desktop Linux? Is it a good business decision for Dell to be in the
> > market? I don't know the answers
> > to these questions. However, I do know that if MS is using monopolistic
> > power to keep Dell from
> > properly exploring this market, then many loose b/c this particular path of
> > innovation is left
> > unexplored.
> >
> > Does this mean that I won't admire MS for it's brilliant business acumen?
> > No. But there is a larger
> > question of fairness and what is best for the market as a whole. In this
> > particular case, I think
> > that it is more than possible for thousands (if not millions) of
> > email/web-only
> > computers to be sold at a price < $200, possibly much less. I think that the
> > retailers are as blind
> > to this as Henry Ford II was to the market for compact cars in the early
> > '70's when he said "mini-cars,
> > mini-profits."
> >
> > Now, the Japanese automakers ate Ford's lunch. But who can be expected to
> > eat Dell's lunch when
> > Dell is the distributor? Linux (only one component) can't lower it's price
> > point any further... and setting
> > up a global brand with the kind of reach that can sell at that price point
> > isn't a trivial (or inexpensive)
> > undertaking.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web 
> > site!  http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> > You are currently subscribed to internetworkers as: ids AT idisplay.com
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
> > $subst('Email.Unsub')