Prev: [ANN]: 'tren' Cross-Platform Batch Renaming Tool, Version 1.217 ReleasedAnd Available
Next: No X after upgrade
From: Indi on 23 Apr 2010 11:56
On 2010-04-23, Tim Daneliuk <tundra(a)tundraware.com> wrote:
>
> I've heard this argument and I just don't buy it.
>

Then apparently you don't understand how the free enterprise
system is supposed to work. Seems to be epidemic these days,
but that's a whole other discussion even more off topic than
this one. :)

> In any case, the "Microsoft cheated and that's why they won" argument
> is easily refuted simply by observing Reality. In the face of all this
> alleged bad behavior, there are more OS choices than ever today,
>

And yet there's only one OS choice available for 97+% of all PCs sold
by OEMs.

> I use everything - Win, FreeBSD, Linux, and MacOS. Each has its
> virtues, each has its vices.
>

Actually, so do I. Well, I rarely "use" windows, except for testing,
netflix streaming, and the occasional game of pinball (all in vbox on
FBSD). But I do "fix" windows a lot for other people...

><I think we may be starting to sound like melancholy old men :) >

Cheery old lady here, actually -- pleased to meet ya!

--
Caveat utilitor,
indi

From: Tim Daneliuk on 23 Apr 2010 12:13
On 4/23/2010 10:56 AM, Indi wrote:
> On 2010-04-23, Tim Daneliuk <tundra(a)tundraware.com> wrote:
>>
>> I've heard this argument and I just don't buy it.
>>
>
> Then apparently you don't understand how the free enterprise
> system is supposed to work. Seems to be epidemic these days,
> but that's a whole other discussion even more off topic than
> this one. :)

Well, I'd argue that, but not here as you say. I'll just end my
comments on the matter by saying that government has NO business
interfering with commerce unless there is demonstrated fraud,
force, or threat taking place - no one of which was ever present
in the circumstances we're discussing.

>
>> In any case, the "Microsoft cheated and that's why they won" argument
>> is easily refuted simply by observing Reality. In the face of all this
>> alleged bad behavior, there are more OS choices than ever today,
>>
>
> And yet there's only one OS choice available for 97+% of all PCs sold
> by OEMs.

It's doesn't matter. There is HUGE choice today. The fact that
most people choose not to replace Windows is hardly because of
some evil plot by Microsoft. It's a reflection of Windows'
"good enough for most people" technology status.

>
>> I use everything - Win, FreeBSD, Linux, and MacOS. Each has its
>> virtues, each has its vices.
>>
>
> Actually, so do I. Well, I rarely "use" windows, except for testing,
> netflix streaming, and the occasional game of pinball (all in vbox on
> FBSD). But I do "fix" windows a lot for other people...
>
>> <I think we may be starting to sound like melancholy old men :) >
>
> Cheery old lady here, actually -- pleased to meet ya!

Likewise ... though I'm not officially old yet and I do refuse
to grow up :)
>


--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk tundra(a)tundraware.com
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

From: Bob Melson on 22 Apr 2010 23:21
On Thursday 22 April 2010 20:16, Tim Daneliuk (tundra(a)tundraware.com)
opined:

<snip>
> I've heard this argument and I just don't buy it. Something is
> anti-competitive only when *force* is involved - say, the Fine
> Government setting airline fares. But no one *made* anyone buy a
> Microsoft product. There were non-MS options out there like the
> LSI-11, Amiga, and Apple. People bought the Dell|Compaq|HP + MS
> *because it was perceived as a good value*.
>
> Generally speaking, predatory monopolies can only survive using force
> and possibly fraud. Absent those two things, either the monopoly will
> price itself at the natural price for the good or service, or it will
> open a door for competitors. MS neither used fraud nor force upon its
> customer base. It set terms of how you were permitted to sell *its*
> products. This is perfectly reasonable. Anyone who didn't like it
> could buy something else, hack their own system, or go without.

At the time, M$ had somewhere around 40-50% of the user base, thanks
largely to IBM. They were able to leverage that strength with the OEMs to
tell them, in effect, "if you offer anything else BUT our product, we will
withdraw our license to you and refuse permission for you to sell our
product." This from senior people at both Dell and Compaq. Remember that
both companies were still very young, tho' not startups per se, and had to
do whatever was necessary to gain or maintain market share. Dell
struggled for a couple of years with their own version of UNIX (SVR4,
IIRC), but found the support costs and the market were not favorable and
ultimately dropped it. Compaq caved immediately, which would argue that
they were smarter than Dell - but Dell still exists independently and
Compaq is now part of HP. Why that's so is the subject of a separate
discussion. Nevertheless, the pressure from M$ was there and,
characterize it as you will, it was anti-competitive in the extreme.
>
> In any case, the "Microsoft cheated and that's why they won" argument
> is easily refuted simply by observing Reality. In the face of all this
> alleged bad behavior, there are more OS choices than ever today,
> OpenOffice is a valid replacement for MS Office, and MS has to claw
> and kick to maintain advantage in the face of other browsers, search
> engines, development frameworks, etc. And they're still not just
> winning, but actually pulling away from their competition. Why?
> Because they're still a "good enough" solution for the masses.

There are many ways to explain M$'s success, not all of which involve
cheating or predatory business practices. While I have no doubt that
they've engaged in both, it's also pretty clear that Gates and Ballmer and
the rest were and remain pretty astute businessmen. They must've done
something right to have something like 90% of the home desktop o/s market.
And, of course, that controlling presence in the market means that the
applications market for M$ will be far richer than for any of the linuxes
or bsds.

<snip>

Bob

--
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing.
Ralph Waldo Emerson

From: Bob Eager on 23 Apr 2010 02:43
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 18:49:15 -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

> On 4/22/2010 6:09 PM, Indi wrote:
>> On 2010-04-22, Tim Daneliuk <tundra(a)tundraware.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> There was essentially nothing commercially available that could have
>>> done what was needed at the time Win 1.x was released.
>>
>> That's very silly. Win 1.x was a huge failure, and no-one used it. By
>> the time windows became semi-usable there was OS/2 -- a *vastly*
>> superior OS. I know you claim you were there and all but it seems to me
>> you don't really know your history.
>>
>>
> A fair point, but OS/2 wasn't truly a GUI driven environment and THAT
> was the future, for better or worse. (I use GUIs to run multiple xterms
> ;)

The OS/2 environment had a virtually identical GUI to Windows, until 1992.



--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

From: Louis Epstein on 23 Apr 2010 19:50
Tim Daneliuk <tundra(a)tundraware.com> wrote:
: On 4/22/2010 6:09 PM, Indi wrote:
:> On 2010-04-22, Tim Daneliuk <tundra(a)tundraware.com> wrote:
:>>
:>> There was essentially nothing commercially available that could have
:>> done what was needed at the time Win 1.x was released.
:>
:> That's very silly. Win 1.x was a huge failure, and no-one used it.
:> By the time windows became semi-usable there was OS/2 -- a *vastly*
:> superior OS. I know you claim you were there and all but it seems to
:> me you don't really know your history.
:>
:
: A fair point, but OS/2 wasn't truly a GUI driven environment and THAT
: was the future, for better or worse. (I use GUIs to run multiple
: xterms ;)
:

I am a CLI snob who considers GUIs a frill to occasionally invoke from
one's shell prompt before getting back to work.;)

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: [ANN]: 'tren' Cross-Platform Batch Renaming Tool, Version 1.217 ReleasedAnd Available
Next: No X after upgrade