home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:10698 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3341
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!swrinde!gatech!prism!matd!rhoward
- From: rhoward@matd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
- Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! :)
- Message-ID: <rhoward.724964340@matd>
- Date: 21 Dec 92 18:59:00 GMT
- References: <BzKsJ2.Bwp@csulb.edu> <1992Dec20.215347.1614@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> <BzLMIH.II3@csulb.edu> <1992Dec21.145115.25441@tc.cornell.edu>
- Sender: news@prism.gatech.EDU
- Followup-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
- Organization: Georgia Tech Research Institute
- Lines: 56
-
- bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) writes:
-
- >In article <BzLMIH.II3@csulb.edu> sichermn@csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes:
- >>In article <1992Dec20.215347.1614@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
- >>>In article <BzKsJ2.Bwp@csulb.edu>, sichermn@csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes:
- >>>I _still_ don't understand what isn't "fair" about what Microsoft is doing.
- >>>Why shouldn't Microsoft let its application programmers talk to its OS
- >>>programmers? What is wrong with giving their own programmers an edge?
- >>
- >> Because it gives them undue power over the software market as a whole
- >>and acts detrimentally to the market for applications software in that
- >>Microsoft leverages its unique and restricted access to information about
- >>it's operating environments to gain an advantage in a separate market. Now
- >>you may not see these as separate markets but that is for the FTC to decide.
-
- >Why do you consider this unfair ? MS made a bussiness decision to
- >write operating systems, and it turned out to be a successful one.
- >And this decision was many times very risky. Even today MS may lose
- >all its tremendous investment in Windows-NT because of OS/2.
- >Other companies did not. Tough for them. MS could not have any advantage
- >over other companies if people did not buy their software. And people
- >did buy because that is what they needed, or at least believed they
- >needed.
-
- >If the other companies want to have advantage, let them write a
- >better Operating System that people need, rather than resorting to
- >the governemnt. IBM did just that. MS is not in the market to supply
- >profits for other companies.
-
- Others have (IMHO) written better OS's. DRI's DR-DOS 6.0 is
- better than MS-DOS 5.0
-
- The problem is that I cannot call my local clone vendor and
- get a PC with DR-DOS installed. Why? Because MS has used
- their enormous market presence to, in effect, force that
- PC maker to install MS-DOS on *all* PCs they make. Even
- if they don't send out my PC with MS-DOS on it, MS gets the
- licensing fee anyway. So if I *really* want DR-DOS, it costs
- me money (to go and purchase it), and time (because I have to
- install it over MS-DOS). DR-DOS had better be *damn* better for
- most people to bother with that....
-
- You cite IBM as an example..yet they are having a hard time
- getting clone makers to pre-install OS/2...for just those
- reasons.
-
- Robert
- --
- | Robert L. Howard | Georgia Tech Research Institute |
- | robert.howard@matd.gatech.edu | MATD Laboratory |
- | (404) 528-7165 | Atlanta, Georgia 30332 |
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
- | "See, when the GOVERNMENT spends money, it creates jobs; whereas when |
- | the money is left in the hands of TAXPAYERS, God only knows what they |
- | do with it. Bake it into pies, probably. Anything to avoid creating |
- | jobs." -- Dave Barry |
-