home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:11256 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3561
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
- Path: sparky!uunet!microsoft!wingnut!philipla
- From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
- Subject: Re: Is Microsoft the next Standard Oil?
- Message-ID: <1992Dec31.034930.3422@microsoft.com>
- Date: 31 Dec 92 03:49:30 GMT
- Organization: Microsoft Corporation
- References: <1hpr2dINN80o@tamsun.tamu.edu> <1992Dec29.194407.13490@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> <1hqe98INNsef@tamsun.tamu.edu>
- Lines: 20
-
- In article <1hqe98INNsef@tamsun.tamu.edu> bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce Dubbs) writes:
- >
- >Actually, I wasn't talking about Standard Oil, I was talking about MS.
- >The cost of duplicating software is negligible. The cost of
- >developing is high. If one company has deep pockets and no controls,
- >the potential exists for that company to dump the product (software) for a
- >period of time until the competitor goes out of business and then
- >raise the prices again.
- >
- >Has MS done this? You bet. How much was OS/2 1.0? Answer: $325.
- >Why so much? No competition. How much was the original OS/2 PDK?
- >Answer: $2600. Same reason. Did IBM go along? Yup. They were
- >partners, not competitors then.
-
- OK, I give up. Which of the examples above is an example
- of the underpricing you describe in your first paragraph?
-
- -Phil
- --
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Phil Lafornara 1 Microsoft Way
- philipla@microsoft.com Redmond, WA 98052-6399
- Note: Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
-