NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/comp/os/os2/advocacy/11442

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-02 | 3.4 KB

Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:11442 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3627
Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!gumby!wmichgw!x90wardell
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is Microsoft the next Standard Oil?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 2 Jan 93 22:52:25 EST
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>  <[e-mail]>
Organization: Western Michigan University
Lines: 60

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] writes:
>
> |>     Let's go with your logic and say that Standard Oil was not
> |> a monopoly.  Let's say it existed today and only controlled 60% of the
> |> market.  60% of a multitrillion dollar market is frightening.
>
> What's so frightening about that?  As long as no one is forcing people
> at gunpoint to buy their products, they could be put out of business
> overnight by their customers.
>
    Because when someone dominates to such an extent, people buy it
because it is name brand.  AT&T was the same thing, other copanies could
have been started up but it was extremely difficult.

> |>     Let's change the situation to be more like the Microsoft situation,
> |> let's say that not only did Standard Oil control 60% of the market but
> |> they also made all the drilling equipment that could be had.
>
> If they started charging outragious prices for drilling equiptment then
> someone else would start making drilling equiptment and get a piece of the
> action.  The only way that I can imagine that Standard Oil could possibly
> have all of the drilling equiptment is for them to produce it cheaper than
> anyone else could, in which case who cares, or for them to use guns, either
> theirs or the goverments, to stop any competitors, in which case we've got
> a problem.
>
    Okay, to make it a bit closer to Microsoft, let's say that the drilling
equipment had become standardized around this one company who charged
outratigious prices, compeitiros would pop up and try to compete but in
order to compete, for example, you wuld have to give up most of your present
equipment  since it was not compatible with the mean drilling company.


> |>  While
> |> standard oil did not have  a virtual lock, controlling more than half
> |> of the largest industry on the planet (larger than the car industry, larger
> |> than anything) is frightening.
>
> As long as you're dealings with that company are completely voluntary
> then why are you scared?

    Key word, voluntary.  PC manufacturers are pretty much forced to
include DOS and windows with their comptuers or face paying much higher prices.
Do you really think that Ms-DOS is cheaper by itself wholesale than Dr Dos?
Dr Dos at wholesale costs about $29 to MS-DOs's $34 (for our company), however
many customers want Windows.  But look out, Microsoft will give you a
special deal on Windows if you put ms-Dos and Windows on EVERY machine you
make.  The result, you can't give the customer a choice of OS's like they
should.  Who's going to pay an extra $40 for Dr. DOS when MS-DOs comes
with the computer free?  This is wrong.

                            -Brad

p.s. my typing is a bit messed up because I have my computer torn apart on
the desk and am typing from about 3 feet from the keyboard... (testing
the modem...and saw this post...)