Hello Scott, hope you are doing well. A couple of things from your most recent post to me -
<<And one axiom that I believe strongly in is "Survival of the fittest.">>
I believe in survival of the fittest too, but MSFT is not the fittest. We don't even know what computing power opportunity cost we have paid because of their monopoly. And their monopoly was enabled because they signed IBM, and by default the clone makers, to one of the most restrictive licensing agreements in history. It was anti-competitive then, before anyone had an inkling what PCs would mean. Not only was there not a level playing field, no one had a chance to get on the playing field.
If we follow your logic regarding "survival of the fittest", AT&T would still be the only phone company, and my business would still be paying 25 cents per minute for long distance even though I bill 1,000,000 minutes a month. T-1 access fees would be $30,000 per month, and it would take me months to get another one if I needed it.
Where would we be now in terms of PC computing power, both in operating systems and applications, if there had been some semblance of competition in the business? Imagine, no competition in the last 10 years, a guaranteed pre-load revenue stream, so the big sloth lumbers along and keeps outputting marginal product. They are not the "fittest" because we made a choice and voted for them with our dollars, WE HAVE NO CHOICE.
<<I just do not believe the perspective that at some point the folks at Microsoft should have looked at each other and said "Ok guys, I guess that what we have done is enough. We ought to stop.">>
If you are talking about continuously developing and improving product, providing value over and above other comptetitors, I couldn't agree more. As the DOJ trial has shown, that is not what has been happening. Does rigging Federal Court demonstrations show that Microsoft is the "fittest"?
<<I'm sure that if (or when?) Novell comes to dominate the access to networked resources through distributed name spaces in NDS directories ... and no one anywhere on earth can get to a resource unless it's through a Novell directory ... what will you be saying then? Will you be one of the people who starts the early efforts to say to Novell "Hey guys ... that's enough ... we have a {x}% marketshare and are making enough money."? For some reason I don't think so ... ;-)>>
Its not even close to the same scenario. Novell can't obtain a restrictive licensing agreement for the Internet. There are multiple players, all developing around LDAP, and people are voting with their dollars. Novell actually has to make a better product to succeed. They can't shove NDS down the throat of someone buying a server, and tell them to F*** off if they don't like it.
<<I know that others on this thread will argue this forever, and that's why I say we ought to drop it for now>>
It's good that we can agree to disagree.......agreeably.
jww |
