OK Scott,
I finally have some time to respond. Acutally I think we will have to agree not to agree on most of your differences of opinion - BUT - there is one point that you brought up that I must respond to. I have heard this argument from countless MSFT Lemmings and I cant believe that you use the same bogus analogy as them. I must correct it....
I agree that Microsoft included new features and standards support into Windows when they added IE. (I actually *do* think that the browser is a natural extension of the OS ...) To me this is just like car manufacturers now adding cell phones into automobiles. You could argue that this might destroy the market for add-on cell phones ... and a cell phone can be argued to have nothing to do with a car. Or we could pick CD players in cars ... or air conditioners ... now bike racks ...
I don't agree that the example that you cite is a "clear violation" ... I believe that any vendor should be allowed to include any enhancements to it's products. Cars should allowed to include cell phones as standard features. TVs should be allowed to include cable-ready tuners. Microsoft should allowed to include a browser.
The automotive industry example cannot be used if one makes some fundamental fictional assumoptions to the current industry - if you want to compare the MSFT argument against the DOJ to your automotive example. So let me modify your analogy Scott.
Lets say that GM owned 90%+ of the Car/Truck segment of the automotive industry (akin to MSFT owning 90%+ of the Desktop OS segment of the computer industry). Now lets say that in stead of cell phones (bad example for your analogy since there is a large non-automotive market for them and lots of competition for the product) a small automotive company creates & sells on the after-market an innovative new "while-you-drive-coffee-dispaneser" (aka WYDCD) that fits all GM cars (and other non-GM cars - but who cares with a whopping <10% marketshare). Their idea catches on like crazy and they get a huge market-share on the product.
Now GM decides that this is a great thing to have and they cannot be without it in case the product make all the other car/trucks more popular, and its something GM should be into. Soooo, GM decides to build their own version of it (now have it OEMed from another company like your example would have done with Cell phones in cars) and install it free of charge on all their new models of vehicles. In fact it is suggested that GM's new WYDCD likely works better with their own vehicle than this little up-starts WYDCD.
Well let me see, since 90%+ of all the new car purchases are for GM cars (not reality) and since the rumours are that GM's is better integrated into its cars/trucks than these after-market products, and since GM has offered to give away their WYDCD for all current and new owners of cars/turcks - I wonder how long the poor little up-start company will survive NO MATTER HOW FEW MISTAKES IT MAKES?
Since the up-start is a small company, it cant't compete for long in 0-price products against GM so it is inevitable that the up-start must die. A great idea created by this company stolen by a slow non-innovative monopoly holder.
This would be a clear example of GM abusing its monopoly to destroy another flegling segment in the automotive industry. It was exactly what MSFT did and admits to doing. Of course GM can say that it the WYDCD was a needed and integrated part of their latest cars, but isnt that a great yet lame excuse?
Now I apologize to GM for using them as a guinea pig, but we all know that so many fundamentals had to change in order for GM to become the evil ogre that this example potrayed them to be. They arnt because your example is not anaccurate example of the MSFT/DOJ situation.
BUT, change the players from: GM to MSFT, small upstart to NSCP, WYDCD to Browser, and cars/trucks to Windows/WIN9x, NT.
Now Scott, the fictional example I have given you has become a real example of MSFT.
Sorry, but I hate when people use that example as logic. Its completely not valid.
Again, your other points, I dont have the energy to debate them - it was a bad day here at work.
BTW - Have a great vacation Scott!!
Cheers Buddy!
Toy |
