Hello Rich,
PMFJI, but I wanted to reinforce your analogy ... and clarify some issues. You stated:
I have both Navigator and IE3 on my home machine. One works better
for some things. I added IE3 later. I also have WordPerfect8 and
MSWord(part of office). As a consumer, I do have a choice.
Compaq testimony, however, may prove a case for DOJ at another (not
end-user) level.
You are completely correct here. This environment allows you to pick and choose to have any, or all, of these applications.
Now to your illustration of car radio.... Chrysler, GM, et al.
should have the right to use "porprietary" connectors, software,
etc., to protect that product even if it is part of their automobile.
If I, as a competitor, want to sell my car radio for use in those
cars, I will have to match their power connectors, speakers. et.al. .
I wil not make it easily done either. (You just apply this to
computer hardware purveyors for the past 30 or so years).
I continue to stress the moves last week by Microsoft toward Novell. The parallel of what has occurred is that Microsoft has now stated that if you install that new car radio ... you void the warrenty on the car! They have decided that they are now going to forbid you to purchase that other vendor's product.
What happens when they decide that installing Netscape is not allowed because it alters "key" file type associations?
I don't think is the proper role of "Politicos" to tell anyone
what kind of "standards" he must provide for the radio competitors. A
marketplace is best served by viable competition. Government, In MY
OPINION, has no business getting into it when one competitor finally
"WINS" in its chosen endeavor.
I agree with you ... to a point. And I *do* believe that consumers need to vote with their wallets. But when a large portion of the population of computer users have already invested in this product ... and there is no *real* alternative for business today ... do you allow a company to make *these* types of moves?
You might think that it's right ... but I'm not sure that it's good for the future ...
Scott C. Lemon |
