Again, your theory is funny and of no solid base at all .
1) Regarding your statement that Microsoft uses contract tying to force OEM bundle
and install IE with their OS.
First of all my question to you is "have you ever read the details of those contract?
or it is just your own guess or heard from the reporter ? "
secondly, it is not illegal to bundle other software product with another software
product to improve the performance of total package. So, what is wrong to bundle
IE with OS ? If it is wrong, then it means Intel can not embed the CPU with Video,
Audio function blocks, or the Cash memory anymore to make the CPU perform
better (faster, and add more functionality), even the MMX technology is illegal,
because the function set of MMX will eventually hurt the business of other competitors , and INTEL has 90% of the CPU market. If your theory is correct, then
it also means FORD can not sell the car which bundl with any components by FORD while those components were also manufacturered by other independent
manufacturers, because this means FORD bundel the autos it sells with the auto parts which also manufactured by other auto parts manufacturers, and accoring to DOJ's
theory, it hurt the competition , and according to your theory, FORD force the
auto dealers, or consumers to buy other auto parts bundled with the car, and those
auto parts were also manufactured by other independent manufacturers. So, if
you theory hold, FORD can only sell the auto body, and as a consumer, you have to order your tires, the airconditions, the engine, the transimission, the break, the mufflers, ...etc either from FORD or from other independent manufacturers, and you
will also need to have a third party to assembly the auto for you, by so doing, FORD
will not be against what you call anti-trust law. So, did you buy the whole car from
FORD, GM, Crysler , or you just buy the auto body from them ? Why don't you
complain that FORD, or other car makers illegally bundle other auto parts , the tires,
the headlight, the air contitions...etc, and illegally force you to buy the whole package from them ????? Or, you just have a double standard ? Or it is just because money talks, that you hold the NSCP stock ? You are just too simple minded.
The same thing hold for the Coke business, Coke was bundled with the aluminum
can and sold together to the consumers. If your theory hold, in the future you can only buy coke with your own cup, because coke can't bundle the can , it will hurt the
business of other aluminum manufacturers, and based on your and the DOJ's theory, it is monoply and against the law. Because, Coke had 100% of the coke market.
Even the hamburg you eat will be illeagal, because it bundle the beef from Mcdonald's farm, and based on your theory McDonald can only sell the bar, and the
beef sould be ordered separately by the consumers either from McDonald or
other independent providers. In this case , it means NSCP's navigator.
Miscroft did not force the OEM to bundle anything, it is already integrated as
a product, and the OEM do not have to bundle anything at all. Just like when you buy the car, it is sold to you as a whole package, the air condition , the tire, the engine is there, if you like the whole package, then you buy it, otherwise you go to other
dealers, just that simple. And there are other OS available, if you do not like Win98,
then you go to other OS, no one force you to buy Win98 which
has network navigating capability. I do not know if FORD will let you just buy the auto body and buy the engine from others. Without the engine being bundled with the auto body, a car is nolonger called a car anymore.
2. As to Microsoft give its explorer free.
I do not think the explorer is free, because the explorer is part of the win98, and win98 is not free at all. You can only say that Win98 had new capability being added , and which is no free at all. Just like buying a car, comparing the 1998 models with the 1997 models , you probably see more new features being added, and the list price is not changed. It does not mean the neww features are free, because the car is not free, it only means the price of the car is not raised. Without raising the price did not mean the IE product is not better than that of the competitors'.
3. Internal document is one thing, and it is another thing in the real world. I did not read those internal documents, and have no comment here. But, I do not think it is wrong for a company to have internal document which includes the content about
how to compete with competitos' products. If your theory hold, then you can not say anything against the government at home , and this is count as a crime, then, do you know that it is against the constitution which the country is built on, that is, freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Did you come from Russia ?
So, pls read 1), 2), 3) again and think it carefully !!!! |
