Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (23664)	11/23/1999 11:29:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Well, shoot, that takes us back to Brian Arthur, network economics, increasing returns and all that jazz, the arguments cut both ways. Or is this the classical "Chicago School" natural monopoly? Anyway, I've never advocated "structural remedies". The one thing that crosses my mind that actually might do some good would be to split Win9x and NT into different companies, so that somebody would actually have some incentive to make Win9X work decently. I'd hold my breath even less on that one than any of the existing proposals, though. Cheers, Dan.

To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (23664)	11/23/1999 1:59:00 PM
From: Bearded One	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

This weeks Economist has a wonderful summary of how Jackson's findings have turned the 'natural monopoly' argument back at itself. If Microsoft has a natural monopoly, then it is not efficient to compete against it. Almost by definition, if something comes along and knocks off a natural monopoly, then the monopoly is no longer 'natural.' Microsoft took actions against companies which presented threats to its monopoly. Those actions were predatory and simultaneously showed that even if Microsoft's monopoly was 'natural' at one point, it was no longer so.