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 : Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Captain Jack who wrote (683)	5/31/2002 2:01:45 PM
From: MeDroogies	Respond to of 4345

I suspect you have worked with MSFT on something and never had a bad experience. I, on the other hand, HAVE had several. Both directly and indirectly. MSFT IS dangerous. They do lie, cheat and steal. The term vaporware used to be applied primarily to MSFT products for these reasons. In many cases, they still are. I'm a Libertarian. I don't fall into the monopoly camp easily. I oppose most monopoly legislation. This is one where I did a 180 AFTER I had problems with MSFT and MSFT related vendors. Consumers always want a better product, but I've used PocketPC and Palm. Palm remains superior, as far as I'm concerned, and not due to anti-MSFT feeling. I use MSFT products all the time. Some are good. I disagree with your assessment of the situation. Palm could've made agreements with the major mfgs early on, but MSFT locked them out because most of MSFT's licensing prevent OEM's from going to other vendors if MSFT can provide SOMETHING remotely similar. That's why it sucked for so long. MSFT was in no rush, not because they were mfg's were waiting to get in the market, but because they knew that time (and money) was on their side. They knew they could build slowly and let the market develop, with little cost to themselves, then launch their fully functional product with alot of fanfare, and from major mfgs, at a competitive rate and make outlandish claims about it. MSFT is great at posturing. They have deep pockets. And they are a monopoly. Don't forget, a monopoly is only illegal if they engage in behaviors that are inherently anti-competitive. MSFT is smart, in one sense. They rarely KILL their competition. They simply kneecap them so they can tell the judge "we still have competition". It's a fine line, but I don't see the difference between that and anti-competitive behavior.