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: Reginald Middleton who wrote (17887)	3/5/1998 9:21:00 PM
From: Keith Hankin	Respond to of 24154

This has not altered the prices of other OSs, therfore they can not unilaterally control prices. Yes it does, for even if I decide to use another OS, when buying the PC, I will still have to pay for the MSFT OS, even if I don't use it. Win 95OSr2/98 also represents significant new R&D expense. I'm sure that they've already made back their expenses on R&D for Win95OSr2, and then some. Also, you're telling me that I have to pay for MSFT's R&D expenses for Win98, when I'm buying Win95? Just look at MSFT's unprecedentedly-high profit margins, and you can see that they don't have any competitive pressures to keep prices down. This is a true sign of a monopoly. Win 95 is more than 10 time the product that DOS was. Not exactly hard to do. If you admit that NSCP gave away free email clients to cut off Eudora's air supply, and gave away free browsers to cut off Air Mosaic's "air" supply (no pun intended:-) NSCP is not a monopoly. MSFT is. And that is why they have to live by different rules. You may consider this unfair, but this is part of the price they have to pay for doing business in the US of A. Yes, I know you keep saying that NSCP is some sort of monopoly and MSFT isn't, but I don't know who you expect to really believe this except those who wish to continue to make controversial statements just to get attention.