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: damniseedemons who wrote (18767)	4/28/1998 1:25:00 AM
From: Gerald R. Lampton	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Jeez, do you people really think Microsoft would cut off an OEM in the face of all the scrutiny they're under??? They'd be out of their minds to do this, and, if they are doing it, not to cave immediately to the first person who stands up to them and exposes the behavior, precisely my point. And Jerry, despite all of Marc Andreessen's hype about Linux that you seemingly are believing, if an OEM no longer bundled Win32 but instead went with Linux, their sales would quickly approach zero. If an OEM broke with Microsoft over Microsoft's refusal to allow them to bundle Windows and another OS, their sales would not quickly approach zero. If the OEM were large enough, they would be in a perfect position to call Microsoft's bluff. Microsoft cannot afford to have its larger partners raise a public ruckus about their bad sales tactics. It would make Microsoft look terrible, bring down the DOJ on them and, potentially, cause one of Microsoft's key partners dedicate itself to helping to construct an architecture around a rival OS to the exclusion of Windows. Microsoft could potentially lose access to huge swaths of customers. I doubt very seriously that such a risk is really worth taking, especially since, if you believe the "increasing returns" school of thought, the cost to Microsoft's market share of bundling Linux will be small. If the OEM were smaller, it would not have the market power to go up against Microsoft. But, there is, apparently, an installed Linux base, however small. It is simply a question of making Linux usable by "the rest of us," a problem Netscape is evidently now addressing. For a smaller OEM, servicing this base might present a viable business strategy, albeit one very different from the strategy most OEMs are pursuing now. I do not deny that such a strategy will be risky, nor that sales will see some rough spots. But I think the assumption that anyone who goes against the Windows tide will get crushed is an assumption that should be carefully examined, because it just might turn out to be false.

To: damniseedemons who wrote (18767)	4/28/1998 4:03:00 AM
From: nommedeguerre	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Sal, >>If an OEM no longer bundled Win32 They would save about $50 if they already owned DOS6.22/Win3.1 and a Windows95 upgrade disk. Of the half million or so people who purchased retail Linux last year, none of them bought new PC's, right? If Compaq had offered a machine with Linux on it last quarter they might have earned 0.02/share. Cheers, Norm

To: damniseedemons who wrote (18767)	4/28/1998 11:46:00 PM
From: Andy Thomas	Respond to of 24154

>>And Jerry, despite all of Marc Andreessen's hype about Linux that you seemingly are believing, if an OEM no longer bundled Win32 but instead went with Linux, their sales would quickly approach zero.<< If you offered BeOS machines as well (http://www.be.com) you might be able to make some money. I think you might be surprised about the number of people who are looking for an alternative to windows. If Netscape can write a good Linux shell they will be a good alternative. Be looks promising, especially from a multimedia standpoint. FWIW Andy