To: Thure Meyer who wrote (19433 ) 5/19/1998 2:18:00 PM From: Reginald Middleton Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 24154
<I keep beating on this particular point, but if we could force "open source" types of standard for word processing, spreadsheets, graphics tools, web pages, etc.., (like ethernet, IP, etc.), then the marketplace would operate efficiently. Right now its just not efficient (IMO).> So I guess under the forced "open source" types of standard" I would be coerced to receal the code, methodologies, and man-years of work I out into my proprietary materials so all of my competitors can take advantage of it. There is no impetus to strive here. It more than borders on socialism and is definitely not capitalistic, reducing the concept of intellectual property and competitive trade secrets to that of rubble. <This is also a problem when trying to assess investment risks since even superior technology and market presence can be wiped out by MS. This is precisely what the NSCP problem was and still is.> If you were a business student, revisit your equity analysis classes. the primary assessment of risk starts adn end with management, not the underlying technology and not pre-existing market presence. As a matter of fact, during my short lifetime, the superior technology has lost out more times than not - in software, videotapes, automobile engines and other markets. <This is precisely what the NSCP problem was and still is.> NSP's problem was that they did not execute properly. It had nothing to do with technology. They should have kept the client free, focused on actual proprietary server applications (not just software) and sold a substantial minority interest to a better capitalized partner, namely IBM and/or Sun, in lieu of the secondary offering. The shareholders would be about three times better off (using historical data). Again, it is mgmt and not technology that is the key.