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 (21777)	11/25/1998 5:53:00 PM
From: Bearded One	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 24154

Gerald, let's turn this around. There seems to be lots of evidence that points to the possibility that Microsoft is a monopoly in the OS market. The high profit margin is evidence, not conclusive evidence, but evidence. The document I posted giving an example of the power-discrepencies between the OEMS and Microsoft is evidence, though not conclusive. The 90+% marketshare is evidence, though not conclusive. So, we have lots of non-conclusive evidence. But all the non-conclusive evidence points in the same direction. To me, that's pretty conclusive. This leaves just two arguments against concluding that Microsoft is a monopoly. One, it could just be luck on Microsoft's part. Lots of disparate random factors colliding together gives the false impression that Microsoft is a monopoly. The other (similar) argument is that there's evidence that Microsoft is not a monopoly, it just hasn't been presented. The first argument is impossible to decide on, so lets work on the second. Anyone have any evidence that Microsoft is not a monopoly in the OS market? Any niche OS markets that Microsoft once dominated but now have gone to someone else? Any OS prices that Microsoft was forced to drop? Any complaints by Microsoft to an OEM that the OEM ignored?