Subject:
|
Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 24 Oct 2001 23:54:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
621 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > > >
> > > > > MS is not a monopoly.
> > > > >
> > > > > It has competitors, and effective ones at that. MS is dominant in certain
> > > > > market segments but since there are few or no barriers to entry other than
> > > > > MS competence at making good product, the net result of MS dominance (not
> > > > > monopoly) is that we pay less for OS and app than we would without them.
> > > >
> > > > What about the integration between OS and applications? Different market
> > > > segments right? So why should one corporation be able to leverage its
> > > > products in one segment as a direct consequence of its dominance in another
> > > > segment?
> > >
> > > Why not?
> > >
> > > This assertion has been made in this and other antitrust trials but has not
> > > been justified. I see nothing wrong with it. It benefits everyone to get
> > > more efficient products. There are no barriers to entry, so dominance is due
> > > to efficiency and product superiority. Those are good for the consumer.
> >
> > I would contend that it _is_ a barrier to entry. No other application
> > producer has the same access to the OS. The efficiency accrues from
> > interactions between the OS and application packages, as much as from any
> > inherent superiority in the applications.
>
> Nothing is stopping anyone else from writing a better OS. Novell tried. IBM
> tried. Novell tried buying one from AT&T...
>
> > Secondly, preinstalling Office and IE on new Wintel machines minimises
> > consumer choice.
>
> Nothing is stopping any hardware vendor from not installing it and going
> with a different OS, or any end consumer from uninstalling it. Nothing
> except that maybe consumers don't WANT Linux on their boxes.
Okay, another couple of points.
1. It's not about the OS, whatever the merits of DOS/Windows//NT. It's about
producing the OS _and_ the application software (whatever the merits of the
Office suite). By developing both the platform and the applications that 90%
of users want, MS gains a massive advantage over anyone who wants to develop
either a platform or apps separately. And it's not just because they've got
better developers or a better distribution network -- they can customise
both product lines to work optimally with one another, shutting out other
developers. This is especially so when they have the inside running on new
versions of the apps and OS.
2. I'm not really interested in reviewing the anti-trust case in detail with
regard to pre-installs. I think it's worth noting how ignorant many people
are of even the most basic software customisations (like setting a new
default homepage on their browser for instance), and how unreasonable it is
that "industry standards" should be tied to a particular corporation's products.
> > Thirdly, OS/application "efficiency" makes it much easier
> > to compromise security (and privacy?), cf Lovebug, Melissa etc.
>
> Here you have something. I'm just not sure what. I'd say take a looksee to
> see if those license provisions that disclaim responsibility are actually
> enforcable...
Or build and use systems that aren't as intrinsically vulnerable...
--DaveL
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
| (...) Yes, yes, yes, it does. But I'm still sort of missing how that's a bad thing. By developing both the engine and the transmission that 90% of users want, already preengineered to work together, GM, Ford, Daimler, Toyota, et al gain a massive (...) (23 years ago, 25-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Gotta love Oracle...
|
| (...) Nothing is stopping anyone else from writing a better OS. Novell tried. IBM tried. Novell tried buying one from AT&T... (...) Nothing is stopping any hardware vendor from not installing it and going with a different OS, or any end consumer (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
173 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
