MS court case

[Richard Brousseau]

The vultures at MS got what they had coming.
Some analysts calculate that the MS monopolistic practices
resulted in a $50 US over charge on each computer made due to
the inflated price of MS operating systems. If MS sends me a
cheque for $200 for the 4 computer I have bought over the years,
I might take a kinder look at their present predicament. From my
present perspective, they have been a bullying entity, greatly
thwarthing innovation and competition in this business far too
long. If they get brought down to size, in less than a matter of
weeks, new companies and products will quickly emerge to take
fill any gap. This will result in far better products and prices
than wihich the consumer must endure from their monotholic grip
on the market. Hopefully, the day may soon arrive where bankers
and venture capitalist will not initiate any financing
discussions with a start-up venture with the question: Does your
product compete against a MS product? and upon hearing yes walk
away from the table.

Just some of my humble thought on the question

[Jon Ogden]

"Richard Brousseau" <rbrous@home.com> wrote:
>
>The vultures at MS got what they had coming.
>Some analysts calculate that the MS monopolistic practices
>resulted in a $50 US over charge on each computer made due to
>the inflated price of MS operating systems. If MS sends me a
>cheque for $200 for the 4 computer I have bought over the years,
>I might take a kinder look at their present predicament.

Are you saying that Windows was worth $50.00 less than you paid for it? That's
opinion, not analysis, and certain not a fact. If you are saying that you
never, ever, not once, used Windows, then you shouldn't have opened the software
package.


>From my
>present perspective, they have been a bullying entity, greatly
>thwarthing innovation and competition in this business far too
>long.

And your prespective is what exactly? Employee of Novel?

>If they get brought down to size, in less than a matter of
>weeks, new companies and products will quickly emerge to take
>fill any gap.

Not in weeks, not in months, maybe in years -- and their business practices
will be just as hard-nosed as Microsoft's

>This will result in far better products and prices
>than wihich the consumer must endure from their monotholic grip
>on the market.

It will? You have proof of this? A better price than I.E.'s?

>Hopefully, the day may soon arrive where bankers
>and venture capitalist will not initiate any financing
>discussions with a start-up venture with the question: Does your
>product compete against a MS product? and upon hearing yes walk
>away from the table.

Ahh now I understand, no-one would put up the one billion dollars you needed
to develop your really neat idea for a database that would do have as much
and costs 90% of what SQLServer does.

>Just some of my humble thought on the question

Nothing humble and not much thinking involved in your rant.

[Robert Scoble]

Microsoft Windows cost more than a billion dollars to develop (Microsoft
continues to spend about a billion PER YEAR in research and development
costs).

They got in this trouble because they are giving away a browser for free.

Can you imagine the outcry if they gave away the OS for less than what it
cost to develop it? I can hear Apple and Sun and friends crying out now
"Microsoft is unfair for giving away the OS for less than it cost them to
develop it which is anti-competitive."

The fact is that Bill Gates can't win this game. He should have split up the
company while he had the chance.

--
Robert Scoble
http://www.netmeeting-zone.com
The NetMeeting Zone -- Microsoft NetMeeting MVP
http://www.devx.com --The Premier Online Information Source for Programming
Professionals


"Richard Brousseau" <rbrous@home.com> wrote in message
news:38edc8ab@news.devx.com...
>
> The vultures at MS got what they had coming.
> Some analysts calculate that the MS monopolistic practices
> resulted in a $50 US over charge on each computer made due to
> the inflated price of MS operating systems. If MS sends me a
> cheque for $200 for the 4 computer I have bought over the years,
> I might take a kinder look at their present predicament. From my
> present perspective, they have been a bullying entity, greatly
> thwarthing innovation and competition in this business far too
> long. If they get brought down to size, in less than a matter of
> weeks, new companies and products will quickly emerge to take
> fill any gap. This will result in far better products and prices
> than wihich the consumer must endure from their monotholic grip
> on the market. Hopefully, the day may soon arrive where bankers
> and venture capitalist will not initiate any financing
> discussions with a start-up venture with the question: Does your
> product compete against a MS product? and upon hearing yes walk
> away from the table.
>
> Just some of my humble thought on the question

[Andrew]

"Richard Brousseau" <rbrous@home.com> wrote:
>
>The vultures at MS got what they had coming.
>Some analysts calculate that the MS monopolistic practices
>resulted in a $50 US over charge on each computer made due to
>the inflated price of MS operating systems. If MS sends me a
>cheque for $200 for the 4 computer I have bought over the years,
>I might take a kinder look at their present predicament. From my
>present perspective, they have been a bullying entity, greatly
>thwarthing innovation and competition in this business far too
>long. If they get brought down to size, in less than a matter of
>weeks, new companies and products will quickly emerge to take
>fill any gap. This will result in far better products and prices
>than wihich the consumer must endure from their monotholic grip
>on the market. Hopefully, the day may soon arrive where bankers
>and venture capitalist will not initiate any financing
>discussions with a start-up venture with the question: Does your
>product compete against a MS product? and upon hearing yes walk
>away from the table.
>
>Just some of my humble thought on the question

It's a pity you haven't been around very long. 10 years ago when I was developing
Unix apps the operating system cost in the vicinity or $5000 (AUD). If you
think that Microsoft are overcharging for WinNT at around $400 (AUD) then
perhaps you should stop using computers and take up ant farming or something
that requires less capital expenditure.

Andrew

[Jim Fawcette]

You have an excellent point.

MS and Intel, whatever else they have done and whether you agree with all
their competitive practices (which I do not), have done more to lower the
price of computing power than all other commercial companies combined.

That's not because they are altruistic, but because their business models
were based on creating high volume products, while their competitors were
focused on selling high-priced products to a narrow customer base.

If MS (and Intel) won because their business model was superior, should they
now be punished?

Or more to what should be the real point of the trial -- what will that do
to help consumers? Will OS/2 and Solaris become excllent end-user products
overnight because of the verdict? Will dozens of new OS vendors magically
spring up with much better alternatives to Windows? Will the average computer
user suddenly develop the expertise to install Linux?

I doubt it. And, frankly, I doubt the cynical lawyers involved care.
/ jim