>The railroad gained their monopoly in part because they were given exclusive land grants at well below cost.
Which railroad are you referring to? The government offered ultra-cheap land to several. that's why I said barons, plural. No, it would have been impossible to start a new railroad with out government help, but what happened to the competition between those that recieved help? Your point may have shown my use of the railroad industry as a poor analogy of M$'s single company hold on the OS market. However, it hardly refutes the fact that once a company, (or group of companies with a friendly agreement) makes it up the difficult road to success in a capitalistic system there is nothing short of government intervention to keep them from doing as they please. Again, I am NOT arguing that M$ code should be auctioned off, I just think that the idea that people always seem to espouse; "the free market will work for the best if we would just let it", is incredibly naive.
Orders of magnitude more software companies doing what? Are these companies developing specialized software for industies or applications the average user will encounter? If it's the latter I'd bet you my bottom dollar their developing for the Windoze OS. Again, I maintain you're missing the big picture, walk into any business off the street and see how many are using OS/2 or Unix. In an educational environment the story would be different and I'll grant you that many corporations use Unix, but I truly doubt that the majority of users out there, from secretaries to teenagers playing Quake at home, have even HEARD of Unix. Do these people have a choice in OSs? I think not. Who is to blame for that and what is the solution? I don't have an answer to those questions but denying a problem exists just dooms the rest of the poor users of the world (non-geeks) to a single (shoddy) OS.
>Microsoft does not have a stranglehold on me or any of my computers. I can change operating systems at the drop of a hat. You can, too.
Of all the desktop computers in the world how many do you think run M$ exclusively? I have read that the figure is close to 95%. If you think that the majority of computer users can change THEIR OS at the drop of a hat you have not been in an office environment lately. M$ is THE OS if you want someone to be able to read your memos or see your slide presentations. Because of this they can do just about anything they want, like charging $89 for a bug fix. The system of capitalism works wonderfully, to a point. Once a company obtains dominance in a field the competition is quickly strangled. If you don't think this is true I will remind you of the Railroad barons that neccessitated the creation of antitrust laws in the first place. Is forcing M$ to sell their code the solution? No, I don't think so, but your opinion seems to be that there is no problem with the way M$ does business. I heartily disagree with you there, and quite honestly the fact that someone like yourself (use Linux, read/.) frightens me.
I have been switching back and forth between/. and ARS for two months now. I like the fact that I get a little more hardware oriented news there. Now I only have to turn my little head and check their box. Thanks Rob
Slashdot Mirror
>The railroad gained their monopoly in part because they were given exclusive land grants at well below cost.
Which railroad are you referring to? The government offered ultra-cheap land to several. that's why I said barons, plural. No, it would have been impossible to start a new railroad with out government help, but what happened to the competition between those that recieved help? Your point may have shown my use of the railroad industry as a poor analogy of M$'s single company hold on the OS market. However, it hardly refutes the fact that once a company, (or group of companies with a friendly agreement) makes it up the difficult road to success in a capitalistic system there is nothing short of government intervention to keep them from doing as they please.
Again, I am NOT arguing that M$ code should be auctioned off, I just think that the idea that people always seem to espouse; "the free market will work for the best if we would just let it", is incredibly naive.
Orders of magnitude more software companies doing what? Are these companies developing specialized software for industies or applications the average user will encounter? If it's the latter I'd bet you my bottom dollar their developing for the Windoze OS.
Again, I maintain you're missing the big picture, walk into any business off the street and see how many are using OS/2 or Unix. In an educational environment the story would be different and I'll grant you that many corporations use Unix, but I truly doubt that the majority of users out there, from secretaries to teenagers playing Quake at home, have even HEARD of Unix. Do these people have a choice in OSs? I think not. Who is to blame for that and what is the solution? I don't have an answer to those questions but denying a problem exists just dooms the rest of the poor users of the world (non-geeks) to a single (shoddy) OS.
>Microsoft does not have a stranglehold on me or any of my computers. I can change operating systems at the drop of a hat. You can, too.
/.) frightens me.
Of all the desktop computers in the world how many do you think run M$ exclusively? I have read that the figure is close to 95%. If you think that the majority of computer users can change THEIR OS at the drop of a hat you have not been in an office environment lately. M$ is THE OS if you want someone to be able to read your memos or see your slide presentations. Because of this they can do just about anything they want, like charging $89 for a bug fix.
The system of capitalism works wonderfully, to a point. Once a company obtains dominance in a field the competition is quickly strangled. If you don't think this is true I will remind you of the Railroad barons that neccessitated the creation of antitrust laws in the first place. Is forcing M$ to sell their code the solution? No, I don't think so, but your opinion seems to be that there is no problem with the way M$ does business. I heartily disagree with you there, and quite honestly the fact that someone like yourself (use Linux, read
Sorry I can't flame you because I agree with you.
I find it ironic that a story mentioning how new ideas are met with flames, is flamed.
I also think that there is always a large amount of ego involved in some of the comments I've read;
"This is all nothing new because *I* have been sending email for years!"
I have been switching back and forth between /. and ARS for two months now. I like the fact that I get a little more hardware oriented news there. Now I only have to turn my little head and check their box. Thanks Rob