I do not agree. Mr. Gates is _the_ most influential guy in the business. There are few on the list that he could not take out of business should choose to do so. He could easely kill Apple (M$ even owns part of it) skype or kazaa could be build into windows anytime and who would then download the independent programs if a network of all windows users were readily availble?
M$ does not innovate. Thats not their business. Their business is to make money. So they wait and see which applications are successfull, and voila if they are free on the net, they appear in windows for free too (ie, mediaplayer, firewall)...
On the other hand, if there is a market where all competitors charge, they simply make a compeeting product (usually simpler) and make it easy to use. (sql server, office)
So they have success. Not only through being a monopoly but also through analysing their competitors and trying to see how they can improve their programs, and how they can make them simpler so that ordinary people can use them. - Something Linux, Oracle, IBM and so on could learn a lot from.
Also, M$ has a mantra of making it easy for the developers to make programs for their platform. Consider VB and dotnet. Especially VB really sucks from a computer science perspective, but it really have enabled a lot more people to produce programs than for example c has. (or at least it is a lot easier). And this is one of the reasons why M$ won windows vs. os/2. They gave away their developers kits, while IBM charged $20000 a piece. Guess where the garage developers of the early 90's put their developing efforts? And have you noticed how there is a lot of code examples and documentation for dotnet and vb on the net, while oracle and ibm has almost none?
So to recap.
1) m$ enter platform 2) m$ makes it easy to program for their platform 3) a lot of companies makes a lot of programs for m$'s platform 4) m$ picks the winners of 3) and buys them or hires their best developers and makes a competing product, preferably bundling it with other m$ products for a synergy effect, and definetly making it easier to use. 5) profit (a lot) 6) Bill Gates is the world richest man, and quite more powerfull than the top 50 it people.
Phew, that was a lot. Thank you for reaching the bottom.
Now, consider what you would do if you have any power over Linux, Symbian, IBM, SAP or any other company with a platform worth defending. I don't think they are doing very well. And I simply cannot believe how stupid the execs of the above companies are.
Slashdot Mirror
Democracy is counting skulls instead of brains. - Cant remember :)
Nevermind Oil, we just want a dollar every time anyone use the northpole in a compass! :D
Then again. How would they sue you without using your name?
I do not agree. Mr. Gates is _the_ most influential guy in the business. There are few on the list that he could not take out of business should choose to do so. He could easely kill Apple (M$ even owns part of it) skype or kazaa could be build into windows anytime and who would then download the independent programs if a network of all windows users were readily availble?
...
M$ does not innovate. Thats not their business. Their business is to make money. So they wait and see which applications are successfull, and voila if they are free on the net, they appear in windows for free too (ie, mediaplayer, firewall)
On the other hand, if there is a market where all competitors charge, they simply make a compeeting product (usually simpler) and make it easy to use. (sql server, office)
So they have success. Not only through being a monopoly but also through analysing their competitors and trying to see how they can improve their programs, and how they can make them simpler so that ordinary people can use them. - Something Linux, Oracle, IBM and so on could learn a lot from.
Also, M$ has a mantra of making it easy for the developers to make programs for their platform. Consider VB and dotnet. Especially VB really sucks from a computer science perspective, but it really have enabled a lot more people to produce programs than for example c has. (or at least it is a lot easier). And this is one of the reasons why M$ won windows vs. os/2. They gave away their developers kits, while IBM charged $20000 a piece. Guess where the garage developers of the early 90's put their developing efforts? And have you noticed how there is a lot of code examples and documentation for dotnet and vb on the net, while oracle and ibm has almost none?
So to recap.
1) m$ enter platform
2) m$ makes it easy to program for their platform
3) a lot of companies makes a lot of programs for m$'s platform
4) m$ picks the winners of 3) and buys them or hires their best developers and makes a competing product, preferably bundling it with other m$ products for a synergy effect, and definetly making it easier to use.
5) profit (a lot)
6) Bill Gates is the world richest man, and quite more powerfull than the top 50 it people.
Phew, that was a lot. Thank you for reaching the bottom.
Now, consider what you would do if you have any power over Linux, Symbian, IBM, SAP or any other company with a platform worth defending. I don't think they are doing very well. And I simply cannot believe how stupid the execs of the above companies are.
And Colon :)