>From: "Billy Brown" <email@example.com>
>That, IMO, is what the government anti-trust folks have done. The Microsoft
>case isn't about protecting consumers from exploitative monopolies. Its
>about protecting businesses from competition, at the expense of the
IMO its not about protecting consumers or competitors. It basically comes
down to the "crabs-in-a-bucket" syndrome. Once any crab gets too close to
climbing out of the bucket, the other crabs will pull him right back in.
Gates & Co. were the winners. Problem is they won way too big. The natural
reaction is to join forces against the big winner who leaves us all in the
dust. I think it comes from our in-bred American fear of concentrated
I can actually feel both sides of this issue, but if it were up to me, I
would have waited until MS actually abused their power in a big way before I
pulled the rug out. I know Netscape would argue that they *did* abuse their
power. But I don't buy that. They were just way competitive and like
everybody else in the world they used their strengths for their own benefit.
I would have waited until they did something really dastardly, like
getting us all hooked on IE as freeware and then charging for it. Or
crushing all contenders in the OS field and then gouging the consumer with
exhorbitant prices or a pay-per-use or software rental scheme (like I hear
they're working on).
"I like dreams of the future better than the history of the past"
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:13 MDT