Re: uninstallation

[Steve Cohen <stevecoh@mcs.com>]

Mitch Stone wrote:

> In reply to Steve Cohen's message sent 1/24/98 8:07 PM:
>
> >And I still say that a lot of the reason that it's easier for Macintosh to
> >achieve
> >this is that they are not hobbled by having to support "generic" peripherals.
> >Macintosh is not an open standard.  It's a proprietary standard that is
> >selling
> >hardware at a markup.  If you want to pay that extra, fine.  But there is
> >a reason
> >Macintosh lost battle after battle if not the war, and it's not that the vast
> >majority of
> >businesses and individuals are a bunch of sheep.  It's that the equipment was
> >cheaper.
>
> I find a few inaccuracies and unsustained assertions in this statement.
> The Macintosh supports "generic" peripherals, insofar as I understand
> what is being suggested. Scanners, printers, drives, etc. all can be
> connected -- they don't have to be manufactured by Apple, or even blessed
> by Apple. In any event, the hardware issue is not pertinent to question
> of the removal of applications, which is the subject at hand. If you have
> any information to the contrary, please be forthcoming.
>
> Nearly everyone seems to harbor some theory as to why Apple "lost" the
> war, but to even express the question in these terms is to support the
> theory that only one company can prevail industry-wide. According to this
> yarn, minority products are, by definition, "losers" and should be
> disregarded. If that is the case, then perhaps we all ought to abandon
> this discussion immediately, declare Microsoft the fee simple owner of
> the technology universe, and go home to our wives and families.
>
> Also, I will observe with the utmost respect that anyone who says that
> there must be a reason why Apple is where it is today probably does not
> actually know the reason. "Expensive hardware" is an oversimplification.
>
> >What I'm saying is that I'm sure there must be a better way to manage all the
> >complexity of the PC-clone marketplace than what Microsoft has set out.  I
> >don't
> >know what it is.  But since the Apple Macintosh is not an open standard
> >either, I'm
> >not sure it's relevant to the discussion.
> >
> I imagine nobody here wishes to get into a full-on discussion about what
> constitutes "open" as opposed to "closed" standards. I agree -- it is not
> relevant.
>
> >By all means, use what you prefer.  But I will admit that I get
> >exasperated by
> >people who say they use Macintosh as a status symbol that sets them above
> >the herd
> >of PC users.  The issue is how to stop Microsoft from building a monopoly.
> > Telling
> >everyone to buy a Mac instead ain't gonna get it done.
>
> "Status symbol?" Honestly, this is much too old a war-horse to be trotted
> out here.
>
> When exactly did suggesting that people who are fearful of a Microsoft
> hegemony, or don't care for their products, =actually buy a product from
> a competitor= become unwise advice? Isn't this is the very essence of
> informed consumer behavior?
>
>    Mitch Stone
> +---
>    The idea that people know what they want is wrong.
>           -- Laura Jennings, Vice President, Microsoft Network
>
>    Boycott Microsoft ** http://www.vcnet.com/bms

  You may be right that my remarks about generic peripherals are somewhat
off-subject
and out-of-date.  There was a time when it was nearly impossible to use an Apple
computer
and a non-Apple printer, but that was probably long ago.

Okay.  And yes, I see nothing wrong with urging people to buy products from a
Microsoft
competitor.  Long before I discovered this list-serve or any of the internet sites
devoted to
the maintenance of competitiveness in the computer industry against would-be
monopolists,
I followed this advice.  Although the free downloadable versions of Netscape were
more than
adequate to my needs, I bought two editions of Navigator because I respected the
product and
figured they needed some money to stay competitive with Microsoft.  But this is a
small gesture
and not really likely to make a difference, and principles are important.

But Microsoft isn't a hardware manufacturer (or much of one anyway. They do sell
mice and keyboards, I suppose).  Microsoft did not make my computer.  Gateway 2000
did.  I like my
computer.  And yes, I want to have it all.  I want all the benefits of
"standardization" but I want
that standard to be fairly and honestly enforced and I want fair competition among
software
vendors within that standard.  From that perspective, urging me to buy a Macintosh
is utterly
irrelevant.

This issue really goes beyond Microsoft.  If Apple were in the hegemonic position
that
Microsoft is today, I think we might be launching these same verbal assaults on
them.