[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Fair Trade and Anti-Monopoly

  I believe that Microsoft has created more wealth in ten years than any
  other company in history. And I am not referring to the more than 10,000
  Microsoft Millionaires (employees of Microsoft) but rather to the tens
  of thousands of small businesses like mine  who grew through nurturing
  by Microsoft, and because Microsoft standards, once mastered, allow
  little guys to create for the big guys. Microsoft standards are a great
  leveler; the low cost of their products put them in reach of all. As
  someone who favors giving the little guy a chance, you should be
  applauding Microsoft for all it has accomplished.
  David E. Y. Sarna       davids@objectsoftcorp.com
  ObjectSoft Corp. (NASDAQ:OSFT)    http://www.objectsoftcorp.com
  433 Hackensack Ave., Hackensack, NJ 07601
  Tel.: (201) 343-9100    Fax: (201) 343-0056
  > -----Original Message-----
  > From:	myturn@vcol.net [SMTP:myturn@vcol.net]
  > Sent:	Sunday, November 02, 1997 12:25 PM
  > To:	Multiple recipients of list
  > Subject:	Fair Trade and Anti-Monopoly
  > 	Were it not for antitrust actions that compelled IBM
  > 	to respect our competitive markets, MS would be a
  > 	zero today.
  > 	Now, based on some merit and much aggressive
  > 	questionable practice, MS is a near monopoly in
  > 	significant markets.  It will get its day in court as all
  > 	of  us should.  
  > 	The story of the success of a small company reported
  > 	today that may be indebted to the standards the
  > 	market has seemingly adopted, is a fair one.  This 
  > 	appraisal of MS must take into account the need for
  > 	such standards to allow both consumers and small
  > 	producers to succeed.  
  > 	The current method of fighting it out in marketing to 
  > 	get standards out there, and then curbing abuse via 
  > 	fair trade and anti-trust, has its faults.  The best 
  > 	technology is not always the standard the market 
  > 	selects.
  > 	Some new systems may be in order that would balance
  > 	marketing by jury competitions, as in architecture.
  > 	Winners of jury awards might get large subsidies to 
  > 	allow them to catch up to inferior products that have
  > 	"caught on" -- especially when "catching on" is often
  > 	the result of marketing practices that only barely escape 
  > 	prosecution.
  > 	In all events, the Nader Appraisal has its work cut out
  > 	for it.  If it does not come up with solutions it can
  > 	sell to voters -- such as juries and large subsidy awards
  > 	-- we will make only marginal progress.  (Of course, 
  > 	MS will, I hope, be made to back down in the browser
  > 	tie-in to Windows.) 
  > 	Meanwhile, there is a good chance that in ten years a 
  > 	user friendly open system, with virtually no user futzing
  > 	required (VNUFR), served by 	many producers, none 
  > 	with dominance over all others, 	will emerge.  MS may 
  > 	even be the largest software writer for such open 
  > 	system. Or it may be only a lesser player.  
  > 	Our real need is for digital money to support 
  > 	democratic free enterprise, digital education on 
  > 	demand, and digitally enhanced law and politics to 
  > 	inform the public and serve its interest.  	If  MS 
  > 	doesn't supply these needs, and PBS does not,
  > 	and Disney, Sony, Turner, Murdoch, etc., do not, 
  > 	maybe NS (Nader Systems) will.
  >         John Gelles                   email  address: myturn@vcol.net
  >         http://www.myturn.org   ;    http://www.rain.org/~jjgelles/
  >         The Web addresses above argue for economic rights and
  >         wealth  creation,  and for individual and national  security,
  >         to be financed by credit and protected against inflation by 
  >         full automation and  saving --  not  by  high  interest,  high
  >         unemployment and high taxes.