[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: arrogance toward customers
On Fri, 14 Nov 1997 15:51:08 -0500 (EST), Dave Hamilton wrote:
>I hope you and others don't assume that those of us who are not against
>Microsoft, are against everything else. With Microsoft's success, it
>comes as no surprise to anyone that they have their detractors. It
>should also be no surprise that Microsoft has a lot of supporters. And,
>that those supporters can be just as independent in their opinions as
>the detractors. I don't assume that people objecting to Microsoft's
>size and success are really "plants" from other software companies. I
>certainly have not made it my purpose in life to oppose OS/2, Netware,
>MacOS, UNIX, or anything else (heck, I still have a working Apple ][+).
>I'm not making any assumptions about anyone else involved here, and
>hopefully everyone else will do the same.
I don't believe most of us would care (I know I wouldn't) what
platform companies or consumers chose to use as long as they're able to
make that choice based on what they feel the best suits their needs.
The problem is that this often isn't always the case.
M$ does everything its' power to 'stack the deck' so that they
don't have to compete. They don't gain marketshare by putting their
products up against the competition, they do it with unethical OEM
contracting and questionable license agreements. In the vast majority
of the markets in which M$ has become dominant they've done it without
having to compete with the other products, they found ways to lock out
the competing products so that the consumer didn't have a choice...how
do the think they captured the home PC market, they did it by forcing
OEMs into contracts (that have since been deemed illegal) that forced
the dealer (who then forced their customers) to pay for a license for a
M$ OS for every CPU that went out the door. The problem is that in the
last consent decree the DOJ did nothing to remedy the marketshare M$
gained using illegal OEM contracting, and IMO if they had we wouldn't
need a forum like this today.
I personally boycott M$ products because IMO they're one of the
most unethical companies I know of. But I'm not about to try to force
my beliefs on anyone else, what I would really like to see M$ forced to
compete on the value of their products instead of using their lawyers
and PR machine as their way to garner more marketshare. All most of us
want is to see M$ compete on a level playing field, then let the market
make its' choice based on the products...the problem is that M$ doesn't
want to have to compete fairly, and they've been using their dominance
on the desktop to cheat consumers out of having a choice. It's time
someone forced M$ to stop using anything but their products to compete
(or should I say so their products don't have to compete).