"Is Nader right?"

[chuck <cswiger@widomaker.com>]

  Paul Ferzoco (by way of John N Bryan) wrote:
  > It's their overwhelming plan to FORCE us to use their products that
  > piss's me off. Those of us who've been in the industry for 30+ years are
  
  Hmmm, could someone elaborate on the use of 'force' by MS to use their products?
  I can easily understand that MS does a hard sell to a company, like their recent
  announcement that the Williams Co. will use the MS office suite, and that if your
  an employee of the Williams Co. you will be forced to use MS products or seek
  employment elsewhere. But is there any documented evidence that MS used some
  sort of leverage, hints of retribution, economic threats, threats of isolation, explicit
  or implicit, to coerce Williams or anybody into using MS against their will? I know
  of one city that bought a bunch of Win95 wrkstns and installed Corel office suite on 'em
  all. The head man there doesn't like MS monopoly and actually does something about it -
  purchases non-MS products.
  
  I still think there is time for public market forces to foster a groundswell of support for
  a competitive product without having to resort to draconian govt. enforced anti-capitalist
  measures, like the socialist 'anti dog-eat-dog' bill supported by competitors to a trans-
  continental railroad in Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged".