Re: Supply and Demand

[Mitch Stone <mstone@vc.net>]

  In reply to Robert Mark Waugh's message sent 11/27/97 12:45 AM:
  
  >Actually, you're still not getting the Netscape licensing agreements.  It is
  >free for educational use and for non-profit organizations, and beta's are
  >always free.  Individual users _should_ buy a copy, but the licensing is not
  >really enforced terribly hard unless you're a company.  So, in effect, while
  >most people don't have to pay for it at home, it's still a distinctly
  >commercial product.
  >
  >It is, however, acceptable to have products as shareware, or even freeware. 
  >See below.
  
  Yes, I am "getting it." As you say, most people don't have to pay for 
  Navigator, and never have. Whatever the company's official policy, I 
  think this is widely understood by the public.
  
  >No.  This is what is at issue regarding the predatory pricing violations. 
  >Microsoft is utilizing it's other monopolies' profits to capture further
  >monopolies.  There is a difference between predatory pricing and tying, both
  >of which are illegal, both of which Microsoft is quite obviously guilty of.
  
  I don't know what revenues Netscape uses to subsidize the preponderance 
  of free copies of Navigator, though I presume it must come from 
  somewhere. And again, for purpose of this discussion, I am not 
  interesting in the tying arguments. They are relevant, but not to the 
  question at hand.
  
  >One way that the difference can be seen, not from so much a legal stand 
  >point,
  >but from a moral standpoint.  The main business goal of Netscape is to create
  >software that distribute information.  Netscape also produces a front end to
  >it's backend products (which are the products that actually make the whopping
  >70% of their profits, with the browser only capturing 18%)... So, in fact, 
  >the
  >browser is a perfect complement to the server products.  In this case, it is
  >quite obvious that distributing a free browser is not so much tying or
  >predatory practices, but is in fact enabling users to use the primary 
  >product.
  >
  >Another example of Microsoft tying and predatory tactics that is never
  >discussed is the fact that they include MS IIS with Windows NT, Advanced
  >Server.  This is quite obviously again a seperate product that is being tied
  >and leveraged using predatory (free) pricing against competing products, of
  >which there are several to choose from (Netscape, O'Reilly, etc).
  
  I have discussed this in some detail on the Boycott Microsoft site. I 
  agree, more people ought to know about it. I hope you will understand why 
  I am asking these questions: I am frequently challenged for what is 
  perceived by readers as an unwarranted "defense" of Netscape. And 
  honestly, knowing what I know, it can be difficult to respond to the 
  challenges.
  
     Mitch Stone
  +---
     He not only wants to win, but he wants to kill the competition. 
     He wants to bury the wounded. -- James Wallace, on Bill Gates
  
     Boycott Microsoft ** http://www.vcnet.com/bms