[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
"MS is the American Way!" <LOL> Steve, tell us another one!
Read my analysis all the way through. I promise to talk about
"pink-polka-dotted sailboats" at some point.
Here's my dissection of Steve Balmer's Remarks:
"I think what we're doing is right, lawful, moral,
proper, and competitive. I might even say it's the
American way. We're innovating, adding value,
driving down prices, competing, serving our
customers, and we're doing it well. A lot of other
companies in the United States are benefiting
because they're building on top of our platform and
thriving," he vaunted. "I might start playing the
"Star-Spangled Banner" if I went too long."
I take issue with his remark that MS is competitive.
How do you measure how a company is competing? The definition of
competition is two or more entities engaged in trying to acheive a goal
under a predetermined set of rules. Microsoft, by including IE in it's
OS is taking itself out of the browser competition. It effectively says,
we don't want to sell another browser. How is this competition?
I take further issue with his remark that what he is doing is lawful,
right and moral. Using your domination in one market to acheive goals in
another market isn't moral, it's greedy. Greed is bad - it's not right,
and it's certainly not moral.
I take issue with Microsoft doing customers or companies any good.
Everyone knows competition is good for a marketplace. I've already shown
that MS has no interest in competing with anyone. Competing wastes time
on the way to becoming rich! For more on why Microsoft is bad for
customers, read about innovation and software prices below.
I take issue with his statement that Microsoft is innovative.
I can't see how Microsoft still insists they are innovative. Much of
their talent is stolen from other companies, and that talent is wasted.
Do all of you at Microsoft hear that? All of you who were bought from
Borland? Apple? Interface Designers? I love the innovation that
Microsoft has shown the users in the field of disk compression, memory
management, fax software, and dial-up software. All of these items have
been integrated and all of these items have suffered horribly from
Microsoft so-called innovation.
"It is our hope and expectation that the judge will
concur with us--that what we've done is right and
innovative and pro-competitive because it serves
the consumer very well.
What customers? MS sells the majority of it's software at very
reasonable prices to OEM manufacturers. The rest of the world has had to
suffer with the exact same prices on all of it's software. The price on
Microsoft Office, Windows 95, and NT server haven't changed
signifigantly in several years. Microsoft serves it's OEM customers
fairly well, and that's no wonder for it's where MS's domination stems
from. It's a cozy relationship.
"We expect the judge to agree with us that we have
a right to sign contracts with our partners that say
that they cannot convolute our product in the
distribution process. That they can't take pieces of
our product out."
To the contrary, the government can tell MS it has to sail
pink-polka-dotted sailboats in the Indian ocean every tuesday before
dawn if it felt Microsoft would stop being anti-competitive because of
it. The issue is NOT what Microsoft is being told to do, the issue IS
whether or not Microsoft is being anticompetitive by what it is doing.
These practices must be stopped.
Delphi Programmer & Western Michigan Student (CS)
Kalamazoo MI USA