Re: bundling (again)

[Doug Masson <dmasson@well.com>]

So have we figured out what constitutes bundling? When does a single
product become a combination of products? And, if someone figures a way to
split a product, does the former product become bundled products? Or is it
like the philosophical notion of an atom, incapable of being split without
becoming something else?

If we've already figured that part out, then I guess we can begin our work
ridding the world of the agonizing question of what constitutes
"fairness".


_____________________________________________________
Doug Masson			There is no windchill
dmasson@well.com	  	  at absolute zero.


On Fri, 3 Dec 1999, Joe Moore wrote:

> "Lewis A. Mettler" wrote:
> > Let me say it again in simple English, "bundling is inherently unfair to
> > consumers".
> > 
> > If for any reason you do not think so or can not understand that obvious
> > observation, then please explain how bundling is fair.  That is
> > precisely what I have been trying to get others to do for the last
> > "whatever period of time".  When NO ONE does that, I begin to assume
> > that bundling is in fact "inherently unfair to consumers".
> 
> Is that all consumers?  If so, then a contradiction can be shown by
> finding a  consumer to whom bundling is fair.  Bundling applications
> with an operating system is fair to those consumers who want the
> functionality of all elements of the bundle.  Therefore, bundling is not
> inherently unfair to all consumers.
> 
> Are there consumers for which bundling is unfair?  Yes.  But your
> generalization is not justified.
> 
> If you mean that "bundling is inherently unfair for some consumers", I
> would say that the fairness is not inherent to the bundling, since it is
> not universal.  So your generalization is not justified.
> 
> --Joe
> 
> -- 
> IBM's vision is apparently to make IBM hardware "scream with Microsoft 
> software" --The Register,
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/990927-000003.html
> 
> I have visions of screaming with (at and about) Microsoft software, too.
> 
> 
>