Re: defending Bill Gates the consumer

["Lewis A. Mettler" <lmettler@lamlaw.com>]

Eric,

Why do you continue to refuse to let consumers pick and choose what they
buy?

You falsely assume they even want Internet Plus Pack.

They may all already have their applications.  All of them.

Eric Lee Green wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 18 Dec 1999, you wrote:
> > As has been shown on this list defending Bill Gates as a consumer is
> > easy to do.
> 
> Well, Lewis, here's a plan:
> 
> Buffy, Bonnie, and BIll want to buy an operating system.
> 
> Buffy and Bonnie want Internet capability, like most people buying a new
> computer today.
> 
> Bill doesn't.
> 
> So let's add up the costs to consumers of bundling vs. non-bundling:
>               bundled     unbundled
> Bill           $79              $69
> Buffy         $79              $69  + $29 for Internet Plus Pack
> Bonnie      $79               $69  + $29 for Internet Plus Pack
>                =====           =====
>                 237              265
> $79 is what we paid for Windows 98 at Linux Hardware Solutions. I am breaking
> the Microsoft OEM licensing agreement by telling you this, but what can they
> do, yank LHS's OEM contract? (Linux Hardware Solutions is no longer in business,
> so there isn't much Microsoft can do to them!).  $29 is what I paid for the
> Internet Plus Pack in 1995. $69 is my estimate of the cost that Windows 98
> would be without Internet access bundled, based upon my knowledge of the
> software industry and distribution mechanisms (Microsoft probably only saw at
> most $10 of that $29 sale price for the Internet Plus Pack, due to middleman,
> packaging costs, shelf rental costs, etc.).
> 
> Okay, Bill is paying $10 more for his OS. But: Buffy and Bonnie are paying $20
> *LESS* for their desired configuration. And consumers, ON AVERAGE,  are paying
> $9.33 *LESS* for their desired configuration, due to the cost savings from
> bundling rather than having to buy their desired configuration as separate
> components.
> 
> So yes, Bill is harmed. But the average consumer in the above example is
> actually HELPED, because they're getting the desired functionality for less
> money. So Lewis, you are saying that the majority of consumers should suffer
> just because one person did not want browser functionality?
> 
> > Clearly I have claimed to represent the consumer. My articles on Bill
> > Gates illustrate that.
> 
> I suggest checking my web site at http://members.tripod.com/e_l_green . I have
> a variety of articles there debunking various defenses of Microsoft's
> inexcusable ethical lapses and noting outright lies that Microsoft propogates
> about their conduct and products. I, however, am not arrogant enough to presume
> to represent "the consumer".
> 
> > So.  I assume that everyone supporting that position is in fact
> > "selling".  They may not disclose who they represent but the fact
> 
> Ah. Here we go. The product I want to force the sale of is Linux. I am a Linux
> enthusiast, and I have "forced" the sale of Linux into every place of
> employment I've been at for the past five years, as well as stridently
> criticizing Microsoft's loathful ethics (or lack thereof) and shoddy business
> practices at every opportunity. I have detailed my credentials elsewhere.
> I am being paid by Enhanced Software Technologies, a founding member of Linux
> International, in order to design computer software. I am not being paid by any
> other entity.  I do not own stock in any of the following companies: Red Hat
> Software, VA Linux Systems, Microsoft, or Intel. I do not serve as a paid or
> unpaid spokesperson for any of the above entities, and anything I say here
> reflects my own opinions, not those of Enhanced Software Technologies Inc.
> 
> That does not eliminate the fact that most consumers want a browser when they
> buy a computer. It also does not eliminate the fact that Microsoft removes the
> ability of consumers to have a choice of browsers, by making it impossible for
> computer manufacturers to include Netscape Navigator as the browser of choice.
> But that's another issue altogether from the dead horse that you insist upon
> beating.
> 
> --
> Eric Lee Green   e_l_green@hotmail.com
>   http://members.tripod.com/e_l_green/

-- 
Lewis A. Mettler, Esq.(Attorney and Software Developer)
lmettler@LAMLaw.com
http://www.lamlaw.com/ (detailed review of the Microsoft antitrust
trial)