[Am-info] Gateway Official Hits Microsoft Licensing In Testimony

[Joe Moore]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 10:33:43AM -0500, Felmon Davis wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 March 2002 05:32 pm, Joe Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 05:04:35PM -0500, Felmon Davis wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 26 March 2002 11:38 am, Joe Moore wrote:
> > > > I wonder what would happen if the OEM really looked at the cost
> > > > of alternative OS support vs. the cost of supporting Windows. 
> > > > What do you think the service surcharge would be for a
> > > > Microsoft OS?
> 
> I hope so but this hypothetical scenario assumes both sufficient 
> demand for other operating systems and a good cost/profit balance: 
> OEMs must find that the market is willing to bear whatever it costs 
> them to install Linux, OS/2 or whatever. (I'm having a hard time 
> filling out the 'whatever' with plausible candidates.)

This scenario doesn't assume anything about demand.

OEMs must be allowed to make the cost/benefit analysis of making non-Windows
operating systems to be preinstalled on their hardware.  It should not
be Microsoft making that decision.

The OEMs in this situation would be able to price their operating systems
as the market would bear.  If Dell could keep their customers happy
by spending $15/PC to support RedHat, and Acer could do it by spending
$10/PC, (and they priced their OS efficiently) then Dell would
obviously have to charge more for their RedHat install, or find a way
to offset this cost elsewhere.  If consumers see paying Dell an extra
$5 (compared to the same-specced PC from Acer) for the Dell logo and
support, then there's a good, competitive choice.

> I don't think the demand is there, yet. I suspect the profit isn't 
> there yet either.

The demand is not there yet, any more than there is demand for competition
among airlines flying to the moon.

The profit currently isn't there because offering alternative operating 
systems has a huge contractual cost imposed by Microsoft.

--Joe