[Am-info] query about MS "Innovations"

[John J. Urbaniak]

Felmon Davis wrote:

> On Saturday 06 April 2002 12:48 am, Sujal Shah wrote:
> >[...]
> > So, having multiple applications for a given function is
> > facilitated (i believe OpenOffice, Abiword, and KOffice are all
> > working on a common word processing file format, for example).
> > Source availability helps a bit, too, since you can document the
> > format completely from the source, then have someone clean-room a
> > new implementation (though a lawyer might have something to say
> > about that).
> >
> > This doesn't mean that open source addresses the monoculture
> > problem, though.  Monocultures are created by not having
> > competitors, and by having incompatible competitors (eventually,
> > people give up and either install several types, or choose the one
> > that appears cheaper, a la millions of pre-installed Office/Works
> > installations).  Sometimes, they are created by other factors
> > (imagine RedHat and Suse, for example, cornering 99% of the Linux
> > space, and both deciding to standardize on Abiword, with funding...
> > we'd see a monoculture very quickly appear, assuming abiword was
> > equal or better (hypotheticallys) to the other offerings).
> >
> > I hope I made sense (it's after midnight here, and I'm about to go
> > to bed). :-)
> >
>
> Makes good sense. I was interested in the 'monoculture' issue, not
> the virus issue per se. You argue monocultures arise from market
> conditions favoring monopoly. That was in a way an answer to my
> question which I'll rephrase though since it, the question, is a bit
> clearer to me: are there any technical factors which favor the rise
> of a monoculture?
>
> I can't think of any in relation to file formats for word-processors
> - Word and Excel leave a lot of room for 'metadata' which can pose
> privacy risks but kword or StarOffice needn't abuse such a buffer
> this way.
>
> What about other stuff like 'sendmail'? Hasn't there been kind of a
> monoculture there in the Linux world until lately? A good solution (I
> assume, in its day) gets diffused and its risks and hazards get
> similarly diffused?
>
> I'm asking questions in order to try to think straight on the issues,
> in this case, about conditions for 'monocultures'.
>

I would argue that the technical factors dis-favor the rise of
monoculture.

But the emotional factors, fear, laziness, desire to do what everyone
else does, follow the path of least resistance, etc., favor monoculture.

We see repeatedly which wins.

John