Re: no Java in XP Windows

> > My feeling is that at this time and for some time to come Microsoft has
a
> > tight control on the OS and desktop applications market. So, I think
that
> > associating either of those groups with another area of technology lets
> the
> > new product gain acceptance through Microsoft's ability to push it into
> the
> > market.
>
> Please reiterate. I don't think I understand what you mean.

Since Microsoft has both a tight control on the OS market and a tight
control on the Applications market, if you let either of the two associate
closely with another area of technology they can use their position to push
that technology into the marketplace using monopoly control. So I really
prefer splitting off Internet technologies into another group. I think this
is more important right now because there is a lot of change in how things
are being done.

I'd prefer it if the market could influence things rather than just MS
pushing a technology on the market.


> But that's the $64K question; how is a breakup going to achieve your
> objective - which is essentially a dramatic reduction in marketshare for
MS'
> products.

Actually, that isn't my objective at all. What I want is that the best
technology/price/performance provider have the marketplace. I personally
feel that if MS is forced to compete that they will.

Look at the difference in how they have behaved in the desktop and server
markets. Microsoft has spent the last 9 years readying their server
software. That is what is supposed to happen. But in the desktop
marketplace, they force a new technology on the market at their own timing.
Holding back technology when their licensing with other companies makes it
prudent, and forcing unready products on users.

Now, their ability to force the desktop has influenced the server
marketplace. But they are far from winning it. They compete with Unix
variants and IBM's variety of OSs. All I want is to see the same form of
competition exist in the low end of the marketplace.

I think that the lack of competition in the desktop marketplace really hurts
the server marketplace. After all, to the user, the server is no more
reliable than their desktop. The server is no more feature rich than they
have access to from their desktop. The server is no more user friendly than
is provided by their desktop. If one server environment has the fast track
to providing services to the desktop then it has an advantage in competing.

> > If it does become the defacto front end, then it could be that if it is
> tied
> > to either of MS's other companies then this would just grow into another
> > monopoly problem.
>
> It already is the defacto front end. This battle was won long ago.

Well, yeah. Of course that is what the main focus of the antitrust suit was
about. But it could be that now that Microsoft has been shown to have acted
illegally, Netscape has the option now to sue for their own remedy.
Remember, this suit is from the Justice department and its findings can now
be used as statements of fact in lawsuits from those who were cheated by
Microsoft.

So it is possible that Netscape could in fact get a remedy of their own at
some point that would require bundling their browser with Windows for a
period of time or some such.

> I think you're looking for a "fair" playing field. The problem is that
> capitalism doesn't work that way.

Well, I don't think so. I mean, I agree that there are always perceptions of
unfairness. I think all we can do is limit how far out of bounds people go.
When we see a company straying from the rules, we start our litigation. By
the time we get a settlement, that guy has already looted the masses and we
are opening the door for a new guy. But between the times when the market is
held and looted by some goliath, we open the chance for the little guy to
compete and innovate.

By the way, I know that IBM has been every bit as misbehaved as any other
company but I still find them to be about the best company in the world. I
used to love the way IBM's R&D developed such incredible technology and the
way their cross licensing deals opened the R&D channels to much smaller
companies. This let the whole cross licensed marketplace develop along
different lines instead of just everyone trying to invent the same thing.

A lot has changed but I still like IBM quite a bit. Someday, when Microsoft
isn't ripping me off every day, I may have good things to say about them. I
am a forgiving Christian man. It is much easier for me to love a repentant
sinner than one who continues to deny his misdeeds. ;-)



> John Taylor

Chris Rehm
javadisciple@earthlink.net
If you believe that the best technology wins the
marketplace, you haven't been paying attention.


+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---