Re: no Java in XP Windows -- MIDRANGE-L

Responses in line,

----- Original Message -----
From: "srichter " <srichter@mail.autocoder.com>
To: <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: no Java in XP Windows


> How do you explain the success of ms office? It is not bundled with the
os, ms charges a premium for it, and yet it outsells all of its competitors.

Actually, this was very much the subject of part of the monopoly problem. MS
Office is very much bundled with the OS. Now, the version I use came with
the computer my wife bought. According to the testimony of hardware vendors,
one reason for this was the licensing options of Windows. In other words,
the license cost for the OS is different if it is bundled with Microsoft
products than it is when bundled with non-MS applications. So, for Lotus or
Corel to bundle a suite with a vendor's computer they have to make an offer
that overcomes both the cost of Windows and the increased cost of the OS.

Initially, when MS Office had no market penetration at all, MS shipped it
for free bundled with the OS. Now, I could suppose that they just ate the
cost of that, but somehow the company managed to make money. I suppose they
were just lucky enough to have all that extra income from Windows.

As a result, many users didn't see a need to invest in an opposing suite
when they already had a free one with their system.

Over time, this destroyed the income model for application vendors like
Lotus and WordPerfect. Once these companies could no longer compete,
Microsoft found they could charge a premium for their product and their
customers would be forced to pay it.

Here's a funny thing, IBM was not allowed during this time to do the same
thing because of their consent decree signed as a result of their bundling
in the mainframe arena. So they really couldn't have just bought Lotus or
WordPerfect years earlier and bundled it to compete.

> In regard to access to api's ...
> 1. After reading the Andrew Shulman books on windows internals, I dont see
why the techniques he uses to disassemble the api calls could not have been
used by lotus and wp.

Well, I am not sure what method was used by WP to demonstrate the problem
they were having. Originally, I believe they concentrated on developing
their own product without worrying that their application's reliability was
being sabotaged by the OS vendor.

But do you really think this should be necessary? I mean, if I want to sell
a product on an AS/400, wouldn't I feel a little cheated if I discovered
that the guys developing Code/400 were given a set of internals and APIs
that I was not?

> 2. Did big users of windows, like say citibank, not get the correct api
documentation either?  I doubt it. And I also doubt that the developers at
lotus and wp were fooled. I think only their lawyers say so.

Well, perhaps. I wasn't there.

> 3. all the windows api's are calls to functions in dll's. Lotus and wp
could have written their own versions of the api's that they suspected of
being bogus. No?

Certainly, but that would of course happen after they reached the point
where they figured there was some reason to suspect they were being cheated.

> 4. Lotus and WordPerfect had plenty of dos profits to spend on writing
their own api's if they really thought that ms was not giving them the
details. But they chose to pocket their dos profits while ms reinvested
theirs in windows.

Basically, it is a shame they spent their money developing their products?
MS has a profit margin twice as high as the industry average. That is not
because they have been "reinvesting" it is because they have control of
their marketplace and they can thus charge what they want.

> Not an ms appologist,

I'm sure not. I think that most people want the same thing, a good industry
standard OS, competative low priced applications, etc. The question is
really how to achieve that.

Microsoft has made a practice of doing things which really aren't good for
us. On the other hand, they have the products and the money to really give
use great competative products. So I think the best thing that could happen
is to put them in a position where they must compete on technical merit,
price/performance, COO, etc. I think they will compete. I certainly have no
wish nor perception that Microsoft would suddenly disappear! I would just
like to see them innovating the way WordPerfect did and the way Lotus did
and the way Netscape did. I would like to see it not take 9 years from the
time they promised a product until they delivered it. Stuff like that.


>
> Steve Richter

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
+---