 |
| |
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by dv8ed
No, seriously, tell me why releasing it to developers and just giving away the runtime dll, like vbrun, would have been bad. Developers can still put out something like MyIE in that circumstance. MyIE being a better browser than IE, that would benefit consumers. |
Why would MS spend millions on R&D on something and then hide it from most end users until someone else makes a frontend for it?
No, seriously, tell me why it's bad for MS to provide basic webbrowsing to anyone with Windows. The whole argument boils down to "it's anticompetitive", which is total bullshit: There's tons of competition out there, whose fault is it if IE is good enough and satisfies the needs of most customers? In the end, isn't it about protecting the customers?
quote:
Um. Um. Um. Want to try that the other way? And there is a difference between the short-term benefit of getting free stuff and the long term benefit of getting a better product. |
So please explain to me how people are being hurt in the "long term" of IE being free. 
quote:
None of which have any impact on the PC browser market as a whole, and therefore create no pressure to make IE better. Have you perhaps noticed IE stagnating lately? |
Why should they add more to a basic web browser? For more features, they want you to go to MSN. But most people just want a basic one. 
Again, you fail to understand what the programs MS bundles are about : basic features. If you want more advanced ones, go get them, but everyone should be entitled to basic defrags, basic disk checkers, basic partioning programs, basic instant messaging, basic web browsing, and basic virus scanning.
quote:
If, perhaps, MS put the effort of writing an AV package into, I don't know, debugging Windows, it might not demand AV support quite so much. |
Wonderfully lame and unoriginal troll. Most viruses aren't due to bugs in Windows, but social engineering and people's stupidity. Once you get someone to run a program or script, they can be infected. Only a slim minority are ones like Blaster or Code Red.
quote:
This is certainly an exception, not a rule. Go down to Best Buy or Circuit City or something. |
Ah, yes, I forgot that we have to use retail computer sales as the benchmark for our entire debate...
It doesn't matter if there are "exceptions", especially considering the "free" antivirus software most OEMs ship expire after only one year.
You're doing a damn fine job of attempting to dance around it, but what you're trying to do is force people to pay about $50/year for Norton rather than getting something necessary for the OS, with the OS.
There's a fundamental problem I've never seen any of the anti-MS folk address competently: The whole argument against MS making new products as part of the OS is that it's "anticompetitive". If it's anticompetitive, how come there's still lots of competition? If the consumers are somehow dissatisfied with the MS product, they can go replace it with whatever else they want, and no one's stopping them.
Not only has the bundling concept proven to be competitive, but it's so competitive that all of the other browsers look rather shite in comparison. Why should they opt for a slower, buggier browser like Netscape or Mozilla? Perhaps if people looked at the crap IE is competing with, and addressed those problems, IE would have more competition.
MS is the scapegoat for a pathetic little company with an uncompetitve product and a huge ego.
quote:
I ignored your questions because I already answered them. AV software is necessary. If MS wants to release a free AV scanner for download, go right for it. The question was product tying, which is bad for the overall quality of the software in that sector. |
Which you've never proven, because as we all know, with the historical precedents you're so fond of, there is still plenty of competition people can choose for.
The only thing it did was displaced the aging NS4.x browser. Netscape still makes crap products, why won't anyone admit the reason its marketshare sucks is Netscape sucks? Get real.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skanky Burns
If the bundled virus scanner is good enough, what use do we have for other products. In this situation, the consumer can only win.
If (as will most probably happen) the bundled virus scanner is decent, but products for sale are better, provide faster fixes when a new virus is released or such, then in this situation, the consumer can only win. Those who need more than ms can offer will download/buy something that suits their needs.
As the situation changes, consumers will change too. If MS stagnates development of the scanner, there will be a large-scale movement of people to whatever program satisfies their needs. |
u have dillusions as to how fluid and open markets are. they are not infinitely pliable there is friction getting in and getting out of markets.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skanky Burns
And that matters how?
Need I remind you of the browser-wars? |
there is not going to be a large scale movement of investors sinking money into competing w/ microsoft product. there just isnt. first they get it pre bundled w/ 95% of all computers, then at ne point they want microsoft can simply spend over the top of u. would u invest in that prospectus?
"yah we're gna compete w/ MS it'll take a few million to develop and minimally market our product. course MS could just outspend us, plus they're already in 95% of the market by default plus they have enormous cash but I still think its a good idea."
no1 is going to put money against microsoft, infact if I owned norton stock(are they public?) I'd dump it RIGHT NOW. cause when the 500 lbs bear that is MS decides it wants ur piece of the pie, it gets ur piece of the pie.
even if microsoft "slacked" on its product development. at ne point in time they could put upwards of A BILLION DOLLARS into it. they have something like 50 billion in cash in the bank. so I don't see how any sane investor would dare to compete w/ the prebundled advantage+the massive cash reserve. its personal economic suicide.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
The main problem with your argument is your inability to type full words.
Aside from that, you also seem to forget that MS' biggest competition isn't corporatations that needs investors, but open source upstarts from someone's garage. |
plz dont respond to me. I responded to someone else for a reason.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skanky Burns
If that logic followed through, then we wouldn't be seeing competing browsers. IE comes pre-bundled. MS has a massive cash reserve.
Yet Mozilla is around. Ditto Opera. Ditto Firebird. Ditto many of others.
Yes, MS could spend a billion dollars into their browser division and make a truely great browser. I would bet against it though. |
all free. how much money is mozilla and opera making? if they start making millions of dollars gimme a call. if u rn't making money from it MS isn't in a position to care. ur simply adding functionality to their product(the OS) for free.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
No sir.
Let me drop my pants so you can spank me. |
thats alright this time, just dont let it happen again.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Verto
Microsoft adding a free Anti-Virus program, is like Ford deciding to put fairly nice rims on all their cars, straight from the factory. Those who want to seriously bling-bling would still probably want to buy their own, but it would be ok for most people. |
that is a nearly unbearably poor analogy. there are so many pertinent differences that u'd need a net just to catch them all.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Verto, et al., the "car" analogies all fail for another reason as well. There is no monopoly car manufacturer. Now, let us suppose we are dealing with a true monopoly - let us say the former AT&T. Let's also suppose that people independent of AT&T developed the answering machine and had a well developed market. Now, what would happen to this market if AT&T were to install their own answering machines in every home free of charge? |
another thing that urks me is this "free of charge" thing. reorganizing what u consider "charging" the customer for makes zero difference to a microsoft accountant. its all marketing tactics. even in this hypothetical if atnt forced all service providers to put answering machines in. atnt would not simply take the profit losses ad infinitum like they were falling on the perverbial sword for their dear customer.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-08-2003 09:22
|