Re: Coercive Monopolies in Technical Markets (Intro)

From: Tom WSMF (
Date: Fri Apr 13 2001 - 13:48:54 PDT

On Fri, 13 Apr 2001, Stephen D. Williams wrote:

--]Well written.

I have to agree but with one bit to argue.

Free software is as important to MS as other commerical competitors for
one very important reason.

If this is truly a monopoly then we are stating that everyone who uses
OS's is using MS OSs, therefore is paying MS either in market share,
money, or combinations of both. If someone or many ones choose to use a
free os in place of a MS OS then the market share, money, or both that
should have gone to them is not. The loss is the same wether its going to
a competitor or staying inthe pockets of the users.

The result is loss of market share, loss of money, or both.

Therefor a free os can do damage to MS as well as an OS for pay.

The beauty of LInux over another forpay OS is that the money and market
share saved usualy go into tech, which means higher demand for neat tech
stuff and thus cooler stuff.

It is this diverting of resources away from the coffers of the "entitled"
entity of monopolistic or Uber controling force that will do the best
most lasting damage. Not only does it weaken the target it creates waelth
of both money and mindshare in other ways that will further work to eat
away at the base of the seeming impreginatable fortress of cotrol.

[[Heavy diversionay side bar---
With the OS wars, what competition did MS have? Being there as it happend,
and being an Apple fanatic at the start of the 80's , you will have to try
real hard to get over on the fact that most of the OS's at the time, froma
consumer standpoint, sucked. It was not the case that MS won by fear and
intimidation, if that were the case Apple should have won (see previous
posts about gold dealers, supoply chains, job rants on the floor, etc).
Rather MS won by sucking but sucking with good PR.]]

--]Free/Open software and related concepts seem to really philosophically
--]confuse a lot of people who seem to think that it's Marxest, etc. I see
--]it as compatible with capitalism with a few differences, but that's a
--]different conversation. One thing it's not is coercive.

Its a confusion that shows intent and education and willingness to knee
jerk to fud.

      /"\ [---=== WSMF ----]
      \ /
       X ASCII Ribbon Campaign
      / \ Against HTML Mail

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 29 2001 - 20:25:42 PDT