[CLUE-Talk] Legal breaking of the MS monopoly WAS: Re: [CLUE-Tech] HP laptop

[Sean LeBlanc]

On 01-16 17:53, Ed Hill wrote:
> 
> Hi Kevin,
> 
> What I was hoping to do was convince some of the folks on the list to
> *DO* something useful about these problems.  Go write a letter outlining
> how the microsoft monopoly has hurt your business and what should be
> done to end the the abusive behavior.  Your letters are important.
> 
> So did you write one?
> 
> Ed
> 
> ps - If you want, I'll be more than happy to re-post plenty 
>      of background reading (URLs) and the address for your
>      letter or fax.

Would you mind doing this? 

I only ask because I must be missing something here - isn't this something
for the free market to settle? If you like Microsoft, buy and use Microsoft.
If you don't, use an alternative. Where is the M$ tax being paid if you are
buying from a Linux-friendly vendor, or if you are constructing your own
machine? 

The only real anti-competitive practice (on an OS level) I can think of that
affects everyone is the WinModem and WinPrinter, but with proper
understanding those can be avoided, and with enough people avoiding those
faulty products, there will be a correction as well. I realize hardware
vendors do this so they can cut costs on these components, but they need to
be clearer about this.

As for OEMs that *do* charge the M$ tax, can't you just vote with your
wallet? If the Dells or Compaqs of the world insist on charging for M$ OSes
you don't want, can't one buy somewhere else?

I guess as a Libertarian, I fear that any class action suits being taken (at
least on behalf of a federal or state government) against a company amount
to little more than extortion in the end, and benefit no one but big
government. Take the tobacco settlement. The biggest in history: 200+
BILLION. And it turns out that years later, MOST states are spending that
money any way BUT towards the original intent of "preventing smoking"...some
are using the money to balance their budgets.  What will be the final result
of an M$ settlement? A Software Department to "oversee" the industry? That
could be disastrous. 

Look, I have no love for Microsoft and their products. But ultimately their
success or failure is up to the consumer. There *are* choices out there. If
companies and consumers choose to keep hitting themselves in the face with
Microsoft, then M$ will succeed. If companies and consumers get fed up with
all the issues (esp. security issues) surrounding M$ products, M$ will lose,
and lose big. Again, I ask for the links because I don't see how Windows is
anti-competitive if there *are* choices for OSes. The arguments I've seen in
the past where "M$ owns the railroad", making the analogy that the OS is the
railroad just don't cut it. If one has the option to travel one of several
railroads that run in parallel to that railroad, it's not the same thing.

Regarding Microsoft running MSN *and* having an OS - that may be something
where gov't action is needed if MSN takes over many more ISPs.

-- 
Sean LeBlanc:seanleblanc at attbi.com Yahoo:seanleblancathome 
ICQ:138565743 MSN:seanleblancathome AIM:sleblancathome 
Sour, sweet, bitter, pungent, all must be tasted. 
-Chinese Proverb