Re: Netscape, XyWrite, and the Media

[Harry Binswanger hb@xxxxxxxx]

>There was a study which was published in "Harper's" in the summer of
>1998 showing that _NO_ manufacturer of PC's would provide a system
>with anything other than Windows. One or two said they would _remove_ windows
>and give you a blank system but they would not thereby reduce the
>price. If you insisted on , say, Linux, some would not do it, some would
>do it and charge extra.

Well, Harpers didn't ask W.L. Computers right down the street from me on
37th near 5th.

>There is also evidence that MS bullied European manufacturers if they
>would not install it,

"Bullied"? What they sent geek-goons over and threatened to break their
knees? I don't think so. It is impossible to style MS as "anti-competive"
without using the language of physical force to, inappropriately, describe
the terms under which they offer their product. In a free society, MS would
have the full legal right to demand that all purchasers of MS products wear
kilts and pigtails, plus never mentioning the word "Linux." Plus charging
$10,000 per installed copy of their OS. (Only companies find it more
profitable to please their customers.)

> and that a system with DR DOS installed woould
>be deliberately dumped with error messages (leading, according to
>its owners, to the demise of DR DOS. MS settled a suit with Caldera
>recently over this issue)

Now if that were deliberate (which I highly doubt), it would constitute
physical force: malicious interference with the property of another company.

MS won because its product, although aggravating to us single users, is not
a problem for companies large enough to have IT personnel whose job it is to
spare the end user from its bits of baffling behavior. That's the way I see
it.

Regards,
Harry

Harry Binswanger
hb@xxxxxxxx