Re: true in the near term: "Why M$ has won" (I@week)

[Richard Crisp <crisp@rambus.com>]

Of course one point that most people seem to overlook (conveniently for
their arguments perhaps) is that when comparisons are being drawn
between Microsoft and prior trust busting such as IBM, Standard Oil etc,
is that in the case of Microsoft, the consumer is getting more for less
money. Not so with IBM or Standard Oil or the ridiculous comparison I
read in today's Mercury News about the village peddler that says "if you
want to buy my butter you have to buy my eggs". A more accurate
comparison would be "free eggs if you buy butter".

Last time I checked, IE is free. You pay for Win9x but get the IE
without paying a penny more.

In my case, I just ignore IE and install Netscape which I prefer.

I guess the IE takes up some disk space, but since disks are so cheap
now, I simply don't worry about any of that.

In the meantime all I hear is a lot of belly aching by Microsoft
wannabes.

The Microsoft wannabes remind me a lot of Micron Technology. Micron
complains about the Taiwanese and Koreans selling DRAMs and SRAMs in the
us below their manufacturing cost. But when I go to Taiwan (monthly) I
hear that the guys bombing the price of DRAM are none other than Micron. 

Appleton (Micron's CEO) raised holy hell about the Korean bailout,
citing the issue that our tax dollars are used to prop up his
competitors. Well I have news for Appleton: the fact is that the low
price of DRAM and SRAM is good for American industry as a whole, and who
the hell cares if Micron is suffering, if Compaq, Dell, Gateway, Sun,
IBM, HP, SGI, etc all can sell a better box for less money using cheap
DRAM?

Like Micron, the Netscapes, Suns, Oracles etc of the world want to use
the courts to solve a problem that stems from the fundamental fact that
they simply cannot get their act together enough to be competitive in
the market.
rdc