Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: ENR Article - This is a good one for

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
You said it so much better than me. I agree with you and was trying to
convey the same idea. Microsoft stepped over the line of control with the
intention of profiting.

The basic premise of the whole conversations is that engineers shouldn't be
afraid to offer peer-to-peer services including free information services
(like detail libraries) for fear of preventing somebody who might come up
with the thought of marketing such as package. The purpose of our existence
is to make a living working with our engineering skills, not trying to
profit from the use of the information available to us. If profit of the
tools is the goal, we need not be engineers but software developers.

The idea of being adamant to help one another because of fear of preventing
someone from selling a product seems off-the-wall to me. It's simply pushing
reality to another level of the absurd.

Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Turk [mailto:73527.1356(--nospam--at)compuserve.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 4:37 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: ENR Article - This is a good one for


Dennis,

If you owned the operating system, and controlled what operating system was
installed in *every* Intel based computer manufactured, and controlled what
other software the computer manufacturer could bundle with the computer and
installed your spreadsheet (assuming that it was something that was desired
by 90 percent of the people buying a computer) for free, then I would say
that you would soon have control of that spreadsheet market and have
everyone
else that had a similar spreadsheet for sale screaming to the blue heavens.

Gillette Safety Razor Company "gave away" (charged only a nominal price) for
their razor, but made a helluva profit on the blades which were necessary
for
the razor to work.

Micro$oft "gave away" (charged only a nominal price) to computer
manufacturers for their operating system to be preinstalled and controlled
what software could be preinstalled on the computer.

>From the gitgo, M$ purchased existing systems, starting with Seattle
Software's DOS (Dirty Operating System) which, itself, copied CP/M.

Any software that threatened M$'s dominance in an area was either bought by
M$, such as FoxPro, and put out to pasture, or disparaged, such as Timeline,
or a "free" version by M$ preinstalled on computers with M$ operating
systems.

That is monopolizing!

A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
Tucson, Arizona

Dennis Wish wrote:

>>If you use that argument, than I should never have donated the lateral
design spreadsheet to the community because it would hurt Keymark and
Woodwork's market - which I doubt it made a dent in.<<