Suggestion for Breaking Microsoft's Monopoly

E

Eugene Esterly III

badgolferman said:
They are not monopolies. There are viable alternatives available. If
they make a product that people want then they will take market share
away from Microsoft. IBM was the monster at one time and they lost
their market share.

This is called capitalism. If you don't like it there are alternatives
elsewhere.

I have to agree with the above statement. The USA is a capitalist
society & the main thing in business is that you have to give the
customers what they want or they will go to your competitiors. The main
reason why most computer software companies go bust isn't because of
companies such as Microsoft, IBM, et al, it is because they want to sit
on their rears & not add new features & innovations to their software.

Some companies want the money to come in but they don't want to listen
to the customers, et al.
 
C

Caesar Romano

I still think Winodws and MS Office should be open source. They are
monopolies and this is illegal in the US.

No, monopolies are not illegal in the U.S. What is illegal is for a
company with more than a specified market share in a defined market
engaging in "monopolistic practices". A monopoly that does not engage
in monopolistic practices does not violate the law.
 
D

Daniel Mandic

socrtwo said:
I still think Winodws and MS Office should be open source. They are
monopolies and this is illegal in the US.


As the U.S. Post?



Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic
 
B

Brian (Groups)

Daniel said:
Too much knowledge makes you blind and interrogating.

That's the moment where a human is asking himself, because of so much
knowledge. But not without saying it loud and officially (mostly
politicians).

Sorry, my limited knowledge does not enable me to comprehend any of the
above.
Why is little knowledge dangerous??? Have your cacao or coffee and tee
ever exploded or burned your stomach? It's mostly developed and
harvested by people with little knowledge. Or the Oil-Platform digger,
do you think he (she) is stupid? Or, is it more intelligent to open a
barbershop or a milk-bar on a Oil-platform?

I would like to drink my drugs (see above) rather from a skilled
cultivator than from a intelligent (much knowledge, schools, diplomas
etc...) business stock-trader. Yuck, he/she could give me only shit,
that's all they can cultivate (living their life without planting one
tree but using many - car driving, heating, farting, disposal-gases.

I believe the expression is alluding to "a little knowledge" of a
*particular* subject. The cultivators and oil rig workers are probably
*very* knowledgable in their own areas of expertise, as are the
business stock traders in theirs. Thanks for supporting my contention.

Brian
 
C

Craig

Daniel said:
socrtwo wrote:



As the U.S. Post?
Daniel;

Our business offers shipment via U.S. Post (USPS) as well as Federal
Express (Fedex), United Parcel Service (UPS), DHL, Emery & Airborne.

But...we counsel our customers against using USPS for our international
shipments since they /may/ subcontract to private companies within the
target country. Twice in the last five years, these (unrelated)
subcontractors have attempted to extort our clients.

Sorry, don't have their names but the target countries were France and
Philippines.

In sum, USPS isn't a monopoly and, thank goodness!

-Craig
 
D

Daniel Mandic

Brian said:
Sorry, my limited knowledge does not enable me to comprehend any of
the above.

Possibly it's not your knowledge, it is more my limited expression in
english.

We have such politicians asking themself (e.g. in a TV Live
Show/Moderation), but not without saying it loud, like: "I ask myself
why this problem.... etc. etc...blah"
I believe the expression is alluding to "a little knowledge" of a
*particular* subject. The cultivators and oil rig workers are probably
*very* knowledgable in their own areas of expertise, as are the
business stock traders in theirs. Thanks for supporting my contention.

Brian

And the harvester?



Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic
 
S

socrtwo

This is a freeware group. Open source is arguably a kind of freeware.
Isn't there one poster in this group who will side with me.

Possible reasons for keeping MS Windows and Office a monopoly:

1. I own stock in Microsoft.
2. Microsoft is paying me to troll groups and refute revolutions.
3. I didn't think of this myself.
4. Making Microsoft open source would hurt my paycheck.

Good Reasons to open source it.

1. Good guys win (meek shall inherit the earth).
2. Let's see exactly where they stole code if any.
3. Programs that are on most people's machine no longer act in secret,
we can see exactly what they are doing.
4. Steal the thunder or at least one of the key motivations of virus
writers/security threat.
5. Perhaps this opens most systems vulnerable tio other attacks like
say terrorists, but they use computers too.
6. Jesus prophecied that whatever was said in secret would be shouted
on the rooftops. It's going to happen anyway, why not now?
7. Bill Gates can sleep easier. As he said recently nothing good
comes from him being the richest person in the world. Presumably
because of the exposure, but also because as the scripture says, those
who pursue wealth pierce themselves with many painful arrows. It's a
miserable experience to seek to be wealthy.
 
A

Al Klein

This is a freeware group. Open source is arguably a kind of freeware.
Isn't there one poster in this group who will side with me.

Possible reasons for keeping MS Windows and Office a monopoly:

1. I own stock in Microsoft.
2. Microsoft is paying me to troll groups and refute revolutions.
3. I didn't think of this myself.
4. Making Microsoft open source would hurt my paycheck.

Prohibiting trade secrets would destroy the economy - the only reason
needed to not side with you. If you want to live in the far distant
past invent a time machine and go back there.
 
D

Daniel Mandic

Al said:
Prohibiting trade secrets would destroy the economy - the only reason
needed to not side with you. If you want to live in the far distant
past invent a time machine and go back there.


Please put me out....


I just replied: And the U.S. Post?
..
..
..
..
..




Kind Regards,

Daniel Mandic
 
J

John Hood

Al said:
Prohibiting trade secrets would destroy the economy - the only reason
needed to not side with you. If you want to live in the far distant
past invent a time machine and go back there.
Where does it say anything about prohibiting trade secrets?

John H.
 
D

d12s34f56

socrtwo said:
This is a freeware group. Open source is arguably a kind of freeware.
Isn't there one poster in this group who will side with me.


Possible reasons for keeping MS Windows and Office a monopoly:

1. I own stock in Microsoft.
2. Microsoft is paying me to troll groups and refute revolutions.
3. I didn't think of this myself.
4. Making Microsoft open source would hurt my paycheck.

Microsoft is a monopoly because it succeeds, just because you and a
bunch of loser geeks think otherwise doesnt mean it's right or most
people agree with you, you are not god, you know nothing about what
other people think, if you really know that much, you wont be so
miserable that you have to bash those who succeed to prove you are
‘different' and "smart".
Good Reasons to open source it.

1. Good guys win (meek shall inherit the earth).

Ha, since when loser becomes synonymous with “good guys",
2. Let's see exactly where they stole code if any.

If they stole anything, you have to first show your proof to prove your
allegation, it's your reponsiblities to prove it, not Microsoft, not
anybody's, you can's just request to ransack other people's home to
"prove" if they have stolen from you.
3. Programs that are on most people's machine no longer act in secret,

Most people didnt ask you to "free" them from Microsoft's secrecy, you,
like all those slashdot.org type geeks, take yourself too seriously.
we can see exactly what they are doing.

As said above, you dont have the right.
4. Steal the thunder or at least one of the key motivations of virus
writers/security threat.

So the best way to combat drug abuse is to legalize heroin? You are
sooooo liberal.
5. Perhaps this opens most systems vulnerable tio other attacks like
say terrorists, but they use computers too.

I guess you strategy to combat terrorism is to spread AIDS so that
everybody's immune system is compromised.

6. Jesus prophecied that whatever was said in secret would be shouted
on the rooftops. It's going to happen anyway, why not now?

You are not Jesus, you can't predict the future, you might think you
are, but you are not, it's as simple as that.
7. Bill Gates can sleep easier. As he said recently nothing good
comes from him being the richest person in the world. Presumably
because of the exposure, but also because as the scripture says, those
who pursue wealth pierce themselves with many painful arrows. It's a
miserable experience to seek to be wealthy.

Those who steals from other will burn in hell, if it's miserable
experience to persue wealth, so why dont you donate your paycheck to
me? If you can't, Please shut up, open source hypocrite..
 
D

Daniel Mandic

Do you know in the slightest how to reply in Usenet?


I told it one time...


If you do not read all in the thread you cannot reply as you wish.



once again:

The > marks are wrong.

It should be:

So it is O.K. for me.





Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic


P.S.: You are writing about stealing. From what time-period to today do
you mean? 2000? - Stealing high-end resources (Diamaonds and lower...).
Or earlier? - When even human bodys have been stolen from Africa.
 
A

Al Klein

Where does it say anything about prohibiting trade secrets?

Microsoft's source code is a trade secret. Forcing them to reveal the
source code would require a law prohibiting trade secrets. Or a law
requiring MS to make their source code available, which would be
unconstitutional.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top