If linux is as functional as you say then there is 100% no doubt that there
is a viable alternative. Thus disproving the monopoly.
Anybody remind you today you're just a village idiot Justin? Now they
have.
Being a monopoly has nothing to do with viable alternatives. In
decades past Ma Bell, the original AT&T, was a monopoly until the
government broke it up. During the 50's and 60's and into the 70's
hardly anything in telephone technology changed that filtered down to
the consumer. Same old, same old. Why bother? AT&T had a lock on phone
service.
Back then we only had ground phone lines, long distance was expensive.
You wanted Internet access assuming your local phone company offered
it back in the ealy 90's, they on purpose dragged their feet and
limited speed to a trickle. Broadband? You kidding? You were lucky if
the local phone companies allowed you to hook up a 4800 baud modem.
Then with competition things rapidly started to change. When the cable
companies entered the picture it gave the local phone companies a well
deserved kick in the ass. Now they had to improve their service and
they did and the only reason they did was because of competition.
Now that Ma Bell was broke up and no longer is a monopoly, look at the
landscape. Cellphones, lower long distance rates, Internet phones, new
technologies sprouting up almost daily because of a HEALTHY
competative market. Think any of that would have happened as well or
as fast if AT&T remainded a monopoly?
Now Justin, are you sitting down? Imagine what might happen if
Microsoft wasn't a monopoly? Never mind, asking Justin to think is a
waste of time. He's Microsoft's biggest fanboy but can't even admit
that.
Don’t get me wrong. Linux has it’s place. I just don't feel it has it's
place in the average business desktop.
Bingo! What do you think would happen if Microsoft had say maybe just
40% of the market place or even less? Hint: An explosion in new
technologies. Microsoft wouldn't go away, no, forced to instead play
on on a level playing field the consumer would benefit because instead
of Microsoft alone deciding how things should be, maybe a half a dozen
or more companies would be competing for the same consumer's dollar.
Everybody would benefit because to hang on to the share they had
everybody would be forced to improve... even Microsoft. No more shoddy
software from anybody because to hold your market share you couldn't
get away with that kind of crap any longer.
You don't know s*it about business... or anything else, which you
reprove daily. But hey, keep entertaining us with your crap. Makes mye
chuckle.
