
Permalink for comment 534375
RE[3]: Comment by Radio
by tomcat on Sat 8th Sep 2012 17:20 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Radio"
Member since:

I would be right if MS didn't have killing any competitors (with any means, legal or not) in its DNA.
I want to emphasize once again: killing not competing (I admit that Apple isn't any better recently).
They are not about choice for the consumer but removing that through network effects that are totally outside of consumer control. Ok, XBOX is another story, a sign or "new" MS, but answer me is XBOX a sustainable business for them? Aren't they still making most revenue from their monopolies?

I'm all for competition but be it RIM, WebOs, Japanese super duper mistery OS, but pleeeaase not MS.

Paging, dsmogor. The 1990s are calling you. Seriously, dude, it's a new world. Microsoft isn't squaring off against a few poorly coordinated, inept players anymore. Google, Apple, Etc are all very well-financed and dominant in their markets. Any fears that you have are utterly muted by current reality. Microsoft will be *lucky* to gain even relevant market share in search, mobile, tablets. And given that, anything which makes the dominant players continue to compete, produce better products, and lower prices is good for everyone. Rooting for monopolies is what you're doing. Bad, bad idea. Apple and Google are the new Microsofts -- and in some ways, they are a lot worse.

Reply Parent Score: 2