>> Nobody buys MS because they like it. They buy MS because there's 
>> nothing else on offer.
> 
> Right. Because neither Apple nor Linux are significant.

If you want to use Apple software, you must buy Apple hardware. Last 
time I checked, it's very pricey and available in only a handful of 
configurations, which usually can't be upgraded in any way. (Not to 
mention that there's only one possible supplier.)

> And we all know 
> there were no competing operating systems available when MS-DOS hit the 
> scene.

No, back then there *was*. Now there isn't really.

> The basic problem is that an OS is a natural monopoly, and it's also an 
> ecosystem for the software that runs on it.

Granted.

There's no *technical* reason, however, why somebody can't go out and 
implement an alternative office suite. (Apart perhaps from file 
compatibilty.) Yet nobody has done this. So everybody has to buy MS 
Office, because no alternative exists. That's just one example of what 
I'm talking about.

(Heck, I hear even Apple make you use MS Office!)

> There's definitely a network effect going on, and Microsoft definitely 
> squashed a lot of competition by contracting to have their stuff on 
> every machine sold for a while, but it's the network effects and the 
> availability of the kind of business software that you and I don't 
> really use that keeps Microsoft rolling.

Maybe. Personally think it has far more to do with MS's careful plan to 
remove all alternatives from the market. But anyway, we've had this 
discussion before. Nobody is going to agree with me...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message