Microsoft Monopoly, OS vs Applications, Version Upgrades

Posted by Joe on May 26, 1998 at 09:18:48:

We really need to separate the wheat and the chaff here and decide if we are talking about operating systems or application programs. While there are certainly competitors for application programs, is there really a competitor for the OS? And don't tell me OS/2 or Unix or Mac. Is there really an alternative to Windows for the x86 platform?

I think not and, as a result of this, I suppose one could surmise that MS has an OS monopoly. So someone comes out with a new x86 OS tomorrow. Does it run windows applications? No? then were are we going to get applications from? And are those apps going to be able to share information freely with other people's applications? Probably not (have you ever tried to read a Word Perfect file with Word (or vice versa)? And since the exchange of information is vital to the way we do business today, would we buy such applications? I suspect the answer is no.

So, if Microsoft does have a monopoly, it is because we gave it to them. Remember, they weren't always the only player and they didn't crush the competition unfairly -- they simply made products that appealed to us (and they way we need to do business) better.

Back to the original question though: Does MS have a monopoly on Applications or OS? There's lots of places to buy apps; MS has an OS monopoly. In my opinion, they should give the OS away. It is the service enabler, and they are going to make money hand over fist with applications anyway. They should give the OS away, (or charge very little for it). Even the drug pusher gives away the first fix to get you hooked.

My gripe is that they keep *changing* the OS, which may require me to buy all new apps since the old ones might not run on the new OS. And if I chose to keep the old OS, I'd better not need to swap files with anyone or add any new apps since file are not always exchangeable and the new apps are not old OS friendly.

I have two different versions of Win 95. They look and feel completely different and yet are both called Win95. How can I believe that one is a bug fix of the other? Clearly they aren't, and Win98 isn't an improved version of Win95 -- its a totally new OS. I don't want a new OS. I want Win3.11 with bug fixes. But I can't get it, can I? I have to buy the latest and greatest OS thing, all new apps, and try to figure out how to make it work without a major loss of time. And after I climb the learning curve, am I any more productive? Am I able to get things done easier? Have I added any new and worthwhile features to assist me in my work? Probably not.

My dream would be to have a stable platform to get work done on. That means bug fixes to some version, not feature enhancement and new look-and-feel. And not compatability changes either. Just fix the bugs and let me get on with life.

What the justice department should charge MS with is some form of class action suit on behalf of all of the companies that have lost time (and time is money) to upgrading, troubleshooting the upgrades, training, lost files, and general lost revenue in the form of lost productivity as a result of MS Windows 'upgrades'. Here is where the real crime has been committed.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: We really need to separate the wheat and the chaff here and decide if we are talking about operating systems or application programs. While there are certainly competitors for application programs, is there really a competitor for the OS? And don't tell me OS/2 or Unix or Mac. Is there really an alternative to Windows for the x86 platform? : I think not and, as a result of this, I suppose one could surmise that MS has an OS monopoly. So someone comes out with a new x86 OS tomorrow. Does it run windows applications? No? then were are we going to get applications from? And are those apps going to be able to share information freely with other people's applications? Probably not (have you ever tried to read a Word Perfect file with Word (or vice versa)? And since the exchange of information is vital to the way we do business today, would we buy such applications? I suspect the answer is no. : So, if Microsoft does have a monopoly, it is because we gave it to them. Remember, they weren't always the only player and they didn't crush the competition unfairly -- they simply made products that appealed to us (and they way we need to do business) better. : Back to the original question though: Does MS have a monopoly on Applications or OS? There's lots of places to buy apps; MS has an OS monopoly. In my opinion, they should give the OS away. It is the service enabler, and they are going to make money hand over fist with applications anyway. They should give the OS away, (or charge very little for it). Even the drug pusher gives away the first fix to get you hooked. : My gripe is that they keep *changing* the OS, which may require me to buy all new apps since the old ones might not run on the new OS. And if I chose to keep the old OS, I'd better not need to swap files with anyone or add any new apps since file are not always exchangeable and the new apps are not old OS friendly. : I have two different versions of Win 95. They look and feel completely different and yet are both called Win95. How can I believe that one is a bug fix of the other? Clearly they aren't, and Win98 isn't an improved version of Win95 -- its a totally new OS. I don't want a new OS. I want Win3.11 with bug fixes. But I can't get it, can I? I have to buy the latest and greatest OS thing, all new apps, and try to figure out how to make it work without a major loss of time. And after I climb the learning curve, am I any more productive? Am I able to get things done easier? Have I added any new and worthwhile features to assist me in my work? Probably not. : My dream would be to have a stable platform to get work done on. That means bug fixes to some version, not feature enhancement and new look-and-feel. And not compatability changes either. Just fix the bugs and let me get on with life. : What the justice department should charge MS with is some form of class action suit on behalf of all of the companies that have lost time (and time is money) to upgrading, troubleshooting the upgrades, training, lost files, and general lost revenue in the form of lost productivity as a result of MS Windows 'upgrades'. Here is where the real crime has been committed.