BFRD

Recently a thread had sparked a debate about whether or not Microsoft was an economic monopoly. The context of the thread that it was posted in caused that discussion to be off topic; and it was removed. I had a chat with admin and he agreed to let this stand as a topic on its own. However, we all need to keep in mind that this discussion cannot turn political (or rude). This is merely to get some rational thoughts on a topic that many of us seem to have only an un-educated opinion (please note that I said many and not all). So let’s keep our posts clear and well worded. Also, please keep in mind that this is an open forum and any posts that claim an opinion as fact could be considered libel. Keep your posts polite and if you do state something as a fact, provide reliable references. Let this be notice that trolling will not be tolerated.

As for my opinion, I do not feel that Microsoft can be considered an economic monopoly. Let’s look up the definition of monopoly before going any further.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/monopoly
(I couldn't get the definitions to paste properyly, so here is the link)


So now that we have a definition of a monopoly, we should figure out how that definition would apply to MS. This is where I begin to harden my belief that there is no such monopoly. Each definition focuses on a single entity possessing the ability to provide goods or services. If we look at the core products of MS, nowhere can we find that they are the sole provider of goods or services. If we look at Operating Systems, they compete with IBM, Apple, UNIX, and many flavors of Linux. Their browser competes with Mozzila, Opera, Safari, Netscape and many others. MS Office competes with OpenOffice, Corel, Lotus and several others. I cannot think of any aspect of their business that doesn’t have competition, in many cases the competition is offering free products. So for the people that claim that MS is a monopoly, exactly what is it that they have a monopoly on? The government isn’t making them any more or less successful than they do with any product they use. Surely MS shouldn’t be punished for having a huge market presence. After all, isn’t that huge market presence what every company hopes to attain?


I think the bigger issue may be anti-trust, but I think that can be a different post.

Contrary to some opinion I welcome opposing views. We can only learn new things if we allow ourselves open to the possibility that what we currently feel is true, may actually be false. Perhaps my view is incorrect, I will be more than happy to explore other possible truths if they merit such exploration. I would encourage each of you to do the same. Spend a little time trying to belive each post. At the end of the day, if you still can't swallow it, at least you decided to give it chance. So remember to keep your thoughts on target, legal, and polite.

__________________
Helpful Posts (Hopefully )
Overclocker's Calculator
Photo Editing - B&W w/Color Accents

CyberDruid

No--it's not a Monopoly in the strictest sense of the term. They may be engaged in litiginous acts, but nothing that would cause them to be broken apart like the telecoms were 30 years ago.

__________________
I Build Custom Rigs and Work Acrylic. PM for details.... 25,291 3DMark06...21,908 Vantage...Join the Red Tide
Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About CyberDruid...Support Your Local Druid...Mod Supply Sale...LaserCut Grills

xenophobe

No. Apple, however, is getting there with their ipod, iphone, itunes deal though....

l V l

Microsoft bought a very nice chunk of share from apple, ensuring their survival as not a monopoly forever. LOL. MS is pretty smart.