Don't believe in the free enterprise myth, why? Follow the links and you will see why. Someone mention Bill Gates? LOL I want to hear your defense of the awesome rags to riches story of BG after this enclosed read. Good luck.
http://www.google.com/search?q=amer...opoly&btnG=Search&hl=en&lr=&domains=rense.com
THE JEALOUSY EXCUSE
Q: "You're just jealous of Bill Gates and his friends. They are fabulously wealthy, and you are not. Get over it!"
A: "Tell me, do you approve of the fabulously wealthy drug cartels in South America?"
Q: "That's a bogus comparison. Drugs are illegal, software is not."
A: "All right, how about the tobacco companies. They sell a legal product, yet people are angry at them. Would you call that jealousy?"
Q: "No, but it's not the same. Smoking is hazardous, at least sometimes."
A: "So we agree that prosecution of the wealthy is not always the result of envy. Sometimes there are legitimate concerns about the quality of the products, or the tactics used by so-called "successful" people."
Q: "Yeah, but software doesn't cause cancer! Leave Bill Gates alone."
A: "The reason people are angry at the tobacco companies is not just the chemical composition of tobacco. It's because they lied to Congress, and they have sold a product that keeps people hooked in a stupor, and they have targeted children."
Q: "What does all of this have to do with Microsoft?"
A: "Not only are Microsoft products of very poor quality, but Microsoft's court testimony was an abomination -- rigged videotapes, phony denials, excuses, and doubletalk. The design of Windows targets technologically illiterate people and keeps them that way, dependent on Microsoft and unable to think for themselves. And of course Microsoft wants to swamp the schools with their products exclusively, so children will grow up incapable of using computers without Windows."
Q: "You would do the same if you had the same opportunity. It's just business."
A: "No, there are still some honest people in this world. I take pride in the quality of my work and the quality of the things I buy and sell. Societal decadence, the lowering of standards, and the spineless acceptance of deceptive business practices are no excuse for cheating people out of their hard-earned money."
Q: "Are you saying that everybody out there is stupid?"
A: "If Microsoft's shoddy products were physical objects -- such as cars, furniture, or stereos -- people would hate being forced to use them. People would be much angrier about a monopoly of products that they *knew* were bad, unlike software which fools people into blaming themselves for the problems. How else could they sell millions of books that called people "Dummies?" But sooner or later people wise up, and Microsoft is running out of suckers."
THE INNOVATION EXCUSE
Q: "Doesn't every company have the right to innovate without outside interference?"
A: "Not every company. Would you like to see a Mafia-owned pizza factory use clever new technologies to take over and monopolize the market for pizza, for example?"
Q: "That's not fair. Microsoft does not have hit men or drug dealers."
A: "We'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now. But how do you feel about white-collar crimes, such as industrial espionage, consumer fraud, and extortion? If a different company in a different market engaged in such criminal enterprises, would their ability to "innovate" be a reason to grant exemption from punishment?"
Q: "Okay, fine, but every honest, decent company deserves the right to innovate freely."
A: "Good, then we agree that the right to innovate does not belong to *every* company, only to honest and decent ones. All we have to do now is draw the line."
Q: "Yes, but what does that have to do with Microsoft? You can't assume that they are crooked just because they are successful."
A: "No, but likewise, you cannot assume they are honest just because they are successful. Either assumption would be an illogical, extreme position."
Q: "But you have to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt. Innovation is too important to risk clumsy intervention by the government."
A: "Would you agree that any agency that squashed an innovative, new company should be punished?"
Q: "Yes, exactly, innovation must preserved at all costs, even if some people get away with a few shady deals."
A: "So if that agency was Microsoft, and they crushed the innovative, small companies they competed with, they should be punished?"
Q: "That's not the same thing. Microsoft creates innovations. Microsoft is an innovative company."
A: "Do you believe that a pharmaceutical company that crushed its competitors out of existence, yet found a cure for cancer, should be exempted from punishment on that basis?"
Q: "Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about! Microsoft's innovations are too valuable to ignore. Innovation must be preserved at all costs."
A: "Yet that pharmaceutical company may have put 20 other companies out of business, killing off the cures for 20 other diseases. Then we have lost 20 times the innovation we have gained. So your position is a contradiction; agencies that crush innovative companies must not be exempted from punishment, because we risk losing more innovations in the long run."
Q: "But there are economies of scale involved here. Just like pharmaceutical companies, the software industry needs powerful, gigantic companies in order to innovate. That's the only way to generate the huge amounts of capital necessary to innovate in software."
A: "That assertion is false; little companies and individual software developers can innovate without the need for huge infusions of capital. Ever hear of Linux?"
Q: "Well, you got me there."
A: "Yes, Microsoft has destroyed more innovation than they have created. If they get away this time, thousands of innovative ideas may be lost forever, or at least delayed by many years, because Microsoft will have to waste time re-inventing the wheel."
THE ECONOMY EXCUSE
Q: "The current economy is booming. Microsoft is the reason for this. Microsoft has led us to an economic paradise."
A: "First of all, the current economy is a sham. Net personal, corporate, and federal debt now exceeds $12 Trillion and is growing rapidly. The economy is built on the shaky foundation of an overheated stock market, a mountain of debt, and millions of low-wage, foreign temporary workers in the high-tech industries."
Q: "Well, I got mine. Besides, as long as Microsoft continues to grow and prosper, the stock market will do just fine. Their innovations keep everyone working."
A: "Over the last two years, the majority of the stocks are down. Most of these are down 30% or more from their highs. And in 1998, half a million white-collar workers were laid off. Microsoft products have raised costs to the point that companies must constantly borrow to keep up, which makes them targets for takeovers and acquisitions."
Q: "Give me one concrete example."
A: "In 1999, First American National Bank of Nashville, TN, took over People's Bank of Dickson, TN. However, PB used Windows, which raised FANB's integration costs. Then FANB downgraded from OS/2 to NT and tried integrating their systems with First Guaranty Bank of Mississippi. The resulting integration costs pushed FANB into the poorhouse. Now AmSouth Bank of Birmingham, AL, a strong OS/2-using bank, is buying out FANB. Banks with lower TCO systems like OS/2 will eat banks that use Windows."
Q: "Well, Microsoft products keep the economy going by keeping up the "churn" in high-tech sales."
A: "Sooner or later, you have to pay the piper. The only thing covering up all this red ink is the absurd rate of mergers & acquisitions, along with the hyperinflated stock values that result. Sooner or later, somebody has to pay for the negative return on investment."
Q: "What do you mean, "negative?" Productivity is at an all-time high!"
A: "White-collar workers now put in 49 hours a week, but they only get paid for 40. It's easy to look 25% more productive when that 25% is free labor donated by the workers."
Q: "How do you explain the low unemployment rate?"
A: "Service jobs. A bunch of high-skill, low-wage jobs like computer technician and software tech support. Since 1992, every net new job in the L.A. basin pays less than $12 an hour. You ever try to feed a family in L.A. on $12 an hour?"
Q: "So you're saying Microsoft has got all the economists snookered?"
A: "Economists are no smarter than anyone else. Microsoft has done a great job of fooling almost everyone. But you can't fool all the people all the time."
continued on:
http://www.os2hq.com/archives/arch26.htm
