Microsoft Hatred FAQ

[David Schwartz]

"Peter T. Breuer" <ptb at oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message 
news:b94533-nu5.ln1 at news.it.uc3m.es...

> In comp.os.linux.misc David Schwartz <davids at webmaster.com> wrote:

> No they aren't.  A pc o/s is something you load on an IBM pc, and an IBM
> pc is an open format.  There is no "microsoft computer", and there is no
> such thing as a "microsoft computer shop".

    That doesn't at all address my point. The point is, there are large 
numbers of people looking for computers with Windows installed on them. If 
you sell this type of computer, this type of person will come to you.

>> When a shop sells
>> machines that ship with Microsoft Windows, it is to some extent the power 
>> of
>> Microsoft's brand that brings them into the shop.

> No it isn't. Quite the opposite - look at a computer shop or a
> computer advert, and you will see "Pentium 4 3.4GHz 1MB cache, 1GB DDR
> RAM", etc. etc.

    And you will also see "Designed for Windows XP" or a Microsoft logo in 
the ad.

> Really - bar all the argument-shifting and picking up from nonsense
> points, I wish I could find some kernel of sensibleness in your
> argument because at times in the past you have acted sane. But not
> here! If you have an argument, out with the bones of it.  What is it?
> Something like "MS can do anything they like to make a profit"? No -
> they can't. Is it "MS can't be criticised for behaving like mad bad
> bullies"? Uh, uh, yes they can. And so on. What IS your line?

    No, my point is that this specific Microsoft tactic was a *lesser* 
tactic than offering only exclusive wholesale deals and there's nothing 
wrong with a company that only offers exclusive wholesale deals.

    What Microsoft didn't want was someone going to a store to buy a PC with 
Windows and being told that another OS is better and cheaper. If you want to 
sell a competitor's products, Microsoft wasn't going to let you use their 
popularity to draw that person in.

    Why should Microsoft let him build his business selling PCs with Windows 
and then let him sell the customers that he admits he would have only 
because he sells Windows PCs on a competitor's OS? He says he wouldn't have 
had enough customers to stay in business if he didn't offer Windows. Then he 
wants to concvince those customers to use a competitor to Windows. Why 
should Microsoft let him do that?

    If I am working on a new burger that competes with the Whopper, do you 
think Burger King corporate is going to let any restaurant sell my competing 
burger? So that people who go into a Burger King because they want a Whopper 
can be told how my competing burger is cheaper and better?

    Exclusive wholesale arrangements are not unusual at all. And one of the 
main reasons is that you don't want someone specifically looking for your 
brand to then be switched to a competitor.

    The point is, he wouldn't have customers if he didn't offer Windows. His 
customers are coming to him *because* he offers Windows. Microsoft wants a 
portion of the money that he gets solely because he offers Windows. Why 
aren't they entitled to it?

    He admits, he wouldn't have any business or any customers unless he 
offers Windows. That is, it is his offering Windows that allows him to build 
a business, a customer base, and so on. Why is it wrong for Microsoft to 
want a cut of the business that he has only because he offers their 
products?

    This is what Burger King does if you want to sell their burgers.

    DS