A Personal Blog
MS's Domination… Is It Bad?
This thought has been brewing in my head for a while. Is MS’s “monopoly” and “domination” a bad thing? Many people get upset when MS releases new products: XBox was MS abusing it’s position, or so I’ve heard many times.
The majority of “anti-MS” people seem to really have one major concern: competition. They really want competition. Anything which vaguely smells of stifling competition is, apparently, a bad thing.
By and large I agree. It’s one of the reason I’m a real proponent of minority governments. But that’s for another day, and not on this blog ;-)
Anyways, getting back to the point, I’ve been wondering if it’s a bad thing for MS to enter entirely new markets with the “goal” of dominating it.
I use the word “dominating” loosely. I don’t mean doing anything unethical, I simply mean that they create a better product for the sake of competition (and money, obviously).
For instance, voice recognition.
If MS enters that market, and manages to dominate (ethically); it will be good for consumers because they will get a better product in the end. It would definitely increase my productivity.
Now, I’m not talking the big dreams of dominating the living room, really. I’m talking about things that affect people’s day to day lives, and mean real productivity and, gosh, pleasure.
Agh, what am I talking about, these are all dreams. And not very realistic ones. Plus, I’ll probably be burned for saying I want MS to extend their reach. Really I don’t care who does it as long as I can get decent products that help me, work properly and aren’t written by companies who’ll die in 3 years.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Jeremy Wright on January 14, 2004 at 9:53 pm, and is filed under Business. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site. |
No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
about 8 years ago
The practical reality is that without MS (or somebody) dominating, the markets would grow much slower. Would the office automation market have exploded likeit did if there was 20 Office packages, each with 5% of the market and incompatible file formats? I am big an Open Source proponent as you will find (outside of the datacenter anyway) but having some sort of standard is what enables a technology to cross the chasm into mass acceptance.
(You can’t talk tech marketing without a gratuitous Moore reference!)