mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

(RWC Members only)-Microsoft Bundling Practice--Off Topic

To: "Dan Ray" <danray@bluegrass.net>
Subject: (RWC Members only)-Microsoft Bundling Practice--Off Topic
From: Blake Wylie <bwylie@hiwaay.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 23:11:45 -0600 (CST)
When out in my MG, I always carry my Right Wing Conspiracy Membership Card.
I never leave home without it.  ;)  What about you, Dan!  :)

BTW...we're having a secret Right Wing Conspiracy at the secret meeting
place.  If you don't know the secret Right Wing Conspiracy handshake, you
will not be admitted.  Those who bring their MG get a free Right Wing
Conspiracy hat and mug.  :P

Heheh...  :P  

As always, have a great day!  :)

Blake Wylie
1970 MGB

At 05:59 PM 2/11/98 -0600, Dan Ray wrote:
>I think that first off, its a combination of sour grapes (on the part of the
>liberals who think Bill Gates has too much money) and a well-moneyed lobby
>effort. Having just downloaded IE4, Its a lot better than the NS I was
>using, but probably about the same as NS Navigator, which I haven't used.
>The difference is that after market stereo companies competing with AC
>Delco, in the case of GM, are more abundant and can make money selling to
>those with older cars AND can offer improved performance as well, whereas
>old computers really can't use new webbrowsers anyway.
>The whole thing is silly in my book. Web browsers are free to everyone on
>the net if they don't have them anyway. Why anyone would pay for a browser
>is beyond me! IF Netscape figured out something that MS couldn't to improve
>performance, then I'd go with it!
>If you really want to stretch it, why don't the satellite channel operators
>have the government investigate TV makers for providing coax connectors on
>their TVs and not satellite dishes? Maybe that's too far a stretch...
>
>Dan
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Scott Gardner <gardner7@pilot.infi.net>
>To: mgs@autox.team.net <mgs@autox.team.net>
>Date: Wednesday, February 11, 1998 10:48 AM
>Subject: Off-Topic--Microsoft Bundling Practice
>
>
>No LBC content here, but this is the biggest group of intelligent,
>insightful and opinionated people I can reach on a short notice, and
>I need to bounce something off of y'all.
>If you haven't been following the story, the government has accused
>Microsoft of unfair business practices by "bundling" their new
>Internet Explorer 4.0 web browser with Windows 98.  The claim is that
>the web browser is NOT an integral part of the operating system, but
>rather is an application program, and that by making it difficult for
>the end user to uninstall IE 4.0, that this will hurt companies such
>as Netscape that make a living selling web browsers, since most users
>will just blindly go with the Microsoft web browser that comes with
>the operating system.
>My question is, how does this differ from auto makers putting radios
>in new cars?  No one could argue that a stereo is essential or
>integral to the operation of an automobile.  While some car companies
>will offer a "radio delete" option allowing you to purchase a new car
>without a radio, many others do not.  Some of the companies that DO
>offer the "radio delete" force you to buy the stereo anyway by making
>it part of an "option package" along with other options such as power
>windows or a sunroof.  You can get the radio deleted, but that breaks
>up the "option package", and you lose the discount for buying the
>options as a package, thus spending more money than if you had gone
>ahead and kept the radio in the car in the first place.
>There are many car audio companies that would presumably make more
>money if new cars didn't come with radios already equipped, so why
>haven't they cried foul yet?  While car owners CAN remove the
>factory radio and replace it with an aftermarket radio, this is very
>difficult on some cars due to switch location/integrated dashboards,
>etc., and many owners are just going to stick with the radio that
>came with the car, since it's already there.
>I'm sure there are other products and companies that have similar
>practices, but this was the first one that popped to mind.  Any
>opinions?
>
>Scott
>
>
>
>
>
>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>