Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 16:14:05 12/07/97
Go up one level in this thread
>He was talking about operating systems. I knew the manager of the local >Egghead software outlet in my area a while ago. (He has since moved on). >During this period, Egghead went from stocking a couple shelves of OS/2 >software along with OS/2 itself, to only stocking OS/2. Since the latest >version back then was selling quite well, I asked him why the change. >Why stop stocking OS/2 titles? He said that he couldn't testify to this >publicly, but that Microsoft reps had come to Egghead and told them that >if they continued to stock OS/2 titles, they would lose the deep >discounts they received on Microsoft Word, Excel, etc. He said he didn't >like it, but they sold so much Microsoft product, that they could only >comply, or they couldn't compete. Right. This is a common method also here in germany ! If a bookshop tried to sell original Karl-May books not from the Karl-May-publishing-firm, a guy from the Karl-May-firm came and said: If you continue to sell these books, we will not deliver you any longer with our books ! I call this blackmailing. I could mention many other examples... > >If you attempt to buy a Micron computer without Windows 95 or NT >installed, because you intend to put OS/2 or Linux on it, Micron will >tell you that they cannot sell you the computer without Windows >installed. They will not tell you why, but they won't sell it to you >unless you buy the Windows with it. > >In the same fashion, DR-DOS, which was a better product than MS-DOS, was >selling quite well, and forcing Microsoft to upgrade their stodgy DOS to >compete. When Windows 3.1 came out, there was a sudden error message >that would come up if you were running DR-DOS, stating that your data >was in danger of being corrupted. If you called Microsoft about it, they >would ask, "Are you running MS-DOS?", and when you told them DR-DOS, >they'd tell you that it was a problem with DR-DOS that would go away if >you switched to MS-DOS. It was later proven that the error message was a >fake, and that it only lokked for DR-DOS, and if it found it, posted >this message. It wouldn't corrupt your data, just scare you out of using >DR-DOS. Digital research went out of business. Right. I bought DR-DOS to "fight against the evil MS-DOS". I had never problems with connecting WIN and DR-DOS because DR_DOS always had patch-files in the internet. DR-DOS was the better DOS: If the company behind it would have been stronger, Microsoft would have had a serious problem. Or if DR-DOS and the GEOWORKS people would have worked together. Geoworks was able to run on an XT as a desktop-publishing-system with task-switch. ON AN XT !! I think there are many genius people.And if they would fight together against microsoft they would have good chances, also because many people don'T like gates methods. E.g. I don't like INtel/IBM for the same reason I don'T like Microsoft, and I waited a long time for AMD coming out with nice CPU's like k6! I have now 3 AMD machines. I will always help small companies fight against BIG MONOPOL companies. > >Even the original Windows was a tactic to crush a competitor. At the '82 >COMDEX the talk of the show was a product called Visio. It was a >windowed environment for PCs, and many of the major players then had >signed up to write applications for it. Dollar Bill went around the show >telling them that he was only "6 months" from releasing his own >environment called "Windows", and it was so much better than Visio that >they would waste their time writing for it. Of course, he did not even >have the idea at that time, but started work right afterward on his >vaporware. It was not released for two years, and it wasnot as good as >Visio, but by that time Visio's manufacturer had gone out of business, >as they could not sell anything, due to the lack of applications. > >This tactic has been repeated over and over by Gates and Ballmer. I >recall the spin that you shouldn't write apps for OS/2 2.0, because >Windows NT would be out in 6 months. Then when it was released a year >and a half later, and it was a PIG, Gates admitted that no home user >would really want it, and only 2% of all Windows users would want to >upgrade, but that you shouldn't write applications for OS/2 2.1 because >Windows 4.0 would be out in 6 months (i.e October of 1993). Well Windows >4.0 became Windows '95 2.5 years later, and the saga continues... > >Hope this helps you understand how a company can stifle competition. >There are other examples, of course, but this should give you the idea. > >kp
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.