[ale] [Fwd:Hear, hear, Sen. Schumer]

[Chris Woodruff]

This does prove that MS can use its monopoly of the desktop to push other
companies from their territory.  Why should I dump my software for my
product for Microsoft just because they have the OS it runs on.  Common
sense tells me that the producer of a piece of hardware will know more about
the functionality and capabilities of the hardware then the OS maker.  Let
the OS maker make the OS better not override my software for my hardware.

If you believe that a company should not do stuff that doesn't fit within
the company's business then MS should never had developed MSN, IE, Slate or
MSNBC. None of those have made money as far as I know.  By your agreement MS
shouldn't be writing software that is not part of the OS.  Which is what the
whole damn Antitrust case should be about.

Chris Woodruff

PS -- Sorry I replied to this message.  I lost the first one.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pete Hardie" <pete.hardie at dvsg.sciatl.com>
To: ale at ale.org
To: "ALE" <ale at ale.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: [ale] [Fwd:Hear, hear, Sen. Schumer]


> Alan Hightower wrote:
> > OK, I'm definately not a MS advocate, but for once I'd have to side with
> > Bill on some of what the good Senator is arguing for:
> >
> > "All customers, even those who specifically install the Kodak software
> > applications, are presented with the Microsoft application, scanner and
> > camera wizard, meaning additional steps are necessary for those
consumers
> > to access the Kodak software," Schumer said.
> >
> > The only reason Kodak spent time developing this software in the first
> > place was because the OS didn't provide it.  You can't tell me Kodak is
a
> > software company.  I think having wizards that give you a uniform
> > interface to digital cameras, scanners and other A/V equipment is a good
> > thing.  The only reason the Senator is upset is AOL & Kodak saw this as
> > an excuse to take another shot at MS.  They pulled the Sentor's strings
> > because they employ a large number of his constituents.  If I were
Kodak,
> > I'd gladly dump my investment in their dinky software - there is no
> > doubt in my mind they are loosing money on it as it stands.
>
> The problem is that Kodak was working with MS during the development of
the
> Kodak software, and suddenly the new Windows makes it very difficult to
get
> to the Kodak software, at the saem time that MS has their own image
processing
> software available.  It totally refutes the MS position that they can't
abuse
> their OS monopoly to gain a position in another market.  It's not an issue
of
> which software is better - if I choose to install Kodak, I should be able
to
> run it without MS putting a wholly gratuitous barrier in my way.
>
> --
> Pete Hardie                   |   Goalie, DVSG Dart Team
> Scientific Atlanta            |
> Digital Video Services Group  |

--
To unsubscribe: mail majordomo at ale.org with "unsubscribe ale" in message body.