3 ms·
... because Netscape couldn't compete with Microsoft, because Microsoft could give away a browser for free as in beer. Perhaps we're meaning different things b
by duncan_bayne 9y ago
... because Netscape couldn't compete with Microsoft, because Microsoft could give away a browser for free as in beer.
Perhaps we're meaning different things by the word 'compete'?
- icebraining 9y agoYeah, and I can win against Usain Bolt if I just shoot him first.
- duncan_bayne 9y agoThat's exactly how Netscape and others approached the problem of competing with Microsoft. "We can't compete, let's make an anti-trust complaint" "I can't run as fast as Bolt, so I'll shoot him"
- Brockenstein 9y agoYeah you mean "whoever came out on top must have out competed the other" and you don't care if it was by hook or by crook. So, yeah in the sense that a five year old Rocky vs Ivan Drago in a boxing match is a competition technically. But no one can honestly say it's really a competition, as in there's any spirit of competition. U.S. v Microsoft makes it pretty clear. MS'es strategy was break the law and do anything to win. Then it was weather the lawsuit and win or lose, they had years to position IE as the dominant product. So losing hardly mattered they still got what they wanted. What could Netscape actually do to counter all that? They were practically bystanders in this nearly as much as my grandmother was. Such was MS'es power in the 90's.