3 ms·

> If I'm not the customer, then I'm the product. This is not necessarily always the case, for example the free thing might be a loss leader, exist to boost sec

> If I'm not the customer, then I'm the product. This is not necessarily always the case, for example the free thing might be a loss leader, exist to boost secondary or tertiary effects or otherwise exist for non-profit motivated reasons.

wpietri 7y ago
Sure, it's a generalization, not an absolute. But for me there's not a big difference between "I'm the end product" and "I'm an intermediate product used to increase sales of the end product". Microsoft isn't a charity; they're an oligopoly pushing hard to keep their stock price up.
- meheleventyone 7y ago
  I think your characterization of being an "intermediate product" is also dubious since you aren't being sold in any reasonable sense ala the way you are with ad tech. And whilst MS are obviously in the business of making money that doesn't mean it's the only thing they'll do.
  - wpietri 7y ago
    If you'd like to argue that MS is giving this away just to be nice, instead of as a calculated move toward sustaining or increasing revenue, I'd be interested to see that. But for now let's assume they're doing what their shareholders expect: making money. We can't know whether I'm an intermediate product without knowing their goals, which they're unlikely to be transparent about. But lets suppose one of their goals is usage and market share statistics that they use as proof to convince paying customers. In that case, my usage is very much an intermediate product. Or let's imagine that one of their goals is restored market dominance in developer tools. To that end, they would like their competitors to receive less money, leading to their collapse. If they paid somebody else to give away developer tools for that purpose, I'd obviously be the product. That they're paying for that internally obscures it, but fundamentally doesn't change the exploitative nature of the relationship.
    - meheleventyone 7y ago
      If all this is really what you believe rather than just being argumentative then how can you use any product. Usage and market share statistics are just as useful to JetBrains in that regard and you pay them for the privilege of being an “intermediate product”.
      - wpietri 7y ago
        Jetbrains shows no signs of wanting to be a monopoly player in development tools. I've been a customer a long time, and I think they've done a great job of balancing making money with doing solid work and serving their customers. Microsoft, on the other hand, has a long history of willful domination and exploitation, and they've specifically done that with free products to kneecap competitors.
        meheleventyone 7y ago
        Ahh, so we get to it. You just don’t like MS. I think that’s a valid reason not to use their products.
        wpietri 7y ago
        No, I like competitive marketplaces, as they're one of the core engines of capitalism. I deeply dislike willful monopolies and oligopolies in general, because their goal is to break that engine in ways that harm consumers and often society. Microsoft themselves I can take or leave now that they've been mostly defanged. I also really like having good developer tools. Many of them come out of community-driven open source. But some of them cost money. And for those, I very much want there to be a competitive marketplace, so there are strong incentives for all players to keep improving.

wpietri 7y ago

Sure, it's a generalization, not an absolute. But for me there's not a big difference between "I'm the end product" and "I'm an intermediate product used to increase sales of the end product". Microsoft isn't a charity; they're an oligopoly pushing hard to keep their stock price up.

meheleventyone 7y ago
I think your characterization of being an "intermediate product" is also dubious since you aren't being sold in any reasonable sense ala the way you are with ad tech. And whilst MS are obviously in the business of making money that doesn't mean it's the only thing they'll do.
- wpietri 7y ago
  If you'd like to argue that MS is giving this away just to be nice, instead of as a calculated move toward sustaining or increasing revenue, I'd be interested to see that. But for now let's assume they're doing what their shareholders expect: making money. We can't know whether I'm an intermediate product without knowing their goals, which they're unlikely to be transparent about. But lets suppose one of their goals is usage and market share statistics that they use as proof to convince paying customers. In that case, my usage is very much an intermediate product. Or let's imagine that one of their goals is restored market dominance in developer tools. To that end, they would like their competitors to receive less money, leading to their collapse. If they paid somebody else to give away developer tools for that purpose, I'd obviously be the product. That they're paying for that internally obscures it, but fundamentally doesn't change the exploitative nature of the relationship.
  - meheleventyone 7y ago
    If all this is really what you believe rather than just being argumentative then how can you use any product. Usage and market share statistics are just as useful to JetBrains in that regard and you pay them for the privilege of being an “intermediate product”.
    - wpietri 7y ago
      Jetbrains shows no signs of wanting to be a monopoly player in development tools. I've been a customer a long time, and I think they've done a great job of balancing making money with doing solid work and serving their customers. Microsoft, on the other hand, has a long history of willful domination and exploitation, and they've specifically done that with free products to kneecap competitors.
      - meheleventyone 7y ago
        Ahh, so we get to it. You just don’t like MS. I think that’s a valid reason not to use their products.
        wpietri 7y ago
        No, I like competitive marketplaces, as they're one of the core engines of capitalism. I deeply dislike willful monopolies and oligopolies in general, because their goal is to break that engine in ways that harm consumers and often society. Microsoft themselves I can take or leave now that they've been mostly defanged. I also really like having good developer tools. Many of them come out of community-driven open source. But some of them cost money. And for those, I very much want there to be a competitive marketplace, so there are strong incentives for all players to keep improving.