3 ms·

I don't disagree. Do note that Microsoft had essentially zero lobbying before they were convicted, and a huge army of lobbyists when the punishment was neutered

I don't disagree. Do note that Microsoft had essentially zero lobbying before they were convicted, and a huge army of lobbyists when the punishment was neutered; and Google had a lobbying army from very early in its life. Are you claiming that this state of affairs is good for citizens at large? I disagree. I believe the function of a government is to make life better for its citizens at large, and that the enforcement wrt Microsoft failed that goal (and will likely fail that goal with Google).

scarface74 6y ago
I am saying it is better to let the market along with people using their free will decide. Yes MS still has 90% market share with the desktop - but it doesn’t matter. People’s attention and all of the energy and money moved to the web and mobile making alternate platforms viable. Apple alone sells more iOS devices than all personal computers combined. It’s only 15% of the market. It wasn’t the government that allowed Apple and Google define the current era of computing. When it comes to office, Google’s offerings and Apple’s offerings are good enough and they are free. Office 365 is an excellent deal compared to paying $600 for Office like you did in 2000. Most people can get by with an iPad or a Chromebook and Macs are a viable alternative. As far as Google, outside of Sheets and Maps, I find most of Google’s products second rate. I use alternatives I used Google search for the first time in ages without an ad blocker and I found it to be an abomination.
- beagle3 6y ago
  I read your response as “I don’t care if any abuses or how much better things could have been as long as they are good enough”. Did I get it right?
  - scarface74 6y ago
    No, I am saying that technology moves so fast and government is so incompetent, that it is better to let the market disrupters take care of it. As another anecdote, the government sued IBM for being a monopoly in 1969. By the time the case wound its way through the courts, the government dropped the case because it didn’t matter. The market had moved on. (https://www.nytimes.com/1982/01/09/business/why-baxter-dropped-the-ibm-suit.html https://www.nytimes.com/1982/01/09/business/why-baxter-dropp...) By 1982, the PC was already taking over. Just like while the government was worried about the Microsoft “monopoly”, Jobs was busy raising Apple from the dead, Google was moving from a college campus to being a real company, Amazon was expanding from just selling books and companies were starting to decrease their dependence on Win32 APIs and on to the web. Not to mention that Java and Flash was making rich cross platform web apps viable.

scarface74 6y ago

I am saying it is better to let the market along with people using their free will decide. Yes MS still has 90% market share with the desktop - but it doesn’t matter. People’s attention and all of the energy and money moved to the web and mobile making alternate platforms viable. Apple alone sells more iOS devices than all personal computers combined. It’s only 15% of the market. It wasn’t the government that allowed Apple and Google define the current era of computing. When it comes to office, Google’s offerings and Apple’s offerings are good enough and they are free. Office 365 is an excellent deal compared to paying $600 for Office like you did in 2000. Most people can get by with an iPad or a Chromebook and Macs are a viable alternative. As far as Google, outside of Sheets and Maps, I find most of Google’s products second rate. I use alternatives I used Google search for the first time in ages without an ad blocker and I found it to be an abomination.

beagle3 6y ago
I read your response as “I don’t care if any abuses or how much better things could have been as long as they are good enough”. Did I get it right?
- scarface74 6y ago
  No, I am saying that technology moves so fast and government is so incompetent, that it is better to let the market disrupters take care of it. As another anecdote, the government sued IBM for being a monopoly in 1969. By the time the case wound its way through the courts, the government dropped the case because it didn’t matter. The market had moved on. (https://www.nytimes.com/1982/01/09/business/why-baxter-dropped-the-ibm-suit.html https://www.nytimes.com/1982/01/09/business/why-baxter-dropp...) By 1982, the PC was already taking over. Just like while the government was worried about the Microsoft “monopoly”, Jobs was busy raising Apple from the dead, Google was moving from a college campus to being a real company, Amazon was expanding from just selling books and companies were starting to decrease their dependence on Win32 APIs and on to the web. Not to mention that Java and Flash was making rich cross platform web apps viable.