3 ms·

Same as I felt when the government said Microsoft had a browser monopoly. They (Microsoft and Google) both got to this point fair and square by providing ease

Same as I felt when the government said Microsoft had a browser monopoly. They (Microsoft and Google) both got to this point fair and square by providing ease of use and quality of life to the consumer. Monopolies happening due to competence, great execution or even luck are not a problem. People should be not alarmed by corporate monopolies as long as Federal govt. retains monopoly of B2 bombers (and violence in general) the latter always retains the capability to disrupt a corporate monopoly.

runjake 4y ago
Microsoft’s monopoly was anything but fair. They did all sorts of shady, anti-competitive things WRT browsers, Windows, and Linux. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
- McLaren_Ferrari 4y ago
  > "The issue central to the case was whether Microsoft was allowed to bundle its flagship Internet Explorer (IE) web browser software with its Windows operating system". Netscape wanted to make money selling the browser, time has proved they were way wrong in their calculus as consumers are not willing to pay for a browser. Hence it comes with the OS to give to the consumer the capability to go on the internet as soon as they turn on their computer for the first time. Time also proved that browsers are not where the money is, search and social media is. Netscape missed search and made Microsoft miss search too due to he DOJ lawsuit, but it's a poor consolation given where Microsoft is today and where Netscape is today. So Netscape was completely delusional, they went to cry to the feds, Microsoft got distracted defending themselves from the aforementioned feds and Google and Facebook benefited the dispute.
tomohawk 4y ago
According to antitrust law, it is illegal for a monopoly to do things that are perfectly fine for normal companies to do. For example, it is not legal to use dominance in one thing as leverage to achieve dominance in another thing. Microsoft used their monopoly (> 70% market share) in OS to go for a monopoly in many other things, includind web browser. We are still living with the aftremath of this today, as the software ecosystem is much more constrained than it aught to be. Back then, the FTC actually did things about monopolists breaking the law, so they set MS back on their heels. And MS employed many anti-competitive practices to beat the competition. Things like buying their way onto the boards of banks, which happened to hold loans for their competitors. And then calling the notes or cancelling lines of credit.
- McLaren_Ferrari 4y ago
  > Microsoft used their monopoly (> 70% market share) in OS to go for a monopoly in many other things, includind web browser. A monopoly in a market where the price of the product is zero /s . It's incredible to me that people still think Netscape was wronged even though the market has shown for decades now that consumers are not willing to pay for browsers. Consumers want to be able to get on the internet as soon as they start their brand new computer. Microsoft saw that and provided a solution, whereas Netscape went to cry to the feds as opposed to recognize that their business model was flawed and pivot. If you are stubborn not even the feds can save you, and in fact fast forward Microsoft is a company which makes 50B dollar profit/yr and where is Netscape? Also we are back to square one with a monopoly in the browser , only now it's Google and not Microsoft. The consumer thinks Chrome is a better browser so it doesn't matter that Edge is pre-installed, they all download Chrome within the first week of buying a new PC. Google managed to win marketshare on WIndows even though evil Microsoft pre-installed Edge because unlike Netscape they were smart enough to realize what the customer wants (a free and fast browser) instead of going to the feds to cry out of laziness or inability to pivot:

runjake 4y ago

Microsoft’s monopoly was anything but fair. They did all sorts of shady, anti-competitive things WRT browsers, Windows, and Linux. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....

McLaren_Ferrari 4y ago
> "The issue central to the case was whether Microsoft was allowed to bundle its flagship Internet Explorer (IE) web browser software with its Windows operating system". Netscape wanted to make money selling the browser, time has proved they were way wrong in their calculus as consumers are not willing to pay for a browser. Hence it comes with the OS to give to the consumer the capability to go on the internet as soon as they turn on their computer for the first time. Time also proved that browsers are not where the money is, search and social media is. Netscape missed search and made Microsoft miss search too due to he DOJ lawsuit, but it's a poor consolation given where Microsoft is today and where Netscape is today. So Netscape was completely delusional, they went to cry to the feds, Microsoft got distracted defending themselves from the aforementioned feds and Google and Facebook benefited the dispute.

tomohawk 4y ago

According to antitrust law, it is illegal for a monopoly to do things that are perfectly fine for normal companies to do. For example, it is not legal to use dominance in one thing as leverage to achieve dominance in another thing. Microsoft used their monopoly (> 70% market share) in OS to go for a monopoly in many other things, includind web browser. We are still living with the aftremath of this today, as the software ecosystem is much more constrained than it aught to be. Back then, the FTC actually did things about monopolists breaking the law, so they set MS back on their heels. And MS employed many anti-competitive practices to beat the competition. Things like buying their way onto the boards of banks, which happened to hold loans for their competitors. And then calling the notes or cancelling lines of credit.

McLaren_Ferrari 4y ago
> Microsoft used their monopoly (> 70% market share) in OS to go for a monopoly in many other things, includind web browser. A monopoly in a market where the price of the product is zero /s . It's incredible to me that people still think Netscape was wronged even though the market has shown for decades now that consumers are not willing to pay for browsers. Consumers want to be able to get on the internet as soon as they start their brand new computer. Microsoft saw that and provided a solution, whereas Netscape went to cry to the feds as opposed to recognize that their business model was flawed and pivot. If you are stubborn not even the feds can save you, and in fact fast forward Microsoft is a company which makes 50B dollar profit/yr and where is Netscape? Also we are back to square one with a monopoly in the browser , only now it's Google and not Microsoft. The consumer thinks Chrome is a better browser so it doesn't matter that Edge is pre-installed, they all download Chrome within the first week of buying a new PC. Google managed to win marketshare on WIndows even though evil Microsoft pre-installed Edge because unlike Netscape they were smart enough to realize what the customer wants (a free and fast browser) instead of going to the feds to cry out of laziness or inability to pivot: