4 ms·

Uh... aren't they able to do that by leveraging their monopoly in other industries? That's the definition of monopolistic behaviour that almost got them split

by Teever 2y ago

Uh... aren't they able to do that by leveraging their monopoly in other industries? That's the definition of monopolistic behaviour that almost got them split up 25 years ago.

nradov 2y ago
Which other industries does Microsoft monopolize? They used to have a personal computer OS monopoly but there is a least one viable competitor, and personal computers have become less relevant as many tasks have shifted to mobile devices. My flagship smartphone cost more than a typical Windows PC.
- Teever 2y ago
  They hold a dominant position in desk operating systems, word processors, and spreadsheets.
  - nradov 2y ago
    But not a monopoly in any of those categories. Google Docs and Sheets are kind of garbage compared to Microsoft Office if you need to do anything complex or work with large files, but for many users they're good enough.
    - Teever 2y ago
      How is this different from 1998 when Microsoft was accused of being a monopolist? Apple was selling a desktop operating system that was a competitor to Microsoft Windows, Corel WordPerfect was a thing and so was Lotus 1-2-3.
      - nradov 2y ago
        It's different because in the previous antitrust case, Microsoft was accused of product tying. They apparently had private APIs built into their operating systems which only their own applications were allowed to use, and weren't available to competitors. There is no such allegation today. Any third-party vendor can write Windows applications that work just as well as Microsoft's own applications. Apple also had a much smaller desktop OS market share at the time. They nearly disappeared but are in a much stronger position today, which makes it harder to argue that Microsoft has a monopoly. There's no strict threshold for market share in these cases, but it's one of the factors taken into account.
        Teever 2y ago
        Just because they aren't tying their products now doesn't mean that they aren't abusing their monopoly position and leveraging it to boost up their non-monopoly position in other markets.

by Teever 2y ago

Uh... aren't they able to do that by leveraging their monopoly in other industries? That's the definition of monopolistic behaviour that almost got them split up 25 years ago.

nradov 2y ago

Which other industries does Microsoft monopolize? They used to have a personal computer OS monopoly but there is a least one viable competitor, and personal computers have become less relevant as many tasks have shifted to mobile devices. My flagship smartphone cost more than a typical Windows PC.

Teever 2y ago
They hold a dominant position in desk operating systems, word processors, and spreadsheets.
- nradov 2y ago
  But not a monopoly in any of those categories. Google Docs and Sheets are kind of garbage compared to Microsoft Office if you need to do anything complex or work with large files, but for many users they're good enough.
  - Teever 2y ago
    How is this different from 1998 when Microsoft was accused of being a monopolist? Apple was selling a desktop operating system that was a competitor to Microsoft Windows, Corel WordPerfect was a thing and so was Lotus 1-2-3.
    - nradov 2y ago
      It's different because in the previous antitrust case, Microsoft was accused of product tying. They apparently had private APIs built into their operating systems which only their own applications were allowed to use, and weren't available to competitors. There is no such allegation today. Any third-party vendor can write Windows applications that work just as well as Microsoft's own applications. Apple also had a much smaller desktop OS market share at the time. They nearly disappeared but are in a much stronger position today, which makes it harder to argue that Microsoft has a monopoly. There's no strict threshold for market share in these cases, but it's one of the factors taken into account.
      - Teever 2y ago
        Just because they aren't tying their products now doesn't mean that they aren't abusing their monopoly position and leveraging it to boost up their non-monopoly position in other markets.