Alternatives: Competing on merits
\r\nMicrosoft is many things, but they are not suicidal. They clearly\r\nrecognize they aren't competitive in any market where they cannot\r\nleverage a monopoly. Just look at their financial results. Sometimes\r\nthey can't even do it with the monopolies (see MSN).
\r\n
\r\n\r\n
I agree with this statement.
\r\n\r\n
\r\nTo endorse the enemy would break their own monopolies, and they'd have\r\nnothing. They will fight tooth and nail, by fair means and foul, untill\r\nthe battle is won or lost, because the alternative is slow but certain\r\ndeath.
\r\n
\r\n\r\n
I disagree with this one. In particular, the "slow but certain\r\ndeath" aspect.
\r\n\r\n
Losing its monopoly dominance and illegal market control would\r\ncertainly leave us with a vastly changed Microsoft. I don't think this\r\nneed be the end of the firm.
\r\n\r\n
They would no longer be able to play the game that's worked for them\r\nto date -- one which it appears they've realized from the very\r\nbeginning. Bill Gates's "Letter To Hobbyists" and stories of his\r\n"modest proposal" ~1980 (in a story I've had personally related, he\r\napproached Intel with a proposition to divide the IT market into three\r\nparts: IBM the business world; Intel, embedded and control products;\r\nMicrosoft, the hobby market) both indicate his intent to dominate the\r\nmarket, by illegal means if necessary.
\r\n\r\n
Instead, we'd have Microsoft competing on merits. And to a certain\r\nextent, we're getting there. Microsoft certainly doesn't want to admit\r\nthis, and is pressing the "integrated solution" message hard (see [link|http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-981552.html|Microsoft Show Linux\r\nSome Respect], but they're also being called to task for (and are\r\nresponding to) claims that their software is slow, buggy, unstable, or\r\ninflexible.
\r\n\r\n
What are the implications of a Microsoft competing on\r\nmerits? Note that that's probably still a Microsoft with a war chest in\r\nthe tens of billions of dollars, a large talent pool, and a considerable\r\npatent portfolio. Anyone care to speculate?
\r\n