Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: More on : split MS into 3 identical companies
From: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 21:12:51 -0500
From: "John Lyon" <jelyon () jelyon com> To: <farber () cis upenn edu> Some of our fellow IPers may be interested in John Dvorak's column in the latest PC Magazine, Feb 09, 1999, "Nationalize Microsoft." I hesitate to quote from the article, lest the quotes propigate, contextless; and yet, I will not be dissuaded from doing so. He's not pro-government, nor anti-competitive, and he writes (in part): The typical outcome of an antitrust case is usually some sort of consent decree with continued oversight by a court. This will not work with Microsot, which will forever be dragged into court saying it's complying while it continues anticompetitive practices. Regulating the software industry as a whole or Microsoft specifically would be impractical. Simply using eminent domain laws to nationalize the company is the only solution and the only way to reinvigorate innovation and competition. It will level the playing field and stabilize Windows, which has yet to be debugged. Snide swipe at Windows aside, his concept raises issues not addressed in his article, for example, if MS were to be "nationalized", what implications would that have for Windows users in other countries? What kind of pricing structure would the Government use? Free? Monthly Fees? Taxes? To whom would go the profits? Would it be better to "Internationalize" Microsoft? ____________________________________ John Lyon, Proprietor and Impresario http:// jelyon dot com The hurrier I go, the behinder I get
Current thread:
- IP: More on : split MS into 3 identical companies Dave Farber (Jan 19)