Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

["Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.lhota.adarose@verizon.net>]

Preben Randhol" <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> wrote in message
news:slrnaet3n4.1kd.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no...
> Yes, but then you need goverments that take action when the free market
> doesn't work because the biggest companies uses illegal methods to keep
> their position. You do not need goverments who looks the other way and
> says "ok, but next time try to keep it secret".

Yes, but isn't this a "straw man" argument? Who, outside of doctrinaire
anarchists, has ever argued that companies of any size should be allowed to
use illegal methods?

> The problem with the free market is that the only steering comitee it is
> supposed to have is the consumers. This is not enough. There will always
> be the collective irrationalism to hinder it, besides the consumers do
> not have any means of dealing with the cheating in the free market. If
> you think so, then tell me why people stick to the hopless Word
> wordprocessor of writing documents when there are better alternatives.
> Because everybody else uses Word. See what I mean?

Yes, I do. Ever since I've worked on PC's, there has been a word processor
that was so dominant that no one would entertain any alternative. When I
first did DOS development, that Word Processor was WordStar from MicroPro.
Later, the word processor that held more than 50% of the marketplace was
WordPerfect. At the time, it seemed that with so many people trained in
WordPerfect and so many existing documents in WordPerfect format, nobody
would change word processors. Given the history of this market, why should
we believe that Microsoft Word is the perpetual word processor champion?

> And speaking of free market, why does the USA impose a tax on imported
> steel now?

The answer is obvious: it's a bald attempt to buy votes. Outside of
politics, the imported steel tariff is a terrible idea.