Re: OT: Microsoft takes on history

[Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org>]

On Fri, 24 May 2002 19:57:01 GMT, Frank J. Lhota wrote:
> 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?

Silence is consent. It doesn't matter if everybody disagrees if nobody
acts.

> 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?

It looks finally to be shaking, but perhaps more because of Microsofts
own decisions than anything else. Another reasons is that other
word processors are mimicking it. Making them little better (actually
sometimes worse as they have to guess the format of the Word files). The
marked would be more free if the document format is standardised. Then
it doesn't matter which implementation is used. If somebody likes Word
then they can use this and somebody else can use
Abiword/KWord/Staroffice etc.. in stead. Then you could start paying for
quality software and support rather than buggy crap.

Preben