Re: Boycott Microsoft

[psmith@baynetworks.com (Paul D. Smith)]

%% "Christopher Smith" <drsmithy@usa.net> writes:

  >> There are Internet sites out there where you either have to have
  >> Win95 or Internetexplorer or you can't get on them, not matter what
  >> kind of computer you have.

  cs> There are website that only work if you have Navigator as well - are
  cs> they equally as evil ?

They are unpleasant, but not equally evil.

Hypocrisy?  No.

This is because Netscape produces its product for a variety of operating
systems, and doesn't write any operating systems itself[1].  So, if you
want to view those sites you're not restricted to a particular platform
and operating system, but merely to a particular browser.

IE-specific sites, on the other hand, cannot be used unless you're 100%
Microsoft, including operating system _and_ browser[2]... and that
implies a lot of other Microsoft tools, too [I don't deny that many of
the best apps that run on Windows are produced by Microsoft.  Not much
of a coincidence, that, if you ask me, and merely yet another example of
why Microsoft is a monopoly which should be broken up.  But I digress
:).]

There _IS_ a distinct difference.  If the WWW is the next "killer
technology" for moving computer systems into large numbers of new homes
and businesses, then restrictions like this _will_ shape the future of
the 'Net and _do_ represent a distinct anti-competitive, monopolistic
stance on Microsoft's part.

If IE becomes a standard component on 90% of the home desktops, what
incentives do Web designers have to support other browsers--or, put
another way, why should they eschew features known to be IE-only?

Even if people prefer Netscape and go to the trouble of downloading it,
designers can merely say "well, you also have IE on your system, just
use that to view our site".  This is a significantly different
statement, in terms of customer annoyance, than "go download another
browser and use that".

This snowballs and snowballs, and soon people don't even bother starting
Netscape and Microsoft is controlling the majority of the content of the
'Net (and they're big enough and hold enough of a monopoly on a huge
segment of the market to do it, unlike Netscape) and in order to see
this content you need IE, which means you need Windows... etc.

[1] And now, Netscape actually gives away the source code so you could
    put it on _ANY_ platform.

[2] There are rumors of IE for other platforms, but I've never seen one
    and even if true, those rumors don't posit anywhere near enough
    platforms to make it a truly open browser--and really, I don't trust
    Microsoft to "do the right thing" and produce equally functional
    software on what is essentially software produced by a direct rival
    for their main business advantage.  In all honesty, knowing the
    anticompetitive practices they have been busted for in the past and
    those which they still admit to but won't change, do you?

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <psmith@baynetworks.com>         Network Management Development
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     These are my opinions--Bay Networks takes no responsibility for them.