Re: OS For IIGS

[CUTjefbla@bconnex.net (Jeff Blakeney)]

On 7 Nov 1997 09:47:41 GMT, ab616@chebucto.ns.ca (Tony Cianfaglione)
wrote:

>   This is due to the fact that Microsoft's OS is a stand-alone product
>and that Microsoft didn't get a cut from the initial sale of the computer.
>If they did, they would more inclined to offer older OS's for free on an
>FTP site somewhere.  I appreciate what Apple has done with supplying
>updates for its computers but I don't believe people should kick at
>Microsoft just because their situation is different.

Okay, they don't make money from the initial sale of the computer but,
around where I live, the price of including Windows 95 with a system
increases the cost of the system by up to 10%.  This is a pretty good
chunk of the pie.

Besides, Apple is still getting "kicked" by allowing people to get
their operating systems for free.  This is due to the fact that they
only make money for the operating system from the sale of new
machines.  Microsoft makes it from anyone who needs to use their
operating system.

And I don't really think Microsoft is getting "kicked" too bad either
in that they do have other products that they sell which will offset
the loss of allowing people to get their operating system for free.
Microsoft makes money from the sale of their other programs while
Apple makes money from the sale of their hardware.

Which brings up another point.  If they really want people to buy and
use their other products which require their operating system, don't
you think they should be encouraging more people to use their
operating system?  This would be much easier to do if the operating
system were MUCH cheaper than it is now.

Besides, just look at how much money Microsoft is making at present.
Don't you think they could afford to follow Apple's example and let
people get the operating system they need for a reasonable price?

### I've had enough SPAM.  Cut the obvious from my address to email me. ###