[AccessD] OT: Microsoft threatens its Most Valuable Professional

JimL,

» 3. Microsoft is being undercut by competition. Competition is good. These
software prices were artificially set by MS (intentionally to undercut other
competition), and so therefore they have to rely on some legalese text in a
EULA to protect their flow of income (not even sure it exists?), rather than
trying to be a competitive and ethical business. This is the sort of thing
that damages your reputation in the geek world (can MS afford this
anymore?). «

I read "artificially set by MS (intentionally to undercut other
competition)" and I had to wonder if he understands what he's saying.
Microsoft "intentionally" set prices to undercut the competition.  In
what way is that "artificial"?  Sounds like the complaining of a naive
anti-capitalist.

I'm part of the "geek world" but I also ran my own business for 15
years.  I think that this Microsoft hater defines "ethical" as
"rolling over and playing dead when any old tiny Linux-based company
markets a product that competes however peripherally with something
made by Microsoft".

Steve Erbach
Neenah, WI


On 6/6/07, Jim Lawrence <accessd at shaw.ca> wrote:
> OT: An email I received from a friend.
>
> More comments on the latest NEWS story from the Registry. These are not my
> comments but fellow who use to be Microsoft fanatic and about 2 years ago
> made the switch to the 'Dark Side". He now is 2IC in a large development
> company and asked me to post his email.
>
> <comment>
> This would be further indication that Microsoft doesn't "get" current trends
> in the industry and Web 2.0, mash-ups, open source and everything... The
> ideal situation for Microsoft would be that someone be developing for the
> Windows platform and using their development tools.
>
> If someone is willing to _pay_ for TestDriven.net, that would be a big
> flashing red neon sign that:
>
> 1. Microsoft left a big gaping hole in their product that consumers were
> asking for. Logic would dictate that the aim of a business would be to meet
> consumer demand, which Microsoft couldn't, so someone else had to fill it.
>
> 2. The person buying it, likely will _never_ have gone for the whole package
> and is price-conscious
>
> 3. Microsoft is being undercut by competition. Competition is good. These
> software prices were artificially set by MS (intentionally to undercut other
> competition), and so therefore they have to rely on some legalese text in a
> EULA to protect their flow of income (not even sure it exists?), rather than
> trying to be a competitive and ethical business. This is the sort of thing
> that damages your reputation in the geek world (can MS afford this
> anymore?).
>
> In my opinion, I think Microsoft ought to be happy people are using their
> IDE and developing for their operating system, and not running off to play
> with Eclipse, Mono, RealBasic, Java, and all the rest of the great stuff out
> there...
>
> Or they could continue bullying people, who are actually helping to promote
> their bottom line.
>
> Which is actually OK by me, because I personally would like to continue
> seeing people migrating over to Linux.
> </comment>
>
> Any comments
>
> Jim