I've just read this amusing article about Microsoft representatives whining over a proposal that Japan, China, and South Korea work together to develop an alternative operating system to Windows. As I was reading it, one interesting quote stood out:
quote:"We'd like to see the market decide who the winners are in the software industry. [...] Governments should not be in the position to decide who the winners are," Robertson said.
But the question is... if a government is going to be a major user of the product (an excellent example being the US Department of Homeland Security signing a multi-million dollar deal to provide Windows products to their offices), do they not represent a market all of their own?
The problems of quality in Microsoft products aside, doesn't it seem rather paradoxical for governments to become major (or even exclusive) customers of Microsoft (not using other vendors), and still claim fair marketing? This seriously blurs the line between a government and a business.
As for the last, not really, because they do have other options, but when you can get hundreds of thousands of units for less from IBM clones and MS software, well, we do only give them so much to spend without throwing a fit....
As far as the Orient taking a stabe at MS, I say, oh yes, give it to them.
Failed to contect to flare.solareclipse.net, so try 2
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
A free market can't operate without government intervention. That's the real paradox.