Re: Where to download free Fujitsu COBOL compiler

On Nov 8, 2:05 pm, "HeyBub" <hey...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
tlmfru wrote:
HeyBub <hey...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fO2dnf57BobeA2nXnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
tlmfru wrote:
HeyBub <hey...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:8M-> If you're
worried that a Microsoft monopoly will gouge the consumer, don't.
In virtually every case, a free-market monopoly is good for the
consumer!

You can't possibly be serious!  Hasn't Microsoft been fined   1.5
billion euros for anti-competitive behaviour?  And haven't they just
been enjoined from  selling WORD because they've infringed upon a a
patent for XML?

Yes, Microsoft got pounded by the European courts.

But look at your claim: "... anti-competitive behavior." That's not
anti-CONSUMER behavior. MS got flogged for including a media player
with XP to the competitive disadvantage of other companies that
wanted to SELL a media player. From the consumer's perspective, FREE
is better than PAID.

And their motive?  To prevent other companies from competing at all.
In
every<< case the consumer benefits from having a choice (I believe
that's
what capitalism is all about).

Possibly, but the CONSUMER still benefits. Capitalism is NOT about choice..
There are three things that go into the creation of a product or service:
Capital, Labor, and Raw Materials. Capitalism is the PRIVATE control of the
first of these.

Listen, man: if I have a monopoly on
something I'll charge what I feel like and if you don't like it,
tough.  Nor do I care if I'm providing a crappy whatever-it-is.  You
gotta buy from me!

Show me one example of your fears being realized. Just one. It simply
doesn't happen as you describe.

In the case of Microsoft, their biggest competitor is Microsoft. If they
don't produce a better next-version, their revenue stream dries up!

Nonsense. They have the OEMs tied up with contracts so that (almost)
all new machines ship with whatever new version of Windows MS dictates
regardless of merit. It that were not so then Vista would never have
been shipped and OEMs will still be shipping XP. The revenue stream is
locked in, at least for the next year.

They also conned the corporates and signed them up to 3 year contracts
in the very late 90s they shipped XP but those corporates got nothing
from the next 3 year contract.

Eventually the revenue stream will dry up.

It is to
their advantage to create a better product at a lower price.

They don't have a lower price. Certainly they do have a cheap 'Home
crippled' edition which is cheaper that XP Home but it is much more
than XP for Netbooks.

MS split the editions so that 'Home Basic' is roughly the price of XP
Home, but 'Home Premuium' is much more and the OEMs are 'encouraged'
to use that.

Vista was _not_ a 'better product' which is why it is still only ~20%
of Windows. Windows 7 is better than Vista (probably much better) but
many think that is it not better than XP SP3.


Just in the
case of Standard Oil, they would make a greater profit by driving DOWN the
price of Kerosene, not inflating it.


No. Wrong. They drove down the cost of a barrel of oil (they didn't
have wells) and they drove down the cost of transport to themselves
with exclusive contracts. The price of kerosene fell, especially where
they were driving competitors out of business, but they made higher
profits.

Further, monopolies are sanctioned, even encouraged, by the United States
Constitution!

The US constitution is irrelevant to me. Anyway the anti-trust laws
are not against monopolies but are against the _abuse_ that monopolies
can wield. MS has been found guilty.

As for being prohibited from including XML, there is no way the
CONSUMER benefits from that sanction.

Only that the law must be followed.

You keep trying to find SOME hook to show that monopoly power is bad. How is
following the law good (or bad) for the CONSUMER?

Microsoft has been found guilty of not following the law.


I stand by my statement: "In virtually every case, a free-market
monopoly is good for the consumer." Conversely, most
government-sanction monopolies leave much to be desired (cable TV,
most roads, water distribution or other utilities, and soon, the
internet).

Well, when the telephone company in Manitoba (MTS, a government
monopoly) was sold to private enterprise, the cost of residential
service quickly doubled.

And the taxes that were going to subsidize the service either went away or
were diverted for other purposes. You did get a significant tax reduction,
didn't you?



Given the recent market catastrophe, if you can state with a straight
face and reasonable conviction that private enterprise is always the
way to go I'll buy you a beer.  Private enterprise works as long as
the profits aren't threatened.  Then they go jetting off to the
government for handouts!

Let me turn it around to a simpler proposition: You show ME one enterprise
better run by the government than by private enterprise and I'll buy you a
baby bottle complete with teat.

But where does the blame lie in your example? To the companies asking for a
handout or to the government for providing it? The freedom to succeed goes
hand in hand with the freedom to fail. Take away one and you don't simply
remove the other, you kill freedom altogether.

The economist Harry Browne asserted that every dollar spent by the
government is a dollar of wealth destroyed and he spent several books
proving it. There is virtually NOTHING that the government does that cannot
be done cheaper by private enterprise (it IS the government's job to enforce
contracts and punish evil-doers, but not much else). How about police and
fire protection, you might ask? That's easy. In my town there are probably
twenty times the number of private security guards as there are cops and
recent tabulations show that 85% of the firefighters in the country are
volunteers. Most wars throughout history have been fought by mercenaries,
and so on.

George Will said the primary purpose of government is to protect the borders
and deliver the mail. Once it demonstrates that it can do those tasks
competently, we can rightly trust it with something else.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Fines ?
    ... It's always hard to make it in a market already dominated by big ... The USA would long ago have done what the EU is doing if Microsoft ... If the World Government should become totalitarian, what can be done about it when there is nobody outside to help? ... Capitalism has failed insofar as it hasn't produced a system for stabilising the free market and making monopolies inherently impossible. ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: Where to download free Fujitsu COBOL compiler
    ... worried that a Microsoft monopoly will gouge the consumer, ... Further, monopolies are sanctioned, even encouraged, by the United States ... Well, when the telephone company in Manitoba (MTS, a government ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Where to download free Fujitsu COBOL compiler
    ... worried that a Microsoft monopoly will gouge the consumer, ... Microsoft got pounded by the European courts. ... Conversely, most government-sanction monopolies ... The reduction in price was not the result of Standard Oil but was ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Where to download free Fujitsu COBOL compiler
    ... worried that a Microsoft monopoly will gouge the consumer, ... billion euros for anti-competitive behaviour? ... Conversely, most government-sanction monopolies ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)