Hi,
> > > > For example would you pay 100.000 euros for a car where you can replace > > engine, lights, seats, cpu, software etc, or would you buy a 15000 mass > > produced one? The example is exaggerated, but consider that even smaller > > price differences, make a lot of impact to certain people. > > > > So in almost every example I can think of, if companies are forced with > > legislation to break their products in multiple separate parts, prices > > would go up in the average case, and go down in few (geeky) cases. Do > > you really believe the average person is prepared to pay more for > > something that has not any immediate impact visible to him (not everyone > > is a mechanic or software developer). Most probably he'd just import his > > product from a country where they don't have those laws. > Your "analogy" is not analogous to the general purpose computer being > bundled with software. In the case of Microsoft's dominant market > position, the bundling actually raises prices. Sure, the users get > Windows cheaper than they would get it by buying it separately, but by > being forced to buy Windows they lose out on the option to buy several > cheaper OSes, many GNU/Linux systems at their zero price among them. > In case of the car, you are actually free to order the parts and > assemble the damn thing yourself. > > This has everything to do with the market, which should be free. > Antitrust laws were invented for a reason. > I agree. Vicen
_______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
