I'm not going to get into this discussion even though I have pretty strong feelings about it...but I think you may do well to stop focusing on the term "monopoly" and instead consider each side with respect to policies and behaviors potentially being anti-competitive and/or anti-consumer (in a collective sense, not anecdotal accounts of "vendor XYZ replaced my 1200-year-old abacus with a new tablet for free). Further, I don't believe that all monopolies are necessarily bad.
That is all. :) Greg > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. Martin > Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2011 3:13 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [H] Laptop? > > > > On 12/10/2011 3:56 PM, Joshua MacCraw wrote: > > On Dec 10, 2011 8:57 AM, "Anthony Q. Martin"<[email protected]> > wrote: > >> It shares no characteristics of a monopoly. Sure it's closed...but > > anyone can make apps for iOS...who else makes Windows? Who else > makes > > WebOS? Anyone can write for those platforms, just like they can for > > Android. It absolutely isn't a monopoly...heck, you guy's must have > > forgot...MS was forcing all PC venders to include Windows on their > > machines. That was way closer to a monopoly that anything Apple has > done. > > When one has choice, there cannot be a monopoly. It's like saying Obama > > is a socialist because he wants healthcare for everyone (I'm so sure that > > Canada is a socialist country!). > > > > HARDWARE! Windows can run on any mac, can IOS do the same on any > wintel > > box? NO! Artificial prevention and lack of drivers. > > So? What does that have to do with being a monopoly. Apple choses to > only support its own hardware. One can chose to either use it or not use > it. If Apple did exactly what MS has done, they could just be an > also-ran and disappear in the market. They exist mainly because they > are a clear alternative. Why does this bother anyone? Why must you > argue that they need to get in line just like the Dells, Acers, etc of > the world? Then you truly would have no choices. > > > > > MS was slapped several times for their practices. Apples only IP is IOS so > > your argument is idiotic. > > Your statement is idiotic because it makes no sense. People are > claiming you need an apple computer to run an apple OS, which is based > on Linux anyhow. Even less reason why it could be a monopoly. They > practically give their OS away, too. > > > > There's a big difference between being a socialist and doing things for the > > betterment of society. > > ??? > > Apple is a business. Business don't exist to do things for the > betterment of society. > > > > >> Apple's choice to harber a closed system had its pros and cons. But MS > > was forcing a license of Windows on everything and let everyone develop > > their own hardware...and for that we all surferred countless hours dealing > > with the resulting headaches that brought. AFAIC, MS didnt' get a > > reasonable version of Windows until Windows 7. All those years that we > had > > to deal with crap software so that Gates and crew could become incredibly > > rich. Meantime, Apple being a closed system -- both in terms of software > > and hardware kept them small, but much less of a headache for users, > which > > made them rich. And they made products that people actually wanted to > own > > after they got smart and decided to live in a niche PC market while still > > able to charge premium pricing (by having a less buggy system and > excellent > > customer support). Now that MS has faded and Apple (and others) have > the > > limelight, the haters are just changing their focus. It's kinda sad. The > > notion that anyone should be able to make a MAC clone is as close to > > socialism as I can imagine. They should just give away their intellectual > > property just so others can benefit? > >> Finally, if Apple were to get 95% of the market like MS has, it would be > > because their business model was simply superior to that of all those > > others. They still have managed to avoid becoming a commodity product, > > which says a lot for their product. > > > > Right, because the average consumer understands enough to choose > based on > > specs and facts? LOL! > > What does that have to do with Apple being a monopoly? It certainly adds > nothing to the conversation. > > > >> And if you ask me, MS killed off so much competition that the PC world is > > way boring (which is why there are now new markets for opportunity). > When > > is the last time anyone got excited about any software that runs on a PC? > > > > Whenever the next PC game is announced maybe? > > That's just sad...the only interesting piece of software you can point > to is a computer game. > > > >> Remember the days when we all wanted to get the latest software? > Those > > days are so dead. We have MS to thank for that. > > Right, keep drinking the koolaid. I laugh and point to apples famous 1984 > > commercial with the room full of clones. Now that room is full of prius > > driving hipsters who think they're unique despite being forced into the > > same cookie cutter choices. > What does that mean? > > >> On 12/10/2011 11:30 AM, Thane Sherrington wrote: > >>> At 09:43 AM 10/12/2011, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: > >>>> What are you talking about, man? Apple makes laptops, pcs, tablets, > > mp3 players, etc. Others make devices that do exactly the same things that > > Apple products do. You can't say apple has a monopoly on its products > > anymore than you can say that lenovo has a monopoly on the x220t laptop > or > > samsung has a monopoly on the series 7 slate. It's a silly argument. > > Apple laptops are part of a plethora of hardware choices. > >>>> Having a closed ecosystem doesn't make it a monopoly. You have no > loss > > of choice and you aren't forced into anything. Hating for little reason is > > not an attractive trait. > >>> > >>> I think his point was: If Apple were to get 95% of the market (like > > Microsoft has) then there would be no Dell, HP, Acer, etc choices. If you > > want Apple OS, you must by Apple hardware. I guess it's not a monopoly > > (although it shares some characteristics), it's more of a closed garden. > > Frankly, I'm glad that Microsoft (for all its warts) is the dominant > > player in the PC world. If things were reversed, the PC world would be a > > lot less interesting. > >>> T > >>> > >>>
