IBM was accused of requiring its customers of buying its punch
cards -- which were the way of entering data into a computer a
generation ago. Monsanto requires people who purchase its seeds
to use its herbicide, Roundup, which we discussed last week. Why
is that not a tie-in? Maybe because the
Yes they were.
DeLamarter, Richard Thomas. 1986. Big Blue: IBM's Use and Abuse of Power
(NY: Dodd, Mead).
On Sat, Jan 18, 2003 at 08:08:43PM -0800, Eugene Coyle wrote:
I think IBM was actually forced to stop the tie-in of the punch cards,
but my memory is hazy. There is a book about it,
Bill Lear wrote:
On Friday, January 17, 2003 at 09:55:04 (-0800) Michael Perelman writes:
I thought Bill Lear's question yesterday was very interesting. Given his
background, I'm surprised he did not relate his question to software. For
example, Microsoft makes it difficult to run its
Title: RE: [PEN-L:33943] Re: Re: Artificial economic inefficiency
I don't remember, but wasn't IBM once (i.e., back in the 1960s) accused of illegal tie-ins that restrained trade? (so the key word is tie-in?)
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The technical name is the Lear effect.
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 02:15:15PM -0600, Bill Lear wrote:
On Friday, January 17, 2003 at 09:55:04 (-0800) Michael Perelman writes:
I thought Bill Lear's question yesterday was very interesting. Given his
background, I'm surprised he did not relate his
I thought that tie-ins were driven by contracts, not technology.
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 12:44:09PM -0800, Devine, James wrote:
I don't remember, but wasn't IBM once (i.e., back in the 1960s) accused of
illegal tie-ins that restrained trade? (so the key word is tie-in?)
Title: RE: [PEN-L:33948] Re: RE: Re: Re: Artificial economic inefficiency
all I know is that back in the early 1970s, I was talking to the information technology folks at work (at the Chicago Fed) and they told me that IBM had been accused of anti-trust violation because they'd set up one
