Comments on: Microsoft should release XP for free http://www.aquick.org/blog/2007/04/19/microsoft-should-release-xp-for-free/ entertaining hundreds of millions of eyeball atoms every day Sun, 12 Aug 2012 17:06:22 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: adam http://www.aquick.org/blog/2007/04/19/microsoft-should-release-xp-for-free/comment-page-1/#comment-847 adam Fri, 20 Apr 2007 01:30:20 +0000 http://www.aquick.org/blog/2007/04/19/microsoft-should-release-xp-for-free/#comment-847 I think it's slightly different. With respect to Office, Microsoft still has a lock on the market, and despite their differences, the various versions of Office are all just different tools for editing Office files. If the free alternatives actually worked even nearly as well as the various versions of Office at editing those files, they'd be serious competitors for people who need to share files. They don't, and they're not. Arguably, for many things that people want to use a computer for, there are a number of "good enoughs". If it's a choice between two "good enoughs", neither of which makes any money for Microsoft, wouldn't they prefer the one that encourages people to continue using programs that run on their platform instead? Every person who decides on a Linux or Mac desktop is pretty much gone from the Microsoft roadmap for the foreseeable future, and probably isn't going to pay to come back anytime soon. But they could be lured back at least partially with a free OS. I don't understand your analogy to Betamax. I think it’s slightly different. With respect to Office, Microsoft still has a lock on the market, and despite their differences, the various versions of Office are all just different tools for editing Office files. If the free alternatives actually worked even nearly as well as the various versions of Office at editing those files, they’d be serious competitors for people who need to share files. They don’t, and they’re not.

Arguably, for many things that people want to use a computer for, there are a number of “good enoughs”. If it’s a choice between two “good enoughs”, neither of which makes any money for Microsoft, wouldn’t they prefer the one that encourages people to continue using programs that run on their platform instead? Every person who decides on a Linux or Mac desktop is pretty much gone from the Microsoft roadmap for the foreseeable future, and probably isn’t going to pay to come back anytime soon. But they could be lured back at least partially with a free OS.

I don’t understand your analogy to Betamax.

]]> By: David Fenton http://www.aquick.org/blog/2007/04/19/microsoft-should-release-xp-for-free/comment-page-1/#comment-845 David Fenton Thu, 19 Apr 2007 23:32:33 +0000 http://www.aquick.org/blog/2007/04/19/microsoft-should-release-xp-for-free/#comment-845 Microsoft more than just about any other software maker knows perfectly well that "good enough " is often the enemy of "better." MS would be out of business if that were not so. The biggest competitors to Microsoft Office 2007 are MS Office 2003, MS Office XP, MS Office 2000 and, yes, even MS Office 97. By your logic, had Sony somehow made Betamax free, it would have beaten VHS. It didn't happen because markets are not based on merit, but on a web of characteristics, including network effects that can be much stronger than the pull of a better product (in the case of VHS, it was possibly Sony's refusal to allow pornography to be distributed on Betamax, so that pornographers went to VHS instead). Microsoft more than just about any other software maker knows perfectly well that “good enough ” is often the enemy of “better.” MS would be out of business if that were not so.

The biggest competitors to Microsoft Office 2007 are MS Office 2003, MS Office XP, MS Office 2000 and, yes, even MS Office 97.

By your logic, had Sony somehow made Betamax free, it would have beaten VHS. It didn’t happen because markets are not based on merit, but on a web of characteristics, including network effects that can be much stronger than the pull of a better product (in the case of VHS, it was possibly Sony’s refusal to allow pornography to be distributed on Betamax, so that pornographers went to VHS instead).

]]>