Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th Sep 2012 23:41 UTC
Permalink for comment 534200
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-09-01
I would be right if MS didn't have killing any competitors (with any means, legal or not) in its DNA.
I want to emphasize once again: killing not competing (I admit that Apple isn't any better recently).
They are not about choice for the consumer but removing that through network effects that are totally outside of consumer control. Ok, XBOX is another story, a sign or "new" MS, but answer me is XBOX a sustainable business for them? Aren't they still making most revenue from their monopolies?
I'm all for competition but be it RIM, WebOs, Japanese super duper mistery OS, but pleeeaase not MS.