Linked by Kroc on Thu 30th Aug 2007 13:03 UTC
Editorial I hear often that when something new appears that "competition is good". The primary reasons competition is seen as good, are: it drives down prices; it gives consumers more choice; it pushes technology forward, quicker. Competition is not good because: competition is why consumers have to choose between HD-DVD and BluRay; competition is why DRM exists; and more. In this article, each of the supposed benefits of competition will be looked at in more detail.
Thread beginning with comment 266988
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Because, competition increased the complexity of operating systems. *shakes fist at sky*

If we wouldn't have had competition, operating systems would have stayed at 1984 levels for ever, and we would still be using the more reliable sneakernet rather then this new fangled, untrustworthy Ethernet thing-a-ma-bob. ;)

DOS boots really quickly too, but I wouldn't want to use that as my primary OS. The better example would be QNX, I think. I remember it being super streamlined and quick.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Kroc Member since:

Windows won the competition, that market stagnated, and now new competition is fighting back.

It's nice that an Amiga booted in seconds, but we're not all using Amiga's now, despite being superior technology. Competition killed the better technologies in the name of the company who could be the most ruthless, not best.

Reply Parent Score: 2

evangs Member since:

As others have pointed out, this should not be an argument against competition. Instead it is proof that competition is needed. Seeing as Windows won the competition, there was no longer any competition in the market hence it stagnated.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Karitku Member since:

This is kinda silly because my experience with Amiga is classical example why non-diversity lost. Amiga might been superior in same area of technology, but it was also expensive, had quality issue and suffered bad decision of company. Amiga simply lost because it couldn't meet the demands of people and couldn't lean down the costs. Business wanted something that Amiga couldn't offer, cheap and choices. Nazis had superior tanks against Russians but they still lost because what war needed was cheap and good enough tank. Overall whole article is confusing, you should read history and study financing before you go make this kind silly articles.

Reply Parent Score: 1

helf Member since:

your post made me crack up. Thanks ;) I needed that.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Flatland_Spider Member since:

I was hoping it would give someone a laugh. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1