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 267056
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Hm
by sbergman27 on Thu 30th Aug 2007 17:01 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hm"
Member since:


Now FF is the competition, and sudenly we have IE7.


I'd hardly say "suddenly". It took a long time to get development rolling again, since IE had been dormant for so long.

The keystone cops style fiasco of Mozilla, from initial Netscape source code release, through the hugely unpopular Mozilla Suite, to its emergence as the relatively (though still marginally) successful Firefox, is probably outside the scope of this thread.

But in the end, yes, FF has, through competition, benefited users of both browsers, as well as those of other browsers.

The free market... and competition... work. Albeit sometimes on an excruciatingly long time scale. It's a slow process anyway. And there are so many ways for the more powerful entities to game the system.

But in the end, the gaming... the cheats... end up doing nothing but buying time. And the abusing party has to actually get back to reality and compete.

Reply Parent Score: 4