Neuromancer
The case against Microsoft is based not just on bad economics, but on a fundamental misunderstanding of government's decision-making role when it comes to market operations. This misunderstanding has led to an attack on one of the US’s most successful firms.It is difficult to measure consumer "harms", much less harms that may only occur in the future. A common misconception about antitrust law is that its purpose is to ensure fair competition. That's not true; antitrust law's purpose is to protect consumers. If fair competition maximizes their welfare, so be it; if monopoly maximizes their welfare that’s what the antitrust laws provide for. It's not clear that Microsoft has a monopoly in the first place. Past Microsoft customers are not a captive market, as the Department of Justice portrays them. Rather, Microsoft must continue to add features and functionality to its products to get its Windows 95 consumers to become Windows 98 (and beyond) consumers. Consumers are free to change operating systems at any time. There are such alternatives as Linux with the graphic interface, the Mac OS but the point is that even if there were none Microsoft's ability to raise prices is strictly limited by the mere possibility of such an alte
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Mac OS, Department Justice, , Bibliography Microsoft, Bill Gates, Past Microsoft, predatory pricing, Joel Klein, It's Microsoft, maximizes welfare, standardization innovation, preferences tradeoff, fair competition, department justice, effects advantage microsoft, allegedly enjoys, microsoft allegedly, advantage microsoft, allegedly enjoys systems, enjoys systems, microsoft allegedly enjoys, network effects advantage, advantage microsoft allegedly,
Approximate Word count = 1250
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
 |
