tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17898384.post4213358127306452372..comments2024-03-25T21:41:06.801-07:00Comments on Mobile Opportunity: Q. Are the big tech companies guilty of antitrust violations? A. It doesn't matter, they will probably be punished anywayMichael Macehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17966107280587843091noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17898384.post-36309942566668275662020-02-29T14:28:40.056-08:002020-02-29T14:28:40.056-08:00The speed at which the tech industry moves compare...The speed at which the tech industry moves compared to other industries and the the glacial movement of government is one reason for the emotive panic and hysteria. Another is that the workings of tech devices and big data is a mystery to most people and being confronted by the unknown produces fear.<br /><br />I've been reading your blog for 15yrs now and it never fails to be incisive and thought provoking.<br />Please keep on sharing your thoughts.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16318061124429333728noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17898384.post-43718082220711680372020-02-04T20:17:22.320-08:002020-02-04T20:17:22.320-08:00Thanks for the correction. Flash, and I like your ...Thanks for the correction. Flash, and I like your Kissinger quote.<br /><br />Peter, thanks for your comment, and you're right that Microsoft technically lost. But the conduct remedies imposed on it were minor. That actually supports my point, I think -- conduct which was much more egregious resulted in much milder sanctions than are being advocated against the current tech leaders.Michael Macehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966107280587843091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17898384.post-88395863095807287812020-02-03T06:49:58.421-08:002020-02-03T06:49:58.421-08:00Good article, and good counterpoint to your previo...Good article, and good counterpoint to your previous one (which, by the way, influenced my decision to put our Silicon Valley condo up for sale). My general reaction is to echo Henry Kissinger: It’s a pity both sides can’t lose. I miss the old Silicon Valley, where we competed to sell cool stuff to our customers, rather than selling them to advertisers. I’m obviously biased—I was at Palm then too, and the old ways made software quality a lot more important to the business model.<br /><br />Some broader points: “Reinvent the Law” seems to be the <i>Times’</i> preferred alternative to the rule of law in general, and "the courts don't view tying as illegal unless you can show that it's increasing prices to consumers" is an earlier reinvention/interpretation, rather than actual legislation, IIRC. <br /><br />One minor point: In “having a monopoly isn’t legal unless,” there’s a missing “il-.”Flash Sheridanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13677318551997068520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17898384.post-10743355763298369132020-02-02T14:05:50.998-08:002020-02-02T14:05:50.998-08:00It looks like it has always really been about the ...It looks like it has always really been about the competition more than the consumer. Standard Oil apparently benefited the consumer, but it was broken up after monopolizing the oil business. <br /><br />Both Intel and Microsoft were legally held to account for their attacks on their competitors, and they both lost in major cases. <br /><br />The Big US Microsoft Anti-Trust trial was about them attacking competitors, not consumers, and IIRC they lost, and were found guilty of multiple abuses their monopoly position. Pretty much all of it was aimed at locking out competitors.<br /><br />Intel was heavily fined for blocking AMD with exclusionary deals with OEMs. <br /><br />IMO this is how it was, and should continue be used. To stop anti-competitive practices. <br /><br />You have to fight to keep some kind of level playing field, because if you don't, by the time their dirty pool comes around to harming consumers, there may be no competition left.PeterScotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07638068202706360452noreply@blogger.com