#17 - If a consumer decides to use the browser that came with their PC, that is a choice because there is nothing in the OS which prevents them from installing an alternative browser.
You claim that the only way Microsoft attained dominant marketshare is through forcing consumers to use their product. This might be an acceptable argument if this were the *ONLY* way a company could attain dominant marketshare, which you then claim is not so.
However, you also argue that the reason why Netscape had dominant marketshare is because with 2.x and 3.x versions they had a better product.
So you therefore must concede that a company with a better product can attain dominant marketshare.
Now my argument is that both companies attained dominant market position by producing a superior product at their points in the timeline.
Now you can certainly prove me wrong, but in order to do so you must prove that Netscape's 4.x release was noticeably superior to both the IE 4.x and IE 5.x releases. Only then can you make the claim that IE's market share position emerged because of their forcing the consumer.
Your argument is logically flawed and without merit like most anti-MS arguments. :(
|