I spent my childhood living in Naples, Italy. The city and community was filled with competition. My dad owned his own pizza place next to his cousins pizza place. They were angry at each other, many times going to the street in their white cooking clothes and yelling at each other. Other one took off customers from the another. They could had sold many more delicious pizzas, but couldn't because there just wasn't enough customers. What I learned from it was that you need a clean playing field, so I moved to New York and started my pizza place on the fifth avenue. But competition came there too. Then I decided to become a pizza consultant and just make pizzas for the fun of it. I've never been happier.
What I'm saying here is that in the end customers won't get hit by competition. It will be bad for the pizza place owners, but there will always be pizzas for everyone. And they will be even more delicious, because the pizza place owners have to fight harder.
While I severely doubt the truth of the above anecdote (especially given your username) the basic point is correct. In the vast majority of circumstances more competition in a market is better for consumers not worse. This is one of the major reasons the United States has anti-trust rules. Consumers should be far more worried about a single monolith controlling an entire industry.
Yes, in the majority of cases more competition is better. Then there are operating systems.
Until applications and data are built on completely open standards -- interoperable with ANY capable device -- this multiple OS business is just a hassle for consumers.
Imagine if your must-have pizza topping was incompatible with any other company's pizzas!
Until applications and data are built on completely open standards -- interoperable with ANY capable device -- this multiple OS business is just a hassle for consumers.
You haven't been paying much attention to where the technology is going, have you? As it stands right now, any program written for.Net that relies on the built-in namespaces instead of Windows specific API calls will run on Linux or Mac with the Mono CLI. That's the direction MS is moving, and they are the Giant Evil Corporation(tm) who is most likely to fight this sort of change. They have to move this direction, however, or else be passed by in the open movement that is going on.
...ok, then point me to the.NET desktop app that is compatable across all of those platforms like a curses or X app can target all of the various Unixes? Until there is something a Mac user would want in such an app, all rhetoric to that effect is just mindless propaganda..NET is just a way for Linux or MacOS to move away from their core strengths while getting nothing in the bargain except 2nd or 3rd class status with respect to the relevant "standard".
If it weren't for competition between OSs, we'd still be using MS-DOS.
Windows only came about because of competition from the Apple Mac.
MacOS and Windows only got things like pre-emptive multitasking because Linux showed it was possible on consumer level hardware.
I remember thinking there was something inherent about PC hardware that meant you had to reboot in order to change IP address, until Linux proved otherwise. I'm *certain* Windows wouldn't have fixed this without competition from Linux.
I remember thinking there was something inherent about PC hardware that meant you had to reboot in order to change IP address...
I recently had to repair a network filled with Win98 boxes and a Win2000 server, and OH MY GOD was it annoying! Sure, you can do DHCP, no problem, just need a quick reboot... Oh, you expected me to pick up the DNS via DHCP too? Sorry Charlie, that has to be set manually. No worries though, just punch in the IP addresses and give it a quick reboot... What's that? Something is wrong with the DHCP and you need a new IP address? No worries, just punch in the new one and give it a quick reboot...
If it weren't for competition between OSs, we'd still be using MS-DOS.
Hmm... possibly. We had Amigas, Atari STs, Macs, Apple-IIs and Amstrads back then. The OS was a non-issue, as the hardware was where the competition lived, and the applications was what we bought the hardware for. Few cared about the OS, except as a springboard into the apps.
MacOS and Windows only got things like pre-emptive multitasking because Linux showed it was possible on consumer level hardware.
None of this stuff is surprising in any way. You're right that consumers should worry more about monopolies, yet this competition is proof that the monopolies are weaker than ever, which is a win for consumers. Google has been deliberately undermining MS for years for example by supporting firefox in order to wrest the browser market from MS. Once they went public with the Chrome browser, android and the chrome OS it became obvious that Google feels strong enough to go head to head with MS in a far more
Just don't act surprised down the road if, in the event Google becomes the market dominating monolith MS once was, they begin acting like a monopoly.
I think it is a matter of priorities. We need Google to prevent Microsoft from extending their monopoly on the desktop onto the internet. Just imagine a world where Microsoft dominates both. Really scary thought! Once the Microsoft threat of total world domination diminishes, then we will worry about Google - if we need to. Google has done so much good in this
If that were true, then it would be true that pizza in New York was uniformly (or at least usually) good. In fact, though, most pizza in New York is edible, but not very good. That's not to say that there isn't such a thing as a good New York pizza--there is. But there's a phenomenal amount of mediocre pizza in New York. So your analysis doesn't apply. Why? I suspect that cheap pizza out-competes good pizza. So if you can predict the future of computing from the New York pizza situation, the f
I suspect that cheap pizza out-competes good pizza.
This is actually a fairly common thing in Europe too. There's lots of kebab/pizza places that are run by people coming from Turkey or the area around. They directly compete with prices; cheap prices, but also cheap ingredients and somewhat bad service (there are exceptions tho, but in general). Those pizzas aren't that good, you'll find a lot better pizzas in the actual italian like pizza restaurants or the local pizza chain. But many people still use those because it's cheap, even if its just a $2-3 difference.
People are stupid when money comes in to question. Many choose a little bit cheaper, but more crappier thing over a quality product. That will probably happen to computers too, and is most likely already happening.
It possibly has something to do with marketing too. I used to get pizzas delivered from a local place that we found online (with a horrible web site. If you made the mistake of looking at it in IE you got PowerPoint style transitions when you clicked on every link). They were cheap - around half the price of the big chains - but similar quality. They didn't advertise though, so the likes of Dominos and Pizza Hut that put adverts on television got more business. Almost everyone I knew who tried their pi
People are stupid when money comes in to question. Many choose a little bit cheaper, but more crappier thing over a quality product. That will probably happen to computers too, and is most likely already happening.
People are stupid when money comes in to question. Many choose a little bit cheaper, but more crappier thing over a quality product. That will probably happen to computers too, and is most likely already happening.
Maybe people buy at exactly the price/quality point they want. Am I stupid for buying a cheap Seat Ibiza rather than an expensive Ferrari Testarossa? I don't think so. The difference in utility I'd get from the Ferrari is worth less to me than the money I've saved.
Given the choice between a $200 netbook and a $1000 high-spec laptop, one has to ask, is the extra stuff you can do worth $800? Different people will have different answers to that question.
That will probably happen to computers too, and is most likely already happening.
Where have you been for the last 20 years? That is exactly what has been going on. Did you not notice that Microsoft and Intel have become industry giants on the back of crappy clone hardware?
The computing industry is plagued with this problem. For some reason, when it comes to cars or clothes, people understand that sometimes it's better to pay more to get a quality product. But when it comes to computing, it's almost always a race to the bottom, to buy the cheapest junk possible. We even have the situation where people are infecting their own machines with dangerous malware because they are too cheap to buy software.
Things are changing, though. I think this has been the case in the past because people didn't really like computers, or identify with them. They were just necessary evils that one had to buy for work or study. But now that computers are an essential part of daily life, and increasingly status symbols or social identifiers, people are starting to recognize quality in both hardware and software.
Not everyone cares. It's hard for me to relate to people who just by the cheapest computer, but it makes sense to them. But with pizza I really can relate. Cheap crappy pizza is *really* convenient. When I was living near Wall Street there was a crappy pizza place across the street from my apartment, and I frequently got lunch there, because saving time was more important to me than getting the best pizza. The pizza was edible, about the level of Sbarro. Most pizza in New York is at that level.
But there's a phenomenal amount of mediocre pizza in New York. So your analysis doesn't apply. Why? I suspect that cheap pizza out-competes good pizza.
You live in NY and you think good pizza is more expensive than the mediocre pizza and that's why there are so many mediocre pizza places around?
That's not quite it, most of the really good pizza places I know of offer pizza for the same price as anywhere else. There are a few reasons I know of that so many "mediocre" places exist around new york. One is that not everyone considers that pizza to be "mediocre." Most people will favor their neighborhood pizza place that they grew up with as a kid. Pizza pl
Or get free pizza with a beer in some places in brooklyn. Sure, it is not the greatest pizza in the world, but it sure flies through the air very well.
All that tells us is that (in New York at least), the vast majority of consumers want cheap pizza more than they want "good" pizza. But the fact that you can still find good pizza in New York also tells us that there is also a market for more expensive, nicer pizza. A smart entrepreneur might target that market rather than join the race to the lowest price.
Recenly in my town, the curry restauranteurs complained to the council. Many restaurants were allowed to open on the same street, and they complained tha
Cut throat competition,like say Wal-Mart versus everybody else, leads to everybody concentrating on fewer "models" whose quality decreases as an unavoidable consequence of the price war, which means that after a while you can only get it in "medium" and it breaks or wears out quickly.
That is ridiculous, the only way Wal-Mart (or anybody else) can get the cheapest goods possible is by constantly seeking better deals. They are the ultimate cheapskate, true, but if you've ever actually been to Wal-Mart you'll notice they have a large selection of items in every category. Every cheap supplier out there is competing for a space on Wal-Mart's shelves, and this induces massive amounts of competition at the bottom level.
...leads to everybody concentrating on fewer "models" whose quality decreases as an unavoidable consequence of the price war, which means that after a while you can only get it in "medium" and it breaks or wears out quickly.
That was probably the worst example you could possibly give. Wal-Mart i
This is how we did it in Naples (Score:4, Funny)
What I'm saying here is that in the end customers won't get hit by competition. It will be bad for the pizza place owners, but there will always be pizzas for everyone. And they will be even more delicious, because the pizza place owners have to fight harder.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Yes, in the majority of cases more competition is better. Then there are operating systems.
Until applications and data are built on completely open standards -- interoperable with ANY capable device -- this multiple OS business is just a hassle for consumers.
Imagine if your must-have pizza topping was incompatible with any other company's pizzas!
Re: (Score:2)
Until applications and data are built on completely open standards -- interoperable with ANY capable device -- this multiple OS business is just a hassle for consumers.
You haven't been paying much attention to where the technology is going, have you? As it stands right now, any program written for .Net that relies on the built-in namespaces instead of Windows specific API calls will run on Linux or Mac with the Mono CLI. That's the direction MS is moving, and they are the Giant Evil Corporation(tm) who is most likely to fight this sort of change. They have to move this direction, however, or else be passed by in the open movement that is going on.
Linux products like Wi
Re: (Score:2)
...ok, then point me to the .NET desktop app that is compatable across all of those platforms like a curses or X app can target all of the various Unixes? Until there is something a Mac user would want in such an app, all rhetoric to that effect is just mindless propaganda. .NET is just a way for Linux or MacOS to move away from their core strengths while getting nothing in the bargain except 2nd or 3rd class status with respect to the relevant "standard".
Re: (Score:2)
If it weren't for competition between OSs, we'd still be using MS-DOS.
Windows only came about because of competition from the Apple Mac.
MacOS and Windows only got things like pre-emptive multitasking because Linux showed it was possible on consumer level hardware.
I remember thinking there was something inherent about PC hardware that meant you had to reboot in order to change IP address, until Linux proved otherwise. I'm *certain* Windows wouldn't have fixed this without competition from Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember thinking there was something inherent about PC hardware that meant you had to reboot in order to change IP address...
I recently had to repair a network filled with Win98 boxes and a Win2000 server, and OH MY GOD was it annoying! Sure, you can do DHCP, no problem, just need a quick reboot... Oh, you expected me to pick up the DNS via DHCP too? Sorry Charlie, that has to be set manually. No worries though, just punch in the IP addresses and give it a quick reboot... What's that? Something is wrong with the DHCP and you need a new IP address? No worries, just punch in the new one and give it a quick reboot...
Note that a
Re: (Score:2)
If it weren't for competition between OSs, we'd still be using MS-DOS.
Hmm... possibly. We had Amigas, Atari STs, Macs, Apple-IIs and Amstrads back then. The OS was a non-issue, as the hardware was where the competition lived, and the applications was what we bought the hardware for. Few cared about the OS, except as a springboard into the apps.
MacOS and Windows only got things like pre-emptive multitasking because Linux showed it was possible on consumer level hardware.
Aren't you forgetting the Amiga? Befor
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
None of this stuff is surprising in any way. You're right that consumers should worry more about monopolies, yet this competition is proof that the monopolies are weaker than ever, which is a win for consumers. Google has been deliberately undermining MS for years for example by supporting firefox in order to wrest the browser market from MS. Once they went public with the Chrome browser, android and the chrome OS it became obvious that Google feels strong enough to go head to head with MS in a far more
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is a matter of priorities. We need Google to prevent Microsoft from extending their monopoly on the desktop onto the internet. Just imagine a world where Microsoft dominates both. Really scary thought! Once the Microsoft threat of total world domination diminishes, then we will worry about Google - if we need to. Google has done so much good in this
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If that were true, then it would be true that pizza in New York was uniformly (or at least usually) good. In fact, though, most pizza in New York is edible, but not very good. That's not to say that there isn't such a thing as a good New York pizza--there is. But there's a phenomenal amount of mediocre pizza in New York. So your analysis doesn't apply. Why? I suspect that cheap pizza out-competes good pizza. So if you can predict the future of computing from the New York pizza situation, the f
Re:This is how we did it in Naples (Score:5, Insightful)
I suspect that cheap pizza out-competes good pizza.
This is actually a fairly common thing in Europe too. There's lots of kebab/pizza places that are run by people coming from Turkey or the area around. They directly compete with prices; cheap prices, but also cheap ingredients and somewhat bad service (there are exceptions tho, but in general). Those pizzas aren't that good, you'll find a lot better pizzas in the actual italian like pizza restaurants or the local pizza chain. But many people still use those because it's cheap, even if its just a $2-3 difference.
People are stupid when money comes in to question. Many choose a little bit cheaper, but more crappier thing over a quality product. That will probably happen to computers too, and is most likely already happening.
Re: (Score:2)
It possibly has something to do with marketing too. I used to get pizzas delivered from a local place that we found online (with a horrible web site. If you made the mistake of looking at it in IE you got PowerPoint style transitions when you clicked on every link). They were cheap - around half the price of the big chains - but similar quality. They didn't advertise though, so the likes of Dominos and Pizza Hut that put adverts on television got more business. Almost everyone I knew who tried their pi
Re: (Score:2)
People are stupid when money comes in to question. Many choose a little bit cheaper, but more crappier thing over a quality product. That will probably happen to computers too, and is most likely already happening.
No way. Amiga?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People are stupid when money comes in to question. Many choose a little bit cheaper, but more crappier thing over a quality product. That will probably happen to computers too, and is most likely already happening.
Maybe people buy at exactly the price/quality point they want. Am I stupid for buying a cheap Seat Ibiza rather than an expensive Ferrari Testarossa? I don't think so. The difference in utility I'd get from the Ferrari is worth less to me than the money I've saved.
Given the choice between a $200 netbook and a $1000 high-spec laptop, one has to ask, is the extra stuff you can do worth $800? Different people will have different answers to that question.
Re:This is how we did it in Naples (Score:4, Interesting)
That will probably happen to computers too, and is most likely already happening.
Where have you been for the last 20 years? That is exactly what has been going on. Did you not notice that Microsoft and Intel have become industry giants on the back of crappy clone hardware?
The computing industry is plagued with this problem. For some reason, when it comes to cars or clothes, people understand that sometimes it's better to pay more to get a quality product. But when it comes to computing, it's almost always a race to the bottom, to buy the cheapest junk possible. We even have the situation where people are infecting their own machines with dangerous malware because they are too cheap to buy software.
Things are changing, though. I think this has been the case in the past because people didn't really like computers, or identify with them. They were just necessary evils that one had to buy for work or study. But now that computers are an essential part of daily life, and increasingly status symbols or social identifiers, people are starting to recognize quality in both hardware and software.
Re: (Score:2)
For some reason, when it comes to cars or clothes, people understand that sometimes it's better to pay more to get a quality product.
You say that, and yet one of the UK's biggest clothes retailers is Primark, which sells relatively low-quality clothing at rock-bottom prices.
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone cares. It's hard for me to relate to people who just by the cheapest computer, but it makes sense to them. But with pizza I really can relate. Cheap crappy pizza is *really* convenient. When I was living near Wall Street there was a crappy pizza place across the street from my apartment, and I frequently got lunch there, because saving time was more important to me than getting the best pizza. The pizza was edible, about the level of Sbarro. Most pizza in New York is at that level.
Re: (Score:2)
But there's a phenomenal amount of mediocre pizza in New York. So your analysis doesn't apply. Why? I suspect that cheap pizza out-competes good pizza.
You live in NY and you think good pizza is more expensive than the mediocre pizza and that's why there are so many mediocre pizza places around?
That's not quite it, most of the really good pizza places I know of offer pizza for the same price as anywhere else. There are a few reasons I know of that so many "mediocre" places exist around new york. One is that not everyone considers that pizza to be "mediocre." Most people will favor their neighborhood pizza place that they grew up with as a kid. Pizza pl
Re:This is how we did it in Naples (Score:4, Informative)
A $1.50 slice in Brooklyn or Queens will generally be better than a $5 slice in some tourist trap or hipster pizza place in Manhattan.
Re: (Score:2)
Or get free pizza with a beer in some places in brooklyn. Sure, it is not the greatest pizza in the world, but it sure flies through the air very well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
All that tells us is that (in New York at least), the vast majority of consumers want cheap pizza more than they want "good" pizza. But the fact that you can still find good pizza in New York also tells us that there is also a market for more expensive, nicer pizza. A smart entrepreneur might target that market rather than join the race to the lowest price.
Recenly in my town, the curry restauranteurs complained to the council. Many restaurants were allowed to open on the same street, and they complained tha
Yeah it was funny (Score:1)
Cut throat competition is always good for the consumer.
Re: (Score:2)
Cut throat competition,like say Wal-Mart versus everybody else, leads to everybody concentrating on fewer "models" whose quality decreases as an unavoidable consequence of the price war, which means that after a while you can only get it in "medium" and it breaks or wears out quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
That is ridiculous, the only way Wal-Mart (or anybody else) can get the cheapest goods possible is by constantly seeking better deals. They are the ultimate cheapskate, true, but if you've ever actually been to Wal-Mart you'll notice they have a large selection of items in every category. Every cheap supplier out there is competing for a space on Wal-Mart's shelves, and this induces massive amounts of competition at the bottom level.
...leads to everybody concentrating on fewer "models" whose quality decreases as an unavoidable consequence of the price war, which means that after a while you can only get it in "medium" and it breaks or wears out quickly.
That was probably the worst example you could possibly give. Wal-Mart i
Re: (Score:2)
How 'bout a white pizza with calamare? (Oh-kay, I can't spell, but we both know what I want, right?)
Re: (Score:1)
Unless the competition weakens the winner so much that he goes out of business too. That leaves you even fewer choices than you would with a monopoly.
Re: (Score:1)