From: ghio@temp0209.myriad.ml.org (Matthew Ghio)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 1998 03:12:29 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: the best justice money can buy --Lessig suspended
In-Reply-To: <19980203.154218.attila@hun.org>
Message-ID: <199802071906.OAA06180@myriad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Tim May wrote:

> (The real issue is going to be Web servers. Whether Netscape can prosper
> in the world that is coming is unclear.)
[snip]
> Looks to me like Intel is the real winner here.

Apache currently represents over 50% of the web servers in use.  Even
Microsoft can't compete with that.  Microsoft's growth in web servers has
been largely at Netscape's expense.  So Netscape's move to the freeware
market is not unexpected, but it's a bit late; they should have been
pushing Linux/FreeBSD/etc to their NT customers long ago.

The issue of differing tactics of Intel versus Microsoft has a lot to do
with why Microsoft is getting scrutinized while Intel is largely being
left alone, despite their similiar market share.

The first difference is product quality.  I have an Intel Pentium which
has been working flawlessly for months.  Microsoft Windows, on the other
hand, can't go two days without getting screwed up in one way or another.
Intel has had two or three major flaws in their products in the last few
years (FDIV, F00F, and the fpu flag problem).  Microsoft gets blamed for
new flaws every week.  Guess which company I have a higher opinion of?
I am certainly not the only one who feels this way.

Second, Microsoft is rude, arrogant, and offensive.  They absolutely do
not know when to quit, no matter how much bad publicity it gets them.
Intel's behaviour hasn't been exemplary recently either, but they do know
when to back off.  Intel got in a little argument with Robert Collins a
few years ago, but once the bad PR started, they left him alone.
Microsoft, in contrast, has repeatedly harassed anti-microsoft web sites
(such as www.micr0soft.com) kicked anti-microsoft people out of comdex,
and so on.  Like Scientology, such tactics usually only increase the
attacks from critics.

Intel's handling of the "slot 1" was a major mistake.  Intel came off
appearing to be a bully trying to squash competition, which earned them a
lot of bad press.  Settling with Cyrix/NatSemi was a smart move (which
they should have done earlier).  But at least Intel knew when to cut their
losses and move on to other things.  Contrast that with Microsoft's
adamant, pig-headed pursuit of their bundling strategy; no matter how much
bad publicity it gets them, they keep doggedly trying to shove it down
people's throats.

So next time you're meeting with Intel management, remind them that if
they make quality products, their customers will be happy.  If they sell
lousy products and attack their opponents, they will get attacked back.

(And Intel- please stop telling us about how great your secret
proprietary bus interfaces are, we don't want to hear it, and it makes
you look bad.)