This is nice for MAC! And in fact Microsoft helped Apple to gain this share! Why? - Because of Vista which sucks big time! I am not saying is the reason but one of the top reason!
Basically, it's a good article, including the links it goes to.
But, there are errors, and omissions, in the article, which I seem to find in most all Wiki articles.
Some of what is said is misleading. It doesn't cover descriptions of situations that appear to be a monopoly, but aren't, such as Apple's case.
It also is incorrect when it states that monopolies will attempt to restrict manufacturing, and distribution of goods, to keep prices high. That's part of the old, and now partly obsolete, definition. It simply isn't true in the modern case of almost unlimited markets. It only works in saturated markets, for example.
We can look to software here (which is, in a sense, what we're talking about anyway).
Other than for items such as food and fuel, most markets are not infinitely sellable. Once the product is purchased, that's it for an indefinite time. It used to be that most Americans bought a new car every two years. No longer.
Software is infinitely upgradable, which, like food and fuel, also extends the market to infinite levels.
We can go on with this forever too. Its a long, and as you noted, complex subject.
Software is infinitely upgradable, which, like food and fuel, also extends the market to infinite levels.
Nothing's infinite. Just because the number of software possibilities appear to you as such, there is no such thing in this human universe that is infinite.
Nothing's infinite. Just because the number of software possibilities appear to you as such, there is no such thing in this human universe that is infinite.
Nothing's infinite. Just because the number of software possibilities appear to you as such, there is no such thing in this human universe that is infinite.
Nothing's infinite. Just because the number of software possibilities appear to you as such, there is no such thing in this human universe that is infinite.
Um, well, yes, of course. I think we all know that. It's a matter of relative proportion.
It's also just an expression. I didn't expect anyone to take it literally.
Comments
- PC owner, waiting for my pc to die! ;-)
http://www.slickdeals4u.com
Well, monopoly isn't defined that way, or almost all companies would be defined as monopolies in certain product areas.
Even MS, with Office having a bigger marketshare than all Windows sales put together, isn't defined a monopoly in office suites.
It is a complex issue, this is a good source of info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
It is a complex issue, this is a good source of info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
Basically, it's a good article, including the links it goes to.
But, there are errors, and omissions, in the article, which I seem to find in most all Wiki articles.
Some of what is said is misleading. It doesn't cover descriptions of situations that appear to be a monopoly, but aren't, such as Apple's case.
It also is incorrect when it states that monopolies will attempt to restrict manufacturing, and distribution of goods, to keep prices high. That's part of the old, and now partly obsolete, definition. It simply isn't true in the modern case of almost unlimited markets. It only works in saturated markets, for example.
We can look to software here (which is, in a sense, what we're talking about anyway).
Other than for items such as food and fuel, most markets are not infinitely sellable. Once the product is purchased, that's it for an indefinite time. It used to be that most Americans bought a new car every two years. No longer.
Software is infinitely upgradable, which, like food and fuel, also extends the market to infinite levels.
We can go on with this forever too. Its a long, and as you noted, complex subject.
Software is infinitely upgradable, which, like food and fuel, also extends the market to infinite levels.
Nothing's infinite. Just because the number of software possibilities appear to you as such, there is no such thing in this human universe that is infinite.
Nothing's infinite. Just because the number of software possibilities appear to you as such, there is no such thing in this human universe that is infinite.
You're missing the logic.
Nothing's infinite. Just because the number of software possibilities appear to you as such, there is no such thing in this human universe that is infinite.
Finitism eh?
Nothing's infinite. Just because the number of software possibilities appear to you as such, there is no such thing in this human universe that is infinite.
Um, well, yes, of course. I think we all know that. It's a matter of relative proportion.
It's also just an expression. I didn't expect anyone to take it literally.
Though the number system extends infinitely.