Re: SQL server Vs Oracle

From: Arvin Meyer <a_at_m.com>
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 17:42:58 -0400
Message-ID: <7h4vh3$r48$1@esinet2.esinet.net>

Your assumption is correct, if you ignore the "economy of scale". Unless the market is big enough, there won't be any intelligent company who will enter it. Markets for specialized implementation will never be big enough, by definition.

When the market is big enough, they are forbidden, by law to buy their competitor (witness Quicken) They can compete, but are not always successful. This doesn't mean that I endorse everything that Microsoft makes. Many of their tools lack the features necessary for industrial strength applications. There will always be markets for high-end and/or specialized applications that Microsoft can't profitably compete in.

---

Arvin Meyer
onsite_at_esinet.net

Jim Kennedy wrote in message <9MjZ2.75405$A6.37448636_at_news1.teleport.com>...
>Actually, if your competitor had about the same number of resources as you
>then your statement about copying would be true. However, there are few
>software companies with the economic resources to match MS. So instead you
>get MS putting 10 times the resource behind an idea that someone else has
>already developed and crushing their effort. They benefit greatly from you
>creating the first on by:
>1. They don't have to make the same software design mistakes you did. i.e
If
>you could the second time around you would probably do something different
>we all do.
>2. They have a good idea as to what the market sucess will be since you did
>that homework for them.
>3. They have at least as good an idea as you of what users like or do not
>like and what new features they want - since you created the first one they
>get to ride your efforts.
>
>So other people's efforts really lower the cost of entry for MS. Given
>their marketing clout and seeming willingness to literally buy a market -
>something a startup cannot do (e.g. paying a highly visible customer
massive
>amounts of money to switch browsers) It makes it very difficult to compete
>and stifles innovation.
>Jim
Received on Sun May 09 1999 - 16:42:58 CDT