![]() There is a notorious running problem with games holding your hand too long and tutorials going on forever. Along the way the game tells you what's going to happen. The game is called 'You Have To Burn The Rope'. everyone else charges a fortune too.It is comedy of the obvious. If you want to create a desktop application, and you're a business, most likely you'll end up developing it on MS tools. The simple fact is, we are still living in a world dominated by Windows.Also, if you for instance buy a Visual Studio Ultimate with MSDN subscription for almost $12,000 chances are you'll renew it every year since the renewal costs a third of the original price. MS has many programs to make things cheaper for businesses.Faster deploy time means more money in the company's pocket. The tools MS has produced generally make development quicker.Businesses generally decide on tools based on how easy it is to hire people that can use them. There are several reasons that MS charges what they do and get away with it. There'd be money to be made and every (publicly traded) company has a responsibility to make as much money as possible. I'd be willing to bet money that if MS tools went away tomorrow, Eclipse and XCode wouldn't be free for very long. Specifically, I believe Sun was engaged in this practice with Solaris vs Windows Server, StarOffice (eventually OpenOffice) vs Microsoft Office, MySQL vs SQL Server. This is, as I see it, what a lot of people have been trying to do to certain Microsoft products for a long time. After a few years, no-one bothered to buy domestic barbecues because they were 'too expensive'.Īfter the domestic manufacturers were out of business, or near to it, the eastern manufacturer raised their prices to normal/higher than normal for a few years because there was very little competition. They purposely took a big loss on every single sale. There's a famous (well, at least it was famous among some economics circles) study of a barbecue manufacturer that built barbecues in Asia and shipped them to North America (Canada mostly IIRC) and charged next to nothing for them, for a good number of years. One possible answer is to attempt to commoditize a competitor's product(s) in order to displace their dominance in a market. Other answers here are good, but consider the opposite: why do their competitors charge little-to-nothing? To put it another way, there's an assumption that you always get what you pay for, on both ends of the price spectrum.īecause of these and other factors, Microsoft knows that the price they set will be met by a large portion of the industry, and they can toe the 'almost too expensive to be worth it line' with abandon. There is still a popular misconception (not just in computing) that the more something costs, the better it is.There is a sense of "Everybody's doing it".Their tools integrate well with each other.There are a large number of reasons for choosing a particular environment, platform, or technology, but the biggest ones I see with Microsoft are: We'll use what they have because that's what our customers/vendors/collaborators are most likely to be using." And this assumption holds true because it's an assumption a lot of people make simultaneously. One consequence of this is that a lot of consumers will look at Microsoft and say "They're the big guys. ![]() ![]() Microsoft is a huge player in a lot of areas of software, and has been for long enough that they are, to some extent, pretty well entrenched. To expand on the "because they can" notion:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |