Funny NYPD wrote:
> Good point.
> Release a product full of bugs to force end-user keep upgrading, endless 
> patches for patches, .... ... Manager got huge bonus for market 
> "expanding", engineer got Job security, every body from the vendor side 
> are happy, the end-users get all the pain and have to pay more for less. 
> This is so much for the typical USA MBAs marketing strategy.
> Funny N.

Funny, where you get your ideas from? I know that defending Microsoft is 
unpopular, and I hate Vista too, but I don't subscribe to crazy conspiracy 
theories. In general, it makes me cringe anytime someone starts saying "this 
company is making a shoddy product on purpose, so it would break and the 
customers would buy more".

Vista problems = more money for Apple and Linux. Microsoft would have an 
incentive to make a good operating system, even if they were a total 
monopoly, though there's no question that they would have a much stronger 
incentive if they had more competition. Microsoft have zero incentive to 
sabotage their products. In fact, there are many reasons why they would NOT 
want to do that.

I really wish more engineers paid attention in Economics 101 (or had better 
professors). On the other hand, maybe it's good that some of the best 
engineers are mediocre businessmen -- they can concentrate on what they do 
best. :)

Best regards,

Vitaliy 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist