John Doe wrote:

David Maynard nospam private.net wrote:


John Doe wrote:


David Maynard nospam private.net wrote:



John Doe wrote:



David Maynard nospam private.net wrote:

...



What I find fascinating is the espoused notion that Microsoft,
a handful of boys with absolutely nothing, no 'business
reputation', no history of development, no demonstrated DOS,
and nothing else in the field, somehow 'took advantage' of and
'screwed' poor old IBM. What in the world do these folks think
MS used to 'force' IBM into the deal?


Maybe your recollection is about the company Microsoft bought
DOS from.

No, my 'recollection' is about the subject at hand, namely the
original IBM/Microsoft deal for DOS and the folks claiming that
Microsoft screwed IBM by retaining the rights to sell it to
non-IBM computers.



As far as I know, the major problem IBM had with Microsoft was
when Microsoft prohibited IBM from including IBM's own Lotus
SmartSuite on IBM's computers. Microsoft used Windows to force
IBM's compliance.

At least they didn't try to get a reverse royalty payment on
every prior computer made like IBM did with their MCA license.

The one you brought up raising an interesting conundrum because
you have IBM wanting it both ways. They had a competing O.S. and
a competing office suite yet while they're trying to wipe MS off
the business scene they want their competitor to give them
preferred OEM status.

I'm not sure I'd be real happy about that either.


Microsoft refused to allow IBM a license to Windows, unless IBM
dropped its bundling of Lotus SmartSuite on IBM personal
computers.

The 'license' you speak of is an OEM discount agreement and, in
particular, the one IBM wanted was 'like Compaq'. I.E. preferred
OEM status


You mean the license to resell Windows.

No. The issue is whether you get the discount.

Of course IBM isn't going to
want to pay $50 more per computer than Compaq.

while
simultaneously competing with MS in the O.S.


There was no competition in the desktop operating system market.

IBM was competing with OS/2.


and business suite market.


Microsoft was able to prevent that by threatening no license to
resell Windows.

Anyone can buy retail and IBM considered it.


That may be true but irrelevant.

It's perfectly relevant because it shows the only issue is a matter of the
discount.


As I said, I'm not sure I'd like the idea either of giving my
competitor a discount on my products so they can make money on my
products that they then use to bolster their own competing
products they're trying to put me out of business with.


At the time, Windows was the required monopoly operating system.
There was no competition in the desktop operating system market.

IBM was competing with OS/2. And if they weren't then why the hell did they
keep trying to sell it?


But you're repeating yourself.


Do you understand that Microsoft holds monopoly power over the
Intel-based personal computer operating system market?

That's irrelevant to giving discounts to your competition.