From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Rude behavior on this group.
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Distribution: world,local
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 18:39:51 GMT

In <1992Dec15.054239.12858@microsoft.com> richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut) writes:

>In article <1992Dec14.213730.28787@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>In <1992Dec13.200650.7979@microsoft.com> richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut) writes:
>>>>"Freebies"?  Any computer seller who'll give you Windows for free is non-
>>>>existant.  If they have to pay for the software, the cost  gets passes along
>>>>to the buyer.

>>>Not necessarily so.  In a competitive market, and "competitive" amply
>>>describes the market for IBM compatible personal computers, vendors eat
>>>those costs because passing the costs on would raise one's prices above
>>>one's competitor's prices.

>>Some of us have.  In fact, some of us have taken more than a few
>>Economics courses.

>Good.  Let's see how much you remember.

More than you've taken, I guess.

>I've left the original quote I was responding to to make a distinction
>between some subtly different statements.  In particular, I was responding
>to the notion that "the cost gets passed along to the buyer."

So it is your position that vendors will sell at a loss indefinitely
instead of passing along costs to their customers?

>>The reasoning about how getting DOS and Windows
>>even when you don't want it is 'free' is, in my opinion, bogus.  I may
>>only be paying a few dollars for it but I'm still paying for it.

>Not true.  What you are paying for is other consumers' willingness to pay a
>higher price for a system with Windows installed.  It's a bit of a subtle
>point, but it is certainly not a case of vendors "passing the costs on to
>the buyer" as is the common misconception.

It's a misconception that isn't a misconception.  The 'answer' you
arrive at all depends on viewpoint.  However, any company that isn't
passing along its costs isn't going to be in business very long, as
some simple arithmetic will reveal.

>As for whether or not Windows pre-installed can be considered a "freebie",
>that depends upon one's point of view.  If you want it, it's considerably
>cheaper to buy a system with Windows pre-installed than it is to buy a
>system without Windows, buy Windows seperately and install the software
>yourself.  For a number of people, this is very much a "freebie".

Not at all.  It's simply allowing them to buy in at a greatly reduced
price due to volume at their reseller.  This is not 'free', and part
of those costs are born by people who didn't want it in the first
place and have to take it.  The individual cost is small (smaller than
the retail cost of the package by quite a bit -- particularly if
recently posted comments about an $8 deal are true), but costs that
must be paid nonetheless.

And you can bet that those costs are 'passed through', or you're
looking at a vendor who won't be in business very long.

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy