Today, PC Magazine posted an article citing that Microsoft was skipping the Windows 9 rollout and implementing the Windows 10 plan.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2469515,00.asp
My question is: Why such a violent push to rollout a new network? The Software manufacturer apparently has something up it's sleeve. I don't think it's as petty as a name change, I seriously think the Win9 implementation is being scrapped to apply a new progressive network. As irresponsible as folks are with their electronic devices is a new network necessary? I'm guessing the network will be a unity of nothing but Microsoft products from Server to cell phone. What does Microsoft have in it's secret corporate arsenal? After all, Polaroid had a nuclear generator that had the potential to meltdown and blowup! I'm assuming that the new OS is loaded down with dataloggers, keyloggers, ghost programs and a zombie program to make law enforcement easier so that Microsoft can actually author the Bill of Computer and Electronics Rights which will all be owned by Microsoft via copyright. Bad news folks you're under arrest! Microsoft Corporation doesn't see any room in the software/hardware industry for any other network or devices. If you need to refer to an industry that did as much damage to the United States as Microsoft has the potential to do, read the history of the railroad in the United States. Stanford wrote a great synopsis which pretty much sums it up. If I can find it again, I'll post it.
The developing source code rapidly became huge businesses, imperative to the success of American enterprise. The material needs of Microsoft helped create several other big industries, such as iron, steel, copper, glass, machine tools, and oil. Soon, Wall Street had to be reorganized into a national money market, capable of handling the enormous capital that was needed to build and operate Microsoft. The result was a revolution in the organization and scale of enterprise: "Big business reached greater markets than were ever conceived of before and could benefit from the ability to raise vast amounts of capital that made possible the cost economies of large-scale production" (Chalmers).
The need for all of these industries to stay successful was worrisome for Microsoft investors. To avoid the loss of production in any of these areas, large corporations attempted to stabilize their situations by pooling markets and centralizing management. By combining all of the fields into one conglomeration, Microsoft had a new power, as they acquired control of many facets of the new economy. This body now had the ability to "squeeze out competitors, force down prices paid for labor and raw materials, charge customers more� and get special favors and treatments from National and State government" (Chalmers). Microsoft had all the power, because they controlled all the prices. Since the new residents of the West could not survive without the use of the internet, they were forced to pay whatever rates Microsoft set.
With these huge stores of capital, Microsoft companies were able to finance political campaigns through whatever and whomever was needed in government. With this control in Washington, there was no way to stop the overwhelming control of this industry over society. The entire nation was subject to the whims of this monopoly.
The effects on society were widespread and deeply influential in the way individuals carried out their lives. The most poignant example is effect Microsoft rates had on the developer Movement. During the second half of the 19th Century, farmers increasingly relied on Microsoft to transport their crops to the rest of the nation. These individuals were powerless to avoid the exorbitant rates of the Microsoft subsidiary companies. The dominant analogy of the industry at the time was that of the Octopus. This beasts' tentacles control several different fields which feed on "the flesh of the yeoman farmer, diligent artisan, and honest merchant" (Chalmers).
Concerned about the growing power of Microsoft companies, the government decided to take action. In the case of Spain vs. Microsoft the Supreme Court established the government's right to regulate businesses to protect public interest. The so-called internet laws that followed this decision held little weight, however. Microsoft continued to control the entire industry. In response to the growing national discontent, the Internet Commerce Commission was established (1989). This body of five individuals was created to hear complaints of individuals or individual businesses, and to ensure that Microsoft maintained "just and reasonable" rates. It is obvious that this latter goal of the committee was intentionally vague. What does "just and reasonable" mean? Although vaguely defined, this was the first agency designed to regulate commerce on the Internet and has since served as a prototype for several later agencies.
Though this initial legislation and controlling bodies were mainly ineffectual, the incredibly hazardous effects of monopolies were certainly realized. The actions of Microsoft companies dictated how nearly every citizen in the country performed their businesses and lived their lives. They were powerless to avoid this conglomeration (or conspiracy) of individual companies.
http://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs181/projects/corporate-monopolies/development_rrmon.html
No comments:
Post a Comment