Wallace B. McClure

You are absolutely right Wally. Just another liberal anti-production organization trying to stop progress. They are probably all for the socilistic philosophy of Linux and other Source Available to Hackers applications. As far as I am concerned, when liberals get bent out of shape over something, then it most likely is a great thing.

"Their dominance in the marketplace is based on the fact that their customers are paying for the products, nothing more."

I don't know who this ECIS is, nor do I necessarily agree with them, however if you go back to the Adam Smith theory of the invisible hand, the market is not just those who are paying for the product, but all consumers in the market.

It is perfectly reasonable, rational, and desirable for consumers who do not feel their needs are being met to advocate and complain.  This is a recognition that the free market involves not just producers, but also consumers.

In time, if the complaining voices resonate, they can effect the market.  Again, that is reasonable, rational and desirable.  It is therefore in the best interests of the producer to judge the market and respond.  If the complaining voices are strong, they must surely change their product and adapt.

As a sidenote, if you feel the complaint is not valid because the product performs a feature in such a way that it is a benefit to you, then it is your right to similarly speak up.

The point is, that the "market" is not solely about those who buys.  It also includes those who do not buy, who refuse to buy, or whose needs are not being met by market producers.

This does not mean I think we should see government action enforcing an action.  But it certainly means that people have a right to their opinion, whether you agree or not.

Again, I don't follow ECIS, or really know or feel if their complaint has any merit.  However I frequently hear this myth about the way markets work and I wanted to counter it.

On a lighter side, I find it interesting how the ECIS implicitly gives XAML & OOXML a boost by legitimizing them as competitors to HTML & ODF.

The funny part is that they neglect to recognize how many times Microsoft has thrown out technology and had it flop.  Even if the Windows OS has a monopoly on the desktop, it doesnt guarantee that any of its features will also monopolize other markets.  

Take the browser wars for example.  The only reason why Microsoft succeeded for so long was the lack of any decent competitor.  Then one day, after years of neglecting IE, some new releases from the Mozilla guys changed the story in a short period of time.  The same can happen if Java/XUL/SVG et al can do what FireFox did to the browser wars.

The ECIS has once again dropped their pants and shown the world their incompetance.

~Lance

So.... why aren't they whining about xml being supported in pretty much every product? THAT is more of a html killer (remember, xhtml is xml).

freakin idiots. be universal in your application of rules. if ms can't include a media player, no one else should be able to.

Wally - Yes, but people who don't give money are also potentional consumers and you ignore them at your perile.

Look at General Motors.  For years they only listened to customers who bought GM, and ignored customer who bought Toyota and Honda.  Eventually they lost more customers than they kept, and their marketshare slid precipitously.

The point is, just because someone has bought Honda, does not mean GM should not listen to their complaints as a potential customer.  And believe me, the Honda owners were telling their friends what crap GM made, and their friends eventually listened.

CodeSniper - Agreed.  I don't like that ECIS thinks the only way to get what they want is to have the Government kneecap Microsoft.  As you say not everything MS creates is useful or popular.  My point was simply that ECIS does have a right to their opinion.

But it's up to us to determine whether they are right or not.