The problem with monopolies in the technical area is that they have a business reason to be incompatible (otherwise, they'll be cloned). That means they build over complex systems which have finicky compatibility problems.
The monopolist's need for obscurity and complexity doesn't just cost the developing company money, it hurts people trying to use their systems or interact with their systems.
Also, it hurts the speed of technological change. When an area is owned by a monopolist, the development investments are moved to an area that isn't owned yet -- paid for by milking the safe income. That means the owned areas (like web browsers) languish.
In short, unethical monopolies hurts my life quality in multiple ways, since I get to work with worse systems (well, not that I work with Windows any longer).
Comments
Like running a criminal monopoly.
The problem with monopolies in the technical area is that they have a business reason to be incompatible (otherwise, they'll be cloned). That means they build over complex systems which have finicky compatibility problems.
For a typical example, see this: http://www.robweir.com/blog/2009/05/update-on-odf-spreadshee...
The monopolist's need for obscurity and complexity doesn't just cost the developing company money, it hurts people trying to use their systems or interact with their systems.
Also, it hurts the speed of technological change. When an area is owned by a monopolist, the development investments are moved to an area that isn't owned yet -- paid for by milking the safe income. That means the owned areas (like web browsers) languish.
In short, unethical monopolies hurts my life quality in multiple ways, since I get to work with worse systems (well, not that I work with Windows any longer).
Edit: Grammar, clarity.