Bill Gates And Microsoft Monopoly Computer Science Essay

Here we have the authoritative instance of a double-edged blade. Many people hold the position that Bill Gates is so rich because his successfully established concern, Microsoft, is the biggest monopoly in today ‘s universe. On the other manus, there are those who believe that Bill Gates has been reasonably rewarded for the engineering created and maintained by Microsoft. In the first portion of this study, I will analyse and turn to the position that Microsoft is the biggest monopoly. Thereafter, I will show an analysis of Bill Gates ‘ claim that he was “ rightly rewarded ” for the engineering Microsoft provides.

Microsoft was founded in 1975 by Bill Gates and Paul Allen. They sold BASIC, the first Personal computer computing machine linguistic communication plan, to MITS computing machine, who was Microsoft ‘s first client. Microsoft made a contract with IBM in 1980 when IBM decided to travel into the personal computing machine ( Personal computer ) market. With that contract, Microsoft would supply the basic operating package ( OS ) for all the computing machines that IBM sold. That OS was called MS-DOS. As IBM grew and dominated the Personal computer market in the 1980s, the consequence was that Microsoft became the market leader in OS package.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

By 1998, it was reported that Microsoft had a 90 % market portion [ 1 ] and as of October 2009, it was reported that Microsoft had retained the king of beasts ‘s portion of the market, at about 91 % [ 2 ] . At the clip of authorship, Microsoft is still the largest company supplying package solutions in the universe. Today, if you enter any retail shop that sells IT merchandises, such as computing machines, you will happen that most of the computing machines have a pre-installed Microsoft Windows runing system, in add-on to a few other Microsoft applications, e. g. Windows Messenger, Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player, etc.

Indeed, these yearss you can barely happen any computing machine on sale that does non come with an operating system. That is because the operating system is the ‘brain ‘ of a computing machine that ties everything together and by and large runs all the procedures. If you pay a spot of attending, it is non difficult to recognize that about all the computing machines use Windows as the operating system.

Why is that so? Since when did Microsoft go the market leader and how did Microsoft accomplish this? These inquiries, and more, will be addressed in the undermentioned paragraphs. In the 1990s, Microsoft became the dominant participant in the computing machine package industry when its merchandises enabled it to accomplish a 90 per centum market portion.

When Microsoft launched Windows 95, it besides installed the Internet Explorer with the operating system. The US Department of Justice claimed that the Internet Explorer and the operating system were dissociable merchandises. Most of the OEMs sell computing machines with MS-DOS preinstalled in the computing machines.

Microsoft used its pre-dominant power in the OS market with those OEMs and bundled its Internet Explorer with its runing systems, making a disproportionate market portion for its Internet Explorer Program at the disbursal of the other browser competitors. The US Department of Justice ( DOJ ) sued Microsoft with this grounds demoing that Microsoft had below the belt established a monopoly in the package industry and that Microsoft used its power to derive market portion through unjust concern patterns.

Basically, it was put away by the Department of Justice that Microsoft had the power to endanger or make force per unit area on independent package sellers who write package for runing systems. The DOJ argued that Microsoft created huge force per unit area on package sellers and gave these package sellers small alternate but to subscribe excessively protective non-disclosure understandings with Microsoft, so that those package sellers could merely develop applications for Microsoft ‘s operating system.

The package sellers knew that they had to subscribe these the contracts, despite the non-competitive concern environment that would be wrought as a effect of making so. It was an ineluctable fact that Microsoft was their biggest client in the industry, and that they would be better off, economically and financially talking, covering with Microsoft alternatively of other runing system developers. Due to Microsoft ‘s laterality in the market, package sellers had to subscribe these restrictive trades in order to hold assuring concern chances.

In making so, these package sellers really helped Microsoft to make an unjust and uncompetitive concern environment. In this manner, Microsoft played a major function in puting its challenger companies at an unjust disadvantage. Besides, the package sellers were possibly excessively acute or forced by fortunes to subscribe on with Microsoft in order to sell more of their merchandises and addition greater net incomes compared with selling to other smaller houses that had smaller market portions.

By utilizing the aforesaid tactics, Microsoft has created high entry barriers to new entrants who develop and sell alternate runing systems in the package industry. These houses are improbable to win or be for really long due to the unjust and uncompetitive environment fostered by Microsoft. Software sellers who develop and sell alternate operating systems would sooner or subsequently find that it is hard to construct a sustainable concern in the market and finally phase out.

The fact is that the mean individual tends to prefer buying computing machines with pre-installed runing systems, so that he or she can salvage on the cost of buying an operating system and avoid the clip needed for put ining it. It is merely more convenient ; when a consumer purchases a computing machine, it is ready to be used instantly. Microsoft was able to acknowledge this facet of the package industry really early on, and has used this concern tactic really efficaciously and sharply to capture a big portion of the market. Since the 1990s, Microsoft has grown well and captured the king of beasts ‘s portion of the market t.

Its presence in the operating system market has been continuously strong. This makes it hard for possible rivals to come in the market. In general, big houses have advantages over smaller houses in any industry, particularly when significant economic systems of graduated table are taken into history. Large houses are able to pull on more resources and are by and large more efficient at utilizing and maximising them, compared to smaller houses. Due to economic systems of graduated table, larger houses, as in the instance of Microsoft, are able to accomplish lower norm entire per unit costs, and thereby utilize resources more expeditiously.

Smaller houses are merely non able to convey sufficient resources together at low monetary values. In order to cover the high development costs for their merchandises, they need to raise the monetary values of their merchandises, and this already puts them at a disadvantage when their merchandises are viing for gross revenues against Microsoft ‘s merchandises. Normally, it requires significant capital resources to set about the development of an operating system.

By the clip the development is complete, smaller houses may hold already run out of resources before they could convey their finished merchandises to the market, and even if they managed to make so, they would happen that they were merely unable to vie with Microsoft in footings of merchandise pricing and after gross revenues support. As a consequence of holding been in the market for so long, holding established market laterality, and holding created high barriers to entry for new houses, Microsoft has therefore been the individual biggest operating system supplier in the market, with hardly any rivals.

With a few noteworthy exclusions, for illustration Apple and Linux, consumers are non spoilt for pick when shopping for runing systems to replace Windows. In fact, consumers may non even want to travel off from Windows to seek and larn a new operating system, because they view it as a instead dearly-won move. First, Microsoft bundles its operating system seamlessly with the OEMs. The computing machines go to the market at a individual monetary value, which includes the fabrication cost of the hardware and the developing cost of the operating system.

Consumers would see it as a more appealing pick compared to the option where they would hold to buy the computing machine and operating system individually. On top of that, they would necessitate extra clip to put in it and perchance trouble-shoot any ensuing jobs that might originate. The mean individual would non desire to pass any attempt on installing if he or she already has the pick of a ready-to-use Personal computer for purchase. Generally, consumers would non desire to purchase an alternate operating system if the computing machine they purchased already has one pre-installed.

This is a fact that Microsoft has capitalized upon to make a high barrier to entry to other runing systems and forestall them from pulling important consumer demand and set uping their market portion, merely because consumers have already been “ aquiline ” by Microsoft in the first topographic point. Therefore, houses who create and sell other runing systems will see great troubles in set uping their concerns and doing them feasible, profitable, and sustainable in the long tally. Second, Microsoft ‘s early market laterality has created a snowball consequence.

As a consequence of roll uping their flagship runing system with about every computing machine sold in the universe, they have created an environment where consumers have grown so accustomed to their operating system, that over the long term more and more concerns and persons are by and large taking computing machines with the Windows operating system because they have grown to be really familiar with it. A sudden passage from Windows to any other operating system would intend a steep acquisition curve. At the same clip, it is really dearly-won and inefficient to make so.

Peoples are by and large immune to alter [ 4 ] [ 5 ] . As such, one time a individual has spent clip larning Windows, get the hanging it, and so utilizing it for survey, work, and amusement intents, that individual is less likely to desire to utilize a new operating system. If a individual has to larn a trade name new runing platform, he would necessitate to pass excess clip and attempt to larn how to efficaciously utilize the system and easy pick up the accomplishments and cognition required. As such, the mean individual is improbable to see buying an option operating system.

This opposition to utilizing an alternate operating system over Windows applies non merely to persons, but besides to concerns. Most companies would take computing machines pre-installed with the Windows operating system over other runing systems. The chief ground behind this determination is that it would assist them to cut down costs. With the prevalence of the Windows operating system in the universe today, many people have been utilizing Windows for old ages and even though new loops are released every few old ages, the basic maps remain the same.

Therefore, every bit long as companies opt for a globally used runing system such as Windows, they are able to salvage on preparation costs and increase productiveness early on. There is no initial period where employees are larning a new operating system and bettering their ain efficiency with utilizing the system. The above would non keep if companies are utilizing other runing systems that their employees are non familiar with. Third, consumers by and large look for computing machines with an operating system that is able to run or back up most of the applications available in the market.

A consumer would wish to utilize an operating system that can run all the applications that he or she needs to utilize. As we know, consumers tend to do determinations based on what is most economical to them. If consumers know that Windows is the most normally used operating system in the universe, they will be given to choose for it. By taking Windows, which dominates the market and attracts most of the package sellers to develop applications for it, consumers would hold greater assurance that the applications they need to utilize will be able to run and work swimmingly.

By taking Windows, consumers could salvage any possible fuss or incommodiousness that they may meet with other non-mainstream runing systems. Therefore it is more good and efficient for consumers to take Windows. To sum up, consumers are really familiar with Windows. There is no important push factor for them to exchange from Windows to other runing systems. By taking Windows, consumers can bask time-saving and cost-saving benefits, and hence they will be improbable to travel off from Windows.

The chief ground Microsoft has been so successful today is that Windows is already prevailing worldwide. Microsoft enjoys great web outwardnesss that play a important portion in beef uping its market place. Microsoft, its consumers, and its web together organize a stable three, contribute to Microsoft ‘s monopoly. Of the three, where do web outwardnesss fit into the image? The fact that Windows is the mainstream runing system in the industry and occupies about 90 per centum of the market portion compels the package sellers and developers to make package for Windows foremost.

With the aid of those package developers, people who choose Windows can bask a enormously big pool of package and applications. In bend, the huge pool of applications strengthens consumer demand for Windows and other Microsoft applications. The more package developers and sellers join this web with Microsoft, the more consumer demand for Microsoft Windows every bit good as the demand for the merchandises that the package developers and sellers create. The strong web between Microsoft and package sellers helps to reenforce Microsoft ‘s laterality in the market.

This is every bit simple as a snowball consequence. On the other manus, the depression or about zero demand for other runing systems means it is highly dearly-won for possible rivals to develop and make their ain operating system. Even if some houses still go in front and seek to vie with Microsoft as their new runing systems can offer more figures, these houses still have to vie with Microsoft to derive some package sellers who would compose applications for their bran-new operating systems.

Besides the package sellers who have already signed protective non-disclosure understanding with Microsoft, there are barely any bing package sellers who can last without holding Microsoft as their biggest client. Let us state there are a few package houses exist. The companies with new runing systems will hold job carrying those package houses to compose applications to back up the new system. The job is package sellers do acknowledge that an operating system will pull more consumer demand if there are already plentifulness of applications that can run on the new system.

They would wait until that point of clip when the new operating system has more or less established with 1000s of application to make up one’s mind whether they should give their resources into this concern. The fact is that no individual house wants to bear the hazard of developing the first 1000 applications for the new system. The package houses will wait for person else to bear the hazard foremost. Equally long as this state of affairs persists, it will be really hard for these new runing systems to acquire a important market portion.

One all right illustration is Apple ‘s operating system Macintosh. Apple is an illustration of failure to perforate the barrier to entry of OS applications. As we can see from the market, Apple was non able to efficaciously vie with Windows or gain a important market portion even though Apple has 1000s of applications that support its operating system Macintosh and a ferociously loyal fanbase. This grounds shows that even a system that supports 1000s of applications is non plenty for Apple to pull a bulk of users from Windows. Consumers make determinations based on the most economical pick.

Consumers know that even though the Apple OS could offer 1000s of applications, Windows could offer even larger pool of applications. Besides, the possibility of a plan running swimmingly on Windows is higher than the possibility for Apple OS. That explains why Apple was still non able to pull a big group of consumers off from Windows. Since the demand for Apple OS is non sufficient high, Apple likely could non take down its monetary value to vie with Microsoft Windows. This farther affected the gross revenues of Apple computing machines. As of April 2010, Apple ‘s market portion stood at 7. per centum.

There is another operating system, Linux, which besides fails to come over the being of applications barrier to entry in this market. Slightly different from other runing systems, Linux is chiefly used to run waiters and non PCs, and it is an unfastened beginning runing system. Today, Linux has 1000000s of users. However, many package sellers did non follow Linux to develop sufficient applications to do it an attractive replacement of Windows. Mainstream consumers still favour Windows with its dependable developer support and its hereafter in the Personal computer kingdom.

Linux was non able to vie with Windows ‘ immense reservoir of applications and inducements to pull developers. Up to here is my essay. Below is merely some mention. For Microsoft, being the biggest monopolizer in the personal computing machine package industry and holding established high barriers for new entrants do non intend it can govern the market all the clip without any menaces. Indeed, there were instances where Microsoft faced challenges and menaces from other rivals. In the terminal, Microsoft was able to get the better of its rivals utilizing some smart moves and tactics.

When Microsoft launched Windows 95, it besides installed the Internet Explorer with the operating system. The US Department of Justice claimed that the Internet Explorer and the operating system were dissociable merchandises. Most of the OEMs sell computing machines with MS-DOS preinstalled in the computing machines. Microsoft used its pre-dominant power in the OS market with those OEMs and bundled its Internet Explorer with its runing systems, making a disproportionate market portion for its Internet Explorer Program at the disbursal of the other browser rivals.

;