Stan Beer
Monday, 16 October 2006 12:08
Opinion and Analysis
Page 3 of 3
Why are these risky plays?
As far as prices are concerned, Apple CEO
Jobs hit the nail on the head when he said, "If you want to stop
piracy, the way to stop it is by competing with it, by offering a
better product at a fair price." Many would argue that raising Windows
to prices as high as hardware in some cases is not a fair price. In the
affluent West, most people will pay it but in the second and third
worlds, this will be an issue.
One of the reasons Microsoft grew into the most successful IT company
of all time, and in the process nearly put Apple out of business, is
that it originally offered users a reasonably priced product and the
freedom to choose their hardware supplier. As the cost of hardware has
dropped, Microsoft has increased its prices to the point where it is no
longer reasonably priced.
As far as SPP is concerned, it will certainly stop the pirate users but
it will also stop many of them from buying legitimate copies of Windows
some time in the future because it will force them to look for free
alternatives in the present such as Linux. It will also create bad
feeling amongst legitimate users.
We have in the past been criticised by some readers for occasionally
basing stories on our own polls. However, we decided to let a poll run
for about one week asking the question: Is the Vista Software
Protection Program fair to users? Of the 1312 responses, 1033 answered
no (78.7%) and 279 answered yes (21.3%).
Admittedly it's hard to tell from polls like this whether the feeling
is really that strong among users. However, it goes without saying that
many people do not like the prospect of being constantly policed by a
vendor to which they've already paid good money.
Maybe Microsoft believes that all this will not matter. If so, it may find that it has lost touch with its users.