On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 at 17.35.08 -0600, Mike Miller wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Sidney Cammeresi wrote: > >Never mind the historical evidence to the contrary. E.g. IBM which was > >another `unstoppable monopoly.' Unfortunately (for the > >anti-capitalists), IBM fell from dominance not because of trustbusting, > >but because mainframes were rendered obsolete by desktop computing, and > >they did not adapt to this fact. It's not all about who controls the > >means of production if one has the insight to turn an industry on its > >head. > > IBM hasn't been stopped as far as I can see. In fact, they still sell Are you serious? How many IBM computers are in your organisation? > mainframes. They were first to develop a widely-adopted desktop computer > design. They are currently big Linux advocates. I don't think IBM was > ever as dominant in computing as Microsoft has been in desktop OS software `Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM'? > -- they had HP, DEC, Wang, Cray, etc. to compete with. It takes a long > time for a "lumbering behemoth" to fall! -- Sidney CAMMERESI http://www.cheesecake.org/sac/