Replies

It's really quite simple why MS wants to maintain dominance of the browser market - you get to control the way content is served by controlling the way it's received. Once you have a major portion of the client end - browsers - you then create exclusive methods of content delivery that can only be used by your browser. But that's not the money making bit - the money maker is that only your servers can deliver via that method. That's where the money is, and why you want to control the client end - so you can sell a zillion dollars worth of server-end software to companies anxious to communicate with all those clients you control.

Imagine a world where televisions were just invented. The MS method of money making goes like this - first, you give away a free Microsoft television to everyone in the country. Then, once you've done that, you start approaching corporations and other deep-pocketed organizations and offering to sell them broadcast facilities for megabucks. Now, because you control the client end, you can stack the deck in favor of your broadcast facilities - the server end, where the money is. Microsoft TVs will only get color pictures and stereo sound when the broadcaster uses Microsoft studios. But if someone tries to use a non-Microsoft broadcast facility...well, Microsoft TV owners can see it, but only in black-and-white and with crappy mono sound. It only does the cool stuff if you have a Microsoft TV and the broadcaster has a Microsoft studio.

That's the impetus behind stuff like ActiveX and ASP.NET - to create channels where you can do cool stuff, but only if you use MS browsers and MS servers. So if you want to do that cool stuff, you have to buy the server from MS, because they sure aren't giving that away for free, unlike the client end.

That's the impetus behind stuff like ActiveX and ASP.NET - to create channels where you can do cool stuff, but only if you use MS browsers and MS servers. So if you want to do that cool stuff, you have to buy the server from MS, because they sure aren't giving that away for free, unlike the client end.

Exactly, but you'll have to convince others on this thread of that. And just because you managed to pull that off, doesn't mean that your catbird situation will continue even if somebody else starts offering a better free client end and less and less people have your client in their home. You may still offer good stuff, but you have lost control of the power to create cool stuff for YOUR client. The other guys might not be so willing to develop their new market dominating client in the way you want in the future. Things change, times move on. I don't think Microsoft is dumb enough to ignore Firefox.

You don't know what you are talking about. ActiveX was not created for the Internet (although years ago they attempted to use it on the Internet). ASP.NET does not create content that only works on MS browsers. All the cool stuff offered by .NET is usable by any browser that conforms to W3C standards. BTW: FireFox does not support CSS correctly. It is FireFox's problem, not Microsofts. CSS are defined by the W3C, not Microsoft.