Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Apologies if this was mentioned in COLA already.
>
> Dell are allegedly charging more for their open PC than they charge for a
> machine with a commercial O/S installed.
>
> To me, this raises many concerns. Is it possible that Microsoft are
> funding hardware to preserve the integrity of their shackles?
That kind of kick back is illegal under every coutry's laws.
In many cases they may be getting away with it by receiving
the kick back in a different country to which Dell$ and M$ is
committing the crimes - so this needs international cooperation,
though it can still be done on a country by country basis as well.
The EU would certainly be interested because they have
in the past hunted down memory chip companies that charge
different prices in different markets to selectively
attack strong competitors.
Micoshaft are overcharging software buyers to subsidise hardware
vendors illegally through kick back agreements.
Hardware vendors have a right to take them to the
anti-trust courts and fine Dell$ and M$ billions of dollars
in tripple damages and basically keep most of that fine
to themselves for the harm done to their businesses
and to their investors.
> Are they
> relying on expensive Office licences and user dependency through
> familiarity? If so, is this not unethical? Must anti-trust be woken up
> again?
>
> Are Dell just too blind to see an irrational pricing scheme? I once went
> to a restaurant where half a litre cost less than half than an entire
> litre. Is it merely a fluke or a master plan?
>
> http://hardware.slashdot.org
article.pl?sid=05/10/08/034211&tid=190&tid=137
>
> Roy
>
|
|
