> Were it not for the pirates, they could
> likely charge less per license and the
> profits would increase at the same time.

(fx: laugh type="akira")

You appear to be under the misapprehension that Microsoft set their pricing based on pure economic motives of a reasonable profit, etc etc. They don't -- it's fairly obvious that they've got enough cash to be able to set their prices at whatever the market will bear, whether it reaps Microsoft a profit or not. Cost of production vs. cost of final product is a tenuous comparison to make in software development in general, and with some honking big cash reserves, Microsoft is in an even better position to play the "screw 'em until they squeal" game.

If everybody paid for a copy of windows, the only people who would benefit from that are Microsoft's shareholders. That may be fine with you, and probably with everyone else, but don't try and spin the "lower prices" baloney. It didn't fly back in the day, and it doesn't fly now. Stopping piracy is about benefit to the software company, not to the consumer. Never has been, never will.


[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/295/30331#30331