Learn from the mistakes of others

actually, the dominance largely negates the choice. most people are only familiar with ms products. they use them at work, used them at school, and most people they know use them.

being different is not what most people are into.

humans are social animals. they prefer groups over solitary, sameness over difference/change. most people will go with what they know, and what they are comfortable with.

purchasing is not a merely logical process of weighing up the competing options. even if they had the time, and the expertise, most people go with what they feel is the best choice.

otherwise marketing would not work.

when was the last time you was an advertisement that compared the technical features with alternative products and offered a logical reason for choosing x over y?

actually, the dominance largely negates the choice. most people are only familiar with ms products. they use them at work, used them at school, and most people they know use them.

being different is not what most people are into.

humans are social animals. they prefer groups over solitary, sameness over difference/change. most people will go with what they know, and what they are comfortable with.

purchasing is not a merely logical process of weighing up the competing options. even if they had the time, and the expertise, most people go with what they feel is the best choice.

otherwise marketing would not work.

when was the last time you was an advertisement that compared the technical features with alternative products and offered a logical reason for choosing x over y?

ICT industries are so profitable because, outside of hardware, they are very, very cheap to run compared with the prices that people are prepared to pay for them.

And since humans are social animals, any industry that derives it's income from exploiting human social relations will be very popular. This includes the entertainment industries, magazines, and all that jazz.

The Industrial Revolution was remarkable because of the pace of the technological arms race - particularly in Western Europe. Nevertheless, the trend to want bigger or faster or more was not new even then.

The Corporation, The Trust, The Trademark, The Patent and other social constructions arose as a part of the response to the pace of change. Everyone wanted to be first, and to be biggest. The British eventually won by social reconstruction. We are still working within this social framework now.

It is ironic that the tools created a couple of hundred years ago to encourage social and economic growth, 'notionally' for the benefit of society as a whole, are now used to control segments of society and have captured economic growth. The Corporation and Intellectual Property have been manipulated out of the shackles of their original purposes to serve their own interests. The Corporation is now considered the model for human governance rather than a mechanism for encouraging (and protecting) investment. Intellectual Property was also supposed to encourage and protect investment - in innovation and development - but is equally useful in preventing competition and bludgeoning opponents, especially if they might be shouldering in on 'your' market share.

Both The Corporation and Intellectual Property are social constructions. Neither is necessary for either Capitalism or for Economics to function. But they are very expedient mechanisms for creating the all important 'growth' that the ascendant models of social value exchange are being based upon.

Words are important. What we mean by 'growth' and 'value' and 'a better life' makes a big difference to what we get in the end ...

ICT industries are so profitable because, outside of hardware, they are very, very cheap to run compared with the prices that people are prepared to pay for them.

And since humans are social animals, any industry that derives it's income from exploiting human social relations will be very popular. This includes the entertainment industries, magazines, and all that jazz.

The Industrial Revolution was remarkable because of the pace of the technological arms race - particularly in Western Europe. Nevertheless, the trend to want bigger or faster or more was not new even then.

The Corporation, The Trust, The Trademark, The Patent and other social constructions arose as a part of the response to the pace of change. Everyone wanted to be first, and to be biggest. The British eventually won by social reconstruction. We are still working within this social framework now.

It is ironic that the tools created a couple of hundred years ago to encourage social and economic growth, 'notionally' for the benefit of society as a whole, are now used to control segments of society and have captured economic growth. The Corporation and Intellectual Property have been manipulated out of the shackles of their original purposes to serve their own interests. The Corporation is now considered the model for human governance rather than a mechanism for encouraging (and protecting) investment. Intellectual Property was also supposed to encourage and protect investment - in innovation and development - but is equally useful in preventing competition and bludgeoning opponents, especially if they might be shouldering in on 'your' market share.

Both The Corporation and Intellectual Property are social constructions. Neither is necessary for either Capitalism or for Economics to function. But they are very expedient mechanisms for creating the all important 'growth' that the ascendant models of social value exchange are being based upon.

Words are important. What we mean by 'growth' and 'value' and 'a better life' makes a big difference to what we get in the end ...