Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 26, 1999)
Battalion PINION Page 9 • Friday, February 26, 1999 'srateaj iddife;! indtoy onopoly Madness IATES Mtot t i* m athApei UStes» p. 3Wr." ♦IM :es LoImHij awn M n) m ms-Bani I Stxw Carlson G* lotiorro«< Party W pons* Hero soft not lilty of unfair mess tactics harles E. Wilson, Secretary fense .gthe hower Snistra- §n, is best re membered for Muote, at’s good tie country is good for Gen- Motors, and vice versa. ” day, that quote could best plied to the computer iRtany Microsoft, a company E |provides thousands of jobs, ns of dollars in taxes and (revolutionized the comput- dustry in this country and ghout the world. [despite all the good Mi lt does, it is now under at- from the Department of Jus- br anti-trust violations and nly business leader with a e public image than Bill |s is Montgomery Burns, is not a good thing, icrosoft is being demonized aring to market its Internet ser, Internet Explorer, as part of its jdows 98 operating system. This is lidered restraint of trade because 90 percent of the computers on [planet run off of Windows, joth the federal government and most icrosoft’s major competitors believe if Microsoft is allowed to market an net browser with Windows, no one EL pH have any incentive to buy a compet- irowser. his is of course a baseless fear. Mi- oft’s main competitor in the browser >stry, Netscape, already controls 40 :ent of the market and its browser is lable free on the Internet, he browser industry is open to com- [ion, which means the company produces the best product at the ipest price is going to win. Win- sdoes give Microsoft a powerful ^Wantage in this market, but it does 3"# 01 mean Microsoft possesses a monop- )407-9/OS JiTAM R$ D.H.D. LOSS oly, which requires government in volvement should not be involved. This is a capitalist economic system, companies that do not engage in predato ry business practices are companies that fail. The reason Microsoft has been so successful is because Bill Gates under stands this. Microsoft pulled a David and Goliath on the once seemingly invincible IBM, an object lesson that has never been lost on Bill Gates. He understands that the com puter industry is constantly changing (as anyone who has had the distinct pleasure of buying a computer only to find it is obsolete three months later should know) and that if Microsoft does not ag gressively market its products and work to crush its competitors, it will get crushed. Microsoft is by no means all powerful. Its main strength is software for personal computers, an important market but one that is declining in importance. The per sonal computer market is completely sat urated, with most sales now coming from replacements of older models not new customers. This means if Microsoft wants to con tinue the aggressive expansionist policies that have made it so successful, it is go ing to have to enter new markets. Computer industry specialists believe the next major markets will be servers, information appliances and embedded software systems. These are all markets with established companies that are more than capable of defending them selves and Microsoft has been flounder ing in its attempts to compete with them. Microsoft’s Win2000 product is al ready over two years behind schedule (crippling Microsoft’s efforts to compete in the critical business server market), Microsoft Network only has two million customers compared to the 16 million held by America On-Line and then there is Microsoft’s Web TV, the biggest com mercial flop since New Coke. Microsoft is still an immensely powerful company but it faces ferocious competition in most of the markets it will need to expand in to survive. It is appropriate to expect Microsoft to fight for its life in the marketplace, it is not appropriate to expect it to fight for its life in the courts. Microsoft provides good products at reasonable prices and in doing so has made computers widely available across the whole country. It pumps billions of dollars into the economy every year, making the entire country richer. It helps facilitate the development of new tech nologies that improve the lives of every one. In other words, Microsoft is good for the country. Which means this anti-trust suit has to be bad for the country. Mi crosoft has achieved its prominence by beating its competition on the open mar ket; it should not be punished for being GABRIEL RUENES/The Battalion successful. With the net value of Microsoft stock currently valued around 400 billion dol lars, can the country afford to risk dam aging a company that plays that vital of a role in the national economy? Gates is a smart man; he knows if he gets lazy and complacent he will get crushed in the marketplace, which is precisely why he has never gotten lazy and compla cent. His competitors are understandably frustrated and are trying to use the power of the federal government to beat the man they have found to be unbeat able. Maybe they should work on improv ing their own products instead? Microsoft makes this country richer, stronger and better; it should be allowed to continue to do this. Brendan Gay is a senior political science and history major. iM»e). » is lesi* ax indu« 1 jCS. Ciw 6 ' xical merchants need to stop iking advantage of Aggies ost people know , college students vitep w JLa re “broke.” So, ARMS/ ih\ does everything cost e in college towns? his is a huge mystery ggies, as well, as oth- ollege students. Students at Texas A&M being financially ex ited by businesses, as Christian ROBBINS fill 2 aiflyoPP 1 as, Texas A&M University. According to ws story on KBTX-TV, College Station chants consider Aggies to be the lifeline iheir businesses. his is not a startling discovery consider- the businesses charge students more for jties, groceries, gas and other everyday s, than they would be able to charge in other city. n College Station, students pay astro- ical prices to live in apartments that Id be considered sub-standard in a ma- metropolitan city. Rent, food, car repair almost all items bought on-campus cost re on average than in normal areas, he only possible reason why businesses the need to charge so much is they Ihinkthat students can afford it, but this is jbviously not the case since many Aggies Beet some form of federal financial aid [rkto help offset the cost of tuition. Veil,” the local businessman thinks, “if any students have jobs, then surely they afford to pay our high prices.” Wrong conclusion, Mr. Businessman, allege students cannot afford high prices not only are they being exploited fi- cially by being overcharged, but they are ig exploited economically by being under- idby employers in the Bryan-College Sta- Harea. itudents in college towns are generally less than their counterparts in other ,es because businesses know there is an ndance of cheap labor, he average yearly salary for a college stu- before taxes is $11, 550. .ccording to the United States Govern- ,this is below the poverty level. Stu- tswho are part-time workers make less than $5760 a year. Given (he situation, it is disgraceful that businesses would charge students more mon ey for basic necessities. How do businesses justify this travesty of justice? “Students can get money from their par ents.” This is obviously not the case or stu dents would not get jobs to offset tuition. Not all Aggies depend solely on their par ents for financial support and parents who do support their children financially should not have to pay for price hikes, in addition to high tuition. “Students can use coupons.” Some busi ness do give good coupons and those busi ness deserve congratulations, but if an item costs the same without the coupon, then why waste the paper? “Local businesses donate money to A&M, thus giving students their money back.” Stu dents donate to A&M programs at the begin ning of each semester. It is called tuition. Donation should not be a justification for high prices. Donating to Texas A&M pro grams is in the best interest of Bryan-College Station merchants and most importantly it is tax-deductible. The problem has been stated, so what is the solution? Aggies could live in tents on campus and eat only at Hot Dog, Etc., but it rains too much here. Or Aggies could boycott local merchants, but that would result in tremendous suffering. Businesses know students have classes to worry about and do not have the time or en ergy to organize protest rallies over the price of milk. Basically, there is no solution because stu dents would have to give up eating, working, shopping and sleeping, so they have no choice but to patronize business that take ad vantage of them. The only other hope is for the businesses to realize the error in their ways, realize that Aggies are not cash cows and respect them fi nancially for being the lifelines of their busi nesses. Christian Robbins is a junior speech communications major. Quoted presidents not actually Christian In response to Ryan McMullan’s Feb. 25 mail call. This is in reply to the mail call that implied that our founding fa thers were Christian and that our nation was founded on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. My friend, you are sorely mistak en. A majority of the founding fa thers were either Deists or Unitari ans. It was interesting to me that you so eagerly spout off quotes without any references. Unfortunately I will not afford you that same luxury. I preserve the truth of the Amer ican history, and that history is that this nation was designed to be sec ular. Thomas Jefferson once said that Morris, a friend of Washing ton’s, “often told me that General Washington believed no more of that system (Christianity) than he himself did,” {Memoir and Corre spondence of T. Jefferson, IV, p. 512). James Madison said “in no in stance have ... the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people” {The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents, Steiner). In a letter to John Adams, Jeffer son decries the Christian God as a “hocus pocus phantasm of a God, like another Cereberus, with one body and three heads” (Steiner). Our second president of the United States, John Adams said “the divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity” and “this would be the best of all pos sible worlds, if there were no reli gion in it” (two separate letters in A Bibliographical Dictionary of An cient, Medieval, and Modern Free Thinkers). Other founding fathers and presi dents that were not Christian are the following: Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Paine, John Quincy Adams, and Ulysses S. Grant. MAIL CALL Nathan Bosdet Class of ’02 Accompanied by 11 signatures Reconstruction era laws good for Texas In response to David Lee’s Feb. 24 opinion column. After reading David Lee’s column on Governor George W. Bush, some facts need to be stated in response to his misinformed comments on re construction. Among the measures that were passed after the Civil War, mainly by Radical Republicans, were laws to strengthen the Freedman’s Bureau, civil rights’ acts, the 13th (which abol ished slavery), 14th, and 15th amend ments. Black people were able to attain voting rights, own land, become politi cians, become educated and have other rights. Many black colleges were created during this period. Under the provisions of the Morril Land Grant College Act, Texas A&M and Prairie View A&M were created. The existence of these schools can be credited to ex-slave Matthew Gaines and other Black legislatures of the Reconstruction. Yet, right-wing forces of the Democ ratic Party of the late 1800s passed segregationist Jim Crow laws. They also passed the grandfather clause, poll tax, and the literacy test that cre ated barriers for Blacks to vote. The final nail in the Reconstruction coffin was the Supreme Court’s Plessy vs. Ferguson ruling in 1896 which up held the “Separate but Equal” doc trine. The ruling was not overturned until the 1954 Brown vs. Board deci sion. So I wonder now which group does Lee consider brutal and ruthless? Because of courageous people, the civil rights movement came. Earl Smith Graduate Student Quayle would make good U.S. president In response to David Lee’s Feb. IC.opinion column. Many in the media attempt to dis credit Dan Quayle because of his miss spelling of the word “potato.” One only need watch Jay Leno’s “Headlines”segment on Monday nights to see some of the stupid mis takes the media makes on a regular basis. I’m sure the Battalion insiders know of many mistakes that their own paper also makes on a regular basis. It is said that, “Actions speak louder that words,” so let us not judge Quayle on his petty slip-ups, but rather let’s judge him on his record. Author of the bestseller Standing Firm, Quayle was standing for family values before it was popular. He was also one of the most ac tive Vice Presidents in our nation’s history. I have read his book Standing Firm, and I have had the opportunity to hear him speak. Nothing he said either in his book or in person was in the slightest bit uneducated. As a matter of fact, Dan Quayle is one of a few politicians that truly in spires me. As an American, I would be proud to one day call Dan Quayle, “Mr. President.” Brian McCauley Class of ’02 The Battalion encourages letters to the editor. Letters must be 300 words or less and include the author’s name, class and phone number. The opinion editor reserves the right to edit let ters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 013 Reed McDonald with a valid student ID. Letters may also be mailed to: The Battalion - Mail Call 013 Reed McDonald Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-1111. Campus Mail: 1111 Fax: (409) 845-2647 E-mail: batt@tamvml.tamu.edu