Re: competition


Antony Stone
 

On what grounds did FS (threaten to) sue these companies?


Antony.

On Thursday 21 December 2017 at 22:56:26, Sky Mundell wrote:

You hit the nail on the head Erik. That certainly what did happen.
Competition in the early days of the windows screen reading market was
supposed to put prices down and put functionality up. Instead, FS sued any
agencies who did not purchase JAWS and threatened them to either buy JAWS
or be sued. These agencies should have argued that client choice was more
important But back then they weren’t allowing client choice either. And,
as for the sniping of AT companies, that is what happened. Remember that
lawsuit that FS filed against Serotek, and GW Micro? I think this was in
response to agencies starting to buy alternative screen readers for their
clients that this lawsuit happened. These lawsuits were totally
unnecessary and they should have dented fs’s reputation.

erik burggraaf Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 11:09 AM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] competition

Competition makes a lot of products better. I've never seen any evidence
that this applies to screen readers though.

Windows is the only OS without built in access. Narrater is less and less
useless all the time, but it's not up to the quality of what's built in to
any other OS on the market.

Windows is the only system with a multi-screenreader approach. Lots of
people tried to capitalize on android access, but the built in features
are good enough to put paid and even free competitors out of business.

Competition never brought the prices down or the functionality up. Users
certainly didn't benefit from the legal snyping of the big AT companies or
the antitrust of microsoft building in it's own screen reader. Oddly
enough, the same people who lobbied against microsoft building it's own
screen reader also lobbie governments for exclusivity agreements to sell
only one of the so called competing products. What do we call that when
microsoft tries it? Antitrust. Huh... How do users benefit from the
exclusivity agreements?

NVDA development isn't driven by competition with other screen readers.
It's driven by the community through donations of code and money and other
talents derived from the community.

Even when there were many products competing in the market, I didn't see
any evidence that the competition improved the over all performance,
stability, feature sets or monitary value of screen reader products in
general.

Now that the actual number of windows screen readers is shrinking, and the
number of viably accessible OS is growing, and the business models of
windows screen readers are so dramatically different, I believe pmarket
competition is even less important than it was five or ten yearss ago. I
mean, what's the value of an exclusivity agreement to sell only one
product when the next best competitor can be downloaded for free by any
one with a computer?

Best,

Erik

On December 20, 2017 12:45:24 AM "Sarah k Alawami" wrote:

I'm actually up for competition. It will make each product better and
better as time goes by.. I didn't want to use nvda in 2006 or 2007 when
it came out as jaws at the time was the best. Now I won't touch jaws with
a 10 foot pole. I tried to make my work switch but their excuse was that
nvda was not meant for the word place and they would not consider it.
--
"Microsoft's profit margins require a monopoly lock on the market; thus,
they're stuck with being predatory evil bastards. The moment they stop being
predatory evil bastards, their stock price will tank and their options pyramid
will crash and it will be all over."

- Eric S Raymond

Please reply to the list;
please *don't* CC me.

Join nvda@nvda.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.