[KLUG Advocacy] Interesting . . .

[advocacy@kalamazoolinux.org]

>>http://www.pbs.org/cringely/
>>"Invincible: How Microsoft and Wal-Mart Can Lose, but
>>Can't Be Beaten"
>>Wow,  this guy is on the PBS site?  The article seems rife with
>>conservative/republican axioms.  Not that they are neccesarily wrong,
>>they are just tossed out in such a, well..., axiomatic way.  Below the
>>journalistic standards I expect from PBS.  Reads a bit like an InfoWorld
>>article.
>I have been following Cringely's writing for years.  I respect him.  He is
>not afraid to say unpopular things.  Also, He did two very good TV shows
>for PBS.  "Triumph of the Nerds" and "The Internet 2.0.1".  Nerds is a lot
>f fun that everyone on this list would enjoy.

I've seen bits of the Nerds show,  never the entire thing linearaly.  It did
seem pretty good,  I remember having some minor issues with some of the things
said,  but then I'm a geek,  which pretty much means I'll take exception to
something just about anyone says. :)

>>"But at their hearts, each business is successful because it has managed
>>to reduce its cost per transaction until it is lower than all its
>>competitors"
>This has nothing to do with technology and everything to do with economics.

Economically I fully understand this theorum,  and while still simplistic, it
seems pretty near the truth.  My arguement is that a company is more than
economics,  and that those other factors will effect the company's economics in
due course.  So his statement that his is the cause and root of their "success"
is mistaken.  Their "success" is an accumulation of past decisions, both
technological and economic, and the general perception of them by participants
in the market (customers).