This is hardly an original observation, but remember the fuss over MSN?
I am a member, for various reasons. Recently some news rag had a story
about AOL, wondering why people subscribe when you can get most of the
content on the web. But this article stated that now that they have
bought CompuServe (of which I am also a member, for various other
reasons), they are the only such company. Really? I'm sure that MSN and
Prodigy enjoyed that.

I also use MS Money. I can remember when Quicken upgrades were $49.95
and Money was $19.95 with a $10 mail in rebate. How come MS can't beat
them? How come Intuit can compete with MS?

>----------
<snip>
>As for successful companies in general, I do not believe that the end
>justifies the means.  If a database is a piece of horse-pucky, then
>the company who makes it should not get rich on the basis of it.
>If they do, then they do NOT have my admiration; rather, I question
>how it came to be.
>
>Did the competition not market as well?  Or were lies told along
>the way?  Or was there some other reason?
>
><snip>
>
>With MS Write, it doesn't take long to realize its bare-bones nature.
>For IE, which is real competition to Netscape, there can be no such
>realization.  Would you complain if Netscape was the browser on the
>desktop, and IE had to be downloaded?  If IE then disappeared, would
>you say *that* was meant to be?
>