Quote:
Originally Posted by eschwartz
Quit it with the ad hominem attacks on anyone who disagrees with you.
You're making me bored.
|
I disagree with that. Noimp's response to HarryT was a precise analysis of HarryT's post. How can that be an ad hominem attack?
If it is an ad hominem attack, then HarryT must be attacking himself
Quote:
Originally Posted by dickloraine
You just describe one side of the story. But look for example at self publishing. There amazon is a driving force, allowing much more people to enter the market.
Publishers combat amazon on all fronts, I don't see them handing the production of books over.
Much of what you rightfully dislike has its source or solution not at amazon. Amazon practically invented the ebook market, more or less against the big piblishers. That they now own that market has much to do with the other players in the book market beeing unable to react to new things.
Taking away customer rights is not amazons doing, but whole branches of business. The music, movie, software, book industries to name just a few. It is bad politic and must be solved there.
|
That's a counter to noimp's position.
But I suspect noimp is not only talking about the current situation, but how he sees it going into the future. Hence his "fable" and the (future) control of public domain material via format dominance. As I understand him, he sees the potential of a closed file format becoming the de facto standard in the future, and solely controlled by Amazon.
Amazon was named after the biggest river in the world to express its ideal and goal of supremacy in the markets of its choice. Noimp is interpreting Amazon's increasing control of electronic publishing and distribution in the context of Amazon's own stated ambition: Market domination. So I think there us nothing very debatable on that point. It's a given, and is the way you would expect any extremely competent large company to function. It is interesting to watch how Amazon is attempting to attain its goal. For the most part I don't see anything controversial in noimp's analysis of Amazon's strategy.