Advertisement

Economic Perspectives on Software Design: PC Operating Systems and Platforms

  • Steven J. Davis
  • Jack MacCrisken
  • Kevin M. Murphy
Chapter
Part of the The Milken Institute Series on Financial Innovation and Economic Growth book series (MILK, volume 2)

Keywords

Marginal Cost Software Product Line Consumer Welfare Personal Computer System Customer Valuation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, William James, Yellen, Janet I. 1976. “Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90, no. 3, pp. 475–498.Google Scholar
  2. Bakos, Yannis, Brynjolfsson, Erik. 1999. “Bundling Information Goods: Pricing, Profits and Efficiency,” Management Science, 45, no. 12 (December).Google Scholar
  3. Bakos, Yannis, Brynjolfsson, Erik. 2000. “Bundling and Competition on the Internet: Aggregation Strategies for Information Goods,” Marketing Science (January).Google Scholar
  4. Baldwin, Carliss Y., Clark, Kim B. 2000. Design Rules: Volume 1, The Power of Modularity. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Berndt, Ernst R., Rappaport, Neal J. 2001. “Price and Quality of Desktop and Mobile Personal Computers: A Quarter-Century Historical Overview,” American Economic Review, 91, no. 2 (May), pp. 268–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Besen, Stanley, Farrell, Joseph. 1994. “Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3, no. 2.Google Scholar
  7. Boyce, Jim. 1998. Inside Windows 98. New Riders Publishing.Google Scholar
  8. Carlton, Dennis W., Waldman, Michael. 2000. “The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries,” George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State, Working Paper No. 145 (March). Available at http://gsb-www.uchicago.edu/research/cses/WorkingPapersPDF's/145.pdf.
  9. Coase, R.H. 1972. “Durability and Monopoly,” Journal of Law and Economics, 15, pp. 149–149.Google Scholar
  10. Computer Language Company. 1999. Computer Desktop Encyclopedia. Point Pleasant, Pennsylvania. Searchable at http://www.computerlanguage.com/sitemain/content.html.Google Scholar
  11. Cusumano, Michael A., Selby, Richard W. 1995. Microsoft Secrets. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  12. Cusumano, Michael A., Yoffie, David B. 1998. Competing on Internet Time: Lessons from Netscape and its Battle with Microsoft. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  13. Davis, Steven J., MacCrisken, Jack, Murphy, Kevin M. 1999. “The Evolution of the PC Operating System: An Economic Analysis of Software Design,” June 29. Available at http://gsbwww.uchicago.edu/fac/steven.davis/research.
  14. Davis, Steven J., Murphy, Kevin M. 2000. “A Competitive Perspective on Internet Explorer,” American Economic Review, 90, no. 2, pp. 184–187. Republished in expanded form with mathematical supplement at http://gsbwww.uchicago.edu/fac/steven.davis/research.Google Scholar
  15. Davis, Steven J., Murphy, Kevin M., Topel, Robert H. 2001. “Entry, Pricing and Product Design in an Initially Monopolized Market.” Available at http://gsbwww.uchicago.edu/fac/steven.davis/research.
  16. Easterbrook, Frank H. 2000. “Information and Antitrust.” Keynote address delivered at a symposium on “Antitrust in the Information Age” at the University of Chicago on October 29, 1999. Revised version is dated October 4, 2000.Google Scholar
  17. Economides, Nicholas. 1986. “Minimal and Maximal Product Differentiation in Hotelling’s Duopoly,” Economic Letters, 21, pp.67–71.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Economides, Nicholas. 2000. “The Microsoft Antitrust Case,” Working Paper 2000-09, Stern School of Business, New York University. Available at http://www.stern.nyu.edu/ networks.
  19. Ellison, Glenn, Fudenberg, Drew. 2000. “The Neo-Luddite’s Lament: Excessive Upgrades in the Software Industry,” Rand Journal of Economics, 31, no. 2 (Summer), pp. 253–272.Google Scholar
  20. Evans, David S., Nichols, Albert, Reddy, Bernard. 1999. “The Rise and Fall of Leaders in Personal Computer Software,” National Economic Research Associates. Available at http://www.neramicrosoft.com/NeraDocuments/Analyses.
  21. Evans, David S., Nichols, Albert, Schmalensee, Richard. 2001. “An Analysis of the Government’s Case in U.S. v. Microsoft,” Antitrust Bulletin, 46, no. 2 (Summer).Google Scholar
  22. Evans, David S., Schmalensee, Richard. 2001. “Some Economic Aspects of Antitrust Analysis in Dynamically Competitive Industries,” NBER Working Paper 8268 (May).Google Scholar
  23. Farrell, Joseph, Katz, Michael L. 2000. “Innovation, Rent Extraction, and Integration in Systems Markets,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 48, no. 4 (December), pp. 413–432.Google Scholar
  24. Fisher, Franklin M. 2000. “The IBM and Microsoft Cases: What’s the Difference?” American Economic Review, 90, no. 2 (May), pp. 180–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fisher, Franklin M., Rubinfeld, Daniel L. 2000. “United States v. Microsoft: An Economic Analysis,” in Did Microsoft Harm Consumers? Two Opposing Views. Washington, DC: AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies.Google Scholar
  26. Fudenberg, Drew, Tirole, Jean. 1998. “Upgrades, Trade-Ins and Buybacks,” Rand Journal of Economics, 29, no. 2 (Summer).Google Scholar
  27. Gans, Joshua S., Hsu, David H., Stern, Scott. 2000. “When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?” NBER Working Paper 7851.Google Scholar
  28. Gilbert, Richard J., Katz, Michael L. 2001. “An Economist’s Guide to U.S. v. Microsoft,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15, no. 2 (Spring), pp. 25–44.Google Scholar
  29. Gookin, Dan. 1992. “Windows 3.1 vs. OS/2 2.0,” InfoWorld.Google Scholar
  30. Hylton, Keith N., Salinger, Michael. 2001. “Tying Law and Policy: A Decision Theoretic Approach,” Boston University School of Law Working Paper Series, Law and Economics Working Paper No. 01-04. Available at http://www.bu.edu/law/faculty/papers.
  31. Ichbiah, Daniel, Knepper, Susan L. 1991. The Making of Microsoft. Prima Publishing.Google Scholar
  32. Katz, Michael, Shapiro, Carl. 1994. “Systems Competition and Network Effects,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3, no. 2.Google Scholar
  33. Katz, Michael L., Shapiro, Carl. 1999. “Antitrust in Software Markets,” in Competition, Innovation and the Microsoft Monopoly: Antitrust in the Digital Marketplace, Jeffrey A. Eisenach and Thomas M. Lenards, editors. Boston, Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers for the Progress & Freedom Foundation.Google Scholar
  34. Khanna, Tarun, Yoffie, David. 1996. “Microsoft, 1995,” Harvard Business School Case Study 9-795-147.Google Scholar
  35. Klein, Benjamin. 1999. “Microsoft’s Use of Zero Price Bundling to Fight the Browser Wars,” in Competition, Convergence and the Microsoft Monopoly, Jeffrey A. Eisenach and Thomas M. Lenard, editors. Boston, Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers for the Progress & Freedom Foundation.Google Scholar
  36. Klein, Benjamin. 2001. “The Microsoft Case: What Can a Dominant Firm Do to Defend Its Market Position?” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15, no. 2 (Spring), pp. 45–62.Google Scholar
  37. Liebowitz, Stanley J., Margolis, Stephen E. 1999. Winners, Losers and Microsoft: Competition and Antitrust in High Technology. Oakland, California: The Independent Institute.Google Scholar
  38. Markoff, A. 1996. “Tomorrow, the World Wide Web,” The New York Times, July 16, p. D1.Google Scholar
  39. McAfee, R., Preston, J. McMillan, Whinston, Michael D. 1989. “Multiproduct Monopoly, Commodity Bundling, and Correlation of Values,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 104 (May), pp. 371–384.Google Scholar
  40. McCartney, Laton. 1986. “The Pros and Cons of Going Multi-Vendor (Practicality of Companies Utilizing More Than One Vendor for Computer Systems),” Dun’s Business Month, 128 (November), 93.Google Scholar
  41. Microsoft. 1995. “Microsoft Developer Relations: Proving Microsoft’s Commitment to Third Parties,” Microsoft Corporation White Paper.Google Scholar
  42. Microsoft. 1998. Microsoft Internet Explorer Resource Kit. Microsoft Press.Google Scholar
  43. Posner, Richard. 2000. “Antitrust in the New Economy.” Address delivered to a conference on antitrust sponsored by the American Law Institute-American Bar Association Committee on Continuing Professional Education, September 14, 2000, New York, and published in Tech Law Journal. Available at http://www.techlawjournal.com/atr/-2000914posner.asp.
  44. Quarterman, John S., Wilhelm, Susanne. 1993. UNIX, POSIX, and Open Systems: The Open Standards Puzzle. Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  45. Ramstad, Evan. 1998. “PC Makers Hunt for Gold in Internet Hookups,” The Wall Street Journal, August 12, Page B1.Google Scholar
  46. Reid, Robert H. 1997. Architects of the Web: 1,000 Days that Built the Future of Business. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  47. Reinganum, Jennifer F. 1985. “Innovation and Industry Evolution,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 99, no. 1, pp. 81–99.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. Salinger, M.A. 1995. “A Graphical Analysis of Bundling,” Journal of Business, 68, no. 1, pp. 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schmalensee, Richard L. 1984. “Gaussian Demand and Commodity Bundling,” Journal of Business, 57 (January), S211–S230.Google Scholar
  50. Shaked, Avner, Sutton, John. 1982. “Relaxing Price Competition through Product Differentiation,” Review of Economic Studies, 49, pp. 3–17.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  51. Shapiro, Carl, Varian, Hal R. 1999. Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  52. Stigler, George J. 1963. “United States v. Loew’s, Inc.: A Note on Block Booking,” Supreme Court Review, pp. 152–157.Google Scholar
  53. Tirole, Jean. 1988. The Theory of Industrial Organization. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  54. Vickers, John. 1986. “The Evolution of Market Structure When There Is a Sequence of Innovations,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 35, no. 1, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
  55. Whinston, Michael D., 1990, “Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion,” American Economic Review, 80, no. 4 (September), pp. 837–859.Google Scholar
  56. Whinston, Michael D. 2001. “Exclusivity and Tying in U.S. v. Microsoft: What We Know, and Don’t Know,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15, no. 2 (Spring), pp. 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wildstrom, Stephen H. 1998. “Build Your Own Browser,” Business Week, July 20, p. 17.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven J. Davis
  • Jack MacCrisken
  • Kevin M. Murphy

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations