Get help from the best in academic writing.

ENG 131 Indiana University Bloomington Analysis of Baldwin & DuBois Paper

ENG 131 Indiana University Bloomington Analysis of Baldwin & DuBois Paper.

The answers do not have to be as long as the example answers are.Choose three paragraphs from your rough draft and re-write them utilizing the three strategies below. Post both the original paragraph and the rough draft. You don’t have to use all three strategies, so if one of them isn’t useful to you don’t feel you need to write an example of that form. You should post 6 paragraphs in total (three old, three new). Turn this paragraph into a compare/contrast paragraph using the method I demonstrated in class and sen below. Choose between a block or point-by-point style. Don’t forget to include exemplum.Begin with a topic sentence and expand on that initial thought using the numbered system we talked about earlier in the semester. Note the number of each new sentence in the margin (use Word’s “comment” function if you’re unsure how to enter material in the margin) Be sure that your topic sentence is on level 2-3 of Hayakawa’s ladder.Write a paragraph of examples and illustrations that begins with a broad concept eventually narrows to specific exemplum (think about Hayakawa’s ladder). This paragraph will probably be in your confirmatio.I have an examples response as well down hereYet if one looks closely one sees that there is no essential difference between a beggar’s livelihood and that of numberless respectable people. Beggars do not work, it is said; but, then, what is work? A navvy works by swinging a pick. An accountant works by adding up figures. A beggar works by standing out of doors in all weathers and getting varicose veins, chronic bronchitis, etc. It is a trade like any other; quite useless, of course—but, then, many reputable trades are quite useless. And as a social type a beggar compares well with scores of others. He is honest compared with the sellers of most patent medicines, high-minded compared with a Sunday newspaper proprietor, amiable compared with a hire-purchase tout—in short, a parasite, but a fairly harmless parasite. He seldom extracts more than a bare living from the community, and, what should justify him according to our ethical ideas, he pays for it over and over in suffering. I do not think there is anything about a beggar that sets him in a different class from other people, or gives most modern men the right to despise him. ComparisonDifferences between the potential of girls’ and boys’ could be observed since their childhood. Female infants speak sooner, have larger vocabularies, and rarely demonstrate speech defects. (Stuttering, for instance, occurs almost exclusively among boys.) Girls exceed boys in language abilities, and this early linguistic bias often prevails throughout life. Girls read sooner, learn foreign languages more easily, and, as a result, are more likely to enter occupations involving language mastery. Boys, in contrast, show an early visual superiority. They are also clumsier, performing poorly at something like arranging a row of beads, but excel at other activities calling on total body coordination. Their attentional mechanisms are also different. A boy will react to an inanimate object as quickly as he will to a person. A male baby will often ignore the mother and babble to a blinking light, fixate on a geometric figure, and at a later point, manipulate it and attempt to take it apart. ContrastPlath also accentuates linguistically the speaker’s reliving of her childhood. Using the heavy cadences of nursery rhyme and baby words such as “Chuffing,” “Achoo,” and “gobbledygoo,” she employs a technical device similar to Joyce’s in A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, where the child’s simple perspective is reflected through language. Like Joyce, Plath wants to recreate with immediacy the child’s view. But whereas Joyce evolves his Stephen Dedalus from the “baby tuckoo” and the “moocow” stage into maturity, she has her speaker psychically regress to her childhood fantasies, where every German is potentially her father and the German language seems to be an engine “chuffing” her off to Dachau. Comparison and Contrast1. The characteristic motive of English poetry is love of nature,especially of nature as seen in the English rural landscape. 2. Fromthe “Cuckoo Song” of our language in its beginnings to the perfectloveliness of Tennyson’s best verse, this note is ever sounding. 3. Itis persistent even amid the triumph of the drama. 4. Take away from Shakespeare all his bits of natural description, all his casualallusions to the life and aspects of the country, and what a losswere there! 3. The reign of the iambic couplet confined, but could not suppress, this native music; Pope notwithstanding, there came the “Ode to Evening” and that “Elegy” which, unsurpassed for beauty of thought and nobility of utterance in all the treasury of our lyrics, remains perhaps the most essentially English poem ever written. Numbered, Topic-sentence-first“The worship of the oak tree or of the oak god appears to have been shared by all the branches of the Aryan stock in Europe. Both Greeks and Italians associated the tree with their highest god, Zeus or Jupiter, the divinity of the sky, the rain, and the thunder. Perhaps the oldest and certainly one of the most famous sanctuaries in Greece was that of Dodona, where Zeus was revered in the oracular oak. The thunder-storms which are said to rage at Dodona more frequently than anywhere else in Europe, would render the spot a fitting home for the god whose voice was heard alike in the rustling of the oak leaves and in the crash of thunder. Perhaps the bronze gongs which kept up a humming in the wind round the sanctuary were meant to mimick the thunder that might so often be heard rolling and rumbling in the coombs of the stern and barren mountains which shut in the gloomy valley. In Boeotia, as we have seen, the sacred marriage of Zeus and Hera, the oak god and the oak goddess, appears to have been celebrated with much pomp by a religious federation of states. And on Mount Lycaeus in Arcadia the character of Zeus as god both of the oak and of the rain comes out clearly in the rain charm practised by the priest of Zeus, who dipped an oak branch in a sacred spring. In his latter capacity Zeus was the god to whom the Greeks regularly prayed for rain. Nothing could be more natural; for often, though not always, he had his seat on the mountains where the clouds gather and the oaks grow. On the Acropolis at Athens there was an image of Earth praying to Zeus for rain. And in time of drought the Athenians themselves prayed, ‘Rain, rain, O dear Zeus, on the cornland of the Athenians and on the plains.’” Examples and Illustrations In any case, this book is not a survey of the “postmodern,” nor even an introduction to it (always supposing such a thing was possible in the first place); nor are any of its textual exhibits characteristic of the postmodern or prime examples of it, “illustrations” of its principal features. That has something to do with the qualities of the characteristic, the exemplary, and the illustrative; but it has more to do with the nature of postmodern texts themselves, which is to say, the nature of a text in the first place, since that is a postmodern category and phenomenon which has replaced the older one of a “work.” Indeed, in one of those extraordinary postmodern mutations where the apocalyptic suddenly turns into the decorative (or at least diminishes abruptly into “something you have around the home”), Hegel’s legendary “end of art” — the premonitory concept that signaled modernism’s supreme anti- or transaesthetic vocation to be more than art (or religion either, or even “philosophy” in some narrower sense) — now modestly simmers down into the “end of the work of art” and the arrival of the text. But this throws the chicken coops of criticism into commotion fully as much as it stirs those of “creation”: the fundamental disparity and incommensurability between text and work means that to select sample texts and, by analysis, to make them bear the universalizing weight of a representative particular, turns them imperceptibly back into that older thing, the work, which is not supposed to exist in the postmodern. This is, as it were, the Heisenberg principle of Postmodernism, and the most difficult representational problem for any commentator to come to terms with, save via the endless slide show, “total flow” prolonged into the infinite. Bad
ENG 131 Indiana University Bloomington Analysis of Baldwin & DuBois Paper

MIS 320 Central Washington University Business Process Return Policy Discussion

MIS 320 Central Washington University Business Process Return Policy Discussion.

I’m working on a business discussion question and need an explanation to help me understand better.

Returns ProcessInstructions: The picture below is an image taken from Reddit. Answer the following questions:What do you think could be improved in this business process scenario? Where did this return process go wrong?If you were the store manager, how would you prevent this mistake from happening in the future?In order to get full points for this assignment, students should answer both questions accurately. There is no word count as long as you answer both questions correctly.
MIS 320 Central Washington University Business Process Return Policy Discussion

Data Analysis: Hypothesis Testing

online assignment help Use the Sun Coast Remediation data set to conduct a correlation analysis, simple regression analysis, and multiple regression analysis using the correlation tab, simple regression tab, and multiple regression tab respectively. The statistical output tables should be cut and pasted from Excel directly into the final project document. For the regression hypotheses, display and discuss the predictive regression equations if the models are statistically significant. Delete instructions and examples highlighted in yellow before submitting this assignment.   Correlation: Hypothesis Testing Restate the hypotheses from Unit II here.  Example: Ho1: There is no statistically significant relationship between height and weight. Ha1: There is a statistically significant relationship between height and weight. Enter data output results from Excel Toolpak here.                     Interpret and explain the correlation analysis results below the Excel output. Your explanation should include: r, r2, alpha level, p value, and rejection or acceptance of the null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis.  Example: The Pearson correlation coefficient of r = .600 indicates a moderately strong positive correlation. This equates to an r2 of .36, explaining 36% of the variance between the variables. Using an alpha of .05, the results indicate a p value of .023 < .05. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis is accepted that there is a statistically significant relationship between height and weight. Note: Excel data analysis Toolpak does not automatically calculate the p value when using the correlation function. As a workaround, the data should also be run using the regression function. The Multiple R is identical to the Pearson r in simple regression, R Square is shown, and the p value is generated. Be sure to show your results using both the correlation function and simple regression function.  Simple Regression: Hypothesis Testing Restate the hypotheses from Unit II here.  Ho2:  Ha2:  Enter data output results from Excel Toolpak here. Interpret and explain the simple regression analysis results below the Excel output. Your explanation should include: multiple R, R squared, alpha level, ANOVA F value, accept or reject the null and alternative hypotheses for the model, statistical significance of the x variable coefficient, and the regression model as an equation with explanation. Multiple Regression: Hypothesis Testing Restate the hypotheses from Unit II here.  Ho3:  Ha3: Enter data output results from Excel Toolpak here. Interpret and explain the simple regression analysis results below the Excel output. Your explanation should include multiple R, R squared, alpha level, ANOVA F value, accept or reject the null and alternative hypotheses for the model, statistical significance of the x variable coefficients, and the regression model as an equation with explanation.    References Include references here using hanging indentations. Remember to remove this example. Creswell, J. W.,

Biotechnology Development and the U.S. Economic Hegemony Research Paper

Table of Contents Abstract Introduction Conclusion Bibliography Footnotes Abstract Biotechnology is understood by many to be one of the most promising areas of technological development and among the most probable to bring significant economic and societal gains to the United States in the 21st century. With so much potentially at stake, an international competition has emerged among states and companies to grow and capture the value of biotechnology products. Competitiveness generally refers to the relative potential of a nation or company to convey goods or services to markets. Evaluations of competitive strength usually rely on indicators such as revenues, market share, and trade. Biotechnology is not a detached industry, but relatively a technology applied across a wide range of products in different industries for which biotechnology products in general account for a small fraction of total sales. For this reason, this research reviews national biotechnology research and development (R

Effect of Microsoft’s Monopolistic Approach

Effect of Microsoft’s Monopolistic Approach. The Effect of Microsoft’s Monopolistic Approach to Software Bundling on Innovation and Competition. Contents (Jump to) Chapter 1 – Introduction Chapter 2 – Literature Review 2.1 Monopolist or Fierce Competitor 2.2 Bundling, Innovative or Stifling Competition 2.2.1 Bundling Examples in Other Industries 2.3 The Case Against Microsoft Chapter 3 – Analysis 3.1 Bundling, Competitive or Market Restrictive? 3.2 Strategies to Gain Market Share 3.3 Microsoft and The European Union Chapter 4 – Conclusion Bibliography Chapter 1 – Introduction When mentioning Microsoft, one’s thoughts naturally turn to computers, as the two are inexorably tied together. And while they both need each other, software was the latter development in this marriage of needs. Based upon digits, computers utilize this foundation as the basis for their computations (Berdayes, 2000, p. 76). A digit is a “… numeral … that represents an integer …” and includes … any one of the decimal characters ‘0’ through ‘9’ …” as well as “… either of the binary characters ‘0’ or ‘1’ …” (Atis, 2005). Computers utilize digits under the ‘base-2 number system’, which is also termed as the ‘binary number system’ (Berdayes, 2000, p. 3). The base-2 system is utilized in computers as it implements easier with present day technology. A base-10 system could be used, however its cost in terms of technology innovation would make computers prohibitively expensive (Berdayes, 2000, pp. 53-56). Via the utilization of binary digits as opposed to decimal digits, bits thus have only two values, ‘0 and 1’ (Barfield and Caudell, 2001, p. 344, 368). The preceding is important in understanding the relationship of numbers to computers as well as Microsoft’s later entrance into this world. The following provides a visual understanding of how this works: Table 1 – Decimal Numbers in the Binary System (Swarthmore University, 2005) Decimal Number Binary Number 0 = 0 1 = 1 2 = 10 3 = 11 4 = 100 5 = 101 6 = 110 7 = 111 8 = 1000 9 = 1001 10 = 1010 11 = 1011 12 = 1100 13 = 1101 14 = 1110 In computers, bits are utilized in conjunction with bytes, which are represented as ‘8-bit bytes’ that work as follows: Table 2 – 8 Bit Bytes (Barfield and Caudell, 2001. pp. 50-54) Decimal Number Bytes 0 = 0000000000000000 1 = 0000000000000001 2 = 0000000000000010 65534 = 1111111111111110 65535 = 1111111111111111 The earliest computer has been traced back to the ‘abax’, which is the Greek word that describes ‘calculating board’ as well as ‘calculating table’ which as invented in China and called the abacus, it was also used in ancient Greece, the Roman Empire, Russia, Japan, and is still in use by the blind (, 2005). Operating much as the bits and bytes in the modern computer, the abacus has a vertical row of beads that represent multiples of 10, 1, 10, 100, 1,00 and so forth (, 2005). The basic principle of the abacus operates in much the same manner as the modern computer, through numerical representation. The first generations of modern computers were huge in comparison with today’s small, powerful and fast machines, and needed air-conditioned rooms to dissipate the heat. Programming on the first commercial computer in 1951, the UNIVAC, was a group of related mechanisms driven my mathematical equations that had to be written in order for the UNIVAC to work on problems (, 2006). It would take another 6 years for the first personal computer to be developed, the IBM 610 Auto-Point, which was termed as a ‘personal computer’ because it only took one individual to operate it, however, the cost in 1957 termed at $55,000 translates in to well over $100,000 in today’s value (, 2006). In 1975 saw the introduction of the Altair 8800, which sold for $439, with 256 bytes of RAM, which also represented the year that Bill Gates, along with Paul Allen founded Microsoft (, 2006). Altair was seeking a computer language, which Gates and Allen delivered via a program called BASIC on 23 July 1975, which they gave the company “… exclusive worldwide rights to … for 10 years” (Rich, 2003, p. 34). Sold as an add-on with the Altair 8800 for $75, the preceding provided the revenue underpinnings for Microsoft (Rich, 2003, p. 35). Generating just $381,715 in 1977, Microsoft was upstaged by Apple Computers that made machines as well as their own operating system (Rich, 2003, p. 36). Apple’s success caught the attention of IBM, which was not in the personal computer market, the foregoing was the means via which Gates entered the picture with IBM based upon DOS, program it secured from Seattle Computer for just $50,000 that heralded the beginnings of the industry giant (Rich, 2003, p. 51). Microsoft MS-DOS represented the foundation for the beginning financial strength of the company, which would enable it to develop Windows 95 and successive versions leading to Vista in 2007. Along the way, Microsoft has been accused, rightly or wrongly, of a monopolistic approach to software bundling that has stifled competition and innovation. This paper will seek to examine this facet, its effects, how it happened and the ramifications of the statement. Chapter 2 – Literature Review 2.1 Monopolist or Fierce Competitor In “Trust on Trial: How the Microsoft Case is Reframing the Rules of Competition”, by Richard McKenzie (2000, p. 1), reflects that Microsoft in the last 25 years has become “… the world’s premier software company, dominating many of the markets it has entered and developed…” and also finds itself “…under legal assault …” for monopolist behaviour. McKenzie (2000, p. 2) indicates that in the United States “…it’s the Justice Department against Microsoft, but behind the courtroom scenes there has been a good deal of political maneuvering by other major American corporate high-tech combatants -Sun Microsystems, Oracle, Netscape, IBM, and America Online, to name just a few – who would like nothing better than to see their market rival, Microsoft, get its comeuppance in the court of law”. In this instance it is the “…efficacy of antitrust law enforcement has been on trial” as the Microsoft case represents “…the first large-scale antitrust proceedings of the digital age;” (McKenzie, 2000. p. 2). McKenzie (2000, p. x) reflects upon the government case against Microsoft as a monopolist, indicating that while its operating system comes “ … preloaded on at least nine of every ten computers containing Intel microprocessors sold in the country, if not the world” was it this that made the company a monopolist? The market dominance that Microsoft has in the fact that its operating system comes preloaded in over 90% of the computers sold was expressed by the former United States Republican candidate Robert Dole, who stated “Microsoft’s goal appears to be to extend the monopoly it has enjoyed in the PC operating system marketplace to the Internet as a whole, and to control the direction of innovation.” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 28). This view was also repeated by the media as well as New York Attorney General Dennis Vacco who see Microsoft’s “…product development strategies are evidence of monopoly power: …” in that the “ … Windows operating system has become almost the sole entry point to cyberspace” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 29). It is without question that Microsoft’s dominance resulting from preloaded operating software provides it with an advantage in introducing other forms of software. But, is that simply good business practices or predatory behaviour? For consideration, McKenzie (2000, p. 47) points to the book written by Judge Bork “The Antitrust Paradox” where he stated repeatedly “… antitrust should not interfere with any firm size created by internal growth …”. And like it or not, that is how Microsoft got into the position it now enjoys. But, in all the rhetoric, there is another facet to Microsoft’s dominance, the PC manufacturers themselves. As stated by the manufacturers themselves, there simply is no other choice! (McKenzie, 2000, p. 29). Eric Browning, the chief executive of PC manufacturer Micron has said “I am not aware of any other non-Microsoft operating system product to which Micron could or would turn as a substitute for Windows 95 at this time” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 30). This sentiment was also echoed by John Romano, an executive at Hewlett-Packard who advised “… we don’t have a choice …” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 30). The tie-in between monopoly power and market dominance has been explained by Franklin Fisher, the chief economist for the Justice Department as “Monopoly power is a substantial degree of market power,” or the ability of a firm “(a) to charge a price significantly in excess of competitive levels and (b) to do so over a significant period of time” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 30). Fisher further asserts that Microsoft’s dominance in the market “… is protected by “barriers to entry” in the form of “economies of scale in production,” “network effects,” and “switching costs …” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 30). Fisher adds that “There are no reasonable substitutes for Microsoft’s Windows operating system for Intel-compatible desktop PCs. Operating systems for non-Intel-compatible computers are not a reasonable substitute for Microsoft’s Windows operating system” because there would be high costs to switching to non-Intel-compatible computers like Mac and Unix” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 30). However, the monopolistic tendencies of Microsoft have not resulted in the company charging higher prices as a result of its dominant position. This view was put forth by the chief economic consultant for the state attorneys general in that “…the absence of viable competitors in Intel-compatible operating systems means that Microsoft doesn’t have to worry about raising its price or using its economic weight in other ways …” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 30). He asserts that “ … a monopolist would continue to raise its price so long as its profits rose. …” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 31). Something that Microsoft has not done. Such is inconsistent with the manner in which monopolists behave. The line of reasoning for the preceding is that “…the cost of the operating system represents on average 2.5 percent of the price of personal computers (and at most 10 percent for very inexpensive personal computers), so “even a 10 percent increase in the price of the OS [operating system] would result at most in a 1 percent increase in the price of even inexpensive PCs …” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 31). Warren-Boulton thus concludes “…that Microsoft’s price for Windows is very likely far below the monopoly price …” which is a result of “…the so-called “coefficient” of the price elasticity of demand facing any firm (the ratio of the percentage change in the quantity to the percentage change in the price …” (McKenzie, 2000, p. 31). Therefore, argues McKenzie (2000, p. 32) a monopolist would not price its product in the very low range, “…because a very low elasticity implies that a price increase will increase profits …”, thus the government’s case has opposing views of Microsoft’s monopolist position, a telling facet in considering the overall implications of the company. The foregoing direct contradicts Franklin Fisher’s, the chief economist for the Justice Department, claims that Microsoft earns “ … superhigh profits …”, which its low prices does not support (McKenzie, 2000, p. 32). Thus, in being a so-called monopolist, Microsoft’s pricing policies do not reflect the behaviour of one. The complicated market, competitive, product and business realities of Microsoft in a competitive market must also be viewed as the company taking actions to protect its position through new product introductions as well as making it difficult for competitors to gain an edge, the manner in which all firms operate if they intend to remain in business and continue as market leaders. The fact that Microsoft provides its Internet browser free along with its operating system, serves the interest of customers in that they have this feature already available in the purchase of their computers. It also represents a competitive action that limits other browsers from gaining an edge in the market. McKenzie (2000, p. 32) aptly points our that “ … Any firm that is dominant in a software market isn’t likely to want to give up its dominance, especially if there are substantial economies of scale in production and network effects in demand …”, something with both Fisher as well as Warren-Boulton indicate is true in the software industry. McKenzie (2000, p. 32) adds that if Microsoft where to start losing market share for its operating system “…it could anticipate problems in keeping its applications network intact, which could mean its market share could spiral downward as a new market entrant makes sales and those sales lead to more and more applications being written for the new operating system …”. The flaw in the monopolist argue, as pointed out by McKenzie (2000. p. 34) is that even if a company had a 100% share of the market “…it must price and develop its product as though it actually had market rivals because the firm has to fear the entry of potential competitors …”. To make his point, McKenzie (2000, p. 34) points to classic microeconomics textbooks that teach that a monopolist represents a ‘single producer’ “…that is capable of restricting output, raising its prices above competitive levels, and imposing its will on buyers …” therefore in the position of the U.S. Justice Department, Microsoft’s high, 90%, market share is a near or almost monopoly, that McKenzie (2000, p. 34) aptly states is like almost being pregnant, you either are or you aren’t. To illustrate his point, McKenzie (2000, p. 34) points to the company called Signature Software, which at the time had “…100 percent of the market for a program that allows computer users to type their letters and e-mails in a font that is derived from their own handwriting”. He adds that despite it being the singular producer in the market, the company “…prices its software very modestly, simply because the program can be duplicated with relative ease.” McKenzie (2000, p. 34) also points out that Netscape at one time almost completely dominated the browser market, yet did not price its advantage in monopolist fashion. In protecting its position, Microsoft developed and introduced new products, all of which any other firm had the opportunity to do and thus innovate, yet such did not happen. McKenzie (2000, p. 137) asserts that the aggressive development of new products by Microsoft was in defense of its market position as well as being good marketing and customer satisfaction practices. He points to the following innovations by Microsoft that helped to cement is market dominance and stave off competitive inroads, all of which could have been created by other firms (McKenzie, 2000, p. 137): 1975 Microsoft develops BASIC as the first programming language written for the PC. A feat that could have been accomplished by anther firm had they innovated and gotten the initial contract with Altair for the 8800. 1983 Microsoft developed the first mouse based PC word processing program, Word. 1985 The company develops the first PC based word processing system to support the use of a laser printer. 1987 Microsoft’s Windows/386 became the first operating system to utilize the new Intel 32-bit 80386 processor. 1987 Microsoft’s introduces Excel, the first spreadsheet that was designed for Windows. 1989 Word became the first word processing system to offer tables. 1989 Microsoft Office becomes the first business productivity application offering a full suite of office tools. 1991 Word becomes the first productivity program to incorporate multimedia into its operation. 1991 Word version 2.0 becomes the first word processing program to provide drag and drop capability. 1995 Internet Explorer becomes the first browser to support multimedia and 3D graphics 1996 Microsoft’s Intellimouse is the first pointing device to utilize a wheel to aid in navigation. 1996 Microsoft introduces Picture It, the first program to permit consumers to create, enhance and share photo quality images over their PC’s. 1997 DirectX becomes the first multimedia architecture to integrate Internet ready services. 1998 Microsoft’s WebTV in conjunction with the hit television show Baywatch becomes the first internationally syndicated Internet-enhanced season finale. 1999 Windows 2000, which later becomes Windows NT adds the following innovations as firsts to a PC operating system, Text to speech engine, Multicast protocol algorithms that are reliable, Improvements in the performance registry, Inclusion of DirectX, Vision based user interfaces, Handwriting recognition, and a number of other innovations to enhance its operating system, and maintain as well as increase its market position. The preceding represents examples of innovation spurred by Microsoft that could have been introduced by its competitors in various fields first, but where not. Thus, Microsoft in these instances, as well as others introduce consumer enhancing innovations to further its market dominance through aggressive new product development, a path that was open to others as well. 2.2 Bundling, Innovative or Stifling Competition Rosenbaum’s (1998) book “Market Dominance: How Firms Gain, Hold, or Lose it and the impact on Economic Performance” provides a perspective on the means via which companies gain as well as lose market share, and the tactics they employ to best their competition. Few people remember that when Microsoft introduced Microsoft Word and Excel, the dominant software programs for word processing and spreadsheets were Lotus 1-2-3- and WordPerfect (Rosenbaum, 1998, p. 168). In fact, WordPerfect was the application found in all businesses, period (Rosenbaum, 1998, p. 168). Each of the preceding applications cost approximately $300, which Microsoft bested by selling his Office Suite program for $250. Through providing limited use Word programs in Windows, consumer had the chance to test Word before buying it (Rosenbaum, 1998, p. 168). More importantly, Microsoft’s spreadsheet, word processing, presentation programs were simply better and easier to use that the competition. By innovatively offering a free limited version of Word with the operating system, Microsoft induced trial, to which it had to follow up on with a better product. In looking at competitive practices and competition analysis, there is a relationship that exists between the structure of the market and innovation, to which Hope (2000, p. 35) poses the question as to “…whether monopoly is more conducive to innovation than competition …”. Hope (29000, p. 35) indicates that in response to the foregoing, there is no “…clear-cut answer, probably because there is none …”. Hope (2000, p. 35 puts forth the theory that “…Most economists, and virtually all designers of competition policy, take market structure as their starting point – as something which is somehow, almost exogenously, given (although it may be affected by competition policy), and which produces results in terms of costs, prices, innovations, etc …” However, Hope (2000, p. 35) tells us that this is wrong, based upon elementary microeconomics, as “…Market structure is inherently endogenous… (and is) … determined by the behaviour of existing firms and by entry of new ones, simultaneously with costs, prices, product ranges, and investments in REffect of Microsoft’s Monopolistic Approach