Where do you get those two "solid fact" from, ed? As to integrated IE, remember what Bill called Slivka? Is this referring to the famous April '94 retreat account in the revisionist history? As far as Clark's memo, Warden certainly enjoyed hitting Barksdale over the head with it, but the overture was rejected, and the situation 6 months later was considerably different.
from zdnet.com
A short time later, Warden summed up, his voice rising as he did so.
"Isn't it true," he asked, "that the only fair conclusion that can be reached is that Mr. Andreessen invented or imagined a proposal to divide markets and that you and your company signed onto that invention or imaginary concoction in order to assist in the prosecution of this case?"
"No," an angered Barksdale shot back. "That's absurd."
Well, if you want invented or imagined accounts of that meeting, there's always Bill's various pronouncements about what went on and how he wasn't the least bit interested anyway, and couldn't remember a thing about it. Random snippets I posted here a couple months ago:
The Seattle Times reported that Gates told the government during Thursday's deposition that he knew nothing about a reported attempt to persuade rival Netscape Communications Corp. to divide the market for Internet browsers.
Gates previously called the allegation about collusion ''an outrageous lie.'' He said the 1995 meeting ''was to discuss various technologies Microsoft proposed sharing with Netscape, so that Netscape's browser could take advantage of the cool new features we were developing for Windows 95.''
At one point, Slivka proposed that Microsoft give away some software on the Net, as Netscape was doing. Gates, he recalls, ''called me a communist.''
Near as I can tell, Andreeson's "imagination" seems quite consistent with the general accounts of how Microsoft meetings of this type go. Anyway, what happened to the "we were just doing what everyone does" account? What does Microsoft claim transpired there? Is the official line Bill's old "cool features" story?
After the day's hearing, government attorney David Boies said accounts of the June 21 meeting by Microsoft officials had done nothing to dispel Netscape's version of events. "I think it's pretty clear from Microsoft's notes, Netscape's notes and AOL's notes what was going on," he said.
The Reback chronology, Boies said, was related to a separate investigation of Microsoft's licensing of its Internet dialer software. Copies of the chronology released to the press referred to a specific subpoena, but left the subject matter unclear. The chronology was originally prepared for the Justice Department.
Microsoft Senior Vice President for Legal and Government Affairs William Neukom said the day turned the case on its head. "To the contrary," he said. "What really happened at the meeting on June 21 is Netscape was trying to draw a line around its browser market."
Huh? Whose account supports that peculiar conclusion? Oh, I get it, there was this crack from Warden:
"But you wanted your God-given right to 95 percent of the market didn't you?" Warden asked, quoting a quip first attributed to Barksdale in the 1970s when he was an executive at Federal Express.
So now assertions by Microsoft's lawyers constitute the TRUTH about what went on at that meeting. No need to go into details or provide some other account of what "really" happened. Ok, I'm used to that view of the TRUTH around here. The God-given right line line sounds a lot more like Bill than Barksdale, but maybe Barkdale did invent it, making the Microsoft execution of the concept another one of those famous Microsoft "innovations".
Cheers, Dan.
|
