What Washington's Get-Microsoft Witch Hunt Means to You www5.zdnet.com
Washington's Get-Microsoft witch hunt? Sounds like Jesse's been the recipient of the "poor aggrieved Microsofties" line of late. So, Robert Bork signed on with Netscape, and a bunch of companies we're always hearing Bill's going to have for lunch banded against him. This is a witch hunt? As alleged leader of the ilk, I got to say Bork's membership is going to be a lot more probationary than old Orrin Hatch's. From what I recall, Bork's a libertarian who doesn't believe in civil liberties, only property rights, and his recent book was somewhere around the bend.
Microsoft is too immature and arrogant to finesse the DOJ. It will continue to treat the U.S. government as a competitor, using the same "f@#$ you!" attitude it takes with business rivals. And because the government is slow, ignorant (of technical issues) and inefficient, the resulting decade of lawsuits will sap vitality from the entire industry. And delay every future release from Microsoft, starting with Windows 98.
Sheesh. Microsoft has the same "f@#$ you!" attitude with everyone, including its most important customers, the OEMs. "They have to ship the machines the way we build them". Every future release from Microsoft is always delayed. Remember the OS formerly known as Windows97? Or did DOJ somehow erase all the NT5 ship dates and write in TBD? That Janet Reno, what a clever little fox. She must have pulled another one of Nathan's Nixon era dirty tricks to crash Bill's Comdex demo too.
It's a witch hunt. A pile on. One that Microsoft could have prevented if it had been smart and subtle instead of stupid and stubborn.
And it couldn't happen to a nicer company, he notes drily.
Also from Anchordesk "Need to Know" www5.zdnet.com
JUDGES PUT PLENTY OF QUESTIONS TO DOJ AND MS
In a 90-minute hearing, a three-judge appeals panel riddled DOJ and Microsoft attorneys with questions about the integration of Internet Explorer and Windows 95. But a decision on Microsoft's appeal of a lower court order requiring it to offer computer makers a version of Win95 without its Web browser could be months off. Our take: For all its talk about "principles" Microsoft seems to be relying heavily on procedural issues. Sort of like a guy who robs banks but wants off because the cops used bad grammar when they read him his rights.
Who's piling on now? My take is that the procedural arguments are a lot more substantive legally, maybe even intellectually, than all the "principles" about being able to "innovate" by copying and "integrating" into the OS. This action looks like it's going to go out with a whimper, not a bang, but I expect there will be bigger battles to come.
Cheers, Dan. |
