Microsoft does not own the Internet. It owns the access to the internet on 96.2% of all new PC computers sold world wide. Just a few more "technically innovative" tweeks and it will "inadvertently" own the Internet. That's the game plan, right?
Dishonest BS and you know it. Microsoft no more "owns" the access to the Internet than Netscape did before IE was available. The only entity that ever "owned" the access to the Web (and not even the whole Internet as there was ftp, archie, gopher, etc) was the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign when NCSA Mosaic was the only game in town. Mosaic is now for all intents and purposes relegated to the history books.
Do you own Windows 95/98? Do you use IE? If so, do you use it because Microsoft forces you to or because you choose to? If you don't use it then you disprove your own argument that Microsoft owns access to the web. Hell, you can even install third-party dialers and stacks if you're that anti-Microsoft. Try Trumpet Winsock.
B. RE: "Simply install Netscape and set it to be the default browser and there you go." GW
Doing that does not currently void the warranty or hopelessly screw up the computer. But, just how far do you "go"? An integrated browser is more functional, right? Microsoft says so, right? Its a necessary "technical innovation", right? Swore to it on a stack of bibles in a court of law, right?
How can what you say be so right and what Microsoft says be so wrong?
More dishonesty, innuendo and word twisting. Are you related to the President? What I said is not at all at odds with what Microsoft said.
What't the BS line about not "currently" voiding a warranty and screwing up a computer? More worthless rhetoric?
An integrated browser probably is more functional, or at least quicker to start as part of the code is already loaded in the OS. You can still get and use a third-party browser. An integrated disk compression driver is probably more functional. You can still buy and use third-party disk compression drivers. Does it make the third-party software operate less efficiently or effectively than it did before the function was integrated into the OS? No. Does the new integrated software operate more efficiently or effectively? Maybe. If it works better then I win. The third-party vendor loses if he can't make his product work better. Now whine to me about the poor old Dow Industrial component U.S. Leather put out of business by the invention of artificial rubber and the move away from horse-drawn and -powered machinery.
Is it a logical progression and technical innovation to put the browser function into the OS? Netscape doesn't like that. Was it a logical progression to put a real backup tool into the OS? I bet the makers of Fastback didn't like that. Was it a logical progression to put anti-virus checkers into the OS? I bet a whole slew of companies didn't like that. Was it a logical progression to put network support into the OS? I bet Novell didn't like that. Was it a logical progression to put memory management into the OS? I bet Quarterdeck didn't like that. Was it a logical progression to but disk defragmentation into the OS? I bet Norton didn't like that. Was it a logical progression to put a windowing interface and task switcher into the OS? I bet Quarterdeck (again) didn't like that. What do you want? MS-DOS 2.0 and be forced to buy everything else separately?
Capitalism has winners and losers. Only in Fairy Land does everybody win. Life sucks, doesn't it? |
