Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DownSouth who wrote (31713)	11/5/1999 1:24:00 PM
From: taxman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal judge was expected to issue part of his verdict Friday in the government's massive antitrust case against software giant Microsoft Corp. in what could be a preamble to a final judgment that could come as early as year's end. A ruling on ``factual findings' that Microsoft is a monopoly and in violation of federal antitrust laws would set up a potentially Solomon-like decision for U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson: whether to slice the company into parts or imposing a range of different, lesser remedies. The impact could be dramatic. The market value of Microsoft's stock is the highest of any company in any industry at nearly $472 billion, and its Windows software runs more than 90 percent of the world's computers. ``The implications of any remedy have got to be front and center,' said Jonathan Zuck, head of the Washington-based Association for Competitive Technology, a pro-Microsoft group. Jackson's factual findings Friday weren't expected to make any explicit reference to punishments he might be considering, but government lawyers -- who insist they haven't yet decided what to recommend to the judge -- will look for any signs to suggest his thinking. ``You might be able to read between the lines, see whether it reflects the judge's view that Microsoft has behaved so abominably that Draconian remedies are called for,' said Robert Levy, a legal scholar at the Washington-based Cato Institute. ``The harder the judge comes down on Microsoft's head, the more likely is a remedy that's something greater than a slap on the wrist.' The Justice Department has proposed a separate hearing, possibly next spring, to consider punishments if it wins the case. Here are options the judge might eventually consider: --Breaking up the world's largest software company could happen two ways; one would split it into separate companies selling an operating system, business applications and Internet content. Critics argue such distinctions can be blurry and that the company selling Windows will still wield dominance over the nation's computer makers. --Another breakup scheme would divide Microsoft into identical spinoffs, dubbed ``Baby Bills,' and set them to compete against each other. Critics warn that different flavors of Windows could emerge, confusing consumers. --Forcing Microsoft to allow competitors to sell and improve their own versions of Windows, either through public auction or requiring Microsoft to publish its secret blueprints for the software. --Requiring Microsoft to distribute rival software products, such as Netscape's Internet browser, if it includes its own versions of those programs within Windows. --Forcing Microsoft to sell Windows for the same price to all the nation's computer makers, to prevent the company from rewarding its allies and punishing its enemies with lucrative discounts. Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company regards

To: DownSouth who wrote (31713)	11/5/1999 2:35:00 PM
From: paul	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 74651

"..failure of WP and Lotus was because MSFT came out with Windows 2.0. WP and Lotus refused to write product for Windows until 3.0 was about to be replaced by 3.1, or there abouts" So in other words, rather than competing with a better version of Word - which everyone acknowldeges sucked at that time - Microsoft changed the platform which Lotus and Wordperfect couldnt compete with. Sort of like trying to build a house when someone else owned the blueprints. Did Microsoft's OS team share information to the applications team to give MS a leg up on their competitors? of course they did - even the perception that they could would cause competitors to hesitate if they knew Microsoft could change the rules any time. Wordperfect was more committed to OS/2 because they knew they had a fighting chance with IBM should OS/2 succeed - not because they were afraid to compete. Now Microsoft owns every desktop application of consequence or has bought or made attemps to buy them - is it any wonder that the desktop software industry is dead - Microsoft has sucked all the air out of it! your argument is all the more reason to break up Microsoft so that the OS team and the applications team compete fairly. IMHO of course!