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.

Strategies & Market Trends : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: theRedDog who wrote (32524)	11/5/1999 9:08:00 PM
From: Vitas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

>>> History eventually will give Gates a place together with Morgan, Rockefeller<<< there was an interesting PBS show awhile back that presented the view that although they may have operated monopolies and Morgan, Rockefeller, Edison, Bell, et al accumulated a lot of wealth, the bottom line was their inventions/ideas improved the quality of life for everyone, and people were able get their goals achieved at a lower cost than if they had to use the old existing methods. Vitas

To: theRedDog who wrote (32524)	11/5/1999 9:12:00 PM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

Nick, your conclusion are quite sad but true. The bottom line is get rich quickly by violating the laws and hire the best attorneys. And they want to call it "free enterprise" . Haim

To: theRedDog who wrote (32524)	11/5/1999 9:41:00 PM
From: Monty Lenard	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 99985

RedDog, first let me say that I am not long MSFT. <G> But... I have to say that IBM was stupid as was Mac. Both wanted to restrict the market as much as anyone but went about it the wrong way and were out smarted. IBM has screwed me so many times I hate to think of it. (gotta love their OS2 at 600 or 850 when first released!) Mac would not (if I remember correctly) allow people to load their OS as MSFT among other big mistakes. I am a MSFT fan for one reason. I think that with all it flaws MSFT has been great for the end users like myself. They have enabled me to do things that would probably have been beyond my ability without extensive formal education in computer programming. I consider Windows a bargain at the prices they charge considering what I would have had to pay IBM etal. Now does Windows have bugs....sure .... but is there anything out there that doesn't.....not to my knowledge. I hate to see anyone use the gov't (and my tax dollars) against ANY business. Most of the very people who are making these decisions could not make it in the REAL WORLD. After their all wise move of breaking up AT&T, I get 4 or 5 calls each week trying to get me to change my LD provider and have even been SLAMMED by a couple. When I go to a motel I now have to dial 45 numbers to make a LD call. Anytime anyone thinks the gov't is all wise in their business decisions in "OUR BEST INTEREST" better look at the history. Personally, I am a real MSFT fan. I cuss em but I am still enjoying their products. Monty

To: theRedDog who wrote (32524)	11/5/1999 10:13:00 PM
From: Siddhartha Gautama	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99985

but by that time MS will get most of its revenue from dominating Internet transactions with ASP and COM. Consider the points below and tell me if you still think ASP and COM are a sure fire monopoly: 1. Apache is the most popular web server. In the protocols space, the dominant wins. And wins for SURE if it is free. 2. Serving web pages themselves is the simplest part of building an Internet transaction system. 3. The most complex part is building a reliable and scalable back-end system. (Reminds me of EBAY:) 4. The infrastructure software for Internet businesses will come from independent software vendors. 5. COM+MTS have competitors such as CORBA, DCE, etc. 6. Microsoft is just another player in the server operating system space.