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: NetFlyer who wrote (32687)	11/7/1999 5:15:00 PM
From: jmac	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

Isn't the real issue not whether they have a monopoly in the operating system and that harmed anyone but that they have a monopoly in the operating system and then made it into something of an operating system plus and that by doing the plus, they harmed the consumer. I don't buy the argument. I got their browser for free and i don't believe that they overcharge for theri operating system. I am not a techie. Linux is great if you want to customize our desktop. But, for me, and I suppose millions of others, I prefer to turn my machine on, and use it without thinking about the operating system or having to tweek it to do this or that. I believe the Judge is wrong and I believe MSFT will prevailat the appellate level if they don't cave in and hand the DOJ a settlement that only the DOJ can live with.

To: NetFlyer who wrote (32687)	11/7/1999 8:31:00 PM
From: ed	Respond to of 74651

If we assume every who buy a computer is under the same model, that is buying a PC and Software and run the PCs. If one person is not harmed, then it means the rest of consumers who buy PC are not harmed , because they are all under the same model !!!!!! Can you give me an example that show me consumers are harmed by Microsoft, and pls do not just give vague statement , such as " If you are not harmed it does not mean the rest of the consumers are not harmed" !! You are just arguing for arguement !!!!!