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 : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: nommedeguerre who wrote (23532)	11/11/1999 10:00:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 24154

Microsoft Shareholders, Mostly, Support Their Chairman nytimes.com Of course they do, Norm. The PR blitz and the squealing accompaniment might be more effective if we hadn't seen it all before, though. But during a question-and-answer session with the shareholders, Gates did hear from one man who urged the company to "try your damnedest to see that this here suit is settled out of court." And another man spoke of "the feelings of disappointment at best that I have and humiliation at worst that I have at how the case against Microsoft was handled by our counsel." With the company's general counsel and chief legal strategist, William H. Neukom, seated on the dais with Gates, the shareholder asked whether Gates might hire a new legal team so that "we are not outrun and outmaneuvered by the government," putting such a sarcastic emphasis on the word "government" that several in the audience laughed or applauded. But Gates went into a defense of the company's legal approach and, by implication, of Neukom, who sat silently through the exchange. "It's pretty important in a case like this not to look in a very superficial way for someone to blame," said Gates. "When the government decides they're going to block innovation, your own government decides they're going to take you to court and say you should not make those kinds of advances, it's not going to be a pleasant experience. It's not going to be something that anyone should have to go through." And, he said: "The way we've put forth the story through our internal and external counsel about why our work is good for the economy, good for consumers, I'm quite proud of what's been done there. I'm really quite supportive of what's been done there. We're going to continue to tell that story." His remarks drew applause from the audience, and many shareholders said afterwards that they were fully behind Gates and his defense of the company. Right. Naive high school civics guy says "putting out a story" doesn't seem like the way things are supposed to work in a legal proceeding, but never mind. It's only proper for the top Bill to take the heat off the general counsel Bill, since by all indication the top Bill's been running the "innovative" legal strategy all along. "Microsoft must be free to imitate, er, um, integrate, I mean, innovate. Innovate, yeah, that's the ticket". After two years of that blather, it's hard to get worked up about it, though. But hey, Comdex is next week, do you think we'll see a reprise of Dancing Bill, the party animal, from 2 years ago when the antitrust action first heated up? Or does Bill have something more innovative in mind? Cheers, Dan.

To: nommedeguerre who wrote (23532)	11/11/1999 12:49:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Dvorak's outlook for Microsoft zdnet.com Over on zdnet, the commentary and talkback has been pretty reliably pro-Microsoft, but cranky John Dvorak is an exception. He's often a little off the wall, but this prediction is dead on, if not exactly profound. It seems somebody else is unimpressed by certain elements of Microsoft's "innovative" legal strategy. Q: What will happen next? A: Look for a lot of public complaining by Microsoft. (In fact, see Bill Gates's open letter in major newspapers today.) This will get old fast. Also look for a lot of Microsoft stooges representing seemingly independent organizations to spew the Microsoft party line like never before. Listen for the overuse of the word "innovation." That's is the code word used by both Microsoft and apologists for the company. Every time I hear the word, which is completely meaningless in the context of this case, I turn on the BS meter and watch it jump. This case is about abuse of monopolistic power and unfair business practices, not about innovation. It's beside the point unless unfair business practices and anticompetitive behavior are innovative. I don't understand why the company just can't say it's sorry for any infraction and be done with it. Cheers, Dan.