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: Hal Rubel who wrote (41841)	4/12/2000 11:35:00 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

RE:"Don't be so surprised that people don't see things the way you do. Not everyone has their life's fortune tied up in Microsoft. H." I suppose all the other tech stocks are doing great? Jeezz.. Jim

To: Hal Rubel who wrote (41841)	4/12/2000 6:16:00 PM
From: MIKE REDDERT	Respond to of 74651

Congress seems to disagree with you, Hal... they are asking the same questions that I have. As to my life's fortune, I won't respond to that cheap shot. The bottom line is that the majority of the public doesn't believe that they have been screwed, congress apparently doesn't believe it, and I don't believe it... that would leave you, and several companies with a vested interest in a judicial solution to their competitive impotence in the other corner. Oh, and I must include the socialist Joel Klein who, given his way will create precedents that will damage the entire technology industry. As to your answers: 1) When MSFT gave you IE for free, did you feel that they took advantage of you ? When MSFT was selling Win 95 for $65, did you feel abused because you would have rather paid $300 for IBM's competing OS ? Please explain what this second monopoly is and specify how it harmed the consumer. 2) Do you really believe that PC clone producers are under any direct pressure from MSFT to install their OS. This one doesn't float at all. As to Gates, he is being gigged because he is successful... his OS is the system of choice. Since when does sales pressure force someone to buy a product that they don't like ? ... absurd! As to retaining the customer base, MSFT is most certainly not the only company to enjoy the benefits of being first to market. 3) Nope... you are way off here... PC saturation statistics make this argument moot. 4) Again, PC makers chose to offer the various versions of DOS and Windows... MSFT certainly had no power to force acceptance before Win95... again, their advantage is in being first to market. That defines the "force" that is bothering you and Joel. 5) Curious... I see the USA and the world technology boom as truly amazing. If you are positing that it would have grown faster, you are merely speculating... you have no proof. As I explained in the previous post, MSFT has contributed to setting the standard for performance in the technology sector at very high levels. No cheap shots Mike

To: Hal Rubel who wrote (41841)	4/12/2000 6:25:00 PM
From: Michael L. Voorhees	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

I am neither a conservative or liberal but found this article at osopinion.com Why Conservatives Support Microsoft The phrase I heard many times as an excuse for Microsoft's illegal behavior was "Bill Gates never put a gun to anybody's head and made them use his products." That phrase kept ricocheting around inside my head until it finally hit something.... That was it!! The "reasoning gap" between me and the hard-right, dyed-in-the-wool conservatives supporting Bill Gates' felonious monopoly explained it all: * Conservatives don't believe in white-collar crime.* Suddenly it all made sense. That same excuse was used by hard-right conservatives who support Big Tobacco, too. "Nobody put a gun to their heads and forced them to smoke." They seemed to be having some sort of obsession or fixation with guns. Apparently, a person was only a criminal if they used or threatened to use physical violence. If a company was very wealthy, it just did not matter how they got there, "by hook or by crook," as long as nobody used guns to threaten people. So Microsoft deserves a free ride, according to those steeped in the purest form of right-wing politics, because they have never been observed using getting physical with their competitors. They have lied, they have cheated, they have engaged in deceptive and perhaps fraudulent business practices. Microsoft has used every dirty trick in the monopolist's handbook, plus several "new and innovative" tricks that aren't written down anywhere, to punish excellence and hijack successful products out of the hands of brilliant but powerless innovators. But the fact that nobody has ever observed them sending Guido or Vito or Don Corleone to visit their victims means that they must be innocent, right? Taking this reasoning to its logical conclusion, white-collar crime does not exist, because if there are no bruises and no bloodshed, then it wasn't really a crime. Embezzlement, dirty payoffs, and insurance fraud run rampant; stock-market swindles and false advertising are abundant. But nobody will give these crooks the hard time they deserve, as long as they look legitimate. If you act like a harmless, wispy nerd and keep all your threats off the public record, then you can destroy as many honest businesses as you please. The ultimate irony, I suppose, was when Judge Jackson ruled that Microsoft "did violence in the marketplace." As long as he doesn't have a strong Italian accent or wear brass knuckles, Mr. Gates will keep making people "offers that they can't refuse."