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.

Pastimes : It All Depends on DOJ vs MSFT -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brian Sullivan who wrote (47)	3/14/2001 11:57:26 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 61

And why does MIT's Lester C. Thurow write so favorably about Microsoft? Maybe because of MSFT's $25 million alliance with MIT? (http://www.microsoft.com/PressPass/press/1999/Oct99/MITCollabPR.asp) Or because Thurow is an opponent of free enterprise who argues for scrapping patent law? (http://www.ipo.org/DailyNewsChron1997.html) Here's a good Thurow quote: "The Microsoft case is also interesting from another perspective. In areas where standardization and interoperability are important, we all want to buy the same product. Put simply, everyone will be better off if everyone buys the same product." Obviously the guy doesn't understand the concept of open standards. If everybody needed to buy the same products in order to ensure interoperability, there would be no compatibility between NTSC video products, MIDI gear, home audio equipment, ASCII text files, homes on the power grid, telephones, etc. etc. As a matter of fact, it is no secret that most computer-related standards would be MORE compatible between products, not LESS, if Microsoft's anti-compatibility engineering efforts were quelled by this antitrust trial. Dave

To: Brian Sullivan who wrote (47)	4/26/2001 8:09:43 PM
From: t2	Respond to of 61

Antitrust case weakens USA Brian, That article should have been read by those people taking Microsoft to court like it was a tobacco company. This was what I was saying just when the trial started. The people taking Microsoft to court did not realize the possible consequences of their actions. Greedy State Attorney Generals were the real problem, IMHO. There would have been a reasonable settlement prior to the fact finding by Jackson. The damage has been done to MSFT's wireless initiatives but luckily we could be on the verge of a big rebound in this area for MSFT. In addition, the dot.com blowups are helping MSFT in a big way, IMHO. I said back then that Europeans and Asian were laughing at the US for what they were trying to do with their power base. (just noticed this thread existed)