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 : Zeev's Turnips - No Politics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: w0z who wrote (55237)	4/23/2002 5:22:22 PM
From: Steve Lee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 99280

Don't b so dramatic. XP supports Java perfectly. It just doesn't install the MS JVM by default. First time you come across a java app it asks u if u want to install the component. If u say yes, then it installs it and u r all set. What this means is that u can use the JVM from a another vendor, eg Sun if u like. It looks like MS gets criticised whatever it does. WHen it bundled a browser it was told it should make the type of browser a choice. When it built in Java support it got sued by Sun so it took it out and made it an option. Now u r criticising them for giving the customer a choice of what JVM to use. Bill, exactly what should MS do about a JVM to make you happy?

To: w0z who wrote (55237)	4/23/2002 5:25:15 PM
From: LTK007	Respond to of 99280

States: Gates Misconstrues Penalties WASHINGTON, Apr 23, 2002 (AP Online via COMTEX) -- The nine states suing Microsoft Corp. tried Tuesday to show that company chairman Bill Gates is too extreme in his interpretation of proposed antitrust penalties against his company. Gates said a provision barring retaliation against firms that choose non-Microsoft products is so broad that it would "ban Microsoft from competing in any product category." Gates and Steven Kuney, a lawyer for the states, battled over clauses in the provision, as Kuney tried to box Gates in on an acceptable rewrite. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is free to impose whatever penalty she sees fit to respond to Microsoft's violations of antitrust law. Gates refused to answer whether a particular change, which specifically mentioned retaliation, would be acceptable. "Give me the sentence written down and give me some time to read it," Gates said.. ( typical gates , the ultimate game player, i bet he is the type of Chess Player that would 'accidently' knock over the chess pieces if he sees a bad situation.:)--max) Kollar-Kotelly did not press Gates to answer the question. U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, who handled the original liability case, found that Microsoft retaliated against other companies many times. When Apple Computer chose a rival Web browser over Microsoft's, Gates called Apple's chief executive to ask him "how we should announce the cancellation of" Microsoft's translation of the Office business suite for Apple's Macintosh computers. Gates did agree, under questioning, that the states' proposal would have stopped him from making that threat to Apple. Kollar-Kotelly made a surprise ruling when she stopped the states from introducing an internal Microsoft e-mail to Gates about proposed retaliation against Intel Corp. Kuney said the 2000 e-mail involved Microsoft's anger that Intel was planning to lend some support to a non-Microsoft operating system. Microsoft lawyer Dan Webb said "the only possible purpose (of the e-mail) would be to introduce new anticompetitive conduct." Such evidence usually is not allowed in a penalty hearing, but Kollar-Kotelly has permitted evidence as examples of ongoing conduct that may be affected by the states' remedial proposals. The judge gave Kuney little latitude during his questioning. She sustained almost every objection made by Webb, even appearing to contradict her earlier guidelines on what sort of testimony was allowed. Kollar-Kotelly also has given Microsoft witnesses more opportunities to make presentations during their testimony, even though she originally ordered that all direct testimony be written and submitted to the court. The states argued strongly to be allowed to give one demonstration during their case, which they ended last week. Microsoft already has presented several demonstrations - usually computer-generated slide shows - including four by Gates. The appearance by the Microsoft chairman came a little over two years after a court concluded that his company operated as an illegal monopoly that thwarted competitors and hurt consumers. The Justice Department and nine other states settled the case last fall and their deal with Microsoft is awaiting court approval. The states remaining in the case, along with the District of Columbia, want Kollar-Kotelly to impose tougher penalties than those in the settlement. The penalties sought would include requiring Microsoft to share with competitors technical information and blueprints about how some of its most popular software works and to create a modular version of Windows that could incorporate other software makers' products. Gates also argued that the penalties would keep Microsoft from releasing timely security updates. Gates referred to a proposal that would require Microsoft to continue selling the previous version of Windows after it releases a new version. Gates said Microsoft wouldn't be allowed to recall or replace a version if a major security hole was found. Kuney said Gates really was afraid of giving consumers a choice of taking an older, cheaper version of Windows if they didn't want the new features. States that rejected the government's settlement with Microsoft and are continuing to pursue the antitrust case are Iowa, Utah, Massachusetts, Connecticut, California, Kansas, Florida, Minnesota and West Virginia, along with the District of Columbia. --- On the Net: Microsoft: www.microsoft.com National Association of Attorneys General: www.naag.org By D. IAN HOPPER AP Technology Writer