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: Reginald Middleton who wrote (13651)	10/24/1997 8:47:00 AM
From: nommedeguerre	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Reggie, > How did Microsoft respond to Compaq removing the Internet Explorer icon from the desktop? >> There is nothing wrong with this action from MSFT. If I were to ship/bundle an app OEM or through other channels of distribution, I would expect it to be delivered intact. If you want to tamper with someones intellectual property, do it to your own. This brings up some interesting problems in theory. Microsoft does not own the hardware; Compaq does. Yet, Compaq is not allowed to determine what is displayed on COMPAQ's video system. It would seem they should have control over what is displayed on their equipment at the very least. I can also see that Microsoft does not want several versions of their fledgling OS's running around until they become mature products. Such a tricky issue to resolve. Does this mean it would be okay for an electric company to insist that they will not deliver power to homes which do not use electric heat? Same sort of logic applies here, I would think. Corner a commodity then corner the applications that use it by threatening to take away the commodity if we don't "play along". Here is something that is also tricky to resolve. Let's suppose I have purchased a Compaq running a virgin Windows95 with an equally celebate Office97. If one fine day an irregularity in the software wipes out some critical file resulting in a financial loss, are they (MSFT) liable? How are they removed from liabilities that affect other product manufacturers? If their product (as delivered under license) has defects which result in a loss to others then should they not be held accountable? Sounds to me like the tobacco cartels should "bundle" Joe Camel with Microsoft BOB since many computer users integrate smoking as part of their ongoing Windows Experience (it would be interesting to see the relationship curve for #cigarettes/wk vs. #reinstalls/wk). Take it easy, Norm