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: Daniel Schuh who wrote (13696)	10/25/1997 12:39:00 PM
From: Reginald Middleton	Respond to of 24154

<And John Rose, a senior vice president at Compaq, told the Wall Street Journal that it was customer demand, not a Microsoft letter threatening to terminate its Windows 95 license, that drove his company to offer Internet Explorer exclusively on the boxes it sold. Yes, I'm sure the customers were on the horn to Compaq and Micron, demanding integrity and uniformity in their Windows Experience.> Do you disagree with the fact that IE 4 is techincally superior to Comm. 4?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (13696)	10/25/1997 1:38:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Virtual Reality Modeling Language Looks For Widespread Adoption techweb.com You win some, you lose some. That must be the feeling of VRML developers as some of the first solid commercial browsers fully implementing the VRML 2.0 specification begin to appear. That long-awaited landmark, however, is tempered by the fact that Microsoft and Netscape have failed to live up to their promises to include VRML 2.0 viewers with every shipping copy of their 4.0 browsers. No comment on this, being mostly a plain text guy. Cheers, Dan

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (13696)	10/25/1997 2:37:00 PM
From: Gerald R. Lampton	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

"We love Microsoft. Microsoft loves us." All these retractions are going to have just boatloads of credibility. Don't you think that the judge is going to figure out that, if Microsoft is holding a gun to the OEMs' heads, the OEMs are going to cave and say how it was all just a big misunderstanding by DOJ? The more serious question, the one that really concerns me is, what was the intent of the DOJ people who actually put together the Consent Decree with Microsoft? Did they know that Microsoft was going to bundle IE with Windows as an "integrated product"? I thought not, but maybe I'm wrong.