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: damniseedemons who wrote (13803)	10/29/1997 1:25:00 AM
From: Gerald R. Lampton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

>I WONDER what word processor the salivating lawyers at the U.S. >Department of Justice used to type up their latest antitrust screed >against Microsoft. Word Perfect. (If she bothered to go to the DOJ web page where the "screed" is posted, she'd know.)

To: damniseedemons who wrote (13803)	10/29/1997 4:54:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

The Micro soft-shoe news.com Of course, all Silicon Valley companies indulge in "spinning" the truth to suit their needs, but nobody does it like Microsoft. The company is so cocksure of its ability to dictate the terms of the discussion that it is fighting battles on two contradictory fronts at once. While the Redmond, Washington, company is arguing in one court that it, and it alone, may decide what components make up its Windows operating system, it's arguing in another court that Sun has no right to do exactly the same thing with Java. Heads you're wrong, tails Microsoft is right. Still, I can't wait to see how Microsoft's twisted argument that Internet Explorer is actually a part of Windows cleverly disguised as a separate application plays in court. This is one situation the company is going to find difficult to semantically soft-shoe its way out of. Since Microsoft and the Department of Justice simply disagree on exactly what the wording of the agreement means, the judge is going to have to rule based on the spirit of the law. It's going to be hard for the company to smirk it's way out of this one. Or at least, one can hope. Credit: Opinons editor Margie Wylie just blew her chance to sleep under a digital Mona Lisa in the world's most expensive Marriott. I imagine the judge hasn't been invited to spend a night as Bill's guest, but who knows. There's always Slade Gorton around to lead the fight for an antitrust exception- what's good enough for baseball is good enough for Microsoft. Cheers, Dan.

To: damniseedemons who wrote (13803)	10/29/1997 5:04:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

From Sal's op-ed piece, seattletimes.com These competitors want to have it both ways: They ridicule Bill Gates as a has-been in the brave new world of Java (a programming language that, coupled with Netscape, could someday supplant Windows as the world's standard operating system). Yet at the same time, these rivals crawl to the government sniveling about Gates' insurmountable monopoly power. Come on, cyber-gurus. Which is it? Boy, that one sure sounds like a Microsoft plant, the usual "Java the great programming language" company line and the "crybaby competition crawling to the government" bit. Oh, but I'm sure your random Seattle Times columnist is totally immune to Microsoft groupthink. As for this crypto cyber-guru, I've never said Java is going to kill Windows, only that it's a good idea that should be allowed to live or die on its merits, not on how good Microsoft is at the Embrace and Demolish act. As to the government, the law is the law, and other companies besides Microsoft have run into problems with antitrust law without a PR campaign of worldwide whining about how unfair it is that laws meant to deal with monopolies might apply to Mighty Microsoft. Fey. Cheers, Dan.