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 (14253)	11/18/1997 7:19:00 PM
From: drmorgan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Dan, from your article - "We are providing our software for free!" Gates said, showing his exasperation. "This breaks no laws -- the government should not even be involved." Again, why stop at browser's? I know I sound like a broken record (scratched CD?) but why doesn't MSFT destroy Corel and Lotus by offering Office '97 for free? Once they're (the enemy) out of the office suite business MSFT can charge whatever they want. As for NSCP's server business why not give away MS server software too? Derek

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (14253)	11/19/1997 4:39:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

That Bill can dance zdnet.com Sheesh, it sounds like Bill wasn't taking the possible death of Windows all that seriously Monday. Or maybe he just went out and drowned his sorrows afterward. There's pictures here too, though apparently there weren't any lampshades around for Bill to wear. Cheers, Dan.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (14253)	11/20/1997 12:18:00 PM
From: Harvey Allen	Respond to of 24154

It looks like in the DOJ complaint that Microsoft can add anything they want to windows they just can't force the OEM's to take it. (ie Win98 with IE and Win98 without IE). Holding Microsoft in contempt for conditioning the license to Windows 95 on OEMs' licensing Internet Explorer in no way prohibits Microsoft from developing integrated products. To the contrary, the Petition alleges that Microsoft has violated the Final Judgment by the way in which it has marketed and distributed Internet Explorer through OEMs, not by anything Microsoft has done to develop an "integrated product." Indeed, the language of the proviso to Section IV(E)(i), which focuses on "developing integrated products," makes clear that the proviso was never intended to exclude from the prohibition of that Section forced, joint marketing of separate products, even complementary products like Windows 95 and Internet Explorer, but rather was intended to ensure that the Final Judgment does not prevent the legitimate development of new, single products into which new features or functionality have been truly integrated. In other words, Microsoft can develop whatever products it chooses, but it cannot leverage the monopoly power of Windows 95 to force OEMs to take a non-integrated Internet Explorer if they do not want it. usdoj.gov