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 : COMS & the Ghost of USRX w/ other STUFF -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scrapps who wrote (10619)	12/12/1997 10:27:00 PM
From: Wigglesworth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22053

Palm Pilot Killer from Microsoft: biz.yahoo.com

To: Scrapps who wrote (10619)	12/12/1997 10:43:00 PM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22053

Re Another thing I'm starting to believe is the browser is as much a part of the OS as anything else. The browser is no different than printing, faxing, scanning and so on...it's all part of the continuing evolution of the PC. LOL, your statement reminds me of a really cool cover pic on Boardwatch Magazine, May 1996 (no that's not a typo -g-). The picture shows Bill Gates with all kinds of futuristic looking gear on his head, tubes everywhere, and in front of Bill is a map of the USA, with a big cube suspended over the USA with "Microsoft" written on each side. There are light beams going down to every major city in the US. Title: Resistance is Futile... ....You will be assimilated -G- later, I'm off to meet the wizard, DK

To: Scrapps who wrote (10619)	12/12/1997 11:42:00 PM
From: jhild	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22053

Scrapps, well, we will continue to disagree on MSFT I think. Ultimately, I think you could make a case to say that most everything "could be" part of the operating system. In fact I have no particular problem with MSFT giving those pieces away "in conjunction with" the sales of their OS. Where they have clearly crossed the line is in "requiring" that those pieces be made available with the OS, and not only requiring it's delivery, but doing so on an exclusive basis. The judge has flat out disallowed this practice. And I agree that it probably is the only thing that he could do. The mechanics of the government's filing, in my mind, doesn't seem that important in any event. I believe that I read that the 1M a day wasn't going to be applied, but that it still could be. Even as you pointed out some time ago this in and of itself would be no deterrent to what's involved. The issue of the non-disclosure agreement in the environment of this ruling, kind of makes no sense either since the government's purpose was to gather evidence to make it's case. It would appear that the judge has said the case is already made. All that said however, I think MSFT has probably achieved it's primary goal of beating back the percieved threat to their OS. With regard to copyrights, I don't see any real solution for limiting monoply applications. These things are requiring constant upgrades and revisions. Eliminate the protection and that would be the end of rapid innovation across the board. MSFT just like everyone else should have some protection, but I believe that there should be checks and balances that don't allow a monoply in one area to consume other areas through coercive business practices. Reading the descriptions of MSFT's contracting language, I think that is what they have done. I think the judge agrees that they have broken the law in this regard.