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 : Corel Corp. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Leo Mitkievicz who wrote (3914)	12/13/1997 8:19:00 PM
From: Arch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9798

Leo, What you hope for the version of WP is not too different from my own expectations. I have been a long-term user of MS Word, from its original version 3 for DOS, which was the first workable version, to its current version Word 97. I still use MS Office everyday as the default productivity suite. What has drawn me to Corel is my frustration with MS products: MS utterly ignores users' needs and does not respect users' long-term investment in user interface and file formats. Almost every time it releases an upgrade, it changes the file format and forces other users to upgrade just to be able to read each other's files. It's a great marketing strategy but frustrates users. Because it controls most of the market, it can do anything it wants. Your story does not surprise me. Here is an old story pertaining to the Borland vs. Lotus case (1/6/96) 10:41 High Court - Borland -2-: Court Splits 4-4 >BORL IBM WASHINGTON -DJ- The Supreme Court handed Borland International Inc. (BORL) a win in its closely watched copyright battle with Lotus Development Corp. In a terse announcement, the high court said that the justices had split 4-4 on the case, with Justice John Paul Stevens not participating. The ruling wasn't accompanied by an opinion and therefore won't have any effect as precedent beyond the Lotus-Borland fight. The computer industry and intellectual property lawyers had followed the case closely, assuming that the high court would for the first time decide the extent to which copyright law can be used to protect computer software from being copied. Instead, the evenly divided court summarily affirmed a controversial ruling by a federal appeals court in Boston that denied Lotus copyright protection for a central element of its popular Lotus 1-2-3 spreadsheet program. Lotus had accused Borland of imitating the software and sought damages estimated at more than $100 million.