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 : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Schiz who wrote (4343)	12/17/1997 11:39:00 PM
From: Li Cai	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

MSFT has been a great company and will continue to be one. I do not see how a richest person in the world and a multi-billion dollar company can be brought down by anyone or any group.

To: Schiz who wrote (4343)	12/18/1997 1:07:00 AM
From: mozek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

Ken, Windows has had networking protocols built in since Win3.1, before Navigator existed. No one complained about TCP/IP. How about if Microsoft decided to use HTML as a viewing format for the Windows shell? Would that be conforming to standards, playing fairly and extending existing Windows functionality or monopolizing something? How about if Microsoft added HTTP as a networking protocol? What Microsoft is saying is that the networking, security, and HTML viewing functionality in IE is depended on by applications coded to Windows. IE is integrated with Windows. The current DOJ and state objections are not instigated by customers or even computer manufacturers complaining, but by intense political lobbying by Sun, Netscape, and other MS competitors. Sun feels threatened because Microsoft's Java support in IE, part of every Windows system is better and more functional than theirs, and threatens their death grip on Java innovation. Netscape is obviously threatened by the fact that a browser is really nothing but protocols and interfaces that belong in the OS with a shell UI. Microsoft is not hiding behind anything. You should see the resources that go into redesigning, retrofitting, and testing the removal of a complex set of components and functionality such as IE. Injunctions are supposed to prevent something through cease and decist orders, which Microsoft is addressing with the older version option. A judgement that ordered a company to spend millions of dollars and precious human resources currently focussed on building the business could hardly be called an injunction. What I don't understand is why so many people can't recognize this sham. If the DOJ can order Microsoft to exclude specific technologies from the operating system bit by bit, it's the customer and the computing community who suffers. Years ago, I went to a PC Expo to set up and run a booth with my company. It was late, and we had to set up our systems and demos, then get some sleep. Without considering it a big deal, I plugged in a computer and started setting up the demo. A few minutes later, a guy meandered by pushing a box on a dolly. "Who plugged in that cord?" he asked in a pretty menacing tone. OK, I lied and said that some guy came by and did it. He emphasised that I'd better be telling the truth or they'd have to fine us for using non-union labor. Maybe if he didn't meander, he would have been around in time to plug in the cord. Make rules to prevent competition. That's monopoly preservation. Microsoft is innovating by truly integrating useful technologies with our daily computer use. Should we all have to pay a Netscape tax for any network protocol that they put in their particular UI shell? If you want to use Netscape, use it. It's a great product, but don't hold back innovation or Windows just to force people to buy Netscape or Sun utility packs. At the last Java One, Li Gong told the audience at a security talk to wait for thier security solution (which didn't exist) before using another solution you might hear about at the conference (nudge, nudge, wink, wink). WHY WAIT????!! At the same JavaOne, Microsoft demonstrated and described a Permissions based code access security model for Java which shipped in IE 4.0. Isn't it interesting that Sun just announced a similar one as if it was the newest thing since sliced bread? If anyone thinks that government regulators should decide what specific drivers, protocols, UI features or technologies should comprise a new OS version, they should try to look through their cloud of anti-MS sentiment to see the damage of that precedent. Thanks, Mike