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 : Microsoft - When to short -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rich Goldsmith who wrote (40)	12/19/1997 3:14:00 PM
From: Arik T.G.	Respond to of 96

Rich, Agreed. I believe T.A. to be a greater diety then Ms.Fat. The lesser diety has just upset the greater diety by crossing the 129 line. Any up move from now on I consider as correction. BTW- Bill and Paul sold $1.25B in July-Aug at 136 and up. CFO was quoted at same time saying he's "leery of stock valuations" and co stopped buy back at those levels. Gap at 100 still waiting to be filled. BTW #2- The stock has been on a sideways motion for 6 months. Tried to break up last week and failed. Tried to break down and succeeded. Confirmation if Monday's close under 129. ATG

To: Rich Goldsmith who wrote (40)	12/20/1997 3:06:00 PM
From: Kashish King	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 96

Microsoft's days are numbered for several reasons and this DOJ action could not have come at a worse time. The PC is an open architecture although Intel appears to have a monopoly on the CPU market. That's actually a perception generated by their ability to make the fastest products at the lowest cost before any of their competition. There are probably a half dozen industrial giants that tried and failed to take on Intel for that single component. The achitecture is still open and consumers still benefit from Intel's lowest cost, highest performance products. On the other hand, Microsoft owns the only practical "CPU" which is the Windows OS. They also control the architecture completely. Microsoft makes changes to the architecture to advance its own applications development and to further close the system from being infected with open standards. There is no way anybody can compete with applications which are tightly woven into a closed system. The browser is only the latest example. I have to be honest, I could care less about the proprietary nature of their stuff and would make my life one helluvalot easier to have one platform because I develop software for a living. Unfortunately, Microsoft's architecture is badly designed, poorly implemented, archaic, inefficient, inchoherent and unproductive. That translates to extraordinay amounts of time and effort (read: cost) to develop software for their system and at the first sign of an alternative I'm gone. Guess what? There is an alternative and in 1988 you will see Java move into mainstream business, especially since the latest version is close in performance to more traditional development environments. Java is open as are all of the architectural issues surrounding it. Microsoft's foundation is already crumbling. The Roman Empire did not fall in a day.