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: Reginald Middleton who wrote (15557)	12/24/1997 12:00:00 PM
From: Michael Do	Respond to of 24154

<The consumer does have a choice. You just named two of many.> So, maybe it is the time that US Government to levi a 100% monopoly tax on MSFT monopoly product (win9?) and use that money to rebate to other OS users:-) Mike PS> For the record, I ALWAYS use MSFT products, Win95 with IE4 desktop. I think MS products are OK to good, own some MSFT stocks, no NSCP stock just its browser:-) Just do not like the way MSFT conducts its monopoly....

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (15557)	12/24/1997 1:40:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Respond to of 24154

>>><What's consumer going to buy? OS/2, MAC, etc...? That should be OK if MS pulled this kind if craps out 10 years ago when consumers really had a choice. > The consumer does have a choice. You just named two of many.<<< Not really. MSFT has damaged choice on both of these platforms. They have practically dictated Apple's choices, via that check they wrote, and were able to get Apple to stop selling it's OS to the clone vendors. That's limiting OS choice in a big way. On OS2, they had applications that ran on that platform, but have been pulling those applications out (having already reduced the other major application vendors to ashes) and now have been reducing support and new versions of those MSFT apps. (What happened to that great MSFT OS2 version of SQL Server? That sold like hotcakes, BTW) They use their applications to help force you buy the platforms they want (eventually guiding you to Windows), and use the OS to eventually guide you to their applications, by making the competition difficult to use. It doesn't work just one way, although we have just been talking about IE and the OS lately. This is a pervasive strategy throughout their marketing and development as they hav publicly admitted on more than one occasion. Speaking of MSFT employees that posted here in the past, where is Thomas Reardon when we really need some answers? Maybe I shouldn't have scared him off with that remark about the SEC investigating company employees/officers acting as spinmiesters on these fora. Or maybe it was just that they knew this reopening of the lawsuit was inevitable and they would have to shut up any detailed input from people who arguable would know the truth about high level policy? Chaz

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (15557)	12/27/1997 6:50:00 PM
From: nommedeguerre	Respond to of 24154

Reggie, "The consumer does have a choice. You just named two of many." Does the OEM license force the user to pay for a copy of Windows whether he wants it on his new machine or not? If Windows was the best product then such licensing agreements would not be necessary at the OEM level. There are no market-forces of free-choice occurring when I buy a DELL and am forced to purchase a Windows license as part of the sweet deal. Those who choose to run a "competing" OS are in fact subsidizing those who run Windows. This does not sound like an even playing field for competition. Cheers, Norm