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: damniseedemons who wrote (15644)	12/28/1997 7:01:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 24154

Sure, Sal, if you accept the Microsoftese definition that the OS is "whatever we say it is". Why not include Word and Excel? That'd be cool, too, we've heard in court, if it's necessary to maintain the monopolistic death grip. Microsoft didn't have much interest in the internet till it looked like a threat, and it never, never exhibited the least interest in giving anything away, ever. Now, every little thing done to Windows since it originally shipped is "part of IE", and it's all free! Microsoft can argue whatever it wants, but if it wants to make a case in court, it would do well to actually try to explain what it's doing, and not act like everybody is too stupid to possibly figure it out on their own. Of course, it might not help Microsoft's case much if they explained what they were doing, with any degree of honesty, so maybe it's better if they keep pushing the "beyond the understanding of mere mortals" line. There's a certain irony in my perpetual arguments with you and Reg, when we all agree totally on where Microsoft is taking us, we just disagree on if it's desirable or not. And if it's legal, of course. Too bad about antitrust law and monopolists, that's another hoary argument that always comes up, about how everybody in software is going to be hamstrung, when there's only one monopolist of note that I can see. Cheers, Dan.

To: damniseedemons who wrote (15644)	12/28/1997 7:27:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

>>>What did you think of it when Microsoft first shipped Windows (which was nothing more than a UI--similar to IE integration)? Did you think it was too much of an application to be considered part of the OS? Now what do you think about it?<<< When MS first shipped windows (1.0) I thought: a. About time, since Unix has X already, Mac has windows, etc, it's about time MS did something. b. Upon trying it and then trying to program with it, I thought, "what a pi* s**t!" Did I think it was an application? No, I thought it was a lame attempt at extending the OS to provide visual support for writing applications in the same manner that dozens of others had already done. Now what do I think about it? I think that MSFT leveraged their position with DOS and MS OS2 to cleverly force everybody to use windows, and then they used their position in Windows to force everybody to use MS productivity apps, and now they are using their position in productivity apps and windows to force everybody to use Internet Explorer. Then, I think they will use their position with explorer and WebTV to control which web services we see, use, and pay for. Then they will leverage that to promote their television, online trading, online banking, credit card and stock purchase settlements, publishing, satellite etcetera ad naseum and until the total impoverishment of every other business that gets in their way. After which they will suck the life force out of every consumer that gets in the way. Of course, that's just my humble opinion, not yet a fact in any way, as they are currently losing money on the TV network, the WebTV, the publishing and so on as I understand it. But not for long, if they get to bundle IE, is how I see it. Chaz

To: damniseedemons who wrote (15644)	12/28/1997 8:29:00 PM
From: drmorgan	Respond to of 24154

Sal, you know it's kind of interesting with everything going on with MSFT and the DOJ, and the whole browser/OS integration issue. I had forgot about the first time I got on the internet was actually with TCP/IP and a browser built into the OS! It wasn't totally integrated but it did seem like it was. It was OS/2 Warp 3 and of course no one cared much as OS/2 never really took off. And that browser was a piece of crap compared to IE or NSCP. Derek

To: damniseedemons who wrote (15644)	12/29/1997 3:25:00 AM
From: Bearded One	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Sal, we make choices all the time. This time, the people seem to be making a choice that the browser should be separate from the Operating System. That's why Microsoft is going to lose this--the consumers are not even asking for this integration, so their justification for doing it falls through, leaving naked their motivation to conquer another industry. As far as the PC space, that is far from the only space. Internet space, for example, is very different from the PC space. Electronic Commerce space is very different from PC space. Corporate Database space is very different from PC space. All these spaces are becoming more and more intertwined nowadays as well.

To: damniseedemons who wrote (15644)	12/29/1997 8:57:00 AM
From: Justin Banks	Respond to of 24154

TCP/IP is only a protocall, not a UI. But there's still a problem with drawing a line between what they can and can't do. Today, you don't think a browser should be integrated into the OS. What will you be thinking in the future? After all, the internet is so important, compelling, and all that, right? If "The internet changes everything," wouldn't that also mean it changes what we expect from our OS? That's what an API is for. If MSFT were to publish the APIs that facilitate browser/os integration, that would be a good thing. By not doing so they are almost by definition competing unfairly be leveraging their knowledge of Win32 internals, don't you think? -justinb