To: Pink Minion who wrote (16074 ) 1/15/1998 12:48:00 AM From: Charles Hughes Respond to of 24154
>>>of those 220-228 files, which are standard Windows runtime from before <<< Obviously, it's not a matter of files, it's a matter of functionality. The fact that they may have put the windows password routine, the html parser, and Aunt Emma's last will and testament into the same files means nothing in terms of what they have to do to comply. What they need to do to comply is make IE invisible and have Windows still work. That part should be easy. If they wanted to present as competent programmers they would organize their files so that closely related material shared the sme DLLs but I don't expect them to do that anytime soon. What they want is for somebody to order them to remove particular files. Hopefully one of those will happen to cause a bug when removed, so they can play gotcha with the court. Then they can say, see, you can't tell us what to do, because you don't know how. I think if they got their wish it would just piss off the judge and he could just order them to accomplish what reasonable software engineers know could easily be accomplished. It's pretty lame. But what other choices have they got? Play fair? Innovate? Produce debugged products and sell each one on it's own merits for a given price intended to produce a profit? Microsoft? This is the company that beat IBM at its own monopoly game. If they weren't being slippery they wouldn't know what to do. And people nearly always run true to form, over the age of 21. The only way MSFT management can avoid tripping over their own ingrained propensities is to put themselves in the hands of a rational law firm and stand back from case decisions, in my view. Nolo Contendre, baby. Chaz