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: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (16481)	1/21/1998 4:01:00 AM
From: Bill Ulrich	Respond to of 24154

&#147&#133what do you tell someone like Quicken, who incorporated IE components into their software and, once all "pieces that are only relevant to the execution of IE" are removed, may or may not have a product that works on Windows?&#148 Hi Gerald, the article you mentioned was certainly good, but I think the above statement pre-supposes Intuit has made their product so it only works when used in conjunction with IE. Knowing that not all computer users are on the net&#151knowing that, of those who are, Navigator still has a slight edge in market share, do you think Intuit would make a product completely dependent on the use of IE? I don't think they're that short-sighted. No, you have a product which gives you additional functionality when used with IE, hence the inclusion of IE components. But not everybody is on the net. Not every Quicken customer who is on the net uses IE&#151but if you do, then here's some nifty extra stuff. Otherwise, it works in Windows just fine. Intuit would shoot themselves in the foot by using anything other than non-critical IE components&#151just those which assist Quicken in calling to IE. I would bet their business and software acumen is at an appropriate level to not make such mistakes. So, in answer to your question, you don't have to tell Intuit anything (&#133just an opinion). -MrBT

To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (16481)	1/21/1998 9:51:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 24154

And, what do you tell someone like Quicken, who incorporated IE components into their software and, once all "pieces that are only relevant to the execution of IE" are removed, may or may not have a product that works on Windows? You also have to consider issues of efficiency: If 30 software vendors all use IE components in their products, does it make sense for them all to have to include all the junk needed to run it in their software? Does this not incentivize Microsoft to distribute IE covertly, through third party software, instead of overtly on its own OS? How would such alteration of the distribution of the product affect overall efficiency in the market place and competition? But Gerald, this is the way things work already. All software vendors, including Microsoft, can rely on being there is the much-maligned original retail Windows95 release. Which is what the customers want, of course, why else would it be the best seller? (sorry, had to repeat that for form's sake) Quiken already ships IE on their disks. The only way vendors like Intuit could stop shipping IE if they needed it is if people start shipping separate releases for Windows95 and Windows98. To repeat as usual, my understanding is that vendors are required to ship up to date versions of Windows dll's if they use them. I'm not sure, but Microsoft may be drifting toward just requiring vendors to ship the current IE to get the full runtime library update all in a hunk. And, when everything ships on CD, it's no big deal. The only problem is the dll hell version control thing, and what happens if you mistakenly install IE3 over IE4 with some old software. But that's something Microsoft is responsible for to begin with, it's something they ought to figure out how to fix. Despite my alleged cheering for DOJ, I don't think they're quite on top of things, and the current action is, uh, problematic. Now that everybody but Microsoft seems to accept the results of install/uninstall, add/remove IE as suitable compliance, I'm again wondering why Microsoft is going to the wall on this. So, they ship OEMs another CD, to go with the 4 other "compliance" versions they're getting now, and the guy at Compaq who took the heat on the sacred icon thing gets a nice symbolic coaster for his desk. Nobody's going to ship Windows that way. The only effect is to lower the symbolic middle finger somewhat. Since the appeals are already filed, and Microsoft is supposedly sure of victory there, what's the difference? Or is the "good faith effort" thing totally irrelevant? Cheers, Dan.