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: miraje who wrote (16566)	1/21/1998 11:45:00 PM
From: Keith Hankin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

<<Whatever you feel about the Communist Party, you have to understand the conditions under which it thrived.>> It has never thrived in this country except in certain academic circles. Well, it had many adherents and was a growing movement within blue-collar workers. The reason it never got major marketshare was because changes were effected to obviate the needs that drove people to Communism. Any system of government that cannot reasonably provide for the welfare of its people will be abandonned for what seem to be unthinkable and terrible alternatives (e.g. Weimar Republic => Nazi Party).

To: miraje who wrote (16566)	1/22/1998 1:12:00 AM
From: Pink Minion	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Several posters have commented that this thread has deteriorated into name calling and off topic "blah, blah, blah". They're probably right. However: It is one big merry-go-round arguement. Go back 1000 posts: Reggie: "The customer has chosen, its Microsoft!" Dowd: "What a bunch of commie hot air. The government should be broken up!" Bowser: "You all are jealous of their success. Monopolies are great for my portfolio" Reggie: "Microsoft rules. There is a choice in OSes. " The ilksters follow the bait. Me thinks youz like to stir thinks up. === If communism worked, it would be thriving today. Communism has a lot in common with a monopoly. Disguise for a dictatorship. Except a monopoly doesn't go broke because there's no incentive to invent or do anything better. Makes it kind of hard to dominate the world with no money. As the great financial wizard mentions, the better product (technology) usually doesn't win out, and this is what bothers us geeks so much. We are very aware of this everytime we crash and use truly superior software products. And it is not just software. We know what MS is doing, and so do you guys. It reminds me of my favorite excuse when I was a kid: "Well, he told me to do it!". Bill is the same: "Well, the judge told us to do it". Luv to ask Bill "If the judge told you to jump off a cliff....?". There is no reason to "integrate" application code into the OS. In fact, this is the main reason why is crashes so much. Some of you need to learn the difference between "integrated" and "pre-installed". The main function of an OS is to manage application code running. The mention of integration is an oxymoron. The fact that you double click the icon says you are firing up an application/product. The ONLY reason to integrate is to leverage your monopoly. It is plain and simple. Put them out of their misery when they are young so that can't fund their next project. If Microsoft made engines, they would integrate the gas tank to put Tanks R Us out of business. Who cares if it blows up taking a few casualties. You all can like their products, but please don't tell us to like them. Mr. B