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: Daniel Schuh who wrote (17410)	2/12/1998 2:14:00 AM
From: damniseedemons	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

You have to understand that Microsoft/Intel are like a family. They may have a few little fights, but in the end, they love each other very much. I think the author was really overstating/exaggerating everything, BTW. There were also several misconstrued facts, but I'm low on time so will not bother listing them all.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (17410)	2/12/1998 7:10:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Lawyers Drive Home a Point in Microsoft Case nytimes.com The much dreaded Chrysler car radio analogy is beaten to death. Lawyers Drive Home ... , get it? Of course, they go modestly upscale to the car stereo level. Even among lawyers accustomed to splitting hairs, antitrust law is regarded by many as a mind-boggling specialty larded with vague statutes and academic commentary written in the arcane language of economics. But they're wrong, of course. It's clear as day, and Microsoft has done nothing wrong. Many a local expert has assured us of that. Monopoly, shmanopoly, you can always run linux. Market share has nothing to do with it. Add to the mix a lawsuit about computer innards and operating systems -- subjects that cause most people's eyes to glaze over -- and you have some sense of the daunting complexity of the government's ongoing legal action against Microsoft. Sheesh, I'll agree with the glaze over part, but computer stuff isn't that complicated. It can be understood by mere mortals, I promise. On one side: "All [Microsoft is doing] with Windows and Internet Explorer is taking two products and bundling them together" like a car and car stereo, said Schechter, who as a government lawyer negotiated the 1995 consent decree with Microsoft and supervised the government's initial investigation of Microsoft. Oh fine, the guy who came up with the original wimpy consent decree. It gets better, though. On the other side of the car stereo debate was Charles F. Rule, a private antitrust lawyer who has been consulting with Microsoft on antitrust matters for the past three months. Rule was formerly an assistant attorney general in the Justice Department in charge of the antitrust division. Almost a full attribution there. But, they left out "Rick", and the Reagan administration part. I.e. he was in charge of a de facto moratorium on antitrust enforcement. Nothing political there, of course, the Reaganauts were incorruptable and clearly all right-thinking Libertarians and Objectivists at heart. That's why they came up with this War on (some) Drugs thing, and the S&L debacle too. Cheers, Dan.