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 (17735)	3/3/1998 2:18:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Gates Fears Curb on Innovation washingtonpost.com This is the Washington Post interview referred to elsewhere. There's not exactly anything "innovative" here, I'd say, but read it and judge for yourself. Far from the usual cautious demeanor of business leaders visiting Washington, he was roaring with indignation and disdain for those who question his business practices. He dismissed one question as unfair," another as "dishonest." "Come on!" he said impatiently to one questioner. "Give me a break!" he said a few moments later to another. I.e. the well travelled "beyond the comprehension of mere mortals" defense, with requisite implied middle finger salute. Everybody but the MSFT true believers are just so. . . random. But Gates maintains that he's only doing what consumers want. "We've gone out and asked software developers, and it's overwhelming . . . that they want the Internet to be in the operating system," said Gates, his hands fluttering to emphasize his point. "And so this is serving customers, both the developers and the end users. It's like saying, you know, should air conditioning be in a car, should a radio be in a car? When you buy a car, why does it have tires on?" There's that well-traveled Chrysler car radio. Erstwhile FOB Fred Moody had a few words to say on the automotive analogy front, I guess Bill didn't notice that one. Plus, the old "what the customers want" line, like good old retail Win95 flying off the shelves, demonstrating that Microsoft is correct in its contempt for the OEMs, who insist on shipping this OSR2 junk instead of what the "market" has chosen. Developers are really wild for the latest "embraced and demolished" Microsoft Java, too. There's a lot more rehashing of old company lines in the interview, I didn't notice any new ones. I could have missed something though. Cheers, Dan.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (17735)	3/3/1998 2:37:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Microsoft in Senate's Focus washingtonpost.com In the more immediate future, some legal specialists say the inquiry could send important signals to the Justice Department, which has filed a lawsuit over Microsoft's tactics in the Internet browser market and is actively collecting evidence that could lead to a broader antitrust action under the Sherman Act. By voicing public skepticism of Microsoft, Hatch, whose committee oversees Justice, can urge the department to pursue a vigorous antitrust investigation. At the same time, by holding public hearings, Hatch and other senators can indicate to the department that there is political support for what would be a highly controversial case, the experts said. My old line was that the antitrust division getting its budget zeroed was more likely than effective antitrust action. At the moment, I'd say I was wrong about that one. But who knows, maybe all the closet Objectivists will emerge and convince their representatives of the incorrectness of their thought. "We think, left unchecked, Microsoft has a monopoly position that they could use to leverage their way into banking, newspapers, cable and broadcasting, Internet service providers, applications, databases, browsers. You name it," Sun CEO McNealy said yesterday. "When you have a monopolist in the food chain, they absolutely have Pac Man capabilities." Which of course is exactly the line promoted by all the Microphiles here, except in the pesky, troubling, unfair antitrust context. Gates bluntly disputed the "monopolist" characterization in a breakfast with Washington Post editors and reporters yesterday, saying his company is only providing what its customers ask for and isn't raising prices or constricting supply like a traditional monopolist. Ah, so now Microsoft isn't a "traditional" monopoly. It's a new wave monopoly! Or hegemony, or master of the universe, or whatever. Sources familiar with the Justice Department's case say the government no longer sees the consent decree case as a top priority and instead is focusing most of its efforts on assembling a broader antitrust case against the software giant. Offhand, I'd say this is appropriate; my understanding is that MSFT attorney Urowsky more or less agreed, when the consent decree matter first came up. We'll see what happens. One other WP story on the hearings at washingtonpost.com . A tidbit from that for the dictionary crowd: "A monopolist, by definition, is a company that has the ability to restrict entry by new firms and unilaterally control price," he [Gates] said. "Microsoft can do neither." I don't know where that one came from. Maybe next year's Encarta. Cheers, Dan.