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 : WavePhore (WAVO)- VBI fed WaveTop for WebTV -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dale sicher who wrote (1164)	4/7/1998 6:21:00 AM
From: AJ Berger	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2843

DOJ won't interfere with Window'98 lauch other than to require MSFT to offer another version that does NOT bundle IE40. WaveTop is a component of WebTV for Windows that does NOT need IE40 to work. IE40 is only needed by WaveTop when you access a link that has not been downloaded by VBI into your hard drive. I think it's safe to assume that any box maker that adds a TV-input to they're offerings, will opt for the IE40 included version of Windows'98. Keep in mind that most TV-input kit's like those from HAUP that include WaveTop already bundle IE40 as well. WAVO stock may get spooked by these proceedings, but there is no fundemental reason for concern as for Windows'98 launch or WaveTop inclusion.

To: dale sicher who wrote (1164)	4/7/1998 8:43:00 PM
From: Doug (Htfd,CT)	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 2843

My experience with A/T law leads me to question your statement that "the fact that WaveTop will only work with a customized IE4 is a typical example of Microshaft's anti-trust behavior. " IE4 is rapidly becoming the dominant browser, like it or not, Netscape, because Windows is the dominant O/S. Wavephore's decision to utilize a customized IE4 can be easily rationalized by MSFT's market power without resort to a hypothesis of monopolistic or conspiratorial behavior by Microsoft. Of course, if there are other facts, such as MSFT using its market power to coerce WAVO into not making its product compatible with NSCP or other browsers, you have a situation more like that I hear the USJD A/T Division is painting. But I don't hear you pointing to such facts. Perhaps they are there, if so, it would be helpful to hear about them. It used to be that Net software was written first for NSCP's browsers, and now some is being written first for MSFT browsers. I don't see how this, by itself, is evidence of monopolization or conspiracy in restraint of trade. It is consistent with MSFT's investment in WAVO and WAVO's recognition of MSFT's importance as a market. I see no Sherman Act violation in a small company's decision to design its products to work best with the products of a powerful investor which also makes the world's most successful product. Or do I misunderstand your point? Doug (long WAVO)