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: Larry Sullivan who wrote (18960)	5/8/1998 3:01:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 24154

Jeez, Larry, aren't you satisfied with all the "it's so unAmerican / Bill Gates is John Galt breastbeating over on "how high"? Things have been pretty quiet here. As for Pepsi, like all businesses they are free to file what they want with the courts; Microsoft has availed itself of that privilege numerous times. Doesn't mean much till it comes before a judge. The idea that Microsoft is somehow unique in getting in trouble with the trustbusters is, shall we say, curious. As far as I know, the "we are the world" PR defense is pretty original though. That's innovation for you. Cheers, Dan.

To: Larry Sullivan who wrote (18960)	5/8/1998 3:03:00 PM
From: Dermot Burke	Respond to of 24154

washingtonpost.com

To: Larry Sullivan who wrote (18960)	5/8/1998 5:38:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Respond to of 24154

>>> Crap in PepsiCo vs. Coke and Crap in DOJ/Netscape/Sun/Caldera vs. Microsoft.<<< For years it was gospel in the drink distribution business that Coke and Pepsi were very effectively working together to force everyone else off the store shelves. And for a very long time there was nothing else, after the virtual demise of RC and Nehi. In fact this was true. I had a restaurant and a coke machine (see how they control my mind too ;-) or two, and whenever I put in pepsi tanks they would insist that I sell nothing in my store but pepsi products, or I couldn't sell theirs. Same thing for coke. They started up a marketing campaign designed to cast the soft drink choice as a choice between the two of them. This also worked very well. As long as Americans really only wanted to buy carbonated sugar water. Then those dippie hippies came along with their funny food and everybody started eventaully drinking stuff like snapple, fresh juices from odwalla, and other wierd concoctions, so now coke and pepsi both have problems. Due to their monopoly having fallen apart. I was even able to buy some orange nehi soda the other day in a major chain, first time in years I had seen it. Now, does anybody know if the government took action or threatened take action in the case of the coke/pepsi monopoly? Chaz (P.S. I agree it is ironic for Pepsi to compain about monopoly, since they had been a part of the problem for a long time.)

To: Larry Sullivan who wrote (18960)	5/13/1998 10:36:00 PM
From: Andy Thomas	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 24154

Hi Larry, You're right. These morons in washington dc don't know anything about the industry. how are they supposed to manage it? it is funny how mcnealy of sun can sell something on huge margins, and when nt threatens to shatter his business model from below, his only response is to go to the doj for help... that's pathetic. and to those who say cutler stole nt, i would ask: 1) didn't microsoft have the foresight to recruit him over? 2) exactly how did cutler steal the code? i consider NT to be msft's, no matter what the naysayers think.. i'm saying that msft is capable of creating an original product. other people will say msft stole dos, that cpm was better, but they never mention that the fat file system, which i believe letwin of msft wrote, was far superior to cpm's at the time, and that was what really won the os war for the early pc platform... moving right along...ibm totally hosed themselves down wrt to msft... who knows what that's all about? apple killed themselves with their arrogance... i believe it was the educational sales department at apple which fought for higher prices and no sub-contracted computer makers.... their staying the sole producer and keeping prices high, right in the midst of the win3.0-3.1 revolution, led to their clearly poor position by the time of win95... had apple had cheap computers and clones in 1990 the story would have been much different... as a matter of fact, i can remember having been utterly amazed during that time at the apparent arrogance displayed... anyway, government doesn't belong in business... unless it's a corporate social state, but is that what anyone wants?... let's end government subsidies, and government regulation of business...government has become irrelevant, except in the harm it causes its intended subjects, and the crippling affect it has on the recipients of government largesse... finally, bill gates is not john galt... he's bill gates. FWIW Andy (these are my opinions)