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 (19104)	5/15/1998 5:16:00 PM
From: Thure Meyer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

"Most people don't know squat about anti-trust laws in general." Most people don't know squat about any particular topic of choice. That's not surprising considering how many topics exist. I don't see how that is relevant to this discussion about MS. In the arena of anti-trust laws we have to rely on the government to enforce existing statues. Government, another one of those BIG things in this world. "Microsoft has to take on the current laws and expose them for what they truly are..." That's an interesting comment. What are they truly? I have been following the discussion in this forum and if you have an alternative interpretation as to the law, I would love to read it. Thure

To: miraje who wrote (19104)	5/15/1998 5:20:00 PM
From: Bearded One	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

"Simplistic philosophy", as you cynically put it, is precisely what needs to be aired and debated. Actually, I disagree. The battle isn't between competing "simplistic" philosophies, but rather between those who believe in simplistic philosophies vs. those who believe that life is complicated and laws should reflect that complication. See kabbalah.israel.net

To: miraje who wrote (19104)	5/15/1998 8:48:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

JB, I will restrain myself for once from propagating the off-topic political debate and agree that Bill and Microsoft probably won't push the ideological battle to the limit. Offhand, I'd say Bill's about as interested in debates on political theology as he is in the other kind of theology, he just wants to win. You think he preaches Libertarianism when he's off doing his straight to the top lobbying with foreign heads of state? I imagine the "Asian values" guys would be quite amused by that. As far as the law goes, it's properly in the realm of politics, as messy and unpleasant as that may be. Bill's at times shown some desire to assume the "Citizen Gates" mantle, but brilliant guy that he is, I'm sure he'd be as repelled by the mess and partisanship as, say, Colin Powell was. As for government control suffocating the whole industry, all I can say is give me a break. So, every other ruthless and overpowering monopoly in software will have to operate under the same rules as Microsoft. Personally, I'll worry about that when the next such monopoly shows up, it's pretty hypothetical until then. Some might say that's only fair, given that IBM and Intel, among others, manage to live with those rules. But, fair's a funny word in the Microsoft context. Cheers, Dan.