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: Reginald Middleton who wrote (19259)	5/18/1998 12:25:00 PM
From: Bearded One	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Why aren't my products suggested as a potential bundle for MSFT products? Is it because I don't have the connections and resources to hire Bork and Dole to do my bidding? No, rather it's because you didn't have the dominant market share in an emergent essential technology which Microsoft is illegally trying to usurp.

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (19259)	5/18/1998 12:31:00 PM
From: Keith Hankin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

The problem with the DOJ's suggestion is that it shows that it is not attempting to preserve "natural" competition in the free markets (which can mean that an ultimate winner emerges) or the best interests of the consumer. What the DOJ is doing is acting as an agent of the lobbying forces wielded by the N.O.I.S.E. consortium. Perhaps the biggest problem I have with almost all of your arguments (when you stay on point), is that you tend to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Sure, some of the DOJ-proposed remedies dictate specific outcomes, and these should be avoided. But DOJ has proposed outcome-neutral options, but MSFT has steadfastly refused any and all of them. But the bulk of the DOJ actions seem to be geared more towards providing the possibility of real competition. Just because a small subset of the options the DOJ has provided dictate specific outcomes does not mean that the entire anti-trust case is improper.