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 : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: C. Niebucc who wrote (7717)	5/20/1998 3:52:00 PM
From: Hal Rubel	Respond to of 74651

Gates: An Edison or a Rockefeller? RE" It's important for the world to see Gates as Rockefeller, not as he wants to be seen, as Edison." Larry Ellison A Small Point: Will the situation end up where by Microsoft's tacit and rapidly growing monopoly in computing technology is formally endorsed by our society with special legal status as a tolerable monopoly? Could Bill Gates become relegated in history to the position occupied by the likes of Jay Gould, Jim Fisk, & J. D. Rockefeller rather than that of a Thomas Edison, James Land, or Robert Sarnoff? HR PS: Of course there is always the middle ground of Edward J. Sloan, Henry Ford, and Henry J. Kaiser. What is Bill Gates? Is he a really a total innocent, completely preoccupied with technology and innovation? If unleashed, will he be gentle with us? Stay tuned.

To: C. Niebucc who wrote (7717)	5/20/1998 5:33:00 PM
From: Logos	Respond to of 74651

Re: <Justice first attacked Microsoft over its practice of charging computer makers a license fee for every machine shipped, rather than just those actually shipped with Windows. But the only competitor for Windows was a copy of Windows loaded illegally. In protecting itself Microsoft was protecting its honest customers from free-riders.> But I'm pretty sure Microsoft forced the box makers to pay for MS DOS, whether they used it or another DOS, such as DR DOS. Here was a case where there really was a competitor to the Microsoft product (and a lot of people thought DR DOS was better than MS DOS). Granted, DR DOS was doomed from the day Windows 3.0 first shipped, but that doesn't justify what Microsoft did. Does anybody know more on this? Haz