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: Keith Hankin who wrote (19575)	5/21/1998 9:54:00 AM
From: Reginald Middleton	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

<I believe the argument that the DOJ is using is that it is MSFT who has distorted the playing field with their illegal leveraging of their monopoly to gain browser share. Thus, including competitors' browsers would be an attempt to partially offset this distortion.> I respect your opinion keith, and I admit MSFT plays rough, but that is the name of the game. It should be obvious that NSCP plays rough as well, as evidenced by the governmental lobbying. MSFT offers a better client, at a better price, with better incentives. This has a lot to do with thier gain in market share. If, by any chance they were doing anything wrong, the best way to level the playing field would be to create as much competition as possible. This will not be efficiently accomplished by subsidizing the current market leader. The end result of any action is to have several (as in five) companies at competitive levels of market share (the fundamental flaw in the whole concept of the DOJ artificially manipulating market demand is that the natural market will always win in the end - the market wants a stable, uniform platform with which to standardize there platform with confidence and security, this can only be supplied by an 800 pound gorilla). There is more of an competitive incentive to back me than there is to back the majority share company. The mere suggestion of such a scenario makes obvious the fact that leveling the playing field is not the objective of the DOJ. Else they would supply subsidies to the smallest companies, not the largest. You don't legislate affirmative action for the average white suburban male, if you must past such legislation as a proxy for reparation, you do so in the favor of the have nots, and not the haves. This is not a far fetched concept.