SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Cory Gault who wrote (19810)5/28/1998 8:52:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh  Respond to of 24154
 
I'm sorry Cory. Life hasn't been good for you since the untimely demise of the short lived anti-Bork rally, has it? So HP is going to leverage its laser printer "monopoly" into a monopoly on supplies for its laser printers? That's dangerous. Aside from which, there seemed to be plenty of other laser printer suppliers around last time I looked.

As for Intel, they may or may not find themselves in trouble. I don't put them in the same class as Microsoft, they got good engineering, and they got competition too. They keep cutting their prices, and they replaced all those buggy Pentiums free. That seems unlike the integrity and uniformity of the Windows experience, though I hear Windows 98 sucks less. Plus, they have a different attitude toward antitrust law. From last week's Economist

The thing that strikes anybody who has followed the fortunes of this extraordinary company and which puzzles both friend and foe is the absolute refusal of Bill Gates to accept the responsibilities that go with monopoly-or even that he has a monopoly. Intel's Andy Grove, though not averse to the occasional act of brutality, realised more than 12 years ago that his company was heading for dominance and would consequently need to watch its act.

Everyone at Intel who has dealings with other companies is schooled in antitrust law. Intel insiders regard the macho memos circulating in Redmond, and which the Department of Justice has netted in such numbers, as, at best, examples of near-suicidal indiscipline. Intel has its own problems with regulators-it is once again under investigation by the FTC -but seems confident that at least it hasn't created a veritable arsenal of smoking guns.


(from Play nicely, or not at all , The Economist, 23-May-98 )

Since it seems to bother you that I post the news clips on Bill's legal problems as followups to my own postings, I will amend my style. Bright and open minded guy that you are, I'll post them to you instead, ok? I'm sure you'll enjoy keeping abreast of things.

Cheers, Dan.



To: Cory Gault who wrote (19810)6/1/1998 6:18:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24154
 
Microsoft shows off IE 5.0 www5.zdnet.com

Another story strictly for amusement purposes. In particular, parse this if you can.

A key developer-oriented enhancement to IE 5.0 will be a technology Microsoft is calling "behaviors."

Behaviors will separate authoring and programming functions and allow web designers and content providers to focus on their specialties, rather than having to program, Microsoft officials at the TechEd booth explained. Microsoft is using scriptlets to componentize the behaviors--which are likely to be developed by both Microsoft and its third-party partners--allowing them to be added directly to HTML pages.


After you componentize your behaviors with scriplets, your personal DNS will no doubt be much more in line with where you want to go today. Unfortunately, the concept gives me a terrible pain in all the diodes down my left side.

Cheers, Dan.



To: Cory Gault who wrote (19810)6/3/1998 2:04:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 24154
 
Here's a url for you, Cory: objectivity.org

Also for general amusement. Much in the spirit of capitalism.org. This looks like a forgotten piece of some previous "grass roots" effort in Bill's defense, from when things first blew up, there are a bunch of dead and never-finished links but the intent is clear. What next for the friends of Bill, motherhood.org? apple-pie.org? freedom-is-slavery.org?

Actually, the preferred course these days seems to be more direct, round up the usual suspects and have them publicly profess their love and admiration. The OEMs all truly, deeply love Microsoft, and Compaq was the sad victim of incorrect thought in the sacred icon war. Now that their thought has been corrected, they love Microsoft more than anyone. Really.

Cheers, Dan.



To: Cory Gault who wrote (19810)6/3/1998 6:39:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24154
 
What Bill Gates and My Kids Have In Common zdnet.com

One thing he has in common with my kids is they all seem to whine "It's not fair" a lot when they don't get what their way. This column goes for an older child analogy, though.

It's times like this that a parent (or a government) needs to be consistent in its message. Making sure that Microsoft competes under the rules of appropriate business behavior is a really good idea. While it's no doubt true, as Gates and company contends, that there have been many small companies to get rich on Microsoft's coattails, it's equally true that many companies have been bullied right out of business by the Redmondians. Some ground rules need to be worked out and mutually agreed upon for the businesses wading into the technology industry, much like adolescents testing the waters at the lake before taking a chilly plunge, otherwise they may find themselves in over their heads.

Cheers, Dan.



To: Cory Gault who wrote (19810)6/4/1998 4:08:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 24154
 
Unlike Microsoft, Intel Uses Light Touch in D.C. Dealings washingtonpost.com

Another compare and contrast story on everybody's favorite co-conspirators. It talks about a few issues that come up from time to time here.

Microsoft Corp. and Intel Corp. appear to be in quite similar predicaments, facing litigation that could reshape their billion-dollar businesses. Yet their strategies in responding to their respective run-ins with official Washington could scarcely be more different. While Microsoft's confrontation with the Justice Department has become bitter and highly public, Intel's investigation by the Federal Trade Commission has hummed along for nine months at a frequency so low that until last week -- when the agency signaled a likely lawsuit against the chip giant -- few Americans had even heard about it.

Why the difference? Experts say it boils down to a matter of style. In contrast to Microsoft's guns-drawn tactics, they say, Intel executives and lawyers have stuck to a playbook they've used through years of negotiations with politicians and regulators: Keep it quiet, never let things get emotional, and be just as chummy as possible.

"They haven't gratuitously taken shots at enforcers the way Microsoft has," said Kevin Arquit, a former FTC lawyer now in private practice. "It doesn't take an antitrust attorney to tell you how counterproductive that can be."


On the topic of that world class lobbying machine that Bill's going to have in place Real Soon Now:

Microsoft officials have quietly griped that their problems in the nation's capital stem from their unwillingness to spread enough money around the city. But Microsoft currently outspends Intel in contributions to political action committees and it employs far more lobbyists, according to Alan Shuldiner of the Center for Responsive Politics. In 1997, for instance, Intel spent $600,000 on outside lobbyists, less than a third of the $1.9 million spent by Microsoft.

Intel, say observers, is more savvy about getting a lobbying bang for its buck. While Microsoft has been reluctant to establish a corporate lobbying presence in Washington, Intel has had an office here since 1986. Its longtime representative, Mike Maibach, gets high marks from association heads for understanding the light touch often required in the delicate art of getting one's way.


Poor Bill, it's all so unfair. Nobody likes a ruthess cutthroat whining crybaby.

Cheers, Dan.