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: Hal Rubel who wrote (8217)	6/2/1998 1:34:00 AM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 74651

Gates very brilliantly marketed Intel/IBM/MS primacy to a vulnerable and willing public* in the '80's, thus laying the foundation for today's seemingly unbeatable market dominance.* Excuse me, but I hope you are not implying that PC users continuously ponied up cash to buy MS products because they were naive and didn't know any better? That is a very cynical attitude, Hal. It seems to me that the people who in the 80's invested training and efforts in the MS OS environment and compatible software are, in retrospect, obviously very intelligent, and they made the right decision. DK

To: Hal Rubel who wrote (8217)	6/2/1998 11:05:00 AM
From: Daniel W. Koehler	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Hal <<In fact, Microsoft would not even have been able to build and harvest the blessings of the monopoly it currently enjoys if it were not for the body of regulations that govern commercial activity in our society>> I assume you are referring to contract law, the uniform commercial code etc rather than antitrust regulation. If not, then I think we are confusing the batboy with the batter. Government regulation, imo, hobbles the free market in allocating resources and capital most efficiently. If laws are broken, we have the tort system where individual claims may be brought and rule of law may work. The rule of law, imo, does not contemplate proactive market intervention before fact. Government should be neutral in the marketplace. Otherwise, the fallacy is that regulators know better than the market what the plethora of individuals making up the market want and need. And that, imo, is the arrogance of regulation and a fundamental violation of individual liberty. It's like the batboy compelling Babe Ruth to bat right handed or else sit on the bench. That's one arrogant MF batboy! Long Msft. Short Nscp Ciao, Daniel