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: Alan Buckley who wrote (8231)	6/2/1998 3:30:00 PM
From: Hal Rubel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

Contribution of Microsoft's Competitors to Microsoft's Monopoly RE: "I guess Microsoft has a monopoly on good marketing, too. Do their competitors have any responsibility for the situation they find themselves in?" Yes. Its mostly Apple's fault. They had the best chance at one time. HR PS: Ho humm ... For what its worth, Apple, with its mighty 3.8% market share, will always be out there trying: "Tuesday, June 2nd, 10:18 AM EDT Mac OSX/Intel update Japanese sources now report that in a fully public presentation, Apple Japan representatives stated that OS X for the Intel processor architecture is being readied. Apparently, an audio-only QuickTime Movie (courtesy of the Mac Treasure Tracing Club) of the speech is available, but is only in Japanese. If any readers are able to translate this file, please send transcript(s) to MOSR here. Additionally, one source noted a compelling explanation for a Carbon-compatible API set for the Intel platform: I make no claims for having an inside track, but a message that I heard at WWDC (and one that you have alluded to) is that we owe thanks to the QuickTime team for the existence of Carbon on Rhapsody. That is: the effort to bring QT 3.0 to Rhapsody pretty much meant that Apple had to bring a large subset of the Toolbox to Rhapsody. I think that it is a justifiable speculation that if QuickTime 3.0 formed the core library for Carbon on Rhapsody, the same must be true for Intel. With QuickTime for Rhapsody/Intel almost fully functional, Apple's work to make a Carbon API set -- where developers would have to recompile, but other porting work would be light -- for the Intel platform is greatly reduced. This is not, however, a quick solution for Apple; there are many reasons why a port of Carbon to Intel would be difficult and very likely not 100% Carbon/PPC compatible....which of course fuels the fires of the ongoing debate of whether OS X for Intel is possible, likely, or sensible for Apple." This is from Mac OS Rumors, a much maligned source. Nothing to worry about. It is a technical development at best, not a marketing innovation. Intel box makers will not be permitted to use it. Go back to sleep. HR

To: Alan Buckley who wrote (8231)	6/2/1998 4:01:00 PM
From: Ed Schultz	Respond to of 74651

>>Do their competitors have any responsibility for the situation they find themselves in?<< Absolutely. Most all of Microsoft's competitors screwed up because they were "out to get Microsoft" instead on staying focused on doing great products. Borland - At one time a great company until they tried to grow too big too quick to compete with Microsoft. Novell - Same story as Borland. Great product but lost it when they decided to go after Microsoft. Lotus - Disliked Microsoft so much they went with OS/2. Cost them big time. Netscape - Instead of focusing on creating a great product for Windows, they spread themselves way too thin and declared war on Microsoft. Now lets take a quick look at the successes: Oracle - Extremely focused on databases. Intuit - Extremely focused on financial software. Gotta run.