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 : Zapata (ZAP) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Philip J. Davis who wrote (572)	7/28/1998 9:30:00 AM
From: GlenRP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1206

Hey philip go somewhere else and squabble. This is the Zap board in case you forgot.

To: Philip J. Davis who wrote (572)	7/28/1998 10:00:00 AM
From: T. Peirce Baker	Respond to of 1206

WHEN WILL IT END!!

To: Philip J. Davis who wrote (572)	7/28/1998 10:38:00 AM
From: Mad Duck	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1206

Why don't you and Churchill continue your discussion via private e-mail? It would unclutter this thread and let us focus on ZAP.

To: Philip J. Davis who wrote (572)	7/28/1998 10:59:00 AM
From: RJC2006	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1206

As a hard line Dole supporter even if the DOJ was full of Marxists, so what? They were dually elected, now live with it. <<Falacious logic. Beware the invalid assumption. Being a mechanical design engineer, you should be well aware of this.>> As I said...according to your logic... >>>You are misinformed. This is not true. And in any case, why wouldn't the OEM's call MSFT's bluff and simply purchase IBM's OS/2? Could it be that most consumers prefer Windows to OS/2? Imagine that! >>> My mistake. MSFT's edict was that they wouldn't sell Windows unless it included Internet Explorer. So much for "competition". <<<It is because DOJ thinks that MSFT has a monopoly in the OS market that they feel MSFT is "leveraging" it's monopoly to sell other products. The monopoly doesn't exist. Ergo, MSFT is not guilty "typical predatory practice".>> There are a hundred stories on the wires concerning MSFT and their edict that if I-Net Explorer wasn't installed they wouldn't sell Windows at all. That sure shows a lot of faith in the product. Here is the direct quote from just one of the news sources... "In one sense, the undisputed facts offer one more disturbing example of Microsoft using its control of a nearly essential ingredient in personal computing - Windows - to induce or force others to serve its interests. Microsoft does not dispute that it required manufacturers to install Internet Explorer as a condition of getting Windows. According to court documents, Compaq and Gateway were among computer makers pressured to not give preference to Netscape Communications, maker of a browser and other products that compete with Microsoft software. Both caved under pressure from Microsoft. "Without an operating system, we would not be in business," said a Gateway executive." <<<You don't seem to know the meaning of the word.>> Uh..huh...yeah right.