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: Daniel Schuh who wrote (21111)	10/19/1998 11:13:00 PM
From: micromike	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Judge Jackson has allowed each side 12 witnesses and two surprise rebuttal witnesses that will testify later in the trial. It sure would be nice if one of those surprise witnesses for MS is Mike Dell. The DOJ would have a field day with that guy. At the senate hearings he sure convinced me that MS has total controls over his company. Oh what did Dell say at those hearings. He supplies what the consumers demand but for some reason he didn't bundle Netscape with his systems only IE considering at that time Netscape was the number one browser. If by chance the DOJ broke up MS. I wonder how loyal these companies like Dell would be to MS. JMHO Mike

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (21111)	10/20/1998 12:16:00 AM
From: Dermot Burke	Respond to of 24154

<<"How much do we need to pay you to screw Netscape?>> That's a beauty, Dan. There's also this one from today. <<Those contracts included, on occasion, paying Internet service providers per-subscriber fees or marketing expenses, the testimony states. In one contract proposal, Microsoft offered to pay Bell Atlantic Corp. (BEL) $15 to $45 for each Explorer signup, the document states. Netscape had over 1,000 browser distribution contracts with service providers in 1995 and early 1996, Barksdale said. Today, virtually none of the contracts remain in effect as negotiated, he said. >> sourced from newswires.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (21111)	10/20/1998 10:32:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 24154

Jonathan Postel Is Dead at 55; Helped Start and Run Internet nytimes.com This is really sad news. The obit is I think a little light on the role Postel played in developing the internet, except for this little line: Postel began his work on computer networking in the late 1960s, while a graduate student at the University of California at Los Angeles. He was one of a small group of computer scientists who created the Arpanet, the precursor to the Internet. At UCLA in 1969, Postel assisted in the installation of the Arpanet's first communications switch, which routes network traffic. That would be the first IMP. He was also involved in developing all the basic internet protocols, from TCP/IP up. And while not a business mover and shaker, he was looking out for the good of the internet, right to the end. As part of the effort to hand administration of the Internet over to an international private corporation, this month Postel delivered to the government a proposal to transform the IANA into a nonprofit corporation, with broad representation from the commercial and academic sectors. Which leads to the following timely news: U.S. Expected to Support Shift in Administration of the Internet nytimes.com The Administration's long-awaited decision comes in the wake of the death last week of the plan's key proponent, Jonathan B. Postel, at age 55. Postel was one of the Internet's most revered technical wizards. He had administered the infrastructure of the Internet address system under a Federal Government contract since he invented it 30 years ago.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (21111)	10/20/1998 10:52:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 24154

Government Lays Out Its Case Against Microsoft nytimes.com After months of noisy prelude, the antitrust trial against the Microsoft Corp. opened in federal court Monday morning with a pointed personal attack on Bill Gates, the company's chairman, who testified in a taped deposition that he knew little if anything about the key charges leveled against his company by the Justice Department and 20 states. "My only knowledge is the Wall Street Journal article; it surprised me" Gates said of reports of a meeting in which his company had offered its chief competitor in Internet software a chance to divide the market. Gazing directly at his questioner, brow furrowed, head tilted slightly to the left, he added, "I was not involved" in discussions of the key meetings. But as the Justice Department proceeded with its opening argument over the next two hours, its lead lawyer in the case, David Boies, presented more than a dozen memos and e-mail messages written by Gates over the last three years, showing clearly that he and other senior Microsoft executives not only knew about the matters in question but had forcefully directed them. Using memos and documents, the government portrayed a company obsessed with crushing its competitor, the Netscape Communications Corp., and willing to use every tool at its disposal, including threats and financial inducements, to force or persuade other companies to drop any planned or existing alliances with Netscape. Gates told his questioner at another point in the deposition that he had not even read the government's antitrust suit. As to its central charge, illegal collusion to divide software markets, Gates said only: "I think somebody said that was in there." Uh huh. Bill didn't even read the suit, but he had no problem telling everybody on the planet it was groundless. That's what happens when you act as your own attorney. Gates also said that in 1995, "somebody came to me to ask if it made sense investing in Netscape." Shaking his head dismissively, Gates recalled, "I said it didn't make any sense to me." Moments later, Boies displayed on a 10-foot video screen and enlargement of a memo in which Gates wrote to Paul Meritz, a senior Microsoft executive, that over time Microsoft might have to compete with Netscape. "But in the meantime we can help them," Gates wrote. "We can pay them some money." We can make them an offer they can't refuse. Does Barksdale have any racehorses? Leaving the federal courthouse Monday afternoon, William H. Neukom, Microsoft's senior vice president of law and government affairs, said that the government's opening presentation was "based entirely on loose and unreliable rhetoric and snippets that were not in any reliable context." Microsoft will offer its own opening remarks on Tuesday. The unreliable context refered to here seems be the Mind of Bill, apparently gone prematurely but conveniently senile. The government also proffered several memos from computer manufacturers complaining bitterly about Microsoft's licensing restriction that prohibited them from offering Netscape if they wanted to offer Windows. "We're very disappointed," Hewlett Packard wrote to Microsoft last year. "This will cause significant, costly problems. From a consumer perspective, it is hurting our industry. "If we had another choice of another supplier, based on your actions here, we would take it." Nah, Microsoft is good for consumers, good for business, good for the world! Nobody really wants an OS that sucks less, anyway. The OEMs all love being kicked around and treated like dirt, Michael Dell explained that to the Senators. Intel has to be told which "innovations" the "consumers" really want. They want what Bill wants. Cheers, Dan.