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: Gerald Walls who wrote (11893)	10/28/1998 10:40:00 PM
From: J Krnjeu	Respond to of 74651

First, the appeals court has already ruled that intergration of IE into Windows 98 is legal. Next MSFT won't be forced to put the Netscape icon on the Windows desktop. Should that happen Netscape will be forced to include all Internet mail programs into their browser. Next, Netscape had better hope that their shareholders decides not to sue the management based upon incompetence. From the trial it's apparent that whatever memo, letter or e-mail written does not mean what it says and what the employees say is not what they mean and maybe just maybe the CEO or the COO knows what the letter, memo, e-mail or whatever is said or maybe they don't know on that day and someone else in the company knows or maybe it was the memo, letter or e-mail that written was right or maybe the situation at that time was wrong or maybe ah I forgot the rest. Its pretty apparent that no one at Netscape knows what they are doing. Thank goodness Netscape doesn't have a business plan cause they couldn't understand it. Oh by the way, Netscape and the DOJ illegally withheld information from MSFT. The memos turned over last weekend were required to be turned over months ago. If the case were as strong as some think, the DOJ and Netscape would not be sandbagging information. Thank You JK

To: Gerald Walls who wrote (11893)	10/28/1998 10:55:00 PM
From: Rusty Johnson	Respond to of 74651

Microsoft claims that Netscape lost out ... based on technical merits. So prove it. Put 'em side by side. They obviously have nothing to worry about if Explorer is superior. They could avoid the whole trial with some reasonable concessions. They have already given up some contract practices ... an admission of guilt in my book. I don't blame them for testing the limits of the law. What's the cost to Microsoft to add the Netscape icon? Nothing. What's it costing to defend themselves in court? Millions. Wouldn't the consumer benefit? It makes perfect sense. They are charged with leveraging their operating system "monopoly" to control the browser market. There is nothing wrong with having a monopoly. I would have cut a deal with the DOJ to avoid this embarrassing trial. It is doing more damage to MSFT than simply giving the consumer a choice of browsers. Isn't that what Bill claims he's all about? Delivering value to the consumer? If his products are so "innovative" why does he seem so paranoid? The consumer will choose his products because it's "great software" right? Like I say ... I couldn't care less. Linux, Solaris and AIX running Netscape work great. No worries. MSFT will continue to grow at 20% per year ... not a bad return on your money. I hope you make money ... I hope Bill makes money ... I hope MSFT prospers ... I just see clouds on the horizon that have NOTHING to do with the DOJ. Bill should retire and smell the roses. History is littered with personalities that wanted to dominate the world. He should enjoy life. If I can enjoy going around the world for eight months on $10 per day he could enjoy traveling for eight years (or many more) on $10,000,000 per day. He doesn't need this trial. Ancient proverb: Chicken Boy could end up with egg on his face. (OK, I made that up.) Best of luck.