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: garrick le who wrote (21189)	11/3/1998 2:09:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Gates on Tape: Scant Memory of Key Details nytimes.com Dang, I got to get back on top of this stuff, I've been distracted again. I missed yesterday's show! The Bill Gates on the courtroom screen was evasive and uninformed, pedantic and taciturn -- a world apart from his reputation as a brilliant business strategist, guiding every step in Microsoft Corp.'s rise to dominance in computing. That's come up before, he notes dryly. Premature senility? Deposition dependent amnesia? Lying under oath? You be the judge. At any rate, it's a Microsoft trade secret. For the most part, both Gates, the nation's wealthiest man, and his questioner, David Boies, the Justice Department's trial lawyer, remained civil and polite. Boies, however, did show a flash or two of irritation at Gates' plodding evasions -- so at odds with his public image as a quick-witted tactician, immersed in every significant detail of Microsoft's business. At times, Boies pointedly reminded Gates that he was under oath. Maybe Bill was operating under the recent Microsoftese definition of "honesty"- getting the Chinese to pay for his software. There's a song about that in Hong Kong, I hear. When asked about these allegations in general, Gates gave his most unequivocal reply. "Are you aware," Boies asked, "of any instances in which representatives of Microsoft have met with competitors in an attempt to allocate markets?" Gates replied, "I'm not aware of any such thing. And I know it's very much against the way we operate." Boies probed further to ask, "It would be against company policy to do that." And Gates answered, "That's right." Standard Microsoft business practice, but against company policy? I'm confused, as usual. Still waiting for the Microsoft version of what really happened at the famous Netscape meeting. First Bill said it was to tell them about neat features in Windows, but then he forgot. Then it was all Andreeson's fantasy, then Microsoft was set up. Did I miss anything since then? Cheers, Dan.

To: garrick le who wrote (21189)	11/4/1998 1:16:00 AM
From: ed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Ok Ok , you are good and I am bad. Then , pls show me the evidence !!!! Pls do not show me the talking story. I want the hard evidence.

To: garrick le who wrote (21189)	11/6/1998 7:25:00 PM
From: Zanga56	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

You guys are a bunch of crybabies. WAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! MSFT is using the Clinton defense (All the other president's did it too). It's a doggy dog world boys, they play rough. Gates said you gotta keep your eyes open or you get burned by the competition. NSCP had 90% then MSFT came in and broke up that monopoly. The DOJ should commend this action rather than trying to screw Bill. NSCP has 50% of the market. Consumers can choose which browzer they want to use. No one puts a gun on the consumers head as to which one to use. Freedom to choose. The price of browzers is $0.0. What a monopoly this is DOJ. If NSCP still had 90% the price would still be $89.99. So where is the harm. The DOJ protects the consumer. There are two major players there is a clear choice. Browzers can be changed with the click of a mouse. MSFT is going to the moon Alice.