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: Keith Hankin who wrote (21195)	11/4/1998 12:54:00 AM
From: damniseedemons	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

>>Isn't it enough to show elimination of competition? Do they have to show specific substantive harm to consumers? I don't believe that this was required in other successful anti-trust suits.> Keith, I don't mean to be a smartass; but NSCP is still alive and all indications are that the company will remain viable for the foreseeable future. By any measure, NSCP has been an extremely successful company. Not only did the company beat the odds as a startup, but it went public and has a market capitalization of $2.5 Billion.... Of course, NSCP was being billed as "the next Microsoft," so since it didn't work out that way people take it to mean the the company is a failure. I disagree.

To: Keith Hankin who wrote (21195)	11/4/1998 1:48:00 AM
From: ed	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Again, What are you talking about ? If Win 95 / 98 is the only bridge for Navigator to walk across the river , then NSCP should be dead in the water today. But the FACT is NSCP distributed millions copies of Navigator every year . So the FACT proved that win 95/98 is not the only bridge for Navigator. If WIN 95/98 is not the only bridge for Navigator to walk across the bridge, then why DOJ filed a suit against Microsoft to protect NSCP only while back in 1995 NSCP had more than 90% of the browser market ? NSCP said it is not good for all the web designers to have to talk to Microsoft , then why it is good for all the web designers to have to talk to NSCP if NSCP continues to have a monopoly in Browser market ? The FACT is 60% of the web designers will have to talk to Microsoft while 40% have to talk to NSCP. So, in your mind , consumers' benefit is secondary, then What is the goal of DOJ ? To protect the benefit /monopoly of NSCP ? even the price of Browser will be sky high if NSCP continues to have a monopoly of the browsers market ? Your logic did not make sense at all !!!!!!!