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: ed who wrote (21207)	11/4/1998 4:36:00 PM
From: garrick le	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 24154

Consumer benefit in the short term does not mean anything. Once MSFT get a stranglehold on browser market,the consumer will pay more for it and the temporary benefit will vanish. Moreover,these issues affect future innovations and limit new competition from succeeding. GL

To: ed who wrote (21207)	11/9/1998 3:43:00 PM
From: Keith Hankin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

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 ? Where did I ever say that Win 95/98 is the only bridge? If there was only one railroad company and they gouged their customers, would you say that that's okay because they could always use trucks instead? Or if a ferry company gouged customers to cross a body of water, that the customers could always swim instead? 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 ? It isn't. If NSCP had a monopoly, it wouldn't be any better than MSFT having a monopoly. 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 ? Consumer's benefit should be primary in the case. DOJ should do whatever it can so that NSCP can also get browser bundling with PCs, so that the consumer can choose between MSFT and NSCP more easily.