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: XiaoYao who wrote (21219)	11/4/1998 7:23:00 PM
From: Bearded One	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 24154

In your assumption, once a company has a monopoly (or dominate market position or whatever monopoly mean by DOJ), then the only thing this company can do is wait for its competitors to shot at its head and lost the market position This attitude amongst some Microsoft boosters is utterly amazing. Xiao Yao, do you think that perhaps Microsoft might be able to preserve its monopoly by simply offering excellent products without resorting to strong-arm tactics? Perhaps Microsoft could, at some point, learn to distinguish between A) offering IE 4.0 to Apple, and B) offering IE 4.0 to Apple coupled with a threat of stopping development of Mac Office if Apple didn't not only accept IE 4.0 but also stop promoting Netscape Navigator? Or how about learning to distinguish between: A) offering a competing product to Quicktime, and B) offering a competing product to Quicktime while simultaneously making changes in the Windows Registry so that Quicktime would not work correctly? In both cases, Choice A 'hurts' Microsoft competitors, but the hurt to the competition is a side effect of Microsoft offering superior products. Thus, Choice A is legal. Choice B, however, is what Microsoft did. In those cases, Microsoft is setting out directly to hurt competitors-- there is no reason to allow this behavior in a monopoly.

To: XiaoYao who wrote (21219)	11/5/1998 8:58:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Right, Xiao Yao. Microsoft must be free to innovate! And to kill anybody else's innovation that might be a threat, even before it comes to market. Andy Grove caved, and we'll probably never know how many others did too. It's all good for consumers, though. As I've said before, personally I think it'd be good for consumers if Microsoft saw fit to ship an OS that sucked less, but that's just me. Funny thing, I'm actually trying Windows98, it's sort of OK, but it keeps shutting off the computer with its hose-head power management. Then when I power up again, it comes up with this message that say "you computer didn't wake up, do you want to disable power management", and I click yes, and it does the same thing in another hour. I disabled everything possible on the power management screen, too, it still keeps shutting down. I'll leave it in till it falls apart a little more, then go back to OSR2. Rumors of Win98 sucking less seem to have been greatly exaggerated. Cheers, Dan.