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: Reginald Middleton who wrote (21734)	11/24/1998 12:53:00 PM
From: Benny Baga	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

>>>>The point is that MSFT did not perform any wrong deeds in the past. You are dead wrong. An offer to divide markets is illegal both in civil and criminal law, no if's and's or butt's. BTW, I have a bridge to sell you. Benny

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (21734)	11/24/1998 1:59:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Respond to of 24154

Hi Reg. <<<Notice the proliferation of apps, hardware selection and avialability of programmers on the Win32 platform. This is not available on any other computer platform known to man. >>> Not since they got a monopoly. Used to be, though. >>> AOL's management is singularly the most qualified to extract the maximum shareholder value out of NSCP's website. Doesn't answer my question: "How having the notoriously proprietary-prone AOL take over Netscape is good for the rest of us is unclear too." I'll grant they may force me to give them money. However, my main complaint is that I expect the browser to become a far more proprietary item. And that browser is a foundation stone of the Web Industry. Without Netscape coordinating development, control of web browsing standards could be ceeded to MSFT, which would be worse. Of course AOL could make it easy for the competition, which is the free web and the millions of web sites on it. I doubt it. I see the Netscape-AOL deal as potentially anti-competitive. I absolutely hope the government scrutinizes it carefully before it is allowed to go through to ensure that my fears are groundless. Otherwise I think the majority of web users may suffer, and the millions of AOL competitors like myself and yourself who depend on open browser standards and equal access to every web site will be hurt as well. Would it surprise you if a future version of the browser gave you no choice about what your home web site is, or what happens on the search engine, or having an AOL frame around whatever you do, or with AOL logging your moves? I don't know that this would happen, but it wouldn't surprise me. It's bad enough already in my opinion, with the difficult-to-undo search button ties to Netscape promotions and ads and preferential engine treatment, and that damn little yellow AOL icon guy inextricably attached to my Windows menu bar (anybody know how to get rid of that guy?) I can't even figure out how to produce a decent alternative to their search button setup, even though I know I am being channeled toward their products and clients. Do you think AOL will make it better? >>> The point is that MSFT did not perform and wrong deeds in the past. Uh, that's not what is coming out in court, ref the Java situation and the rest. You note that other companies did something you consider equivalent. If so, no doubt MSFT will help the gov file a case. The people who invented and built this thing, mostly for free, didn't do it so these guys could steal it away and start charging us for it. Actually, I think work should probably start on a standard freeware browser, contributed by the programming community to the general public, right now. As well as an alternative, unbiased, uncensored search engine and unbiased commercial search engine list mechanism. JMHO. Cheers, Chaz (Glad to hear from you, BTW.)

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (21734)	11/24/1998 4:21:00 PM
From: Andy Thomas	Respond to of 24154

Hi Reginald, I agree that the government should stay out of this. Once it's all over, I think a lot of companies are going to be restricted in their activities, not just MSFT. On the other hand, it would be nice if MSFT could write some decent software. There are a lot of other things MSFT could do differently, in order to gain the support of those out there with scruples. On the other hand, a DOJ suit isn't the answer. FWIW Andy FWIW Andy

To: Reginald Middleton who wrote (21734)	11/24/1998 6:21:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

The point is your word on whether or not Microsoft has done anything wrong is a bit suspect, isn't it, Reggie? This "natural monopoly" thing sure is being bandied about a lot. Seems a bit dubious to me, the usual attempt to turn network externalities on its head. Of course, if Microsoft wants to argue that it is a "natural monopoly", that would seem to imply an admission that it is, indeed, a monopoly. Sort of a tricky argument to make, eh? If you want to argue Chicago School "benefit to consumers" Libertarian theory, that's fine, Gerald will back you up these days. Me, I just want to know when this "natural monopoly" will see fit to give us an OS that sucks less. Cheers, Dan.