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 : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale J. who wrote (12950)	12/30/1998 2:15:00 AM
From: Charles Tutt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

Actually, I think the big story of 1999/2000 might be the extent to which Sun appears on the consumer scene. Perhaps not all of that presence will be obvious (i.e. in Sun branded items), but the astute investor will recognize it. People will begin browsing the Internet from their cell phones, etc., obviating the need for a PC. Microsoft has failed consumers by forcing bloat on them when slim is called for. Another example: Microsoft has Barney; maybe Sun will power the Teletubbies (Javatubbies??). JMHO, of course, and I've been wrong before.

To: Dale J. who wrote (12950)	12/30/1998 3:23:00 AM
From: QwikSand	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 64865

If it is so bad, why can't SUNW, ORCL, or IBM produce something better for the average consumer? Sorry for the length of this answer, Dale, but this old question always disturbs me. Bill answers this question himself in "The Road Ahead". It's in his "positive feedback" rap about why the VHS VCR beat out the Betamax in the marketplace. It had nothing to do with one being "better" for the consumer. The marketplace needed a single standard. There were two competing standards. Market forces opposed each other. Market dynamics decided the conflict. At some point the forces no longer balanced each other, acceleration happened in one direction, the game was over. It had to do with who was spending how much on marketing, and who was making deals with who, and who didn't want to license technology from who. You go do some scientific analysis Dale and tell me how one method of writing magnetic flux patterns on a tape is better for consumers than the other (in fact the early-80's consensus was that the picture quality of Beta was slightly better, as you may recall). Microsoft didn't get where it is by producing something better. Not to take anything away from Gates: he parlayed his original good fortune into the greatest monopoly business empire in history through shrewdness, drive, smarts and leadership of his people and, when he had to, hardball tactics that were at times criminal. He did not do it by providing the best products at the best prices for the benefit of consumers. It's not best for consumers to be trained to accept "productivity devices" that crash twice a day, nor to be continually forced to update to ever-more-bloated, ever-more-confusing word processors that are not even backwards compatible with their predecessors. Gates exploited market dynamics such as the unwillingness of computer builders to use software written by other computer builders, and, illegally, his own monopoly, to force box builders and users to take what he handed them. That's his secret, not quality or price. Gates is a robber baron. America honors robber barons. So, fine. But don't paint him as anybody's benefactor except Microsoft shareholders. For them (including me) he's a benefactor. The "average consumer" has to consume Bill's junk, and not because he likes it. He never really had a choice. Apple could have provided one, but blew it. (That's another story.) Regards, --QwikSand

To: Dale J. who wrote (12950)	12/30/1998 8:13:00 AM
From: John Mireley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

NT backup/restore problems? realworldtech.com

To: Dale J. who wrote (12950)	12/30/1998 11:23:00 PM
From: micromike	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

Sure Mike, sure. The OS might crash, but it is still the best OS for the consumer. You crack me up. This is exactly why MS dominates the hobby computer field. People like you don't understand that a computer isn't suppose to crash all the time. If you get a chance to use a computer that doesn't run MS OS you might be surprised on how a computer is suppose to work. If it is so bad, why can't SUNW, ORCL, or IBM produce something better for the average consumer? OS2 and MAC was superior to MS but as the old Beta VHS theory goes the best product doesn't always win in certain market conditions. Conditions are changing and MS is not behind the drivers seat any more The problem MS has now it the internet, Java, HTML and open source code. Considering you have shorted Sun and Orcl and you think a computer is suppose to crash all the time you might as well short IBM while your at it. techstocks.com JMHO Mike