SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (22745)2/22/1999 11:34:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh  Respond to of 24154
 
Good story, Gerald. Sounds like somebody's done Bill one better in the premature senility department, difficult as that would have seemed. I wonder if there'll be videotape of Jackson rolling his eyes?

Cheers, Dan.



To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (22745)2/23/1999 2:53:00 AM
From: Rusty Johnson  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24154
 
New York Times version ...

U.S. Attacks Microsoft Official on Netscape Meeting

By STEVE LOHR

WASHINGTON -- The Microsoft executive responsible for dealing with Netscape Communications Corp. testified Monday that he did not regard Netscape as a competitor in June 1995. But the government presented e-mail written at the time in which the witness himself and other Microsoft's executives portrayed Netscape as a potentially dangerous rival.

The point is crucial because that meeting between Microsoft and Netscape is a key episode in the government's antitrust case.

With document after document supplementing his acerbic cross-examination, David Boies, the Justice Department's lead trial lawyer in the case against Microsoft Corp., proceeded Monday with perhaps the most sweeping attack on the credibility of a witness since the trial began last October.

Again and again, he tried to point to contradictions between what Daniel Rosen, the witness, was saying Monday and what he and other Microsoft executives had written and said in the past.

Boies certainly felt he succeeded. He abruptly cut off his cross-examination in the afternoon as Rosen repeatedly seemed evasive on the stand, interrupting Rosen in mid-sentence and telling the judge, "I have no further questions."

Afterward, Boies explained his tactic on the courthouse steps. "I thought the points about the witness' credibility had been made," he said.

Microsoft replies that Rosen was simply trying to be precise about highly detailed discussions of software technology and strategy. And Rosen testified that his belief that Netscape did not intend to compete with Microsoft was based on what Netscape executives told him then.

Rosen led a team from Microsoft that met with Netscape executives on June 21, 1995, when the government contends that Microsoft threatened Netscape and made an illegal offer to divide the Internet browser market between them.

After Netscape declined the deal, the government says, Microsoft embarked on a campaign to crush Netscape, the early leader in the browser market, and stifle competition. Microsoft replies that those allegations are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of what occurred at the meeting.

Rosen testified that at the time he saw Netscape as a potential partner rather than a bitter rival. Microsoft, he added, was trying to persuade Netscape to adopt the underlying Internet technology it was building into its Windows 95 operating system, and then to build software products on top of Microsoft's technology.

Yet on May 15, 1995, more than a month before the disputed June meeting, Rosen wrote an e-mail titled "Internet Direction" in which he described the threat that Internet software posed to Microsoft's control of the basic technology of personal computer software.

"Microsoft currently controls the base and evolution of the desktop platform," Rosen wrote. "The threat of another company (Netscape has been mentioned by many) to use their Internet World Wide Web browser as an evolution base could threaten a considerable portion of Microsoft's future revenue."

In court, Boies asked, "Did you believe that at the time you wrote it?"

Rosen replied, "No sir."

The Microsoft executive added that his memo was a draft document, which he said he had never sent, and that it represented mostly a summary of thinking within Microsoft.

Then Boies pointed out that the e-mail bore the heading, "Sent: Monday, May 15, 1995, 12:48 a.m." Rosen replied that the time in the heading represented when he saved the e-mail on his personal computer and did not necessarily indicate that it had been sent.

But in the afternoon, Boies presented a Microsoft document list showing that the government obtained Rosen's e-mail from Ben Slivka, a Microsoft executive who was listed among the intended recipients of the Rosen message.

"Does that refresh your memory?" Boies asked.

"Yes," Rosen replied, "at the least, I sent it to Slivka." But he added that he still did not believe that he sent the unfinished draft to senior Microsoft executives listed as recipients.

Later in the same memo, Rosen wrote that Microsoft should try to "strike a close relationship with Netscape" and that Microsoft's goal should be to "wrest leadership of the client evolution from them."

Asked about this passage, Rosen said that "by wrest, I mean take." But he said again that this referred to underlying Internet software and did not imply trying to push Netscape out of parts of the browser market.

Holding to his testimony that he did not regard Netscape as a rival in June 1995, Rosen said that a strategy document written by William H. Gates, the Microsoft chairman, in May 1995 was simply wrong.

In the document, "The Internet Tidal Wave," which was widely circulated within Microsoft, Gates called Netscape a "new competitor 'born' on the Internet" and said Netscape's strategy was to "commoditize the underlying operating system" -- a direct threat to Microsoft's lucrative business.

Asked about the Gates document, Rosen said, "I recall when reading this I thought that Bill was probably wrong."

A Microsoft spokesman, Mark Murray, said that the government's efforts Monday did not show contradictions in Rosen's testimony or that Microsoft was engaged in revisionist history to suit its defense. Instead, he said, the testimony and documents merely demonstrated that in 1995 there was "some disagreement within Microsoft about whether Netscape would be a competitor or not."



To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (22745)2/23/1999 8:49:00 AM
From: Harvey Allen  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 24154
 
microsoft.com

12

1 WAS GOING TO BUILD AN INTERNET BROWSER FOR WINDOWS 95,

2 CORRECT?

3 A. I THINK CERTAINLY WELL BEFORE I JOINED MICROSOFT IN

4 EARLY '94 AND MAYBE EVEN SOONER, MICROSOFT HAD DECIDED TO

5 BUILD INTO THE PRODUCT THAT BECAME WINDOWS 95 A NUMBER OF

6 INTERNET TECHNOLOGIES THAT COULD PROVIDE, AMONG OTHER

7 THINGS, CERTAIN KINDS OF BROWSING FUNCTIONALITY. BUT IT WAS

8 ALWAYS MICROSOFT'S INTENT TO PROVIDE A PLATFORM TO DO THIS

9 THAT WOULD ALLOW LOTS OF PEOPLE TO ADD VALUE ON TOP OF THAT

10 PLATFORM, INCLUDING NETSCAPE, AMONG OTHERS.

11 Q. MR. ROSEN, I WANT YOU TO PROVIDE WHATEVER EXPLANATION

12 FOR AN ANSWER THAT YOU HAVE THAT YOU BELIEVE IS NECESSARY TO

13 KEEP AN ANSWER FROM BEING MISLEADING. BUT IF YOU WOULD BE

14 WILLING TO DO SO, I'D LIKE YOU TO BEGIN BY TRYING TO RESPOND

15 DIRECTLY TO MY QUESTION AND THEN GIVE YOUR EXPLANATION SO

16 THAT I AT LEAST HAVE THAT AS A CONTEXT. WOULD YOU BE

17 WILLING TO DO THAT?

18 A. I WOULD BE VERY WILLING TO DO THAT, MR. BOIES.

19 Q. NOW, MY QUESTION IS, DID THERE COME A TIME WHEN,

20 ACCORDING TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE -- HOWEVER YOU HAVE ACQUIRED

21 IT -- THAT MICROSOFT DECIDED TO BUILD AN INTERNET BROWSER

22 FOR WINDOWS 95?

23 A. YES, BUT IN THE SENSE OF INTERNET BROWSER -- AND I KNOW

24 THIS -- I CAN'T -- I MUST PUT THIS IN CONTEXT BECAUSE THE

25 INTERNET BROWSER INCORPORATES A GREAT MANY TECHNOLOGIES,

13

1 SOME OF WHICH ARE USED TO PROVIDE THE BASIC FUNCTIONALITIES

2 THAT MICROSOFT AND OTHERS COULD USE, AND SOME OF WHICH

3 PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT VALUE ADDED ON TOP OF THOSE

4 TECHNOLOGIES.

5 SO IN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, IT IS VERY

6 IMPORTANT TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE TWO, BECAUSE MICROSOFT

7 WAS ENCOURAGING NETSCAPE TO ADOPT THE UNDERLYING

8 TECHNOLOGIES IT WAS BUILDING INTO WINDOWS 95 THAT, IN FACT,

9 EXISTED ON OTHER PLATFORMS, LIKE MANY VARIETIES OF UNIX, AND

10 BUILD A PRODUCT ON TOP OF THOSE, TAKING ADVANTAGE OF AS MANY

11 OF THE TECHNOLOGICAL CAPABILITIES THAT WE WERE BUILDING IN

12 AS POSSIBLE.

13 AND MICROSOFT WAS ALSO BUILDING IN SOME

14 FUNCTIONALITY WHICH MAY, IN FACT, BE DIFFERENT, IN MANY

15 RESPECTS, THAN WHAT OTHERS WOULD BUILD ON TOP OF IT.

16 Q. THE TERM "BROWSER" IS A TERM THAT WAS REGULARLY USED

17 WITHIN MICROSOFT IN 1995 AND 1996 AND 1997, CORRECT, SIR?

18 A. YES.

19 Q. OKAY. AND YOU KNEW WHAT THAT MEANT WHEN YOU HEARD IT,

20 RIGHT?

21 A. YES, SIR, I DID. BUT ONE THING THAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY

22 IN MY LAST ANSWER IS THAT THE TERM "BROWSER" IS

23 CONTEXT-SENSITIVE, AND I WAS TRYING TO BE VERY PRECISE IN MY

24 ANSWER, AND ANSWER IN THE CONTEXT WITH WHICH YOU ASKED YOUR

25 LAST QUESTION.

14

1 Q. NOW, USING "BROWSER" IN THE WAY THAT MICROSOFT AND YOU

2 ROUTINELY USED IT IN YOUR BUSINESS IN 1995 AND 1996 AND

3 1997, DID MICROSOFT BELIEVE IN LATE 1994 AND EARLY 1995,

4 WHEN, ACCORDING TO YOU, MICROSOFT WAS ENCOURAGING NETSCAPE

5 TO BUILD A BROWSER FOR WINDOWS 95, THAT NETSCAPE'S BROWSER

6 WOULD COMPETE WITH MICROSOFT'S BROWSER?

7 A. I'M SORRY, SIR. THAT WAS A VERY LONG QUESTION. CAN YOU

8 PLEASE REPHRASE IT?

9 Q. CERTAINLY.

10 YOU HAVE SAID THAT IN LATE 1994 AND CONTINUING

11 THEREAFTER, MICROSOFT ENCOURAGED NETSCAPE TO BUILD A BROWSER

12 FOR WINDOWS 95, CORRECT?

13 A. YES.

14 Q. AND YOU HAVE SAID THAT MICROSOFT INTENDED TO BUILD A

15 BROWSER FOR WINDOWS 95, CORRECT?

16 A. NO. I SAID MICROSOFT INTENDED TO BUILD BROWSING

17 FUNCTIONALITY IN VARIOUS LEVELS OF TECHNOLOGY THAT SUPPORTED

18 THAT INTO WINDOWS 95.

19 Q. MR. ROSEN, MICROSOFT REPEATEDLY SAID IN 1995 AND 1996

20 AND 1997 THAT IT WAS BUILDING AND OFFERING A BROWSER FOR

21 WINDOWS 95; DID IT NOT, SIR?

22 A. SIR, I CAN ONLY TELL YOU WHAT I KNEW AND WHAT I

23 BELIEVED. I DON'T THINK I CAN TELL YOU WHAT MICROSOFT

24 BELIEVED. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PUT SOME CONTEXT IN FRONT OF

25 ME FOR THOSE STATEMENTS, I'D BE VERY HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.

15

1 Q. MR. ROSEN, I WILL PUT THE CONTEXT IN FRONT OF YOU IF I

2 HAVE TO, BUT WHAT I'M ASKING YOU RIGHT NOW IS FOR YOUR BEST

3 TESTIMONY HERE UNDER OATH.

4 IN 1995 AND 1996 AND 1997, TO YOUR OWN KNOWLEDGE,

5 DID MICROSOFT SAY INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY THAT IT WAS

6 OFFERING A BROWSER FOR WINDOWS 95?

7 A. NO, SIR. AS I TRIED TO DESCRIBE IN MY LAST ANSWER,

8 MICROSOFT, DURING THAT PERIOD, TO MY OWN BEST KNOWLEDGE,

9 SAID IT WAS BUILDING BROWSER FUNCTIONALITY INTO WINDOWS 95.

10 Q. ALL RIGHT, SIR. AND I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR. WHAT

11 YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU ARE NOT AWARE OF MICROSOFT SAYING,

12 INTERNALLY OR EXTERNALLY, THAT IT WAS OFFERING A BROWSER FOR

13 WINDOWS 95 IN 1995, 1996 AND 1997; THAT'S YOUR TESTIMONY?

14 A. NO, SIR, IT'S NOT MY TESTIMONY. MY TESTIMONY, WHICH I

15 THINK I'VE GIVEN VERY CLEARLY IN THE LAST FOUR ANSWERS, IS

16 THAT MICROSOFT HAS SAID THAT IT IS BUILDING BROWSER

17 FUNCTIONALITY INTO WINDOWS 95. THAT IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN

18 THE STATEMENT THAT YOU REPEATED BACK TO ME.

19 Q. OKAY. NOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'VE SAID THAT MICROSOFT

20 SAID IT WAS BUILDING BROWSER FUNCTIONALITY INTO WINDOWS 95.

21 THAT'S YOUR TESTIMONY, RIGHT?

22 A. YES, SIR.

23 Q. OKAY. NOW, I HAVE A DIFFERENT QUESTION. I'M NOT

24 TALKING ABOUT BROWSER FUNCTIONALITY -- WHATEVER THAT MEANS.

25 I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SIMPLE WORD "BROWSER." DO YOU

16

1 UNDERSTAND THAT?

2 A. I HAVE HEARD YOU SAY THE WORD, YES, SIR.

3 Q. OKAY. NOW, WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS NOT ONLY DID YOU HEAR

4 ME SAY THE WORD, BUT IN 1995 AND 1996 AND 1997, DID YOU HEAR

5 MICROSOFT SAY AND WRITE THE WORD "BROWSER" AND SAY THAT THEY

6 WERE GOING TO OFFER A BROWSER FOR WINDOWS 95?

7 A. SIR, I CANNOT ANSWER THAT QUESTION BECAUSE, AS I'VE TOLD

8 YOU, I CAN ONLY TESTIFY TO WHAT I KNEW AND WHAT I HEARD. I

9 CANNOT TESTIFY TO MICROSOFT.

10 Q. AND, SIR, IF YOU NEVER HEARD ANYBODY SAY THAT MICROSOFT

11 WAS GOING TO OFFER A BROWSER FOR WINDOWS 95 IN 1995 OR 1996

12 OR 1997, THEN I WANT TO GET THAT TESTIMONY.

13 IN OTHER WORDS, I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO TESTIFY

14 ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE AT MICROSOFT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE SAID THAT

15 YOU DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT, OKAY? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?

16 A. YES.

17 Q. I'M ONLY ASKING FOR YOUR OWN KNOWLEDGE. AND WHAT I'M

18 ASKING FOR IS WHETHER YOU WERE AWARE THAT PEOPLE IN

19 MICROSOFT IN 1995 OR 1996 OR 1997 WERE SAYING THAT MICROSOFT

20 WAS GOING TO OFFER A BROWSER FOR WINDOWS 95?

21 A. I WILL GIVE YOU THE SAME ANSWER THAT I GAVE TO YOUR LAST

22 FIVE QUESTIONS, WHICH IS THAT, NO, SIR, WHAT I HEARD WAS

23 THAT PEOPLE SAID, AND I HEARD AND I UNDERSTOOD THAT

24 MICROSOFT WAS BUILDING BROWSER FUNCTIONALITY INTO

25 WINDOWS 95.

17

1 Q. OKAY. DID YOU EVER HEAR PEOPLE TALK ABOUT A BROWSER

2 BATTLE WITHIN MICROSOFT IN 1995 OR 1996 OR 1997?

3 A. THE QUESTION WAS DID I HEAR PEOPLE TALK ABOUT A BROWSER

4 BATTLE WITHIN MICROSOFT? THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS,

5 "NO." TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, MICROSOFT ONLY OFFERED

6 ONE -- THERE WAS NO BATTLE WITHIN MICROSOFT ABOUT OFFERING A

7 BROWSER.

8 Q. DID YOU HEAR, SIR -- DID YOU HEAR PEOPLE WITHIN

9 MICROSOFT TALK ABOUT A BROWSER BATTLE BETWEEN MICROSOFT AND

10 NETSCAPE?

11 A. AT WHAT POINT IN TIME, SIR?

12 Q. IN 1995 OR 1996 OR 1997?

13 A. I'M NOT CERTAIN. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GIVE ME A CONTEXT

14 FOR THAT, I WOULD BE VERY HAPPY TO ANSWER IT.

15 Q. BUT YOUR ANSWER IS, WITHOUT BEING REFRESHED WITH

16 DOCUMENTS, YOU'RE NOT CERTAIN?

17 A. I'M NOT CERTAIN THAT I HEARD THOSE SPECIFIC WORDS, NO,

18 SIR.

19 Q. DID YOU KNOW OR DID IT COME TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT IN

20 1995 OR 1996 OR 1997, MICROSOFT WAS SEEKING TO GAIN BROWSER

21 MARKET SHARE?

22 A. NO, SIR. MY UNDERSTANDING, YOUR HONOR, IS THAT

23 MICROSOFT WAS TRYING TO LOOK AT TECHNOLOGIES SURROUNDING USE

24 OF THE INTERNET AND LOOKING AT USAGE SHARE OF THOSE

25 TECHNOLOGIES, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT I UNDERSTAND WHAT

18

1 BROWSER MARKET SHARE PARTICULARLY MEANS.

2 Q. LET ME BEGIN WITH JUST WHETHER YOU EVER HEARD ANYBODY

3 SAY OR SAW ANYBODY WRITE THAT BROWSER MARKET SHARE WAS AN

4 IMPORTANT GOAL FOR MICROSOFT.

5 A. I DON'T RECALL HAVING SEEN THAT.






To: Gerald R. Lampton who wrote (22745)2/24/1999 12:52:00 AM
From: nommedeguerre  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24154
 
Gerald,

>>This is bizarre.
>>http://www.msnbc.com/news/243500.asp

Nothing bizarre about the head of vaporware lying his way through a hearing. He probably worked his way up from customer support therefore double-talk and evasiveness are just second-nature by now.

Cheers,

Norm