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: Bearded One who wrote (22773)	2/26/1999 12:04:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Judge grills Microsoft executive news.com Speaking of warped minds, we have this little tidbit off the wires. For amusement only, of course. Invoking "Moby Dick" Kempin earlier testified that letting computer users alter the company's ubiquitous Windows operating system would amount to "butchering" a unique product. He said he has "a hard time believing that [personal computer manufacturers] should have the right to change the product.'' Moreover, he said, giving personal computer users freedom to make such changes would be akin to burning the first chapter of Moby Dick, the classic Herman Melville novel. "That to me is butchering the book," Kempin said in his second day of testimony. He suggested altering Windows also violates the company's intellectual property rights to deliver a product the way it was created. The "integrity and uniformity" defense raised to new levels of absurdity. Offhand, I'd say Windows is more like Thomas Wolfe, whose mammoth novels were supposed to be unreadable before his editor rewrote them. Microsoft could actually get to work delivering an OS that sucked less, but the greatest company in the history of the known universe has other fish to fry. Cheers, Dan.

To: Bearded One who wrote (22773)	2/26/1999 1:18:00 AM
From: Gerald R. Lampton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Microsoft might still not win (your Natural Monopoly arguments notwithstanding) Oh, and pray-tell why do you think that??? ;) To me, their inability to tell even an approximation of the truth in such a public arena where they know* they are going to get caught is extremely revealing. That takes seriously warped minds.* Unless they're doing it on purpose. And it takes a really seriously warped mind to think they're doing it on purpose. ;) But these mistakes are so bush-league. Even though I am not a big fan of the Big Law Firm, I also recognize that the people at Sullivan & Cromwell who are handling this case are not stupid. They also know the judge does not approve of Microsoft and probably will not rule in its favor in any event. Schmalensee's testimony does not conflict all that much with the network effects theory of monopoly. Other than his ridiculous claim that Microsoft does not have market power, of which Boies made mince-meat, what conflicts there are mostly are matters of degree. Plus, the potentially most incriminating witnesses, people like "Air Supply" Maritz and Kempin, for example, are actually coming off relatively well (I emphasize: "relatively"), suggesting they, at least, have been adequately prepared. Then there's "stealth" Devlin, who came through relatively unscathed and could well save Neukom's pet theory based on the Sacred Cow -- er, I mean, Court of Appeals Opinion. It is the people that we perceive should be doing well, Schmalensee and the relative small-fry from inside Microsoft, who look bad. And surely the lawyers knew better than to let their client put on doctored videos. Now, I'm not there, so I am missing the atmospherics. And I will admit I am probably wrong. But, just maybe, by looking stupid, they are trying to get the government to overplay its hand. A risky strategy, to be sure, and one that only a warped mind like mine would conceive of. ;)

To: Bearded One who wrote (22773)	2/26/1999 2:07:00 AM
From: Gerald R. Lampton	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

. . .And lest you think I am alone in my maniacal insanity, there's this little hum-dinger from a News article on the trial from ZD Net: More than one reader has suggested that Microsoft may be aiming to intentionally throw the trial at this point, marshaling its resources at this point towards its planned appeal(s). I'm skeptical, but I have no better theories to suggest. zdnet.com And, just to add more fuel to the fire, here's a good point she makes about Microsoft's PR: Microsoft seemed genuinely to believe, as late as December, that it would have a chance to avenge itself for all the "lies" told by the government witnesses once it started calling its own defendants. At least that's what its executives told its partners and even its own managers. Now, we know that Microsoft can down-play a trial if it wants. Compare the comments of the lawyer handling the Sun Java suit with Neukom's bombastic comments after the Sacred Court of Appeals Decision came down and the whole, high-profile, we're gonna blow their socks off PR spin Microsoft put on this case before it went to trial. Then came the big let-down which, when you think about it, should have been foreseeable, given the "in-house" quality of their witness list. So, what do you think? Is my theory mad, or what?

To: Bearded One who wrote (22773)	2/26/1999 2:38:00 AM
From: nommedeguerre	Respond to of 24154

Bearded One, >>Mr. Kempin seems to be taking the correct route, which is to not deny that which is irrefutable, but rather say that what Microsoft did was perfectly allowable That's because Joachim has that "Albert Speer" charisma that he knows will win the hearts of his persecutors with just a few winks and clever truisms. >>To me, their inability to tell even an approximation of the truth in such a public arena where they know they are going to get caught is extremely revealing. That takes seriously warped minds. Nothing that three feet of garden hose and a special "closed session" with Gunther and Hans could not cure. At least Kempin is attempting to be a man about the whole thing; does not say much about the rest of the Hustlers of High Tech. Cheers, Norm