Yes and one could also make a case for the pushing of the impeachment of the
current resident of the White House by both MSNBC and FOX at this special time
in the MS law suit but that would be too complicated according to current rules
of concentration being taught in the public schools. Meanwhile that ice is
still breaking away and when the ocean rises will thirty feet be enough to do
silicone valley in or will it just get Hollywood and Bangladesh?
Meanwhile no one seems interested in commenting on Friedman's predictions on
the future of work and its effect on social security and his feeling of
compassion for the rest of humanity. I guess all economics, like politics are
local.
REH
Christoph Reuss wrote:
> Mike Gurstein forwarded:
> > Government case vs. Microsoft looks solid Jan. 10, 1999
> >
> > BY DAN GILLMOR
> > Mercury News Technology Columnist
> ...
> > [Microsoft]'s a culture of hard work and superb talent, without a doubt.
> > The talent shines through in documents that show penetrating strategic
> > insight and tactical smarts.
>
> Users would be served better if the "superb talent" was _technical_
> rather than marketing-strategic and monopoly-tactical...
>
> > At one point, Jackson noted with acid accuracy to a Sun Microsystems Inc.
> > executive that Microsoft's version of the Java programming language
> > worked better than Sun's own version in some respects. Sure, Microsoft's
> > overall aims were to ruin Java's promise as a potential Windows
> > competitor. But the company could plausibly claim that it was doing
> > something beneficial for consumers.^^^^^^^^
>
> "Plausibly" ? For computer-laymen (lawyers) perhaps... Actually,
> Microsoft's version worked better with Microsoft's operating system.
> Just like MS application programs worked better with MS-Windows than
> did application programs of other software manufacturers, because
> MS didn't publish the "secret" interfaces in the manuals, so only MS
> could use them. And just like MS-Word happened to work better with
> MS-Windows than with MacOS, so that ignorant Consumer Magazine journalists
> advised readers to buy Wintel-PCs instead of Macs "because the word
> processor is too slow on the Mac" (!!) (this was actually written in a
> Consumer Magazine here in Switzerland).
> That's Gates' way of bullying the users to use _his_ products, but such
> tricks can hardly be called "doing something beneficial for consumers" !
>
> > If Microsoft is found to enjoy a monopoly with its Windows operating
> > system, as I believe the court will rule, the company inevitably will be
> > found to have used the monopoly in illegal ways.
>
> What's often forgotten is that it were _jurists_ in the first place
> who made Gates what he is now:
> - His father, a rich lawyer, who helped Gates to trick out IBM and his
> competitors in the "early days".
> - The courts that ruled in favor of Gates in the Windows lawsuit: Apple
> sued Gates for "copying" the MacOS graphical user interface to Windows.
> The court ruled that this was no copyright violation, basically arguing
> that the interface can be decomposed into small units that can not be
> copyright-protected. This "reasoning" made about as much sense as
> argueing that a novel can't be copyright-protected because the words
> and letters of which it consists are not protected... (BTW, this was
> written in a German Computer Law journal..)
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> In a world without walls and fences who needs windows and gates ?
