Manny wrote:
Netscape ins't the issue. It's Micro$oft's monopolistic practices.
Ok... and the question is did its bundling of IE with Windows constitute
a monopolistic practice or was it part of the natural process of adding
value to its product?
Back then we felt that bundling a browser with an OS was unnecessary, MS
argued otherwise and we didn't agree with them, but today no one considers
an OS complete if it doesn't come without a browser (just like for a text
editor and, in *nixheads' cases, a compiler). Apparently, MS saw further
than most of us did...
Anywa, like I said, that is the technical side of the issue (and is what
I primarily care about). The lawyers (mainly Netscape's) might have a
different view of whether such bundling was right or wrong.
> Some people smell something fishy with Micro$oft's "embrace" of open source.
> Some don't. I'd rather play it safe and not trust Micro$oft. Their past
> monopolistic actions (some of which they have been convicted for) make it
> reasonable to do so.
What would be helpful is hearing about rational reasons (like, say,
possible consequences of the CPL terms) that would give us cause to reject
Microsoft's open source.
--
reply-to: a n d y @ n e t f x p h . c o m
--
Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph)
Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph
Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph
.
To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug
.
Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to
http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie
