Today's SJMN report from 1995 is galling to me -- as the quotes attributed to Gates validate the Judge who denied the 1995 consent decree (he wrote something along the lines of 'this is a slap on the wrist' and you can't do that and expect this company to change its practices) from Feb. 1995: <quote> The Court cannot find the proposed decree to be in the public interest because it does not find that the decree will "effectively pry open to competition a market that has been closed by defendant['s] illegal restraints." AT&T, 552 F.Supp. at 150. -snip- The Court does not doubt the Government's position that the practices alleged in the complaint are artificial barriers."28 Nor does it doubt that the decree does address those practices. But what the Government fails to show is that the proposed decree will open the market and remedy the unfair advantage Microsoft gained in the market through its anticompetitive practices. </quote> Fast forward a couple months -- and here is MSFT bullying Intel. Meeting in July 1995: http://www.sjmercury.com/business/microsoft/trial/breaking/docs/mstrial11109 8.htm Gates also told Intel executives that, "We haven't changed our business practices at all,'' although he suggested -- with apparently remarkable foresight -- that Microsoft might change its corporate policies about how often to destroy internal e-mail. The article suggests that Gates LIED in his videotaped deposition: <quote> The afternoon session of the trial, now in its fourth week, opened with the government playing part of a deposition from Gates that was videotaped last summer. In the tape, he was asked: "Did you ever express any concern to anyone at Intel, or to your knowledge, did anyone at Microsoft ever express any concern to anyone at Intel, concerning Intel's Internet software work?'' His response: ""I don't think Intel ever did any Internet software work.'' At that point the tape was stopped and Steven McGeady, vice president of Intel's Content Group, testified that he personally had put on a presentation for Gates describing Intel's work on Internet software. -snip- But McGeady turned out to be anything but hostile, cheerfully explaining that Gates did not want Intel working on any sort of software. At a meeting between top executives of both companies on August 2, 1995, Intel discussed its software efforts and Gates was not pleased, said McGeady. "He became quite enraged.'' -snip- Microsoft executives threatened to stop supporting Intel's next generation of chips -- the company had spent at least $500 million to develop its MMX technology, which was to be released the following year, in 1996 -- if Intel didn't toe the line, McGeady said. To underscore the point, he told the court, Microsoft publicly announced it was supporting rival Digital Equipment Corp.'s Alpha microprocessor. Without support from Microsoft, McGeady testified, Intel's new chips would be nothing more than very expensive processed sand, since few people would buy a computer that couldn't run the world's most popular operating system. "The threat was both credible and fairly terrifying,'' McGeady said. In the end, Intel dropped NSP and Microsoft supported MMX. </quote> http://www.sjmercury.com/business/microsoft/trial/breaking/docs/mstrial11099 8.htm Kathy > Kathy E. Gill > DCAC/MRM Production Visibility Support -- 425.234.2004, pager 425.568.0195 > The biggest mistake people make in life is not trying to make a living at > doing what they most enjoy. ~ Malcomb S. Forbes > Microsoft Exchange: the perfect name for its users' greatest desire! > ____________________________________________________________________ -------------------------------------------------------------------- Join The Web Consultants Association : Register on our web site Now Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants If you lose the instructions All subscription/unsubscribing can be done directly from our website for all our lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------
