on 8/17/04 11:05 PM, Julian Vrieslander at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 8/17/04 7:27 PM, "John C. Welch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On 8/17/04 6:17 PM, "Entourage:mac Talk" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> >>>> Since perceptions can be totally wrong - and often are - that's >>>> nothing Microsoft can or need reply to. >>> >>> Oh, come on - MS near enough invented the concept of FUD! Read some of the >>> Halloween docs if you really don't know what I'm talking about: >> >> Actually, it was IBM. > > I recall that there was a big anti-trust judgment against IBM for those > shenanigans.
Early '70s -- around 1975, I think. IIRC, it worked something like this: 1) Competitor to IBM would announce product with new technology. 2) IBM would announce "white paper" that "just happened" to be of a similar technology. 3) Potential customers would wait for IBM solution. 4) Competitor would go out of business. 5) IBM would go on (without releasing the technology, or would buy the assets of the now-failed company). There were other things (some of which I was personally involved, and which ended up taking potentially millions of dollars from my pocket, but I'm not bitter about that, I'm really not. Really. Truly. Yes, I'm being honest. I'm really not bitter. OK, I'm a little miffed! ;-D ) >> MS is a bunch of amateurs by comparison. > > They might be better at working the courts and political channels... I don't think so, from my experience it's just that most of the IBM shenanigans never got to court... -- Glenn L. Austin <>< Computer Wizard and Race Car Driver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.austin-home.com/glenn/> -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.letterrip.com/> old-archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
