Linux-Advocacy Digest #744, Volume #26 Mon, 29 May 00 13:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: democracy? ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Saddest anti-Linux site on the web? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (ZnU)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (rj friedman)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (rj friedman)
Re: Let's whine about wine (Rein Klazes)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Drestin Black, more proof of the success of OSS (abraxas)
Re: Which Microsoft will inherit lawsuit? ("Charles R. Lyttle")
Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com ("Brad")
Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com ("Brad")
Re: Is Linus a terminator ? (Bloody Viking)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Joseph)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 29 May 2000 15:10:09 GMT
On Sun, 28 May 2000 17:57:42 -0400, Joseph wrote:
>Computer manufacturing requires billion dollar fabrication plants to
>manufacture. Software cheap - there are not costs for duplication
>software. Software is by far cheaper to manufacture - the cost of an
>FTP site and a connection will generate unlimited quantities of
>software.
What, the FTP site actually designs and programs the software ? Of course
it's easy to copy software. Noone's disputing that. Creating software
however is somewhat more difficult.
>> Programming technology *has* improved, but it hasn't improved very
>> much in this area. The main improvement that can be applied to
>> an OS is the emergence of C++.
>
>Hardware is programming logic and it too needs to be designed. It also
>has to be orders of magnitude more reliable than a MS software product.
It's also orders of magnitude simpler.
>Still prices are dropping, not increasing.
Most software packages cost less today than they did 5 years ago. How much
does MS Office 6 go for on ebay ? If you're talking about prices of the
*latest* software, you also need to compare with prices of state-of-the-art
hardware.
>I don't do crack. If I wanted to market and develop a new OS I could do
>it in one day. I'd repackage LINUX or FreeBSD and call it JOS. MS even
That's not developing a new OS.
>repackages some BSD networking code in their Windows OS.
Yes, but it's still largely code they wrote.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: democracy?
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 11:11:38 -0400
"Andrew N. McGuire" wrote:
> On Sat, 27 May 2000, Mark Wilden wrote:
>
> + Praedor Tempus wrote:
> + >
> + > Direct democracy would SUCK.
> +
> + I agree.
>
> I third the motion...
>
> +
> + > You would have religious rightwingers and
> + > idiots (the majority of the public)
> +
> + However, I don't think the majority of people are 'idiots'. Compared to
> + what?
>
> Well, for example you have the majority who believe that as of
> January 1st, we started a new millenium. Then you have those
> of us who are smart enough to realize that there was no year 0.
Why wasn't there a year 0. Oh yeah, we left that to "experts" who
didn't believe that there is a zero.
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Saddest anti-Linux site on the web?
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 15:07:14 GMT
According to netcraft, it's running Soalris.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote on 28 May 2000 18:04:10 -0400
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >Dr. Strangelove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the
Network:
> >>Just take a look at this site, it is clearly the saddest anti-Linux
> >>site on the web, made by a 14 year old spotty geek:
> >
> >>http://www.startnet-uk.com
> >
> >...and, it appears to be running Linux.
>
> bash$ telnet www.startnet-uk.com www
> Trying 209.207.222.71...
> Connected to www.startnet-uk.com.
> Escape character is '^]'.
> HEAD / HTTP/1.1
>
> HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request
> Server: Zeus/3.3
> Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 13:24:53 GMT
> Connection: close
> Content-Type: text/html
>
> Connection closed by foreign host.
> bash$
>
> "Zeus" refers to Zeus Technology. That's all I know about it.
>
> [.sigsnip]
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 15:44:35 GMT
In article <93uY4.4222$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "ZnU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <KaaY4.2705$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [snip]
> > > > >Manufacturing technology has improved; computer components are
> > > > >cheaper.
> > > >
> > > > Surprise! No monopolies there, lots of good competition.
> > >
> > > It's not immediately obvious that there's a relationship to be found
> > > there. I've noticed an widespread assumption that competition
> > > between a lot of small vendors is better than that between a few
> > > big ones, or between one big one and many small ones.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure I see why.
> >
> > Say you have two companies that make web browsers (OSes or office
> > software or whatever), with the market split 50/50. Each will do
> > everything in its power to destroy the other, including introducing
> > incompatibilities with the other browser. Web developers will hate it,
> > but they'll put up with it. Can't cut your audience in half, after all.
> > So both browsers will be supported, and they'll drift away from
> > eachother more and more.
>
> This seems an oversimplification; I don't think they'll drift apart-
> there are strong pressures for compatability.
We've seen this happen the in the real world.
> And of course, this is specifically about web browsers; these
> conclusions do not obviously translate to other products.
Sure it does. It applies to file formats, APIs, etc.. If the market is
divided into enough segments there's always a pressure to be compatible
with the rest of it that just isn't there otherwise.
> > You have the same issue with one company with 50% of the market and
> > another five with 10%. The big guy will intentionally create
> > incompatibles to kill the little guys and block new entries into the
> > market.
>
> Well, that's exactly the same situation as before, except *now* the
> Big Company has an easier time getting its way.
>
> This is not transparently bad; one can argue that progress is a good
> thing, and that improvements to the protocols should be encouraged-
> even if it is inconvinient for the little guys to keep up.
There are ways to make improvements that won't destroy the competition.
Somehow the PC makers all manage to make their hardware faster without
breaking compatibility with each other.
> It is often claimed that The Big Browser Company will introduct
> *gratuitous* changes that do *not* represent improvements but
> are mere incompatibilities. This is not a viable strategy, which is
> probably why we don't see it happening. If the changes are just
> useless, they will go unused- why cut yourself off from *any* browser
> if there is no benefit to be gained thereby? If the changes are just
> incompatibilities, then users won't use that browser, because it won't
> read existing web pages.
These changes do happen, but they're more subtle than the kind of thing
that totally breaks compatibility. Witness the JavaScript
implementations in IE and Netscape.
> For the Big Browser Company's strategy to work, they must
> *improve* the 'standards'.
Not really. They just have to 'embrace and extend." Microsoft does
plenty of this, and Netscape too did it when it had a large enough chunk
of the market.
> > But what if you have 10 companies with even market share? If one of them
> > introduces some sort of incompatibility, nobody will care but the users
> > of that product. They'll just switch to another product. It's now in the
> > interest of every company in the race to maintain compatibility. Because
> > everything is standards-based, this also allows additional competition
> > to enter the market at any time.
>
> This would seem to make it very difficult for improvements to gain
> acceptace; a browser could support some new feature, but no-one
> would use that feature in a web page if only 10% of the users could
> see it.
>
> If there is a standards *body* that can vote changes, then improvements
> are possible, but still rather difficult- any company that would find it
> difficult to support a given improvement would wish to block it.
>
> IMHO we are better off with at least *some* big pushy companies that
> are willing and able to 'extend' standards.
Again, take a look at the PC hardware industry. Admittedly democracy is
never quite as efficient as dictatorship, but there are other benefits.
> > The point is if no single company holds a significant fraction of a
> > given market, it means that companies must ensure interoperability,
> > which means users are free to choose whatever product they want.
>
> It would seem to me that users are free to do that even the products
> are *not* completely identical to one another.
>
> And it seems to me that having a choice between 57 browsers, all
> of which are exactly the same in every important respect, is a pretty
> useless sort of choice.
They'd all render the same HTML and run the same JavaScript, but
significant differences could exist otherwise.
> Of course, that argument applies mostly to browsers, where features
> are generally only useful if web pages support them. But still.
--
The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
-- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (rj friedman)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 29 May 2000 15:46:35 GMT
On Mon, 29 May 2000 09:49:48 Illya Vaes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
¯I sure don't need to read more messages from you in order to determine whether
¯or not you're an MS Weenie, like so many that come from the woodwork any time
¯MS is under siege (because of their own behaviour).
Hmmm... looking at the name that this individual is posting
under makes me most suspicious that this is one of those
trolls from the MS 'dirty tricks' department. Going back to
the original "Steve Bartko" persona, they seem to gravitate
to using these phony "ethnic sounding" cover names to post
under. E.g., the "Demetrio Lamazaki" persona, and the "Erik
Funkenbush" persona are the more recent ones.
________________________________________________________
[RJ] OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
rj friedman Team ABW
Taipei, Taiwan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To send email - remove the `yyy'
________________________________________________________
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (rj friedman)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 29 May 2000 15:48:43 GMT
On Sun, 28 May 2000 18:15:59 poldy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
¯Why does the judge not know what he's talking about? The issues in the
¯case involve business and economic practices, not technical questions.
¯He doesn't have to be a software engineer to know about competition in
¯the SW industry.
¯
¯Guess what? Neither Gates nor Ballmer are engineers.
Ballmer is nothing but a soap salesman. He got hired at MS
because he and the brat went to school together.
________________________________________________________
[RJ] OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
rj friedman Team ABW
Taipei, Taiwan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To send email - remove the `yyy'
________________________________________________________
------------------------------
From: Rein Klazes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Let's whine about wine
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 18:08:10 +0200
Martijn Bruns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yeah, Wine is crap the way it is now. It won't even run a simple
> one like Girotel (a Dutch telebanking app) correctly. Textboxes
> don't show correctly, not allowing me to succesfully enter my
> password. It generally look like shit, because Wine obviously
> tries to use my Windows color-settings, but doesn't succeed
> entirely. It emits a strange error-message whenever i try to dial
> into the Girotel-server with my modem (i'm pretty sure i
> configured it correctly!)... And it IS, in my opinion, a very
> simple app!
You haven't tried this for a long time, have you? If you did, you
mustn't have tried very hard (like asking what a message that you do
not understand means). Girotel runs perfectly (if the way it runs
under windows can be called that way) for almost a year now IMO.
Step-by-step information in Dutch how to setup wine with girotel can
be found here:
http://www.nl.linux.org/doc/HOWTO/Girotel-met-Wine-HOWTO-NL.html
and the latest information what works and what doesn't about each wine
release:
http://www.casema.net/~rklazes/girotel.html
Rein.
--
Rein Klazes
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 02:24:21 +1000
"rj friedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 29 May 2000 09:49:48 Illya Vaes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ¯I sure don't need to read more messages from you in order to determine
whether
> ¯or not you're an MS Weenie, like so many that come from the woodwork any
time
> ¯MS is under siege (because of their own behaviour).
>
> Hmmm... looking at the name that this individual is posting
> under makes me most suspicious that this is one of those
> trolls from the MS 'dirty tricks' department. Going back to
> the original "Steve Bartko" persona, they seem to gravitate
> to using these phony "ethnic sounding" cover names to post
> under. E.g., the "Demetrio Lamazaki" persona, and the "Erik
> Funkenbush" persona are the more recent ones.
As I've said before, you know you've got 'em when they start talking like
this :).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Drestin Black, more proof of the success of OSS
Date: 29 May 2000 16:17:35 GMT
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> abraxas wrote:
>>
>> Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Our favorite M$ troll uses OSS every time that he posts to Usenet.
>>
>> > Trying 207.126.101.30...
>> > Connected to www.supernews.com.
>> > Escape character is '^]'.
>> > HEAD / HTTP/1.0
>>
>> > HTTP/1.1 200 OK
>> > Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 01:35:14 GMT
>> > Server: Apache/1.3.11 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.5.0 OpenSSL/0.9.4
>> > Last-Modified: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 05:38:40 GMT
>> > ETag: "5a08c-d56-38e439e0"
>> > Accept-Ranges: bytes
>> > Content-Length: 3414
>> > Connection: close
>> > Content-Type: text/html
>>
>> > SuperNews, aka Remarq is an open source shop and has been since its
>> > inception in 1995. NT simply can't handle the type of volume they deal
>> > with.
>>
>> YES IT CAN YES IT CAN!!!
>>
>> Ok, maybe it cant, but AS SOON AS SUPERNEWS CONVERTS TO W2K SUPER-SERVER-
>> EDITION IT WILL BE ABLE TO! I HAVE A BETA COPY OF IT IN MY HAND RIGHT NOW!
>> IT EXISTS! ITS GOING TO WHIP UNIX COMPLETELY! WHO NEEDS APACHE WHEN YOU
>> HAVE IIS! IIS IS SUPERIOR! IT LOADS BETTER! ITS THE BEST! YOU DONT
>> KNOW WHAT YOURE TALKING ABOUT! HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF UN-NAMED ONLINE
>> BOOKSTORES HAVE BEEN USING DATACENTER FOR 15 YEARS AND NEVER HAD A PROBLEM
>> WITH IT!
>>
> You are joking, right? "Hundreds of Millions" web servers? Using Data
> Center for 15 years? So are you asserting that NT was around, in ANY
> form, 15 years ago? Or, for that matter, there are over 100 million
> online book stores?
> IIS is a joke. It is a quaint little web server, yes, but in no way
> should it be confused with something usable.
You really need to pay more attention, fewel.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: "Charles R. Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Which Microsoft will inherit lawsuit?
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 16:26:51 GMT
fungus wrote:
>
> "Charles R. Lyttle" wrote:
> >
> > You know, if split up, the OS company can't ship Java, as
> > that would be an application.
>
> I don't see how a JVM falls into the category of "application".
>
> It all depends how you define "application" I suppose,
> hopefully any split-up proposal will contain a reasonably
> precise definition of the term.
>
> To my mind, an application is a program whose main purpose in
> life is to allow users to view/create data files which are not
> part of the operating system setup/configuration.
>
> eg.
>
> Regedit can be shipped with Windows because it's needed for
> system setup.
>
> IE can't be shipped with Windows because its main purpose
> is to view files which have nothing to do with the OS.
>
> By the same token, mediaplayer, et. al. also have to be
> removed from the OS, and you'll have to install a "multimedia
> pack" to be able to play video files[1].
>
> If this sort of restriction is placed on Microsoft without
> them being split up into separate companies then they'll
> just start playing around with the definition of "main
> purpose", eg. they'll change regedit to work inside a
> browser then claim IE is _needed_ for the OS.
>
> This is why a splitup is 100% necessary, and why "conduct
> remedies" must be rejected as a viable solution.
>
> --
> <\___/>
> / O O \
> \_____/ FTB.
>
> [1] I imagine such a pack will come preinstalled on the
> majority of new machines, and there'll be plenty of free
> ones on magazine cover-disks as well. I refuse to believe
> that this "missing functionality" will cause any hardship
> to anybody, and who knows, having some variety in the
> marketplace might actually spur some decent open (gasp!)
> standards and nicer players than what Microsoft supplies.
>
> Let's face it, Microsoft didn't invent mp3, and I don't
> know many people with a Microsoft supplied .mp3 player
> on their machine. I *do* know that Microsoft is currently
> trying to subvert .mp3 and get people to use their own
> proprietry .asf format instead.
>
> Is this really "helping the consumer"? I think not...
This is a good point. The OS could be built so that it runs Java in the
kernel, making Java part of the OS. Likewise, there are advantages to
having Java built into your spreadsheet or database program. The OS
company, not shipping applications, would want to be inter operable with
other OS offerings, and so would find it beneficial to support standard
Java Kerbosis, etc. The applications, wanting to run on as many OS as
possible, would also have need to do the same. So whoever inherits the
suit, would also inherit the contract and would find it advisable to
negotiate a quick settlement and new contract. Sun would be wise to do
the same. Think about Office on Solaris! If Office gets rid of some of
the "make sure everyone has windows" baggage, it wouldn't be a bad set
of programs.
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Thank you Melissa!
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: "Brad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 16:37:13 GMT
"Dolly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 27 May 2000 02:20:10 -0400, Eric Bennett wrote:
>
> >I don't know much of what the OS/2 and Linux folks see, but as for what
> >goes on in comp.sys.mac.advocacy, it seems all the Microsoft advocates
> >have pretty much given up trying to make arguments that Windows 98 is
> >worth using. All we really heard about in csma, for a fairly long
> >period before W2K came out, was NT. And now all we really here about
> >from the Windows folks is Win2k.
> >
> >Maybe Windows ME will change that? ;-)
> >
> >--
> >Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
>
>
> Doubtfully.. .it's Win95 OSR2... err... 98... um... 98SR2... with
> FINALLY, the promised USB support, and some better driver
> support (though they dropped some legacy drivers
> somehow... like for many older Epson printers like the
> 700 PhotoEX). Oh - and of course the added eye candy to
> make it look like it's worth upgrading to, and as many bug fixes
> (and new bugs) as they could get done - at least to date.
>
> Still crashes and burns trying to run apps that access large
> amounts of RAM (PhotoShop, wav editors, etc...), still crashes
> randomly, still quirky, still working out too many issues.
>
> And no, it's not a beta... it's Win95 fixpack 14..... if you consider
> all the Win95 releases... all 8 or 9 of them, the 98 releases, the
> service releases... and there are really no new features that
> werent already announced in 95 OSR2. At least not in my
> friend's "beta" version that MS provided him.
If WindowsME doesn't fix the resource issue, it's still pretty useless in my
book for "power users". Having a 128K GDI/User resource limit is ridiculous
in this age.
Brad
>
> Dolly
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Brad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 16:37:14 GMT
"rj friedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 28 May 2000 17:10:45 "Brad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
> ¯While in the confines of os2.advocacy you might get away with living
under
> ¯the delusion that OS/2 is somehow thriving...
>
> This is one more example of your "full-of-shit" debate
> tactics. You take your self-made ridiculous statements;
> write them in such a manner as to make it look as if the
> person you are responding to actually was defending that
> position; and then go on to defeat your self-made strawman.
>
> My position is, and has always been, that for the business
> user OS/2 cannot be beaten as the most productive,
> efficient, best bang-for-the buck OS/2 out there. OS/2 may
> not be "thriving" but it is a LONG way frome dead - or even
> dying - as you, in your bitter cup of rejection so often
> proclaim.
>
I am not sure you would know what a business user is, RJ. As a desktop OS,
business or otherwise, OS/2 is on the fringes whether you like it or not.
It has nothing to do with some sort of "bitterness" it is called reality.
As I said in another post, I am sure that if this thread was cross-posted to
the Amiga news group or Atari news group you would have people there
claiming that their OS isn't dying either. As I mention in the article,
OS/2 is still a great server OS and a great client for embedded applications
but as a desktop, it just barely makes the cut.
Brad
------------------------------
From: Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is Linus a terminator ?
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 16:45:02 GMT
Raul Valero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: First, Linus drops away Microsoft and now, Transmeta is
: going for Intel, did Linus born to kill ? :-)
Nope, Linus is not a T-1000. But his OS is doing a nice job of terminating
Microshit. With a little help from America's Department of Justice! The
DoJ makes for a very effective T-1000 model Terminator(tm) but doesn't
come with that Arnold Schwartzenegger accent.
And if you are a postal supervisor, you want to be careful about
terminating people. They might come and Terminate you back!
--
CAUTION: Email Spam Killer in use. Leave this line in your reply! 152680
First Law of Economics: You can't sell product to people without money.
4968238 bytes of spam mail deleted. http://www.wwa.com/~nospam/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 09:57:36 -0400
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> [snip]
> > > He *tried* making a deal with the DoJ. Remember the consent decree?
> > > He got them to agree to "no bundling, but integration is okay". But it
> > > didn't do any good, they came after him anyway.
> > >
> > > He can hardly expect the DoJ to keep its promises *now*. This is
> > > true even if you feel that "browser integration" is positively
> > > sinful; they gave him the okay to do it, and then sued him
> > > anyway.
> >
> > A lie is only as good as the money it's printed on so who cares what is
> > said as long as there is increasing shareholder value.
>
> That's a remarkably unintelligable sentance you've got there.
MS isn't credible, MS is profitable. As long as MS is profitbale the
shareholders are happy. Blaming and demonizing their opponents isn't
going to protect MS IF the stock drops and doesn't recover due to a
pending company split.
> > MS will get sued by shareholders for losing the case IF and only IF
> > shareholders lose money. By the definition of liablity that results
> > from losing so badly, MS management is culpable when they lose the case
> > - Period. That the DOJ won so easily is proof enough MS botched the
> > case and it will enrage the shareholders they were mislead so badly by
> > management IF MS does NOT WIN on Appeal.
>
> Oh, I dunno. You are assuming the DoJ will win this thing; MS seems
> to be betting they can beat this on appeal.
That's why I think they'll be sued by the shareholders. MS lost the
trial when the facts and law were being established. Now MS has a
devestating Finding of Fact but MS says that on appeal they can win.
> If they are wrong, they may face some shareholder complaints about
> their conduct during the trial; even if they never had a chance with Judge
> Jackson presiding, it still does not mean they should've acted as
> goofy as they did.
They had a chance with the judge but screwed it up early on by insulting
him and not cooperating. They created their own problems. Why will
they not continue to do so on appeal?
> Nevertheless, Bill Gates has a pretty good explaination for why he
> didn't settle: tried it once, didn't work.
The explanation might be a large liability. If the remedy hurts
shareholder value then the shareholders can sue on the basis that
Management did NOT negotiate in the good faith they insist. The
shareholders were mislead.
> > Like crummy software, MS's defense is supposed to get better on appeal,
> > the next release. Well if it doesn't get better MS managent could well
> > be be sued for making misleading statements to the shareholders.
>
> I think the theory is not that MS's defence will get better, but that they
> believe they'll get a court that doesn't have it in for them.
That presupposes MS will change their behavior at a time they need to be
even more agressive. The appeals court is no more tolerant than the
conservative, Reagan appointed trial judge. On appeal they have to work
with the Finding of Fact and that means they need to undercut the law -
"Yeah we did these things but so what? The law doesn't apply...."
That means they'll need to be careful to represent case law within the
the context of the case law least they anger the three judges.
> Whether this is true, of course, remains to be see; but there are some
> promising indicators.
Most say it cannot get worse but it can.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
