Billwatch Snippets Database – Part I
Snippet: | At several place the news popped up that the DOJ is not only in court to hear it said that they are right, but that the idea behind the whole thing is to eradicate domination from the structure of the computer and software industry and that something will have to follow up the court sessions. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-07 22:24:00 |
Snippet: | Several consumer groups have bundled their efforts and handed over to the Senate Judiciary Committee a 115-page report that harshly criticizes Microsoft’s impact on innovation and user choice in the computer industry. The article See: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_smgraph_display/0,4436,2146359,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-07 22:36:46 |
Snippet: | Microsoft would gladly be liked in academia, but their efforts to force loose information from two academic writers seems to have an adverse effect. In a statement of the American Association of University Professors we find: Society You can find the full statement here: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-07 23:46:37 |
Snippet: | The New York Times is running an accessible article in which several allegiations in the antitrust case against Microsoft treated with some care: the attempted collusion with Netscape followed by the well-known leverage of a monopoly market to increase share in another market, breaking Spyglass’ business (82 licensees) by giving away its own license of the browser for free, threathening Compaq with denial of access to their essential facility, the Windows OS, and keeping Intel out of the software market. The See: http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/98/10/biztech/articles/08microsoft.html (You’ll need to register to gain access.) |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-08 21:40:46 |
Snippet: | Microsoft’s arguments for getting access to the notes and tapes of interviews that two academicians held with Netscape executives were considered insufficient for Judge Richard Stearns. Actually, Microsoft’s claims were rather ridiculous, See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,27313,00.html?st.ne.fd.mdh |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-08 22:19:29 |
Snippet: | Allegedly CNET reporter used confidential internal e-mail from Microsoft in his article “Microsoft’s holy war against java”. Sufficient reason to receive a subpoena to hand over the material. According to Microsoft Tom Pilla Microsoft competitors are responsible for leaking confidential information in a selective manner. Of course, Microsoft could have avoided the evils of selection by not prohibiting the public from gaining knowledge of the information. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-09 00:39:04 |
Snippet: | Microsoft’s high principles against government regulation stop where the government uses its exclusive position to prevent people from chosing and offers them only Microsoft products. This is what we see in several states at this moment, NetAction’s Nathan Newman (read his papers!) wrote an article about the matter: http://www.netaction.org/monitor/mon35.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-09 03:13:07 |
Snippet: | With the trial coming up, the intensity of speculation increases. Right now, there seems to be a wave of “something must be done, but there are better alternatives to breaking up Microsoft” articles. Jesse Berst refers to several alternatives in his “Why breaking up Microsoft is hard to do — and stupid too”: One of his references is a reprint of the SPA proposal (now where did I have the original): What |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-09 06:44:42 |
Snippet: | A few days ago several consumer organisations handed a 115-page report to the Senate Judiciary Committee that was highly critical of the combination of Microsoft’s market position with their behavior. Although the link is very much never made, Microsoft seems to have felt to urge to respond. I annotated the result You can find Microsoft’s article here: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/10-7pricing.htm My annotation is here: http://main.billwatch.net/annotated/price_critics.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-09 09:46:03 |
Snippet: | The DOJ had to go to court again to ask it to compel Microsoft to hand over the requested databases with information on OEM’s. Jackson had seen what the DOJ had actually received from Microsoft and called it “gibberish”. The reason “We have cooperated 100 percent in the government Given judge You can find the article at: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-09 23:54:54 |
Snippet: | As it reason for not complying with the order to make their OEM databases accessible to the DOJ Microsoft gave that “four GigaBytes is a lot of documents”. First of all, four What See: http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/msftdoj/TWB19981009S0014 |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-11 17:23:59 |
Snippet: | Microsoft graciously allowed the New York Times to publish a rephrasing of a memo by Mr. William H. Gates III himself.
We Meanwhile, Mr. Gates’ And do we find the slightest indication See: http://www.sjmercury.com/business/microsoft/docs/076526.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-13 00:20:36 |
Snippet: | Microsoft’s presspass contains an interesting piece concerning their filing of three motions to the Federal District Court.
What “This To me “walking away” seems like From the fact See: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/10-12objects.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-13 00:39:58 |
Snippet: | In an excellent ZDNet article Microsoft’s offensive to conquer the database market is laid out.
(The See: http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/issue/0,4537,358663,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-13 10:56:10 |
Snippet: | A Microsoft spokesperson declared that the US trial doesn’t negatively influence its European business. Hardly news, as nobody expected that it would. If you are still interested, see: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,27464,00.html?st.ne.ni.lh Another Don’t waste your time on these articles, expect if you are European and starved for news. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-13 21:07:02 |
Snippet: | San Jose Mercury News’ Dan Gilmor has created a nice page with pictures of personalities that you can click on to read what they have to say on the antitrust case. Of Well, I haven’t read the rest of the comments so far. See for yourself: http://www.sjmercury.com/columnists/gillmor/docs/dg101198.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-13 21:27:00 |
Snippet: | Microsoft presently chastises the DOJ for even thinking about the effects of breaking up Microsoft or other alternatives such as having another company sell Windows too. What Anyway, see:http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_smgraph_display/0,4436,2148805,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-13 21:43:43 |
Snippet: | We have been bothered much with opinions, wild speculations and life histories of lawyers. I am quite happy to see someone investing in some very sane advice for the public on how to go through the trial: get your data firsthand and think for yourself. See: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_smgraph_display/0,4436,2148075,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-13 22:12:49 |
Snippet: | After the New York Times played messenger boy for Microsoft and after the grand “principle of innovation” rhetorics, one would expect Microsoft’s new “chief technologist” to be engaged fully in, well, technology, right? Wrong. Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/ctd639.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-14 21:22:20 |
Snippet: | During his tour to raise political support for Microsoft, Gates spawned the usual “right to innovate” slogans.
A When Gartner analyst Scott Winkler Results? No, but they pour money into R&D like mad. See: http://www.sjmercury.com/business/microsoft/docs/043659.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-14 22:52:34 |
Snippet: | There is nothing specifically new about the information John Dvorak gives when criticising Microsoft’s claim that the plans for inclusion of “web browsing technology” into Windows were made many years ago. The reason why I mention this article See: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_rc_display/0,3443,2148858,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-15 20:44:15 |
Snippet: | The Bristol case has opened. The verdict is to be expected on Friday. See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,27577,00.html?st.ne.ni.lh
Microsoft’s request for yet another delay of the trial has been denied. See: http://www.sjmercury.com/business/microsoft/docs/008672.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-15 21:16:11 |
Snippet: | The Gartner Group expects an all Wintel world in a few years. Perhaps there can be a niche market of java systems but otherwise we’ll see Windows on Intel on the desktop and the server and Windows CE on Intel’s StrongARM. I think that these |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-15 21:24:19 |
Snippet: | Microsoft invested in, and commissioned Softways Systems Inc. to put a POSIX level on top of NT. Now this has been branded “UNIX”(tm). Microsoft also has developed an add-on to NT, NT Services for Unix, (SFU) that makes NT systems look more like Unix ones. I say, if Microsoft is in the UNIX/NT integration business, are they not a direct competitor to Bristol? See: http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/news/0,4538,2149485,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-16 08:40:47 |
Snippet: | This weekend the analysis of Microsoft’s 43-page public defense will start. The falsity of many of Microsoft’s claims is easy to show, but it takes an awful lot of work. Take for example Microsoft’s claim that Linux was developed by a single person. “grep N: /usr/src/linux/CREDITS |wc -l” says 252. I have quickly browsed the document and have found many more instances of misrepresentations that can thus be uncovered and answered. This weekend the results of a cursory going through the document will be released at billwatch, with an invitation to the public to participate in the further “debugging” of the document. —— |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-16 08:57:21 |
Snippet: | Microsoft has often claimed that the government cannot judge their actions as it doesn’t understand how business in the computer and software industry works. They never The catalog gives us some Mitch Stone wrote in his introduction to the catalog: You can find the page of “MS investments” under the Updates and rectifications are invited. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-16 23:22:17 |
Snippet: | Quoting from the DOJ’s “FURTHER EMERGENCY MOTION TO COMPEL MICROSOFT CORPORATION AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT” of 16 October:
“Microsoft The media has been very low-key on the important If you want to track what was requested in the first place, see: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f1900/1979.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-17 09:16:47 |
Snippet: | The DOJ seems to have learned an important lesson from the Appeals Court: it should obtain the right credentials for talking about technology. And so it went out to See Mary Jo Foley’s: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_smgraph_display/0,4436,2150958,00.html (Perhaps I should make a menu-button that leads to a “Mary Jo Foley” search at ZDNET.) |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-17 09:36:48 |
Snippet: | Friday Bristol was granted access to all of the depositions and exhibits that have been entered in the lawsuits of the DOJ, Sun, Caldera and AT&T versus Microsoft. Ridiculing I find access to the Bristol’s lawyers will have to hurry as the trial is scheduled to end next Monday. See yet another Mary Jo Foley article: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-17 09:56:34 |
Snippet: | I have little to say about Dan Gilmor’s “Intuit battle started what this trial should finish: justice”, except that it pleases me. Here is a fragment: “I’d argue that the Despite the torrent of When the press resumes its critical function like this, For the full editorial, see: http://www.mercurycenter.com/columnists/gillmor/docs/dg101898.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-18 15:47:24 |
Snippet: | Seeing if anything worth knowing had happened I turned to Mercury News, news.com, zdnet and cnnfn.com.
The Cnnfn is the So, |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-19 19:49:59 |
Snippet: | The reason Microsoft gives for the non-decreasing price of their OS in an industry of falling prices is that they have added new components to it. The most salient new Will the ladies and gentlemen of the press |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-19 22:51:50 |
Snippet: | The point of an antitrust case is not to break a company, but to keep the option of competition open. Nothing bad will happen to Microsoft’s market share if java were allowed to exist: so what if consumers can freely swap the OS’s underneat the JVM, they’ll first have to find a better or cheaper one than Windows. Similarly, nothing much will happen if Microsoft can no longer force OEM’s and ISP’s to ship their software exclusively. The The following Salon Magazine article touches this topic: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-19 23:01:25 |
Snippet: | Bizarre arithmetic forms the foundation of Microsoft’s argumentation in court. “These [exclusive] contracts [with OEM's and ISP's] were pro-competitive because they reduced Netscape’s dominance. They gave consumers a choice.” It is Microsoft’s less-is-more arithmetic saying that consumers are given more choice is choice is limited is outrageous. So Well, go find yourself some context to put the above in perspective. I got this information from: http://www.sjmercury.com/business/microsoft/trial/breaking/docs/mstrial102098.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-20 22:13:27 |
Snippet: | After their earlier temporary ruling in favor of Microsoft’s request to keep the depositions sealed, a three-judge federal appeals court panel considered the public release of pretrial depositions conform to the law. After a stimulating discussion, the panel adjourned without specifying when they would make a decision. See: http://www.sjmercury.com/business/microsoft/trial/breaking/docs/depositions102098.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-21 00:11:40 |
Snippet: | It seems that an Italian software tradegroup has filed an antitrust case against Microsoft.
In English I found only a very short Computerworld announcement: The |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-21 08:29:34 |
Snippet: | Airlines are alleged to be unfairly discriminating in giving online bookings through e.g. Microsoft’s “Expedia” a lower commission than those through travel agencies. Richard Barton, the general manager of Expedia, says: “It’s very disconcerting. How can we compete?” After The Air Transport Association |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-21 08:50:30 |
Snippet: | One reason for the EU’s not pursuing an antitrust case against Microsoft is that they have not received a complaint. This seems like a very good reason to me. Also it seem to me that something can be done about that. I was clueless on how to “If someone These guys are supposed to work for the public. File a complaint and ask that they work for you.” |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-21 09:05:15 |
Snippet: | Having a monopoly to escape the necessity to lower prices in an industry where falling prices are the rule has paid off handsomely. MS announced record profits of $1.52 billion for the most recently ended quarter, and predicts stronger 2Q earnings. More here: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-21 09:07:45 |
Snippet: | Microsoft’s claims that they intended to integrate browser functionality even before Netscape was founded throws a whole new light on the value of integration in the OS. But, as I argue, not the kind that they anticipated. See the article in the “features” menu with the title “Intentions without incentive”. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-22 01:06:49 |
Snippet: | If Microsoft was so innovative for 23 years, has so many extremely intelligent and hardworking employees and started on web browsers before Netscape did, then why did they lag behind so much? |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-23 01:01:42 |
Snippet: | Microsoft is doing its best to make Netscape’s actions resemble their own. For one thing, Netscape sought to gain a large market share – or why not, a monopoly – in web browsers to be able to sell their servers. Of course, the comparison is Netscape’s market share has Microsoft’s |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-23 01:18:06 |
Snippet: | I just entered a snippet in the dark and quiet corner of this site titled “open forum”, requesting quotes of Microsoft executives or consults hired by Microsoft that include name-calling of parties that they dislike. Even in court, Microsoft’s strategy to victory seems to be to give rude names to anybody who disagrees with them. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-23 08:49:35 |
Snippet: | Enterprises can now “buy into the Microsoft vision” by signing the “Microsoft Enterprise Agreement”. This will give them large discounts on Microsoft front- and backoffice products for a three- or four year period. Aside from the long term – a standard strategy of a monopolist, you can look it up in the books - the catch of these agreements is that they are not volume-accounts by numbers, but volume accounts by exclusion: by signing one agrees to not buy software with similar functionality from other parties. Incidentally, two American states have already “bought into the Microsoft vision”. Expect these states to set up regulations that any dealings with them will have to use proprietary Microsoft data formats. Microsoft See Mary Jo Foley’s: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_rc_display/0,3443,2153066,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-24 21:38:22 |
Snippet: | An antitrust case is about actions of companies described in an economical vocabulary. “Monopoly” is primarily an economical term, not a legal term and most certainly not a term that is related to computer or software technology. Computer As I was earlier presently surprised by See: http://www.redherring.com/insider/1998/1021/microsoft.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-24 22:16:43 |
Snippet: | Claim 1: The government acts as a proxy for Microsoft’s competitors, especially Netscape. Claim 2: Microsoft must innovate to keep ahead of the fiery throng of competitors that will overtake it technologically and therefore in the market if they stand still for a moment. Claim 3: By turning itself against the integration of the browser and the OS the government’s actions represent a “return of the Luddites”, that is, the people who smashed machinery as they wanted to continue their manual trades. Mr. If |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-24 23:02:58 |
Snippet: | A hardly readable version of the notes that Marc Andreessen claims to have made during a Netscape-Microsoft meeting on future cooperation is now available from the DOJ’s site. Given You can download it in PDF format from: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/033.pdf |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-25 15:29:59 |
Snippet: | For one thing, Microsoft now has $17 billion in the bank, that is, about the entire worth of Sun and half the worth of Oracle.
Microsoft’s It |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-25 18:26:54 |
Snippet: | Reasoning that the video-tape with the deposit of William H. Gates is equal to having the real-thing in court, Microsoft lawyers now claim that showing this tape would effectively come down to the government’s adding another witness to the list. Well, I have often had the impression that Mr. Gates’ answering questions is just “running the tape again”. Apparently, when the government Given that Microsoft has often claimed that I wonder when someone in For more on these topics, see: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,27918,00.html?st.ne.fd.mdh |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-26 09:08:35 |
Snippet: | After claiming that the notes of Marc Andreessen were faked and also that the meeting didn’t even take place, the latest Microsoft position is that the meeting in which they were alleged to seek to collude with Netscape was an attempt by Netscape to spur DOJ action against Microsoft. Believing that everybody is See: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2154975,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-26 21:09:42 |
Snippet: | You can follow the following link for a rather lame article containing an excerpt of an interview with antitrust theoretician Robert Bork, who is presently employed by Netscape. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-26 22:26:06 |
Snippet: | Rather late, I encountered a techweb interview with Wendy Rohm, author of “The Microsoft file: the secret case against Bill Gates”. The interview is mostly about the See: http://www.techweb.com/internet/profile/wrohm/interview |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-26 22:45:22 |
Snippet: | Microsoft relegated Ms Rohm’s book to the category of “fiction”.
As See: http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayStory.pl?/features/981026msfile.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-27 00:34:12 |
Snippet: | Salon Magazine created the hypothesis that Microsoft’s consistently making good money despite economical turbulance and changing technology might be due to their monopoly position. Not altogether deep, but something that received notoriously little mention in the media. Also they ridicule John Warden’s See: http://www.salonmagazine.com/21st/rose/1998/10/23straight.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-27 08:56:23 |
Snippet: | Following their regular schema of conference EU and US antitrust investigators will meet tomorrow. Given that specific items will be discussed, Microsoft’s position will form part of the discussions. EU Competition Commissioner Karel van See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,27980,00.html?st.ne.ni.lh |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-27 20:45:07 |
Snippet: | After arguing that the meeting never took place, Microsoft has started to claim that the June 21, 1995 meeting with Netscape was the result of a devious plan by Netscape to “set-up” Microsoft and sent the DOJ after them. The problem with Microsoft’s Strangely, Mr. Warden seems to grab Also My source is: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,27935,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-27 21:18:04 |
Snippet: | Ever out to simplify matters, Microsoft will rename the NT family to Windows 2000. Thus it will “make it easier for customers to choose among products”. So, Windows 2000 is closely tied to NT 4 and has nothing to do with Windows 98. And don’t think this “2000″ stands for some year, as it will come out in early 1999. Could it be simpler? See: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2155796,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-27 21:34:11 |
Snippet: | Just for exercising our knowledge of the basics of antitrust law I want to point to a rather “journalistic” primer by Businessweek: http://www.courttv.com/trials/microsoft/primer.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-27 23:13:48 |
Snippet: | To be placed on the Windows desktop AOL had to drop any reference to Netscape on its site and couldn’t advertise with Netscape.
Microsoft’s For the article and some interesting |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-28 09:10:12 |
Snippet: | Microsoft senior vice president for Consumer Systems Paul Maritz wrote the above 20 days before the alleged proposal for market division to Chairman Bill Gates. Ah, all this “throwing mud” by showing email messages from “junior staffers”. Mr. Warden’s defense consisted of changing the meaning of win32. See: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/1,4586,2156160,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-28 20:47:09 |
Snippet: | For months I have been frustrated about Microsoft’s success in enforcing secrecy on the evidence regarding the antitrust case. With the trial proceeding, exhibits now become available. If you haven’t checked it yet, you might do yourself a favor by taking a look at what is hidden in the PDF files at the DOJ: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_index.htm Note |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-29 00:16:31 |
Snippet: | The Business Software Association released a report on the detrimental effects of software piracy. It is a textbook example of bad “ceteris paribus” economics – let’s assume that everything else remains the same. Assumptions of the report are: 1. Those who pirate copies would alternatively pay the full price of that same copy. 2. When twice as much money flows to the software 3. 4. An extra $10 Furthermore, Well, see for yourself: http://www.bsa.org/statistics/index.html?/statistics/global_pwc98_c.html (I am not defending software piracy, I am fighting misleading information about it.) |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-29 11:15:44 |
Snippet: | Apple’s engineers managed to significantly speed up video under Windows by by-passing Microsoft’s graphics code and speaking directly to the video hardware. Microsoft liked the result and requested Apple for a free license of the technology. Obviously this didn’t fit in Apple’s business model and they refused. Key parts of the code were developed for Apple by Anyone remember Stack? There is a pattern to Microsoft’s “innovation”. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-29 21:19:03 |
Snippet: | WebTV’s original enthouasiasm about an open standard java – the java-compatible logo was printed on the boxes - has disappeared with its being acquired by Microsoft. WebTV will not support java until its boxes will run WinCE with Microsoft’s proprietary non-standard java version. See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28136,00.html?st.ne.fd.gif.d |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-30 21:21:42 |
Snippet: | Aside from John Warden’s dragging on in the hopeless attempt to show that having an icon on every Windows95 desktop was irrelevant for AOL when making its decision to support MSIE and not Netscape, nothing much seems to happen. Fortunately, I The exhibits – PDF files If you are happy enough to have GNU software installed on your system the script might do you some good too: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-30 21:46:07 |
Snippet: | Threats to Apple, cowardly Compaq executives having their actions ruled by fear of Microsoft retaliation, Windows breaking Apple’s software, copyright infringement, and strongarming yet other companies. These topics are all touched in the testimony. You can read Dan Goodin’s account of it: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28164,00.html or get the real thing: Incidentally, Microsoft shot back that: “The One I |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-31 10:29:09 |
Snippet: | Accessing the DOJ’s list of exhibits is complicated by the fact that no description is given of the contents of the files. Kenneth Engel made a first stab at making the contents accessible. I dumped his comma-separated file in a HTML table – no fancy database stuff and searches. The result is at: http://main.billwatch.net/trial/exhibits.phtml Speaking of the exhibits, I made a minor change to the “fetchdoj” script (http://main.billwatch.net/background/fetchdoj |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-10-31 14:26:57 |
Snippet: | On October 19th, Marc Chardon, general manager of Microsoft France warned his customers against using Linux. (http://www.mmedium.com/misc/courrier/00057.html#linux )
Not One |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-01 17:05:33 |
Snippet: | Microsoft’s present deep involvement in the cable industry doesn’t seem to have arrived painlessly. It seems like Mr. Gates wasn’t happy with @Home before it came to be a Microsoft partner as it is today. The following article tells a little more: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28065,00.html To |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-01 17:22:53 |
Snippet: | Eric S. Raymond of “The Cathedral and the Bazar” fame posted an annotated version of what he alleges is an internal Microsoft memo. Raymond’s own analysis of Open Source Software is used to both describe it and make a first effort to list how it can be hurt. Even if the memo is not real (but I made a copy of it |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-02 08:25:10 |
Snippet: | Reading Mr. Maritz quote one doesn’t exactly get the impression that Microsoft planned its inclusion of MSIE in Windows in 1994, completely independent of the existence of Netscape. Apparently, they still haven’t catched on to the fact that the attempt to win this lawsuit by misrepresentation will irremediably damage their credibility. What news could the Gates’ video have Anyway, |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-02 20:45:33 |
Snippet: | Contrary to Microsoft’s message to their “millions of customers” on the Mac platform last weekend, Microsoft’s decision to support Office on the Mac platform was a condition of Apple satisfying certain Microsoft demands. See: If (I |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-02 23:49:08 |
Snippet: | Eric Bennett made a transcript of parts of what has become available of Gates’ deposit. At the top you can find some RealVideo links. Mr. Bennett introduces the excerpts with: The overall testimony seems to reveal two things: Apparently, |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-03 08:54:24 |
Snippet: | Well, it doesn’t come easy, but I can read French and I was pleased to find an article by Lib�ration on Linux that mentions the attention Microsoft is giving it now. Given the number of articles mentioned on http://www.linuxtoday.com/ You can find “Linux cogne aux fen�tres de Microsoft” at: http://www.liberation.fr/multi/actu/semaine981102/art981102.html Enjoy! |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-03 22:28:37 |
Snippet: | A significant number of the DOJ’s exhibits consists of Netscape internal e-mail to report “questionable Microsoft practices”. Reference to this is made in an article by Mary Jo Foley on Microsoft’s “interest” in reseller’s relations with Netscape. Microsoft seems to have gone pretty far down the Most laudably, Ms Foley provides the numbers of the exhibits she is basing her article on. See: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/1,4586,2158717,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-04 09:05:36 |
Snippet: | Oops, Microsoft’s decision to “simplify” the naming of “Windows NT” to “Windows 2000″ was born of such a sudden inspiration that they forgot to check whether the new name is trademarked or not. Well, it is. The story of the “Internet Explorer” name repeats itself. Let’s see if they throw $5 million to this trademark holder too. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-04 09:18:32 |
Snippet: | The Chicago Tribune has a nice article about the dangers of using proprietary technology instead of software that adheres to standards. The end up asking: 1.Are you willing See: http://cgi.chicago.tribune.com/tech/frontpage/0,1714,3,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-04 09:34:28 |
Snippet: | The following article tells about the limited access of the press and the public to the court proceedings of United States v. Microsoft. The conclusion is that the trial is as low-tech as that against Standard Oil once was. Some blame is |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-04 10:38:42 |
Snippet: | I had my CD with the OS ready when my new computer arrived at where I work. The installed disk was quickly reformatted, Windows95 and Office CD’s disappeared in the drawer, and not much later I was the proud user of my *personal* Linux computer. Why This regulation has cost my company unnecessary money and is therefore to be considered harmful. (I once wrote a little piece about this matter called “Regulation through taxation” – http://main.billwatch.net/features/tax.html ) Dan Peterson has his own story about being harmed by Microsoft’s company policies. You can find it at Boycott Micrososft, see: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-04 19:11:49 |
Snippet: | According to Microsoft lawyer Joe diGenova Gates’ recollection problems during the deposit can easily be explained by his being tired by being interrogated by lawyers (you know like his parents and the folks he met at school) for twenty hours. So, when are we going to get the answers on the questions that Gates’ couldn’t answer because his memory failed him? Something |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-04 20:03:53 |
Snippet: | Microsoft has again used their old tactic of trying to change the subject by accusing their competitors of behaving in the same way. It may score them public relations points with those who are gullible or easily confused, but it is hard to see how this will help them with the judge. When was the last time you heard someone get out of a speeding ticket by telling the judge “Your honor, others were speeding too.”? It is also amusing to see, at |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-05 04:42:23 |
Snippet: | Already by far the biggest political spender in the computer/software industry, Microsoft is stepping up its hiring efforts even more. Will they manage to buy themselves free from scrutiny? See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28367,00.html?st.ne.fd.mdh |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-05 09:10:30 |
Snippet: | Tim O’Reilly wrote an open letter to Microsoft following up on the “Halloween Document” in which a Microsoft engineer gives advice to his organization on how to do battle with free software. Here are some excerpts from his letter: At |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-05 09:31:40 |
Snippet: | Yesterday I read an article in Forbes magazine declaring the lawsuit of US v. Microsoft the “laughingstock” of the world.
Well, No link to the Forbes article here. I just wanted to say that I often like articles on Microsoft’s adventures in http://www.salonmagazine.com/ and that I was very pleasantly surprised by the special of the French paper Liberation: I welcome links to other European newspapers having specials on Microsoft. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-05 22:21:31 |
Snippet: | You may have heard about the so-called “Halloween” document which is an internal Microsoft memo describing open source and what their responce to it might be. There is now a second document along the same lines which focuses on Linux. They can both be found at http://www.opensource.org/halloween.html . |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-05 23:34:45 |
Snippet: | Never the kind to bring home grown initiatives to fruition Microsoft bought LinkExchange, an advertising service that has facilities for its hundreds of thousands of member sites to exchange links and for advertisers to aim at the visitors of the member sites selectively. Not really important for Microsoft See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28425,00.html?st.ne.fd.gif.f (This |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-06 10:00:10 |
Snippet: | Subtitled “A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy” this book goes into the economics of information. I haven’t read it yet, but I am mighty interested in the discussion of brand name value, commoditizing standards, and de-commoditizing proprietary technology. You can get a taste of the book at “Information Rules – the website”: http://www.inforules.com/ |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-06 10:10:51 |
Snippet: | The DOJ made the transcript of Chairman Gates’ testimony available. You can find it at: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/2051.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-06 10:30:37 |
Snippet: | Yes, it’s Halloween again. A Microsoft reperesentative in the Netherlands has made a responce to the release of the Halloween documents. A version with annotations by Eric S. Raymond can be found at http://www.opensource.org/halloween3.html . This seems to be a trial balloon since it does not come from headquarters, but it does have the typical Redmondian touches of Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt and emphasis on Intellectual Property rights. |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-06 17:43:01 |
Snippet: | An account of more trial shenanigans can be found at http://chicagotribune.com/business/businessnews/ws/item/0,1267,8297-8298-18076,00.html . Apparently, the Microsoft lawyer has so much arrogance and disregard that he continues along a line of questioning even after the judge has clearly told him to move on. |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-06 18:43:30 |
Snippet: | Remember that Microsoft sold SoftImage to Avid Technologies after converting it from an SGI company to an NT company? Part of the deal was that Microsoft had the right to take a 9+% share in Avid. Well, there is no lack of money and now Redmond owns 9.4% of Avid. Guess what, Avid is now releasing NT software. See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28465,00.html?st.ne.fd.mdh |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-07 00:01:33 |
Snippet: | This week Microsoft showed part of the deposit of Compaq’s Steven Decker. According to Mr. Tevanian’s testimony – referring again to the deposit of Apple’s Mr. Schiller - Mr. Decker took Mr. Schiller apart at a meeting between Apple and Compaq and remarked that Compaq was very careful about licensing any non-Microsoft software. The part of the Mr. Decker’s deposit You can read the annotated deposit at: http://main.billwatch.net/annotated/quicktime_compaq.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-08 15:08:00 |
Snippet: | Billwatch went off-line yesterday as the result of an error that also occurred some 40 days ago, and that I haven’t yet understood. I hope it will remain up for at least another 40 days now. -cjr |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-08 15:15:15 |
Snippet: | Jean-Louis Gass�e, CEO of Be, wrote an article in Lib�ration that Microsoft’s relationship with Apple might well turn up a lot of information in support of the DOJ. Well, perhaps Tevanian’s already explosive testimony is only the top of the ice-berg. Furthermore, Gass�e ponders the question of what to do with Microsoft if it loses the lawsuit. If you read French, you can find the article at: A lengthy discussion of the article can be found at: http://slashdot.org/features/98/11/08/006219.shtml |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-08 15:43:38 |
Snippet: | Microsoft has given their reaction to the Halloween documents at “http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/highlights/editorletter.asp”. One of the claims they make is “Microsoft recognizes that customers are not served by implementations that are different without adding value; we therefore support standards as the foundation on which further innovation can be based.” That would seem to be a denial of the accusation that they deliberately create incompatibilities with standards in an effort to gain market share and hence control of the relevant specification. But be careful! In the course of Sun’s suit claiming breach of contract where Microsoft is accused of deliberately breaking compatibility with the standard Java, a quote from none other than Bill Gates saying “Supporting JDK 1.1 is fine, but I am very hard core about not supporting JDK 1.2. I really need to understand where we’re going to draw the line because it’s a slippery slope. If you think we should support the JDK 1.2 that’s fine, but you will really have to explain why and where it stops.” comes out. The full story is at “http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2160952,00.html”. Even if this quote does not outright say that Microsoft intends to break the Java standard in their implementation, where is the added value in their implementation? It seems that it consists soley of tighter integration into Windows. Since this breaks Java’s cross-platform promise, this is a very questionable “added value” indeed. |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-09 03:01:48 |
Snippet: | The article doesn’t contain anything new, but it is still nice that an article published in the paper edition of a major newspaper understands the relevance of Microsoft’s strategy to replace open standards with proprietary technology. See: http://reports.guardian.co.uk/articles/1998/11/8/p-32026.html (Unfortunately, an article in the Boston Globe on the Halloween papers didn’t get it.) |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-09 11:38:17 |
Snippet: | WebCMO, “a site dedicated to web marketing research”, has published a “Linux survey report”. It seems to be a kind of counterpart of the propaganda technology that Microsoft uses. The report is titled “People who challenge Bill Gates”. Well, |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-09 12:10:25 |
Snippet: | Mark Hall has lost his trust in the words of Microsoft product managers. Right now they claim to seek co-existence with Unix, but once they made the same claim about the Mac. The recent DOJ exhibits show how Microsoft’s in-house strategy conflicted with its official statements. Hall fell for it once and doesn’t like the experience of having been fooled. See: http://www.performancecomputing.com/opinions/unixriot/981106.shtml |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-09 12:23:20 |
Snippet: | Over the months I have noted a very clear relationship between the introductions given to press releases at the main page of Microsoft’s “Press pass” and the articles themselves: In the introduction claims are made that do not return in the article. Today Why do they say In its article Microsoft does not relate Mr. Tevanian’s I Well, fight your way throught the “connection reset by peer” messages (as I did) and read for yourself: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-09 23:27:48 |
Snippet: | James Love wrote an excellent article in which he gives a historical perspective on the history of some of the items that Microsoft and its defenders often claim show that the present case is without merit. First, antitrust laws were always Second, Microsoft and Enjoy: http://www.mercurycenter.com/opinion/perspective/docs/antitrust08.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-10 01:49:33 |
Snippet: | Eric Lee Green explained “Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt” in the Microsoft vs Linux context. The article contains some FUD attacks on Microsoft even outside the examples, but is otherwise a good and up to date introduction to the topic. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-10 08:53:29 |
Snippet: | If someone criticizes Microsoft, this person described as either (1) a (whining) competitor, (2) tied to a (whining) competitor – (CPT’s James Love is a full cousin of Caldera’s CEO Ransom Love, Orrin Hatch represents a state in which a Microsoft competitor resides), (3) disgruntled, or (4) and pundit. Intel’s |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-10 09:09:50 |
Snippet: | The title “Why Microsoft must be stopped” indicates the perspective of Mr. Nader and Mr. Love when they discuss antitrust laws. Mr. Love commented in retrospect that “space was short and they cut out some remedies [from the article]“. See: http://www.computerworld.com/home/print.nsf/all/981109740E |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-10 23:50:51 |
Snippet: | Microsoft says the the government is not qualified to regulate the software industry, but in the story of Steven McGeady of Intel’s testimony (story at “http://chicagotribune.com/business/businessnews/ws/item/0,1267,8297-8298-18384,00.html”), it becomes clear that Microsoft is taking it upon itself to be a regulator of the software industry. McGeady says that Intel shelved its Native Signal Processing multimedia project due to pressure from Microsoft. Gates’ deposition does not contradict this, but merely gives his reasons for opposing Intel’s software. But who is Gates to judge what is “low quality” software? That should be a decision for the marketplace, not a self-appointed regulator in Redmond. |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-11 17:58:18 |
Snippet: | Although the Halloween papers merely represent the ideas of an “individual engineer” it seems clear that Microsoft is steering towards using the combination of patentable technology, their monopolistic market position to bring this to market, and the law to keep free software at bay. (Where was this vague claim that NT5 was held up because the technology was not yet both proprietary *and* protected by patents?) The issue is highly Anyway, open source protagonists sense the danger. You can read Bruce Perens’ idea on countering the danger in: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-11 20:36:06 |
Snippet: | Once an ISV that is competing with a product of Microsoft gets attention in the news, Microsoft seems to be more motivated to fix the bugs than through normal support channels. We A most excellent start is given by Robert di Cosmo. You can find his detailed account of Microsoft’s reply to Apple’s claims (http://msdn.microsoft.com/developer/news/quicktime.htm ) Incidentally, (I |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-11 21:11:39 |
Snippet: |
According to this post “http://lists.essential.org/am-info/msg06616.html” Read here “http://cnn.com/TECH/computing/9811/10/cracked-ms.idg/” |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-12 05:01:27 |
Snippet: | At one time in history knowledge was guarded by a single institution that had the monopoly on distributing and interpreting it. Hypotheses like Galileo’s were suppressed as it would undermine faith by showing new possibilities contradiction ancient dogma. No wonder that stagnation ruled the era. Much the But now a Agreed, |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-12 22:21:08 |
Snippet: | Salon Magazine explains about Microsoft’s non-monopoly claims. One is: the marginal cost of software is nearly zero and therefore giving away MSIE is no predatory pricing. Interesting theory: it abstracts from support and continuous innovation. Microsoft’s theory to evade claims of monopoly can be applied in traditional industries too: buy all material, transport and labor in advance so the cost is paid up, and then you can dump the product. Another item that is abstracted from is marketing. To a Clearly, Microsoft must jump through hoops to show that For an article, see: http://www.salonmagazine.com/21st/feature/1998/11/11feature.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-12 22:34:36 |
Snippet: | Microsoft’s main strategy in court against Intel’s McGeady seems to be to show that he has an ax to grind. This isn’t evidence, so what could be their intention? If the general idea is to defuse testimony’s by those having specific ties, this might well backfire when their own executives take the stand to give testimony. Well, aside from getting to know that it was McGeady |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-13 10:45:25 |
Snippet: | The DOJ hasn’t yet posted the testimony of Glenn Weadock (I forgot who that is), but Microsoft’s partial response is already on the Net. The testimony seems to be about the negative sides of browser integration. After the introduction “Consultant’s testimony reflects personal opinions, not statement of facts.” we find the customary “setting the record straight” phrase followed mostly by a marketing monologue. To quote the end of the “response”: “Windows 98 offers users great new features such as Microsoft is not taking the trouble to state http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/nov98/11-13weadock.htm Update: You can find Glenn Weadock’s testimony at: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/2056.htm. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-14 00:17:56 |
Snippet: | Secrecy has long been the cornerstone of Microsoft’s public appeal. For a very long time they worked very hard to keep the public uninformed about their actions. Business agreements are secret – with clients forced to talk to Microsoft before talking to the government; agreements are secret, such as the one on infringement of Apple patents and the one with AT&T that was no longer granted access to the Windows sources when Microsoft decided to go into the UNIX/NT interfacing business itself; the public was denied its lawful right to witness the deposits (Hmm, some weeks ago judges from a Court of Appeals came together on the matter, talked a little and didn’t decide on a date to convene again. Are they really trying to stall opening the deposits or have I missed something?) Due to For Those who were once dismissive have good reason to become more cautious. I As I said, I have no further information, but I I quoted the line from: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28792,00.html?st.ne.ni.lh (Please let me know if you find out more about this letter.) |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-14 23:10:43 |
Snippet: |
Besides the DOJ, Sun and Caldera Interestingly, What is also interesting is |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-15 03:12:35 |
Snippet: | The fragments of the deposit of Gates that related to Intel have been made available. Perhaps the continuous repetition that Microsoft told Intel not to make “low quality” software is considered a nice way out of the allegation that they told Intel to stop making competing software, but the testimony begs the question what basis Mr. Gates has to say that Intel’s products were of “low quality” (We can turn Microsoft’s own court questioning on the Chairman: did he experience this “low quality” himself or was this merely “hearsay”?). Another question that pops up is what right In Furthermore, the Chairman insisted that Intel should have consulted Microsoft before and while making software. All You can find the hardly readable photostats of the DOJ at: HTML with extracts (in English with a French translation in the margin) can be found at: http://www.liberation.fr/multi/actu/semaine981109/art981110.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-15 19:26:05 |
Snippet: | James Love wrote an article proposing three possible remedies for Microsoft’s abuse of its monopoly power. Microsoft’s attitude in the past and right now makes plain that non-drastic remedies will not work. The proposals are: 1. Break 2. Force 3. Make Microsoft See: http://www.techweb.com/se/directlink.cgi?CRN19981116S0215 |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-16 10:24:06 |
Snippet: | An article with the above title was written by Tom Nadeau and published at Boycott Microsoft.
The The article ends with a claim that I wholeheartedly support: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-16 10:41:13 |
Snippet: | Using some inscrutable naming scheme, the DOJ made the fragment of Gates’ deposit that was shown in court on Monday available as: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/gates3.pdf The Gates is following a very exasperating mode of non-communication. Come to think of it, it might be nice to create a compilation of Gates’ philosophical exercises in the courtroom. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-17 10:39:33 |
Snippet: | The media reported little on the testimony of Glenn Weadock. It seems that Microsoft’s basic defense consisted of:
1. 2. I have no access to court transcripts so I |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-17 22:53:49 |
Snippet: | As with Glenn Weadock’s testimony, Microsoft’s answer reached the Net before the DOJ managed to release the testimony on their site. As usual it is a bit difficult to wrestle through the marketeese adjectives in what is supposed to be the answer to a legal testimony, but you are encouraged to give it a try anyway. It seems that the testimony touches the following issues: Mostly, The “Catholic Church” IBM As for java, we Well, I guess that Mr. Soyrings testimony will appear within 24 hours at the DOJ. Microsoft’s answer is here: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/nov98/11-17soyring.htm Update: The testimony of John Soyring is now available at: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/2054.htm. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-17 23:36:35 |
Snippet: | As we must all know by rote, “integrating Windows with Internet Explorer benefits consumers and has stood a legal test in a July 1998 US Appeals court decision.” But Glenn Weadock started chipping away at that facade by outlining some of the drawbacks of the integration: increased support costs and increased hardware requirements for those who want to use a different browser. These drawbacks discourage people from using an alternative browser. In any case, there no choice for the Windows user – Internet Explorer must be dealt with at some level whether it is a desired component or not. IBM’s The bottom line is that IBM supported |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-18 01:37:49 |
Snippet: | Microsoft is either to comply with the java specifications or abandon it altogether.
“Such Given Microsoft’s See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28937,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-18 10:59:22 |
Snippet: | The court order gives a nice overview of the java lawsuit. Reading it I couldn’t help observing Microsoft’s double standards:
1. 2. Anyway, you can find the order re: Sun’s preliminary injunction at: http://java.sun.com/lawsuit/111798ruling.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-18 14:24:06 |
Snippet: | The written testimony of the DOJ’s economic witness, Frederick R. Warren-Boulton, is posted at
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/2079.htm In |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-19 06:31:56 |
Snippet: | Glenn Weadock’s testiomony refers to the deposits of John Kies, Scott Vesey (Boeing), and Jim von Holle. Excerpts of these deposits are now available at: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_excerpt.htm I wish the DOJ had also released the relevant excerpts of the depositions mentioned in Avadis Tevanian’s testimony. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-19 09:58:39 |
Snippet: | Some time ago I read Mr. Rick Rule’s article about “The Case Against Microsoft” by former federal judge Robert Bork. Unfortunately, the article didn’t refer to location where I could find what it agitated against. (I noticed that it is customary for Microsoft publications to go light on references.) Perhaps By accident, I found the real ProComp site this evening: They Ah, Incidentally, |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-20 01:38:30 |
Snippet: | Although the “Motley Fool” thinks that “MS Access” is the product that Microsoft positions to compete with Oracle, and is guilty of several other “inaccuracies”, it made some observations that are to the point, e.g. “In Microsoft’s case, Who calls |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-20 01:47:06 |
Snippet: | I haven’t posted much on the court sessions lately, mostly because nothing much is happening there. I noted some things that I want to comment on, but not enough to justify creating a link for. 1. Microsoft now accuses several other 2. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-20 02:12:48 |
Snippet: |
In today’s cross-examination of the http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2167128,00.html This Update: This account at http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,29058,00.html |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-20 04:44:20 |
Snippet: | After a lengthy investigation, Japan’s FTC concluded that Microsoft has engaged in unfair business practices through certain sales tactics and had violated the nation’s anti-monopoly laws. For this the company was issued a warning. The While on the one hand waiving the verdict of Additional See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/longterm/microsoft/stories/1998/microjapan112198.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-21 14:08:24 |
Snippet: |
Microsoft used Linux in court (see http://www.thestandard.com/articles/display/0,1449,2615,00.html?home.ff) |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-21 17:34:01 |
Snippet: | While Microsoft’s lawyers and PR machine tell us that Microsoft’s 95% marketshare is continuously threatened by throngs of fierce competitors, we find nothing of this in a memo from senior vice president Joachim Kempin to Chairman Bill Gates. This memo was written in December 1997 and concerns the thoughts on OEM pricing of the person within Microsoft who is ultimately responsible for OEM relations. The memo was CC’ed to Steve Ballmer, now president of Microsoft, and Paul Maritz, the senior vice president responsible for Windows. If the contents of this memo is disregarded as the “individual ideas” of someone within Microsoft, I doubt that any information within the company can ever be deemed strategical. What Mr. Kempin, responsible Whatever Microsoft tells in court and to the press today The memo is available as an exhibit at the DOJ’s site and you are very much encouraged to read it. See: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-21 20:24:57 |
Snippet: | Being the biggest political spender in the computer industry seems to pay off as congressmen are literally re-iterating Microsoft’s party-line when accusing the Justice Department of unjustifiably intruding in an unregulated market. While we have seen nothing of government regulation aside from the attempt to have Microsoft ship Netscape’s browser with Windows – something that shouldn’t harm Microsoft or benefit Netscape if we are to believe Microsoft’s own claims on ease of downloading, the technological superiority of MSIE’s integration, and their own total commitment to customer choice – congressmen parrot Microsoft in equating the present investigation with “heavy-handed regulation”. I don’t See: http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/msftdoj/TWB19981120S0016 |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-22 17:14:49 |
Snippet: | On the orders of present Microsoft president Steve Ballmer, Microsoft employees have charted Netscape’s revenues to be able to systematically “pencil” them “out” by contracts on the basis of predatory pricing. See the following memo in the government exhibits: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/exhibits/343.pdf |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-22 17:20:24 |
Snippet: | I greatly appreciate having access to the testimonies and exhibits at the DOJ’s site. Purely by accident I found that the court transcripts are also available, although at a rather unlikely place, namely ProComp: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-22 18:15:42 |
Snippet: | The following account and responses concern the way Microsoft’s FrontPage HTML editor mangles the incoming HTML to a Microsoft proprietary format: “Microsoft FrontPage Extensions”. I am not deeply impressed with the value of the Furthermore, it fits in the companies strategy of locking customers into proprietary formats. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-23 10:44:30 |
Snippet: | Last week the libertarian Cato Institute organized a conference on Technology and Society. Speakers were Milton Friedman (whom I greatly admire for his early work), Larry Ellison (Oracle), Eric Schmidt (Novell), Greg Maffei (Chief financial officer Microsoft), and Stan Liebowitz (Microsoft consultant). You can find the full schedule here: http://www.cato.org/events/technol2.html Milton |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-23 21:49:09 |
Snippet: | By giving away its browser at negative price and announcing that the browser would be wired into its operating system, Microsoft managed to annihilite the market for web browsers. Netscape Effectively, Netscape abandoned the web With rumors going around that AOL – that First Second, Microsoft’s Internet Explorer is not even So, You can read the statement of Microsoft’s senior vice president William Neukom at: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/11-23neukom.htm A C|Net article is at:http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,29149,00.html Update: On Steve Case’s announcement that AOL will renew its MSIE contract to keep their place on the Windows desktop, you can read: http://www.crn.com/dailies/weekending112798/nov24dig08.asp |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-24 02:08:35 |
Snippet: | “In software we don’t live in the world of yesterday or the day before, we live in the world of today.” - Michael Lacovara, Microsoft attorney. What Microsoft fights in Like any other radical political organization, For a less philosophical/political description of Microsoft’s wild claims in court (reflection on rant here see: CNet: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,29217,00.html ProComp: http://www.procompetition.org/xp/p-headlines/i-current/a-911943574/p_article.view |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-25 12:39:03 |
Snippet: |
Here is part of a Scott McNealy speech on how open standards and intellectual property rights can co-exist: http://www.cadence.com/features/vol3No3/mc_nealy In
Words of the wise indeed! |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-25 19:30:41 |
Snippet: | The article from which I plucked this quote doesn’t say anything new, but I wanted to refer to it as its aggressive wording surprised me given that it doesn’t come from a corner where Microsoft criticism is the rule. The article’s See: http://www.techweb.com/internet/columns/fwdthinking/fwdthinking.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-26 00:51:50 |
Snippet: | With all the coverage of the past few days focussed on the Netscape takeover, the cross-examination process has fallen into the background. And no wonder too with Microsoft dragging it out like they are; so far, it has taken 6 weeks for Microsoft to cross-examine half of the government’s witnesses. Here is an article with a report on how the cross-examination has been going lately: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2169272,00.html One |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-11-26 20:05:10 |
Snippet: | To find a little basis for my annotation exercise of Microsoft’s ridiculous (and universally acclaimed) press release concerning the AOL-Sun-Netscape deal, I went after the press releases of the individual companies. The See: http://www.sun.com/981124/aol/;$sessionid$421Y5PYADHGV1AMUVFZE4GUBSSUXEUDO Netscape’s See: http://www.netscape.com/newsref/pr/newsrelease707.html?cp=hom11prt1 As Incidentally, |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-26 22:56:26 |
Snippet: | Not being a regular – or even irregular - visitor of web portals (my “home” page is “blank”), I never worried much about sizes. Now that landmark slides are being claimed I was glad that James Coates provided some numbers: “The latest survey by By It seems to me that these shares are less out of balance than many markets within the software industry. For the decent article from which I picked the data (it was written before the buyout became official), see: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-27 01:08:11 |
Snippet: | According to an article in “The Recorder”, Rick Rule, Microsoft’s chief antitrust specialist, the government may well prod AOL to accept their option to renew the MSIE contract IN ORDER TO ASSIST IN THE PROSECUTION OF THE GOVERNMENT’S CASE. Of Microsoft claimed in |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-28 23:21:13 |
Snippet: | After the barrage of single-source articles on the merger (that is, being written exclusively on the basis Microsoft’s press release), I am most happy to find an article for which the opinion of third parties on the value of the merger for the case at hand has been checked. “Press” at last. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-29 19:39:29 |
Snippet: | After re-reading a flashback of “The Atlantic Monthly” on a 1881 article by Henry Demarest Loyd on Standard Oil’s monopoly, it seemed like a good idea to pay a little attention to it here. The article is not altogether accurate, but it sure See: http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/flashbks/monopoly.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-29 20:29:54 |
Snippet: | The media widely distributed excerpts from Microsoft’s press release “Microsoft says government should end antitrust lawsuit”.
Note The press release is at: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/ (I found no permanent location.) You can find the annotation here: http://main.billwatch.net/annotated/ms_onaolns.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-30 01:26:21 |
Snippet: | It was a revelation to find out why a complicated three-party deal was made in which AOL buys Netscape including the server software that Sun will subsequently license: for tax reasons this division couldn’t be sold to Sun outright. The following article provides some urgently needed background information on the deal: http://www5.mercurycenter.com/business/top/060057.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-11-30 01:48:25 |
Snippet: | More and more colleges force students to use Microsoft software exclusively. At one time – perhaps they still do – Microsoft rewarded professors $200 dollars if they advertised Microsoft tools in class. Given the content of computer courses, textbook writers seem to cash in as well. Where the soviet-union Anyway, read the comments from agitated student Josh: http://www.nls.net/mp/josh/Ms-At-Schl.html Update: For the occasion I dug up some old references.
|
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-01 00:19:44 |
Snippet: | The “big” news is supposed to be that an unnamed source within Microsoft tells that Microsoft is internally fully prepared to continue to the next court. Come now Charles, that’s what you folks at ZDNet said even *before* the trial started. Otherwise Aside See: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_rc_display/0,3443,2170387,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-01 10:11:00 |
Snippet: | James Grimaldi wrote an overview of the trial so far, pretty much as I see it.
The See: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/technology/html98/micr_113098.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-01 15:01:56 |
Snippet: | ProComp compiled a list with excerpts from headlines from articles and editorials from publications like The New York Times and BusinessWeek on the AOL-Netscape merger and the relevance for the present antitrust case. Perhaps ProComp made a See: http://www.procompetition.org/xp/p-headlines/i-current/a-912462425/p_article.view |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-01 19:06:44 |
Snippet: | Microsoft accuses the government of “lying with statistics”. The point is that the government claims, partly on the basis of information provided in a memo by Microsoft’s senior vice president of OEM sales Joachim Kempin, that the prices of Microsoft’s operating system have risen as a percentage of the cost of the hardware of computer systems. Microsoft spokesperson Mark I Incidentally, Read the C|Net article for the quote: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,29374,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-02 00:45:36 |
Snippet: |
The creator of the Java programming language, James Gosling, is the next witness and the story is here: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2170800,00.html ZDNet Update: Gosling’s written testimony is posted at http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/2049.htm. |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-12-02 05:21:09 |
Snippet: | I was very pleased to see (eh, only now) that Microsoft’s website offers some well-presented trial information.
You can find the trial transcripts (that can also be found at http://transcripts.procompetition.org/) at http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/transcripts/ They are available in HTML and – indeed – Word formats. The list of defense exhibits is at: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/exhibits/ You can find a feature article (right now on the |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-02 08:13:21 |
Snippet: | With internal emails being made public as exhibits and being read in court, the have gained a new status.
Microsoft’s press release on the AOL/Netscape merger (annotated here at http://main.billwatch.net/annotated/ms_onaolns.html) Unfortunately, I didn’t find the email itself, only a report on it: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,29415,00.html?st.ne.lh..ni |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-02 08:58:11 |
Snippet: | In a multi-page article, C|Net pays attention to Microsoft’s control and therefore exclusive knowledge of the win32 API. The matter is explained by referring to Netscape being blocked from access. Additional pages concern the influence of java and Linux on this basis of Microsoft’s power. Good reading. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-03 01:25:52 |
Snippet: | As is known to all school-children educated with Microsoft Encarta, Chairman Gates is well-known for his donations to charity.
Last See: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/12-2vaccine.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-03 01:52:13 |
Snippet: | You can find James Gosling’s testimony at: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/2049.htm Microsoft’s reply is at: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/dec98/12-1gosling.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-03 02:01:15 |
Snippet: | As you might have read in an earlier posting, Microsoft spokesperson Mark Murray accused the government of having been “lying with statistics”. Microsoft now supports Murray’s accusation with a press release: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/ (wish they used full paths), thereby making it official. On the basis of the reasons given in http://main.billwatch.net/annotated/price_critics.html we can now say that by Microsoft’s own standards they have been “lying with statistics”. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-03 02:20:03 |
Snippet: | Perhaps I should visit them more regularly as BusinessWeek has some decent articles on the Microsoft matter lined up.
You can find that list of article “updates” at: http://www.businessweek.com/microsoft/updates.htm Their general coverage is at: http://www.businessweek.com/microsoft/cotv.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-03 04:05:28 |
Snippet: | How mean can people be? Mary Jo writes in “Lessons to be learned from Linux” (http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/column/0,4712,2171286,00.html)
“I And in “Microsoft as David? AOL as Goliath? Not exactly” (http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/column/0,4712,2168404,00.html) she writes: “These When AOL attempts to renegotiate its license for And in “How the mighty have fallen” (http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/column/0,4712,2166811,00.html) we read: “The Perhaps Ms Foley belongs to the latter category. Clarification: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-03 23:54:39 |
Snippet: | In this account of Thursday’s court session:
http://chicagotribune.com/business/businessnews/ws/item/0,1267,8297-8298-19621,00.html we Based |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-12-05 02:38:48 |
Snippet: | It’s fair enough to drop out, but its pretty bad to do so without consideration for the reasons why the state of South Carolina entered it in the first place. Instead, State Attorney General Charles Condon merely re-iterated Microsoft’s press releases on the matter: “Recent events have proven that the Internet is a segment of our economy where innovation is thriving.” Please, “Further government intervention or regulation is unnecessary and, in my judgment, unwise.” Further? Please, tell me what “interventor or regulation” has been taken place so far? Condon Could someone explain to Mr. Condon that the point |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-07 23:14:43 |
Snippet: | After accusing the government last week of “lying with statistics”, this weeks’ slogan from Redmond is that the government is “really out to destroy Microsoft”. Note first of Microsoft’s Another issue in propaganda is simplicity. As a well-known but little respected German statesman put it: Another advice to the propagandist, this time by Walter Lippmann in 1921, is: Following these different advices, For less angry words, see: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,29621,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-08 01:05:19 |
Snippet: | ProComp compiled a table with Microsoft’s revenues per PC from 1990 to 1996 on the basis of internal Microsoft material that has now become public. It looks like they managed to drive up prices well. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-08 01:37:00 |
Snippet: |
David Farber’s testimony is posted at the DOJ’s Web site here (http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/2059.htm) and ZDNN’s Mary Jo Foley writes up a piece on it here (http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2173052,00.html). I quote the following paragraph from Farber’s testimony since it really cuts to the heart of the bundling/integration issue:
Even |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-12-08 06:42:45 |
Snippet: | Here are some excerpts from Will Rodger’s: “Gates: Boies out to destroy Microsoft” (http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2172885,00.html)
Here is the complaint: “The And here Will Rodger’s observation that shows that Microsoft is doing more PR work than the government:
Mr. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-08 10:47:29 |
Snippet: | Looking over the news items I found that Microsoft claims by mouth of its lead attorney John Warden that the government’s “real focus seems to be an attempt to influence public opinion against Microsoft”, while Mr. Gates claims that the government, or at least Mr. Boies, is “really out to destroy Microsoft”. There Interestingly, “regulation” is suddenly orphaned. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-09 03:43:23 |
Snippet: | South Carolina dropping the lawsuit of the 20 states against Microsoft with a justification that could have been cut and pasted from Microsoft press releases has renewed the interest in Microsoft’s political spending. ProComp published “Who got the Microsoft money?” (http://www.procompetition.org/xp/p-headlines/i-current/a-913161376/p_article.view) |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-09 03:54:52 |
Snippet: | Microsoft has stated that: Mr Farber’s suggestion that OEMs should decide which components of Windows they deliver to customers would be a disaster for consumers and software developers. Wouldn’t it be a disaster too, to have OEMs buy See Microsoft’s reaction on David Farber’s testimony: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-09 09:56:45 |
Snippet: | It is slightly troubling for Microsoft that in their 1997 “Computer Dictionary” they defined a web browser as a “client application” and that MSIE is an example of such a web browser. Apparently, all this talk of the browser really being part of Windows since 1994 didn’t quite make it outside a very select group in that organization. Another painful item is that Microsoft’s The If you have an FM |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-10 01:50:41 |
Snippet: | Microsoft’s “reasoning” in court and before the public has long rested in an important degree on analogies. Instead of giving structural arguments, they bring up another subject matter and tell us that we really should be discussing that and subsequently match the conclusion on the Windows/MSIE bundling. Clearly, When confronted with Mr. Mr. Farber has reasoned against the value of integration Similarly, Mr. Farber is attacked because he Microsoft is at war with reason. They seek to substitute it with authority, that is, their authority. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-10 10:46:22 |
Snippet: | In the “independent” media we frequently encounter quotes from Microsoft spokespersons and once in a while from someone from the DOJ, and very seldom from a third party independent specialist. The reason for this distribution of quotes is simple: quantity. Microsoft’s spokespersons hold press conferences on the stairs of the court building twice a day on every day the court convenes. Regulary, someone, mostly David Boies, from the DOJ appears at the same location, but certainly not twice a day. Something Aside from this, Microsoft’s advertisements in national newspapers have become a regular feature. The And yet, I wrote this on the basis of my own regular visits at http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/ and http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial and the following article: |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-11 01:56:25 |
Snippet: | From where I am, campaign contributions by *companies* look pretty much like bribes to me. Perhaps I simply lack understanding. For your information “Microsoft cash flows into campaign chests”: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/technology/html98/dona_121098.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-11 02:00:32 |
Snippet: | There is a difference between a Microsoft executive mentioning to the Chairman that they should “piss on” the graphical component of Sun’s java, and having Marc Andreessen write to Sun “Let’s nail the bastards”, referring to Microsoft, or having one Sun executive writes to another: “No agreement with Netscape is worth the ink it’s printed with. Go sign a deal with Saddam Hussein. It has a better chance of being honored.” Words are worth On The For sources see: http://www.businessweek.com/microsoft/updates/up81209a.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-11 02:42:06 |
Snippet: | Following the link below you can read Microsoft’s letter to Compaq in which they elaborated on their earlier “Notice of Intent to Terminate” the Windows license. Microsoft threatened to revoke the license to Compaq if the latter company didn’t obey Microsoft’s demand that Microsoft’s Internet Explorer, the link to Micro-Soft Network, and the Internet Setup Wizard must be placed on the desktop and even given preferential treatment. The latter consists of not merely making them Windows95 “shortcuts” that customers can easily remove, but really grafting them on the desktop. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-12 11:52:49 |
Snippet: | You can find the 49 page testimony of Princeton computer scientist Dr. Edward Felten here: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2000/2060.htm
As It is noteworthy that – contrary to the previous responses – this one does not contain derigatory remarks on the witness. As Like The Government appears to envision a world in which any Why would Compare Microsoft’s present statements on |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-12 16:17:59 |
Snippet: | Microsoft’s exhibits consist for a large degree of articles in trade rags, e.g. to – given java’s speedy development – ancient reviews of JVM’s, and marketing material, such as pages from Apple’s website. The DOJ’s evidence, on the other It seems to me that the DOJ is on the Only with respect to java, did To return to the title of this item, |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-13 05:18:48 |
Snippet: | The information on Microsoft’s lawsuits against C|Net writer Dan Goodin, Caldera for allegedly leaking sealed documents, and two professors for having tapes with testimonies of Netscape executives that Microsoft wants to have, was all featured here at the time. Note that Microsoft sues Caldera for leaking documents that were used in Wendy Rohm’s “The secret Microsoft file” while at the same time claiming that this is a work of “fiction”. Wendy Goldman Rohm presented the big picture in a most readable article published at Mercury News and Boycott Microsoft: http://www.vcnet.com/bms/features/rohm.shtml |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-13 16:50:52 |
Snippet: | Once more, Microsoft has grabbed the release of a beta product as an opportunity to discredit their competition. Earlier they generated an error message in Windows 3.1 when DR-DOS was used as underlying operating system. This time, You can find the full complaint here: http://www.bluemountain.com/home/bluemountain_vs_Microsoft.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-13 20:54:36 |
Snippet: | For once, Microsoft had to find in court that the construction of analogies can be done in various ways, not necessarily positive to them. Mr. Felten compared MSIE with a “screwdriver”. It might well be useful, but that is insufficient reason to glue it to one’s hand. Felten wrote a program to disentangle The MSIE-less version of Windows98 that Felten created See Will Rodger’s: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2175958,00.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-15 10:03:19 |
Snippet: | After their long fight to obtain the original interview tapes and transcripts from academic authors David Yoffee and Michael Cusumano, an Appeals Court denied Microsoft access to these resources. This is quite relevant as it supports the |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-16 04:32:02 |
Snippet: | Goldtouch alleges that it to have Microsoft license its ergonomic mouse design. A year later Microsoft brought out its “own” ergonomic mouse, closely resembling that of Goldtouch, thereby allegedly infringing Goldtouch’s (pending) patent. You can read GoldTouch’s press release – including pictures of the respective mice – here: http://www.goldtouch.com/media/rel121598.htm The original complaint is here: http://www.goldtouch.com/media/complaint.htm At |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-16 14:19:50 |
Snippet: |
Here is a brief article on the upcoming Microsoft anti-trust trial testimony of an Intuit executive: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,29982,00.html Enforcing Update: A more complete account of the Intuit testimony with references to DOJ exhibits can be found here. |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-12-16 17:09:25 |
Snippet: | Not be be confused with Mitch Stone’s “Boycott Micro$oft” site, Matt Welsh recently set up a “Boycott Microsoft” site in his home directory at UCB. Emphasis of the If |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-17 01:51:40 |
Snippet: | Microsoft held out pretty long in not accepting the tcp/ip networking protocol of the Internet. When the Internet took off without them, they were simply forced to follow. Such Java cannot For this reason, to use their The destruction of any form of See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,30023,00.html?st.ne.lh..ni |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-17 10:11:38 |
Snippet: | Apparently, Microsoft got a break from Judge Jackson when he allowed their attorneys access to confidential information the DOJ has on the AOL-Netscape deal. In reality, the judge is only being fair. I am somewhat curious about what may come of this, but I am also certain that if we hear no more about it, then there is no substance to Microsoft’s assertion that this deal “proves there is vigorous competition in the software industry.” Otherwise, Microsoft will surely trumpet its findings loudly. Apart from fairness and Story of the judge’s ruling is here: http://chicagotribune.com/business/businessnews/ws/item/0,1267,8297-8298-20272,00.html |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-12-17 16:56:51 |
Snippet: | I found it an interesting idea that Intuit might have agreed to sell out to Microsoft in 1994 because it feared that Microsoft might bundle an alternative product with Windows. This was expected to do to Intuit what we have now seen happening to Netscape. See: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,29982,00.html?st.ne.ni.rel |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-18 22:15:21 |
Snippet: | While all bugs would be harmful for those producing them in a market situation with many competing vendors, they can serve as a powerful deterrent to market entry in the hands of a monopolist. Microsoft’s knowledge monopoly over Windows makes Due to Microsoft’s monopoly, For this reason it is appropriate to call selective |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-18 22:58:03 |
Snippet: | Who can better speak on the topic of browser integration than the person responsible for Internet technology at Microsoft at the time? Philip Barrett testified that no work got underway on the integration of the browser in the period between april 1994 and september 1994, after which he left. The excerpts of A media packaged account of the testimony can be found at: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/technology/html98/micr_121798.html |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-18 23:44:47 |
Snippet: | Did you believe Microsoft when it told you that they are going to comply within the demanded 90 days with the injunction resulting from the java lawsuit? Foolish. It is to |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-19 12:09:39 |
Snippet: | You thought it could help to write letters to the DOJ and to Microsoft? So far 2,286 messages have been received by the DOJ and ten times as many by Microsoft. The letters to the DOJ are in support of its action almost 3 to 1, while those to Microsoft are 75% positive for the company (hey, that’s also a rate of 3 to 1). Note that the DOJ had to make the emails it received Thus the DOJ is in no position to diminish the value of negative letters they receive. Things Not only does Microsoft |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-19 12:35:19 |
Snippet: | What political interest has Encyclopaedia Brittanica? Perhaps its editors have personal preferences and most likely they also want to prevent too much divergence with prevalent opinion. But otherwise, the answer to the question is “None”. This Microsoft’s Whereas It strikes me as Well, perhaps you’ll enjoy Karlin Lillington’s article published in Salon Magazine better than my hasty editorial. See: http://www.salonmagazine.com/21st/ |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-19 14:17:37 |
Snippet: | Visitors of ZDNet and MSNBC “talk-back” sections of articles on Microsoft’s monopoly might well have come across one or more comments of Lewis A. Mettler, Esq. You can find his website on the Microsoft matter at: http://www.lamlaw.com/ It seems to me that his editorials much resemble those that you find at Billwatch. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-20 21:36:46 |
Snippet: | Just some thoughts on reading an article here.
Did Another item of thought is that Microsoft You can get a belly-full at: http://spyglass1.sjmercury.com/breaking/docs/000384.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-20 22:47:29 |
Snippet: | Although Mr. Oliver doesn’t tell us anything new, I appreciate hearing the arguments coming from a person with a certain stature. See: http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/355/oped/No_monopoly_for_Microsoft+.shtml |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-22 01:43:06 |
Snippet: |
Microsoft does not possess monopoly Details are here: |
By: | Roy Bixler |
Date: | 1998-12-22 06:02:38 |
Snippet: | “Judge Robert Baines of Santa Clara County Superior Court ordered the software giant to work with Blue Mountain Arts so its electronic greeting cards pass through spam filters found in Microsoft’s new Internet Explorer browser. The filters, which must be switched on, are intended to block junk email.” Indeed |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-22 10:56:57 |
Snippet: | Microsoft’s statistical mis-representation of prices of operating systems was discussed here earlier in http://main.billwatch.net/annotated/price_critics.html
One Be Product Marketing Manager Michael Alderete finds fault and responds: http://lists.essential.org/am-info/msg07416.html Is this how Microsoft “sets the record straight”? Another dent in their credibility. |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-23 01:04:51 |
Snippet: | This article pretty much sums up what Microsoft is all about nowadays: http://www.fool.com/portfolios/rulemaker/1998/rulemaker981221.htm |
By: | Case Roole |
Date: | 1998-12-23 11:07:47 |
Also see: