Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Why Microsoft's Copy-Killing Has Reached a Dead End.

____/ nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on Monday 17 December 2007 18:09 : \____

> On Dec 16, 4:53 pm, "Martha Adams" <mh...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> <ness...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>
>> news:f11fbd60-81ec-462b-b641-00ba224a0587@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >> Just another limp lamer with a tortured interpretation of events and
>> >> a
>> >> thesis that Microsoft stole the cheese out of the community rat trap
>> >> and
>> >> owes it success to nothing more than being a poor sport.  One wonders
>> >> why
>> >> others have had such limited success, though.
>>
>> > <Quote>
>> > By the end of the 90s, reality reigned in on Microsoft and it began
>> > racking up a series of settlement obligations it was forced to pay to
>> > other victims of its copy-killing efforts and related anti-trust
>> > actions:
>>
>> >    * Microsoft paid Caldera $275 million for its antitrust actions
>> > against DR-DOS.
>> >    * Microsoft recently settled with IBM in an antitrust suit
>> > involving OS/2 and IBM's Lotus SmartSuite applications to the tune of
>> > $775 million.
>> >    * Microsoft paid Novell $539 million to settle its antitrust suit
>> > over the NetWare operating system, and Microsoft is still being sued
>> > by Novell over claims related to WordPerfect.
>> >    * Microsoft paid Palm over $23 million to settle an antitrust suit
>> > over the unfinished BeOS.
>> >    * Microsoft settled with Sun in an agreement that included $700
>> > million in antitrust and $900 million in patent infringements, both
>> > related to Java.
>> >    * Microsoft paid AOL $750 million to settle the antitrust suit
>> > over Netscape.
>> > </Quote>
>>
>> > Just which part of this is a "tortured interpretation of events?"
>>
>> These numbers are very interesting, especially when you add them up
>> and ask, "Is this *really* a cost of doing business?"  They say it in
>> Washington and it seems to apply here, too:  "A few billion here, a
>> few billion there, after a while it begins to add up to real money."
>>
>> I wonder if Microsoft is fated to crash when the new Administration
>> comes in?
>>
>> Cheers -- Martha Adams    [cola 2007 Dec 16]
> 
> It certainly looks like Gates-Microsoft just regard this as the cost
> of doing business.  I think the EU fines and other threats are
> crossing the pain threshold, however.
> 
> You can't detach antimonopoly action by government from political
> considerations, and certainly the Bush administration has been
> extremely friendly to all types of business (most of whom are big
> contributors).  So a change in Washington could mean a change for
> Microsoft.  Whether it would be enough of a change to bring a return
> of the Jackson-style proceedings, personally I doubt.    Big money
> counts for too much in Washington, and I don't see much change in that
> unless we have a new Depression.

That's just why change is the States is likely to come (almost) last. What
happens in Holland at the moment--if you look closely enough--is akin to a
revolt.

-- 
                ~~ Best of wishes

Maths applied to numbers is like logic applied to statistics. Statistics are
lies.
http://Schestowitz.com  |  RHAT GNU/Linux   |     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
         run-level 2  2007-12-10 11:12                   last=
      http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index