__/ [ mike ] on Friday 02 March 2007 05:34 \__
>> "Doug Mentohl" <doug_mentohl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:es764l$nga$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>- Original Message -
>>
>> I don't believe that anyone could dispute the wisdom shown here!
>>
>>>
>>> From: Ben Slivka
>>> Sent: Wednesday, November01, 1995 7:38 PM
>>> To: Ben Slivka's internet Client Team (Xerox DL)
>>> Subject: Getting to 30% Share Memo
>>>
>>> Here is final copy of the memo we sent to BillG for think week about what
>>> we should do to get 30% browser share. Pls do not distribute broadly.
>>>
>>> ..
>>>
>>> 2. Clone and Supernet Netscape. PSD needs to get serious about cloning
>>> Netscape. We must have a plan to clone all the features they have today,
>>> plus new ones they will add between now and our next release. We have to
>>> make this our only top priority and put our top people on the job. In
>>> addition to our planned Win32.OLE work, we have to get serious about
>>> extending and owning HTLM as a format ..
>>>
>>> ..
>>>
>>> Shell Integration. The Internet is a part of Windows. We will bind the
>>> shell to the Internet Explorer so that running any other browser is a
>>> jolting experience. Shell/Browser user model becomes the same.
>>>
>
> what microsoft did to netscape is a classic case of antitrust violation,
> to say otherwise is to show a lack of understanding of what happened. the
> result is not so much a statement about microsoft as it is about the
> government's failure to enforce basic antitrust law. to understand
> why this occurred one need not look at technology issues but instead study
> how large corporations use their profits to influence the gov't through
> various methods such as lobbying, campaign contributions and a vast
> propaganda campaign espousing the merits of their monopoly-centric agenda.
> upon conducting such a study, one finds that the regulatory component of
> the gov't has been compromised by corporate interest to the point that it
> is often, as in this particular case, rendered completely useless. in the
> end, it had nothing to do with product quality or consumer benefit but who
> had the overwhelming clout in terms of political influence. note that the
> money that pays for all the influence comes from ill-gotten (antitrust
> violating) gains hence the reason microsoft continues to view its endless
> antitrust settlements as "business expenses".
Have a look at this good article which I've just found.
Free-market predators vs. well-meaning reformers
,----[ Quote ]
| The computer business is a prime example of the cut-throat competition
| that American history books and reformers warn us against.
|
| Predatory companies like Microsoft, Intel, AOL and Apple relentlessly
| pursue bigger and bigger markets with no thought of the consequences
| -- concerned only to fatten the bottom line. There is no special
| government regulation controlling computer hardware or software, so
| computer companies can do pretty much anything they want.
|
| At the same time, areas like health care and education are
| rigorously controlled by government. Government operates most
| of our education system and it sets the rules for health care...
`----
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=24068
--
~~ Best wishes
http://youtube.com/watch?v=bYsxaMyFV2Y http://youtube.com/watch?v=QNb7gPA1JFk
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 132 total, 1 running, 127 sleeping, 0 stopped, 4 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
