> > I'm actualy worried about what restrictions may be placed on microsoft..
> > computer technology is still a very new field..
>
> It's been around since the 1930s actually. PCs are now 18 years old, too.
It feels new to me though even though I've been using computers since the
atari800 :)
>
> > placing restrictions on it
> > now is a bad thing..
>
> Actually, what innovate new technologies is Microsoft coming up with,
> honestly?
They came up with an operating system that would run on intel based
hardware... that people would want to run the applications they also
wanted to run.
> Also, I suspect it's their illegal business practices that will
> be restricted, not their ability to develop new technologies and market
> them.
what practice do you consider to be illeagle that they commited?
>
> > and could potentialy harm future advancements if
> > companys are affraid to go into certain areas or to become too
> > sucessful....
>
> Microsoft isn't being attacked for being successful. They are being
> attacked for using illegal tactics to destroy their competition, like
> writing contracts that forced hardware manufacturers to pay for Microsoft
> licenses regardless of whether or not they put *any* MS products on the
> computers in question, and using their monopoly power to make it impossible
> for any company that did not agree to stay in business.
Microsoft didn't "force" the vendors to agree to this.. the hardware
venders did this so they could get cheaper pricing...
Companies that don't agree with microsoft have managed to stay in
busniess.. look at sun, redhat, corel, be, etc...
> >
> > I don't think microsoft should be punnished for being a sucessful
> > company... even if it blow up a few compeditors...
>
> There are laws about how you can compete. Microsoft fragrantly violates
> them left and right.
What do those laws actualy do though?
>
> > >
> > > Also, as a former OS/2 loyalist, considering what Microsoft did to my
> former
> > > favorite OS, and *how* they did it, this doesn't bother me at all. It
> can't
> > > be hurting Caldera's case either, can it?
> >
> > I'm confused.. what did microsoft DO to OS/2?
>
> Microsoft refused to license Windows '95 (or future versions of NT) to IBM
> unless IBM withdrew OS/2 from the market.
Ok so microsoft has a technology they baught/copied/developed however you
want to lable it.. and they wanted more people to use thier product as
apposed to IBM's product... so they ask thier competitor to leave a
product behind... ok...
> IBM refused, and at the last
> hour, under pressure from their PC Company division, agreed to a compromise:
> they would no longer market OS/2. At the time Warp version 3 was making
> *major* gains, and had sold about 10 million retail copies. IBM already had
> a preload agreement with Tandy (which they had to pull out of), and was
> negotiating them with other manufacturers. However, they were not willing
> to risk not being able to offer Windows.
So... IBM, wanting to beable to use a MS licensed product gave up on one
of thier own products...
I fail to see what wrong was done here.. these sorts of deals get made all
the time.. in many diffrent industries... known as "I'll scratch your back
if you scratch mine"
> I don't believe in letting unscrupulous companies milk the consumer.
I belive alot of what microsoft does is harmful to consumers.. and
potientialy harmful to the future of computing.. but it's not nearly as
bad as how scewed up things could get if the government starts getting
involved. I would prefer an "unscrupulous company" milk me then an
organization like the US government which has the power to lock me up to
milk me...
> I *do*
> believe government intervention is necessary in this case.
What exactly do you want the government to do?
>
> > regulations tend to backfire... making the percived problems worse....
>
> Really? Would you like to go back to the days of the robber barons and
> monopolies before current anti-trust laws were enacted?
Ahh yes the evil train people... I'm SOOO glad that in america we have
enforced passenger railroad compitition... I'm so glad that If I decided
that Amtrack was doing a horrible job I could compete with them.. or
heck.. if I wanted to start a mail system to compete with the us postal
system.. ahhh yes... I'm soo glad we have these laws..
> Read a little
> history on the subject. The laws exist for good reason.
I would agree that alot of the laws were written with the best of
intentions.. others were written in the intrest of certain other
oganizations/corperations.. look into alot of those laws that were written
and what they accomplised... you might be quite surprised...
> The only question
> that remains is *which* laws Microsoft violated, and how they should be
> punished for violating them.
What are your views on these two matters?
> Microsoft will not be put out of business, and
> with competition they will be forced to bring higher quality products to
> market.
I agree microsoft will not be put out of business.. infact I'm quite sure
whatever measures are enacted.. they will at somepoint intime backfire...
>
> Just my .02
/me adds .02 more cents to the pot
>
> -Caity
>
>
> ************
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
>
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
