> No, they *forced* their competitor to leave a product behind. In fair > practice, IBM would have been forced to leave their product behind because > of market pressure by consumers, not by pressure from Microsoft. If OS/2 was marketable enough of a product... it wouln't have had to be dumpted... however Microsoft's marketing unfortunatly won... I'm surprised your being so defensive of IBM... if any company could be acused of being strong armed against compeditors.. IBM would be it.. look up FUD in the jargon file and be amused :)... they tell people 'you can use that mathmatical formula because we own the patent.. unless you pay us.. or you give us rights to your patents" bahhh... ************ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Caitlyn Martin
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling curious
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Deirdre Saoirse
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Vinnie Surmonde
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling curious
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Deirdre Saoirse
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Vinnie Surmonde
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling curious
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Vinnie Surmonde
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Cat
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling curious
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Vinnie Surmonde
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling curious
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Vinnie Surmonde
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Cat
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Caitlyn Martin
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Di Gregory
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling curious
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Di Gregory
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling curious
- Re: [issues] MS/DOJ ruling Di Gregory