Go Carol. I'm with you. This Microsoft thing makes Carnegie etc. look
like pikers.
John
>At 11:48 AM 2/11/98 +0000, Scott Gardner wrote:
>
>>No LBC content here, but this is the biggest group of intelligent,
>>insightful and opinionated people I can reach on a short notice, and
>>I need to bounce something off of y'all.
>
>WATCH IT!! You just hit the hot button!! ;-)
> (The smile is for you, Scott, not for Micros**t)
>
>
>> If you haven't been following the story,
>
>Oh.... I've been following it allright! That judge is my hero! Long may he
>wave!
>
>>the government has accused
>>Microsoft of unfair business practices by "bundling" their new
>>Internet Explorer 4.0 web browser with Windows 98. The claim is that
>>the web browser is NOT an integral part of the operating system, but
>>rather is an application program, and that by making it difficult for
>>the end user to uninstall IE 4.0, that this will hurt companies such
>>as Netscape that make a living selling web browsers, since most users
>>will just blindly go with the Microsoft web browser that comes with
>>the operating system.
>
>We've already gone "blindly" into windows and it will be the death of us
>all. [MY REALISTIC OPINION!] It's time we take off the blinders....
>
>> My question is, how does this differ from auto makers putting radios
>>in new cars?
>
>There are enough car manufacturers out there that Motorola or RCA or
>Pioneer or whomever can bid on providing radios to the various
>manufacturers. If they thought they were being shut out, there would be
>suits, believe you me!
>
>> No one could argue that a stereo is essential or
>>integral to the operation of an automobile. While some car companies
>
>--snip--
>
>> There are many car audio companies that would presumably make more
>>money if new cars didn't come with radios already equipped, so why
>>haven't they cried foul yet?
>
>Because they're making money. Probably by replacing the factory stuff. More
>expensive to redo than do right. Remember??! ;-)
>
>>While car owners CAN remove the
>>factory radio and replace it with an aftermarket radio, this is very
>>difficult on some cars due to switch location/integrated dashboards,
>>etc., and many owners are just going to stick with the radio that
>>came with the car, since it's already there.
>> I'm sure there are other products and companies that have similar
>>practices, but this was the first one that popped to mind. Any
>>opinions?
>
>The difference is you CAN purchase another make of car, one that has
>different options. There would be tradeoffs, like there would be with
>different operating systems. In reality, Micros**t has the operating
>system sewed up. (Let's don't go to the "you can get OS2 or use MacIintosh"
>dicsussion... it doesn't wash!): There is only one make and one model. Like
>it or lump it. YOu can have red, blue, black, white, or brown. No pink or
>green or red/white, etc. Why? Because MS said so? You think you can have it
>repainted?? Try it. The car will never run again.
>
>And if I disconnect the power to the radio in the car, the car will still
>run. And run fine. With Internet Explorer the code was such that you cannot
>even delete the cr*p from your desktop, much less recover wasted space on
>your hard drive.
>
>Yes, I'm a bit rabid on the subject. Micros**t cost me a lot of time and
>more money than necessary when I lost my hard drive on December 13. My
>system is STILL not up to snuff. It woud take days to write what all has
>transpired since that time. New CD because MS W95 wouldln't support the
>TEAC I had with the full version of W95. Sort of like you can't take beer
>and wine in the new car you just bought because you didn't pay MS taxes on
>it.
>
>To the gurus out there... don't bother trying to encourage me about
>Micros**t tactics. I was here fighting the problem. You didn't see it! It
>WAS/IS beyond description. The local experts agree! What happened on my
>system should not have happened. But then, I don't use my system in a
>"normal" way. I'm always trying something new and different... not fiddling
>with settings, but using new software. End of that part of the discussion...
>
>And look at the major software players that are G-O-N-E from the software
>scene. They have either disappeared or joined forces with other endangered
>species. Any company that didn't conform to the way MS said it must conform
>became a target of anhilation by MS. Borland?? WordPerfect joined with
>Lotus (I think), then Corel bought WordPerfect. Parsons. HyperAccess caved
>in and became the dialer for Windoze. Matt Grey had the choice of taking
>the money NOW or getting squashed. When you have the financial resources
>that MS has, you can afford to basically give away software to the point
>that you bring the competition to its knees and force it out of business,
>or at least destroy its viability as a competitor.
>
>Lessee here, Scott... how many opinions are allowed for each poster...?!
>
>Carol
|