Microsoft lost the case.

[seti]

The verdict is in....Bill Gates is a bad guy.

[drdeath]

yeah - just read a story bout it http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/story/story_4031.html

[chipbgt]

breaking up microsoft? Stupid idea. what happens then when Intel or Dell or ANY company takes over the top role? are we gonna say " No No, you cant do that.." Microsoft is not a monopoly. We have Linux, Macintosh, BEos....which are ALL better Os's from a technical standpoint.

This is Just stupid.

but thats my opinion.

[goldboyd]

Thats exactly the point, chipbgt. There are many better os's out there, but ms is stiffleing their growth. I'm a big linux fan, i run it on one of my machines, but for my main machine, i run win2k, just for compatability reasons, 99% of the programs out there are for windows only.

[drdeath]

i dont think breaking them up is a good idea, either....

hope noone here had a whole lot of stock in MS! I guess its getting hammered in aftermarket trading! I guess Bill will only be worth 75 billion now... maybe we should start a collection for him....

[chipbgt]

Im sure if these companies can make better Os's they can just as easily make better apps...who says that microsofts are better?

[seti]

Correct me if I'm wrong....The anti-trust case wasn't about OS's. It was about browsers.

[chipbgt]

details, details.... /forum/smile.gif

[Ed_S]

drdeath - THANKS!
I hadn't even thought about the stock price angle, might be a great time to buy! /forum/biggrin.gif /forum/biggrin.gif

seti - Browser is the main issue, as I understand it. And MS is just flat-out wrong on this one. Integrating IE into the OS attempts to take away our freedom of choice. I personally prefer Netscape and do not want IE on my system. Yes, it can be done away with, but why can't that be done in setup?
Another point about this that I've seldom heard mentioned - not all machines are online, so why load any browser? Like many here, I own several machines. One is modem equipped. Why should space be wasted loading software the machine is mechanically unable to use? Just ridiculous!!

[800XL]

Sell Microsoft stock and buy AOL. AOL is positioned fairly well to make some big moves. (Scary as that may seem.)

I somehow doubt Microsoft will be broken up. Bell and Standard Oil (the two classic monopoly lawsuit losers) had very geographically oriented businesses so clear lines could be drawn to cut them up. Microsoft is not so easily sliced up. The only way to do it would be by product type, Office Co., Win2k/NT Inc, 9x ltd, and etc. The likely hood of the individual parts being viable is not high enough to favor a breakup. More likely would be a serious financial censure of some kind.

[drdeath]

personally, i dont see what the big deal is. MS made an OS, and a great majority of the PC population uses it. I dont see why MS cant do anything to it that they want - i mean, its their product. no one would complain if ford would start making stereos and installing them in their cars because "its not fair to other stereo manufacturers" (i know thats not a real senerio - im just making a point). i just dont understand why its such a big deal - why dont they have the freedom to do whatever they want with their own product?

[Swarozyc]

Er, maybe this will answer a few questions for you: http://usvms.gpo.gov/
What I want to say is :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
Good to see that the justice system does not sit in M$ pocket yet. Though, nothig is final because "Microsoft general counsel William Neukom indicated that the company was looking ahead to a lengthy appeals court fight," and "there's good reason for Microsoft to expect a more favorable -- its lawyers might say fairer -- hearing from a three-judge appeals court panel. Court watchers say the odds are that it will be a panel that's much more favorable to MS than Jackson has been. An earlier panel most certainly was. In June 1998, a trio of appeals judges unceremoniously overturned Jackson's initial ruling against MS in a related case." Despite the fact that M$ will probobly get away with everything it's still fun to see them take heavy beating and B. Gates being called "culprit" by the judge" :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
Oh, that's what M$ had to say about the finding: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/1999/Nov99/DOJpr.htm

And finnally:
**LONG LIVE JUDGE JACKSON**

[pickel]

DrDeath : Philco is owned by Ford and they have been putting their radios in their cars
forever. But your computer is your computer and you should the right to decide which OS with which Browser you want. By stifeling the competition we're stuck, for the most part,with some version of Windows or other.
I'm not *****in' about Window's per se because my system works fairly well most of the time. It's the methods Gates and other
influencial(MONEY) companies use to stomp on the little guys is the crux of the whole senerio. Get my point??? /forum/smile.gif

the pickel

I build my own cars because I don't like the junk that costs ten times more than there are worth. I'm stuck with Windows. I don't have the time to become literate enough with a computer to install/use Linux or BEOS. I have to rely on what's readily available. That isn't much of a choice. If the other OS companies hadn't been stiffled by Gates and
his compadres, maybe I would have a different
OS on my computer. I'm proud to say my computer doesn't have "Intel inside" on it.
Maybe a couple of years from now it might say
" Designed for Linux" on the sticker instead of Microsoft. I feel for all the poeple, who thru the years, have lost their careers and
futures at the hands of the BIG GUYS. Think of their kids and wifes, not just corporate
BS.People have suffered because of all the double dealing and lieing and cheating. That's what's really important. the People.

[This message has been edited by pickel (edited 11-08-1999).]

[drdeath]

but if you dont want to use windows, you dont have to - MS doesnt control the whole OS market - like chipbgt said, there is linux, mac, beos, and os2, and other OS's that you could choose from if you dont want to use windows. and you can use other browsers with windows if you like, too - MS doesnt make their OS so that it will "reject" another company's browser or anything... we have a freedom to choose whatever OS and browser we want - MS does not have a monopoly on the OS or browser market. if something is in our computer that we dont like, we can get rid of it and use a different product if we like. some people will say "no we cant, cuz all the programs are made for windows and arent made for linux or mac..." well, thats not MS's fault that all the software companies only make progs for windows. if anything, we should be complaining to the other software companies that they arent making enough programs for these other OS's - i think that if they made more progs for them, it would result in a more competitive OS market.... but why should it be MS's fault that they dont do this? they are running their own business, trying to make money - just like every other company on the face of the earth.

[This message has been edited by drdeath (edited 11-06-1999).]

[chipbgt]

who da man?

DrDeath is.

[seti]

And how they're makeing that money is illegal...it's a fact now, history...no matter what we might think, people that know a lot more about the law have deamed there actions wrong. Personaly I don't see much comeing out of all this....a monatary slap on the wrist, and I think it's best that way. I mean, do we really want more OS's? I know we want better one's. However, wouldn't compition drive softwear prices up? If companies have to develope there software for mulitple platforms....? I don't know. I still think this trial was more about MS vs. Netscape rather then MS vs. the other OS's.

[chipbgt]

Your right, it was and is.....I'm just curious, who out there has actually ever PAID for a browser? If its possible for everyone to get netscape or any other browser for free, and still more people use IE5, than obviously people want to use it more than Netscape. Its not like its hard to get another browser.

[Mntsnow]

Chip. When I first got into computers I DID pay for NETSCAPE as it was a good browser. Then MS came along and offered a BETTER browser for FREE. Then NETSCAPE offered UPGRADES for a FEE and was BETTER than MS' browser. then MS offered a newer and better browser again for FREE. THEN Netscape started to offer their browser for free to the "home user" STILL CHARGEING THE BUSINESS USERS. MS then offered a newer version and Netscape has done so to.....Some people prefer Netscape some prefer IE....I personally prefer IE5 as it for me is a better browser than 4.6 or 4.7 of netscapes.

Mntsnow

[KillerBug]

Hell, sell M$ stock and buy Red Hat!!! Here is what is bad with Windows, Word, excell, almost everything M$ makes, conterary to their advise hexi-monthly to it users, it has never wiped everything out and started over, if you look hard evough in Windows Melinium, you will find Windows 1.0 source code. I know they want to keep compatability, but if someone has not yet upgraded from Windows 1.0 applications, they are not likely to upgrade to the next version of Windows, or for that matter, upgrade from their 386s. Start over with 1000 software engineers, re-write Windows, and if people want to run onler applications, write emulators, if it detects the program was writen for windows 3.1, only load the errors and slow-downs for Windows 3.1, not for every version of Windows EVER!!! If they did that, they would have a monopoly, but one gained fairly, I would take 100% stability and fast windows over Red Hat any day, who wouldn't, after all, despite how much some may claim it is better than before, Windows is still a lot easier to use, and to us DOS junkees, the file system is much prefered.

[Susan]

The point is that MS had the power (and did try to use those powers) to put some pressure on some large corporations to force them into putting IE onto the desktop, 'or else'.

From what I have read, the 'or else' is that MS would stop licensing the installation of Windows software to those companies.

[seti]

...or charge them more for it. Like IBM.

[Zotzmein]

The objective of this litigation is to protect the consumers against the theoretically evils of Microsoft but it smells of nothing more than a governmental response to the rhetoric being dished out by Microsoft’s competition.

I’ve done what every individual has the right to do, I’ve voted with my pocket book. I own Microsoft products but I also own a Linux system and use Star Office as my preferred office suite instead of MS.

Instead of demanding that the government punish Microsoft, why don’t you invest all this energy into educating the less literate computer users around you and wound Microsoft where it real hurts, in the bottom line.

What scares me more than Microsoft business practices; is the government’s growing fervor to insinuate itself into affairs of private citizen and profitable businesses.

I don’t like Microsoft any more than the rest of you; I’d just prefer evil Bill to Big Brother.

Regards to All,

Zotz Mein

[welsh wizard]

Hi all
being down under and Monday trdeing finished while most of you are just hitting early hours of Monday, I must admit I was tempted to Buy into AOL, but in the end MS stocks will still go up after a fall, so better off hanging till they bottom, in the mean time I'll take a gamble on Linux shares, because as long as MS is fighting in the courts, Linux is in for a bonanza of free advertisement.
As for which browser people will use what they like as long as its free.
WW

[jonathankeeping]

I can see why people are anti-microsoft and against bill gates, but the fact of the matter is we should be thanking him. He has come up with an easy OS for everyone to use. Sure Linux and BEos are technicaly much better OS's, but the average person wouldn't have a clue how to use them!!! Microsoft have standardized the PC so you can universally use programs disks etc on any computer around the world. There has to be a standard OS for compatability. If the Mac's had become the OS standard we would be saying the same things to them. However, I don't agree with the way microsoft acts. They have massive funds behind them, yet they still produce bloated software that is full of bugs. They also feel they should dominate the whole computer market, wiping out all of the other rival companies. This clearly isn't fair, and I'm sure recent court procedings will put an end to this foul play.

At the end of the day microsoft is here to stay. It's simple and easy to use, has a massive wealth of programs available and is highly compatable. The other rival OS's are for hardcore users, and while technically sound, they don't have the packages behind them. The fact is we will always love to hate Bill Gates!!!

[Ygor]

Yes we know that M$ is the giant and the "leader" in the computer industry....
What this is really about is how they got there and are maintaining that.
Yes, we can all use other OS's... in theory.
But find the variety of applications across the board for anything but M$ products? Good Luck!
It's one thing to build a better mousetrap, but when the current mousetrap "leader" does so many things behind the scenes to keep your mousetrap away from the public....
Fair competetion does not involve strongarm tactics it appears the DoJ can prove M$ has used.

[KillerBug]

M$ never came up with an OS! They stole DOS, literaly, they took windows away from HP. Who can't use Linux? It is easier than Windows, and safer. As for BeOS, even easier, and UNIX, there are programs to run on it that give you an easy way.

[Louis]

If this jugement is good for Microsoft it as to be good for Apple and IBM who sold the machine with the OS. For Apple if it's not a monopoly what it is ?
OK let face it, this case is not about people against MS, it's MS competitor against MS.
For the Linux advocate, stop blaming MS for everythings, put you energy to make a better OS and people will use it.
For that to append, Linux users have to agree about a standard GUI.
After a standard GUI, Linux have to support others languages (90% of the peoples in the world don't speak english).
The installation of Linux have to be as easy as Windows is.
Linux is getting more and more market share it's a good thing but until these 3 steps have append Linux will still be a computer geek OS.
For the browser part, at first when I surf on the net nether MS or Netscape was doing a browser, at this time I was using Mosaic the only one at that time. Mosaic was wipe out by Netscape who made a better browser at that time. Then came MS Internet Explorer to compete with Netscape, I was still using Netscape untill IE5 who is a far more better browser than Communicator. The reason why Netscape loose part of the market is not MS but Netscape who remain seat on their success, they don't bother to correct bugs in Communicator so I swith to IE5.

[Djaye]

For many years I ran a multinode bbs with synchronet bbs software. I used IBM dos and Quarterdeck products for multitasking. I REFUSED to use w3.1 and its timeslicing. After many years, Gates finally listened to the consumers and made a product that some folks like.
I dont see GM/FORD/CHRYSLER in court reguarding the mandating of their auto engines being universal!
Gates should incorporate an active java interface into the operating system so no browser is needed at all. he should also close all RAS applications to the kernal OS... if aol doesnt like it.. they can spend the years in developement and write their own bloody OS as well.
I work in an ISP's tech support department. 90% of all issues dealing with browsers are netscape communicator errors.
Netscape and AOL are Dregg corporations. Microsoft owns windwos. its THEIR baby. if anyone doesnt like it, move to linix and start developing your own system.
I think its funny that a judge whom is highly unqualified within the knowledge of IT work can make such a ruling.. its like having thomas edison comming to life some 200 years after his death and working on a nuclear generator (guffaw)

Djaye. freeminds/freemarkets

[welsh wizard]

Djaye
they might have lost this battle but as yet they have not lost the War, that will prob go on for years.
WW

[JonathanW]

What the hell would spiltting up Microsoft do anyway??? I dont like Netscape, I like IE alot better, why: It loads faster, and it dont have all that fancy dancy sh*t in it... All I need is a basic browser, not no Fancy honkin 'only its neat stuff is used on a couple sites anyways' sh*t. Theres nothing wrong with Microsoft, I already know Windows, and I dont need to buy any more books to figure out a new one... Netscape sucks anyways, its all a competition to get more $$$, not about whos got a monopoly, they only reason they do is cause nobody else has made an os better than windows (excpet Mac, OS/2, Linux, etc...), so why in the hell would I care, all the software and GAMES and everything is all made for Windows, not Mac or anything like that, so this Gamer 3:16 says to hell with this monopoly bullsh*t, as long as I can play games I dont give a f**k!!!

Please limit the cussing. Thanks. -socalgal

[This message has been edited by socalgal (edited 11-26-1999).]

[jad1097]

Yes Ms sucks. But I have giving up on Netscape! Their browser sucks, Can you say crash! IT's worse than Windows. Go get IE5.1 and see what the real deal is.
Also I will have Beos On my system by the end of the year. But as someone pointed out most software is for Windows.
If you a computer without windows don't you get like $5 bake or something! It cost what $180 for the full cd! What a joke.

[adam-sith]

I like most of Microsoft Products, but I think most people "I.E. Netscape" are just jelous! I mean, the founder is VERY RICH, and very successful! Netscape, is just lame, and need to beta test before they put together a browser! HAHA!

L8r /forum/smile.gif
Adam-Sith

[bobcat]

Their actions have spoken louder than any argument anyone can give about innovation and we the consumer have suffered for it.

We are so stuck on OS and Browsers. What gives MS the right to threaten IBM that if they put a competing OS on their, IBM's machines, that MS will pull the plug on the Windows license.

Or:

We would like to do business with you. If you do not get people to download more than a 50% share of IE vs Netscape...you will pay US money.

Or:

Does anyone remember when they first developed Windows95, there was a nice feature that when you upgraded to 95, it would brake your service provider connection, in favor for the MS product. People had to do a little work around, until MS came clean about them accidently making this booboo and patching it.

Or:

INTEL was convinced by MS not compete with them for the NET. INTEL lost $$$ on that one.

Or:

Hey, we will make up fake errors so that DR DOS won't work, but it really does, but hey, everyone will stop using it because it is incompatible. Wink Wink.

This is not competition. This is a BULLY. I have read many an argument of ...The stongest survive. The fact of the matter we as consumers have suffered in not having choice and having to spend the $$$ for the product.

The millionth time I have used this example:

Just 3 years ago we were paying $350 for an P166. It only cost INTEL $50 to produce. If you got the 200 you dropped around $500 - 600. Then Cyrix and AMD decide to create the low end computer market. BOOM.... What do we as consumers have now? We have the ability to choose from $70 to $1000 on CPU's. To have power at the low end of the spectrum is awesome.

Does anyone here know what INTEL's response was when the low end computer market was created? "Duh, we never thought anyone would want to buy a cheap computer" That is why they found themselves scrambling desperatly to fend off AMD with the Celeron. Of which, the first Celeron sucked per say.

Alot of people have 2 or more machines in their home /forum/smile.gif That would not be the case it were not for AMD. Anyways...We have benefited from this healthy competition.

Wouldn't you rather have lower cost and choice for your support software? I am not knocking innovation by MS. Or, even the price per say. I do know that if we had a real choice, most likely the prices would drop and there would be better products out there.

I can say better products...like a better OS or better word processor. Lets face it, if you don't have anyone to compete with you...you can release buggy software and eventually patch it. If I have a choice and I know that A is less buggy than B and they are both equal per say in functionality...I will buy A.

I turn the soap box over to you..... /forum/smile.gif

[Russianguy]

I don't like that IE is integrated in Win98. But IE is better them Netscape is. MS must take IE out from Win98. And bill Gates must do eather one:
scenario #1 B.Gates must kill him selff
scanario #2 B.Gates must open Winows source code
scanario #3 B.Gates must make Windows free for customers
/forum/smile.gif /forum/smile.gif /forum/smile.gif

[jokostel]

#3 would just be great cause im gonna wait for feb. and save to buy the full version of win 2000 workstation... and not let my dad even touch the main copy!!!hahaha! /forum/smile.gif
YES I AM EVIL,FOR I AM MAN,YES I AM.

[BluMoose]

I think the best solution is for Microsoft to release Window's source code. That would allow Linux as well as other operating system to run the vast majority of software (right now WINE - Windows Emulater - is being worked on for Linux but they are basically reverse engineering the operating system). This is the easiest way to allow competition back into the market.
As it is most Microsoft products are pieces of junk-the mice are a notable exception. The OS's are pretty unstable, IE is 'good' mainly because microsoft has used tactics to ensure many site are not fully compatable with Netscape and other browsers. The strong-arming tactics used by Microsoft are an outrage, they stiffle innovation and the advancement of technology. It is surprising anyone owning a computer would be in favor of such tactics, though perhaps there is some explanation I am not aware of.

-BluMoose

[BluMoose]

Did I forget to mention that otherwise better OS's from the present and past failed because of Microsoft's monopolistic power? Because of this it is basically impossible to make an OS that can run more than a small percentage- like 2-3%-of current commercial software. Again this stiffles innovation for better OS's and multi-platform software.

-BluMoose

[Banti]

Most of the comments that are for M$ are a little of center. First of all, the windows and mouse idea was great... when Xerox came up withit.

The IE that everyone loves was orginally reverse engineered and given away in order ro shut another company down.

The products that M$ actually created are limited to the patches and MS Bob. The rest were taken and/or bought.

Microsoft is not a software company, they are a marketing tidal wave.... When was the last time you saw a BEos joystick? or a RedHat phone?

[BluMoose]

Now that's hardly fair. I happen to think the Microsoft mice are their best product. They are quite reliable and sturdy. Also, their implementation of the laser mouse concept was innovative. Truly, Microsoft mice are quite different quality-wise than Microsoft's software products.

-BluMoose

[neo_otyugh]

I am sick and tired of IE5 crashing and taking windoze with it. i would like to remove IE5 from my computer...and use a browser that is NOT a part of my OS...but i can't do that now. yes i could install netscape as well as IE5, but why should i have to do that. if i do or do not want sofwareon my computer i should have that choice. Windows is not as stable as it could be. If it was just an operating system it might be better, but since microsoft has been cramming its products down our throat with win98, we have little choice.
Netscape and IE were both charged for at one point in time. then as netscape became a much better browser, MS began to lower prices and then to give away IE. They were willing to lose money on their browser just to get market share. then they integrated IE into windows to insure further market share, they even delayed the release of win98 to recode IE into windows.
the way i see it MS has tried to twist everything it has touched. some stuff has been good and some has been bad. the bad stuff could have been alot better, but MS had to change things to force others into doing things their way....and only their way.

i don't see how they will punish microsoft and make it stick...but i am glad that MS has been found to be legally wrong in court.

i think that if there was fair competition in the market we would have faster more stable OS's and better software applications as well.

[richamies]

Micro$oft Mou$e
Micro$oft Keyboard
Micro$oft Watch
Micro$oft Phone

Anyone see a trend developing here?

Micro$oft Home
Micro$oft Car
Micro$oft Wife
Micro$oft Hu$band
Micro$oft Microwave
Micro$oft $tereo
Micro$oft Televi$ion
Micro$oft Video

Hmmmmm.....one thing that wouldn't work would be...

Micro$oft $ocalgal

[kongkong]

to neo_otyugh: I have been in trouble ever since I installed IE5, the only reason I've been using it coz it DOES feel much better than either IE4 or Netscape. Yet after some research, I have applied a couple of patches for IE5, now it is very stable. Actually it is the most stable IE I have ever seen.

I am using NT4, with SP6a, Office with latest SP, and VS6 w/ SP3, a Special SP for the problem regarding VS6 + Option Pack4, and ....blabla... there are many service packs.... too many... I didn't realize.. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

After all these hassels, i am having a pretty stable system now. It doesn't mean it won't crash, but at least i almost always can find out why, unlike in Win98 + IE4.

Sure we all hate SP's or Patches... but as a software developer myself, i don't think that is possible for such a giant size programs like IE, or VS, and even the OS itself.

Personally, i hate Windoze, and love Linux. But I use Windows much more time than Linux. Guess i might love it unconsciously, even it keeps crashing crashing.... http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif


[This message has been edited by kongkong (edited 01-09-2000).]

[Compubrain]

I'm fully in favor of Microsoft releasing the source code to Windows, but I think this case should never have occured. This is nothing but Netscape and a bunch of others who lost market share to Microsoft whining about it to the government. If the DoJ were really concerned about the monopolies, they'd go after Apple. The Macs are the true monopolies, but nobody seems to care. Hmm...I wonder why. Could it be that MICROSOFT REALLY ISN'T A MONOPOLY?!?!

Glad to get that off my chest. I mean, we've got Corel releasing Linux and CorelOffice for Linux. We have a large number of computer games available for Linux, and more programs are becoming available for Linux every day. This proves that the market will automatically compensate for any so-called monopoly. A true monopoly can be a problem, such as with Ma Bell, but there is usually a way to compensate. For example, if Ma Bell was still around now, consumers would buy a cable modem or DSL hookup and use Internet phones for all their calls.

In conclusion, this antitrust case is merely the result of countless companies jealous of Microsoft's success.

Oh, BTW, Microsoft did not steal DOS from IBM. Microsoft wrote DOS 1.0 for the IBM PC. Duh.

[wyvrn]

I think some of the case against Microsoft dealt with monopolistic practices. Microsoft was proven in many cases to use its power to force vendors to use their product, or have no access to it. We all know about the threatening emails. I have not even read the whole case but it seems that Microsoft broke a bunch of rules and stepped on a lot of toes to get where they are today. They deserve to be broken up because they are forcing their OS down the throats of vendors and consumers. I believe this way and I am a Microsoft Certified Professional. However, I know a monopoly when I see one. Linux may be an upstart OS, but does it compare to NT in ease of use? No. Does it hold a candle to the licenses of NT in the corporate world? No. Is linux as popular as Win9x to everyday consumers? Not yet. This is the area that competitors to Microsoft need to hit first. But Linux aint there yet.

[dick royce]

I smell jealousy. Don't get me wrong Microsoft did sent questionible emails around but this whole lawsuit is plane and simple all about greed, stupidity, and jealousy. aol and all the linux publishers are crying foul because their sales and stock suck. They want more especially aol who wants to be King of the world. While you should be allowed to remove IE from your browser without messing up everything else that's harding hurt or stiffling competition or even the consumer. Unix and linux are really only needed for two people those against successful corporations and those who like to hack. If you're the average joe you don't need to or probably care about code. That is why the unix and Linux companies aren't in high demand. You want to accuse someone to stiffling competition then let's talk about aol who has either purchased or put out of business dozens of ISPs over the last 5 years. That's were they got most their customers folks. You got Windows whatever version usually preinstalled on a computer. You aren't paying for it besides if you had or if you went to a store and bought it. You would be out like $200 bucks give or take. That's what Redhat and the others generally sell for yet you get MS office and a half dozen programs that fall under that you also get a web browser and everyone knows it. Redhat you get what? You get one program and a year of tech support. Yeah that's worth the money especially if you're not a hacker or programmer. I have a computer with Win 98 and Unix at home and I have one solely with Linux at work. For redhat you have to buy and install the database programs and programs you get bundled in MS office. There you're now out another 50 -100 bucks each. You can get the broswer free wow no lose there either way. aol and everyone else just want and lack market share and profits and they are not better. They maybe not and for the most part are not worse then MS but their no better either and why go through the hassel of buying and spending more then wasting time installing it if you don't half to. Love or hate Microsoft the fact is it simply jealisouy and greed that is behind the lawsuit. Which I add in closeing is suppose to be for the consumer not weak corporations who don't get the partnerships rivals do.Noone has and will ever prove how consumers were hurt or were over charged for something. You got it preinstalled. Most places would install another for you if you wanted or you could run home uninstall and install your new OS no problem. Most computer places throw in the software to help you want to buy the computer and to make your life easy.Has Microsoft bought it's rivals? What about aol and it's deal with Blockbuster Video to give out and promote aol? What about aol and Time Warner's Cable stations and radio and websites a lot of which are popular with people. Now it has free advertising across the board on all that. Isn't that an advantage? Especially when it only has to share or alway advertising for one or two rivals let alone allow use their cable lines for networks. What about Netscape aol bought them but IE is still their primary in fact sole browser. If anyone isn't playing fair that would be one company especially now that is much worse. People who hatem, are lazy, greedy , and jealious are those who hate Microsoft. All mostly with a jealous passion. What about aol including it's instant messanger and shutting out Yahoo!, Microsoft, At&T, and others. What about aol turning off their members IM service when rivals developed their own IM service. Or last for now how about aol wanting to copyright "you've got mail" and other stupid and common sayings or slogans? I dont smell teen spirit I smell jealousy want some after shave with that. Long live Bill and Microsoft and my justice finally win for once in the world. Especially after the dems tried and failed and are still failing to steal the election.

[Joel Kleppinger]

Nothing like digging up a thread for old times' sake.

Too bad you didn't put some whitespace in your post... maybe the rest of us would've read it. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif