From: Michael S. Lorrey (retroman@turbont.net)
Date: Sun Apr 30 2000 - 17:28:24 MDT
Charlie wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2000 at 09:11:48AM +0000, E. Shaun Russell wrote:
> >
> > As one who deeply respects Gates and Microsoft, I want MS to resume as it
> > has for the last decade: innovative, growing and successful; working within
> > a system which has none of those facets makes it hard for me to see how it
> > can be done.
>
>
> On the other hand, it's galling to see the US government feeling compelled
> to intervene heavy-handedly, and even more galling to see them going
> after MS for basically irrelevent reasons and imposing a silly 'solution'
> that isn't going to help the situation.
The things that most people don't understand is that there are two main
reasons why the government went after Microsoft:
a) Microsoft doesn't donate money to politicians (i.e. they haven't
gotten the clue about keeping the cops bribed)
b) Many lawyers in general, and their paralegals in particular hate
Microsoft for turning what was once the best and best selling word
processor into a virtual Canadian orphan (Word Perfect). Those that gave
in to the marketing and bought Word wound up getting their investments
in that software wasted when it became decertified for writing legal
briefs, specifically because Word doesn't accurately count words.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:28:19 MST