Topic 'Re: Stupid lawsuits...' in forum ''

Topic 'Re: Stupid lawsuits...' in forum '' - dslreports.com http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2553157 en Fri, 25 Mar 2022 11:02:31 EDT Fri, 25 Mar 2022 11:02:31 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2589745
I know you have no idea what position I stand for, and I know you don't care. If you did, you would have read all my previous posts before making cheap shots and making assumptions. You will see that I make many references to "corporate life" and how corporations break the law all the time. It isn't right, but it happens.

If I just read one sentence and assumed something...

quote:

You'd have no problem with me breaking into your house and stealing all of your stuff as long as I didn't get caught?

So does that mean you are a dirty thief and you think stealing is ok? EITHER STAND BY YOUR WORDS OR RETRACT THEM WITH HUMILITY! I think you see my point. :)

--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net
[text was edited by author 2002-02-24 00:31:15]

[text was edited by author 2002-02-24 00:38:04]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2589745 Sun, 24 Feb 2002 00:25:23 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2589655
I quoted EXACTLY your own words. Nothing else. I neither quoted out of context nor assumed anything by your words.

I asked:

"What CAN companies be punished for? Is breaking the law OK?"

And you responded:

"Its ok until you get caught. There is also a fine line between breaking the law and bending it a little."

You DID NOT qualify the statement by saying that is the way corporations think, nor did you say you did not think that way.

I have no idea what "position" you are in, nor do I care. You should stand by your words or retract them with humility.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2589655 Sun, 24 Feb 2002 00:15:24 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2589213 said by jhudson2:

said by Nightfall:
Its ok until you get caught. There is also a fine line between breaking the law and bending it a little.

Current post:

said by Nightfall:
Did I ever say it wasn't unethical? My arguement is that it happens all the time in the corporate business world. I don't like it either. In essence, bending the rules is breaking the law

I stated that it is the way most corporate entities think. It isn't the way I think. If I did think like that, I wouldn't be in the position or the person that I am now. If I were you, I would stop trying to make assumptions about others. We both know what happens when you assume. (The Ass out of U and Me comes to mind) :)

Cheap shots like this are way off base here.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2589213 Sat, 23 Feb 2002 23:21:58 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2584947

said by Nightfall:
Its ok until you get caught. There is also a fine line between breaking the law and bending it a little.

Current post:

said by Nightfall:
Did I ever say it wasn't unethical? My arguement is that it happens all the time in the corporate business world. I don't like it either. In essence, bending the rules is breaking the law

So according to you

1) Breaking the law is unethical.
2) It's OK to break the law unless you get caught.

Therefore, you think it's OK to be unethical. This makes you an unethical person.

What am I missing?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2584947 Sat, 23 Feb 2002 14:02:04 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2582983 quote:

Did I ever say it wasn't unethical? My arguement is that it happens all the time in the corporate business world. I don't like it either. No company does business in America without bending the rules a little bit.

In essence, bending the rules is breaking the law.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2582983 Sat, 23 Feb 2002 09:06:10 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2579906 said by Blizzard:

So let me get this straight. I want a good OS and dependable but i shouldn't have to help the company recoup the money they invested in it because why???

You honestly believe that Microsoft, in the position of software and operating system leader, would have to charge two/three times as much as Apple for their investment? One could argue by having the resources Microsoft has they're in the unique position to offer their operating systems for less.

quote:
Mac os is like comparing apples to oranges. MAC BUILDS EVERYTHING. they man the whole system thats why the OS is so cheap. you payed for it already when you bought the system. plus they know what works.

Umm.. no. I bought my Apple system used. It came with OS 8.6. I went out and bought OS X separate (and got OS 9.2 to boot!). It's perfectly analogous.

quote:
MS has to test and verify all pieces of hardware and their drivers.

So does Linux, BeOS and every other x86 OS manufacturer and yet they didn't stiff the consumer with several hundred dollar bills.

quote:
So from above so far i caught this. You want a free OS thats rock solid stable.

I never said it had to be free. Just reasonably priced. Notice I paid for Mac OS X.

quote:
That runs on the newest equipment and hardware with no issues. hmmm not even linux can promise this.

Neither can Microsoft. I've had so many issues with Windows 3.1 through Millenium it isn't even funny. I'm giving XP Pro a chance on my Wintel box and if it repeats the same problems then it'll be my last Windows machine I ever use.

quote:
The guys who write code need to be paid and thats the bottom line. Companies don't charge what they can They charge what they have to to survive understand that Ms doesn't make much per cd they sell you.

I hardly think Microsoft needs $200-300 for their OS to "survive". Do you hear yourself? Ask yourself why Apple (a vastly smaller company) can offer a world class OS for less than half the comparable OS that Microsoft offers. Or why Red Hat, BeOS (well, used to be able to) and all the other OS manufacturers could offer top notch OS'es for under a hundred dollars in many cases. Yet Microsoft, with billions upon billions of dollars at their disposal charges you the most. It makes no sense. You'd think they'd offer the cheapest since they can sell in large quantities thus recouping their investments easier.

quote:
Look at it from 2 sides instead of one and you might see it.

I have. Have you?

quote:
Ok so i some this up from your post. Everything should be free and I can take what I need because it should be free.

Please illuminate how you ascertained this idea from my original post? I don't see how you can infer this, honestly. I think you're confusing me with someone else.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2579906 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 21:36:53 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2579740 said by Blizzard:

thats gotta be the single most dumbest post i have ever seen on dslr

Nightfall said it was OK to break the law, as long as you didn't get caught. Obviously this assertion is unethical and I attempted to point this out by using ironic hyperbole to take his argument to the logical extreme.

I'm surprised you didn't get it.

I'll try harder next time to make my comments easier to understand by "people like you".]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2579740 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 21:16:23 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2578947 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2578947 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 19:54:26 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2577885 quote:

Yes, and look how CISCO is just about to be next in line.

Which again is stupid. Cisco makes the best routers around. I wouldn't want to see a company that innovates and creates products as secure and good as Cisco to be destroyed because they made the best products and drove their competitors out of business. In my opinion, that is totally stupid. I have dealt with many off brand routers and they all sucked in comparison. I for one don't believe that the company who makes the best product should be forced to split up and be dismantled to let others in. There are others who will disagree, but that is what this forum is for is voicing our opinions. :)

quote:

Have you listened to *anything* that has been said in this thread? They didn't have a choice. The only choices where stomped out by anti-competitive tactics. There is clear, concise, indisputable evidence they paid off companies and threatened others if they didn't comply. Microsoft was formed on the basis of Bill Gates's and Paul Allen's rich parents. Most other people who where tyring to enter the market did NOT have the resources these two men did. I'm tired of you excusing their actions on the basis of what you perceive to be the truth. I have been in the industry a long time, and I was *in* companies this happened to. I watched it go on.

The PC makers DID have a choice. Either go with MS or don't go with em. Simple as that.

I am not debating that MS is a bunch of sharks who stomped out the competition. Just because other companies didn't have the resources to keep up or make a better OS doesn't mean another company has to slow down and let them in. Welcome to corporate life. I too have been in the industry a long time and have seen this. Doesn't mean it is fair, but at the same time if I owned a successful company, I would want it to be the best there is. I suppose you would let your competitors grow and overtake you if you owned a company. I don't excuse what Microsoft did to get where they are at now, but I do understand why they did what they did. They squashed the little companies out of sight and built a corporation that makes billions.

As for what I percieve the be the truth and what actually is, maybe you should get to know me more before you assume what I do and don't know. :)

quote:

You just don't listen, do you? It doesn't matter if the programs where vastly superior. VHS was vastly superior to BETA technology, but the citizenship purchased VHS because of marketing and advertising strategy. MS is the complete synthesis of that, as well as adding anti-competitive and monopolistic practices. It doesn't matter how fast your racing horse is if someone shoots it in the leg.

You have VHS and BETA mixed around, but I know what you mean. VHS had its share of monopolistic and anti-competitive practices as well in the movie industry. Doesn't mean it was right, but I also don't believe that VHS should have to stop to let BETA in the door. VHS did the corporate american thing by stomping out BETA when it had the chance. The backing of the people helped them.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2577885 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 17:17:11 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2577542 quote:

I can think of a lot of companies that have exclusive rights to distribute through others. Look at Cisco for instance.

Yes, and look how CISCO is just about to be next in line.

quote:
I can find more examples, but the point is that if Microsoft software sucked, do you think these PC makers would buy Microsoft operating systems? These PC makers don't want to bury themselves putting a inferrior operating system on a pc that someone is going to buy and hate.

Have you listened to *anything* that has been said in this thread? They didn't have a choice. The only choices where stomped out by anti-competitive tactics. There is clear, concise, indisputable evidence they paid off companies and threatened others if they didn't comply. Microsoft was formed on the basis of Bill Gates's and Paul Allen's rich parents. Most other people who where tyring to enter the market did NOT have the resources these two men did. I'm tired of you excusing their actions on the basis of what you perceive to be the truth. I have been in the industry a long time, and I was *in* companies this happened to. I watched it go on.

quote:
That would be suicide. I know if I was in charge, and Linux was the wave of the future, I would be going with them. I don't care how much Microsoft said they were going to charge me. People make it sound like Microsoft was the bully and Dell, Gateway, and Compaq were powerless to stop em. These PC distributors chose to go with Microsoft and stick with em. There wasn't anything better at the time and there still isn't.

You just don't listen, do you? It doesn't matter if the programs where vastly superior. VHS was vastly superior to BETA technology, but the citizenship purchased VHS because of marketing and advertising strategy. MS is the complete synthesis of that, as well as adding anti-competitive and monopolistic practices. It doesn't matter how fast your racing horse is if someone shoots it in the leg.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2577542 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 16:41:55 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2577484 quote:

This is the way it has been for ages

No, it hasn't. The original framers of the constitution said they didn't want corporate entities having more power than the common man. You ever heard of something called the Boston Massuchusettes company? Or perhaps something called the Boston Tea Party?

Original corps in the USA where not allowed to trade stock with eachother, and would be QUICKLY dissolved if they did anything anti-competitive. We left the British monarchy so we WOULDN'T be screwed over by large companies. Seems peoples memories of history are a little small.

Ugh.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2577484 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 16:34:32 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2576533 --
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2576533 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 14:50:54 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2575615 said by Blizzard:

Whats MS did was fair. If I can't have exclusive rights then Im going to charge you more. plain and simple it was right and the other companies are crying becuase they didn't think about it first. TFB problem solved now lets work on getting OJ's "real killers" behind bars.

I disagree with your statement. "If I can't have exclusive rights then Im going to charge you more." This is the same as paying a customer to not carry a competitor's product. This defeats the purpose of a free enterprise and capitalist system. These business practices are cutthroat and exactly the same kind of practices that eventually led to passing of hallmark anti-trust laws (eg Sherman Anti-Trust Act, Clayton Act) to counter massive monopolies like Carnegie Steel and Standard Oil. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2575615 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 13:02:48 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2574327
Because i run a company i know what they can do and this isn't illegal in any way. When you come to my company and say i need my network managed what can you do for me. I have to go out and burn precious time gathering info about the things about your system thats bad. Ok so i see you had a chance to sign me before to manage it. Now i look and see another company won the bid. This company in the past has caused me to burn man hours to fix the networks so does this mean i shouldn't charge more because it is already there. Or does this give me the right to boost my prices because i know i will have to waste man hours fixing other people issues.

I can boost the price and it is all legal when they sign the agreement. MS did the same thing and I wish i had the foresight Bill Gates had he is a keen business man and a model of the american dream. Have nothing make everything Thats how the USA works and im damn proud of it.
--
No man was ever honored for what he received but rather what he gave.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2574327 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 10:01:36 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2573732 quote:

Someone do a DNS look-up and see if Blizzard is posting from microsoft.com. Bill, is that you? :P

quote:

Indeed. You just pushed the "dumb quotient" through the roof!

I think everyone here has a stance on this issue. Lets refrain from insulting people. :)
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2573732 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 08:01:14 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2573251 said by Blizzard:

dumb comments are running rampant here.

Indeed. You just pushed the "dumb quotient" through the roof! ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2573251 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 04:30:41 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2573241 said by Blizzard:

Someone do a DNS look-up and see if Blizzard is posting from microsoft.com. Bill, is that you? :P]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2573241 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 04:26:09 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2572739 said by MrTangent:

Look, Nightfall. If we let BeOS fall by the wayside in your "corporate war" and then let's say Apple closes shop and maybe many *nix companies/users go by the wayside... what will we be left with then? We'll be left with less choices.

Choices, you see, are what keep other companies in check. It's what keeps companies like Microsoft from charging exorbitant fees for their OSes. If we let Mac OS, Linux, BSD, QNX, etc. go the way of OS/2 and BeOS then who knows how much MS will charge us then?

We *need* competition. I'll repeat that again for you: We need competition

Competition makes businesses (theoretically) fair in their prices and also forces companies to make better products. If you can't see that then you're going to be paying a crapload for Windows in a few years when MS has no other competitors (if this monopoly suit fails, that is).

As I've pointed out before, Microsoft charges $299 for Windows XP Pro. You can get Mac OS X for $129 and you get Mac OS 9 for free. Why then does MS charge so much? Because they can. Because they have a monopoly in the PC world and as more and more competitors fall, the price of Windows increases. It's been steadily going up and up as more and more competitors go out of business. And, as I said before, if they're the only one in business be prepared to pay a lot more for it.

dumb comments are running rampant here. So let me get this straight. I want a good OS and dependable but i shouldn't have to help the company recoup the money they invested in it because why???

Mac os is like comparing apples to oranges. MAC BUILDS EVERYTHING. they man the whole system thats why the OS is so cheap. you payed for it already when you bought the system. plus they know what works.

MS has to test and verify all pieces of hardware and their drivers.

So from above so far i caught this. You want a free OS thats rock solid stable. That runs on the newest equipment and hardware with no issues. hmmm not even linux can promise this. The guys who write code need to be paid and thats the bottom line. Companies don't charge what they can They charge what they have to to survive understand that Ms doesn't make much per cd they sell you.

Look at it from 2 sides instead of one and you might see it.

Ok so i some this up from your post. Everything should be free and I can take what I need because it should be free.
--
No man was ever honored for what he received but rather what he gave.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2572739 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 02:06:09 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2572692 said by jhudson2:

said by Nightfall:
What kind of question is that?

It's the next logical one.

Now suddenly there ARE rules that pertain to conduct when it's your stuff we're talking about. Perhaps the folks at BE are equally as concerned with their stuff. Ya think?

You state that MS did what it did to get to the top, ethical or unethical. OK. Fine. What if they break the law? Not specifically, hypothetically. What if Bill Gates shoots Scott McNealy to gain control of Sun and he flies off to Grand Cayman to escape prosecution? Is that acceptable, since as you said yourself "Its ok until you get caught"?

You lump all of MS's behavior into a big pile and say "oh well, just business. Dog-eat-dog, people get hurt" and COMPLETELY ignore the fact that there are actual laws that pertain to business conduct. Really. Codified and everything. State and Federal.

You've already decided that what MS did or didn't do to BE "isn't against the law" without any actual knowledge of the facts. And even if it was against the law it doesn't matter since MS didn't get caught.

thats gotta be the single most dumbest post i have ever seen on dslr

what if he shoots him? That completely different. Killing is the loss of a life you can't retry that. If you fail in business you can always retry those are 2 seperate issues and you are confusing them. It's not like that at all. What they did was fair and just now it's the companies who have moneys turn to attack MS and you are going to see many do it. People like you are the people that sue McDonalds for the coffe being to hot but yet complain when it's Luke warm so you can't get burnt Make up your mind what you want and walk that line. Thats what Ms did and it got them far.

As far as the manufacturers it's their fault they inked the deals. Signing you agree if they didnt have lawyers look it over and explain it it's their fault same as you when you subscribe to any service.

Does this mean stealing cable service is ok because you didn't read the contract that says you are entitled to what you pay for. Simple you don't like it get it off your PC and move on. Simple way to solve the issue.
--
No man was ever honored for what he received but rather what he gave.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2572692 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 01:55:01 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2572618 said by jhudson2:

So, could Microsoft kill people to maintain their market share?

thats completely differnt i think you need to pull your head out of the movie collection there buddy.

Whats MS did was fair. If I can't have exclusive rights then Im going to charge you more. plain and simple it was right and the other companies are crying becuase they didn't think about it first. TFB problem solved now lets work on getting OJ's "real killers" behind bars.
--
No man was ever honored for what he received but rather what he gave.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2572618 Fri, 22 Feb 2002 01:42:25 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2560084 said by Nightfall:

Until Microsoft is proven in a court of law to be a monopoly and using illegal tactics, what they didn't isn't illegal...in the scope of the law.

Microsoft was proven in a court of law to be a monopoly, and convicted of illegally leveraging their monopoly against competitors.

Go here, read it for yourself:

»www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ ··· tm#iiia

What they did IS illegal in the scope of the law, and the findings were not thrown out, they were upheld on appeal.

Here is the whole history of the case:
»www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ ··· dex.htm
--
... Had this been an actual emergency, we would have fled in terror, and you would not have been informed.
[text was edited by author 2002-02-20 22:09:12]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2560084 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 22:06:46 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557306 said by Nightfall:

Thats not the point! Companies are free to choose whatever products they will and will not carry. If they feel windows is sub-standard and start installing Linux with KDE/Gnome as the GUI, then that is there decision, only to be influenced by the public demand and ability to make profits. Microsoft threatening penalties for carrying a competitor's product defeats the whole purpose of the free enterprise and capitalist systems. This is anti-competitive and monopolistic behavior. No ifs ands or buts! Microsoft didnt achieve their position today by the sheer greatness of the windows operating system, or any microsoft product. Alot of what they have today comes from the fact that they acheived a monopoly. This has been proven in a court of law already.
[text was edited by author 2002-02-20 18:09:24]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557306 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 18:06:37 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557261 said by Nightfall:

Last I heard they were also going to appeal...so who knows how long this thing is going to stay in the court system.

Dude you have GOT to keep up with the news :-). See my post above regarding any appeal.

BTW I took a peak at your site. I didn't know you were into digital photography. Those are some sharp pictures you took. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557261 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 18:02:22 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557150
Jeez, a lot of Microsoft haters in here. Every post by people who like to see Microsoft get sued and screwed has a thumbs up by it. If I could get "thumbs down" I think I would be in the negative values by now. I think I will stop talking in this thread. Else I will probably start getting mail bombs and DOS attacks on my website. ;)

--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net
[text was edited by author 2002-02-20 17:53:16]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557150 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:51:27 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557082 said by Nightfall:

Until Microsoft is proven in a court of law to be a monopoly and using illegal tactics, what they didn't isn't illegal...in the scope of the law.

They HAVE been proven in a court of law to be abusing their monopoly. Do you remember the anti-trust case that's been going on over the past few years. The verdict is already in. Microsoft was found guilty. Then Microsoft wanted an appeals court to review the court decision. The appeals court did so and supported the verdict 100%. The only thing left is passing sentence. Judge Jackson screwed that up when he pushed for an extreme punishment with the breakup decree. The whole issue now is what to do with Microsoft now that they are found guilty.

As far as Be Inc is concerned they now have a legal precedent regarding MS's illegal activity and apparently they have evidence to back it up. So the question isn't whether or not MS is guilty, because it's a fact they are. The question is does Be Inc have a legitimate case. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557082 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:44:59 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557067 said by JYoung:

said by Nightfall:
Until Microsoft is proven in a court of law to be a monopoly and using illegal tactics, what they didn't isn't illegal...in the scope of the law.

If I'm not mistaken, Microsoft was declared a monopoly by a court of law.

That's why they are facing sanctions right now...

True, but the lawsuit was thrown out I believe and a new judge was assigned to the case. Who knows what will happen or when for that matter.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557067 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:42:49 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557045 said by Nightfall:

Until Microsoft is proven in a court of law to be a monopoly and using illegal tactics, what they didn't isn't illegal...in the scope of the law.

If I'm not mistaken, Microsoft was declared a monopoly by a court of law.

That's why they are facing sanctions right now...
--
If you're wondering how he eats and breathes and other science facts, then repeat to yourself "it's just a show, I should really just relax"]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557045 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:40:13 EDT Oh, my mistake.... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Oh-my-mistake-2557016 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Oh-my-mistake-2557016 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:38:31 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557013 quote:

The problem with your analogy is that Best Buy doesn't pay each customer money not to go to the Mom and Pop store. It's been well documented that Microsoft (Best Buy) pays it's OEM manufacturers (HP, Compaq, etc.) money (actually, MS threatens to "fine" them) not to go with other OS'es (Mom and Pop stores). So your analogy is null and void.

It's not that Microsoft is the dominant platform that people like me are upset. It's the techniques (read: illegal) MS used/uses to get there that upset us.

PC Makers can tell Microsoft to shove it at any time. However, is there something better out there? Nope. They are under no obligation to go with Microsoft, but they make the best right now. Why would PC makers want to shoot themselves in the foot and go with a substandard OS?

Threatning to fine them? Please. Sorry, but that didn't happen. I bet they did say, "If you cease to put our OS on your computers we will charge you $$$$$ to get your corporate licensing back." Shady yes, but not illegal.

As I said, we should move this to another forum. It is getting out of hand and WAY off topic. :)
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net
[text was edited by author 2002-02-20 17:41:14]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2557013 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:38:15 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2556984 quote:

Its not my corporate war. This is the way things have been for ages. :)

There are a lot of "lets say" in there, but you are right we will be left with less choices. However, are they choices people would go with in the first place? I don't know many computer illerate users that would go with Linux over Windows XP when buying a new PC. 75% of the users out there want something easy to use and work with.

quote:

Competition makes businesses (theoretically) fair in their prices and also forces companies to make better products. If you can't see that then you're going to be paying a crapload for Windows in a few years when MS has no other competitors (if this monopoly suit fails, that is).

As I've pointed out before, Microsoft charges $299 for Windows XP Pro. You can get Mac OS X for $129 and you get Mac OS 9 for free. Why then does MS charge so much? Because they can. Because they have a monopoly in the PC world and as more and more competitors fall, the price of Windows increases. It's been steadily going up and up as more and more competitors go out of business. And, as I said before, if they're the only one in business be prepared to pay a lot more for it.

This BEoS lawsuit isn't a valid suit. All they are doing is complaining that they got outworked by Microsoft and now they want a piece of the pie.

But lets look at what you just brought up.

They already have a foothold on the PC industry. You think they are going to be charging a huge amount. The fact of the matter is no one knows. I really don't see their prices as excessive. Lets say you build a new PC and don't have a upgrade. $300 isn't that much to pay for software. Break it down. You use it for 3 years, that is less than $8 a month. If you buy a new PC from a dealer, then you get the OS as part of the system. It takes money to make a quality operating system. You think a billion lines of code is free to make and support?

This argument could go on and on. I do agree that competition is a good thing. However, I have yet to see a company come out and challenge Microsoft in the PC market. Linux just isn't going to cut it in its current form right now.

We could carry on this discussion in another forum, but I believe that this lawsuit is stupid and totally irrevelant.

Fact: BEoS is dying/dead.
Fact: Microsoft has a foothold on the industry.
Fact: BEoS believes it can make a quick buck by suing Microsoft and claiming they never had a chance.

I am just saying this opens the door for all those small town grocery stores that were driven out of business because of a big Walmart. How about the mom and pop computer stores that close their doors cause Best Buy undercuts em? Where do these lawsuits stop?
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2556984 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:34:39 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2556815 said by Nightfall:

What is going to stop mom and pop computer stores from suing Best Buy when they are driven out of business? What is going to stop local grocery stores from suing Meijer or Walmart when they are forced to close their doors?

You also have a very valid point. I do wish that users had a choice of operating systems upon purchase of a new system. Windows 95 was probably the biggest piece of crap I have seen. If the PC makers didn't put it on every system that was released, and instead offered BEoS as a alternative, things may be different now.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Money-Talks-2556792 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:19:00 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2556765
Choices, you see, are what keep other companies in check. It's what keeps companies like Microsoft from charging exorbitant fees for their OSes. If we let Mac OS, Linux, BSD, QNX, etc. go the way of OS/2 and BeOS then who knows how much MS will charge us then?

We *need* competition. I'll repeat that again for you: We need competition

Competition makes businesses (theoretically) fair in their prices and also forces companies to make better products. If you can't see that then you're going to be paying a crapload for Windows in a few years when MS has no other competitors (if this monopoly suit fails, that is).

As I've pointed out before, Microsoft charges $299 for Windows XP Pro. You can get Mac OS X for $129 and you get Mac OS 9 for free. Why then does MS charge so much? Because they can. Because they have a monopoly in the PC world and as more and more competitors fall, the price of Windows increases. It's been steadily going up and up as more and more competitors go out of business. And, as I said before, if they're the only one in business be prepared to pay a lot more for it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2556765 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:15:46 EDT Money Talks http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Money-Talks-2556701 said by Nightfall:

PC Makers were under no obligation to do it though. They had a choice and went with Microsoft. I hear a lot of people saying, "Microsoft leverged them and forced them to do it!". However, PC makers could have told Microsoft to shove it and they didn't.

Yeah you have a very valid point. PC makers can just say no and face the consequences, in Hitachi's case, they would have to face higher costs for installing MS software. Now Hitachi could either eat the extra cost of selling the software, or they could pass it on to consumers. This is monopolistic behavior! Now if I were making decisions at hitachi, I would have also bowed to MS as well. I have a position to hold, deadlines and sales projections to meet and a market share to hold on to. Tough for Be Inc. but thats how business is.

said by Nightfall:
If BEoS was superior, as a PC maker, I would have went with them. Obviously, the PC makers didn't think that much of BEoS at the time. It also comes down to how good the product is. If Microsoft was selling a crappy product, how many PC makers would keep including it on their systems? There wouldn't be many. There is only so much leverage you can apply before common sense sets in.

Common sense is rarely common in this world. Money talks and if people want an inferior product and want to pay for it...so be it. If the world worked exactly as common sense dictates it should, Microsoft would have gone bankrupt after the release of Windows 95. People flocked to stores and tried to be the first to buy Windows 95 at midnight upon release only to discover how full of bugs it was. When you think about it, PC makers cater mainly to new PC users who want the biggest and best and newest for their systems. Its like the VHS vs Betamax wars of years ago. Betamax was superior and common sense dictated it should prevail over VHS, but you know the story...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Money-Talks-2556701 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 17:07:52 EDT Re: Microsoft=Illegal Monopoly http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-MicrosoftIllegal-Monopoly-2556284 --
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-MicrosoftIllegal-Monopoly-2556284 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 16:24:58 EDT Microsoft=Illegal Monopoly http://www.dslreports.com/forum/MicrosoftIllegal-Monopoly-2556189 said by beeman65:

They probably have no idea what Linux is or the technology behind broadband. Yet those are the people who gobble up anything that is new and thus make those companies $$$. You can't blame them for that.

Exactly my point. BeOS was new and some even say superior to Windows at the time. Why wasn't it gobbled up? Because Microsoft used its market dominance and leverage to pressure PC makers to not offer it. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/MicrosoftIllegal-Monopoly-2556189 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 16:14:00 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555962 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555962 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:48:49 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555915
In a corporate war, there are casualties. BEoS was one of them. Tough luck. If Microsoft did something shady to drive them out of business, then let someone take them to court over it. This court case with BEoS whining about Microsoft driving them out of business and saying they want money is BS.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555915 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:45:01 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555849
Look at other companies as well and you will see the same kind of actions. No one comes out innocent in corporte war. Money is the motivating factor. BEoS lost and wants a piece of the pie. If you think that is right, then swing the doors open for all the other small companies and businesses that have gone under due to competition.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555849 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:38:31 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555836 said by Nightfall:

What kind of question is that?

Doing what Microsoft did isn't against the law...just not moral and low.

Actually what Microsoft did WAS against the law. Two courts of law confirmed that. I am not big business, bit I think there is a fine line between just being aggressive or anti-competitive and being downright malicious. It seems Microsoft crossed that line when intimidating the OEM's and PC manufacturers. In order to make sure competition is protected lawmaker created anti-trust policy. If we didn't then companies like Standard Oil and Carnegie Steel would likely control their markets even today.

Capitalism works best when there is competition. That's what it's all about. If we allow companies to abuse the freedoms of commerce that made them successful then we as a country would be no better than the countries we criticize. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555815 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:35:39 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555813 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555813 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:35:20 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555690 said by Nightfall:

.... It is like me producing Refridgerated Dill Pickles, my company name is Clausson, and suing Vlassic for driving me out of business. ...

A better analogy would be if Best Buy is selling Sony CD burners with the choice of a 10 pack of Sony Media or TDK media. Sony tells Best Buy they can only sell Sony media with the burners otherwise they will pull out all of the Sony products out of the store. That's more or less what Microsoft did and deprived the consumers of a choice. This is also why the major PC manufacturers don't sell preloaded Linux boxes to the consumer.
--
If you're wondering how he eats and breathes and other science facts, then repeat to yourself "it's just a show, I should really just relax"]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555690 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:23:27 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555680 said by Nightfall:

What kind of question is that?

... Doing what Microsoft did isn't against the law......

No, actually it WAS against the law. And, no, they will not get punished for it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555680 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:22:30 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555657 said by Nightfall:

... You call what Microsoft did bullying. I call it corporate life. ...

And the Court system calls it a monopoly using illegal tactics. Which the "justice" system (I have to put quotes around that now with Asscroft running the show) can now ignore.

tom-ay-to .... tom-ah-to]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555657 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:19:02 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555224
If you are trying to imply that corporate america breaks the law and doesn't get caught, you are right. Just like people commit crimes against each other and avoid getting caught. Doing what Microsoft did isn't against the law...just not moral and low. They did what they needed to do to get to the top. Does that mean that the companies they stepped on during their climb and the ones they put out of business have a right to sue? I don't think so. If you do, I think you should look at other successful companies and how they got to the top. Not everyone comes out looking pretty in a corporate war.
--
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555224 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 14:21:32 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555173 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2555173 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 14:15:13 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2554911
BeOS is a pretty cool little OS. It has native multi-threading of applications built-in.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2554911 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 13:39:47 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2554685 --
Nightfall - »www.nightfall.net]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2554685 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 13:17:03 EDT Re: Stupid lawsuits... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2554618
Let me be more specific. What CAN companies be punished for? Is breaking the law OK? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Stupid-lawsuits-2554618 Wed, 20 Feb 2002 13:08:31 EDT