I was thinking...

Wouldn't Microsoft's dominance in the OS and office suite market be even greater if MS was split in two? If there is one company who ONLY specializes in producing operating systems, those OSes could only get better and better, hence attracting more and more users.

The only ones who really stand to lose here are MS shareholders.

Hehe ... Do you think breaking MS into 2 separate firms will help ?
I think nope:
1. If one of them will make OS and other Office than where is competition ? Only Office will bu sucks ...
2. If each of them will make OSes and Offices you will have 2 different Windows and 2 different Offices which will be very unproductive work together ...

On my opinion there we can say nothing about MS monopoly - Do you use http,html,tcp/ip to view this page ? Why not others ? Becouse they are standarts. Now Win32 is a de-facto standart for a huge pack of user-oriented apps. What DOJ wanna do ? They are doing realy wrong - if MS will be broken all that was created before will be needed to start nearly from begin.

Also i don't see a reason to apply old non-IT market regulation rules to IT-market. Cost of CD with software is a several times bigger that cost of manufactring such CD (and it will be always !!!), but all others products (non-it) have cost about cost of manufacturing. As result there is no needs build more CD-plans and recrut more developers if something was done before and cost of creating new alternative will be very high (hehe - read about entry level and story with OS/2 in findings of facts).

P.S To story about Amd and Intel.
Did somebody of you produce chips @home ? But i'm shore 40% of you produce illegal copies of software ;o).

I don't think the shareholders will lose... When MS gets split won't their stocks split too? I was under the impression that this was a good thing in the stock market, especially since any Baby-MS's are pretty much sure bets... Kinda like AT&T, Baby Bells still monopolize the market. Stockholders should make out like bandits

Hi ALL,

Microsoft shouldn't be broken up. The DOJ is wasting millions
of dollars trying to break-up Microsoft. Look how long it took to
break up AT&T. The DOJ is wasting taxpayers money on something thats
NOT going to happen.

If the DOJ wants more opinions in the OS market. Take a few
million and have one or two other development houses program
a OS to go up against Microsoft. The money would be spent alot
better then spending millions trying to break-up Microsoft.

The DOJ is wasting money on stupid things that they can't
win... Also Janet R. send that Cuban kid back home too....

Just because the people of the world use a now GENERIC OS doesnt mean you can sue the company. I have seen crapintosh and lynx and all those other pieces of crap. The only difference i saw was what they were used for. THEY ALL LOOKED LIKE WINDOWS. The difference being one was for servers (which most of the people in the world dont know what it is) crapintosh being a cheap knock off of a computer (people dont know what the hell the difference is between a disk drive and a crapintosh). You americans all want to sue someone. Why do you think the people go to america? One person has TRIED to sue burger king for hot coffee and the court said "SHUT THE HELL UP" and that was the end of that. CANADA is not a COMMUNIST COUNTRY UNLIKE THE STATES. Leave Microsoft alone you jealous bas****s. We dont sue corel.

I agree, Americans should leave microsoft alone. It is very possible for consumers to purchase other operating systems. Linux and MacOS is becoming more and more popular. Microsoft is it's own company it should support whatever it WANTS to support. America is a FREE MARKET ECONOMY, it's acting more like a communist party. I'm from Canda, where there is more gov't control that America, yet we don't go and sue companies because they're hoarding the market. Sure Microsoft is hoarding the PC market, but you can't sue them because Linux companies can't be competitive enough to provide consumers with the same convenience that Microsoft has provided to consumers. Having Internet Explorer seperate from Windows will confuse consumers and I know one thing, there is NO way that i'm going to BUY Internet Explorer when it used to be free. If i were to purchase an operating system from Windows, how would i get to the internet if i didn't have a browser pre-installed on my operating system. So now i'm forced to waste money on a product that used to be free. So what does the DOJ want Microsoft to do? Put their competitors products on THEIR operating system. THE BOTTOM LINE IS that if Microsoft's competitors were more competitive and insightful like microsoft, maybe consumers would have a wider variety of products to choose from. You can't blame Microsoft for it's competitors lack of initiative.

Wow nice to see that you know what your talking about. You have seen Lynx and it looked like Windows. well first off Lynx is a text based web browser and if you ment linux. Linux is a CLUI (Command line user interface) not a gui like windows. and macos was first. I dont like macs buyt it was first so get the facts str8 befor u ramble like a idiot

he didn't say it did idiot

I really have not understood this from the begining. I got my first PC about 3 years ago, and it came with IE (this was windows 95, before the integration)

I downloaded the netscape which was free, and i had an option of uninstalling IE 4.0

I tried both, and they were both free, but i liked IE

Now IE is integrated to my favorite OS (windows 2000, yet i'm not using it because my DSL isp won't support it btw) and since i can install netscape on it, why would i care

WHY DO YOU PEOPLE CARE?????

I mean is it the space?

Is it that extra 100 megs or something that bugs you? I just don't get it i guess

you really really really missed the point

By breaking up a company that has so many problems getting all of its software to work together would mean even greater difficulties.
And what would happen if the DoJ set a date for the break up. I bet Microsoft would up and leave America in a flash, it would set up somewhere else (Europe perhaps) and set up little mini headquarters all over the states, after all if its not an american company anymore the DoJ cant do a thing.
Just a thought :)

sure they can, they can refuse to import their goods and services.

(ie, they can't ship their products to the USA to sell them)

I'm tired of your unintelligent way of thinking and i just wish i could bruise you guys up a little bit.
Every modern man's life has changed because of bill gates, he should be treated as a god, like ghandi or mother teresa or mandela.
As a computer engineer student i owe my entire life and future to him, and reading to your burocratic way of thinking just makes me wanna make you suffer.

lemming

ummm... sure, stating the truth is really unintellegant.

btw, if you have ever read any of my posts, you would know that I am pro-MS :)

Microsoft got where they are today themselves, and should not be split up just because all other companies are loosers. The loosing companies still make enough money to survive, and even if they didn't they could go along with the other 1 billion people on the earth and make money some other way. Microsoft products are excellent, not causing concern to software fallbacks.

Its like someone winning 10 million dollars and then having a Judge ruling, "that's not fair, split your money with the population".

Whether its luck, fraud or anything else, Microsoft dominate, and that's life.

F*ck off American Judge, things are fine how they are.

What's incredibly interesting, is that this statement is loosely based on the diatribes of a loser........

WTF?

yeah smart a** you'll rejoice right up until the point when 400 retarded new computer users that are friends of yours are on the phone to you 24/7 trying to get you to explain to them how to set up user accounts and asking what root level access is on their linux pc. that'll be some fun for you.

or maybe when they're all bugging you for money because they can't afford separate copies of windows, internet explorer, office, and still be able to pay for online expenses.

how about when you go to buy a new pc and they tell you it'll be a two week's wait while they install everything you ordered and get it running stably.

this is just the tip of the iceberg. you'll rejoice for a while, and then kick yourself in the a** for realizing what a dumb move it really was.

LiuSux is monopolistic because it integrates NetscRape into ALL of it's 10,000 different versions. Just something to think about.............

It is obvious most of you have missed the whole point of why the DOJ took MS to court. It wasn't anything to do with technology or products that MS makes, it was to do with their actions within the business world. MS had done things like price fixing, forcing companies to include Windows when they sell computers, buying companies that produced rivel products etc... It is similar to the AT&T case. MS controled such a large market share of the OS market that other OSs makers had little chance to sell their products, especially when MS forced computer sellers to bundle Windows with their computers. How did they do this you ask. They did it by charging computer makers a fee for each computer they sold, even if it didn't have Windows on it... and thats a monopolistic action!
Bundling IE with Windows was only one of the bad things which they did (and it has been proved that you can take IE from Win98 and it still worked). By doing that it stopped compaines from buying Netscape, which was a much better browser at the time, and forced Netscape to make their browser free. And when a company has to make one of it main products free, it's bound to lose a ton of money.
As for the break up, I think it will not make that much difference now. The tech world is slowly moving away from the desktop PC as more companies move to wireless handhelds and palm-sized decvices. More companies are producing network appliences which run a specfic OS. I feel that eventually what OS your running won't matter anyway, as all your apps will be running across a network (intranet, internet, whatever) and you'll be able to run them on OS/2, Linux, Windows (95/98/2000/2001/CE etc), PalmOS, BeOS, AmigaOS, even your old C64!
My last coment goes to all the people who think that one OS is better than another. Each OS that I have used (and thats most of main ones and a few obscure ones) have good points and bad points, they are all used in different situations and do their jobs well, so quit arguing because your just wasting time. Learn them all and you'll be much wiser!
Oh and I no my spelling sucks!

obviously MS didn't buy up enough "COMPETITORS". That fee you mention is a patent license fee granted by the courts. Netscape Communicator started sucking in version 4.x while IE began looking promising at 3.x. I held out as long as I could(as did most Netscape users) with all the Javascript errors and ditched it never looking back. This is how Netscape lost, not from what anything MS did with IE, but the lackadaisical attitude Netscape had towards improving their browser.

And take your last comment and try to tell that to most of the Linux fanatics here, they'll blow up in your face like their kernels.

hehe

I came to a realization a few months ago. Nobody uses Microsoft Office so they can use Windows. They use Windows so they can run Microsoft Office. So, why isn't the a Macintosh Version of Office up to speed with The Windows Version? Why aren't any Microsoft applications available on QNX, BeOS, Linux, BSD, or AIX? Yes, MS Internet Explorer 3.0 is available for Solaris and HPUX, but it's version 3.0, and crippled compared to the Windows or Macintosh versions. I can tell you why: people don't use Office to run Windows. If Microsoft released all of their programs for other Operating systems, then There would be no need for Windows. Microsoft forces users to use Windows. I would be one of the first people to buy Microsoft Office if it was released for linux or QNX, but I simply use TeX/LaTeX or StarOffice. I am all for The breakup. This might bring a new era of innovation. Who knows, maybe Visual Basic for linux in 5 years? I am all for it. then people who make their VB apps can make them croos platform. Maybe the new applications company will create a new crossplatform API like Gtk+? I would be very happy then. The world will not care of Windows Passes. Trust me. After the split up, people will no longer be reliant on Windows. Then Microsoft will be what it originally was : A software company (remember when all thgey made was MS-BASIC interperter?).

it's called business. Look into it.

I'll go ahead and expound on your thoughts and see if this makes sense for you: Why aren't new movies release for betamax. Why aren't more movies released on DVD. How come they don't make bras for men? (do they make bras for men?) How come sports cars don't come with Monster Truck tires? How come most doors don't accomodate humans 8ft and taller? Why haven't they made bathrooms for extra terrestrials with 10 ani? Where's all the video games for NES, Sega Master System, Genesis, SNes, Sega CD........it's called business, you don't support those that don't net you profit. Not all companies are in it to lose money.

That wasn't such a good argument on your part. And I guess you're suggesting you prefer past decades computing over present day?

"The world will not care of Windows Passes." Another nice argument to support the fact that Microsoft isn't a monopoly. Eventhough that's a major blunder of a statement, I'll take it. hehe

hehe

the "Why aren't more movies released on DVD." should be LD, not DVD.

hehe, my bad cuz woohoo! I bought 11 DVD's this past week.

oh yeah, it's really a crime to make a piece of software for their own software platform... what a bunch of BS.

There ARE other office suites out there, such as Sun's StarOffice, and Corel's Word Perfect, which are available on other OS's.
There is a Mac version of IE, and a Mac version of Office, AND, if you read the headlines in on the frontpage of betanews.com, they talk about MS telling what's going to be in Office2001, or, the next version of Office for Mac... Notice how the Mac version of Office comes out about a year later than the Windows version, and same thing for IE. a) it's marketing, b) it's them trying to port a highly complex Windows program to a completly different platform.

MS doesn't force ANYTHING on ANYONE.
If you want to talk about a company forcing products on the users, look at Apple and the Mac platform. Apple FORCES you, literally, to buy their own OS (ONLY MacOS works on the G3 and later, other than Linux, but that was done illegally by reverse engineering, they closed the specs for the motherboards and stuff, so no more clones), they completly control the hardware and software on that platform.

1. Microsoft is NOT a monopoly.

2. Internet Explorer is so integrated with Windows that it would be very difficult to remove it, and besides that, I don't think most consumers want it to be removed. Try going back to the original Windows 95 (without the desktop update) and you will see what I good idea it was to integrate IE into Windows.

Also, there are many programs that require IE4 or higher. Removing IE will require users download IE before being able to use these programs.

3. Microsoft shouldn't be punished for being successful.

4. It really won't help anything.

5. They really should've gotten a computer literate judge for this case.

Yes, Windows without the desktop update sucks. But that's has nothing to do with a web browser. Drag and drop on the start menu, and having folders automatically expand when you hold a file over them, are great things. But they have nothing to do with web browsing - they're just trying to get a better verison of drag and drop. They could have easily done this without including a web browser, but they did because it motivates you. If you use Opera or Mozilla and never even touch IE, you'd still want install the desktop update for the drag and drop functions.

Andbody that starts making gross generalizations about users of ANY operating system is pathetic. Linux `zealots'? Windows weenies? get real people. They all have advanatges, and they all suck in their own unique way.

wanna bet?

Go to Windows95 Gold and type in a webaddress into Windows Explorer, it won't work. You can do that if you have IE4 and up installed, but not earlier versions.

There is something seriously wrong when you are victimized for being successful.

indeed

I think these COMPANIES petitioned against Microsoft because they were pissed off that Microsoft didn't buy them out. Which is a model for many internet companies, to make something good enough for the higher up company to be impressed enough to purchase.

AOL keyword: COMPANIES, plural of company. Which would negate the meaning of a monopoly.

Let's all petition the government to stop the CRAPPY software industry, AOL, Netscape, Sun, Real...etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc,..................all these companies evidently are monopolizing the second rate and beyond software industry. Why don't you companies loosen up your monopolistic hold on this segment and allow Microsoft to produce pathetic software like you've already done.

jag-offs

Isn't is ironic that the internet never had these kind of problems until it grew to be so common place as to attract profit seeking layers, bureaucrats, and other a******s of the like.

Now we've got the fate of many ventures decided by judges and politicians whose slight experience in computing goes as far as changing the vacuum tubes in the "computers" they had 50 years ago.
Sad Sad Sad.. time to wake up ppl.

I would think that "slight computing experience" meant by at least knowing how to use Windows and Word. :-) I doubt any of the politicans or judges even knew how to change the vaccum tubes when the first computer came out, let alone even knew how one operated.
I would like to see MS dealt with in a fair manner (ok, I somewhat support the breakup of MS), however, I'm becoming really disguted with how our government is trying to show that they are the "big brother". The government is already a "big brother" to its citizens and there is no need to show it off. I get the damn picture, already.

Come on... Your a 'professional' news site, and you write a story like this? Jesus! "With the goal would to"? "A brake up"?

Wake up and fire the illiterate!

Learn to spell yourself before you criticize others!
Your = You're

I was talking to my girlfriend's dad (a lawyer) last night at dinner about the MS/DOJ trial. He told me something I hadn't quite gotten until then0 this same Judge has ruled against MS twice before, and had BOTH rulings overturned, because he was WRONG. Now, here he is again, ruling against MS a 3rd time....Anyone see a pattern? I believe MS will win on appeal, and this Judge may be open to charges himself.

James

Why on Earth would Microsoft be broken up into a company for Windows, and a company for Office and other software? I thought the whole point of the monopoly thing was that Microsoft was allegedly forcing people browse the internet with just their Internet Explorer because it was so conveniently integrated into the Windows OS? If that were the case, which it doesn't seem to be for the DOJ, then it would be ten times harder to find a way to break Microsoft up so that it gives up its dominance with Internet Explorer. That's not to say that I don't like IE, in fact, I think it is the best browser out there, but breaking up Windows and Office isn't going to stop that dominance. How about an Internet based company (works on IE, MSSQL, Frontpage, etc.) and another company that works on normal productivity software, like Windows, Office, etc. That way, if we still want to have Microsoft's stuff integrated with Windows, they would not have it installable on the Windows CD, but must be bought separately. The installation would integrate itself with Windows like it does now. That way, people have an equal chance of getting Netscape or IE, or any other browser. I think that would be more beneficial for all. What do you think?

Here is my take on it. I support the break up to a certain extent, however, there are three issues I'm concerned of. One is the fact that we the consumers will face the issue of compatibility. Will these "Baby Bills" make products compatibile with Windows?. Two. The government as I see it is growing too powerful when it comes to deciding what we must to do to comply with the laws. Where is the consumers voice in this issue? We use MS products and we will take the shaft whether MS is broken up or not. Three. A break up would mean the justice system would be clogged with appeals from MS, geeez, I thought our government wanted to fight crime. What is more important to our citizens and government? Some corporation that likes to play the role of the "anti-consumer" or the criminal? Please save the justice system for people that really need it. There is a way to force MS to be more consumer friendly besides coming to rash descion on breaking it up. I can't outright support or condemn the breakup becasue I DO question the motives of both MS and the government.

Splitting MS software from the OS will losen the IE problem some. IE will be controlled by a different company then. Which means that it would be harder for them to make Windows so IE dependant. the breaking up like this could bring great things. Escpecially if they are forced to recode windows explorer and the majority of that because of it. Maybe, they'll do it right this time, and get a more stable OS.

Yeah...they call it windows 2000 i think.

1. Why did the DOJ decide to go for a remedy that would take so long to implement? I don't get that, there's the appeals for who knows how many years, and then if the judgment still stands, actually breaking the company up.

2.Who's money do you think is being used in this process? MS and the taxpayer, good stuff, forget actually doing something useful with taxpayers money.

3.They should have done something that would have been easier to implement, like make MS release the source for IE. This would force them to remove the intergration.

4. Netscape really sucks, it's a crap browser and is less standards compliant than IE. I will say though that when Mozilla (or mozilla based netscape) is more stable (released), I'll use that.

That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. How would making them releae the source do ANYTHING?

If they forced MS to do that, I would have to move to another country.

What I wanna know is what happens to the already integrated products, like backoffice server, and small business backoffice server? Both good products, but they are basically NT with all the server applications all installed together from the same box, will this still be allowed? or what?????? And where DOES this leave IE? Iv read the OS company will be allowed to license it, so what? does that mean license it to just sell? or license the code to do with it what they want? Is this going to put IE6 (which was rumoured to include a new shell again like IE4) on hold? What about all the html code that is already in windows (which is part of IE I suppose?) like all the MMC stuff etc, there is HTML EVERYWHERE in windows now, has that got to go? or what?!?!?!?

no, it will not.

IF the DOJ wins, it won't be for years. Microsoft is going to fight this by appealing it, in which they will probably win, although, if they don't, like I said, it would take years.

And oh boy, if MS wins, I guarantee that they will sue the butt off of the DOJ.

IE6? By the time the case goes through the appeals process IE25 will be outdated. I agree that MS used some of it's power to force smaller competitors out but, where would we be today if MS had never happened. It is hard for me to imagine having to use OS2 Warp! What hurt Netscape more than anything was AOL getting ahold of it. I used to use Netscape and when AOL bought it I quit, even though at the time it was slightly mainstream. Look at it now! No one has forced Netscape out anymore than it's owner...AOL, and the weenies who choked and sold it to them. Do ya think that not having Windows would have been better for the world? You never heard anyone complain until MICROSOFT became competitive in the browser market. Shame on Bill for creating something that was better than anything else out there. If the browser is the main issue then why doesn't Microsoft include a copy of junk Netscape on it's windows CD? Guess what the majority of people will still be using anyway.
Elkhounder

MS should sue the hell out of the DOJ. This case has passed far beyond the borderline of harrassment. I read that the DOJ used as part of it's argument the notion that Microsoft is attempting to abuse it's monopoly power further by entering the Palm market... ok, so now simply ENTERING another market is abusing power?!?
I think the DOJ, and government in general, needs a housecleaning... or a hanging... pick one.

You and me both buddy. DOJ is disgusting. Where the hell else do you get convicted criminals who once upon a time brutally raped and murdered fifteen year old girls being able to sue (and WIN) multimillion dollar lawsuits because he got beat up after he killed a prison guard and tried to escape. OR Fat b****es (I hope she reads this, a plague o' her house) that sue McDonalds because they're too f***ing stupid to realize ... hey ... coffee ... it's HOT ... and spill it on themselves. OR stupid a** people that put ladders in horse poop and when they fall because there isn't a sticker that says "Don't put ladder in horse poop." Good God Almighty.

I read once somewhere that "everyone is entitled to their share of everyone else's money." What a sad, but true, quote to depict the lives of the lawsuit happy American society as it stands today. Civil litigation is reaching new levels of abuse on the successful.

You forget the people who sue cigarette companies because they got sick of smoking. Smoking is bad, but isn't this obvious?

you missed one EH! you forgot the one about breaking in to someones house and cutting yourself on a kitchen knife. YOU g** d*** AMERICANS ARE PATHETIC IN YOUR LAWS. Dont get caught chewing gum and walking backwards in california.

I think MS should just buy an island somewhere and live under their own jurisdiction. I don't know if they could do that or not, but it'd be cool.

That or move to my country or something - I know the government, throw enough money their way and they'll let you do anything.

Bloody Americans with all your lawyers!!!

;)

I have a question though - Where would we all be if MS said "Screw it, we've made our money; we quit!"

I'm sure someone would fill their place given a year or two, but in the mean time I think that people would be more than a little worried.

What country you from CANADA???

I have to second what JR said, but I feel that I need to amend it.

DELL

Although I went to their site and built a PC with Red Hat 6.1, I am unable to provide a link because they use ASP, and base it on a customer number, but it is an option. It is a PC pre-installed with something other than Windows, from a very competent computer manufacturer.

Secondly if you really pay attention to what 98lite is doing, it is installing old dlls. It replaces the 98 dlls with 95 dlls, and for this service you get buggier versions of older files. While I can appreciate what 98lite does, and why someone may want it, I can install Windows 95 if I want to... without the use of some hack.

98 without IE really is impossible. Your drive contents may load slower, because it is really loading a webpage in explorer that provides you that content, in part through OCX applets. You can even modify what is displayed by modifying the master .htt document, or creating a new one for that directory. Then only that directory will be changed. I'm supprised software developers don't use this to make programs eaiser to use. The benifit of having slightly slower explorer windows is that the browser is faster than when it was a seperate component. Granted that makes NS less capable, but would you rather have a faster on-line experience, or two slower browsers. That is a Microsoft innovation, driven by competition. If NS6 PR1 were less of a resource hog, I may have considered using it as my primary browser, but why give up a good thing?

Wrong. You are pretty much are forced to install Netscape on Red Hat Linux, at least, or else several of the web-based features in the shell won't work. I'd say that is no more "shell integration" than IE on Windows 98.

Incorrect again, you assume that because Netscape is installed with a gui installation of linux it's integrated into the shell. When Netscape is installed, it's a stand alone application, you can uninstall it and your system would be perfectly fine without it. It offers no benefit or non-benefit to the OS other than being able to view web pages. IE adds some functionality to Windows but it's fluff, and you CAN NOT uninstall it. There is a big difference. No one here understands why there's a problem with IE being integrated into Windows, and use poor poor excuses like "it's innvoative" and "it was the next logical step" to defend it.

wrong!!!! you can install any browser on linux to access these functions. on the other hand, you can only access windowsupdate if you are using IE. THAT is forcing the users to use M$'s browser.
which one do you consider to be monopolistic????

No you are WRONG!!! You can bypass WindowsUpdate and download the files directly. For example go here http://www.microsoft.com...downloads/corporate.asp
to download Win98 updates without the assistance of WindowsUpdate. Works with whatever browser you choose.

You don't find computers with Linux pre-installed because Linux is not user-friendly enough for the masses. That has NOTHING to do with Microsoft being monopolistic, but rather the Linux world being too lazy to do something about the usability issue.

And you're grossly misinformed when you claim MS lied when they said IE couldn't easily be "deintegrated." All the help files in Win98 are in HTML format. It would be no easy task for them to go back to the old WinHelp format. And, keep in mind that many third-party applications written for Win98 (rightly) expect IE to be installed; 98lite will break those applications.

if all help-pages are in HTML, the user should be allowed to choose which browser (not only IE and Netscape) he uses to view these pages. HTML is a standard so every standards-compliant browser should be able to view them.
as for software requiring IE. I have NT4 at work (without IE) and I haven't encountered any software which required IE so IMHO it won't be that many applications. If these applications indeed need IE, I can still install it (if I want to). With Win98/Win2k, I'm forced to have IE integrated on my OS, even if I don't use it.

Maybe they should separate Windows even more by telling Microsoft to exclude MS Paintbrush from Windows. Becuz Paintbrush would make people think that there isn't any other drawing program. Yeah, maybe Adobe or Corel should bring Microsoft to court for that. I still don't know why there would be a need to separate Microsoft. If you don't like one of their products then choose another one. Nobody is forcing you to use MS applications over another company's applications. This is getting ridiculous. I thought the goverment was smarter than this. Maybe they should send in federal agents and snatch Internet Explorer out of Windows like they did with Elian Gonzalez, Wazzup!!!! Wazzup!!!!!!!!! Wazzup !!!!!!!!!!!

Why don't you unplug your head from your ass! The suit is centered around anti-competitive practices. Netscape was only one of the examples cited for this.

There are a lot of first time computer users who don't know any better and get confused when they get a dialog saying "xxxx is no longer your default browser..."

Applications such as Corel and Photoshop are geared towards professionals who invariably know what they want in the first place and choose the platform/os (I'm not just talking about Mac either, just in case you jump on that) to suit their work environment.

Netscape had the "xxxx is no longer your default browser..." message before IE. IE copied it from Netscape. I don't see that as anti-competitive.

I said the same thing but not with paintbrush but the calculator. You americans all want to screw everyone.

That is part of Windows

People are fighting over ms because of netscape and a few other companies started to scream and yell about Internet explorer being tied in with windows 98. I would like to take a poll out of people that use this site, who uses netscape ? and who uses Ie ? I bet you will probably find that most of them use Ie. People know that netscape is out there, all they need to do is download a 15 meg file.
I personally use Ie. I use it for several reasons.

1.) It understands DHTML better than Netscape.
2.) Better Interface (opinion)
3.) It routes better if a site is down, where netscape will stop, just error out.

If you don't believe, then use your latest version of netscape you can even use the preview version of the latest release. Go to www.blizzard.com and see if you can see the dhtml additions to that page. You will see it with Ie, but you won't with netscape.

Personally I don't think by splitting MS up it will accomplish anything, except have MS rewrite windows, which will cause more bugs.
Linux won't be ever become the main os unless it starts to use win32 bit code or game manufactures start making games for linux. Why waste programmers time and Money for a OS that is probably only 50% or less of the Market.

Anyway, I just had to throw in my two cents.

if you guys are tired of hearing craps about PC.. simply, go for MAC.. simple.. not so hard..

Nothing like getting gamez and appz months and months after they come out, well after they've been killed by PC users.

yea, and be monopolized by there proprietary hardware!!!! that'll be great!

If you don't like the OS you can always install linux PPC on it, or BeOS, you probably would have to wait quite so long for games to come out, not to mention that the hardware is better than intels...

Well if Apple made the mac, and Apple wrote the OS, and there doesn't appear to be any competition, does this make Apple a monopoly? I think Judge Jackson should take this into account. If i want a mac, i'll goto McDonalds, and get my self a Big Mac.

Mac is the same thing as the altair. NO ONE WANTS ONE.

For some reason everyone thinks that Microsoft is stealing everyone elses ideas. What about the mouse? Anyone know who made the first mouse? XEROX made the first mouse and EVERY OS (except dos) USES THE MOUSE. Every computer uses a hard drive does this mean that everyone who makes a computer is copying each other by using a hard drive? I dont think anyone realizes that not everyone knows what linux, or unix, or even a crapintosh is. They grew up in a windows and Microsoft is superior time frame and they like it. Leave Microsoft how they are. Why punish the source of the OS improvments? Or the company which brought the world to this computerized world? If you want the source code for IE figure it out yourself you lazy bas****s.

yeah yeah.. mac hardware is better than PC. Don't ever bring this up hehe...

nope... no BeOS on the Mac platform, unless you got a G2.

Apple closed their platform when the G3 came out.

In case you didn't notice, but Apple is using a lot of PC hardware in their iMAC's, G3 and higher MAC's. So I wouldn't say they have better hardware than PC's. But I agree that Apple's G3 and higher processors have better performance than Intel's Pentium processors.

Does that mean LiuSux is monopolistic because it integrates NetscRape into ALL of it's 10,000 different versions ? Just something to think about.............

I have mixed feelings on this issue. Sure, it's good that Microsoft will no longer be a huge empire that completely take over the PC market - but let's look at the facts.

Microsoft have done a LOT for the PC market. Plug and Play is a good example - some people still think it's a bad idea, but I really don't think that's the case. It's nice to be able to plug a device into your USB or PCMCIA slot and have it automatically set up straight away. Try doing that before Microsoft invented PnP!
Everyone uses Windows. This is a Good Thing. What would happen to games if people used 5 different operating systems? There would be 5 different versions of the game to support everyone, and it would be 5 times the price. No thanks!

Back on the other hand again, this split-up is at least done fairly sensibly. "Microsoft 1" makes the OS, whilst "Microsoft 2" makes the apps. That way, we won't be forced to use a certain browser, but we still get a single operating system. Good! Problem solved. As long as they don't change it, I think it's generally a good decision.

programming languages are supposed to be portable to any machine.

so your games written 5x over are really more like same game, minor ports.

hardly worth a 5x increase in price.

GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT. Money talks. That's all there is too it.

The net result of the last anti trust breakup of a company is that now, I have the fortune of being called by obnoxious MCI sales people at prime hours, like dinner, late evening when I'm trying to relax...

With the DOJ attempting to do it again, I just can't wait to see how THIS is going to contribute to increasing the level of bliss in my life.

Between this and the Gonzales kid, I'm going to start freebasing my antidepressants instead of swallowing them.

Exactly what kind of incredible innovation is this going to spawn? And the really funny part... they can't merge again for ten years. So in ten years and one day, Operating Systems buys Applications for a dollar and Microsoft again.

Politicians and lawers should not be allowed to breed.

Oh boy this sounds fun! Let's make the computer even harder for people to learn by making everything seperated! Joy!

AOL has more users than MSN Access, how is Microsoft a monopoly? That does it, Im going to hire some Asian to bomb the white house.

does this mean you are a racist? And why asian?

Im sorry I just like racism jokes. Im Asian myself too, you see its ok to make fun on my own race. Again Im sorry if i hit any nerve

Have you been reading the articles? This has nothing to do with MSN or AOL...it's about the browsers.

Wow, thats illegal just to mention..

homeboy got off for the simple fact of riot avoidance. Too bad MS couldn't have used the race card.

In any event, we'll have to start paying for our browsers and media players. No more free IE or Netscape. No more free Real, Quicktime, and of course the beloved Windows Medial Player. You won't get anymore options of free trials or free limited basic versions anymore.

It will be fun if all these poor people who think MS is a monopoly and in favor of a break up start whining about having to pay for all those things now.

Uhhh, how would the break-up effect us having to pay for those things?

well...they have pay and basic/limited versions. The limited versions were to entice you into trying and buying. But in the wake of possibly charging for using MS browsers and media players, they don't have a need to offer any of those products for free, or is they do, would make them time limited, and we all hate those.

does this mean I don't have to pay for M$ products if the DOJ doesn't break them up? why would all companies have to give away their products for free and M$ be the only only to charge money for them?????
what's next??? Let M$ integrate every thinkable application into their OS, charge money only for the OS (yeah right) and say you get the rest for free? Death to competition!! Long live the M$ monopoly?!?!?!?

cripes man...those free things are integral parts of everyday computing and media. If some company thinks they have a better product that they think consumers are willing to pay for, all the more power to them. MS includes these free things because they felt it was only a natural progression. Your logic is very odd: "why would all companies have to give away their products for free and M$ be the only only to charge money for them?????" Since when does MS charge money for their free products.

And you people so much against MS don't realize as you argue for the other companies is that, there are other companies because MS ISN'T a monopoly. There would not be any other OS if MS were a monopoly. There would be absolutely no other company if MS was a monopoly.

Since when does adding in apps equate to a monopoly. Since when does making superior products most consumers buy and use equate to a monopoly.

Perhaps the other companies should be sued for monopolizing the inferior products industry.

OK Here's the solution!!!
TO OS COMPANIES OTHER THAN MICROSOFT:

STOP BEING SO F***ING STUPID AND BUILD YOUR OWN OS THAT HAS ITS OWN APPLICATIONS BUILT IN!!!!! OR CONTRACT OUT TO GET THE APPS BUILT IN!!!! GOD!!!

ALLL you wanna do is WHINE whine WHINE whine WHINE about Microsoft integrating internet browsers, office suites, etc. etc. etc. into their OS! They do this for a REASON: it SELLS! Or am I just stupid in thinking that nearly everyone I know uses Microsoft Windows / Office, even the computer illiterate people who think it's a TV and confuse it and the keyboard?! I hardly think so!!

Problem is: Other OS companies are too half-assed to get the job done as completely as Microsoft, so instead of growing some balls they just sue the pants off of MS because "it isn't fair."

waaaah.

I've seen comparisons using cars and M$ so I'll try to explain this since all you one-track minded guys still don't understand what the problem is.
M$ builds cars (OS) which run a fuel (applications). 90% of the fuel you can get only can be used with M$ cars because no one has the engine (API) to build cars that run on the same fuel.
Now M$ decides to add a stereo "for free" to their car and link it so that if you remove it, the car won't start anymore. Now, all car-stereo manufacturers get f*cked. The stereo isn't part of the car because you don't need a stereo to drive a car. And since everybody with that car now has that same radio, all radio stations start transmitting programs only for that radio. Which means M$ decides how radio works instead of an independent organ.
The analogy is not perfect (far from) but maybe it's the only way to get you M$ addicts to open up your mind.
I use Windows (98, NT, 2000) but also Unix (Solaris, HPUX, AIX, Linux) and what I like about all those unixes is that I have a choice (ksh, bash, csh... for shell; CDE, KDE, Enlightenment, OpenLook for GUI; Netscape, Opera, KDE Explorer for browser). IMHO, M$ eliminates my choice. By giving away everything "for free" (which isn't true because you still have to pay them to use their OS), they kill other companies who only have their applications to sell (they can't develop another OS because everybody uses windows, thus a monopoly, and wants to keep using the same applications, stopping them from switching to another OS).
Breaking up M$ isn't the solution in my eyes either. Releasing the API's would be because this would allow other companies to develop another OS and thereby breaking M$'s monopoly.
You will probably disagree (I wouldn't expect anything else from you) since you seem to love the fact that others make decisions for you.
I'm no American but I believe their is something in your amandments about freedom.

well, you did a good job of arguing about nothing. So I don't disagree with what you said because you didn't say anything. That was a horrible attempt at an analogy. And then attempting to nationalize this argument might further turn those with similar ideas to you, away from you.

You said: "You will probably disagree (I wouldn't expect anything else from you) since you seem to love the fact that others make decisions for you." Thanks for trying to make my decisions for me, hypocrite.

Nice to see how clouded your mind is, you say MS is a monopoly because everybody uses Windows and you miss the fact that you mentioned all those other ones.

Do yourself a favor and look at what you actually typed. Disproving yourself in your own debate is a bit odd.

you would need to be openminded to understand it but you are not.
the analogy i used is the one you M$-lovers always use to defend M$ policy. if i use it, all you can say is that it is 'nothing'.
you say i argued about nothing but i can't seem to find any arguments in your response. i doubt you even read it completely or even understood it. trying to insult me by calling me a hypocrite doesn't convince either.
and where did i disprove myself???? just go to whatever computer store and ask for a pc with another OS. they'll look at you in disbelieve, all they sell is M$ Windows. just because there are alternatives doesn't mean there isn't a monopoly. read all the reports, windows is by far the most used OS on the desktop PC (= monopoly).
i always here that M$ doesn't have a monopoly because there is linux but then i always hear linux is no alternative because it is not userfriendly. so, it is no alternative to windows which means M$ has a monopoly.

I'm not so sure our "amandments" have something to say about that.....

Well...you've managed to discredit your argument yet again. I do enjoy your altered reality universe in unknowingly supporting Windows.

Odd arguments indeed but fascinating. And I won't bother to point out why you discredit yourself, because you obviously miss it gravely as you state your comments.

Did you ever consider the fact that maybe he was framed? ... Ok, me neither.

and yet you do it again....
have you ever tried using arguments in a discussion in stead of the FUD M$ keeps pushing in your brain?? Maybe it's time you started thinking for yourself but then again, that's much more difficult than just saying: "M$ is the greatest because M$ says so and all you other guys are just wrong and I'm right."

You actually think that just because something is wrong that the government will actually oppose it? This is the United States not utopia (though I wish it was). In the U.S., and in the world in general, wrongs are not always opposed and rights are not always upheld. Money speaks and politicians listen. The court's ruling is wrong. MS is not some secret borg colonization attempting to implant special processors in your brains or any of that other bogus, monopolistic microsoft-is-trying-to-take-over-the-world bull@#%&. I think it's almost funny that people would be surprised that a company would choose to support one product with another. I mean come on! It's called good business practice... Besides, IE owns you and your mother. Nuttscrape belongs on the computers of deranged Mac users (sorry to you 0.1% of the population who are Mac obsessors).

Well, now that I've dug myself a huge hole and pissed off half the internet, I should probably get to my point.

First: Nobody is forced to buy Windows, with or without IE. If people don't like a web-enabled OS, then they should install Linux or buy a Mac.

Second: Microsoft, like any other company, will dig in their fingernails when they are threatened. And, yes, that probably does mean that they will throw scraps of meat to the hungry polticians. After all, that is what these things always degrade to...

Third: Even if Microsoft is split up, they are the world's largest, most influential software company and they embody the software economy. Do we really want to throw an already chaotic market into total disarray?

Fourth: Breaking up Microsoft will take years, because of the political process, money tossing, and side-taking.

And finally: Breaking up Microsoft will be a small bump in the road. Look at AT&T. They have thrived since being broken up.

Apologies go out to Macintosh users (I admit that they aren't so bad, but they just bug me). And kudos go out to Microsoft for continuing to produce fine software (even if it is not perfect like critics expect it to be) and for standing strong in the face of nation-wide MS-bashing.

The fact is that MS won on appeal 2 years ago, which allowed the company to incorporate its browser with the OS. This is called innovation, not a monopoly. If, and I say IF, the DOJ wins this case, it will hurt our economy, and also other software companies. Just think, if MS is broken up then is regulated, what is going to stop the government from regulating the likes of Sun, AOL, and Linux? They will say that one company can't innovate their product until the "little" guy catches up. The fact is that MS makes incredible products, and if you don't want to use them, you don't have to. I am sure MS will win on appeal, and make it better for the future of technology.

Incredible products? Yes... I think the way my computer Blue Screens every two minutes is an incredible feature, I think BeOS, Linux and MacOS should all implement such an innovative feature.

As for Microsoft implementing IE into Windows, the reason it is considered monopolistic is because it was implemented in such a way that you couldn't uninstall it. This is bad because then people think since they can't uninstall it they might as well just exclusively that browser. That is bad for competition, and if you guys didn't know, competition is a good thing because it keeps prices down and makes companies innovate. For instance, if Intel had never received competition from AMD and Cyrix we would be using 486SX processors right now.

As for Netscape, it is not a "bad" browser. I'm betting most of you haven't even used it since IE was pre-installed when you installed Windows. I use both browsers and they're both easily as accessible and featureful.

Finally, Microsoft is NOT responsible for the growth of the world. What exactly do you mean growth of the world? I assume you mean they elped shaped the information age. There are other companies that have done MUCH more, and if you people would cease being ignorant boobs, you'd notice that there are companies like Cisco Systems, Lucent Technologies, AT&T, Bell and so many others that have helped develop information technology.

Competition doesn't make innovation or lower prices, it just makes them happen faster and better. If AMD weren't around, Intel would be releasing the 600 Mhz P3 CPU about now, instead of 1000+ Mhz. It's good for business for Intel to come up with faster processors after the market has been saturated with the old ones, but now that AMD has caught up, Intel is having trouble catching up because of it's old practice of waiting to release.

Microsoft might innovate, but if they had real competition, they'd be innovating much faster, and at lower prices. As good as a company is alone in a market, it'll either do better with competition, or fail.

I don't believe MS abused their near monopoly, the fact that they have one is enough of a problem, and it's real hard for competition to get in on it. Main reason why? Most software is made DirectX compatible, which is owned by Microsoft. So either letting other OSs use DirectX in their OS on it's own, or force software producers to support DirectX and another language (which would be problems for the software programmers) would fix it, but in the end, is there any perfect fix to this near monopoly? Not really.

Why do I say near monopoly? Well, they're not the only OS developer, but they're the only ones that have most programmers supporting only them.

Let's compare it to the automative industry. The OS are vehicles. RedHat, Slackware, BeOS, Sun all produce pick-ups and compete against each other for the people who need pick-ups. Macintosh produces motorcycles, and they're all alone in that market, and in that way, they're a near monopoly. Microsoft produces passenger vehicles, and they're all alone in that market, and in that way, they're a near monopoly.

First off, I agree with your statement regarding Netscape. It is a quite capable browser. Infact, I download updated Mozilla builds daily. Nonetheless, I still prefer Internet Explorer over Netscape. Personally, I have found it faster and more stable than Netscape. Others may have differing opinions.

Regarding the integration of Internet Explorer with Windows, however, I disagree with your opinion. In fact I give credit to Micrsoft for taking this step. It was a brilliant business move. It provided a convenient way for inexperienced users to get online.

Finally, I want to comment, in general, about some of the other topics raised in this forum. I do not think it is correct to claim that Micrsoft engaged in unfair business practices by not including an uninstall feature. I also think people tend to over simplify the issues surrounding Microsoft and fail to fully understand the case as a whole. Additionally, believe it or not folks, Linux is not the one true OS (nor is Windows, BSD, BeOS, etc.) Speaking as an experienced IT professional, when selecting an OS for a particular application, I make the decision based upon the requirements of that particular application factoring in support, third-party software, performance, security, hardware constraints, budget constraints, etc.. In other words, there are a lot of factors as play, and whether or not Micrsoft is evil is not one of them. Each OS has its strengths and weaknesses. I rountely install NT and Win2K onto workstations and servers for integration into production environments. If managed correctly, performance, security, and blue-screens are non-issues. And you can certainly say the same about Solaris, BSD, Linux, etc.

Don't blame the bluse screens on MS, they are just a notification of an error communicating with the hardware, which is usually caused by a) bad hardware, or b) user incompetance.

explaining that to anyone in need of explanation of it is a task in itself. But more often than not, it's user incompetence.

if your computer keeps blue screening every few seconds then your hardware is defective - probably you have the wrong graphics card installed.

if am i going to have to pay for my web browser after the break up, can someone please explain to me how that has improved my situation as a consumer?

You've never looked up on ms' technet for most of the HEX error codes when a blue screen occurs. Most of them are buffer overruns, and the main cause of that ladies and gentlemen is unchecked buffers, microsoft is notorious for this type of problem.

Bad hardware errors occur on any computer platform, so why is it such a problem for Microsoft products?? Doesn't that seem a little odd to anyone else?

So you're saying that MCSE's do not see blue screens?? Are they colour blind??

if you've been keeping up with the entire industry, you'll know how much of a farce certification has become. Either by dubious or ethical ways, acquirements of certifications have come under fire due to the fact that certified technicians have no clue what they are doing. So regardless if you are MSCE or not, if you get a blue screen and don't know why they occur, you obviously shouldn't have that certification. And the "you" I'm referring to is anybody.

I love this comment, "My computer blue screens every two minutes". All you people out there that have unstable computers... UPGRADE THAT CHEAP a** 386 with the stepping bug, and get a real computer. I haven't met one person (that actually knows anything about computers) that doesn't have a stable computer. Learn to fix your problems and not blame it on the programmers. I don't see any programs or OS's you wrote make any impact on society, do I? Shut up.

you can uninstall IE without any problems and use netscape I HAVE done this and I promtly switched back because netscape sucks.

ok... let me put it this way...

I haven't seen a single blue screen, except with application incompatibilites in early builds of beta2 of WindowsMe where it was trying to install Real-Mode DOS drivers, when there is no real-mode, in maybe 2 years.

OOO no a free browser with the os, now we can't have that.
it's simple the internet is the next level of technology, they should have full right to incorperate ie into their os.
You do have the option to install netscrape don't you ????
and why can't you have netscrape incorporated into the os, well there is a simple answer for that.....ITS CRAP

The break up will never happen. Case in point: OJ Simpson is guilty as SIN but he is not on death row because of his money. MS has a lot of money and the appeal process will last for years. By the time everything is sorted out, the dynamics of the computer industry will be radically different. Besides, the judge was WRONG! MS is not a monopoly. His ruling will be overturned. There is (in my opinion) too many competing operating systems (Be, Linux, OS2, MAC, etc). There is plenty of healthy competition. Microsoft is single handedly responsible for the massive growth our country (and the world) has seen. Kudos to MS. With Windows 2000, they have outdone themselves.

Microsoft did inovate. This is a MARKETING STRATEGY for Microsoft. They are BENEFITING THE CUSTOMER by including what MILLIONS AND BILLIONS of TRILLIONS download new versions. If you want to sit there on your 14.4kbs and download netscape because you do not like IE go for it. But if you want to surf the net without downloading an ABSOLUTE PIECE OF CRAP then use IE. I would rather use IE 3 then the newest version of netscape, and thats because Microsoft is the GR8TEST. I was wondering if all of these web sites used FRONTPAGE? Why doesnt someone sue Microsoft for having a webpage builder included with MS OFFICE or a database application. This is getting out of hand. Microsoft is the best. Netscape can suck my left testicle.

The break up will never happen. Case in point: OJ Simpson is guilty as SIN but he is not on death row because of his money. MS has a lot of money and the appeal process will last for years. By the time everything is sorted out, the dynamics of the computer industry will be radically different. Besides, the judge was WRONG! MS is not a monopoly. His ruling will be overturned. There is (in my opinion) too many competing operating systems (Be, Linux, OS2, MAC, etc). There is plenty of healthy competition. Microsoft is single handedly responsible for the massive growth our country (and the world) has seen. Kudos to MS. With Windows 2000, they have outdone themselves.

The "Genius Minds" of the DOJ have a nice plan, but they have to know that in the other side of the ring is nothing less than MICROSOFT, a Company who based all of the power they have on One and Only thing in the World and Ladies and Gentlamen it is WORK - HARD WORK for over 25 year. They made its empire and nobody can take it. Microsoft made Windows, and all the software they have and nobody can say: Hey man its not your, and you can't do that, and you can't do this... this is wrong. And trust me, the DOJ (it's not the DOJ, it's some little guys who think they are a competition to Microsoft) now give a punch to Microsoft, and Microsoft will punch back with their best and strongest weapon (and yes ladies and gentlamens it is WORK - HARD WORK, or when you know that WORK is equal money then let it be money)
And when the story will ends, all that LITTLE guys who want to destroy Microsoft will dissapear in ther own stupidity. Maybe somebody think there is someone who made the rules in America, but you have to know Ladies and Gentlamens that the System is work in America, there is Constitution and there is Law and the continuity of the US system for over 200 year will make that the truth must win and Microsoft will be the winner. Clinton was win the Lewinsky case not because money, not because hi is the President but because the American system is work, and nobody is over the law. And one of the you say that Cisco Systems, Lycos... etc is responsible too for the growth of the World. Yes but all of them is warming around a big MUM aroun a standard system, around the same fire. The computer industry need standards more than any other industry and Microsoft is the main standard maker (not the only but the most important) and trust me AMD is not the most responsible that Intel have a GHz chip it is responsible, but Microsoft - the software they made is the main driving force not only for Intel but for the whole industry. Some inovations made by other companies, but the world start to use that innovations allmost allways after Microsoft adobt it and integrated it in their system. You cant kill that INSTITUTION, because then you will kill yourselves.

So Billy if you read this a have to say only one: DO YOUR JOB!

Sorry for my English but I am a Hungarian native.

I AGREE,

Don't blame Microsoft for having a better OS. Some of the blame
should go to the big PC makers. They are the ones that where
stupid. They could have push other OSs like OS/2,RedHat Linux,
SCO unix,FreeBSD and Mandrake.

Also the consumer is at fault too. Most people that are buying PCs
today really don't know how to use them. Most of them are getting
them because they want to get online. Also some parents buy them to
help there kids to improve their learning skills. Like writing better
book reports, getting current information on special projects and
other stuff. The bottom line is, most people I work with and talked
to use Microsofts OSs because its easy to use. Most of them own a
Compaq or a HP system. I ask them have they tried to load a different
operating system. Most don't even know how to reload Microsofts OS
on there system if something went wrong.

Most users don't want to know how to reload windows or how it
works. They just want to know how to connect to there AOL account
an get there e-mail or to surf the web. I would have to say 70% of
the PC users today don't know how to reload or even fix a problem
with there PC system..

Bottom line end user need to LEARN more...

Microsoft has the right to do anything with there software they please
if people dont' like IE (myself included) then use Netscape or some other browser.
go to www.tucows.com and look at the list of browsers available.
like HELLO !
Microsoft made a webbrowser and integrated it into windows cause that is where the computer industry is going...
alot of windows is customizable because the interface is designed using a form of HTML, and why not more people are learning HTML.
further more i don't really like Internet Explorer but i like windows and i think it's nice that i can change the way the Windows Explorer looks.
I have IE 5.5 installed, Netscape 4.72 and Netscape 6 PR1, personally i don't like IE altho it is faster then Netscape sometimes and all.
netscape 6 so far to me has been faster then IE 5.5, but this is more then just a browser war...
it's a load of crap.
the DOJ should leave Microsoft alone...
Microsoft has done nothing but try to make some money...
Microsoft may not be my favorite company but i dont think they need to be split up, what are they gonna do...
Sell a less usefull version of windows with out all the HTML integrated stuff and IE for the same price as now
and then you have to go and buy IE for another $80 just to get all the stuff they already package.
i mean come on people.
Microsoft will fall on it's own one day.
and if it falls now because some other companies aren't liking what's going on then what would we do with out a company making Bug patches for their software...
and what would the computer industry be with out microsoft.
where would we be now if it were not for windows ?
Linux and UNIX is kewl and all but as a Software Developer and Technician i can truthfully say that it is no were as user friendly as Windows, altho it's getting better it is still not the standard that Microsoft has set.

I don't like IE because it doesn't understand half the JavaScript i can program, and tons of other crap.
i mean i don't really care it takes me twice as long to get the page to work in NS and IE. but i'd like to thank Microsoft on there OS and alot of other things like PnP (Which was mentioned earlier) and lots of other things.
Microsoft may dominate alot of the market but at least they aren't the mean babysitter that you got when you were a child.
and Sun Microsystems... well there lawsuit might have been a little more acceptable cause Microsoft did change there code and broke the EULA that Sun has given them.
but they fixed there mistake...
Frankly i don't really wanna see Microsoft Broken up.
it would cause a lot of chaos in the computer industry right now.
say Microsoft just decides to package MS DOS 6.22 with all OEM machines and if you want windows you have to buy it after you get your computer.
that would be humours.
but whichever.

Microsoft has helped me to make alot of money whether i like them or not.
but that is my thoughts so you can all fight over what i've said now.
; )

you can email me at systemadmin@telusplanet.net
if you'd like to comment directly to me cause i probably won't read here again.
i'm just leaving my ideas with you all.

Im not sure if you all realize this but Microsoft will not break up overnight. 2-3 years to break up. And for 10 years. So if they end up kicking a** over competition and 10 years later they reunite they will bring the competitino crawling for mercy. Why do you think that AOL uses IE based browser? Is it because netscape is so good? Obviously not.

AOL doesn't use IE based browsers anymore, I mean why would they when they own Netscape. Think before you speak you dumb ass.

AOL owns netscrape but uses IE.

Hey,

When you login to AOL the doesn't really use either browser. Only
when you select to surf the internet, then it runs the primary
browser you have selected. Most likely its going to be IE NOT
Netscape. Netscape is a average browser, its to slow and lacks
alot of features IE supports. I prefer IE over Netscape any day.

Netscape could have improved its browser. Instead it was
complaining Microsoft wasn't playing fair. People wake up. LIVE isn't
FAIR, Netscape had 3 choice:

1 : Improve Netscape to make it a better product.

2 : They could have put the time in and design their own OS to
go up against Win 9X OS.

3 : Fold the company up, let IE WIN...

As you can see they sold the company to AOL and took the money
and ran. They are the ones that let IE win, by not FIXING problems
with Netscape..

Thats my opinion and if you don't like "TOO BAD"....

thanks for clearing that up for rcbouchard he obviously is not that bright

I agree totally.
Microsoft got where they are today themselves, and should not be split up just because all other companies are loosers. The loosing companies still make enough money to survive, and even if they didn't they could go along with the other 1 billion people on the earth and make money some other way. Microsoft products are excellent, not causing concern to software fallbacks.

Its like someone winning 10 million dollars and then having a Judge ruling, "that's not fair, split your money with the population".

Whether its luck, fraud or anything else, Microsoft dominate, and that's life.

I was pissed off when he called you a dumb-ass and attacked you for no reason. Even if you were incorrect (which you were not) he had no right to call you names. It is unfortunate that many people posting this website are so immature. Anybody that knows anything about IE and Nutscrape knows that AOL still uses IE.