Replies

No, they bought you off.

Substitute CSC and Sun. Look in the mirror.

It's the people who refused to be bought off by MS that get coerced.

They were too busy filing lawsuits to innovate.

It's funny. For years, people outside MS's cloud have been telling MS workers that MS's behavior is criminal. Ya'll refused to agree, said MS just used "tough business tactics". Now the court has made it clear -- that kind of behavior is illegal. Anti-capitalistic. MS has attacked the free market.

Rrrrrrrright, sure, whatever. This trial is 4 years old now. The principal claim of tying has been essentially thrown out. Most of the plaintiffs have settled and, on balance, it's a fair settlement. But as for the states, they're finished. Stick a fork in this trial: It's done.

I don't expect you to quit your job. But I am amazed ya'll can't even admit the truth, even after a conviction. I am amazed that ya'll seem completely unwilling to criticize MS for their illegal behavior, completely unwilling to try and change the company you seem to "love".

OMG, they included a .... (the horror) ... web browser with the operating system! They provided incentives to OEMs that helped them and disincentives for those that didn't. They tried to give choices to Java developers to let them take advantage of platform-specific APIs! They tried to make their browser the preferred browser on the Mac! It's horrible, absolutely horrible! I don't know how the average person can stand to even live in this world with such atrocities occurring. Meanwhile, while Sun says that middleware = bad, it's busily bundling its own middleware with Solaris. What a joke, Harr. You need far more than a clue: You need a life. /SARCASM

But even without the conviction, it's still a mystery how ya'll seem completely unconcerned about the unethical methods used by MS. Beyond f the legal questions, ya'll e heard for years complaints about MS using coercion, fraud, threats, force and purposeful breach of contract against other companies.

I'm shocked, shocked, shocked that a company would try to use underhanded tactics against its rivals.

This is illegal behavior. I can't even imagine what goes thru Mr. Gate's mind when he decides to start threatening Apple because they're considering using Netscape, or start threatening Dell into dropping BeOS or Linux.

LMFAO. There you go again: Dragging out your nonsensical and unsubstantiated accusation that MS threatened Dell over BeOS or Linux. And in a predictable turn, I ask you to prove it, you point at the FoF and CoL, and are incapable of providing a cite. Typical.

He must know that behavior is illegal, and is not 'business'. He must just not care about the law or business. As long as he makes his money, he'd cheat every rule in the books, destroy as many honest businesses as it takes to pave his road to success. Crime pays.

Funny, you don't seem concerned about CSC at all. Why the hypocrisy?

But the biggest mystery of all is, why does the average MS worker ignores this behavior by Mr. Gates?

Why don't you write a letter to their company asking for a response.

Funny, you don't seem concerned about CSC at all.

You're dying on the vine here.

One more time:

I'm critical of CSC when they break the law. You're not critical of MS when they break the law.

In fact, you refuse to even mention the substance of the conviction -- coercion and fraud. You change the subject and pretend it was just 'browser issues' and the like. Which is interesting because that behavior proves you know how bad MS's conviction is, and feel the need to lie about it.

That makes you the 'James Carville' of the MS world. You blindly defend a convicted entity.

Look deep, and consider. Is the only thing that matters to you cash, no matter how ill-gained? Even if that cash was gathered by attacking the free market and keeping choices away from consumers? What limits *do* you have, if any? Would you defend just about any socialists with money? What about Hillary Clinton?

This MS story is indeed ready to stick a fork in it. It's about done -- and MS lost. The only question remaining is what punishments and restrictions will be put on them.

So the only interesting part of the story left now is the blind MS defenders. Like Clintonistas, who were to me the most interesting part of the Clinton story, the question has become, "how can anyone defend such obvious, bold, criminal unethical behavior?"

Like porn queens who have sex with animals for pay, it's fascinating to learn just what some folks are willing to do for money.