On Fri, Dec 07, 2001 at 05:53:30PM -0600, Mary Ayala wrote:
> Okay just to play devils advocate. (Not that I'm particularly fond of
> Micro$oft) but, why would a company be legally required to make a software
> package for Linux? or Apple?  

They chose to make the product for Apple.  They have threatened to
cease that under some circumstances.  Not allowing them to use those
sorts of tactics is what is currently proposed by 9 states and the
District of Columbia.  So, there's no real need for devil's
advocacy<?!> there.  

I just thought it would be a great chance to expand it to include
Linux (heck, BSD, VMS, MPE, -- I don't care.)  The thing is to make
Microsoft sell their products to compete on their own merits, not as
add ons to their shaftware.  In the commercial world, applications
always have been what sell operating systems, and nowaday, how many
businesses would be less loyal to M$ if they could run Word for Linux?

The fact that they'd hate it is just a sign of what a brilliant ;)
idea it is.

> Wouldn't the same then have to apply to all software manufacturers.

No.  Only those covered by the anti-trust settlement, though it would
be a warning shot to any others that were in near monopoly
situations.  Oh, wait -- there aren't any others!

> I just don't see that one standing.  I think that they should have
> to take IM, IE, NetMeeting, OE, and all the other stuff that they
> imbed out of Windows.  

Sure, but if you start untying that Gordian knot, you'd just end up
with 1 floppy disk that was corrupted when you bought Windows. ;)

> I mean if you try and install a rival for some "mysterious" reason
> it just doesn't work quite right with Windows the way the Microsoft
> stuff does.  

That's a different issue.  The one on the table is about restrictions
(or as I hope for, probably in vain, punitive restrictions) to curb
inter-corporate "heavy" tactics.  What you mention is a technical
tactic that has been discussed -- I don't recall for sure, but think
it was even mentioned in the more relaxed settlement that the other
states are signing on to.

> It's like an old teacher of mine used to say.  Microsoft like
> Microsoft and heaven help you if you try and interfere with that
> relationship.

While that statement has a nice ring to it, as far as I am concerned
they are more than happy to continue liking themselves -- I'd just
like the world to pass them by while they do it.

Their attitude to me seems more like something I heard attributed to a
record label A&R guy once:  "My job is to make my job easier."

I still think it's an interesting notion, and with a savvy lawyer, one
that could hold some water.

PCM

-- 
"Trying to do something with your life is like
sitting down to eat a moose." --Douglas Wood