RE: no Java in XP Windows

Tom,

This makes more sense. A breakup as part of a broader set of strategies has
a much better chance of being successful. Unfortunately, all I've heard
about it is what everyone is focused upon: splitting the company in two.
Now, the question is, what are those strategies? Was there anything in
Jackson's decision that dealt with matters such as ownership?


John Taylor


> -----Original Message-----
> From  thomas@inorbit.com
>
>
> I don't think that the breakup is THE remedy; it's only one of
> the remedies. This particular remedy addresses the situation
> where MS could use undocumented (or correctly documented)
> interfaces to give their applications group unfair competitive advantage.
>
> Other remedies are included, mostly changes to business practices
> such as requiring PC vendors to unfairly promote MS products or
> risk losing contracts.
>
> The breakup focuses on the OS<==>App problem and pretty much only
> resolves that single problem area. Although it certainly would be
> possible for collusion, etc., to continue, a couple elements
> would make that difficult.
>
> First, I've understood that ownership would not continue as it
> has. Gates, for example, could choose which side he wanted to
> continue with and would sell his ownership (shares) of the other.
> I believe this would be true in most major owner cases. And I
> imagine there'd be restrictions for some years to come on how
> many shares any of them could buy in the other company.
>
> Second, keeping such collusion activity secret would be
> significantly more difficult. Not only could a simple disgruntled
> employee in either company blow the whistle any time, but records
> of intercompany phone calls, e-mails, meetings, etc., would be
> duplicated on two different systems, probably required to pass
> through intermediate channels, etc. An independent e-mail server
> anywhere between them could be sufficient for e-mail records for example.
>
> You can bet that the FTC, the SEC and who knows what other
> agencies would be running checks for years as part of the
> settlement. The document(s?) that would eventually outline all
> the specfics would likely run to 100s or 1000s of pages. It
> wouldn't be a simple case of move some employees to another
> building and nobody will ever check.
>
> In any case, I'm almost certain the breakup was a remedy for
> specific transgressions, not THE single remedy for all. It's just
> the one that got all the news.
>
> Tom Liotta
>
>
> --
> Tom Liotta
> The PowerTech Group, Inc.
> 19426 68th Avenue South
> Kent, WA 98032
> Phone  253-872-7788
> Fax  253-872-7904
> http://www.400Security.com
>
>

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---