25 Apr
2003
25 Apr
'03
1:43 p.m.
In cctalk digest, Vol 1 #569,
Mail List <mail.list(a)analog-and-digital-solutions.com> wrote:
This is your personal opinion and I respect it. It does not, however,
change the *fact* that Micro$oft was found guilty of breaking the
anti-trust law. No logical argument can dispute that, since it is a
fact; Micro$oft exhausted the appeal process, so unless the law is
changed, or Micro$oft is pardoned, they remain guilty. Maybe the
anti-trust laws are wrong, or unfair, however Micro$oft is now legally
considered to have been a monopoly and to have leveraged their status
to gain unfair advantage over their competitors.
**vp
Doc Shipley
<doc(a)mdrconsult.com> wrote:
MS was charged with exerting undue influence - active coercion - on
their customers, using that market share as leverage.
No one ever had to buy Microsoft products. They always could have
gone with the Macintosh platform, or a Unix system.