From: "Paul Ranson" 

Uninteresting evidence that the judges are dim. And the lawyers arguing the
case are dimmer.

Does your Court of Appeals really think that it's inappropriate for an OS
to be able to render HTML? That's the implication from your quote. Given
that every other desktop OS is integrating browser technology the argument
is surely moot.

(The last sentence you quote is gibberish. I'm not addressing that.)

Paul

"Mike '/m'"  wrote in message
news:t8u74vgc34t7b0b3cbovugjlijitsgkblo{at}4ax.com...
> Some interesting words from the decision of the Court of Appeals:
>
> ====
> ... Although Microsoft does make some claims regarding the benefits of
> integrating the browser and the operating system, it neither specifies nor
> substantiates those claims.  Nor does it argue that excluding IE from the
> Add/Remove Programs utility or commingling code achieves any integrative
> benefit.  Plaintiffs plainly made out a prima facie case of harm to
> competition in the operating system market by demonstrating that
> Microsoft's actions increased its browser usage share ....
> ====
>
>  /m
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4