From: Mike '/m' 


Whatever you or I think does not matter.

Microsoft was convicted of committing a felony.   Neither your nor my
opinion on it will change the decision.  So deal with it.

 /m

On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 21:28:43 -0000, "Paul Ranson"
 wrote:

>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