From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_011B_01C2CE1E.E625C190
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   You can spin all you want.  Trying to spin a speculation into =
something you can construe as policy is FUD worthy of Mike Miller.

   The public data from history is the historical usage of IE which can =
be correlated to the rise in favorable reviews of IE especially relative =
to alternatives like Netscape.  You can draw conclusions from this, =
though I can pretty much guess that your will not be the obvious ones.

Rich

  "John Cuccia"  wrote in message =
news:g7864v44oek8hg6jo8903kjrr2pvqrsepf{at}4ax.com...
  OK, Rich, I'll play your game, for just this message:

  On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 17:01:20 -0800, "Rich"  wrote:

  >   I see that you have selectively quoted my reply to you in order to =
hide your error and to make it easier for you to try to divert attention =
by changing the topic.  To further your deception your editing changed =
the meaning of what I wrote.  To help you get back on track let me =
repeat.
  >
  >   You need to do a better distinguishing between a personal opinion =
being expressed on the then future and public data from history = reporting
on what really happened in the now past.

  Why?  That was a "personal" opinion directly related to future
  Microsoft  business, and the "personal" opinions of company executives
  regarding the future of their company very (*very*) often become
  company policy (and strategy).  After  all, those folk become
  executives precisely because someone thinks  their opinions, and the
  process by which those opinions are formed, have merit.

  Concerning the 2nd part of your statement: What "public data from
  history" are you talking about?

  >
  >   As for your off topic reply, I don't know about you but the people =
I work with express personal opinions related to their own work and the =
work of others all the time.  I spent two hours yesterday discussing = with
someone what I thought was wrong with his plans for a feature he = owns in
a product being developed by his group.  Only time will tell the = extent
to which each of us has correctly predicted the future.  I felt = it
entirely appropriate for me to offer my unsolicited opinion.  I'm = also
solicited for opinions, solicit the opinions of others, and receive =
unsolicted opinions at times too.  Maybe your work place is oppressive.  =
Mine is not.

  There's nothing in the above to refute the fact that the
  MS-executive-held opinion )that the desktop monopoly should be used to
  leverage the dissemination of IE) wasn't taken seriously, or, perhaps,
  implemented. =20

  Who knows, if the person you advised values your opinion, he may
  incorporate it into his product.
------=_NextPart_000_011B_01C2CE1E.E625C190
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   You can
spin all you =
want. =20
Trying to spin a speculation into something you can construe as policy = is FUD=20
worthy of Mike Miller.
 
   The
public data from =
history is the=20
historical usage of IE which can be correlated to the rise in favorable = reviews=20
of IE especially relative to alternatives like Netscape.  You can = draw=20
conclusions from this, though I can pretty much guess that your will not = be the=20
obvious ones.
 
Rich
 

  "John Cuccia" <jcuccia{at}bigfoot.com>">mailto:jcuccia{at}bigfoot.com">jcuccia{at}bigfoot.com>
wrote =
in message=20
  news:g7864v44oek=
8hg6jo8903kjrr2pvqrsepf{at}4ax.com...OK,=20
  Rich, I'll play your game, for just this message:On
Thu, 6 Feb =
2003=20
  17:01:20 -0800, "Rich" <{at}>
wrote:>   I see =
that you=20
  have selectively quoted my reply to you in order to hide your error =
and to=20
  make it easier for you to try to divert attention by changing the =
topic. =20
  To further your deception your editing changed the meaning of what I=20
  wrote.  To help you get back on track let me=20
  repeat.>>   You need
to do a better =
distinguishing=20
  between a personal opinion being expressed on the then future and =
public data=20
  from history reporting on what really happened in the now=20
  past.Why?  That was a "personal"
opinion directly related =
to=20
  futureMicrosoft  business, and the
"personal" opinions of =
company=20
  executivesregarding the future of their company very (*very*) =
often=20
  becomecompany policy (and strategy).  After 
all, those =
folk=20
  becomeexecutives precisely because someone thinks  their =
opinions,=20
  and theprocess by which those opinions are formed, have=20
  merit.Concerning the 2nd part of your statement: What
"public =
data=20
  fromhistory" are you talking =
about?>>   As for=20
  your off topic reply, I don't know about you but the people I work =
with=20
  express personal opinions related to their own work and the work of =
others all=20
  the time.  I spent two hours yesterday discussing with someone =
what I=20
  thought was wrong with his plans for a feature he owns in a product =
being=20
  developed by his group.  Only time will tell the extent to which =
each of=20
  us has correctly predicted the future.  I felt it entirely =
appropriate=20
  for me to offer my unsolicited opinion.  I'm also solicited for =
opinions,=20
  solicit the opinions of others, and receive unsolicted opinions at =
times=20
  too.  Maybe your work place is oppressive.  Mine is=20
  not.There's nothing in the above to refute the fact that=20
  theMS-executive-held opinion )that the desktop monopoly should be =
used=20
  toleverage the dissemination of IE) wasn't taken seriously, or,=20
  perhaps,implemented.  Who knows,
if the person you =
advised=20
  values your opinion, he mayincorporate it into his=20
product.

------=_NextPart_000_011B_01C2CE1E.E625C190--

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