Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 17:24:22 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> To: "Brett Glass" <brett@lariat.org> Cc: <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: Judge: "Gates Was Main Culprit" Message-ID: <000001bf3488$4e7573a0$021d85d1@youwant.to> In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.19991121161740.04723a90@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> At 12:59 PM 11/21/1999 -0800, David Schwartz wrote: > > > Windows 98's disk compression is better than Stac's. > > Stac doesn't do disk compression for Windows 98, so the above > is absurd. Err, right. That's why Stac is out of the market. If they provided a superior product for the operating systems that people wanted to use, they'd still be here. > However, Stacker -- when it was made -- beat > the pants off of DoubleSpace, especially as far as reliability > was concerned. DoubleSpace was known to corrupt users' disks, > as Microsoft ultimately admitted. Right. That's why it had a market, for awhile. > >Windows 98's memory management is better than Quaterdeck's. > > Again, a disingenuous comparison. QEMM did not do the same sort of > memory management as Windows 98. Right. That's exactly my point. > Microsoft's EMM386 -- the correct > program to which one should compare QEMM -- was markedly inferior, > and supplanted QEMM only because it was free. Right, but QEMM still survived, because it was superior. It would let you cram many more bytes out of your box than anything Microsoft had. But, of course, technology moved on. It became obsolete. > Microsoft likewise > bundled Helix's optimizer for free so as to kill Quarterdeck's > best-selling product and thus prevent DESQview and DESQview/X from > ever challenging Windows. I don't understand this argument. Sometimes leverage is bad, sometimes it's good. And you change off how it suits you. If Microsoft using Windows to leverage IE is bad, why is Quarterdeck using QEMM to leverage DESQview good? > >IE is a better browser than Netscape's > > Not so, especially from a security standpoint. IE is riddled with > DANGEROUS security problems. You are the only one who thinks this. Pretty much everybrowser shootout since the respective 4.0 products were released has been won by IE. If you don't like ActiveX (which I personally don't), you can turn it off (which I don't either, *sigh). > Alas, Netscape was shut down by Microsoft's predatory tactics. The > shell of the company was bought by AOL, primarily for its portal > and peripherally so that AOL could avoid total dependence on > Microsoft's browser by keeping Navigator barely alive. Umm, it had nothing to do with any predatory tactics. It had everything to do with IE being a better browser. And as I explained, using predatory tactics to replace a superior product with an inferior one gains nothing. The onlything a predator has to gain is the difference in value between the two products. If IE is worth less than Netscape, Microsoft's takeover would net it a loss. > One can only wonder how much Microsoft is paying you to spew such > nonsense on this list. You are the master of ad hominem, Brett. If you'd like, write out any sort of statement that says that Microsoft has never paid for me any public statement I have made. Mail it to: David Schwartz 1455-E Foxworth Avenue, PMB 118 San Jose, CA 95118 I will sign it, notorize it, and mail it back to you. I would also suggest you stop the slander here. In my capacity as Director of Software Development for WebMaster, Incorporated, I sometimes have to recommend various platforms to my customers. If people believed your nonsense, that could compromise my ability to do that. And it wouldn't surprise me if investigation into legal action would follow. So if you wish to continue to raise this allegation, I strongly suggest you back it up with evidence. DS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000001bf3488$4e7573a0$021d85d1>