Re: Boycott Microsoft

[roger@. (Roger )]

On 19 May 1998 20:13:21 GMT, someone claiming to be Chad Irby wrote:

>roger@. (Roger ) wrote:

>> someone claiming to be Rick wrote:

>> >Can you see something wrong with:
>> >
>> >Vendors not being allowed to pre-install a non-MS browser?

>> I might, if it were happening.  Which it isn't. Sony, as an example,
>> bundles both IE and NS

>...and Dell and Compaq, on the other hand, have been subject to MS
>strong-arm work due to their wanting to bundle other software with their
>machines.
>
>It has been happening.

Nope.  The Compaq issue was that they wanted to remove IE, not that
they wanted to bundle NS.  And what problem has there been with Dell?

>> >Vendors not being allowed to replace the IE icon with another one?

>> No, since there was a contract saying that they would not.

>> >Web sites only allowing access to IE browsers on W95?

>> If that is a choice that the webmaster made, who are you to say that
>> they should change it?

>If they made it through an unethical (and, in this case, illegal) bonus
>paid by Microsoft to keep that site from being accessed through
>non-Explorer browsers, they're setting themselves up for troubles in the
>future.

Which case is this?  You have proof that MS illegally paid a bonus to
a webmaster to keep the site from being accessed by others?  What
site?