|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Microsoft should not be penalized for making a superior
product. It should be penalized for directly interfering with a person's
lawful right to choose. It is unfortunate that some people blindly defend
Microsoft when they have no knowledge of Microsoft's specific business
practices and how it may have violated the law -- you know, the same law that
their competitors are held accountable to as well. Is there a general problem
with people's understanding of English?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Joe</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><B>-----Original Message-----</B><BR><B>From:
</B>Bram <<A
href="mailto:AIB@xxxxxxxxxxx";>AIB@xxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>To: </B><A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> <<A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>Date:
</B>Saturday, January 15, 2000 10:52 AM<BR><B>Subject:
</B>Microsoft<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Product that MS delivers is far superior and as
far as an operating system goes, there is no other game in town. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Should a company be penalized for producing
superior products??</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Mon Jan 17 09:31:01 2000
Return-Path: <majordom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from listserv.equis.com (listserv.equis.com [204.246.137.2])
by purebytes.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA27442
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 13:47:40 -0800
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA32581
for metastock-outgoing; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 13:11:26 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA32577
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 13:11:22 -0700
From: lissen@xxxxxxx
Received: from SIMBA.pdq.net (simba.pdq.net [204.145.251.3])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA02332
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 13:22:14 -0700 (MST)
X-AirNote: 1
Received: from 56K-488.MaxTNT2.pdq.net [209.144.230.234-4] by alice.pdq.net ID 41_-1;
Sat, 15 Jan 2000 14:06:36 -0600
Message-ID: <008901bf5f93$eef79f20$1464fea9@xxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <004701bf5f7b$7857cf60$38e8adce@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: to be or not to be
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 14:05:02 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_007C_01BF5F61.845829A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#d8d0c8>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Joe:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>You are quite correct and I thank you for clarifying the
issues. The issues are not of freedom but are of oppression by a
monopolistic company against its potential competition.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Lionel Issen</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:jehardt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx"; title=jehardt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Joseph
Ehardt</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, January 15, 2000 11:10
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: to be or not to be</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I don't think I have anything mixed up. More likely is that
I have read the publicly distributed Findings of Fact in DOJ vs Microsoft and
am more familiar with American law.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>From your comments, which are pretty far ranging, I
think you might not understand what Microsoft did with respect to Compaq. It
also did similar things with other companies. But let me return to Compaq,
because it helps to understand the facts as revealed by Microsoft's own
internal documents as made public in the trial.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Question: What right does Microsoft have to demand that
Compaq not use Netscape at its personal browser? Compaq was installing
Internet Explorer on systems sold to customers, which should have made
Microsoft content, but it had adopted the internal company standard of using
Netscape which predated IE. Microsoft demanded that this end.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Question: Switching the context, if you think that Microsoft
has this right and you happen to not use Internet Explorer, do you believe
that Microsoft has the right to force you to switch to Internet Explorer, and
if you refuse, that it has the right to strip Windows off your personal
computer and electronically monitor your system to insure that you never
install Windows on your system?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>The issue is not whether Microsoft has the right to
distribute and sell its products, nor is it that Microsoft owns the rights to
these products. No one has argued that it does not. The issue that has been
adjudicated, re-stated in different terms, is whether Microsoft had the right
to use its monopoly power to force people to buy its product when they do not
wish to do so. Microsoft was interfering with the right of individuals and
companies to freely choose other products.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Another example: IBM has an office application suite of its
own (Lotus) that it put on computers that it builds. Do you think that
Microsoft has the right to force IBM to replace its own Lotus software with
that of Microsoft Office?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>There are more examples that were proven during the course
of the trial, and they are all contained in the Findings of Fact document.
Personally, I want my right protected to freely choose products and services
as guaranteed by the law. I refuse the assertion that any company has the
right to coerce me to buy its products.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Maybe if your information sources were not from press
accounts, then you might have a more circumspect understanding of Microsoft's
actions.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Joe</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><B>-----Original Message-----</B><BR><B>From:
</B>A.J. Maas <<A
href="mailto:anthmaas@xxxxxxxxx";>anthmaas@xxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>To: </B><A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> <<A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>Date:
</B>Saturday, January 15, 2000 03:32 AM<BR><B>Subject: </B>Re: to be or not
to be<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Think yo have a few things mixed here:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-Intellectual Property of one's own developped software
belongs to originator, thus is</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> at liberty to with it whatever he
pleases.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-Free distribution rights of that develloped property
belong to the rightfull owner of</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> that (intullectual) property</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-Free enterprise</FONT><FONT size=2> rights of one's
own develloped software solely is in its owners hand </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-Exchanges duty to suspend a company's listing(s),
when a party or several parties</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> (US Government or Sate Governments combined)
announce a raid, eg and </FONT><FONT size=2>while the</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> raid's Take Over bid and process is still
in progress. Unequal distributed information</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> and stocks-sensitive information can damage owners
and future owners. Compensation</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> trials will have be started, with as the worsest
results dismantelling of that Exchange</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> that is at fault, and government (tax) funds to
have to fork out these compensations, as</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> the eledgible parties most likely will/went
bankrupt.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2>-Shareholders rights to be compensated when a
company is lawfully being raided/taken over,</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT size=2> these rights are secured
by/in </FONT></FONT><FONT size=2>countries laws (and enforced on the
Exchanges) and any losses</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> due to this effect will </FONT><FONT
size=2>have to be compensated (naturally with tax-payers funds)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-Consumer rights and experiences that are not taken
into considderation</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-Governmental duties and obligations to govern and not to
dictate rules and be carefull</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> in their actions, since they pocess the
largests amounts of </FONT><FONT size=2>monopolies everywhere in the
society,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> including </FONT><FONT size=2>in the
jurispedential dep.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-Covered communism if a state or its representatives are
indulging in on free enterprise, else</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> confiscates or otherwise directly or indirectly by
ruling put their will on its enhabitants, its citicens</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> or </FONT><FONT
size=2>its companies.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-Incompetent. The people involved not to be daily computer
users.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> Most Judges and high Gov employees </FONT><FONT
size=2>don't even know what a 'mouse' is, let alone</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> what you can use it for.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>-Hardware co's (or any co for that matter), to look into
their own organisation and its own structures</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> and own employees, if they are not capable to
make their business a succesfull one. It is never</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> the fault of a competitor, eg it is their own
strategy that doesn't/have failed to work. Any co is also</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> at liberty to sack </FONT><FONT size=2>the
wrongdoers </FONT><FONT size=2>and employ the geniuses to start being
succesfull too. So these</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> unsuccesfull co's should not start
crying </FONT><FONT size=2>at other -indeed- succesfull
co's, if what their executatives</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> only goal is, is to fill their own pockets. worst
you as a computer user yourselves can do is to feel</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> sorry for these -raiding your pockets-
unsuccesfull co's. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR>Regards,<BR>Ton Maas<BR><A
href="mailto:ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A><BR>Dismiss
the ".nospam" bit (including the dot) when replying and<BR>note the new
address change. Also for my Homepage<BR><A
href="http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas";>http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:jehardt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=jehardt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Joseph Ehardt</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> vrijdag 14 januari 2000
19:32</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: to be or not to be</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>You are probably right. Why should we take action
against abusive monopolies? Surely Compaq had no right to decide which
browser it wanted to use for its internal corporate information network.
Why don't abusive monopolies have the right to transfer as much capital
into their pockets from that of others? Maybe we should reward Microsoft
for being so abusive with a bonus. After all, it would be pointless for it
to engage in such practices once it had acquired all capital.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>What action to take with Microsoft will require the
wisdom of Solomon. Bill Gates may be signaling that, rather than a breakup
into OS and applications, what might be acceptable is a breakup into
operational and research (where Gates himself would take over the
equivalent of Bell Labs AKA Lucent and Ballmer running the rest). How that
would satisfy the Department of Justice eludes me, but then Gates can't
figure what the fuss is all about to begin with.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Joe</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><B>-----Original
Message-----</B><BR><B>From: </B><A
href="mailto:lissen@xxxxxxx";>lissen@xxxxxxx</A> <<A
href="mailto:lissen@xxxxxxx";>lissen@xxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>To: </B><A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> <<A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>Date:
</B>Friday, January 14, 2000 10:02 AM<BR><B>Subject: </B>Re: to be or
not to be<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>Without going into a long discussion, last
year one of the rumors floating<BR>around was to separate Microsoft into
2 companies. One to develop and sell<BR>the operating system(s), the
second to develop and sell all the other<BR>Microsoft
software.<BR><BR>About a hundred years ago, the US government "broke" up
the Standard Oil<BR>Trust into several different companies, seven I
think. Does anyone believe<BR>that this affected Rockefeller's
dominance of the oil industry or reduced<BR>his income in
anyway?<BR><BR>Lionel Issen<BR><A
href="mailto:lissen@xxxxxxxxx";>lissen@xxxxxxxxx</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Mon Jan 17 09:31:25 2000
Return-Path: <majordom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from listserv.equis.com (listserv.equis.com [204.246.137.2])
by purebytes.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA28574
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 14:20:20 -0800
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA00051
for metastock-outgoing; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 13:27:52 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA00047
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 13:27:49 -0700
From: lissen@xxxxxxx
Received: from SIMBA.pdq.net (simba.pdq.net [204.145.251.3])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA02341
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 15 Jan 2000 13:38:41 -0700 (MST)
X-AirNote: 1
Received: from 56K-299.MaxTNT1.pdq.net [209.144.227.45-9] by pocahontas.pdq.net ID 46_-1;
Sat, 15 Jan 2000 14:23:07 -0600
Message-ID: <000501bf5f96$3d87b420$1464fea9@xxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: S&P lists
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 14:22:18 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
I was able to download the S&P 500 list at the S&P web site. I was not
able to access the list for the S&P mid cap and small cap stocks.
Where can I access these lists?
Lionel Issen
lissen@xxxxxxxxx
|