|
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>I agree with Joseph in that the right to choose should be
paramount. But the simple fact of the matter is also that Microsofts
products are essentially heaps of shit. Thier operating systems
(especially servers) are very poorly designed when compared to prevous Unix
boxes. Any server or workstation that has to be rebooted as many times as
either NT workstation or server or Win98 after a new product upgrade or
application/utility upgrade is very poor indeed. Any other consumer
product that needs as many patches and fixes as Microsofts would be laughed outa
town. The rude part about it all is the fact that they charge hundreds,
no, thousands of dollars for some of thier server based OS's is almost criminal
in itself.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>The only reason MS has such a monopoly is due to good
marketing, and overall compatibility of the OS with general application
software. Hence the reason why WE ALL use it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Its a monopoly, but applications such as Metastock need such a
monopoly. Other wise such companies will have to all sit down together and
re-write the software protocol books in order to be compatible with the myriad
of other OS's that would be with us it MS had NOT become such a monopoly.
If this judgement goes harshly agains MS then we (the consumers) are going to
lose in the years to come simply due to the fact that we will have too much to
choose from and nothing will be compatible without added expense.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I may well be very wrong. But just my thoughts & 5c
worth.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Cheers,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>
Dave</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> Sunday, January 16, 2000 4:02
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Microsoft</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<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></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Mon Jan 17 09:35:35 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 EAA22619
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 04:39:42 -0800
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id DAA05800
for metastock-outgoing; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 03:05:55 -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 DAA05797
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 03:05:51 -0700
Received: from pimout7-int.prodigy.net (pimout7-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.59.180])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA02826
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 03:16:45 -0700 (MST)
Received: from jeff (MIAMB107-33.splitrock.net [209.156.29.10])
by pimout7-int.prodigy.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id FAA107074
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 05:01:33 -0500
Message-ID: <002001bf6008$9bffca20$0a1d9cd1@xxxx>
From: "Jeff" <jcob3@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Reuters DataLink and Symbol Changes
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 05:00:59 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001D_01BF5FDE.ADF423E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>If you do not change the symbol, when the symbol
reverts to the original, the downloader should fill in the missing data.
My experience is with Qwest Communication which recently changed its symbol to Q
from QWST when it changed exchanges. I did not change the symbol for a few
days and did not download any Q data as a result. When I finally did
change the symbol, the downloader filled in the missing days.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Good Trading</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Jeff</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><B>-----Original Message-----</B><BR><B>From:
</B>Charles Kalb <<A
href="mailto:chaskalb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>chaskalb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>To:
</B>MetaStock List <<A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR><B>Date:
</B>Saturday, January 15, 2000 9:26 PM<BR><B>Subject: </B>Reuters DataLink
and Symbol Changes<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=3>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000><FONT size=3>I'm hoping that someone has some
direct experience with this service specifically for classes of securities
that might go through a sequence of symbol changes, e.g. from the
original symbol to a new symbol, then eventually back to that same original
symbol. This is not as far-fetched as it initially sounds. One example <FONT
color=#000000>is when the SEC appends a "D" for 30 days after a
stock split for Bulletin Board stocks.</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000><FONT size=3></FONT></FONT><FONT
size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000><STRONG>BACKGROUND: </STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>I have a question on how The DownLoader (I am using
v6.52) works with Reuters DataLink when securities have a symbol change. I
will pose a hypothetical Over-The-Counter Bulletin Board (OTC BB) stock with
symbol "ABCD" but the question applies to other classes of
securities as well. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>The SEC is currently going through a process of
requiring OTC BB companies to file financial information. During one stage
of that process if the filed forms are not completely acceptable to the SEC
an "E" is appended to the company's stock symbol and the company
has a certain period of time to supply amended information. If the SEC
approves the amended filings the "E" is removed and the company
then is considered a "reporting" company. Companies that do not
pass this process or which do not file any information are delisted to the
Pink Sheets.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>A user determines that a symbol has changed by
inspecting the Reuters DataLink Collection Report/Additional
Information/Details to list the Security Report. DataLink does not
automatically change the symbols, so the user must change them manually in
order to continue getting data for that security. The problem with the OTC
BB stocks is that, if one is attempting to follow a large number of them,
too much time is required to manually keep adding and deleting E's. In the
following hypothetical example it is assumed that the user <FONT
color=#0000ff><STRONG>DOES NOT MAKE </STRONG></FONT>the manually required
symbol changes to his data files.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>Hypothetical Example:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT
color=#000000><STRONG>DATE</STRONG>
<STRONG>STOCK SYMBOL
DATALINK RESULT</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>Prior<BR>to
11/01/99
ABCD
DataLink recognizes ABCD and supplies EOD
<BR>
data for it</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>11/01/99
through
ABCD<FONT
color=#ff0000><STRONG>E</STRONG></FONT>
DataLink gives error message that ABCD has
<BR>11/28/99
changed to ABCDE and no data are
downloaded
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>11/29/99
and
ABCD
???????????<FONT color=#ff0000><STRONG>What Happens
Here</STRONG></FONT>?????????????<BR>subsequent days</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000><STRONG>QUESTION: </STRONG>If I do not make
the manual changes to symbols of my OTC BB data files but continue to
attempt to collect daily EOD data for <STRONG>all</STRONG> the stocks in my
OTC BB directory/folder (some with E's, most without), will DataLink
<STRONG>eventually</STRONG> fill in all the missing data for the periods
where stocks had the "E" appended, once the "E" is
dropped? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>Charles Kalb<BR><A
href="mailto:chaskalb@xxxxxxx";>chaskalb@xxxxxxx</A></FONT></DIV></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Mon Jan 17 09:36:51 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 JAA30756
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 09:37:18 -0800
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id IAA07016
for metastock-outgoing; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 08:59:07 -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 IAA07013
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 08:59:04 -0700
Received: from smtp02.wxs.nl (smtp02.wxs.nl [195.121.6.60])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA02989
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 09:09:56 -0700 (MST)
Received: from escom ([195.121.217.2]) by smtp02.wxs.nl
(Netscape Messaging Server 3.61) with SMTP id AAA7FA
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 16:54:06 +0100
Message-ID: <009001bf603a$528e7260$8dda79c3@xxxxx>
From: "A.J. Maas" <anthmaas@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Metastock-List" <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <001601bf6013$2d8b1d00$8dda79c3@xxxxx>
Subject: Re: to be or not to be
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 13:07:24 +0100
Organization: Ms-IRB
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_007E_01BF6022.A1BAED40"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211
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 5.00.2722.2800" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#d8d0c8>
<DIV><FONT size=2>
<DIV><FONT size=2>A last note on this subject:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>There are several rumours going on that the DOJ will give out
his FINAL findings report</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>and FINAL ruling somewhere in the next month, eg Febr
2000.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>At that time of publicing of the Final report and the
DOJ's Final ruling, the Microsoft share</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>and </FONT><FONT size=2>any </FONT><FONT size=2>of its
other listings, will (</FONT><FONT size=2>have to) be suspended (see also
further below).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Now:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>- Anyone owning a share(or other listing) ON that
moment of suspension, </FONT><FONT size=2>will be elagable for any
payments</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> coming out of any later to be
filed compansation claims (if these </FONT><FONT size=2>compensation
actions</FONT><FONT size=2> are also started).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>- Anyone owning a share(or other listing) AFTER
</FONT><FONT size=2>they will come back into listing again,</FONT><FONT
size=2> are not elegable to</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> any results that can stem from any results coming
out of claim procedures.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>This is standard Exchanges procedure, when a listing's
rumerous vital information will be publicaly </FONT><FONT
size=2>announced</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>that can have a large effect on the underlay's
listing.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Thus, Buy the stock BEFORE the last final word comes out
!!!.</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></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>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<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.J. Maas
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>Metastock-List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> zaterdag 15 januari 2000
23:47</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 am speaking from a user and shareholder's point of view,
and not forgetting what is right and what is wrong. That makes me a
happy go round type of private person and part-owner. Whatever covered
</FONT><FONT size=2>communism is to be brought upon me or my properties,
will be met accordingly. The DOJ is a biased state employed marrionet, that
probably not personaly, but indeed combined with his mates, the Gov+States,
will figurerarly bleed for his actions or any by him taken
actions, that will or can at any way and at any time damage my own
(intellectual) possesions and properties, eg shares and stuff.</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> zaterdag 15 januari 2000
18:10</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>TM: I am assuming US law not to be any different
than laws elswhere. If there is to be an unsatisfactory outcome coming
from this dispute, then the European Commission has got some artillary it
wants to throw at Microsoft too. In that, laws are laws. Again, this
artillary is intervering with one's private properties and free
enterprise. As such the Shareholders Association here in the Netherlands
and its sister organisations elswhere in the EuroCommunity are ready
to fully head-on attack the EC's Commission, naturaly with endless
claims to follow. Claims that will be coming in from around the globe.
Where these Governments around the globe seems to team up (the EC has a
deal with the US Fed, to await the outcome first), more many is in the
hand of shareholders. Enough to break societies</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>and their Governments to realy go into bankruptcy. Now
how will that effect the consumer ??</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>TM: Microsoft is at liberty to end licences for their
software as they wish. So is Compaq at liberty to develope their own
software. If their to lazy or not aggressive enough or not financed
enough, then they should seek advise from professionals, as to how to
be succesfull in software too. Also Compaq is at liberty to refuse to sell
Microsoft products with their computers too, and let buying an OS up
to their own customers. Not a very clever thing to do, but its their right
and choise. The negative side of this is that Microsoft might than not
sell enough of its software, and than that would be up to Microsoft to
solve. Here Microsoft has done its homework, where Compaq </FONT><FONT
size=2>enriched its executives while they did not do their homework,
eg were failures and ought to be sacked. Just see how easy Dell surpassed
the utherly simple selling techniques Compaq enherrited from the late 80's
and were the co is to log and did not adjust. IBM for that matter is
an equal example. Not all brains and a lot of company arrogance. Good on
them. Gives other users a chance to buy much cheaper PC's with the same or
in the case of IBM, much better advances and qualities. </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>TM: All the right in the world. Simply because of the
fact that Compaq will have to meet the owners standards, in this Microsoft
standards (and not ever the other way around) if it wants to gain a legal
licensce from the owners of the software, weather this will be Microsoft
or for example, Ton Maas.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>If I notice that one of my copyrighted indicators is
being sold or being mis-used, I will also sue that person/co, since I have
not given out any written permission to anyone to do so or to make any
changes to it. It is my (intellectual) property/propriety and I am the
only one at right liberty to do with it as I see fit, eg and how I
pleases. If I notice for instance, that you want to use it in a weekly
magizine's software, for example for its weekly Hot tips-section, be
sure that I will take on action to prevend it or come to some sort of
arrangement, where "not using SuperChart software" for example could be
included in the license.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> </FONT></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>Microsoft is not forcing any one to use the Internet
Exploder. You can even easy write (f.i. in VB) your own browser.
Neither is it also forcing anyone to use its Microsoft Exchange
program, you know that very dreadfull program, its to simple MsPaint
or NotePad programs. You should feel lucky that these programs come
free with the OEM and OSR versions. You are at your own liberty to use
these programs or "overwrite" with other perhaps better quality software
programs. Also my ISP for instance was also giving its users free
licenses for the Netscape v1.0 to v3.0 browsers, whilst anyone
using different browsers were not supported. If Netscape had forced
these tactics onto my ISP is to be seen and basicaly irrellevent to me,
since I could confince the ISP that I didn't need their support, eg since
the IE browser wasn't giving me any problems at all and since it seemingly
fitted in with my OS, as though "it was there since I bought my PC".
And any browser upgrades (note for free as well) were only
large improvements, that much that I am still running a in 1997 for
the last time installed Win95 OS version and that the latest browser
version, the IE5x, just -by itselve- made the
just-about-what-anyone-needed upgrade to and especially the by me required
upgrade to a "smaller version of Win98". I only miss out on some file
maintance tools and some extra window colouring schemes (but then
again who needs these). </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>TM: Ofcourse it has these rights since it is protecting
its property. Assume you don't have car-jacks in the States? Where the
rightfull owner of a car gets forced by a car-jacker to get out of
his/hers car, and the car-jacker takes off with the car. Now how
would you feel? Having protective tools with you, can prefent you to
loose your car, eg it is after all your rightfull pressious property, aint
it? Or should we say "Please do get in......".</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>In business life its not different, therefore
common sense (that is if you/company have any) teaches you and co's to
protect your/their property(ies).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2> </FONT></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>TM: IBM doesn't have to sell Microsoft software. They
have their own dreadfull OS, named OS2. IBM can than also install
their too simple and too basic Lotus program on their PCs too. PC
that do not work properly, an OS that doesn't work properly and an office
suite that no-one wants, nice combination to hit the All Time Highs on the
stockmarkets, ain't it? Remember too that you as shareholder are
part-owner of that company too? Unless US laws differ from
elsewhere.</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>TM: You too have the right(not the obligation) to tell
the shopkeeper that you do not want Microsoft software. It is then up to
the shopkeeper to refund you for</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>missing the OS, which since its only a US $50 cost, he
most likely will not do. Tell him that you will go to the shop next-door,
and perhaps you can pursway the salesman. Else when you are at home with
your new PC, un-install Windows. Whatever you do after is up to you, and
not the reasponsability of Microsoft, the former shopkeeper(s) or anyone
lese, no it is all in your own hands, free and at liberty to isntall other
software, eg like the above mentioned OS2, PCDOS, UNIX,LINUX, and several
others that are around. That said, good luck with it.</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>TM: The whole issue here is not Microsoft, but the
arrogance of other co's and especially Governments(like said that holds
the largest amount of true monopolies)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>and their teamsters, the so called independent states.
If other co's want to be succesfull at something, then first they
should show and be an aggressive player, have intrest to develope new
things, want to change their inside attitudes, seek advise from real
professionals that can scan the company on its faults and employ the right
workers.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>If not, then they are take-over candidates, of which
formentioned companies will then be the victum. Besides all this
said, I couldn't give a heep if IBM, Compaq or whatever co for that matter
goes down, they call it upon themselves, and it is never due to other
co's that do all in their power and make the right efforts to meet up with
the above criterea. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT
size=2>Joe</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Mon Jan 17 09:36:29 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 HAA26471
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 07:20:40 -0800
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA06547
for metastock-outgoing; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 06:17:06 -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 GAA06544
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 06:17:04 -0700
Received: from hotmail.com (f14.law4.hotmail.com [216.33.149.14])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id GAA02921
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 06:27:59 -0700 (MST)
Received: (qmail 9546 invoked by uid 0); 16 Jan 2000 13:12:19 -0000
Message-ID: <20000116131219.9545.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from 209.214.200.84 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Sun, 16 Jan 2000 05:12:19 PST
X-Originating-IP: [209.214.200.84]
From: "j seed" <jseed_10@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: What is a Trend(Downs)?
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 13:12:19 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
.
>From: "j seed" <jseed_10@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: What is a Trend(Downs)?
>Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 03:52:24 GMT
>
>All,
>
>Traditionally, we are taught that a trend involves higher highs and higher
>lows for an uptrend. In "Trading for Tigers", Walter Downs states that for
>an uptrend to be in effect todays high must equal the highest high of "n"
>trading sessions and todays close must be greater than yesterdays close.
>Questions:
>1.Has anyone else read the book?
>2.Does anyone have any thoughts on this uptrend definition?
>3.Has anyone coded Walters indicators into Metastock?
>
>Thanks,
>J.
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
|