From: Jeff Weinstein <jsw@netscape.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 1cd97077a49c5dc08b50ad254d2b345ff9cb018ab83793e47a3be08ec9351774
Message ID: <30C3E74F.4BB0@netscape.com>
Reply To: <199512041603.IAA22793@blob.best.net>
UTC Datetime: 1995-12-05 06:35:36 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 4 Dec 95 22:35:36 PST
From: Jeff Weinstein <jsw@netscape.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 95 22:35:36 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: GAK_hit
In-Reply-To: <199512041603.IAA22793@blob.best.net>
Message-ID: <30C3E74F.4BB0@netscape.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
James A. Donald wrote:
>
> At 09:25 AM 12/4/95 -0500, John Young wrote:
> > 12-4-95. W$Jabber:
> >
> > "Microsoft Probe Spurs Subpoenas Tied to Internet.
> > Antitrust Effort Appears Focused on Windows 95 Disabled
> > Rival Software."
>
> > The subpoena issued to Netscape may be of particular
> > significance. In the estimate of Netscape and industry
> > observers,
>
> I regularly use netscape on windows 95, and I conclude that
> this subpoena is pure, 100% harassment.
I've heard that when a machine that already has Internet In A
Box, Netscape Navigator personal edition, or some other internet
software with a stack and dialer is upgraded to Win95, the win95
installation may somehow disrupt the functioning of the winsock
or dialer. I've also heard that re-installing the application
will solve the problem. I've never seen the problem myself,
and don't know anything about any subpoena...
--Jeff
--
Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist
Netscape Communication Corporation
jsw@netscape.com - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw
Any opinions expressed above are mine.
Return to December 1995
Return to “Jeff Weinstein <jsw@netscape.com>”