From: frissell@panix.com
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 1997 18:37:39 +0800
To: Tim May <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: Why I Support Microsoft
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19971221205217.00741904@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19971222053134.038305f0@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 01:18 PM 12/21/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:

>Giving Clinton the cold shoulder was Intel. (Having worked for Craig
>Barrett and Andy Grove, I can tell you that they despise the Democrats.)
>
>Though not on the radar screen quite yet, I expect the real action will be
>targetted against Intel. Particularly if it looks like the Merced will
>effectively displace all mainframe and business-sized CPUs.

Bill Gates is in trouble because he is a squishy liberal and didn't know how 
to handle the Feds.

If the AntiTrust boys had gone after a company headed by someone who was 
aware of the nature of government (TJ Rogers of Cypress Semi par example), he 
would have just litigated the matter for 15 years or so and then when the 
decision came down it would be irrelevant no matter what it was.  What is the 
significance of a legal decision involving 15-year-old software?  But Bill 
didn't do that.  He signed the Consent Decree.  He thought that if one pays 
the Danegeld the Dane will stop bothering you.  It doesn't work that way.  
You sign an AntiTrust consent decree and you have the Feds beating you over 
the head with it for years.  [Ask the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company 
which signed one in the 50's and almost ceased trading.]

Don't deal.  Litigate.  Much cheaper.

DCF
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBNJ5BhIVO4r4sgSPhAQEX9AP/dk/HxRPfQgKaDLKxtbTJGqtWas7FILec
hf4EaUM/9IYG0ixF0Y42hj3uHLk1IV0n+nVxGxLlfuSjl1Jm78GUzoD/z3cdlXTv
dvfMtPsMCb6NQfHbZ7tzNQAXhVcXZgM4Op5HoZgGsMHFoHc8PqRoxZ8rhuaKh9tu
E5s16iQENHY=
=4wWl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----