Hi Jerry,

>>George,
>>
>>
>>>DD,
>>>>
>>>>>First of all, and I've stated this before, "Penfield" should have been named "Pinhead".< bg > That aside, however.
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm sure that there are a lot of MS employees cheering and watching to see what the stock does as a response.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You bet. As Craig pointed out this doesn't really change the original ruling, only the 'remedy'. Still, as I pointed out to him I think that the bias was so obviously anti-Microsoft & anti-business (ie. pro-socialism, liberal etc) that it couldn't pass the smell test.
>>>>
>>>>I just love it when the anti-business crowd gets a good punch in the nose (figuratively speaking, of course. <g>)
>>>
>>>< s > And people call me a "Liberal" around here.:-)
>>
>><g>
>>
>>Well, I guess all I need is some yak butter and a horse and I'm all set then.. <g>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Seriously, I had a lot of problems with the whole process to begin with. Starting at the end and working backwards...
>>>
>>>1. "Pinhead" either showed a remarkable amount of ignorance as to how a software company like Microsoft works or the judgement was "for show and not for go". You know, made for the media. In either case, it amounted to despicable behavior for someone in his position.
>>
>>Well, I think what 'gets' me is that people these days seem to 'feel' not 'think'. Listen to the local reporters when they ask questions.
>>
>>I think this was a very hard slap at Judge Jackson more than on the merits of the case itself.
>>
>>Regardless, the judgement of monopolistic behavior still stands I think.
>
>To what end? A law that isn't enforced isn't a law. The effect of the Appelate ruling was to remove the teeth from the judgement. it's like driving the speed limit only to have a police car come up along side and motion you to go faster! (Actually happened to me in Omaha! In a 55mph -Double Fine for workzone stretch of I80 I eventually found that 70mph was acceptable. The 55 mph speed limit posting is not law when it is not enforced.)

Well, from what I read there's still every chance that Microsoft could get broken up. Remember the reversal was only over the issue of the Judge's personal behavior that caused the reversal.

I'd suggest we wait and see.....

>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>2. I had, and have, a problem with the monopoly law that was invoked. It's well over a hundred years old, and has little, if any, applicability in this day and age. It undoubtedly needs a good re-writing. As it is now, it's the law, but it's a bad law.< Geez, I'm starting to feel the same feelings I had back in the late 60's < s >>
>>
>>Whewww.. I really don't think I know anywhere near enough to respond here. I suppose if you strictly applied the law to all who practiced these kinds of behaviors that the federal government would first have to sue itself. Post Office, Public Schools, Social Security, etc.. There's a lot of monopolistic abuse there I'd think.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>As an aside.. It's like Irelend telling the EU to go stuff it and lowering their tax rates even more. <g> Why, what a surprise! their economy is booming and they have a problem finding enough workers, while at the same time the EU member's economies are tanking and. They even wanted Ireland to raise taxes so they could share the misery I suppose... <g>
>>>>
>>>>Duhh.... <g>
>>>
>>>LOL!
>>
>><g>
>>
>>yeah.. What ever happened to applying the "Do we have measurable results?" test?