Re: Software giant plans to argue Explorer development beganprior to Netscape

["Eric M. Bennett" <ericb@pobox.com>]

>If this were the case, why is it that you originally had
>to  obtain the plus pack to get IE when 95 first shipped.

I'm confused about this issue.  I have heard people who say it was only
part of the plus pack.  I have also heard people who say that they received
IE with their original copy of Windows 95 in August 1995.  I can only
conclude that some copies were packaged with it and that some were not.

>I'd also like
>to know that if MS was planning this back in 93, why did they have to
>license Spyglass to come out with a browser?

When Gates made this claim at the Senate hearings in March, Stewart Alsop
pointed out that Microsoft had executed its license with Spyglass *after*
Mosaic Communications (later Netscape) was founded.  Gates then said that
Microsoft had had an internal effort to build a browser prior to deciding
to license from Spyglass.

>I seem to remember a BG interview on the Economist where he stated that
>they were planning to "integrate the internet" with windows 95.  I hope
>the court can see that for what it is, a thinly veiled attempt to play
>on people not knowing the difference between a TCP/IP stack and a web
>browser.

Alsop pressured Gates on this at the March hearings as well when Gates said
that Microsoft had planned to include "internet functionality" in Windows
95.  Alsop asked whether that meant TCP/IP "or a browser that looked like
Mosaic or its derivatives."  Gates danced around that question.

>I do remember that part of the windows 95 spec in 94 was to
>include MS branded TCP/IP and Winsock since many people didn't want to
>hunt down other stacks but there was no mention of a browser until late
>winter or mid-spring of 95, and I remember MS was not even sure that IE
>would make it with the 95 release.
>
>Man I hate these guys.

But of course Microsoft does not necessarily make its strategy public as
soon as it is set.  Microsoft will undoubtedly conjur up internal documents
that "prove" Microsoft planned integration of the browser long before it
was revealed as public strategy.

Alsop had a hard time with this too, and asked Gates, in effect, "If you
had been planning this all along, what was the big deal about your
'internet speech'?  What was the big thing Microsoft had overlooked?"  And
Gates basically said, "IE 1.0 sucked and we simply realized we needed to
improve it."

Given that Microsoft was betting so heavily on the proprietary Microsoft
Network (at the expense of the Internet) back when Windows 95 was launched,
I am already skeptical of whatever internal documents Microsoft is going to
produce.



--
Eric Bennett (http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/), Cornell Biochemistry Department

[If you are Bill Gates and you] want to control video? Just add it to
Windows. Want to control Java? Just add it to Windows. Want to control the
Internet? Just add it to Windows. Everyone has to buy Windows.
-Larry Ellison, Oracle CEO