Re: Microsoft: OEM choice would be a "disaster"

[Christopher Pall <christopher.pall@wmich.edu>]

While I agree with you completely that the entire browser being included is
anit-competitive, there is a a fine line to define here about what the DOJ
needs to prove. The DOJ doesn't need to make a good case against the browser
being included. It needs to prove that the browser was included to destroy
Netscape....

(that comment about cutting off Netscape's air supply comes to mind)

Steve Cohen wrote:
> 
> Brett Glass wrote:
> 
> > At
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/dec98/12-7farber.htm
> >
> > Microsoft claims that "Mr. [David] Farber's suggestion that OEMs should
> > decide which components of Windows they deliver to customers would be a
> > disaster for consumers and software developers alike."
> >
> > In other words, Microsoft believes that the company from which you buy a
> > system shouldn't be  allowed to differentiate its products or choose which
> > software components come with it. This, in turn, means that consumers
> > cannot choose.
> >
> > For whom would choice be a "disaster?" Only one company: Microsoft.
> >
> > --Brett Glass
> 
> You are so right.  Mr. Farber's testimony is the first that hits my central
> concerns when I first began to take a strong interest in this case. I hope
> he's got the sort of personality that won't wilt under the heavy
> cross-examination he is already coming under.