| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft, AOL shares rise after pact | |
|
||
| Time: 11:53 EST/16:53 GMT | News Source: CBS Marketwatch | Posted By: Brian Kvalheim | ||
|
Microsoft and AOL Time Warner shares rose Friday, after the companies agreed to settle a private antitrust lawsuit brought by AOL on behalf of its Netscape unit, ending four years of contention between the companies. As part of the settlement, Microsoft agreed to pay AOL Time Warner $750 million. The companies also said they agreed on a "variety of steps" designed to make their products work better with each other, which includes AOL getting use of Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser for the next seven years.
| ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 159 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:08:41 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 10896 (65.213.122.66) at 5/30/2003 1:55:04 PM |
|
Obviously AOL does not want to promote Netscape and Mozilla anymore.
The truth is that most of the work on Mozilla was funded by AOL aand the OSS slaves contributed little. When AOL funding dies out which is certain to be the case, Netscape and Mozilla will disappear. |
| #2 By 2062 (68.0.187.197) at 5/30/2003 1:58:26 PM |
|
I have to agree. I can't see AOL signing this agreement without understanding the consequences. Netscape is dead. If aol really wanted netscape to succeed they should have made it the aol browser years ago
gosh |
| #3 By 61 (24.92.223.112) at 5/30/2003 2:07:22 PM |
| Halc: Microsoft can't deny IE to AOL. IE's rendering engine is a componant that is part of Windows that ANY Windows developer can use freely. |
| #4 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 5/30/2003 4:29:00 PM |
|
montanagrizzly - Why do we need a new version? tabs, popup blocking and such are just software bloat. :)
Actually I'd suspect a new beta this summer. Maybe a 6.5, with a 7.0 release to go with the next desktop OS. |
| #5 By 9589 (68.17.52.2) at 5/30/2003 7:54:38 PM |
|
The headline should have read, "Bill Gates Screws RealNetworks for the Bargain Basesment Price of $750 million!" or "How to Get 30 million Users to Instantly Use Windows Media Player"! LOL
Bill Gates - Let's see for Thursday I think that I will get rid of that pesky lawsuit with those dolts in Virginia and get 30 million of their customers to use my media client (while maintaining complete control of the browser market) - all for about 25 bucks a customer or about half of the market cap of Real Networks. Hey Ballmer, I think that is what they call a two'fer! Yeah, Wall Street got it right: Real Networks(NASDAQ:RNWK) Industry: Computer-Svcs | [Edit] 7.96 -0.81 -9.2% |
| #6 By 3653 (209.149.57.116) at 5/30/2003 9:51:36 PM |
|
in case anyone has been asleep the last 10 years... this is further proof that Gates is one of the best businessmen ever.
And dont give him gruff for losing $ on Telewest-type investments. Those were strategic in nature, and lost no more money than other investments made by all companies in the late 90s. |
| #7 By 2459 (69.22.78.22) at 5/30/2003 10:07:57 PM |
| #11, MS didn't screw RealNetworks. The licensing agreement wasn't for exclusivity. Apparently, AOL-TW will use Windows Media alongside Real and Apple's Quicktime. If this remains true, Real will only get screwed due to consumer choice. |
| #8 By 12071 (203.217.70.131) at 5/31/2003 11:39:00 AM |
|
#20 Why does criticism of Microsoft equal linux zealotry? For all you know he could be a Solaris zealot, or a BSD zealot which is why he made the comment about Windows being used as a server. Or maybe he's just talking about his own past experiences and possibly that he himself does not believe Windows is stable/secure/whatever his reasons enough to be used as a server. You may disagree with his view but this doesn't instantly make him a Linux zealot. Not everything is black and white, i.e. if you dare criticise Microsoft then by default you must me a Linux zealot. Oh and what is the destructive nature of OSS (not the GPL, OSS)?
#21 May I ask what your "serious" issue with Open Source is? Note that I am specifically asking about Open Source and not GPL (yes there is a big difference to those here that think the two are mutually exclusive). The reason I'm not asking about the GPL is because I'm sure you'll start off by calling it a cancer and how developers will not have jobs anymore - I'm a developer btw. I'm curious to know what your "serious" issues with Open Source are, given that you take Microsoft's stance on the issue and the fact that Microsoft are not anti Open Source at all, in fact they've used quite a bit of BSD Licensed code. |
| #9 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 5/31/2003 12:57:33 PM |
|
montanagrizzly - It's all about choice. I don't like tabs cause they remind me of MDI. I am for popup blocking, but Microsoft isn't about to touch that as they'll get crucified in the press for hurting web business.
So you've got Mozilla, which if you like it go for it... Or Opera, etc. Not all browsers have to be the same. Mozilla doesn't support ActiveX, which we clearly need at work to support our internal business apps. |
| #10 By 135 (208.50.204.91) at 5/31/2003 12:58:39 PM |
|
chris_kabuki - Maybe lay off the coffee all together?
OSS isn't destructive... Just the GPL is. |
| #11 By 3653 (209.149.57.116) at 6/1/2003 1:13:25 AM |
|
montanagrizzly -
http://www.ruihehang.com/myie2/html_en/home.htm Have fun with your tabs and ad blocking. I've been using this for awhile. Like most great software, IE can be used by non-Microsoft devs to build bigger/better software. Have fun. |
| #12 By 12071 (203.217.70.131) at 6/1/2003 10:43:56 AM |
|
#24 "Maybe lay off the coffee all together?"
Maybe lay off the pointless irrelevant comments. "OSS isn't destructive..." Look at comments #19 and #20 again. #19: "I do have a serious issue with Open Source and the GPL in specific" #20: "mentions about the destructive nature of OSS and the GPL" I was simply asking why, no need to get all defensive. #27 Now I'm sure you have more to offer this conversation that personal attacks. I believe I said that a potential sign of zealotry is someone who only sees either the positive or the negative aspects, rather than both sides - whilst #17 did criticise Microsoft it doesn't mean that he has never said anything positive about them. Like you said, he has made 167 previous comments, there may be a positive comment about Microsoft in there somewhere. And to answer your question, no I have not read all of his previous comments. #28 Fair enough, so although you believe than Open Source is better off for humanity, you don't think it will work well in practise. That's fair enough, no-one knows for sure whether it will "work" in practise. Just remember that with Open Source you first do not need to be apart of it if you don't want to be, and that you don't necessarily have to give away all of your source code. You may wish to open source just a component or two that others will find useful, or you can just publish an algorithm. So really you have "serious" issues with Open Source is because developers cannot make money (or as much money) if they choose to give away their code. Remember that the GPL != Open Source and vice versa, just because the GPL says that you have to give back any changes/additions that you have made doesn't make it so for Open Source, take a look at the BSD License for instance. You can do whatever you feel like with that code, you just need to keep the copyright lines intact at the top of the source code! It means that a company like Microsoft doesn't need to write a full ftp client as they can use existing code. Why should every developer have to re-invent the wheel each time they code? Note that I am by no means saying that everything should be Open Source'd but kudos to those that do! A really good, effective example of this where the company/programmers have not lost any money is ID releasing the source code to their older games from which they either are not making any more money from or have already made enough money from. Is this a "bad" thing? Is this taking anything away from other developers? Or is it a huge break for those developers that are starting out writing their own games professionally or as a hobby and want to learn from the "experts"? Quite honestly I cannot see ANY serious issues with Open Source, if you're a developer who is worried about their livelyhood then you should be more worried about your job being done overseas (e.g. India) for 1/10 (or whatever it may be) of your cost! |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 159 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:08:41 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
