Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Political Rant (was: Re: Future of WordPerfect Redux)

Expand Messages
  • David Derbes
    ... I am not sure that is entirely correct. As some random readers may know, I was a frequent poster on the list comp.os.os2.advocacy. OS/2 was originally a
    Message 1 of 7 , Oct 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      On Oct 3, 2005, at 12:34 PM, Randy B. Singer wrote:

      > R. Kevin Hill said:
      >
      > >I thought I had addressed this, but perhaps my claim had been refuted
      > >and I missed it? Many years ago, Corel and Microsoft entered into a
      > >contract. I don't recall what MS gave them (money I think, I think
      > >they were in trouble at the time) and in exchange Corel agreed to
      > >shelve WPMac permanently, in order to give MSWord a monopoly on the
      > >Mac platform, while giving their only serious competition on the
      > >Windows platform a boost in terms of drawing people to Windows, also
      > >an MS product, away from Mac. Whether this was a good idea or not I
      > >don't know, but the upshot is that MS *paid* Corel to kill it and
      > they
      > >did, and the result is that Word is the monopoly program on the Mac
      > >platform. Thus no technical obstacles are relevant and it can
      > never be
      > >revived unless MS says so, which they won't.
      >
      > That is, of course, a compelling paranoid fantasy, but just about
      > none of
      > it is true.
      >
      > Development for WP/Mac was officially discontinued several months
      > before
      > Microsoft invested in Corel, and it was moribund well before that.
      >
      > http://www.macnn.com/news/434
      >
      > <http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/story/
      > 0,10801,51813,0
      > 0.html>
      >
      > The Justice Department throughly looked into any anti-trust
      > problems with
      > MS's investment in Corel, the big concern not being WP/Mac, but WP/
      > Linux:
      >
      > http://www.computeruser.com/news/01/02/15/news5.html

      I am not sure that is entirely correct. As some random readers may
      know, I was a frequent poster on the
      list comp.os.os2.advocacy. OS/2 was originally a joint MS-IBM project
      to replace MS-DOS. At the same time
      and in parallel (but largely unknown to IBM) proceeded the
      development of Windows. MS, as everyone knows,
      put its real muscle into Windows, while maintaining a careful fiction
      that they were hard at work on OS/2. And,
      at an appropriate point, when Windows was good enough to ship,
      surprise, MS pulled out of OS/2 development.

      It was stated more than once that WP, not Corel, but WP, dropped the
      development of WP OS/2 nineteen
      days before "code complete". Nineteen days.

      Some people, including me, found the timing a little odd. Why invest
      tens of millions into a product and then
      never release it? I do not know the ultimate disposition of the
      courts with respect to Microsoft and OS/2, but
      I believe that at least one judge found that MS had acted illegally.
      Dunno if that was overturned or upheld.
      What MS's role in the non-appearance of WP OS/2, if any, has never
      been illuminated to my satisfaction; in
      any case, this was well before the antitrust action was set in
      motion. (We are talking about, maybe, 1992, but
      I am not certain of the year any more.)

      >
      > Ultimately the Justice Department didn't find any illegal
      > agreements, and
      > under the pressure of all the bad publicity, MS divested itself of its
      > interest in Corel.
      >
      > There was no "contract" for Corel to kill anything, and there is no
      > ongoing influence that MS has over Corel to keep any products off
      > of the
      > Market. Indeed, though MS has been a bully in the marketplace, as
      > seen
      > in the MS anti-trust lawsuit brought by the government, MS isn't, or
      > wasn't, stupid enough to pay off a competitor in a high-profile public
      > way, to kill off a competing product. Not even Microsoft is that
      > stupid
      > and arrogant.

      I think you have much too high an opinion not only of Microsoft's
      intelligence but
      especially of its morality.

      I have NO evidence, but if it turned out that MS bought off (either
      with actual dollars,
      or with threats) WP Corp so that it knifed the baby (of WP OS/2), it
      would surprise me
      not one whit.

      Indeed, the phrasing "knife the baby" was used by a senior Microsoft
      employee to describe
      the action MS wished Apple to take with respect to Quicktime. This
      was the testimony of
      Avi Tevanian during the antitrust trial. (Google the phrase "knife
      the baby" and have a look.)

      Microsoft will do whatever it can to monopolize every single area of
      computing. They regard their
      fair share of the market as 100%. As far as they are concerned, if
      you don't get caught, it ain't
      illegal; indeed, even if you do get caught, but it don't cost you
      much, it ain't even worth worryin' about.

      David Derbes
    • Archer Family
      An interesting read is The Microsoft File by Wendy Goldman Rohm. Amazon has it in digital format; you might can find a real copy somewhere (I found it in our
      Message 2 of 7 , Oct 4, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        An interesting read is "The Microsoft File" by Wendy Goldman Rohm.
        Amazon has it in digital format; you might can find a real copy
        somewhere (I found it in our county library).

        ---Tim

        On Oct 3, 2005, at 3:55 PM, David Derbes wrote:

        > On Oct 3, 2005, at 12:34 PM, Randy B. Singer wrote:
        >
        >> R. Kevin Hill said:
        >>
        >>> I thought I had addressed this, but perhaps my claim had been refuted
        >>> and I missed it? Many years ago, Corel and Microsoft entered into a
        >>> contract. I don't recall what MS gave them (money I think, I think
        >>> they were in trouble at the time) and in exchange Corel agreed to
        >>> shelve WPMac permanently, in order to give MSWord a monopoly on the
        >>> Mac platform, while giving their only serious competition on the
        >>> Windows platform a boost in terms of drawing people to Windows, also
        >>> an MS product, away from Mac. Whether this was a good idea or not I
        >>> don't know, but the upshot is that MS *paid* Corel to kill it and
        >> they
        >>> did, and the result is that Word is the monopoly program on the Mac
        >>> platform. Thus no technical obstacles are relevant and it can
        >> never be
        >>> revived unless MS says so, which they won't.
        >>
        >> That is, of course, a compelling paranoid fantasy, but just about
        >> none of
        >> it is true.
        >>
        >> Development for WP/Mac was officially discontinued several months
        >> before
        >> Microsoft invested in Corel, and it was moribund well before that.
        >>
        >> http://www.macnn.com/news/434
        >>
        >> <http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/story/
        >> 0,10801,51813,0
        >> 0.html>
        >>
        >> The Justice Department throughly looked into any anti-trust
        >> problems with
        >> MS's investment in Corel, the big concern not being WP/Mac, but WP/
        >> Linux:
        >>
        >> http://www.computeruser.com/news/01/02/15/news5.html
        >
        > I am not sure that is entirely correct. As some random readers may
        > know, I was a frequent poster on the
        > list comp.os.os2.advocacy. OS/2 was originally a joint MS-IBM project
        > to replace MS-DOS. At the same time
        > and in parallel (but largely unknown to IBM) proceeded the
        > development of Windows. MS, as everyone knows,
        > put its real muscle into Windows, while maintaining a careful fiction
        > that they were hard at work on OS/2. And,
        > at an appropriate point, when Windows was good enough to ship,
        > surprise, MS pulled out of OS/2 development.
        >
        > It was stated more than once that WP, not Corel, but WP, dropped the
        > development of WP OS/2 nineteen
        > days before "code complete". Nineteen days.
        >
        > Some people, including me, found the timing a little odd. Why invest
        > tens of millions into a product and then
        > never release it? I do not know the ultimate disposition of the
        > courts with respect to Microsoft and OS/2, but
        > I believe that at least one judge found that MS had acted illegally.
        > Dunno if that was overturned or upheld.
        > What MS's role in the non-appearance of WP OS/2, if any, has never
        > been illuminated to my satisfaction; in
        > any case, this was well before the antitrust action was set in
        > motion. (We are talking about, maybe, 1992, but
        > I am not certain of the year any more.)
        >
        >>
        >> Ultimately the Justice Department didn't find any illegal
        >> agreements, and
        >> under the pressure of all the bad publicity, MS divested itself of its
        >> interest in Corel.
        >>
        >> There was no "contract" for Corel to kill anything, and there is no
        >> ongoing influence that MS has over Corel to keep any products off
        >> of the
        >> Market. Indeed, though MS has been a bully in the marketplace, as
        >> seen
        >> in the MS anti-trust lawsuit brought by the government, MS isn't, or
        >> wasn't, stupid enough to pay off a competitor in a high-profile public
        >> way, to kill off a competing product. Not even Microsoft is that
        >> stupid
        >> and arrogant.
        >
        > I think you have much too high an opinion not only of Microsoft's
        > intelligence but
        > especially of its morality.
        >
        > I have NO evidence, but if it turned out that MS bought off (either
        > with actual dollars,
        > or with threats) WP Corp so that it knifed the baby (of WP OS/2), it
        > would surprise me
        > not one whit.
        >
        > Indeed, the phrasing "knife the baby" was used by a senior Microsoft
        > employee to describe
        > the action MS wished Apple to take with respect to Quicktime. This
        > was the testimony of
        > Avi Tevanian during the antitrust trial. (Google the phrase "knife
        > the baby" and have a look.)
        >
        > Microsoft will do whatever it can to monopolize every single area of
        > computing. They regard their
        > fair share of the market as 100%. As far as they are concerned, if
        > you don't get caught, it ain't
        > illegal; indeed, even if you do get caught, but it don't cost you
        > much, it ain't even worth worryin' about.
        >
        > David Derbes
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • Rick Mansfield
        You know the thing about it is, if WordPerfect really wanted to give Microsoft a run for its money, they could resurrect some of their shelved versions (Mac,
        Message 3 of 7 , Oct 4, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          You know the thing about it is, if WordPerfect really wanted to give Microsoft a run for its
          money, they could resurrect some of their shelved versions (Mac, Linux, Java, Unix) and
          become a ubiquitous presence with a version for every platform. You would think that would
          be appealing to a lot of mixed platform offices and organizations.
        • R. Kevin Hill
          I really didn t mean to stir up any mischief by my speculations about the Corel abandonment of WPMac. I too have been anxious about the switch to Intel, the
          Message 4 of 7 , Oct 5, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            I really didn't mean to stir up any mischief by my speculations about
            the Corel abandonment of WPMac. I too have been anxious about the
            switch to Intel, the death of Classic, etc, as I am heavily invested
            at least in old files archived in WP format. For simple documents, I
            now create with Mariner Write, but if I had to create something
            complex, I know I'd be right back in my old friend WP because it's the
            only powerful program that makes any sense to me.

            I hope this isn't redundant--I don't always read everything that comes
            through. I spent a day testing out various programs, and while I found
            that nothing was ideal, Abiword was able to open unmodified WPMac
            files better than anything else, though I think it may have deleted
            footnotes. As a part of a preparation for a transition, my advice to
            people is to find the docs which have footnotes and resave copies of
            them as RTF and then reopen in MSWord and resave. For those without
            footnotes, you should be able to later open them with Abiword under
            OSX without a problem. See

            http://www.abisource.com/download/

            if you want to try it.

            On 10/4/05, Archer Family <tarcher@...> wrote:
            > An interesting read is "The Microsoft File" by Wendy Goldman Rohm.
            > Amazon has it in digital format; you might can find a real copy
            > somewhere (I found it in our county library).
            >
            > ---Tim
            >
            >
            > On Oct 3, 2005, at 3:55 PM, David Derbes wrote:
            >
            > > On Oct 3, 2005, at 12:34 PM, Randy B. Singer wrote:
            > >
            > >> R. Kevin Hill said:
            > >>
            > >>> I thought I had addressed this, but perhaps my claim had been refuted
            > >>> and I missed it? Many years ago, Corel and Microsoft entered into a
            > >>> contract. I don't recall what MS gave them (money I think, I think
            > >>> they were in trouble at the time) and in exchange Corel agreed to
            > >>> shelve WPMac permanently, in order to give MSWord a monopoly on the
            > >>> Mac platform, while giving their only serious competition on the
            > >>> Windows platform a boost in terms of drawing people to Windows, also
            > >>> an MS product, away from Mac. Whether this was a good idea or not I
            > >>> don't know, but the upshot is that MS *paid* Corel to kill it and
            > >> they
            > >>> did, and the result is that Word is the monopoly program on the Mac
            > >>> platform. Thus no technical obstacles are relevant and it can
            > >> never be
            > >>> revived unless MS says so, which they won't.
            > >>
            > >> That is, of course, a compelling paranoid fantasy, but just about
            > >> none of
            > >> it is true.
            > >>
            > >> Development for WP/Mac was officially discontinued several months
            > >> before
            > >> Microsoft invested in Corel, and it was moribund well before that.
            > >>
            > >> http://www.macnn.com/news/434
            > >>
            > >>
            > <http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/story/
            > >> 0,10801,51813,0
            > >> 0.html>
            > >>
            > >> The Justice Department throughly looked into any anti-trust
            > >> problems with
            > >> MS's investment in Corel, the big concern not being WP/Mac, but WP/
            > >> Linux:
            > >>
            > >> http://www.computeruser.com/news/01/02/15/news5.html
            > >
            > > I am not sure that is entirely correct. As some random readers may
            > > know, I was a frequent poster on the
            > > list comp.os.os2.advocacy. OS/2 was originally a joint MS-IBM project
            > > to replace MS-DOS. At the same time
            > > and in parallel (but largely unknown to IBM) proceeded the
            > > development of Windows. MS, as everyone knows,
            > > put its real muscle into Windows, while maintaining a careful fiction
            > > that they were hard at work on OS/2. And,
            > > at an appropriate point, when Windows was good enough to ship,
            > > surprise, MS pulled out of OS/2 development.
            > >
            > > It was stated more than once that WP, not Corel, but WP, dropped the
            > > development of WP OS/2 nineteen
            > > days before "code complete". Nineteen days.
            > >
            > > Some people, including me, found the timing a little odd. Why invest
            > > tens of millions into a product and then
            > > never release it? I do not know the ultimate disposition of the
            > > courts with respect to Microsoft and OS/2, but
            > > I believe that at least one judge found that MS had acted illegally.
            > > Dunno if that was overturned or upheld.
            > > What MS's role in the non-appearance of WP OS/2, if any, has never
            > > been illuminated to my satisfaction; in
            > > any case, this was well before the antitrust action was set in
            > > motion. (We are talking about, maybe, 1992, but
            > > I am not certain of the year any more.)
            > >
            > >>
            > >> Ultimately the Justice Department didn't find any illegal
            > >> agreements, and
            > >> under the pressure of all the bad publicity, MS divested itself of its
            > >> interest in Corel.
            > >>
            > >> There was no "contract" for Corel to kill anything, and there is no
            > >> ongoing influence that MS has over Corel to keep any products off
            > >> of the
            > >> Market. Indeed, though MS has been a bully in the marketplace, as
            > >> seen
            > >> in the MS anti-trust lawsuit brought by the government, MS isn't, or
            > >> wasn't, stupid enough to pay off a competitor in a high-profile public
            > >> way, to kill off a competing product. Not even Microsoft is that
            > >> stupid
            > >> and arrogant.
            > >
            > > I think you have much too high an opinion not only of Microsoft's
            > > intelligence but
            > > especially of its morality.
            > >
            > > I have NO evidence, but if it turned out that MS bought off (either
            > > with actual dollars,
            > > or with threats) WP Corp so that it knifed the baby (of WP OS/2), it
            > > would surprise me
            > > not one whit.
            > >
            > > Indeed, the phrasing "knife the baby" was used by a senior Microsoft
            > > employee to describe
            > > the action MS wished Apple to take with respect to Quicktime. This
            > > was the testimony of
            > > Avi Tevanian during the antitrust trial. (Google the phrase "knife
            > > the baby" and have a look.)
            > >
            > > Microsoft will do whatever it can to monopolize every single area of
            > > computing. They regard their
            > > fair share of the market as 100%. As far as they are concerned, if
            > > you don't get caught, it ain't
            > > illegal; indeed, even if you do get caught, but it don't cost you
            > > much, it ain't even worth worryin' about.
            > >
            > > David Derbes
          • Geoff Gilbert
            But only if all platforms could read files from all other platforms ....
            Message 5 of 7 , Oct 5, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              But only if all platforms could read files from all other platforms ....


              >You know the thing about it is, if WordPerfect really wanted to give
              >Microsoft a run for its
              >money, they could resurrect some of their shelved versions (Mac,
              >Linux, Java, Unix) and
              >become a ubiquitous presence with a version for every platform. You
              >would think that would
              >be appealing to a lot of mixed platform offices and organizations.
            • John Rethorst
              WP already was in that position, back when all platforms meant DOS, Mac, Next, Amiga, Atari etc. I don t know whether documents were cross-platform. IAC
              Message 6 of 7 , Oct 5, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                WP already was in that position, back when all platforms meant DOS,
                Mac, Next, Amiga, Atari etc. I don't know whether documents were
                cross-platform. IAC Microsoft still ran them off the road.

                --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Geoff Gilbert <Geoff@e...>
                wrote:

                > But only if all platforms could read files from all other platforms
                > ....
                >
                > > You know the thing about it is, if WordPerfect really wanted to
                > > give Microsoft a run for its money, they could resurrect some
                > > of their shelved versions (Mac, Linux, Java, Unix) and
                > > become a ubiquitous presence with a version for every platform.
                > > You would think that would be appealing to a lot of mixed
                > > platform offices and organizations.
              • Rick Mansfield
                ... Well, of course. Put WP out there everywhere and let all versions read each others files.
                Message 7 of 7 , Oct 5, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Geoff Gilbert <Geoff@e...> wrote:
                  > But only if all platforms could read files from all other platforms ....

                  Well, of course. Put WP out there everywhere and let all versions read each others' files.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.