Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Atari Online News, Etc. Volume 01 Issue 37
Volume 1, Issue 37 Atari Online News, Etc. November 12, 1999
Published and Copyright (c) 1999
All Rights Reserved
Atari Online News, Etc.
A-ONE Online Magazine
Dana P. Jacobson, Publisher/Managing Editor
Joseph Mirando, Managing Editor
Atari Online News, Etc. Staff
Dana P. Jacobson -- Editor
Joe Mirando -- "People Are Talking"
Michael Burkley -- "Unabashed Atariophile"
Albert Dayes -- CC: Classic Chips
With Contributions by:
Carl Forhan
Dan Iacovelli
To subscribe to A-ONE, send a message to: dpj@delphi.com
and your address will be added to the distribution list.
To unsubscribe from A-ONE, send the following: Unsubscribe A-ONE
Please make sure that you include the same address that you used to
subscribe from.
To download A-ONE, set your browser bookmarks to one of the
following sites:
http://people.delphi.com/dpj/a-one.htm
http://www.icwhen.com/aone/
http://a1mag.atari.org
Visit the Atari Advantage Forum on Delphi!
http://forums.delphi.com/m/main.asp?sigdir=atari
=~=~=~=
A-ONE #0137 11/12/99
~ Jaguar's "Protector"! ~ People Are Talking! ~ "Rippin' Riders"!
~ AVC Meeting Update! ~ Infobeat E-mail Glitch ~ "Medal of Honor"!
~ Digital Signatures OK! ~ Price Fixing Evidence? ~ "Test Drive 6"
~ MS Office 2000 Online? ~ Are We Y2K Ready? ~ Rugrats!
-* Judge Rules Against Microsoft *-
-* New Virus Strain Dawns: "Bubbleboy" *-
-* AOL To Government: Neutral But Cooperative *-
=~=~=~=
->From the Editor's Keyboard "Saying it like it is!"
""""""""""""""""""""""""""
It figures that last week's issue was completed and published about an hour
before one of the biggest stories in recent technology history hit the
streets. Of course, I'm referring to the Microsoft antitrust case. We've
been hearing about this case for many months; and it's finally starting to
wind down with this initial decision against Microsoft.
Now the judge has to determine which antitrust laws were broken by
Microsoft. Then the likely appeals, or perhaps a settlement. And then the
"fun" will begin because I believe that there are going to be plenty of
lawsuits brought against Microsoft before this is all said and done.
Was Judge Jackson's decision a good one? Well, the initial ruling was that
Microsoft is a monopoly. Well, that's obvious. Will Jackson rule that
Microsoft broke some antitrust laws? I'm sure that he will. What will
happen after that is anyone's guess at the moment; there are a number of
scenarios that we could speculate. Do I agree with the decision? Well, I
certainly agree with the monopoly conclusion. I also feel that Microsoft
did some things wrong. Were these things illegal? We'll find out. I
believe that Microsoft strong-armed many along the way in such a manner
that, at the least, is unethical.
I am also in awe of how Microsoft's lawyers handled the case. There were a
lot of gaffs. Their witnesses were caught with contradictory statements;
some of their defenses blew up in their face; and Jackson did his homework.
Am I happy with the chain of events so far? To a certain degree. I'm glad
that [a] big business with a lot of power to monopolize the market is being
held accountable, for a change, for its business practices. I'm not anti-
Gates or Microsoft. I believe that they bullied people and companies along
the way to the top. They misrepresented themselves during the trial at
times (Explorer is a necessary component of Windows - bah!).
We've included a number of relative articles pertaining to this case in this
week's issue. Also, we've included some of the highlights of Judge
Jackson's decision, as well as Gates' reaction. As this case continues,
we'll keep you informed.
Until next time...
=~=~=~=
->A-ONE User Group Notes! - Meetings, Shows, and Info!
"""""""""""""""""""""""
AVC Net Meeting Update
The special net meeting with Scott Walters is this saturday (11/13/99)
from 5pm (ct) (Scott has informed me that he will be online at 5:30pm (ct))
till 7:30pm (ct)(this to make up for the first 30 mins.)
The locations of the net meetings is on ICQ (my number is listed at the end
of this message) and for those who don't have ICQ it will also be at
the AVC Web chat room at http://jupiter.beseen.com/chat/rooms/i/1858/
(Scott will be on ICQ but I'll relay the messages back forth from both
rooms.
Hope to see you there.
Daniel M. Iacovelli
Atari Video Club Chairperson
Editor of The Atari Zone Fanzine and E-zine
E-mail: Dan-AVC@usa.net
(ICQ #14051068)
Webmaster of AVC online
AVC online=Http://www.angelfire.com/ia/AtariVideoClub/AVC.html
=~=~=~=
PEOPLE ARE TALKING
compiled by Joe Mirando
jmirando@portone.com
Hidi ho friends and neighbors. It's been another one of those weeks, I'm
afraid. Things have gotten so hectic that it's hard to find the time to
do the things you really want to do. Of course, I know that I'm not the
only one with this problem. I know that it's the same for everyone these
days, and that only the most supremely organized among us can manage to
get to the things that they really want to do.
Unfortunately, I've never been much at organization. I'm lucky if I can
get up on time, let alone stuff thirty hours worth of life into
twenty-four.
One of the things I try to make sure I have the time for is my Atari
computer 'stuff'. Now don't get me wrong, I don't do it out of any
sense that it won't get done if I don't do it, or that I'm in any way
important to what's left of the Atari world. I do it because I genuinely
enjoy it. I find the Atari world to be a comfortable and friendly place
where the friends and neighbors that I've come to think so much of over
the past <ahem> few years keep my mind from turning to the intellectual
equivalent of gruel. I wish I had the time to do more than just talk
about some of the cool things that are happening around me these days.
There are a few very cool products, either already available or soon to
be released, that I could see myself spending days over, but the days
just aren't available any more. Heck, I don't even have the time to put
together and configure a copy of StinG for a friend.
I've always been one of those people who actually enjoys digging around
in the guts of a computer system to find out how it does what it does,
whether it's hardware or software. My latest adventure is installing
Linux on my PC laptop and trying to learn the commands and all the
little quirks that every operating system has. It's taken me much, much
longer to get things going with Linux than I would have liked, but
again, there just aren't enough hours in the day. I've promised myself
that I WILL get it done, but (quite wisely), I put no time limit on it.
<grin>
As I said before, I know that I'm not the only one who's in this boat.
But knowing that doesn't make it any easier does it?
Well, let's get to the news, hints, and all that other stuff on the
UseNet.
From the comp.sys.atari.st NewsGroup:
Ken Hartlin posts:
"Just received an email from my ISP saying that all "SHELL/SLIP/STATIC"
access will terminate on Dec 1st. Just PPP from now on.
Although I could never get it to work, I know there is CAB, etc. for
SLIP, but is there anything available to establish PPP connections?"
Yann Lossouarn tells Ken:
"The problem for SLIP/PPP isn't the web browser, it's the TCP/IP stack
you use : STiNG, STik, MiNT- Net. I dunno for Stik, but STiNG and
MiNT-Net are using PPP very well."
Steve Stupple adds:
"STinG and STiK can cope with PPP and SLIP.
All the TCP/IP's I now of on the ST's cater for it. It's CHAP and PAP
that's the problem!
Has anyone sorted CHAP & PAP out yet as this will open a new world for
many Atarian's, as most of the free IP's use one of these 2 protocols."
**Editor's Note: I haven't read the next few posts yet, so I don't know
if anyone has mentioned this, but StinG does PAP quite well.
Jo Even Skarsein asks Steve:
"What's the problem with these? At least STiNG and MiNT-Net handles CHAP
and PAP, so do the commercial stacks (IConnect, Draconis, WenSuite)."
Pascal Ricard tells Jo Even:
"As far as I know, STinG and IConnect doesn't support CHAP yet. I cannot
get connected with these stacks to two ISPs here (in Vendee, France)
using this protocol."
Richard 'B' asks:
"Has anybody got information on the Iomega ZIP drives, especially the
new 250 meg one.
If possible, can anyone supply me with a copy of the software for the
Atari."
Dr. Uwe Seimet, the author of HD Driver, asks Richard:
"Which kind of software? All you need to drive a ZIP is a decent hard
disk driver."
One of the wizards to come up with some of the cool new things I'd love
to have time to play with, Mario Becroft, posts this for a friend:
"A member of our local Atari club is using Spin version 0.34 under MagiC
version 5 to access a SCSI CD- ROM drive attached to a Falcon computer.
This configuration has been working fine for a couple of weeks. After
upgrading to MagiC version 6 this configuration no longer works
properly.
The message from Spin during booting is as normal and the CD-ROM drive
is identified. But after double clicking on the CD-ROM drive icon at the
MagiC desktop an alert appears indicating "Error 46: invalid drive."
This appears to indicate that the drive is not present.
I have tried using different BOS drivers and various settings, and in
all cases the CD-ROM drive is identified and there are no error messages
while booting but the drive remains inaccessible.
SPINMAGC.XFS is in the C:\GEMSYS\MAGIC\XTENSION directory and
METAXBS.PRX is in the C:\AUTO directory. I tried renaming METAXBS.PRX to
METAXBS.PRG without any improvement.
I am not very familiar with MagiC and after trying all the obvious
adjustments we have not made any progress. Therefore I would be
interested in any hints from MagiC users as to what might be the
problem.
MetaDOS works fine on the same configuration but only under TOS. If Spin
will not work with MagiC 6 then MetaDOS would be an alternative, so any
hints on how to make it work with MagiC would also be appreciated."
Derryck Croker tells Mario:
"It does sound like a configuration problem if it worked before. I'm
running Spin! here with the same basic setup as your club mate under
MagiC 6, no problem.
So check that the CDROM's ID is checked in HDDriver's config, or if he's
not using that make sure that SCSIDRV.PRG is present in the Auto
folder."
Joshua Kaijankoski asks about posting to the NewsGroups:
"I posted a couple of messages a while ago (1 week) and even got a few
replies. What I'm wondering is that I can't seem to find them anymore.
Outlook express displays over 2000 messages from 16 September so it
can't be outdated or anything. Can someone shed a light on this? Is
someone boycotting my posts?"
John Garone tells Joshua:
"Some of the problem may lie with the NewsGroup server. Sometimes my
posts don't arrive and if they do, might disappear leaving older posts
still there (Atlantic.net's NG). In trying out another ISP (Earthlink),
I don't have that problem. Also, you may not be able to follow-up to a
post with double (:)'s. "
Derek Warren tells Joshua:
"I've had the same thing happen to me--only I thought it was my cable
provider's horrible news server at work. For emergencies, I've set up
an account at http://www.dejanews.com/ so I can make sure that CSAST
hasn't been blown off the face of the Earth. <grin>
Interestingly enough, everyone's posts show up and stay there 99% of the
time, but I imagine DejaNews has some fancy backup-and-archive mechanism
at work..
To make things even more complicated, I just logged in at dejanews.com
and only posts from before October 18th, inclusive, were left.
Aaargh.. the saga continues.."
Lonny Pursell adds:
"I had a similar thing happen with newsie and I found out it was because
the reference line was so long it got truncated in the editor and then
for some reason newsie pretended to send it. I say pretended because it
never reported an error and acted like it was sent.
I switched to pine which seems to have cured my problem."
Pete Smith asks:
"Can anyone tell me about a program called Ifusion,Which is supposed I
think to allow Stik/Sting clients to be used with Iconnect.
Is it a reality?, Does it work?, & where is it available???"
Pascal Ricard tells Pete:
"Yes, that's correct. There is also a version for Draconis. I did try a
beta version for IConnect with POPWatch and NEWSWatch. It should be
available through ASH and M.u.C.S. respectively."
Derryck Croker adds:
"Ifusion is bundled with fiffi, ASH's Iconnect ftp client.
As you say it allows one to use STinG clients with an IConnect
connection, especially good as I prefer aFTP over fiffi."
Steve Green asks for help with his TT's hard drive:
"My TT's hard drive decided to die on me yesterday. HDDriver seems to
recognize the fact that it's a Seagate drive but it cannot actually get
the drive spinning (although the heads sound as if they're trying to
read the boot info still!
What I need to know is if it's worth replacing the HD or should I get an
external drive? (is the TT SCSI 1 or 2 - both internal or external)
If I decide to get a new internal then I've been told to ask about the
power consumption as a modern HD could actually need more power than the
internal PSU can provide - and this is the last thing I need!!
Anyway, I don't know much about HD's and especially fitting one! So I
was going to take the TT down to Stafford and get someone like
SysSolutions to fit me one. Good idea or should I simply get a new
external drive (SCSI 1 or 2 though???)"
Our old friend Sheldon Winick tells Steve:
"Either SCSI-1 or SCSI-2 should work just fine in your TT030.
Installation isn't a difficult matter -- should take about 10 minutes if
you don't rush, then time for formatting and reinstalling your software.
You're probably going to need to remove the bad internal drive anyway,
so you might as well simply replace it with a new one."
Steve replies:
Excellent! Thanks, I think I'll be trying for Scsi2 then. But what about
the power consumption that I was talking about before?
What size of drive should I be looking for? I'm told there are 3.5 and
5.25 inch discs....?? Finally, are they real easy to fit? :-/ Is it
simply a case of removing the leads, unscrewing the HD and plonking in
the new one and plugging the leads back in. ? Sounds easy enough! By the
way, will the current leads plug into either a scsi 1 or 2 drive?"
Uwe Seimet tells Steve:
"Note that the connectors have nothing to do with the SCSI level."
Rob Mahlert, mastermind behind Atari-Users.Net, asks for help with a
hard drive too:
"I bought a used 256 meg SCSI drive for my TT a while back. I installed
it in the TT and booted the system up off of a floppy with ICD's
drivers. The TT will recognize the new internal SCSI and my EZ-135 on
boot up. I open up the c: drive (New SCSI), and I get the file directory
like I should. But if I try to access a file the system freezes up and
the drive light stays on. I can open all the folders I like, but the
files all do the same thing, it freezes. Same if I try to
format/partition the drive. My EZ-135 is fine. Any ideas? Is it
"locked"? Or is it no good?"
Henk Robbers tells Rob:
"I had the same problem with a new 1Gig drive. I discovered that the
GEMDOS of TOS 2.06 can not handle partitions with cluster size > 16384.
(I partitioned with AHDI 6.06) Under MagiC 6 there was no problem. If
you have a single partition on that drive the cluster size could by that
large.
Repartition the drive in 2."
Steve Sweet asks Rob:
"Odd, is this occurring after some Auto folder progs have run, maybe some
acc's also, try disabling all of these by booting with a floppy based
driver and then installing a 'C' icon to access the auto folder and the
ACC's.
What hard disk driver are you using, could you try a different one?"
Rob tells Steve:
"I'm using ICD's drivers. I have also tried CMHD(??) and the HD Driver
Demo, no luck with them. I have been booting the system off a floppy
with NO ACC's and only the Driver for the hard drive as an auto program.
The drive is a Maxtor 7245SR made in '93 if that helps put some more
light on the subject."
Well folks, that's it for this week. Wish me luck with Linux, and until
we get together again next time remember to keep your ears open so you
can hear what they are saying when...
PEOPLE ARE TALKING
=~=~=~=
->In This Week's Gaming Section - "Rippin' Riders"!! "Rugrats"!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" "Medal of Honor"! "Test Drive 6"!
Jaguar 'Protector'! 'WWF Attitude'!
"Supercross Circuit"! And much more!
->From the Editor's Controller - Playin' it like it is!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
First the case against Microsoft starts its final verdict process and then a
couple of interesting e-mails arrive in my mail regarding information
pertaining to problems one Dreamcast dealer is having getting product
because it offers discount prices on the game console. Usually you hear
about price fixing but rarely do you see the "practice" unraveled in
writing.
Ever notice that you don't see "sale" prices on game consoles? Everyone
sells these machines for the same price. Why? This is part of my
interpretation of what price fixing is about. The worst part of this occurs
when a dealer decides to buck the system and offer a sale on a system.
What's wrong with that, you ask? To the consumer, nothing - it's great.
But what do you think happens to that dealer when the manufacturer learns of
it? Product shipments are delayed, or dry up.
This is the primary reason you don't see anyone with sales. Do you think a
retailer like Toys R Us is going to risk not being able to get product to
sell? Never! They cannot afford to do that, especially when the real money
is in the games. If I can't buy a game console at a particular retailer,
what's the likelihood of my going to that same retailer for games. Probably
slim.
Want "proof" that this occurs? Here are two e-mails that I received this
week. The mail originated from an online retailer which was sent to their
"affiliates" - people who offer internet links for this retailer and take
orders for product. One of these "affiliates" forwarded me the two e-mails.
I cleaned them up a bit, but I do have the unabridged letters. These letter
appear in our "A-ONE Gaming Online" section. See what you think.
Personally, I think this practice stinks and should be remedied. Maybe
these letters being published will fall into the "right" hands!
Until next time...
=~=~=~=
->A-ONE's Game Console Industry News - The Latest Gaming News!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
989 Sports' Supercross Circuit Brings the Excitement of Authentic
Motocross and Supercross Racing to the Playstation Game Console
989 Sports announced Monday that it will release SuperCross Circuit for
the PlayStation game console November 9.
Capturing the fun of authentic motocross and supercross racing, SuperCross
Circuit is based on official riders, tracks and licensed dirt bikes from
Kawasaki, Honda, Yamaha and KTM.
Featuring some of the industry's hottest motocross and supercross racers,
SuperCross Circuit's champion racers include: Doug Henry, Mike LaRocco,
John Dowd, Larry Ward, Ezra Lusk, Casey Johnson, Sebastien Tortelli, Greg
Albertyn, Jimmy Button, Ryan Hughes, Tim Ferry, Steve Lamson, Kevin Windham
and Mickael Pichon. SuperCross Circuit also features authentic motocross
and supercross style racetracks that add to the game's realistic racing
action. Tracks include: the Metrodome, Pontiac Silverdome, Sam Boyd
Stadium, Red Bud, Steel City and Glen One.
``SuperCross Circuit, as with all 989 Sports titles, delivers unparalleled
authenticity, realism and motocross and supercross racing fun," said
Jeffrey Fox, vice president, marketing, 989 Studios. ``With professional
riders, licensed bikes, authentic tracks and unprecedented gameplay
features, SuperCross Circuit will let gamers experience the fast-paced
action of motocross racing from the safety of their couch."
SuperCross Circuit allows gamers to race like the pros on 9 challenging
supercross stadium tracks and 12 death-defying outdoor motocross courses.
Using authentic motocross bikes, gamers will test their mettle by handling
a 200-pound bike and navigating hairpin turns, bumps and straight aways.
SuperCross Circuit is a fast-paced racing experience that emulates
real-life track conditions over the course of the race - wet courses dry
with time and ruts emerge and enlarge during the race.
SuperCross Circuit Key Features
* Captures authentic motocross and supercross racing and is based on
official riders, authentic tracks and licensed dirt bikes from Yamaha,
Kawasaki, Honda and KTM.
* Features some of the industry's hottest motocross and supercross
racers such as Doug Henry, Mike LaRocco, John Dowd, Larry Ward, Ezra
Lusk, Casey Johnson, Sebastien Tortelli, Greg Albertyn, Jimmy Button,
Ryan Hughes, Tim Ferry, Steve Lamson, Kevin Windham and Mickael
Pichon. Top racing teams like Yamaha of Troy, Primal Fear and KTM are
also featured.
* Nine challenging supercross stadium tracks and twelve death-defying
outdoor motocross courses. Supercross tracks include: Las Vegas' Sam
Boyd Stadium, the Astrodome, the Metrodome, Arizona's Bank One
Ballpark, Michigan's Pontiac Silverdome. Twelve motocross tracks
include: Steel City, Budds Creek, Red Bud, Unadilla and many, many
more!
* Purchase modifications and upgrade bikes as you advance through the
season: make engine modifications, change gear ratios, buy new
suspension kits or a new Pro Circuit pipe and tires.
* Adding to the authenticity of the game are top equipment manufacturers
like Fox Racing, FMF, Renthal, Sinisalo, Pro Circuit, White Brothers,
Gaerne, O'Neal and Factory Connection.
* Real-life track conditions are emulated over the course of the race -
wet courses dry with time, ruts emerge and bikes accumulate mud.
-- Developed by Idol Minds, makers of Cool Boarders 3.
Infogrames North America Sends Test Drive 6 Racing to Stores This Week
Infogrames announced Tuesday that Test Drive 6 will begin shipping this
week for the Sony PlayStation game console. Test Drive 6, the latest
installment in the highly successful Test Drive series, will be available
for the personal computer and the Nintendo Game Boy Color next week, and
will also be available for the Sega Dreamcast(TM) in early December.
``With its incredible speed, big jumps and nerve-racking shortcuts, Test
Drive 6 is like being in a Hollywood chase scene," said Laddie Ervin,
director of marketing for sports and racing at Infogrames North America.
``Most of us will never drive over 100 mph through the streets of London in
a Dodge® Viper, but Test Drive 6 makes it possible."
The title's $3 million marketing effort is the largest in the history of
the Test Drive franchise. The marketing launch includes television ads on
NFL football games, CBS's Howard Stern, MTV, World Championship Wrestling
and ESPN, as well as radio ads on Howard Stern. Television ads began
yesterday and will continue through the month of December. Print ads began
running in September in most major video game publications. The launch also
includes a whole range of retail promotions.
Test Drive 6 has a completely revamped physics model, which gives each car
in its class a specific driving style and handling model. Players can
upgrade each car's engine, brakes, tires and suspension, with each feature
offering four levels of improvement. The game features interactive driving
environments that include breakable objects, obstacles and shortcuts.
Players can race through outdoor cafes in Paris, France, crashing into
tables and causing them to fly into the air, or they can swerve to avoid
barriers on the streets of Rome, as well as knock over rickshaws in the
back alleys of Hong Kong. Some of the more than 34 tracks in Test Drive 6
include Jordan, Maui, Tahoe, Italy, Switzerland and New York.
The game's new artificial intelligence (AI) allows each computer driver to
react uniquely to different situations, so racing opponents can be bumped
and jostled off their paths. In addition, if opponents take turns too
quickly, it will cause them to occasionally wipe out. Cross traffic in Test
Drive 6 will swerve to avoid racers, instead of ignoring oncoming cars, and
cops will chase all of the speeding cars, not just the player's car.
Test Drive 6 for the PlayStation and the PC includes 37 licensed vehicles
including Dodge'69 Charger, '99 Dodge Viper GTS, Dodge Viper GTS-R,
Dodge Concept, Plymouth '72 Hemi Cuda, '99 Prowler, '99 Ford Mustang,
Saleen S351, F150 Lightning, '97 Mustang Super Stallion, '68 GT-40, 1968.5
Mustang 428 CJ, '90 Mustang LX 5.0, Lotus '80 Esprit Turbo, '99 Elise,
Esprit V8, GT1, Jaguar '94 XJ220, '99 XKR, XK180, TVR '99 Cerbera, Tuscan,
Speed 12, Griffith, Aston Martin '99 DB7 Vantage Coupe, Project Vantage,
Shelby '66 Cobra, '99 Series 1, Venturi '99 Atlantique and 400 GT, Panoz
'99 Esperante, Nissan '99 Skyline and R390 GT1, Caterham 7, Audi '99 TT,
Marcos '99 Mantaray, Toyota '99 GT-One and the '99 Subaru Impreza.
The game features a hot licensed soundtrack that includes Fear Factory and
their remake of Gary Numan's Cars, sung with Gary Numan. The soundtrack
also features Eve 6, Empirion, Gearwhore, Q-Burns, Lunatic Calm, Cirrus and
the Kottonmouth Kings.
Test Drive 6 for the Game Boy Color features the following 12 licensed
cars: Dodge Viper, TVR Cerbera, Lotus Esprit V8, Shelby Series 1, Shelby
Cobra, Caterham Super 7, Audi TT, Dodge Challenger, Plymouth Cuda, Dodge
Charger, Panoz Roadster and the BMW V12 LMR. The game features 24 tracks in
12 real-world locations and offers cop chase mode, unpredictable objects
and tournament races where players can earn money to purchase and upgrade
cars.
Test Drive 6 for the PlayStation will feature two-player split screen
racing and supports the Dual Shock® analog controller. The PC version
requires an IBM or compatible with Windows 95/98, Pentium 166, 32MB of RAM
with a Direct 3D compatible 3D accelerator card and 70 MB of hard drive
space. Test Drive 6 also supports NVIDIA's new GeForce 256 Graphics
Processing Unit (GPU), the first graphics architecture to feature a dynamic
lighting engine and an integrated geometry transform engine. Test Drive 6
for the Game Boy will be playable on both the color and black and white
Game Boy systems. The estimated retail price for Test Drive 6 is $39.95 for
the PlayStation, $39.95 for the PC, and $29.99 for the Game Boy Color.
For more information please visit the Test Drive 6 web site at
http://www.td6.com.
Acclaim Sports Ships WWF Attitude for the Sega Dreamcast
First Wrestling Title for Next Generation System
Acclaim Entertainment, Inc. Tuesday announced that WWF Attitude for the
Sega Dreamcast has shipped to retail. Developed by Acclaim Studios Salt
Lake City, WWF Attitude has been a top-seller on PlayStation, Nintendo 64
and GameBoy Color since its release.
``WWF Attitude for Dreamcast is one of the most heavily anticipated titles
we've seen," said Doreen McKenzie, Divisional Merchandiser of Babbages and
Software Etc. ``Our customers are very excited to get their hands on this
game."
WWF Attitude is the blockbuster sequel to WWF Warzone, which sold more than
a million copies in 1998 and remains on top of the sales charts a year
after its release. WWF Attitude for Dreamcast features 40 WWF Superstars
including The Rock, Stone Cold Steve Austin, The Undertaker and Mankind.
Attitude also features the all-new Create-A-Pay-Per-View Mode and Acclaim's
signature Create-A-Wrestler mode where gamers can design their own unique
wrestler. In addition, there are 20 other game modes to play, including all
new specialty matches, new match options, career mode, photo-realistic
wrestlers, and more than 400 moves including signature and finishing moves.
``The graphics in the Dreamcast version of WWF Attitude are superb," said
Mike Archer, Acclaim Producer. ``By adding our Hi-rez graphics and
increasing the game's speed, WWF Attitude achieves the ultimate in realism
on the Sega Dreamcast."
WWF Attitude is supported by a nationwide marketing campaign including
television spots on programs such as ``WWF Smackdown", print ads in ``The
Official Sega Dreamcast Magazine" and an extensive online presence on key
wrestling sites and acclaimsports.com.
First Snowboarding Title Blasts to Sega Dreamcast in Rippin' Riders
Good news for all boarders! Now you can hit the slopes before the snow
falls with ``Rippin' Riders", the first snowboarding game for the 128-bit,
Internet-ready Sega Dreamcast videogame console. ``Rippin Riders" gives
players the extreme gaming experience they crave, along with all the
variety and multiplayer options to keep them coming back for more. The game
is packed with amazing high-speed 3D courses and halfpipes, awesome tricks,
unique characters and even some hidden surprises. ``Rippin' Riders" is
available at retailers nationwide now for $49.95.
``Rippin' Riders" challenges gamers to show their stuff on six fun-filled
courses. The picturesque 3D courses, including challenging high mountain
forest trails and downtown cityscapes, are filled with unexpected obstacles
(including farm animals!) that gamers must try to avoid or run right
through. Only players with the right race time and trick count can unlock
additional hidden courses.
``The intense speeds, outrageous tricks and beautiful 3D settings in
`Rippin Riders' are perfect examples of what the power of Sega Dreamcast
can deliver," said Greg Thomas, vice president of product development,
Sega of America. ``No other snowboarding title can match the depth of
gameplay and challenges found in this game."
To win in ``Rippin' Riders," players must navigate these treacherous
courses as fast as they can, gaining extra points along the way by
performing stunts. As players catch major air off jumps, halfpipes and
other obstacles, they can execute cool moves such as backside 360 tail
grabs and misty flips. Fail to stick the move and it's a serious face
plant, slowing you down and affecting the final race time and score.
The seven characters in ``Rippin' Riders" are extremely detailed, with
intricate outfits and even tattoos. Each boarder has two to three outfits
and nine boards to choose from, including authentic Bonfire clothing and
Salomon snowboards. Also unique to each character is the original
soundtrack that plays as they ride, with songs matching each unique
persona. For serious shredders, two hidden characters can be unlocked, but
only if they meet certain race times and trick counts.
For true competitive fun, ``Rippin' Riders" features multiplayer
capabilities, allowing players to race head to head with their friends.
``Match Race" challenges two players to go at it for the best time and
trick count. ``Line Versus" mode features split-screen action, in which
losing players are eventually edged off the screen with each trick their
opponent executes successfully.
``Rippin' Riders" is currently available at retailers nationwide and at
sega.com for $49.95.
Electronic Arts Ships DreamWorks Interactive's Medal of Honor,
the First World War II-inspired Game for the PlayStation
Electronic Arts announces the highly anticipated release of Medal of Honor,
a WWII-themed action adventure title from DreamWorks Interactive.
Created by DreamWorks SKG co-founder/award-winning filmmaker Steven
Spielberg, Medal of Honor is the first WWII action game developed
exclusively for the PlayStation game console system. The game has players
take on the role of an agent in the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the
United States' prestigious wartime spy and covert operations agency to aid
the Allied Forces through a variety of challenging missions to thwart the
German take over of Europe.
``World War II has served as the setting for so many wonderful books,
movies and television shows," says Glenn Entis, head of DreamWorks
Interactive, ``When Steven returned from filming 'Saving Private Ryan' he
realized he wanted to bring the subject to interactive entertainment. But
it was important for Steven that we present a realistic and honest
depiction of World War II and thus he asked Capt. Dale Dye to consult with
us on the game. Capt. Dye had just served in a similar capacity on 'Saving
Private Ryan' and Steven wanted him to ensure that all facets of the game,
including missions, weapons and enemy movements accurately and respectfully
portrayed the reality of World War II."
Medal of Honor begins on June 5, 1944, the night before D-day when the
Alliance launched a massive aerial assault behind German lines. Assuming
the role of Lieutenant Jimmy Patterson, a young C-47 pilot shot down during
the operation, the player is recruited into the OSS and begins a new career
as a field agent, participating in various covert operations, search and
rescue assignments, and commando raids through seven missions and 24
levels. Each mission is drawn from pivotal historical events that helped
shape the Allied crusade in Europe, including stories involving the
development, capture, and destruction of secret war-making technologies.
Ending several of the levels will be archival black and white WWII footage
to help immerse the player in the era. Players can utilize a total of 12
authentic WWII era weapons, including an American Colt 45, American M-1
Garand Rifle and Browning Automatic Rifle.
Ensuring the realism and accuracy of the era, Capt. Dale Dye, USMC
(retired), the top military consultant to the entertainment industry was
brought on through the course of the development cycle. Renowned for his
contribution to films such as ``Saving Private Ryan," ``Platoon," ``Born
on the Fourth of July" and ``Mission Impossible," Capt. Dye worked
closely with the production team. He put the team through a rigorous mini
boot camp, similar to the routine Hollywood actors face when Capt. Dye
prepares them to play military characters. He wanted the team to understand
how a soldier thinks and acts, how he would hold and use his weapons. In
addition, Capt. Dye helped define Artificial Intelligence (AI) character
movements, which include more than 450 different moves. He wanted to make
sure the AI in the game reflected real-life scenarios, such as the
possibility of having a grenade you've just thrown picked up and thrown
back at you. Capt. Dye also helped develop missions and accurately model
3-D versions of each of the weapons.
Balancing the overall game experience are environmental surroundings
depicting the realism of what a WWII soldier may have encountered.
Destructible elements help illustrate the ravages of war depicting bullet
holes in the wall, as well as glass that shatters and breaks when hit.
Distinctive sounds provide the war-like atmosphere including the thunder of
artillery in the distance, the whistles of search parties and barking dogs.
Additionally, Medal of Honor boasts an original music soundtrack featuring
an orchestral score by award-winning Michael Giacchino that helps draw the
player into the atmosphere.
Medal of Honor for the PlayStation features a two-player head-to-head mode
via a vertical split screen. The game supports Dual Shock analog
controls, carries a ``T' (Teen) ESRB rating and has a MSRP of US $49.95.
More information on the game can be obtained by going to the product web
site at http://www.mohgame.com.
THQ Releases 'Rugrats: Studio Tour'
THQ Inc. Tuesday announced the release of ``Rugrats: Studio Tour" for the
PlayStation game console.
America's favorite babies are making their second PlayStation performance
just in time for the holidays - this time their adventures take them to
familiar movie sets in a major Hollywood studio.
``Rugrats: Studio Tour" is backed by a multimillion-dollar marketing
campaign including television, print and online advertising in addition to
cross-promotional efforts.
This latest installment to THQ's multiproduct, cross-platform Rugrats
franchise is available at major retail outlets nationwide for a suggested
retail price of $39.95.
``Teaming up with Nickelodeon has allowed THQ to bring fun and
family-friendly console-gaming alternatives to millions of parents and kids
worldwide," said Alison Locke, senior vice president of sales and
marketing, THQ. ``We are delighted with the success of our PlayStation,
Nintendo 64, Game Boy and Game Boy Color releases and look forward to
another PlayStation hit this holiday season with `Rugrats: Studio Tour."'
``Nickelodeon's Rugrats TV show continues to enjoy unparalleled success
with 23 million viewers tuning in each week," said Steve Youngwood,
director, software, publishing and new businesses, Nickelodeon Consumer
Products. ``'Rugrats: Studio Tour' gives fans the opportunity to interact
with each of their favorite characters in an all new Rugrats adventure."
In ``Rugrats: Studio Tour," the babies adventure through a major Hollywood
movie studio guided by the unyielding power of their imaginations. Tommy,
Chuckie, Phil, Lil, Angelica, Susie and even Baby Dil are all on hand as
players explore movie sets including ``Diapers of Thunder," ``Captain
Cookies" and ``Lazy Saddles."
Designed especially for kids, ``Rugrats: Studio Tour" incorporates varied
gameplay options from kart-style racing to exploration to miniature golf
through 15 unique, interactive 3-D environments. Players will enjoy
voice-over from the actual Rugrats characters as well as music and sound
effects from the TV show.
The one- to two-player split-screen option invites friendly competition for
the whole family. ``Rugrats: Studio Tour" will enjoy an extensive
television and print advertising campaign targeting kids ages 6 to 11. The
four-week national TV campaign will include 15- and 30-second spots on
Nickelodeon, Cartoon Network, ABC and WB.
=~=~=~=
->A-ONE Gaming Online - Online Users Growl & Purr!
"""""""""""""""""""
Order Protector for the Jaguar Today!
Songbird Productions
http://songbird.atari.org
Protector is an exciting 2D bidirectional shooter that has been a surprise
hit with many Jaguar fans at JagFest '99, CGE '99, and the recent
CinciClassic. You won't want to miss out on this fast-paced blastfest!
Protector will be released on 12/20/99. The retail price of Protector for
new orders is $74.95 plus shipping. The game will be published in a
regular Jaguar cartridge complete with a full color label, full color box,
and a B&W glossy manual.
If you pre-ordered Protector, you owe a balance of $44.95 plus shipping.
If you pre-paid by credit card, you will need to authorize payment of the
balance on your card or supply a different card number. Please contact
Multimedia 1.0 again to complete your order, or email Songbird with your
complete order, customer information, and credit card number. Payment by
check or MO in US Dollars is also always accepted.
As time permits, pre-order customers will receive their copy of Protector
1-2 weeks early. Naturally, your order must be paid in full before it can
be shipped, so get your final payment in today!
Please email Songbird at songbird@atari.org with any questions. And a big
thank you to every Jaguar fan who has pre-ordered one or more of the
upcoming games.
Sincerely,
Carl Forhan
Songbird Productions
http://songbird.atari.org
Evidence of Price Fixing?
[Editor's note: The following two articles are the contents of two e-mails I
received this week regarding transactions between an online retailer and its
affiliates. Price Fixing? What do you think?!]
Date: Tuesday, November 09, 1999
First, we would like to give you $50 in gift certificates. These will
Be 2 codes in the amount of $25 each. These digital gift certificates are
yours to use in any way you like -- use them for yourself, gifts, or
contests for your users. The gift certificates do not expire until May
31, 2000.
We wanted to touch base with you regarding your commissions, and give you
an update on Dreamcast shipments. As you know, getting Dreamcast inventory
has not been easy. We learned recently that a large part of the problem in
securing Dreamcast systems was Sega's priorities in shipping. They ship as
follows: (1) traditional "brick & mortar" stores, (2) online stores, and
finally (3) those selling Dreamcast systems at a discount. Because we fall
into the last category, we've had a very difficult time getting our hands
on the systems. Our orders have been cancelled, and many distributors will
not sell to us because they know we are not selling them for $199. Many of
you and your users have cancelled orders because of the delay; we
understand. For everyone still holding an order, we are doing everything
we can to fulfill those orders - even purchasing units at retail to ship
to you. WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THIS UNTIL WE HAVE FULFILLED EVERY
OUTSTANDING ORDER.
We know that hyping up a product and then not being able to ship is
disappointing - it's disappointing to us, to you, your users, and is NO
way to do business. In the future, we won't use backorders or promises
from vendors and distributors outside of our control as a substitute
for actual product in our warehouse.
Because we are in the process of running commissions through 10/31 (and
we cannot pay commissions on non-shipped products), you will notice
that non-shipped and cancelled Dreamcast orders have been removed from your
revenue reports. We know that in addition to the inconvenience this has
caused, it represents a hit to your revenue.
We want to make this up to you, and the gift certificates are our way
Of saying sorry for the inconvenience and thanks for your patience.
Thank you for sticking with us during this difficult time. We are
working to improve our affiliate program, our website, and our customer
service.
Thank you for being a WhatsHotNow.com affiliate. For those of you with
$25 or more in outstanding commissions, you will be receiving your
commission check in the next few weeks directly from BeFree.
To get your gift certificate codes, simply reply to this message.
Please be sure to leave the message including your site name and email
address at the top.
Another delay apparently due to pricing... This title has been available
from other sources.
Dear Customer:
Regarding your order (Dreamcast: House of the Dead 2), please be advised
that Sega has pushed the delivery date on getting more products to us for
at least another 2-3 weeks' time. We apologize for the delay,
unfortunately there's not much we can do on our end except wait. Rest
assured that we will process your order as soon as possible once we do have
the merchandise in stock.
Please respond by returned e-mail or phone if you would like to proceed
with the order or cancel due to this delay. We apologize again for the
inconvenience and look forward to hearing from you soon.
Sincerely,
=~=~=~=
A-ONE's Headline News
The Latest in Computer Technology News
Compiled by: Dana P. Jacobson
Judge Rules Microsoft Wields Monopoly Power
A federal judge ruled Friday that Microsoft Corp. wields monopoly power in
personal computer operating systems, a major setback for the world's
largest software company in one of the biggest antitrust cases of the
century.
In a long-awaited decision, District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson said
Microsoft's actions had done consumers harm and the company had used its
power to punish competing firms.
The 207-page finding, which sets the stage for a later ruling on whether
Microsoft's actions broke the law, largely sided with the U.S. Justice
Department and 19 states that brought the case against the
high-technology powerhouse.
If Jackson finds Microsoft liable for breaking the law, he could then
move to apply sanctions ranging from restrictions on the way it does
business to breaking up the company.
A final decision may not come until well into next year unless Microsoft
and the government negotiate a settlement.
``Three main facts indicate that Microsoft enjoys monopoly power," Jackson
said, citing the company's large and stable market share, the high barriers
to entering the computer software market, and the lack of a commercially
viable alternative to the Windows operating system.
``Many of these actions have harmed consumers in ways that are immediate
and easily discernible," another part of Jackson's ruling said. ``They have
also caused less direct but nevertheless serious and far-reaching consumer
harm by distorting competition."
The case is a classic confrontation between one of the most dynamic
American companies of the computer age and U.S. government trustbusters
who believe Microsoft has become a schoolyard bully. It has been compared
to some of the epic antitrust battles of American history including a
13-year struggle with computer-maker IBM ending in 1982, and the breakup of
John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil monopoly in 1911.
The government charges that Microsoft used its power to illegally crush
rival Internet browser-maker Netscape and bully other firms. Microsoft
argued it had no monopoly in operating systems and always acted within
the law.
At issue in the case is whether Microsoft reduced choice for consumers
using personal computers by illegally bullying rivals or simply competed
hard in the fast-changing high-tech industry to bring new products to
market.
Netscape was acquired by Internet powerhouse America Online Inc. in March
1999, a deal which Microsoft said repeatedly made the case irrelevant.
The Justice Department hailed the ruling as a ``tremendous victory" for
U.S. consumers.
Assistant Attorney General Joel Klein told a news conference that
Microsoft's abuse of monopoly power had caused "substantial harm to
consumers and innovation" and should result in ``serious remedial redress."
But Klein said it was premature to say exactly what sanctions Microsoft
should face.
Spokesman for the 19 states who joined the action, Connecticut Attorney
General Richard Blumenthal, was even bolder in calling for action against
Microsoft.
``These are serious and far-reaching violations that should lead to serious
and far-reaching remedies," he said.
Straining to put the best face on the outcome, Microsoft founder and chief
executive Bill Gates said at a news conference that the company disagreed
with the findings of the judge.
``The American legal system ultimately will affirm that Microsoft's actions
in innovations were fair and legal and have brought tremendous benefits to
millions of consumers," Gates told reporters from the company's Redmond,
Wash. campus.
However, both Gates and chief government trustbuster Klein left the door
open to a negotiated settlement of the case.
``Microsoft is committed to resolving this case in a fair and responsible
manner while ensuring that the principles of consumer benefit and
innovation are protected," Gates said.
The White House, which has been careful not to take a position in the
case, said President Clinton had no comment on the ruling.
Microsoft's share price fell after news of the judge's ruling to 87-1/16
on the after-market trading system Instinet compared with a closing price
on the NASDAQ market of 91-9/16 during the regular session.
Some Wall Street analysts said the ruling could have a negative impact
on the stock market when it resumes official trading Monday. But they
cautioned that this was just the first ruling of several expected in the
case.
``This is the first act of a three-act play, or rather the first inning
in a nine-inning baseball game," said Jim Lucier, an analyst for
Prudential Securities in New York.
Art Hogan, Chief Market Analyst at Jefferies & Co said: "Clearly, this is
a severe blow to Microsoft ... I think upon appeal it may not be as
harmful to Microsoft at the end of day as it appears, but it's clearly
disappointing and it will set a negative tone to the market."
Excerpts From Microsoft Decision
Excerpts from U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's decision on
findings of fact in the Microsoft antitrust cast:
On Microsoft's power in the market:
``Microsoft enjoys so much power in the market for Intel-compatible PC
operating systems that if it wished to exercise this power solely in
terms of price, it could charge a price for Windows substantially above
that which could be charged in a competitive market. Moreover, it could
do so for a significant period of time without losing an unacceptable
amount of business to competitors. In other words, Microsoft enjoys
monopoly power in the relevant market.
``Viewed together, three main facts indicate that Microsoft enjoys
monopoly power. First, Microsoft's share of the market for
Intel-compatible PC operating systems is extremely large and stable.
Second, Microsoft's dominant market share is protected by a high barrier
to entry. Third, and largely as a result of that barrier, Microsoft's
customers lack a commercially viable alternative to Windows....
``Microsoft possesses a dominant, persistent, and increasing share of
the worldwide market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems. Every
year for the last decade, Microsoft's share of the market for
Intel-compatible PC operating systems has stood above 90 percent. For
the last couple of years the figure has been at least 95 percent, and
analysts project that the share will climb even higher over the next few
years. Even if Apple's Mac OS were included in the relevant market,
Microsoft's share would still stand well above 80 percent."
On evidence of competitor's inability to compete:
``The experiences of IBM and Apple, Microsoft's most significant
operating system rivals in the mid- and late 1990s, confirm the strength
of the applications barrier to entry....
``IBM's inability to gain widespread developer support for its OS/2 Warp
operating system illustrates how the massive Windows installed base
makes it prohibitively costly for a rival operating system to attract
enough developer support to challenge Windows.... IBM now targets the
product at a market niche, namely enterprise customers (mainly banks)
that are interested in particular types of application that run on OS/2
Warp. The fact that IBM no longer tries to compete with Windows is
evidenced by the fact that it prices OS/2 Warp at about two-and-one-half
times the price of Windows 98....
``The inability of Apple to compete effectively with Windows provides
another example of the applications barrier to entry in operation.
Although Apple's Mac OS supports more than 12,000 applications, even an
inventory of that magnitude is not sufficient to enable Apple to present
a significant percentage of users with a viable substitute for Windows."
On why the judge says Microsoft is a monopoly:
``The company's decision not to consider the prices of other vendors'
Intel-compatible PC operating systems when setting the price of Windows
98, for example, is probative of monopoly power. One would expect a firm
in a competitive market to pay much closer attention to the prices
charged by other firms in the market. Another indication of monopoly
power is the fact that Microsoft raised the price that it charged OEMs
(original equipment manufacturers) for Windows 95, with trivial
exceptions, to the same level as the price it charged for Windows 98
just prior to releasing the newer product. In a competitive market, one
would expect the price of an older operating system to stay the same or
decrease upon the release of a newer, more attractive version.
``A Microsoft study from November 1997 reveals that the company could
have charged $49 for an upgrade to Windows 98 - there is no reason to
believe that the $49 price would have been unprofitable - but the study
identifies $89 as the revenue-maximizing price. Microsoft thus opted for
the higher price....
``Furthermore, Microsoft expends a significant portion of its monopoly
power, which could otherwise be spent maximizing price, on imposing
burdensome restrictions on its customers - and in inducing them to
behave in ways - that augment and prolong that monopoly power. For
example, Microsoft attaches to a Windows license conditions that
restrict the ability of (original equipment manufacturers) to promote
software that Microsoft believes could weaken the applications barrier
to entry. Microsoft also charges a lower price to OEMs who agree to
ensure that all of their Windows machines are powerful enough to run
Windows NT for Workstations."
On Microsoft's actions toward other firms, including Netscape and Sun:
``Microsoft's monopoly power is also evidenced by the fact that, over
the course of several years, Microsoft took actions that could only have
been advantageous if they operated to reinforce monopoly power....
``Microsoft feared all of these technologies because they facilitated
the development of user-oriented software that would be indifferent to
the identity of the underlying operating system."
On Microsoft's harm to consumers:
``Microsoft's actions have inflicted collateral harm on consumers who
have no interest in using a Web browser at all. If these consumers want
the non-browsing features available only in Windows 98, they must
content themselves with an operating system that runs more slowly than
if Microsoft had not interspersed browsing-specific routines throughout
various files containing routines relied upon by the operating system.
More generally, Microsoft has forced Windows 98 users uninterested in
browsing to carry software that, while providing them with no benefits,
brings with it all the costs associated with carrying additional
software on a system. These include performance degradation, increased
risk of incompatibilities and the introduction of bugs. Corporate
consumers who need the hardware support and other non-browsing features
not available in earlier versions of Windows, but who do not want Web
browsing at all, are further burdened in that they are denied a simple
and effective means of preventing employees from attempting to browse
the Web.
``Microsoft has harmed even those consumers who desire to use Internet
Explorer, and no other browser, with Windows 98. To the extent that
browsing-specific routines have been commingled with operating system
routines to a greater degree than is necessary to provide any consumer
benefit, Microsoft has unjustifiably jeopardized the stability and
security of the operating system. Specifically, it has increased the
likelihood that a browser crash will cause the entire system to crash
and made it easier for malicious viruses that penetrate the system via
Internet Explorer to infect non-browsing parts of the system.
On Microsoft's bundling and other business practices:
``Microsoft's argument that binding the browser to the operating system
is reasonably necessary to preserve the 'integrity' of the Windows
platform is likewise specious....
``In sum, Microsoft successfully secured for Internet Explorer - and
foreclosed to Navigator - one of the two distribution channels that
leads most efficiently to the usage of browsing software. Even to the
extent that Navigator retains some access to the OEM channel, Microsoft
has relegated it to markedly less efficient forms of distribution than
the form vouchsafed for Internet Explorer, namely, prominent placement
on the Windows desktop....
``Microsoft made substantial sacrifices, including the forfeiture of
significant revenue opportunities, in order to induce (internet access
providers) to do four things: to distribute access software that came
with Internet Explorer; to promote Internet Explorer; to upgrade
existing subscribers to Internet Explorer; and to restrict their
distribution and promotion of non-Microsoft browsing software. The
restrictions on the freedom of IAPs to distribute and promote Navigator
were far broader than they needed to be in order to achieve any economic
efficiency."
On the effect of free software:
``As Microsoft hoped and anticipated, the inducements it gave out
gratis, as well as the restrictive conditions it tied to those
inducements, had, and continue to have, a substantial exclusionary
impact....
``Not surprisingly, the inducements that Microsoft gave out and the
restrictions it conditioned them upon have resulted in a substantial
increase in Internet Explorer's usage share. A study Microsoft conducted
shows that at the end of 1997, Internet Explorer enjoyed a 94 percent
weighted average share of shipments of browsing software by (internet
service providers) that had agreed to make Internet Explorer their
default browser. By contrast, the study shows that Internet Explorer had
only a 14 percent weighted average share of shipments of browsing
software by ISPs that had not agreed to make Internet Explorer their
default browser."
Jackson's conclusions:
``Many of the tactics that Microsoft has employed have also harmed
consumers indirectly by unjustifiably distorting competition. The
actions that Microsoft took against Navigator hobbled a form of
innovation that had shown the potential to depress the applications
barrier to entry sufficiently to enable other firms to compete
effectively against Microsoft in the market for Intel-compatible PC
operating systems. That competition would have conduced to consumer
choice and nurtured innovation.... There is insufficient evidence to
find that, absent Microsoft's actions, Navigator and Java already would
have ignited genuine competition in the market for Intel-compatible PC
operating systems. It is clear, however, that Microsoft has retarded,
and perhaps altogether extinguished, the process by which these two
middleware technologies could have facilitated the introduction of
competition into an important market....
``Most harmful of all is the message that Microsoft's actions have
conveyed to every enterprise with the potential to innovate in the
computer industry. Through its conduct toward Netscape, IBM, Compaq,
Intel, and others, Microsoft has demonstrated that it will use its
prodigious market power and immense profits to harm any firm that
insists on pursuing initiatives that could intensify competition against
one of Microsoft's core products. Microsoft's past success in hurting
such companies and stifling innovation deters investment in technologies
and businesses that exhibit the potential to threaten Microsoft. The
ultimate result is that some innovations that would truly benefit
consumers never occur for the sole reason that they do not coincide with
Microsoft's self-interest."
Statement by Microsoft's Bill Gates
Statement by Microsoft Corp. Chairman Bill Gates after the release of
findings of fact Friday by U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson
in the government's antitrust lawsuit against the software giant:
Good evening. I'd like to take this opportunity to make a few remarks
about the findings of fact issued by the court.
It's important to recognize that today's filing is just one step in an
ongoing legal process that has many steps remaining. We respectfully
disagree with a number of the court's findings and believe the American
legal system ... will affirm that Microsoft's actions and innovations
were fair and legal and have brought tremendous benefits to millions of
consumers.
The court's findings do acknowledge that Microsoft's actions accelerated
the development of the Internet, reduced the cost to consumers and
improved the quality of Web-browsing software.
Microsoft competes vigorously and fairly. Microsoft is committed to
resolving this case in a fair and a factual manner, while ensuring that
the principles of consumer benefits and innovation are protected.
The lawsuit is fundamentally about one question: Can a successful
American company continue to improve its products for the benefit of
consumers? That is precisely what Microsoft did by developing new versions
of the Windows operating system with built-in support for the Internet.
Paul Allen and I started Microsoft with the simple idea that technology
could improve people's lives.
Over the past 25 years, Microsoft has helped create a broad industry of
literally thousands of companies. Together, we've made PCs more affordable,
more widely available, more powerful....
I'm proud to be part of an industry that is contributing so much to
education, productivity and economic growth. You can walk into any
computer store and see the results.
Every day our industry is providing innovation and major benefits for
consumers, and prices have never been lower. New companies, mergers and
alliances are bringing fundamental and dramatic changes to the
marketplace all the time.
Our industry is the most
dynamic and competitive in America and consumers
are the big winner. Microsoft's products are popular because we've focused
on our customers, and innovated to meet their needs.
So we know we must continually go further to improve our product, because
in this industry no one has a guaranteed position. Because of our success,
we understand that Microsoft is held to a high standard. And we accept that
responsibility.
We continue to be guided by the most basic American values - innovation,
integrity ..., partnership, quality and giving back to the community. As
we work to resolve this case, Microsoft's 30,000 employees are focused
on developing new innovations, building great products, delivering quality
service and helping others in our industry create a future of opportunity
for consumers.
With the upcoming launch of Windows 2000 and our efforts to advance further
the potential of the Internet, Microsoft remains totally committed to
delivering to consumers the full potential of the information age through
great software and services. Thank you.
Analysts Think Judge Cornered Microsoft
British analysts shed no tears for Microsoft chairman Bill Gates and
predicted he would have to sue for peace with the U.S. government after a
federal judge found the company was an unfair monopoly.
Business editors and market observers thought that the American whose
wealth is ``more than that of Britain's 100 richest individuals added
together," as one newspaper put it, would be forced to negotiate a
settlement rather than risk the breakup of Microsoft.
``We suspect, and I think most people feel, that Microsoft will actually
go for a settlement with the government ... to avoid being split up,"
Jason Nisse, editor of the Independent Sunday newspaper, told Sky
television Saturday.
Gates and his Microsoft Corp. had been cornered, said technology analyst
Simon Moores.
``Microsoft had been hoping to find some ambiguity in the judgement, but
that doesn't seem to be there," Moores told the Observer newspaper.
``Gates needs to achieve a compromise quickly -- it looks very bad for
Microsoft at the moment."
Nisse noted Microsoft shares had fallen in reaction to the judgement in
the United States Friday and ``could well fall further Monday ...
Microsoft is in a very exposed position."
The finding of fact issued by U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson
Friday said Microsoft had a monopoly in operating system software for
personal computers and used its power to punish competitors and harm
consumers.
``Microsoft Court Ruling Sees Gates Crash to Earth," was the headline in
The Sunday Times early editions. But the paper also reported that Gates,
through his involvement in the Destination Europe consortium, was in talks
to buy a golf club in Britain.
One analyst said the U.S. authorities should just sit back and let the
market minimize Microsoft, arguing that its product Windows was looking
increasingly archaic as an operating system, as did even the personal
computer.
``Already the Internet is being delivered through the television and the
telephone rather than the PC," Neil Bennett wrote in The Sunday
Telegraph, adding that Microsoft's Internet products were ``surprisingly
primitive."
In any case, he said, the rest of the world should be glad of America's
tradition of ``shackling" its most powerful companies instead of
nurturing them.
``There is a self-destruct gene at the heart of American free enterprise,
and the rest of us should be thankful for it.
``Each time America spawns a truly world-class company, the country's
politicians, regulators, and a sprinkling of unsuccessful competitors rise
up, determined to put an end to such commercial success," Bennett said.
Experts Split If Microsoft Should Settle, Appeal
A devastating legal decision that Microsoft used monopoly power to harm
consumers left experts split Saturday whether the company should focus on
appealing against the ruling or cut its losses and enter settlement talks
that may lead to its break-up.
U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson decided Friday that
Microsoft Corp. wields monopoly power in personal computer operating
systems, a major setback for the world's largest software company in one
of the biggest antitrust cases of the century.
The findings were so sweeping that experts said there was little doubt
Jackson would later rule the company violated the Sherman Antitrust Act.
From now on, they said, Microsoft should concentrate on an appeal or
settlement because they believe Jackson will rule against it.
``What was not true until yesterday, and is true going forward, is that
the case has basically just switched to the appellate level," said Dale
Collins of Shearman & Sterling in New York.
It will be some time until any appeal starts. The parties will file
written arguments between Dec. 6 and Jan. 31 that the judge will use to
decide whether Microsoft broke antitrust laws.
There are potentially two further phases in the trial. The first is for
Jackson to decide if Microsoft has liability for breaking the law. If it
does, the judge could then move to apply sanctions ranging from
restrictions on the way it does business to breaking up the company.
Both parties will be entitled to present arguments in both phases.
The remedy phase could prove embarrassing to Microsoft because rivals
and customers could again describe in detail the behemoth's tactics.
The government charges, for instance, that Microsoft used its power to
illegally crush rival Internet browser-maker Netscape and muscle other
firms. Microsoft argued it had no monopoly in operating systems and
always acted within the law.
Netscape was acquired by Internet powerhouse America Online Inc. in March
1999, a deal which Microsoft said repeatedly made the case irrelevant.
There is plenty of time for the two sides to settle the case, although
some lawyers question whether they have the inclination to do so.
``If anything, this would tend to make the government more aggressive in
its bargaining position," said William Kovacic, a professor of
antitrust law at George Washington University. The government probably
believes it is nearing a big win, he said.
Experts agree that a judge's findings of fact are very tough to overturn
on appeal because they form the basis for legal decisions by courts at
any level.
Meanwhile, Microsoft shows no signs of abandoning positions the judge
rejected in his factual findings.
At a news conference Friday, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates said he
disagreed with some of Jackson's findings. ``Microsoft's actions and
innovations were fair and legal and have brought tremendous benefits,"
Gates said.
Jackson found otherwise: ``Most harmful of all is the message that
Microsoft's actions have conveyed to every enterprise with the potential
to innovate...
``Microsoft has demonstrated it will use its prodigious market power and
immense profits to harm any firm that insists on pursuing initiatives
that could intensify competition against one of Microsoft's core
products."
Microsoft general counsel William Neukom questioned during the news
conference Friday whether some of Jackson's findings were ``pertinent"
and said he was confident of the company's position.
Although Microsoft won a ruling last year in an appellate court on an
earlier antitrust action by the government, this time there are reasons
for the company to settle. For instance, once Jackson enters a final
decision against Microsoft, other firms will be able to sue the company
without the difficult task of demonstrating monopoly power simply by
citing Jackson's findings.
Some lawyers said the findings of fact have changed the playing field.
``The line has been moved on remedy" because of Jackson's decision,
said Steven Salop, a professor of economics and law at Georgetown
University. ``Simple conduct remedies are becoming less likely and
powerful structural remedies are more likely as a result of these strong
findings."
Salop said it may benefit both the industry and the company to ``settle
the case by breaking up the company into multiple Windows competitors.
That would let it go back to creating better software and competing on
the merits." Windows is Microsoft's software operating system.
Salop said conduct remedies, which would require close oversight of the
company, would create uncertainty and intrusiveness.
For example, Eric Olbeter, senior Internet analyst for the Schwab
Capital Markets and Trading Group in Washington, said that while
significant regulation would make investors anxious, "markets will be
able to figure out very quickly the value of a divestiture."
Silicon Valley Cheers Microsoft Ruling
Entrepreneurs, start-ups and high-technology veterans in Silicon Valley
cheered a federal judge's ruling Friday that software juggernaut Microsoft
Corp. wields monopoly power and used it to cripple competing firms.
``It's a big day for the whole industry," said James Barksdale, the
former chief executive of Netscape Communications Corp., the pioneer of
the Web browser and one of Microsoft's biggest Internet rivals that was
later bought by America Online Inc.
Now that the U.S. Justice Department and the 19 states that brought the
epic antitrust case against the world's most valuable company have won the
first round in a long legal battle, employees of Silicon Valley stalwarts
such as Oracle Corp., Sun Microsystems Inc. and companies throughout the
United States not only feel vindicated, they're elated.
``The fact that Microsoft holds a monopoly for desktop operating systems
is painfully obvious to anyone in this industry," said Bob Young, chief
executive of Durham, N.C.-based Red Hat Inc., the largest distributor of
the Linux operating system --an upstart rival to Microsoft's Windows.
Among those in Silicon Valley most interested in the outcome of the case
were current and former employees of Netscape. The news prompted Netscape
employees to throw a party at their headquarters in Mountain View,
California.
Netscape developed the first commercial Internet browser, and has long
claimed that Microsoft's decision to give away its own browser for free
sparked a massive slide in its shares of the market The so-called browser
wars were a central issue in the Department of Justice case.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's ruling is but the first of a
three-act legal play.
As such, Jackson's 207-page finding of facts in the trial that began just
over a year ago, will embolden potential rivals to develop and sell
products that are best for their customers rather than those that are
least likely to raise the ire of Microsoft, industry executives said.
``The aura that surrounded Microsoft as this all powerful, inexorable
force that always won has now been significantly diminished," said
Michael Morris, chief lawyer for Microsoft archrival Sun Microsystems, in
an interview.
``To the degree that people in this business take heart in that ... I
think they will be more likely to make their business decisions,
investment decisions and innovation decisions more on what's best for
their customers and the consumers and less with respect to what will
Microsoft will say or do in response."
If Jackson finds Microsoft liable for breaking the law, he could then move
to apply remedies ranging from restrictions on the way it does business to
breaking up the Redmond, Washington-based company, which boasts a stock
market value of more than $400 billion.
``The critical issue now is how to structure the speedy and effective
remedy that protects consumers, increases competition and innovation, and
importantly, prevents Microsoft from maintaining or using its monopoly
power in the future," said George Vradenburg, senior vice president for
global and strategic policy at AOL, the No. 1 Internet service provider.
For its part, Microsoft said it disagreed with many of the findings and
vowed to continue to fight the case.
Microsoft now faces competition that ``hasn't ever existed before" in the
form of Linux, the emergence of non-PC devices that don't use the Windows
operating system, and chip giant Intel Corp.'s move away from its
dependence on Windows, said Rob Enderle, a long-time Microsoft and
technology analyst based in Silicon Valley.
On top of that, PC maker Gateway Inc. is working with AOL to develop an
Internet device that doesn't use Windows and companies such as
International Business Machines Corp. and its Chairman Louis Gerstner are
declaring the PC era over.
What's more, Red Hat's Young said the Justice Department's investigation
of Microsoft allowed it to sign deals with Dell Computer Corp., IBM and
others that it might not have been able to before because of fears of
potential Microsoft reprisals.
``Scrutiny counts and we have sensed it," Sun's Morris said. Yet even as
venture capitalists, entrepreneurs and Microsoft rivals lauded Jackson's
ruling as a ``great thing for Silicon Valley," George Zachary, a partner
at venture capital firm Mohr Davidow Ventures, issued a final cautionary
note.
``At the same time, this is a scary reminder that if you make it to the
top, someone will try to pull you down," Zachary said. ``It's also a
reminder that the government is more involved in technology and the notion
of a free market is not entirely free."
Microsoft Vows To Keep Fighting Antitrust Case
Microsoft Corp. Friday vowed to continue battling antitrust charges and
expressed confidence it would prevail in the landmark case despite a
judicial finding that rejected many of its key arguments.
At the same time top executives of the software company left open the
possibility that the judge's finding of fact would spark a resumption of
settlement negotiations between the two sides, which so far have proved
fruitless.
``From the very beginning, we've said we would like nothing better than to
settle this case," Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates said at a news conference.
Still, he said any settlement would have to preserve the right of the
company and others in its industry to innovate and improve their products.
Despite the widespread view that U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield
Jackson's 207-page ruling was highly favorable to the government's case,
Microsoft executives put a positive spin on the widely anticipated
development.
``It's inappropriate for either party to claim victory," Chief Operating
Officer Bob Herbold said. ``What we have here is findings of fact. We will
see what happens in subsequent stages of this case."
Microsoft cannot appeal the findings of fact although theoretically the
company could petition Jackson to reconsider sections with which it
disagrees.
But executives said they would focus on briefs and arguments to be
delivered in the next phase of the case, the findings of law and
ultimately a final decision and order, expected to be issued next year.
That decision would be subject to appeal.
Microsoft officials also pointed to aspects of the ruling favorable to its
arguments.
``The court's finding acknowledge the core principal that Microsoft's
actions accelerated the development of the Internet, reduced its cost and
improved the quality of Web browsing software," company spokesman Jim
Cullinan said.
Microsoft executives said they were confident they ultimately would
prevail.
``While we disagree with many of these findings, we're still confident
that the law supports us on these points and that the American legal
system will ultimately rule that Microsoft's actions were fair, legal and
good for consumers," Cullinan said.
U.S. Officials Hail 'Victory' On Microsoft
Jubilant U.S. government lawyers Friday hailed a ruling that Microsoft
Corp. wields monopoly power in personal computer operating systems as a
tremendous victory for consumers, and said serious steps should be taken
against the world's largest software company.
At a Justice Department news conference minutes after a federal judge
released his sweeping ruling, Assistant Attorney General Joel Klein said
Microsoft's abuse of monopoly power had caused ``substantial harm to
consumers and innovation."
Looking ahead to the next step in the historic case, the highest-profile
antitrust lawsuit brought during Bill Clinton's presidency and in decades,
Klein said the ought to result in the judge imposing ``serious remedial
redress."
``It shows, once again in America, that no person and no company is above
the law," he said. ``This is a tremendous victory for America's consumers."
Klein was flanked by his boss, Attorney General Janet Reno, and by Attorney
General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, one of 19 states that had joined
the Justice Department in suing Microsoft.
Asked whether breaking up the Seattle-based software giant was a possible
outcome of the ruling, Klein said it was too early to say what the final
outcome would be or what the Justice Department would be recommending.
But Blumenthal told reporters, ``These are serious and far-reaching
violations that should lead to serious and far-reaching remedies."
Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller said the judge's findings "hold open the
full range of remedies." Short of breaking up the company, Jackson could
prescribe restrictions on the company's business practices.
Blumenthal summed up the findings of fact in the antitrust case, saying,
``Microsoft has monopoly power, abused that monopoly and harmed consumers
in immediate and discernible ways."
He said some of the most damaging evidence against Microsoft came from its
own records and e-mails by its own executives.
``Today, we have established a solid beachhead -- an unshakable legal base
for moving forward to liberate this industry from Microsoft's illegal
dominance," Blumenthal said in a statement.
Klein said the Justice Department would be willing to talk about a
settlement so long as Microsoft addressed its violations of consumer
choice and stifling of competitors' innovation.
``We have always said we are prepared to discuss settlement so long as the
important competition issues are fully addressed," he said. Several
earlier attempts at settling the lawsuit have failed.
David Boies, the private lawyer brought in by the Justice Department to
present the case in the courtroom, hugged a smiling Klein and Blumenthal
at the podium and said, ``This is not a surprise. This is exactly what the
evidence showed."
Klein predicted the ruling will have an important impact on the nation's
economy and on the computer industry. He said it was impossible to predict
what innovations might occur after removing the bottleneck caused by
Microsoft's practices and allowing ``the competitive juices (to) flow."
Klein brushed aside a question about whether he was concerned that the
decision might be overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals, which already
has ruled once for Microsoft. "I think we'll take it one step at a
time," he said.
Breakup Of Microsoft Not A Likely Outcome
Microsoft Corp.'s stunning setback in its landmark antitrust case means the
judge will probably require harsh remedies, but outright breakup of the
company is unlikely to be among them, analysts said Friday.
A 207-page opinion released Friday by U.S. District Judge Thomas Jackson
``can only be characterized as a staggering loss for Microsoft," said
Mark Schechter, a Washington antitrust lawyer and former top Justice
Department official.
``This is pretty much everything that the plaintiff had been looking
for," said Carl Shapiro, an economist at the University of California,
Berkeley, and Justice Department consultant. "This points to a strong
remedy and not a slap on the wrist, though there are other strong remedies
besides breakup."
Jackson's ``findings of fact" technically represent only a preliminary
opinion, to be made final in a decision and order expected early next year
after another round of briefings.
But officials on both sides and analysts were already looking ahead to the
likelihood of a Jackson order against Microsoft that could be anything
from a mild injunction to a radical directive to break up the company.
``Technically, he has not found they have violated the antitrust laws,"
Schechter said. ``It's just that the facts are so explicit one can easily
read the violation into them."
Assistant Attorney General Joel Klein hailed Jackson's opinion as ``a
tremendous victory for America's consumers," and even Microsoft
executives were hard pressed to find any silver linings in the keenly
anticipated document.
``The findings of fact are more consistent with the government's claims
than they are with Microsoft's defenses," said Bill Neukom, senior vice
president for law for Microsoft, which is based in Redmond, Washington.
Neukom said the software giant still hoped to sway the judge in the coming
phase of the trial, which focuses on matters of law, but predicted that
the final decision would almost certainly be appealed, a process that
could last a year or more.
A conciliatory-sounding Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates reiterated that the
company would be happy to settle the case, but analysts said the one-sided
nature of Jackson's findings made a settlement even less likely than
before.
``If anything, this would tend to make the government more aggressive in
its bargaining position," said William Kovacic, a professor of antitrust
law at George Washington University who has followed the case closely.
``It will increase their sense that (they) are on the verge of a
hands-down triumph. That makes it harder for them to walk away with a
lighter package of solutions," he said.
Further settlement talks were expected, but officials on both sides
declined to comment on any continuing negotiations.
Court Finding Puts Pressure On Microsoft To Settle
A federal judge's finding that Microsoft Corp. used its monopoly power to
punish competitors puts new pressure on the software giant to settle the
government's antitrust case or face the possibility of a spate of damage
lawsuits, experts said.
The finding of fact issued Friday by U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield
Jackson said Microsoft had a monopoly in operating system software for
personal computers and used its power to punish competitors and harm
consumers.
The finding of fact, which endorsed nearly all the U.S. government's
allegations of anticompetitive practices against Microsoft, will be used
as a basis for determining whether the software juggernaut broke the law.
If Jackson finds Microsoft broke the law, he could move to apply sanctions
ranging from restrictions on the way the firm does business to breaking up
the company. A final decision may not come until well into next year.
If Microsoft does not settle and Jackson's rulings are upheld, other firms
could use the findings for the basis of civil lawsuits against Microsoft,
experts said. Firms could cite Jackson's finding that Microsoft was a
monopoly and would only need to prove their company was injured by abuse
of that monopoly power.
``One benefit to consumers of pursuing this case to a final judgement is
that these findings then have a legal affect that they wouldn't otherwise.
They can then be used in other cases by consumers to pursue remedies on
their own," said Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal.
``That is a real public service of the case," added Blumenthal, a
spokesman for the 19 states that joined the U.S. Justice Department in
bringing the antitrust action, one of the biggest of the century.
If Microsoft and the government settle, however, the finding of monopoly
power would never become final and firms seeking to sue the company would
have to go through the difficult task of proving it holds monopoly power.
Microsoft, which won an appellate court decision last year in a previous
government antitrust action, vowed to continue the legal battle, but
founder and chief executive Bill Gates left open the door for resuming
settlement negotiations.
``From the very beginning, we've said we would like nothing better than to
settle this case," he said following Friday's finding.
Assistant Attorney General Joel Klein, who brought the government action,
said the Justice Department would be willing to talk about a settlement so
long as Microsoft addressed its violations of consumer choice and stifling
of competitors' innovation.
``We have always said we are prepared to discuss settlement so long as the
important competition issues are fully addressed," he said. Several
earlier attempts at settling the lawsuit have failed.
Analysts and attorneys said late Friday the judge's finding was a stunning
decision in favor of the Justice Department and the 19 states that brought
the case.
``It's a smashing victory for the government. There is no question about
that," said attorney Rich Gray of the Silicon Valley law firm Outside
General Counsel. ``The judge has accepted substantially all of the
government's arguments."
Even Microsoft executives were hard-pressed to find a silver lining in the
highly anticipated document.
``The findings of fact are more consistent with the government's claims
than they are with Microsoft's defenses," said Bill Neukom, Microsoft's
senior vice president for law.
Blumenthal called for tough action against Microsoft, saying, ``These are
serious and far-reaching violations that should lead to serious and
far-reaching remedies."
Klein said Microsoft's abuse of monopoly power had caused "substantial
harm to consumers and innovation" and should result in ``serious remedial
redress." But he said it was premature to say exactly what sanctions
Microsoft should face.
Attorneys on both sides said they expected to hold a meeting with Jackson
soon to discuss the next steps for the case.
The judge has asked the government to file a brief on Dec. 6 outlining how
to apply antitrust laws to Friday's finding, with Microsoft due to file
its responding brief on Jan. 17.
The government would then get a chance to file a response by Jan. 24, with
Microsoft's final response due Jan. 31.
Microsoft May Take Chance on Appeal
The judge's initial ruling in the Microsoft antitrust trial is so
stunningly sympathetic to the government that lawyers and analysts suggest
the software giant may stake its chances on winning an appeal rather than
settling the case outside the courtroom.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's sometimes indignant tone
toward Microsoft's behavior left little doubt he would consider tough
penalties, perhaps even a court-ordered breakup of the world's largest
software company into smaller businesses.
``All the remedy alternatives are open, including what many people said
three months ago was unthinkable," said Glenn Manishin, who helped write
a study earlier this year for a prominent trade association that endorsed
a breakup. ``It's very thinkable now."
The government ``has to be emboldened now to ask for about the toughest
penalties you can see," agreed Robert Litan, a former senior Justice
Department official now at the Brookings Institution. ``It is more likely
than not that it will ask for a breakup of the company in some form."
Antitrust professor William Kovacic compared tough penalties to a towering
skyscraper, with the judge being the architect of a decision that
fundamentally could realign the multibillion-dollar technology industry
that helps power the nation's surging economy.
``If this were a construction project, the judge has excavated a
construction footprint that in theory could support a very tall building,"
said Kovacic of George Washington University. ``Maybe he'll only decide to
build 20 stories, but he could build 50 if he wanted to."
Microsoft officials said it was premature to speculate about punishments.
Douglas Melamed, a deputy assistant U.S. attorney general, agreed, saying,
``You're reading tea leaves. I don't know what the judge has in mind."
Jackson, who presided over 77 days of testimony, late Friday declared
Microsoft a monopolist whose aggression stifled innovation and hurt
consumers by limiting choices and keeping its software prices high.
In a remarkably blunt decision, the judge wrote some high-tech innovations
``that would truly benefit consumers never occur for the sole reason that
they do not coincide with Microsoft's self interest." The harm to
consumers, he added, was ``immediate and easily discernible."
The judge did not identify which U.S. antitrust laws Microsoft might have
violated or suggest how the company should be punished. A separate
punishment hearing would be held next year, if necessary after Jackson
issues his final ruling.
But while both sides sounded willing to discuss a possible settlement in
the hours after the judge's findings were issued Friday night, some
analysts said Jackson's pointed document made such an outcome less likely.
``It will reduce Microsoft's incentive to settle," said David Yoffie, a
Harvard business professor who wrote a book about Netscape's battle with
Microsoft. ``Microsoft may feel that any settlement now is likely to be so
adverse that it may as well roll the dice and go through a long
complicated appeals process."
Added Kovacic: ``This is such a rout it makes it much harder for the
government to make concessions after they read all the way through this.
The concessions they want from Microsoft are going to be unacceptable. If
I'm the government, I say, 'Why sell short? Let's double the stakes."'
The judge rejected outright almost all of Microsoft's claims, calling one
``specious" and another simply ``false." And, in an unusually bold move,
Jackson appeared to contradict conclusions by a federal appeals court last
year that had overturned his own decision earlier in this case.
Appellate judges ruled that Microsoft ``clearly met the burden of
ascribing facially plausible benefits" of how it designed its Internet
browser software included within Windows. It called it ``a genuine
integration" but said its decision was ``subject to re-examination."
Jackson did just that, firing back Friday there was ``no technical
justification" for the design. He argued that ``Web browsers and
operating systems are separate products."
After the judge's findings were released, Microsoft boss Bill Gates said
company executives ``respectfully disagree with a number of the court's
findings," and he cautioned that the adverse ruling was ``just one step
in an ongoing legal process."
``If a judge issues a finding that the sun rises in the West - whether
that's startling or surprising - as a practical matter it may not have any
relevance to the (final) decision," said Charles ``Rick" Rule, a former
senior Justice official now working for Microsoft on the case.
States Would Pursue Microsoft Even If U.S. Quits
State attorneys general said Monday they will pursue the landmark Microsoft
antitrust case all the way to the Supreme Court if need be, even if it
takes years and no matter who the next president or attorney general may
be.
A U.S. District Court judge handed down a sweeping condemnation of the
software giant's business tactics last week, holding Microsoft Corp. uses
monopoly power to harm consumers and competitors.
The judge's ruling is one step in a case brought by the U.S. Justice
Department and 19 states that could easily last beyond the end of
President Clinton's term in January 2001. A new administration could
pursue the case vigorously or drop it.
``If they abandon the case, then it's pretty clear what would happen --
the 19 states would continue it," said Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller,
who heads the state effort that runs parallel with that of the federal
government.
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who has also been heavily
involved in the case, agreed.
``Very emphatically and unequivocally we will stay in this lawsuit as long
as it takes to reach remedies that correct Microsoft's predatory business
practices," said Blumenthal.
``Regardless of what the Department of Justice may do under another
administration we're committed to stay the course," Blumenthal said.
Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates has dramatically increased the political
giving of his company over the past few years at the federal level.
Should a Republican such as Texas Gov. George W. Bush become president,
his top antitrust cop might take a look at individual cases, just as
William Baxter did after starting work for President Ronald Reagan in
1981.
``It's inevitable that if there's a Republican administration, they will
at least review high-profile cases such as the Microsoft case, just as
Baxter did in AT&T and IBM when he was the first assistant attorney general
under Reagan," said a Republican antitrust lawyer who has long familiarity
with the antitrust agencies.
Baxter dropped the case against IBM and pursued the AT&T case. After a
strong preliminary ruling by a federal judge, AT&T agreed to be broken up.
The Reagan administration was far less active than Democratic
administrations in bringing cases. Instead, the states became the center of
aggressive action against such targets as insurance companies.
Even during Clinton's administration, it was the states that brought
tobacco companies to the bargaining table without the participation of the
federal government.
Any new assistant attorney general for antitrust will have to clear review
by the Senate Judiciary Committee, now headed by Republican Sen. Orrin
Hatch. Hatch has been a strong critic of Microsoft's business practices.
Hatch, who would likely continue to head the committee if Republicans
retain the Senate in 2000 and if his presidential campaign bid fails, said
the judge's findings Friday were ``a significant step in a long but
warranted struggle on behalf of innovation and consumers."
Judge Rejected Gates' Explanations
The judge behind the blistering ruling against the Microsoft Corp. didn't
question the honesty of Bill Gates outright, but he rejected almost every
explanation of events offered under oath by the world's most famous
billionaire.
The lack of faith that U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson showed
in Microsoft's trustworthiness could hurt chances for a less severe
punishment - or even for a settlement offer - that relied on a company
pledge of some future behavior toward rivals in the technology industry.
Once the judge determines which antitrust laws Microsoft broke, he could
order punishments as severe as breaking up the company unless a settlement
is reached, which many lawyers and analysts consider unlikely.
Investors showed they weren't ready to abandon Microsoft on Monday. In
very heavy trading - about five times the average for the company - shares
fell to $83.50 but then recovered to $89.933/4, down just $1.621/2 from
last week's close.
The judge, in his antitrust fact-finding statement on Friday, embraced the
government's version of key events and Microsoft's motivations.
In one of its most sensational claims during the lawsuit, the Justice
Department said Microsoft quietly met with software rival Netscape to
illegally divide the market, a charge Gates himself called ``an outrageous
lie."
The judge called the offer ``an effort to persuade Netscape to structure
its business such that the company would not distribute platform-level
browsing software for Windows." He didn't buy Microsoft's version of
events throughout his ruling.
``That's the implication," said Robert Litan, a former senior Justice
official now at the Brookings Institution. ``He didn't come out and say
it, but if you read between the lines, that's certainly what he ended up
deciding."
``It's clear he didn't think they had much (credibility)," agreed Marc
Schildkraut, a former Federal Trade Commission official who questioned
Gates during negotiations with Microsoft in the early 1990s in the FTC's
antitrust investigation. ``The findings are very one-sided. It's a tough
row for them to hoe on that ground."
Throughout Microsoft's case, statements by Gates and others outside the
courtroom seemed at times to contradict their legal claims. Stephen Houck,
the lead lawyer for the 19 states joining Justice in suing Microsoft, said
the company suffered from the problem of ``the doggoned witness."
``They encountered three problems: their own witnesses, their own exhibits
and their own client, Mr. Gates," Houck said in closing arguments.
Microsoft trial attorneys, for example, said the company's Web browser was
inextricably intertwined within Windows, but other company lawyers wrote
for an obscure patent last year that ``a Web browser ... is separate from
the operating system."
The judge decided: ``Web browsers and operating systems are separate
products."
Microsoft declined to comment on inferences the judge didn't find its
trial witnesses truthful.
But the company's renowned aggressiveness - and the implication that
executives bent the truth under oath - could hurt the chances for
negotiating a settlement or escaping with moderate conduct-remedy
penalties - enforced promises not to behave in certain ways.
``Any opponent with a track record of defiance or untrustworthiness in the
eyes of the law has to be treated as such," said Richard Blumenthal,
attorney general for Connecticut, one of 19 states that sued Microsoft
with Justice. ``Whenever we talk settlement with an opponent whose
credibility and trustworthiness are in question, we would demand very
strict and specific measures of compliance, with severe penalties."
``To simply have a court order saying, 'please play nice and don't do
these things' - there are some serious questions whether conduct remedies
would be enough," added Wayne Klein, Utah's assistant attorney general.
``They're needed, but will they be enough?"
To assuage the judge, Microsoft also will need to overcome a courtroom
episode two years ago when it infuriated Jackson. The government had
accused the company of violating an agreement in its last major antitrust
investigation.
When he ordered Microsoft in December 1997 to separate its Internet
browser software from its dominant Windows operating system, the company
complied - but after it did, the Windows system didn't work anymore.
``It seemed absolutely clear to you that I entered an order that required
you to distribute a product that would not work?" Jackson asked,
outraged. ``Is that what you're telling me?"
Harry First, the head of antitrust for the New York attorney general, said
those types of legal maneuvers don't help the company convince the judge
it can be trusted.
``How do they carry out these obligations? Do they cut corners?" First
asked. ``We've got a bit of a track record. Certainly this judge has seen
it in front of him. The past is prologue."
AOL Chief Wants Neutral But Cooperative Government
The chairman and chief executive officer of America Online Inc., the
world's largest Internet service provider, said Wednesday the government
should listen to technology companies and resist the temptation to dictate
public policy on matters concerning technology businesses.
Steve Case, chairman and CEO of Dulles, Va.-based AOL, predicted that
public and private policy regarding technology will become more blurred
in the future and encouraged the government and the industry to cooperate
with each other. His prediction was part of a speech to members of Chicago
Communications, a nonprofit group that supports the advancement of
communications.
His remarks came only days after a federal judge ruled that software giant
Microsoft Corp. wields monopoly power and hurts consumers.
``Private industry is going to have to be more pro-active, more forward
looking and more willing to shoulder the responsibility of developing
policies that protect consumers and maximize choice," Case said.
``Government will have to be more willing to listen and to address industry
concerns and resist the temptation to dictate solution."
Case also said government policy should be neutral.
``The new medium should be given a command to succeed or fail on its own
strength and weakness. It doesn't need advantages nor does it need
disadvantages," he said.
When asked how the Microsoft ruling will affect AOL, which is estimated
to have a 50 percent share of the Internet connectivity market, Case told
Reuters that ``it's hard to speculate. It depends on how it gets resolved."
Case also denied AOL had a similar monopoly in its own market.
``We're in a much more competitive market," Case said. "There are 6,000
service providers that we compete with ... so there's far more consumer
choice. They pick AOL because they want it, not because it's the only one
that's offered."
New Computer Virus 'Bubbleboy' Found
Researchers have discovered what they believe to be the first e-mail-borne
computer infection that doesn't require a user to open an e-mail or e-mail
attachment for it to wreak havoc.
Dubbed ``Bubbleboy" after an episode of TV sitcom "Seinfeld," the virus is
known as a worm because it is self-propagating. Researchers at antivirus
software firm Network Associates Inc. received the computer infection
anonymously Monday night at about 10 p.m. local time.
``Historically, as long as you don't open e-mail attachments you're safe
from virus infection, but this changes all that," said Sal Viveros, a
marketing manager at Network Associates. "We've finally come to the
point where if you're using e-mail, specifically (Microsoft Corp.'s)
Outlook, you need to have some sort of virus protection or you shouldn't
read e-mail."
Although the Bubbleboy virus that researchers received last night didn't
cause harm such as deleting files or stealing passwords, it won't be
long before variants crop up that are indeed destructive, Viveros said.
``In this case, it's just sending itself all over the place but it could
fairly easily delete files or steal passwords," Viveros said.
Bubbleboy appears as an e-mail with ``Bubbleboy is Back!" in the
subject line and includes pictures and sounds from the Seinfeld episode
that gave it its name.
Bubbleboy follows other e-mail-borne viruses that have already swept the
Internet such as the ``ExploreZip worm," which can erase files from a
user's computer, and the Melissa virus, which gained notoriety for its
ability to spread quickly but not because it destroyed any data.
Network Associates gave Bubbleboy a ``low risk" classification for now
because customers haven't yet notified it that the virus has appeared on
their computers.
What makes this worm particularly nefarious is that if a user is running
Outlook Express and has the preview pane enabled, the worm can infect
the computer without the user even opening the e-mail. The preview pane
in Outlook Express lets users scan e-mails to see their contents without
having to open them first. Other e-mail programs such as Exchange and
Lotus Notes are also vulnerable, Viveros said.
``Now just by reading an e-mail you can be infected, and if you're using
Outlook Express you don't even need to read it," Viveros said. The worm
will then send itself to everyone listed in that e-mail program's
address book.
Bubbleboy refers to a Seinfeld episode in which a boy who lives in a
bubble because of a faulty immune system is a big fan of Jerry Seinfeld,
who plays himself as a stand-up comic on the popular series. Jerry and
George Castanza, a friend of Jerry's, visit the boy and play Trivial
Pursuit.
But the answer on one of the cards is misspelled, and the boy in the
bubble and George get into a fight. The fight ends with George
accidentally popping the boy's bubble.
``But unfortunately, this virus is not very funny," Viveros said.
Sony Glitch Reveals Subscriber E-mail Addresses
A software flaw allowed advertisers to view the e-mail addresses of
subscribers to Sony Music Entertainment Corp.'s Infobeat service, the
company said.
The roughly 2.5 million users who subscribe to Infobeat get a daily
e-mail update of music and entertainment news. The newsletter contains
advertisements that give special URLs for interested consumers.
"By clicking on select advertisements, certain advertisers had the
ability to obtain the e-mail address of the user who clicked on the
link," the company said in a letter to subscribers.
Sony said it had recently been informed of the error and had fixed the
problem, but advised subscribers to set up passwords for their accounts.
The company said it contacted its advertisers, who "confirmed that they
did not collect or use any of this information."
Privacy issues have become a hot topic recently. Last week, RealNetworks
ran into trouble after it was disclosed that the company had been tracking
data about the music its customers downloaded.
Monday, the Federal Trade Commission and the Commerce Department will
host a workshop to review whether online profiling practices invade
users' privacy. Advocates last week called for the FTC to order a halt
on online profiling pending an investigation.
US House Passes Digital Signature Bill
The House of Representatives on Tuesday approved 356-66 controversial
legislation allowing electronic approvals, or ``digital signatures," to
substitute for written signatures on contracts.
The White House would likely veto the proposal, which it said would
reduce consumer rights, but the legislation could be changed after the
Senate passes its own version. A conference committee of lawmakers would
have to iron out differences.
Supporters, including the high-tech, banking and insurance industries,
said the bill would make financial and other important transactions more
efficient, more secure and less costly.
Digital signatures include an array of technologies that rely on
passwords, encrypted codes or other electronically transmittable means
to verify a person's identity online. The bill would allow people to
sign up for bank accounts, buy a car or enter other legally-binding
commercial arrangements all online.
``Electronic signatures provide a level of authentication that far
surpasses the ink signature that has come to be the accepted standard,"
said Virginia Republican Thomas Bliley, chairman of the House Commerce
Committee. ``Electronic transactions have much less of a chance for
human error and provide for more reliable retention after the initial
transaction takes place."
The bill would also allow companies -- when consumers agree -- to
deliver warranties, notices and other required disclosures in electronic
form.
Opponents, including consumer groups and the Clinton administration,
said they supported wider use of electronic signatures but warned that
the bill would erode consumer rights.
Delivering key notices electronically in ways that some consumers might
not be able to read could effectively overrule state laws requiring
companies to provide notices such as a warning of actions needed to
maintain an insurance policy or mortgage, they said.
``It's just breathtaking in its dumping and reneging on consumer laws
that exist to protect consumers," said Minnesota Democrat Bruce Vento.
``It is one thing to try to ensure the validity of electronic signatures
and I support that effort," said Massachusetts Democrat William
Delahunt. ``But it's another to use this legislation as an end run
around state consumer protection legislation."
Bliley denied that consumers would suffer, adding that the bill exempted
from electronic delivery any notices ending utility service, health or
life insurance benefits, or warning of eviction or foreclosure.
Michigan Democrat John Dingell responded that he was concerned about
notices warning of events that lead to foreclosures or terminations,
such as a notice that a payment has not been received.
The House rejected 278-126 an amendment authored by Dingell and several
other Democrats that would have dropped the electronic notification
provisions of the bill.
Microsoft To Offer Office 2000 Over Web
Microsoft Corp. said Tuesday it would offer its Office 2000 software via
the Internet.
The company said in a statement said that its new Microsoft Office Online
would enable the online delivery of Office 2000 software. ``Office Online
will provide a choice for Office customers who prefer the benefits of
centrally managed software and will be offered to small-business customers
through Microsoft's bCentral Web services portal," the statement said.
Steven Sinofsky, vice president of Microsoft Office, said: "We are moving
into the next wave of the Web where software and services are delivered
together, and we are excited to offer Office 2000 to our customers in this
new way."
Office Online users will have the same benefits of the desktop version of
Office and other upcoming new Web services.
Office Online will deliver the complete Office 2000 suite to clients
running Windows and Windows CE operating systems using Windows NT or
Windows 2000's Terminal Services.
It Appears We're Ready for Y2K
The decision appears to have been made, and it is that a society ingenious
enough to create the computer is capable of avoiding disaster because of a
few ominous zeroes.
You can tell that the decision has been made by the way people act.
Consumers are spending, investors investing, and corporations completing
plans for even bigger sales and revenue in 2000.
In short, as Y2K approaches, the vague but intense concerns of earlier
this year, such as the fear of economic collapse, seem to have dissolved
into mere concern about disruptions and irritations.
As most now understand, if only superficially, Y2K involves the ability of
computers to realize we are passing from 1999 to the year 2000, not to
1900.
Maybe no decision was involved at all, just a growing sense of reassurance
that the $50 billion spent by businesses and the $8.34 billion by
government was enough to fix the tiny but massive defect.
True, airline reservations for New Year's week are said to be down, some
families are hoarding food and water, and banks are ready for cash
withdrawals, but fears of cascading disruptions are fading.
Still, opportunists will exploit the days before year's end with terror
tales and rumors, and amulets, tokens, souvenirs, insurance policies and
final testaments. Entrepreneurship will be alive and well.
Most likely there'll be some disruptions, even serious, but more localized
rather than regional, and very unlikely on a national scale. That is,
speaking domestically.
Overseas, it may be a different matter, and since we now have a global
economy (oil from the Mideast, for example), certain foreign breakdowns
could spread beyond national boundaries.
Still, reassurance comes from government and business: The Senate's Y2K
panel, the Federal Reserve Board, Securities and Exchange Commission,
Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., the Pentagon, and telecommunications and
financial industries, among others.
Of course, the major question involved in all such reports of Y2K
readiness is to what degree these reports reflect the true situation or
are designed to quell public doubts while final preparations continue.
For example, in an Oct. 15 letter to House Ways and Means Committee
Chairman Bill Archer, R-Texas, Internal Revenue Service Commissioner
Charles Rossotti expresses confidence his agency will be ready. But he
conceded, ``We do have some trouble spots in our effort."
But regardless of surveys and assurances, Americans may be placing more
faith in their economy than in anything else.
Their faith is in companies that produced the Internet Age and that
seemingly can overcome any obstacle; in the strength of their incomes and
ability to spend; and in an economic advance that has trampled for most of
a decade the negative expectations of self-styled experts.
That in a sense is like saying, we've faced more threatening situations
and come through, so why shouldn't we just overwhelm the enemy again.
=~=~=~=
Atari Online News, Etc.is a weekly publication covering the entire
Atari community. Reprint permission is granted, unless otherwise noted
at the beginning of any article, to Atari user groups and not for
profit publications only under the following terms: articles must
remain unedited and include the issue number and author at the top of
each article reprinted. Other reprints granted upon approval of
request. Send requests to: dpj@delphi.com
No issue of Atari Online News, Etc. may be included on any commercial
media, nor uploaded or transmitted to any commercial online service or
internet site, in whole or in part, by any agent or means, without
the expressed consent or permission from the Publisher or Editor of
Atari Online News, Etc.
Opinions presented herein are those of the individual authors and do
not necessarily reflect those of the staff, or of the publishers. All
material herein is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing.
