NeoThermic wrote:I'm not trying to support MS, yes they lost an anti-monoply case, but the evidence you've provided for your claims, bar the dcd.uscourts.gov link, is insufficent to make me belive that IE can be removed from Windows 98, and that MS tried to show a video lying about this. I also find no mention of a video in the court ruling you linked.
I'm at a loss. Even if you don't like the non-court links, the "removal" issue is settled in black and white in the court decision. I don't know how to further convince you IE can be removed from Win98 if step-by-step directions don't make any impression. You find the steps "laughable;" nevertheless they work, and they prove MS lied to the court. You still dispute the "doctored video" issue, yet the first paragraph of the CNN link states:
Everyone is now familiar with the doctored video demonstrations, the "performance comparisons" using dissimilar modems, and so on.
NeoThermic wrote:ShepFan wrote:Here's another from salon.com.
All I see here is conjecture that they did what is described in this person's blog. I see no links to any other source that verifies his claims.
Blogs didn't exist in 1999. "This person" is Scott Rosenberg, the managing editor of salon.com, and he isn't "making claims" or speculating, he was reporting, as was CNN.
So, I'm at a loss. The facts seem undeniable to me. Even if one discredits one source or another, if a university student can figure out how to remove IE and CNN checks it out and reports it, then it can be done. If CNN (for instance) says, "Everyone is now familiar with the doctored video...," what is left to say? Nothing I can think of. So, on this issue, I'm over and out.