And when that happens, Microsoft will buy Worldcomm. And then Microsoft
> will require AOL to use MSN's interface bundled with Worldcomm's
> connectivity or get no connectivity at all.
Shhhh. Don't give the Evil Empire any ideas....
Chris Cook
Network Engineer
perhaps I've been smoking too much crack, but back when MSN was getting
started, Microsoft dumped a large amount of money in UUNET's lap. How
much of this ended up going towards UUNET stock? And if they owned a
chunk then, they'd own a chunk of Worldcomm now. But then, I may just be
smoking too much crack.
>
> > And when that happens, Microsoft will buy Worldcomm. And then Microsoft
> > will require AOL to use MSN's interface bundled with Worldcomm's
> > connectivity or get no connectivity at all.
>
> Shhhh. Don't give the Evil Empire any ideas....
>perhaps I've been smoking too much crack, but back when MSN was getting
started, Microsoft dumped a large amount of money in UUNET's lap. How
much of this ended up going towards UUNET stock? And if they owned a
chunk then, they'd own a chunk of Worldcomm now. But then, I may just be
smoking too much crack.
Yep..
<URL:http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/7404.html>
- Josh Richards / jrichard@fix.net / Finger for PGP key -
- Systems Administrator / FIX Net / http://www.fix.net -
Hmmm if my memory serves me right I believe MicroSoft has 3 of its directors on
UUnets board, and that very well could be the end run on the network. The
thought is not comforting....
Henry R. Linneweh
Josh Richards wrote:
last time i looked Jon postel was still on genuity's board. It is my
understanding that this gives him a LEGAL responsibility to act in the
best financial interests of genuity. Seems to me this creates a conflict
of interest given what with his powers as IANA he could do to benefit
genuity with IP allocations etc. now I am confident that he has not used
his position to give special benefit to genuity. but I am also told that
he could be regarded as culpable for not having helped them out when it
could be argued he had the power to do so. This is a distinction that I
was slow to grasp and one that jon with a research rather than a business
background might also be slow to grasp.
Rodney Joffe explained to me in very glowing terms this summer why jon
was on the 'board" his explanation sounded fine. Point is Jon could have
had the same impact as a special advisor to the board. one wonders why
genuity bechtel attornies that could be expected to be aware of these
issues went with the board choice anyway.
does jons board position disappear when genuity is fully acquired? i
would hope so.
UUNet runs MSN's network.
I'm sure this is not a cheap operation.
That money more than likely went into network implementation
costs, as building a private nationwide dialup network can be
quite costly.
typical nanog bitter-batter: making assumptions based upon half
truths.
