Slashdot Mirror

The measure is designed to increase Internet privacy by limiting how businesses can use phone numbers and purchase records and other data collected through their Web sites. Online businesses would be required to get customer permission before collecting or sharing sensitive personal information such as income level or religious affiliation.

In the House of Representatives, Florida Republican Rep. Cliff Stearns has introduced a bill that would allow businesses to trade personal information unless consumers say otherwise. Stearns' bill would not allow consumers to sue if their privacy is violated.

I'm torn about AOL. I used to want their complete destruction. But now I want to see them reinstate Netscape in the browser market,

It looks like you may get your wish. It was announced yesterday that AOL will be dropping MSIE from its Mac OS X version beta.

The change virtually ensures that AOL for Mac OS X will be Gecko based. AOL claims that beta results so far have shown significant improvements in speed and compliance with HTML standards by using Gecko. One can only assume that future Windows versions will at least have the option of a Gecko based browser as well.

Hello! This is yesterday's news. Today's News.com article has more up-to-date info, and it says that Lott's tactic only delayed things by one day.

It sounds like you're afraid that what you have won't be viable in a few years. If you have Windows 2000 and Office 2000 or XP, though, you should be fine.

Read this article on CNet. In your case, forget the Software Assurance program and buy OEM licenses from your vendors. The cost increases that Gartner is factoring are for the retail copies of Windows and Office -- OEM copies are usually about 60% of that price.

Microsoft's licensing changes have pissed off a lot of customers, and a lot of those customers are migrating off Windows and onto Linux on their servers (because heck, it's $999 for Windows 2000 Server and migrating to Samba/Linux doesn't involve much retraining for your users.)

I would be hesitant to push users off of Windows and Office at this point, especially if I had an all-Windows 2000 shop. With only 50 users, you can get a VAR to hook you up with OEM copies of the latest and greatest Windows/Office at any time without buying in to the Software Assurance program. Thus, I wouldn't worry too much about licensing changes. If you want to see the greatest benefit with the least migration cost, put your web and workgroup servers on Linux.

The desktops, however, are often more trouble than they are worth. I'd leave them alone if I were you. The migration and training costs just aren't worth it at this point. The best thing you can do is just to get them all on the same version of Windows (2000) and Office (2000 or XP) and leave them alone from there. You can look at it again in a couple of years.

"'Pocket PC' is a generic term used throughout the industry," company representative Marianne Peterson said to a judge in a near-empty court. "Microsoft is simply not infringing this trademark...and asks the court to dismiss the case." Cnet

"The evidence relied on by Lindows is insufficient for two reasons," said Microsoft. "First, it shows use of 'windows' as the name of a feature, not as the name of a genus of products. Such feature references may show that 'windows' is descriptive of the goods, but not generic. Second, Lindows' evidence shows repeated uses of Windows as Microsoft's trademark. Thus, it offers no support for a finding of genericness." zdnet

Maybe not a complete contradiction, but amusing nonetheless.

It looks like software quality was a factor in convincing AOL to drop MSIE from its OS X version beta.

The change virtually ensures that AOL for Mac OS X will be Gecko based. AOL claims that beta results so far have shown significant improvements in speed and compliance with HTML standards by using Gecko. One can only assume that future Windows versions will at least have the option of a Gecko based browser as well.

I just read how this turkey (btw that's Barry Dennis, 410-591-1900) loves spam. Sheesh. We need more projects like this to combat the village idiots out there.

"Intel's Itanium processors handle 64 bits, but the Pentium family handles 32 bits."

"The Hammer family of processors ... will be able to run conventional 32 bit applications ... as well as 64 bit applications"

• article on news.com
• article on /. about IA64 vs x86-64

The press anouncements also got Intel to change its mind and start developing a new 32/64 bit combo chip.

I mean, I know they've done some particularly ugly things, but the allegation that Microsoft is trying to shave dollars by screwing "partners" is really

" a move that could potentially give Microsoft access to information about customers"

isn't supported by the article. Have we gotten to the point that anything Microsoft does is immediately viewed with Fear And Loathing?

I think I've got bigger things to worry about these days. Besides, not like anybody really cares, right?

The article by Rich DeMillo (CNet news.com May 15, 2002) is much better. He gets to the underlying issue that we are patching up problems as they arise rather than paying any attention to understanding what we are really trying to achieve. In particular he says "The headlong rush to Web services is going to make things worse."

DeMillo has been around long enough to know what he is talking about, but I expect his wisdom to fall on deaf ears in today's instant gratification culture.

There used to be a shareware program called Sensiva that added gesture support to all windows programs, even allowing you to customize your own gestures. However, new Sensiva products seem to have become more and more bloated with all sorts of irrelevant features and are a lot more restrictive than the older versions :(

Wow. You guys are really all missing the point here.

The reason that Gartner expects StarOffice 6.0 to take away 10% of M$ market share in the productivity suite arena is because it's a paid product offered by a reputable, known viable vendor.

There are a whole lot of people looking to get out from under Microsoft's licensing/upgrading set to take effect this summer. Sun's offering may entice them to jump off the fence.

While open source is ready for the enterprise, the enterprise is not necessarily reader for open source.

What does that mean? It means that most enterprise class shops won't go for something that a) isn't supported by someone on the other end of phone and b) they aren't certain will be available in 5 years because of vendor viability.

Sun doesn't really give a damn about all of us - they are targetting a larger market that will provide a longer-lived revenue stream.

And take a bite of out Microsoft's chunky a$$ at the same time.

I don't like OpenOffice. Font support sucks and some of the compatability with MS Office products is less than acceptable. Given that I absolutely have to be able to read/edit MS documents, that is an imperative.

Will I pay for StarOffice? Hell yeah. I'd rather give it to Sun than MS any day.

StarOffice came first - open office is the release of the code into the open source community. StarOffice isn't originally Sun's, but was offered as early as 1996. Sun picked it up (to the dismay of many, myself included ) in 1999.

You can read about the acquisition here

OpenOffice did not come first, StarOffice did. Sun released an earlier code base to the open source community and continued with its own development.

Wow. Hot on the heels of Sun's press release, it looks like Microsoft is also planning their so called next-gen Office which is also supposedly based on XML. That zdnet article is pretty interesting.. it has some comments from Gartner about both Office.NET (ugh! I'm getting .NET-phobia) and StarOffice.

A CDMA version of it that will support Sprint will also be released later...

...another on CNET, for those of you who loathe free registration, or whatever :)

For example, the WAP address wap.sex.com can be viewed on cell phones using Verizon Wireless, Nextel Communications and Sprint PCS wireless Internet services. But the same URL entered into a Cingular Wireless device returns the message "your client is not allowed to access the requested object."

Now compare this old business-week article

But in France, Germany, and most of the rest of the Continent, the pickings are still slim. One trouble is that many phone companies are still in the beginning phases of WAP, and they block access to other service providers. This is known in the industry lingo as a ''closed garden.'' And for the time being, that garden has high fences. When I go to Germany with my French Web phone, I can only gain access to the Web through an international call to France, where I get a French weather report. This will change in the next year or two as phone companies adapt their Web services for roaming travelers.

And this USA today article:

Moreover, the speed hike only seemed to make a marginal difference over other wireless Web phones I've tried; I was still viewing text, and you must punch too many menu keys to access particular screens. And whenever I entered the Web address for usatoday.com, I received the following message: "WAP Gateway: Your client is not allowed to access the requested object."

What may have happened is that the sources tried to get to porn sites, didn't work, and then concluded that those sites were being banned in specific. But it could be a general compatibility problem affecting many sites.

Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)

So there we have it. The myth that was "all consoles are sold below cost" has been vanquished!"

And did you actually read the article? "Not all consoles are sold at a loss" does _not_ equate to "All consoles are sold at a profit."

They quite clearly stated that the XBox _is_ one of the consoles that is losing money.

The numbers they use are backed up by industry analysts. Here's one of many articles that cites those numbers.

"Microsoft is set to launch the Xbox on Nov. 15 at a retail price of $299. Estimates of Microsoft's cost to build each unit have ranged from $320 to $400. Microsoft representatives would not comment on manufacturing costs."

Microsoft isn't going to tell us how much money they're losing per console, but that doesn't mean that reasonable estimates can't be made by people who know how such things work, and all of those estimates agree that they are losing money although the exact amounts differ.

Not all Web sites are affected, just those that use a standard called Wireless Application Protocol (WAP). Web page makers use WAP to create a slimmed down version of their sites for cell phones.

Please take this into account for testing. So far, looking over the web, I've found no supporting evidence for the story.

Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)

Apple uses ATA in its new Xserve rackmount server.

Jobs also said Apple is "humble" as it enters the [server] market. "For everything we know, there are 10 things we don't know," he said.

Perhaps he was referring to the use of ATA instead of SCSI for a "serious" server? *grin*

Your Micrsoft press release really is pathetic evidence of anything aside from the fact that Microsoft is one of the better marketers (pathological liars) out there. Do you have anything else?

Well other news sites including ZDNet are reporting the sales surge here too. Also it makes sense if you lower the price sales will go up. Xbox pricepoint in Europe was too high, however they are far from being dead. They've only been out for 6 months and there selling pretty well now in Europe.

I can guarantee you based on the pathetic sales of XBox prior to the 29th of April, that there was zero chance of the XBox representing ~50% of sales of next gen consoles in Europe up to that point in time from the XBox launch. Microsoft is feeding you its typical line of bullshit and you are only too happy to open up and swallow.

And you have any figures to back that up? Sales reports? Anything? I didnt think so. All you have is your own crappy opinion.

If XBox sales are so strong in Europe, then why is another price drop being rumored (http://www.cube-europe.com/news/102137936781456.h tml).

Umm... Your pulling that from a game cube fanboy website. How legit can that be? I would wait for official reports from Microsoft before I would believe thats true. Maybe they got the pricecut confused with the US pricecut.

Here is a question for you. How many total units has XBox shipped in Europe? That's right you don't know. You don't know because MS is afraid to release such figures.

Do you know? I thought you didnt. Well according to MS themselves since the price cut they've been doing fairly well in Europe. If you can pull out some numbers to contradict that maybe I'll change my mind.. but you cant soo. As for MS being afraid what about Sony being afraid they'll loose market share and already dropping the price? Even after there own execs said there wouldnt be any price cut? I think Sony is more scared then MS.

Nintendo has shipped 400,000 Cubes in Europe since their launch. A number that has been backed up by others in the industry

A lot of those were pre-orders and I'm sure it will slow down. This time of year is slow for consoles. Lets wait until Christmas until we can get a better estimate on how the XBOX is doing. Remember the XBOX launch in the US was awesome. Over 2 million sold. The europe launch was ok but since the price drop its been doing much better. The Japan launch has been slow but sales did go up when they released Halo there. Wait until E3. MS will announce a pricecut for Japan/US. This should help out even more. Plus Morrowind will come out also. IT'll be a good month for the xbox.

Bravo

Hmmm.

If the retailer told you it was a CD, then maybe. If they told you it would play on your stereo, then maybe. If they called themselves a CD shop, and didn't have any actual CDs, then maybe.

But most retailers I know of are "music stores." Most staff would shrug and go "I dunno" if you asked them if it followed red-book specs. The retailer should have a MORAL responsibility, but they almost definitely don't have a LEGAL one. They'd have to work pretty hard to explicitly mislead their customers far enough to get in any trouble.

There's an interesting articleon C|NET about whether Apple should be responsible or liable. The answer is pretty clear: Should they be liable if you put a peanut butter and jelly sandwich in your CD tray? Well then, why should they be responsible if you put one of these things in?

Just in case you''re thinking that MSFT's selling the XBox at a loss is going to drive them into bankruptcy, you might want to read this article on CNNMoney. To quote the article:

It's more cash than Ford, ExxonMobil and Wal-Mart have combined, and nearly four times as much as Intel, the tech company with the next largest cash balance. It is enough to buy the entire airline industry -- twice. Or all the gold in Fort Knox, four times over. It is enough to buy 23 space shuttles or every major professional baseball, basketball, football and hockey team in America.

Look, Microsoft is going to take a bath on the Xbox console. They knew that going in. Doesn't matter anyway. Software is where they will make their money on the console. Plus, unlike both Nintendo and Sony, Microsoft has $40,000,000,000 in the bank. That will sustain a very impressive burn rate trying to get into/take-over this market. Frankly if it wasn't for anti-trust concerns Microsoft could probably buy Sony and Nintendo just to eliminate them as competitors with petty cash.

Any decision will have to have been made by around 05/14/02 for the album to be pressed and in stores by June 3, the expected release date.

I felt this foreknowledge would allow us to inform Eminem, Interscope, and Universal/Vivendi's how wrong this would be. Too late. We'll just get to complain about it after the fact.

The article about it: http://news.com.com/2100-1023-896391.html.

Novell was way ahead of Microsoft when Windows for Workgroups 3.11 came out (wayyyyyyy ahead-Microsoft had no credible network plan), and the bell then tolled for Novell as so many people have the "well if Microsoft did it, then it must be great! Novell isn't needed anymore..." attitude.

It really is funny, and sad, the way the general marketplace perceives Microsoft (though I do think it's changing): They've had a TREMENDOUS number of failure projects (.NET Services just recently becoming one). The various forms of Windows embedded (either of the NT or CE variety), despite bargain basement prices and countless iterations, are still a dismal failure. Throughout Microsoft's product line you can find endless examples of applications that truly is inferior to the competition (note: Don't misunderstand me-> I think some Microsoft products are tremendous and best of breed : They have done some great things over the years, and I'm typing this on a Windows 2000 machine [note: I `upgraded' to XP and quickly switched back. I largely consider XP to be one of those `failure' products, unless you're comparing it to Windows Me, another brutal money grab]). Yet still so many people are certain that when Microsoft enters a market that they'll dominate (I happen to work on a product that is a vastly superior feature to a half-implemented feature in .NET, and it astounds me how many people will say "Oh, but .NET has that", i.e. "a moped can ride on the highway, so why would I need a transport truck to deliver the 8000lb shipment?"), despite astounding numerical evidence to the contrary. Let's face it : Microsoft has been riding the Windows [and it's hitcher Office] gravy train for well over a decade now, and a lot of people move to the Microsoft alternatives not because they are better, or the competitor is a failure, but because of the flawed perception that whatever Microsoft does, eventually they'll do best.

From Kieth's homepage: "The .NET process and Visual Studio .NET both demonstrate good vision and an awareness of the responsibility to build tools and applications on top of the Internet as a Platform."

While, in other news, Microsoft VP Jim Allchin admits .NET is in disarray, and is in in the midst of a complete strategic overhaul.

Interesting dichotomy, that.

I'm glad they are gone. Many names could not be purchased and their fee structure sucked - IMHO.

And to top it off they could not protect their customer database and compromised every one of their customer's credit cards.

I never actually used their service, but made inquiries in the past, for names that I found they would let no one purchase. Some common terms could not be purchased. Even inquiries required giving them a credit card number. And eventhough I never signed up, there was no way to remove my card from their database afterward. I did not know they kept it stored and when they were hacked I had to get a new card number FAST.

I hope no such service is ever made again!

There is another article on ZDNET link that roasts Linux on the mainframe. I think people were too harsh toward sun when they published their report, but the reality is that Linux is not ready for the mainframe YET.

How are they adhering to standards by providing a device which does not fail gracefully? I don't mind if the drive can't play these CDs, but if the device is going to suffer serious damage as a result of putting something in which has the exact same form factor as a proper CD and can only be differentiated by putting it in the device, then Apple has some bad engineering on its hands. Apple blaming this on the pseudo-CD makers is just passing the buck, sorry.

Not really, Apple's not the only one that has
problems like this, Sony's electronics arm
has complained of this as well. (Which I find
funny, considering Celine Dion is published by
Sony's music arm, left hand not knowing what the
right's doing much?)

These discs are crashing machines regardless
of maker. At least Apple's being up front about it.

Funnily enough I just came across this article on ZDNet that talks about how Linux isn't a very good long term server solution. Its here at http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-909084.html

"Remember when the one compression lib had problems a month or so ago?"

Yes I do.

And I have yet to see patches for the mentioned MS programs that use that library according to that news.com page: Microsoft Office, Internet Explorer, DirectX, Messenger and Front Page.

But in Debian, the patch was applied and the fixed debian package distributed on the same day that the vulnerability was discovered.

What was your point?

Perhaps the dear reader of the twice-above post will realize that neither moral justice nor the public's economic interest is best served when justice hinges upon the ability to pay. Or perhaps they will just walk away having recieved the message that "Microsoft is evil." I have no moral qualms about putting that message into people's heads, as Microsoft's behavior record should be what people use in deciding the value to society of a corporation. If and when they finally prove me wrong, I promise to recant. However, with the actions WRT Opera, Dr. Dos, Samba, security through obscurity, planned obselescence and obfuscation of the Word file format, and the proposed school computer settlement, I might as well promise to move to Tibet upon a semblance of a genuine corporate philanthropy.

It is worth pointing out here that, as mentioned in the linked yahoo story (also appeaing in news.com), Microsoft's corporate vice president in charge of the innards of Windows, Rob Short, has been questioned over the CIFS license issue by the states' lawyers. It is interesting to see what kind of impact will the anti-GPL CIFS license have in the outcome of the trial.

Microsoft's File-Share Rule Makes Waves

Amazon

Cybersource

Great Debate

You can find more on your own.

The most compelling proof for me has been my own experience working in mixed Windows/Linux/Unix environments. I know for a fact that my TCO has been so much lower for the Unix/Linux installations that there can not even be a comparison made with the Windows installations. I'm not bashing Microsoft, I'm stating facts from personal experience.

"The more creators of viruses know about how antivirus mechanisms in Windows operating systems work, the easier it will be to create viruses or disable or destroy those mechanisms," Allchin testified.

Allchin also warned that if Microsoft were compelled to disclose all the APIs and technical information the states are asking for, digital rights management would be compromised.

From Tuesday, news.com http://news.com.com/2100-1001-900905.html

Try this link if you don't believe me.

-- Dave

Microsoft was also caught in 1995 using bits of Apple's Quicktime for Windows in an MS product. See this old cnet article for more details.

In that case, they blamed it on a subcontractor. It's been speculated that the big Apple/Microsoft deal at that time (to keep Office for Mac and to bundle IE with Macs, plus a big MS investment in Apple) may have been to settle a copyright infringment claim.

I found this article which briefly describes some of the reasoning behind the .pro restrictions. I guess the $300 is to cover the research that goes into verifying that someone is really a pro. They will also be verifying whether the company owns a trademark to cut down on cybersquatting. Here is a great quote for all you lawyer fans:

"Elana Broitman, a lawyer representing RegistryPro, told the room full of fellow attorneys that such restrictions will naturally hinder abuse because those professions (referring to lawyers) have a higher level of ethics than other groups and "would be less likely to cybersquat." "

This wouldn't happen to be the DRM that has already been broken?

Love the line about keeping your PC on for a long time ("it is only worthwhile participating if you generally leave your PC on for long periods"), given the Windows crashing bug which takes it down after 49.5 days.

And how many people are running Win95 on a PII 450?

I can't comment on their climatology, but their computing cluefullness isn't looking too impressive.

Surely some groups in Microsoft have the skill to create a good abstract browser API. They choose not to use these skills, but perhaps if Microsoft were split up and forced to compete against itself, such a thing would be born.

Microsoft has clearly admitted that they created DLL hell for marketing purposes. They basically said that, "some of Windows interlocking code benefits Microsoft commercially and does not have a clear technical reason to be commingled."

Story Here (ZDNet)

That admission seems to be key to the trial. It seems to prove that a modular windows is possible and that they chose to create a non-modular windows to support their monopoly.

... why no one has latched on to the fact that you can't install products after the computer is delivered in Windows XP Embedded. The author of the linked article (which can be found in the sidebar of the article linked in this story) makes a really good case as to why a system based on Windows XP Embedded won't fly in the consumer marketplace.

Some of you /. readers must have worked on embedded systems before. The fact is that embedded systems aren't meant to be modified after installation. Sure, you can add an installer, but then it no longer becomes an embedded system. Is this hacked, pseudo-embedded system really going to do its job any better than Windows XP does right now? (And will anyone buy a stripped-down version of Windows?)

The real solution is to get Microsoft to open all of their API's so developers can write compatible software (or perhaps replacement software) for Windows and Office components. Enough with the "18,000 different (but modular, ooh!) versions of Windows" arguments... and bring on the more compatible, better software that opening the API's will help to deliver.

In case people are looking for it, here's a link to a story describing the funeral along with a link to the video itself. It's pretty amusing.

I couldn't find a reference to that suit, but here's a story at CNet which discusses this. Note this paragraph:

The U.S. government in 1990 accused Microsoft of coercing computer resellers into paying a fee for each PC they shipped, whether or not a Microsoft operating system was actually installed. This action long preceded the separate antitrust case filed in 1998 by the Dept. of Justice and 19 states.

Bill & co. never cease to amaze me -- but what amazes me more is that so few people have caught on to what they're doing.

Microsofties testifying poorly for the company. Yesterday, Microsoft's Will Poole, vice president in charge of the company's Windows New Media Platform division, conceded that he couldn't think of anything Microsoft had done with its audio and video capabilities to address a trial court's April 2000 findings against the company.

The states also brought out an email from a different Microsoft employee, Kurt Buecheler, who wrote that when Microsoft went to distribute market development money to computer manufacturers, "a key criteria will be shipping Windows Media Player."

Today, when the states lawyer enquired as to why IE6 played music files with WMP technology even if the user had selected RealPlayer as their default, Microsoft executive Linda Averett said Microsoft could use RealNetworks software to play music in Internet Explorer, but chooses not to.

"The reason it is not replaceable is that Microsoft does not allow it to be replaceable, correct?" Schmidtlein (dissenting states attorney) asked.

"Correct, it is an integrated feature," Averett testified.

She also testified about the complaint by RealNetworks that the XP search program couldn't find RealNetworks files. She claimed it was a mistake that had been fixed two weeks ago. This would make it a month after states' top lawyer, Brendan Sullivan, showed the search problem during opening arguments as evidence of Microsoft's wrongdoing.

Yesterday's testimony: http://news.com.com/2100-1001-900213.html
Today's testimony: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/technology/AP-Micr osoft-Antitrust.html

Oracle is not the company with which California has/had the deal. It's some reseller called Logicon, and they have said all along that CA can cancel the order if it wants. They are simpluy unaware that the offer has been accepted.

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1106-900786.html

To make it that much worse for Oracle, IBM has just ousted them as the number one seller of database software. To put that in further perspective, they are losing market share to Micro$oft as well! The company is downplaying it, of course, and no word from Mr. Arroga^H^H^H^H^H^H Ellison yet.