Slashdot Mirror
Senator Seeks Injuction Against WinXP
Hiro_Later writes "Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee has asked state prosecutors to seek an injunction blocking the launch of Windows XP. His reasoning? "Without 'significant changes,' new technologies might never get the opportunity to compete." Microsoft of course disagrees arguing instead that XP will bring more choices and content to consumers not less. What I find interesting is Schumer was formerly a skeptic of the government's antitrust case against Microsoft, perhaps he has seen the light. Judge for yourselves here." Update: 07/25 01:41 AM by H :So, based on the e-mail I've been getting, evidently people have forgotten that what submittors type is in italics. Like this. Notice how when I type here that is in normal type - if you've got other questions, please check out the FAQ. There's lots of fun information in there. We now return you to our regularly scheduled programming.
Actually the check did come in. Only it was $52,000 from [now AOL] Time Warner.
As I sit here and read most of this, I am stunned at the complete lack of care or thought for the impact of what you are all suggesting. Do you not understand the implications?
So, because MSFT sold a piece of SW they will not support, everything should be released under the GPL if it's "old". Well, shoot, then every product ever released in the history of the world should be required to be released under the GPL.
Hey, even if it's not technology it should apply. Shoot, every restaurant I walk into should have the recipe, with full preparation instructions, for EVERY single dish they offer, posted right in the lobby. Coca Cola should provide complete preparation instructions so I can make my own coke products how I want them - just ingredients isn't enough.
I'm sure you have some reason to claim it's not the same, but it is. You are saying there should be no privately owned information. Fine, stop buying anything from anywhere you didn't get complete specifications, instructions, and tools from today. I'm sure you'll save a lot of money to spend on nothing.
What you fail to realize, is that MSFT is a business that spent billions of dollars on that product. I don't care if you like that or not. The kernel itself is still used today in Win2K and XP, and it is THEIR property.
The last thing I want is government that steps in at every chance to bully companies and people. As a matter of fact, I'm for a much smaller government, and sadly, we're going the opposite way. Beat MSFT by being better - don't look for someone else to solve your problems.
Linux will not beat MSFT in a consumer market because it has NO consumer strategy right now. Change that. You think innovation is a "MSFT joke"? Fine, hopefully someone who cares about innovation will push you aside and do it themselves.
People like Linus didn't whine and look for the government to shutdown MSFT before trying to make a difference. I'm saddened by the whining - I hear how MSFT whines, but it sounds the same on this end to, and it's SAD. Make a difference, don't bitch about it.
For every person here who says that the government should force this or the government should force that - go and start a company that DOES what you are saying. Don't try to alter the future by lobbying, because it has a serious impact in the future that is very scary. The reality is I could go buy Maces today - I have a Mac at home. I can run Linux. It's not like I don't HAVE choices. Yes, I understand MSFT is evil, bad bad, and they did bad things, they did this and they did that. Fine compete against them. It takes people to make a difference and innovate.
# Hack the planet, it's important.
The timing is too tight for this to be a coincidence.
Today we learned (here on slashdot) that AOL is opening up its instant messaging software to third parties. Then we hear Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee has asked state prosecutors to seek an injunction blocking the launch of Windows XP
The article linked from the top of the slashdot presents this comment (among others) from Microsoft: Microsoft also took aim at AOL Time Warner, saying the company has steadfastly refused to open its instant messaging systems to interoperate with other systems.
It's plausible that the AOL news were a preemptive strike since they knew that Sen. Schumer was going to make the news later in the day, perhaps at the behest of lobbyists paid for by one or more corporations based in NY state.
I don't believe that the government should have a say in how companies go about doing their business. While I don't agree with several Microsoft practices, it sickens me to think that publicly elected officials may be acting on behalf of corporations. Ayn Rand warned us about this at length (see Atlas Shrugged). I believe that Microsoft should be able to release its software as they see fit. It's up to us software developers and vendors (free software, open software, commercial, whatever) to stop their hegemony. People forget that Microsoft managed to break IBM's stronghold of computer technology by offering better products and being smarter about business than the larger company.
Think of IBM's TopView and compare it to Windows 1.0. They came out at roughly the same time. Neither one worked. IBM dropped the product. Microsoft improved the product over the years to the point where we see it today. OS/2? Good software implementation, but lousy business strategy. The current Linux revolution proves that radically different software is adopted if it (a) satisfies the user's requirements and (b) it's available. Finally, if you aren't old enough to have witnessed the fall of IBM and the rise of Microsoft (or to know what TopView was), please abstain from flaming.
It's our turn to be smarter about distributing our wares and creating better products. We don't need government intervention to win.
Cheers!
Ehttp://eugeneciurana.com | http://ciurana.eu
Not true. Besides cosmetic changes there are a few very significant ones, including but not limited to:
All in all, MS is arrogantly continuing to use exact same tactics they were sued for. Now that they already own the browser market, they can give a token consession to remove IE from the desktop. Now they have set their greedy eyes on the music distribution market. Unless something is done to stop them, they'll own that as well, so you'll have to pay Microsoft tax not only on new computers but also every time you listen to a song or watch a movie or print a picture with your digital camera (Gates claims everything will be pay-per-view in not too distant future). So yeah, blocking XP is a good idea. Even more so since the punishment fits the crime.
___
___
If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
Bad choice there -- If you'll recall the mid-90s, Netscape was running roughshod over every browser available at the time. Remember Netscape-specific tags? <BLINK> anyone?
Netscape was just as bad (if not worse) than Microsoft. When MS got their head and ass wired together and bought the Spyglass browser and turned it into IE, they were competing with Netscape. Netscape decided to implode through insane management decisions and unmaintainable growth, and got trounced technically. Boo hoo. It was not that rascally Bill Gates who destroyed Netscape -- they managed quite nicely on their own, and the Open Standards of the Web were saved (for the moment). Now if Microsoft does the same thing, then they'll be in the wrong.
Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
Yeah, okay, so perhaps that's not all that original. But you get the idea...
--
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
For the love of God, think about what you're saying. I hate Microsoft with a passion, but stopping them from shipping a product because it might hurt innovation? How the hell do you come to THAT conclusion? Besides, the economic impact would be severe. The computer industry NEEDS WinXP to be launched in October to help fuel consumer and business buying, thus giving the tech companies a much-needed boost. If XP were blocked, the computer industry might not recover at all this year. Economy aside, blocking XP just makes absolutely no sense.
> They illegally attacked Java, fragmented it, and now refuse to support in XP
I'm not even going to beat the dead horse of Java partisanship that's so obvious here, but the reason they don't support it in XP is that Sun prohibits them from shipping a JVM in XP.
--
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
Oh, and you know for a fact that Schumer's receiving payments from Microsoft? Uh, OK. Anything you say. (I was unaware that the Branch Davidians were big Microsoft apologists.)
Actually if I was worried about unfair competition and made a comment like:
and the response from the Microsoft spokesperson (Vivek Varma) was:
I'd sure be a little miffed and wanting to drag their sorry behinds in front of Congress to get an answer to my concerns. Just note how Microsoft didn't answer the question at all. Bundling more crap into XP might (perhaps) benefit some consumers but does not (in ant way) address the issue of competition. And Microsoft knows it.
Perhaps the reason some senators are now raising concerns about Microsoft is that they're afraid that they'll be seen by their constituents as having part in propping up a known and increasingly arrogant monopoly abuser by having taken all those campaign contributions from the Gang from Redmond and their cronies and making apologetic statements regarding Microsoft business activities during the past few years. Whatever the reason, if it results in more hearings, like those proposed, taking place and the public hearing more about Microsoft's shenanigans, then that's fine with me.
Actually, I'm looking forward to these Congressional hearings. It almost makes me wish I still had cable so I could tape CSPAN. Microsoft's spokespeople are such bad liars and the transcripts should make for some amusing reading. Let's just hope the press finds the hearings newsworthy enough to cover them and that a few more senators and representatives can keep their zippers up for the next few months.
Cheers...
--
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
I don't see why you think forcing companies who orphan software (and forced upgrades to incompatible systems is certainly a form of orphanage) to GPL the product is so bad.
...
The original intent of copyright was that it be for a limited time. Only an ethically corrupt and morally bankrupt lawyer would interpret "life plus seventy five years" or "ninety years" (both significantly longer than the average human lifespan) to be 'limited' in any real sense of the word beyond the most technical (and in that technical sense a billion years would be a limited time, and clearly out of bounds of what the constitution was intended to allow).
Originally copyrights were 17 years in length, at which time the copyrighted material became public domain. Forcing Microsoft and other makers of proprietary software to GPL their products after they've been orphaned would actually be kinder (from their point of view) than returning copyright limits to their original length (which, IMnsHO is exactly what should be done) as GPLed software couldn't be used in a competing proprietary product the way public domain (or FreeBSD Licensed) code can.
Such a resolution would certainly be in the spirit of what was intended with copyright law when the constitution was written, and would do a lot to restore the shattered balance of the consumers' rights versus those of the copyright holder. Having said that, I'd much prefer the entire morass of Windows code remain proprietary and disappear into that proprietary black hole that has swallowed so many unreleased copyrighted material, never to see the light of day even after the copyright has expired and it would have entered the public domain. Losing that code could only be a service to humankind, but I digress
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Perhaps Coke wasn't the best example you could have chosen.
Bite the hand.
Every time I see him speak on TV, my blood pressure goes up 40 points. He never lets inconvenient things like facts, logic or principles get in the way of a good rant.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Actually Redhat 7.1 + Ximian 1.4 is functionally identical to XP.
The changes in the UI will amount to the same amount of training, and if you pre-load the software for them you just solved everything.
I've had my mother running the above combination for 3 months now... and havent heard a peep otrher than the steady stream of emails from her, and questions on how to open these emails attachments from people that want her advice on something... (My mom is now virus proof! That in it's self is worth it)
Nope, XP is not the only choice, Linux is a viable one.... but only for those that are willing to put forth a tiny bit of effort in the beginning.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Well, Time-Warner was Schumer's 13th highest contributor during the 1995-2000 election cycle (he was elected in 1998 and won't be up again until 2004). So it would make sense that he agreed with Microsoft's position before, but now that Time-Warner has merged with AOL, it looks like he's been kept safely within Time-Warner's pocket.
Cheers,
I believe that Sun prohibits them from shipping their non-standards compliant JVM with XP. I don't believe that Sun would prohibit them from shipping, e.g., the Sun JVM. They could certainly include, e.g., a Kafe Install CD. IBM would certainly be glad to sell them the right to distribute Jikes cheaply.
Sorry. I don't buy the "They'd like to but they can't" argument. Of course, if you had a URL at a creditable source to point me to, that might be another matter. (P.S.: I don't consider M.S. to be a creditable source.)
Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
True. IIRC, he is one of the members of our government who takes a firm stand against the rights and freedoms of the individual, preferring instead a more imperial government. There has to be more to this sudden change of heart than altruism. What's in it for Schumer?
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Are you kidding me? Linux is one giant beta test.
OK, so we have more "wah wah, Microsoft's being a bully" from a prominent US citizen. Good for him, good for us, they're as guilty as sin, ad nauseium, ad infenitem.
The main problem we have here is that Microsoft keeps on "innovating" on Windows to the point of sucking money from people and businesses addicted to thier OS and main stay applications. Fair enough - let them have thier "innovations" - but only those developed over the last 5 years.
IIRC, support for NT will be pulled in 2002. So, the Government should force Micorsoft to release the source code for NT 4.0 SP6a under the GPL after the support is pulled. The whole steaming pile of it. It's 2 versions behind, so should be berift of thier "innovations" and no problem at all to GPL. If thier new products are truly innovative, they'll still sell millions of copies, right?
On the consumer side, it would allow interested parties to maintain thier current environment, the more industrious (some would say insane) to improve on what's there, others could develop competeing products *cough*SAMBA*cough* on other architectures and others still to develop really competive apps for Windows and/or other platforms under WIN32.
IMHO, no one is better able to compete with Microsoft than themselves.
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
the goal of a corporation is to dissolve a market status, exploit the environment, tax the free and undermine democratic choices, and employ slave labour.
Wow! What country do you live in that your corporations do that to you! It can't be Canada, as your email implies. It sounds more like Somalia or Indonesia!
In my country (mostly south of Canada), the goal of corporations are to make a profit for their shareholders. They do not have the legal authority to tax. And we abolished slavery 150 years ago.
There's a hell of a lot wrong with the concept of "corporation" but your list of abuses are not among them.
The goals of the constituents of the market are then not the same as the goals of a free people.
Producers are people. Consumers are people. When these people are free, the market is free.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
I am not denying that a few corporations do these things. But the original post was directing his list of abuses against all corporations, that all corporations had the goal of undermining democracy and employing slave labor.
A few individual people commit murder, rape, arson and theft. But that doesn't make the goal of people to murder, rape, burn and steal. Individuals can commit criminal acts, and so can corporations. To accuse all corporations of employing slave labor just because Nike does is as ridiculous as accusing all human beings of being cannibals just because Daumer was a cannibal. Get real!
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Of course, Microsoft gave him $3,500.
But that only buys a few copies of WinXP. You can see why Schumer is peeved.
-gleam
this
> when I read the following paragraph from the article:
"Windows has always been designed as an open platform that creates new business opportunities for many third parties, including some of our toughest competitors"
It does create new business opportunities... as in "find another line of work".
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
The whole bundling issue comes from the fact that the Antitrust Act says that you can't use a legally obtained monopoly in one market to leverage a monopoly (unfairly, without competition) in another market. This is why, back in the '70s or there about, the government wouldn't let Kodak bundle processing (a market in which they did not have a huge presence) with their film (which was a monopoly at the time).
The fact is that the rules are different for monopolies than for non-monopolies. Monopolies have to be careful what they bundle so as to not leverage one monopoly, which may have been legally obtained through competition, to unfairly gain another. Non-monopolies don't have this concern.
Moves by Apple to bundle extra software would probably not be seen as anticompetitive because they only have 5% of the market. The same goes for Linux which has even less (of the desktop market anyway).
No, it'll be MUCH better to have one company that will tell you everything you can or can't buy for your computer.
Oh, wait...
(Yes, I am ignoring the Free Software movement. Microsoft has destroyed the business of creating and selling many classes of PC software...and that's bad.)
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
So you've never bought a name-brand PC? Good for you. Here's your sticker proclaiming your membership in a most exclusive fraternity. For everybody else, not being able to get a PC without paying Microsoft is sort of a pain.
Your point about Sklyarov is well taken...but don't you see that the kind of power Adobe is wielding could be used by any large (like Microsoft) company? Wouldn't it be a good idea to put some strictures on these juggernauts' behaviour?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Chuck Schumer is just a gas bag looking for a little press. Apparently the check from Microsoft didn't come in this month. It's amazing how he has suddenly started caring a great deal more for the public then he did during the Waco hearings.
If it ain't a Model M, it's a piece of crap.
First, and foremost, impossible. Too much underlying technology in NT that is NOT owned by Microsoft
But in case this were to happen, and microsoft was forced to give away unencumbered previous copies of their OS, it would NOT, be under the GPL.
Reference implementations, that are done so others can look and implement, are beter licensed Under a BSD-Like or Public Domain license. Why you ask?
Well, do you think most companies would use the code if it was GPL'ed and they were *forced* to have to release their enhancements to said code base?
Not likely.
Even RMS agrees with this. ( see the Orgg Vorbis commentary by RMS, in which he agress with it's BSD-Like license).
Yet another case of GPL/Linux fanatics, thinking their way is the only way.
Kinda reminds you of the way MS thinks...
Hey, automobile manufacturers should not be allowed to bundle stereos with their products because it put a huge crimp on the after-market stereo sales. The only people who are going to bother are the hard-core nerds who want a real high-end system that most people wouldn't care about.
Now replace "automobile manufacturers" with "Microsoft", "stereos" with "Internet browser", "high-end system" with "Mozilla" or "Opera", etc, and you have the government's argument in a nutshell.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Finally, a voice of reason. What percent of M$ sales are to goverments? How many to the very governments now embroiled in the lawsuit? I wouldn't be surprised if it is 10-15%. Dropping those sales would cure M$ pretty freakin' quick.
Then take into account the additional 10-15% when contractors aren't reimbursed for M$ software, and/or when they are required to use the native StarOffice file format (for example) when submitting gov't bids, reports, etc.
Then eliminate the French and German government sales. It'll happen sooner or later. There goes another couple of points.
While the 10-15% from the initial government backoff wouldn't do a great deal, the ripple (or multiplier, for those of you who passed macroecon) effect would be large.
Heck, I'm not even sure that they need to go this far. Mandate a certain xml dtd (I think dtd is what I'm looking for) as the preferred document type for government information exchange, and get on with it. Who gives a rat's patootie about M$ if someone can make a Jabber plug-in that will create government standard output logs of chats?
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
I suppose that since you noticed, it's too late to point out? :)
Seriously though, I was thinking about that after I posted, and I remember what I read (O'Reilly book?) saying how voluminous the gov't spec for SGML was, and that it was nearly unusable.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
At least XP actually informs you. On Linux you have to read 6000 man pages or maybe read half a million news group messages before you realise you can do something with it.
How many people have installed Linux and then gone..."ok, now what?". I know I had to ask 50 questions just to find out that you type "startx".
I don't want to beta test. I use linux.
Isn't that an oxymoron?
Simon
Coming soon - pyrogyra
Once XP is released you can say good bye to any non MS technology running on windows
Sorry, but I have to call bullshit here.
My app runs *fine* on XP, and it's not written by Microsoft. So do several hundred thousand *other* apps.
So what is this technology you're speaking of that will miraculously drop dead?
Simon
Coming soon - pyrogyra
Synching with atomic clocks - MacOS 8 had this. ClearType - For fucks sake, the Apple ][ had this one! Technologist Steve Gibson, a software developer and consultant whose claim to fame was inventing the light pen more than a decade ago, says he recognizes the technique as one used in the Apple II. He confirmed his suspicion by comparing notes with Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak, who developed a font-smoothing technique for the Apple II
Yes, and he's fucking wrong, but won't admit it.
Simon
Coming soon - pyrogyra
Your app probaly doesn't do anything important enough to be imitated, or programmed against. I have no doubt there is anti lotus, netscape, realplayer, etc code lurking in the dark heart of that source code they desperately won't let you see.
Nah, there's enough shit code in RealPlayer (hey! It installs all this crap I asked it not to...) and Netscape (wow! look at it crash. AGAIN) without MS having to write any.
The technology he means is probably: email servers, cd burners, internet browsers, media players, database servers, email programs, and everything else important that MS HAS to control or they'll have a fuckin fit.
Nero works fine. Opera works fine. Realplayer works fine. Quicktime works fine. Eudora works fine. Netscape works fine. As for the DB servers, etc... well, I don't have them. Sorry.
So let's see... out of all your examples... I can testify over 60% of them working great. Would you care to give some examples? Or drop the FUD crusade?
Pick one.
Simon
Coming soon - pyrogyra
I also have a friend who was an intern for Schumer while he was still in the House. New York is full of businesses which constantly lobby their Representatives and Senators. Schumer is not known for taking action simply on the whims of lobbyists.
You do have a point, one of these companies may have opened his eyes to the issue, but I assure you that he did not follow through because of the lobbying, but instead because of the results of his research.
---
---
"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
I think out of all the following:
Microsoft Legal, Microsoft Applications, Microsoft Hardware, Microsoft Marketing, Microsoft Operating system
The two I'd be most afraid of are: Microsoft Legal and Microsoft Marketing.
They are the only two departments in Microsoft that have enough chutzpah to kill their own parents, and then beg for mercy because they have recently become orphans.
As another posted has already stated:
Antitrust laws are there to foster COMPETITION and -ETHICAL- Innovation. Those who violate those ethics (ie: abusive monopolies such Standard Oil, AT&T and Microsoft) have their legal -privelege- to continue to innovate in un-ethical manners -yanked-.
I wish they'd get busted up, but it ain't gonna happen. Instead, we're probably going to see something akin to what IBM had to deal with in the 1980's. It's taken them a -decade- to recover, and they've -truly- had to innovate to do it.
Besides, MS doesn't innovate, they Borg.
It's entirely possible that windows is increasing the cost of our hardware, because it all has to be compatable with the original IBM. If you can redesign the hardware to take advantage of new technology, you can use cheaper/better/faster components.
Boycott?
Most of the users on Slashdot I thought use Linux, so either you guys run some form of Windows (like me), or you are going to buy/warez Windows XP just so you can complain that it pops up it's own software and you don't want to hit the X in the corner. I plan to use XP because it mixes the 2K and ME code base into one product. If some people are upset that Microsoft makes software that is so easy to use that people must buy it because they want to work not hack, then let them use Linux. I could care less about seeing the source for Windows. If I wanted to write for it, I would work for Microsoft. They are a business, not a hobby.
If you guys are so "freedom of choice" why must I choose the same as you? I want my XP!
As a matter of fact a number of good restaurants do offer this. The hard part is in the preparation, not in the sheet of paper...
My younger sister prefers KDE2 to Windows on her p120. It does what she needs a computer to do, and does it consistently w/out locking up or melting for no reason. Windows is not easy, Windows is familiar. KDE2 is not easier or harder to use than Windows, it's just different. Don't put down a perfectly good system because you don't understand the difference between familiarity and ease of use.
As an unrelated side note...The only innovation in Windows since the 3.x series was the task bar. Until Microsoft moves to something more intuative than what's fundamentally program manager poping up when you hit the start button, Windows will not get any easier.The best way to accelerate a windows box is at 9.8 meters per second square.
Who cares how hard it is to decide what the punishment should be. The point is while they are deciding MS should not be allowed to continue committing crimes. Criminals are usually in jail while they are awaiting sentensing. MS is a soul-less immortal being so it can not be jailed but it should not be allowed to whatever it wants in the meantime.
War is necrophilia.
Apple does not have a monopoly. Monopolies have restrictions on them that other businesses don't.
Not only is MS a monopoly they have been judged by a federal judge to criminally abused their monopoly to choke off competition. This came after they had already been reprimanded by the federal govt for their previous behaviours. Not only that but the appeals court upheld the guilty verdict of the first judge.
In this case there is no line to draw.
If you are a monopoly and you have been judged to be a criminal three times then you ought have some
restrictions put on you. They are so far over the line there is no question about it.
Criminals don't enjoy the same rights as everybody else.
War is necrophilia.
Neverthe less they have been judged to be guilty of crimes. The appeals court upheld that verdict. They are criminals and should be treated as such.
War is necrophilia.
Your sister installed windows? She is able to open up her box and install hardware and then install the drivers? She seems pretty advanced to me I am sure she could handle Linux. If she can't there is always a MAC. Even my 72 year old dad can use a mac.
War is necrophilia.
Why do you keep insisting that the choice is only between linux and windows. Mac is a great choice for inexperienced people. Much better usability then windows and controlled hardware makes incompatibilities a thing of the past.
War is necrophilia.
Chances are very good that he will have to upgrade his sytems. If not now then in a few months or so. Why not hold off until then and get a mac. Also if he is willing to fork over $500.00 for licenses of XP then it almost pays for a mac.
War is necrophilia.
"Surely, by the same logic, Apple has a monopoly on the "Motorola-based consumer desktop market"???? "
Not until a judge says so. That's the way our system works.
War is necrophilia.
It's not illegal to have a monopoly as long as you don't abuse it. MS criminally abused their monopoly. Big difference there dontcha think?
War is necrophilia.
You seem to be confused about our legal system (do you live in America?). First somebody has to press charges, some party has to be wronged enough to take the offending party to court. So far apparently Apple has not effended anybody enough to actually warrant a charge being filed.
Also It is not illegal to actually have a monopoly it's illegal to abuse that monopoly. Even if apple has the monopoly the management at apple are apparently more ethical amd moral people then the management at MS (not surprising given the slimyness of the MS executives).
MS could press charges against apple but I would doubt they would win.
"the judge was illogical."
A panel of judges on the appeals court upheld the judge so I guess he was not illogical. Maybe you are unable to grasp the complexities of our legal system and are reaaching for overly simplistic answers to your own overly simplistic questions.
War is necrophilia.
Such an injunction would actually give some credence to MicroSquish's standard "wah! They don't want us to INNOVATE" bullshit.
Let them go ahead and ship XP, and then break them up. They were found GUILTY of the antitrust charges, after all.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
>You have to remember Microsoft is NOT going to be broken up. The appellate court has made that decision, and it's doubtful the Supreme Court would overturn it.
The appellate court did *not* decide that MicroSquish isn't going to be broken up, they decided that Judge Jackson's ruling would be set aside, and that another judge will decide what the penalty should be. There is nothing to prohibit another judge from also deciding that a breakup is necessary.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I haven't bought anything from that outfit since some time around 1983, so nothing I do now will reduce their revenues by even one dollar.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
>Never mind that any e-mail client on the planet can send attatchments, the idea never occured to them before to send files.
yeah, but they do click on each and every attached file they receive.. maybe they got the idea from I_LOVE_YOU and/or Sircam..
//rdj
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
The problem for me is, XP does include a couple of features that make it better for home use by my family than Win 98, the biggest one being stability
Every MS WINDOWS package is touted as being "more stable" than its predecessor...since Windows 3.1 (I know, it was a GUI that sat on top of DOS...) Why did this not compel you to upgrade to WinME?
Don't kid yourself. If it's not an application, it may be a driver incompatability, but WinXP will either die or show incompatabilities with one or more devicies or applications you own.
I'm tired of telling my mom that the computer crashed because "Windows is stupid" (which has become my default explanation for computer problems).
Soon, you'll be able to tell your mom that the computer crashed because "Windows XP is stupid" (which will become your new, improved default explanation for computer problems).
I like Linux as much as the next guy, but I'm not sure Linux is ready for my family to use.
Granted. It would be difficult to teach your parents a new OS with a new paradigm if they didn't want to take the time to learn it.
Windows is the only viable solution right now, and Windows XP is the best Windows there is.
Granted, Windows may be the best solution for you right now, but why must you upgrade? 98SE is a pretty good OS, as far as MS-OS's go, and you don't have the benefit of having seen XP in the field (at least not exposed to millions of end - users) so if stability is really your goal, give XP a year to release a few service packs, then consider upgrading. You can still participate in the boycott until XP has proven itself.
Thanks to your "law", taxpayer-funded agencies will be forced to buy Microsoft OSes for half their machines
That is not what I am proposing. I propose "less than" not "exactly equal to" half non-MS OS's. I commend you for your ability to identify the slight ambiguity in my comment and jump out the window with unfounded conclusions. I really got a good laugh at your expense.
Congratulations, you've just overturned the most basic tenets of contract law.
Contract law does not limit a judicial remedy for a proven violation of the Sherman Act. You might as well argue that getting a traffic fine violates basic tenents of property rights. Courts have great power to enforce remedies against law breakers. What are you, stupid?
Also, Coca-Cola must include one can of Pepsi in every six-pack it sells, and optionally a can of Mountain Dew if Pepsico desires.
I am aware of no antitrust claim against Coca-Cola, let alone one that unanimously survived appellate review. Due process of law prevents the Courts from applying a remedy before a Court upholds the cause of action. You really should get a clue.
And Mozilla and Lynx32 and Grail and Amaya and Cello and Winamp's mini-browser...
I was thinking of Winamp's whole package. What is your point? If it's that someone has to draw a line, then you are really boring. Judges draw lines all the time. To get your browser included, you would have to go to the judge and show that the proven MS anticompetitive practices damaged you specifically in some way.
Congress should pass a law that half of all future taxpayer funded PC purchases will come with a non Microsoft OS.
The Court should do several remedial steps, each tailored directly at undoing the harm caused by the specific anticompetive practices Microsoft has done:
1. OS Monopoly countermeasure: uniform licencing. MS may offer one version of its OS at one price. No sale may be refused. OEMs may make any noninfringing value added modification they choose. The Court should reassess every two years if this measure is still needed.
2. Java countermeasure: MS must bundle Sun's version of Java and any java related extras desired by Sun. Reassess every two years
3. Comingling of code: Mandate full disclosure of API's found to be involved. If Browser bundling is found to be anticompetitive on remand, force MS to distrubute Netscape and Opera. Similarly with other media programs. Reassess every two years.
Simple.
I think you fail to miss the context of the post you were replying to.
:).
That fellow suggested a punishment for Microsoft severely abusing its monopoly. If Microsoft had been a good business, working within the law, such a suggestion would, indeed, be absurd. However, they have *NOT* worked within the law.
All the other possible examples you cited used companies that are not currently considered illegal monopolies - so damnit, yes, there IS a difference.
If Coca Cola went and gunned down all the employees of all their competitors, I think fair punishment would be for them to be forced to release their recipe; at that point, all they have is manufacturing ability. Anybody can reproduce their product, so they are no longer a monopoly. The punishment fits, since their crime was to become a monopoly(looking past the murders in this example
That is what the suggested punishment is for; they are not suggesting that "since Microsoft is a successful business, they should have all their code forced open", they are suggesting that "since Microsoft has repeatedly abused its monopoly in such a manner as to cause serious financial and personal damage, they should make amends by making the code for unsupported products available"
Personally, I think if such a thing were to happen, the code should be public domain, not GPL'd. That way anybody can do whatever they want with it.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
However, KDE is not as consistently easy to use as Windows. Some of the apps have horrible UIs or were written by people who don't speak English as a first language (KPackage comes to mind...). The Control Center, while powerful, is intimidating to users (so many panels!), and can't handle many things that Windows's can (like hardware setup - almost always requires command-line jockeying).
AMEN! I hate KDE, and I hate GNome, and I hate all of the others. I hate XWindows period. Really, I hate GUIs to begin with... but...
Even with pretty themes, it's still not nearly as usable as a well set-up Windows desktop. I even beg to differ on KDE being "more stable" than Windows, for that matter, since I see applications go down all the time (and --MY-- Windows ME machine almost NEVER crashes...)
I use KDE2, though, because of the many choices it's one of the better ones. Still, I hate how new windows open and force themselves into one of the four corners, or they stagger, or they want to dock themselves, or they're picky about where they want to be, and even applications which should obviously remember where you want windows to pop up don't seem to remmber it from session to session (and those that do randomly decide to forget.) Generally speaking, the look and feel just plain sucks. Compared to everything I've used spanning Amiga Workbench, MAC OS, Windows, OS/2, BeOS, and countless others -- the offerings on Unix blow.
The fact is - KDE could be called a Kludge, and while that might offend a lot of people, esspecially the people who are die hard Linux Lovers, they always fall back to pretty stupid defenses for their favorite desktops. The worst part about it is, I know a lot of RELIGIOUSLY FANATICAL Linux lovers who loath Windows, but then after watching them for about 10 minutes it's obvious they really don't even know how to USE Windows! (I guess what they say is true. Those who hate Windows run Linux. Those who love Unix run FreeBSD.)
I'm not defending Windows by far. I'd never run a server on it. NEVER. EVER. EVER. I wouldn't even DREAM of it. I'm a Unix lover. I think Unix is wonderful. It makes a great computing platform and it's an awesome server.
A desktop OS it is not. It nver has been, and it's got a whilte to go before it ever will be. Get over it. Deal with it. Some of us are cut out for Unix, the rest of the world shouldn't be using computers, much less the Internet, and definately not Unix.
Every "my little sister this" or "my mother that" story I hear makes me want to vomit. So what? You found a rare individual who "gets it" and wants to use a computer for more than browsing the web. Or maybe they just don't care about general interfaces. Functionality over Form, Purpose over Proposal. If that's the case, wonderful. Fine. Keen-O. Brill. I'm glad you've found users who are happier with Unix than Windows. Thrilled even. I hope they are productive. I hope they accomplish many great things. I hope they find the golden peanut in their feces.
Me personally? I'd prefer not even run XWindows at all because I prefer the command line. But then, I'd say that Mice have only been mainstream for about HALF of the time that I've been using computers, and my first Mouse came with my first Amiga and I hated using it even then. The only reason I use KDE at all is because it would be a little difficult to use LICQ or GAIM without a GUI... perhaps not entirely impossible, but certainly not a pain I want to put myself through just to discovered how difficult it actually is.
For everything else graphics I need, I actually do prefer using Windows. I have a few stable set-ups, they do what I need, and for my desktop (and gaming) usage, Windows is simply a better platform. Yes. Windows is better at some things. Get over it.
For my web-server, coding, poking around, and generally beeing a geek -- Windows doesn't touch my FreeBSD machine.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
MSFT has grown to the point where free market alone won't fix the problem anymore. Whether it is just or not, the problem needs to be fixed by the authorities or doom is upon us.
Your solution "do something yourself" is naive and doesn't work because of the nature of software and the need for compatability (for most people/companies) with the 'de facto' standard. Some exceptions (like you and myself, running Linux or FreeBSD) don't influence the major market consisting of people who hardly have a realistic alternative to MS-Windows at the moment. Unless the government interferes, this can hardly change. Especially if MSFT is allowed to go to new levels of customer-lock-in practices with new stuff such as .NET.
Most open source luminaries (Torvalds, Perens, Redhat) disagree, and think that linux has more than a fighting chance on its own. That said, it wouldn't hurt to have a nice breakup (Preferably into 3 or more pieces. the 2 piece breakup is a sham, really).
When videogames are banned by Senator X and crypto is outlawed, make sure you've got this article bookmarked so you know who to blame.
Microsoft definitely needs to be taken down a notch or two, but this way? Do the ends really justify the means, or is it just this one time?
All this is is one corporation buying a politician to attack another corporation. Is this behavior acceptable this time simply because it's against The Great Satan?
Say Microsoft is taken down because AOL and Sun buy all of the politicians... then what? You thought Bill Gates was bad, imagine Steve Case and Scott McNealy with half of DC in their pockets. Yes Microsoft needs to be cut down a peg or three, but not like this. Do it with boycotts and public education. The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.
Yeah, and Ford has a monopoly on all cars made with a "Ford" logo.
If Apple ever gets 95% of the computer market, then you can call them a monopoly, and we'll debate if they're abusing it.
But expanding the definition of monopoly to include any company that builds something unique is to render the word "monopoly" a useless word. A monopoly is defined as a commodity that is controlled by one party characterized such that the demand for the product is generally inflexible compared to price. As Apple-watchers know, the inexpensive iMac is why Apple is still making computers today. If they had stuck with their deal of making insanely expensive computers, everyone would have switched to PCs. The fact that Apple is constrained -- that is, cannot double the price of their computers and still maintain the same volume -- shows they don't have a monopoly.
It's been already been determined by legal experts that Microsoft has a monopoly, so I don't think that's up for discussion any longer.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
No, replace "automobile manufacturers" with "an automobile manufacturer with 95% market share and almost-exclusive bundling agreements with cities that any roads that are built can only have their cars driving on them", ad then you've got a pretty good analogy.
Throw in that this "automobile manufacturer" won't let you buy a car; you have to lease it from them on a yearly basis. Plus, they recently made it so that the radio in the car will only play radio stations that they own. To play others' radio stations, you can go to AutoZone and install a device in your car to play others radio stations, but studies have shown that most people who know nothing about cars won't bother to do this.
Make those changes, and then you've got a pretty good analogy.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
And to the troll who suggested that Microsoft should be able to do anything they want: Microsoft has a monopoly. They can, on a whim, force companies to pay them money, even it means laying off employees: like when they tried to raise fees earlier this year but charitably gave a 6-month stay so companies could rebudget. They illegally attacked Java, fragmented it, and now refuse to support in XP. They forced Apple, a third company, to use their web browser or they would kill a completely unrelated product. This is not a company that you want to leave alone because they promise to be good.
It's time the US got as tough on them as they would on anyone who engages on illegal behavior.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
I think they should split off hardware, legal and marketing. We can call them MS-good, MS-bad and MS-ugly.
I say it's time for people who want new computers to insist on their choice of operating system. Dell and Gateway allow you to select the OS you want to run (for now, at least). For those more technically savvy, we can have a shop build the PC and not install an OS.
I am aware of the pressure M$ puts on PC resellers to inform them when a customer requests a PC with no OS pre-installed, in fact I am counting on it! I want to get a call from Microsoft about potential licensing problems since I refused to have their OS installed on my shiny new system. Then I can explain that I run Linux and *BSD instead of their crap.
Now that it's going to be in WinXP, it's a "compelling" feature. Guess this is another point for Petreley ("Nothing's been invented until MS implements it.")
after spending $$$millions on usability testing...
don't you mean making millions on usability testing? the way I see it, I've been paying to beta test for M$ since win3.1.
I don't want to beta test. I use linux.
Fish
I sent out an email a while ago to my family explaining why MS XP was bad news. I got several email replies from them thanking me, saying they'll think twice before bothering to upgrade. Then my brother emailed me and asked me to resend it so that he could forward the information on to some of his friends.
Do I think that my efforts alone will have any effect? No, of course not. But if a bunch of people get another bunch of people thinking about the issues that they can relate to on a level they understand, i.e. you may not have access to your computer applications and information you have stored on your computer if you use MS XP, and point to reputable sources that explain the issue, people will think twice. I believe that most people will act conservatively and not want to change what already works for them.
A court order may carry more weight when issued but they are also slowly determined and implemented and more often that not, too late to have any real effect. Grass-roots word-of-mouth can have a profound effect very quickly. Not saying it will or that it will have an effect overnight, just that it has the ability to do so.
Corporations can hire lawyers to keep the government or courts tied up until a product is released and then once it gains market share, the government or court order is too late; however, if consumers won't buy the product, there is nothing the corporation can do.
- tokengeekgrrl
I even bought my dad Neal Stephenson's In the beginning was the command line... so that he could better understand the open source vs proprietary debate.
I think if people are informed as to what they are getting into by people they know, they will not fall prey to MS's marketing machine and want to upgrade or purchase XP.
- tokengeekgrrl
Please oh please, with so many tech enthusiats here on /., please tell me *someone* knows where I can download a crusty old copy of Microsoft Bob. It is undeniably the greatest flop in the history of operating systems/environments, and I've been looking for a copy to situate on a VMware file or a partition right next to Windows 1.01, MS OS/2 Server 1.3, AT&T System V, and all the rest I've collected.
;-)
:-( Crappy reason, but that's how it goes. I just use what does the most, and since I love gaming, Win98SE currently does the most.
What can I say--I'm an ancient OS and old game enthusiast. So, with all the vast resources here, can anyone point me to the fabled Microsoft Bob? And no, a Google search yielded nada in the downloads department. Bob was too useless a program even for the Abandonware people to keep...
But to get back on topic, WinXP won't be a failure--it will bring the moderate stability of WinNT (which is more than enough for Joe and Jane Average) to the gaming compatibility of Win9x/DOS. It is bound to be a success, particularly since OEMs will start shipping most new PCs with it. Like it or not, XP will ship on time and it will have enough new features to get Joe Average jazzed. Remember that just because geeks like us can run cd burning apps, image managers, etc., doesn't mean that the average guy or gal can figure them out or wants to spend the time finding and configuring them--but if it comes with the OS and is dumbed down for the typical consumer, that's a different story. That's why both Apple and MS are integrating functions that traditionally belonged to external apps, into the OS.
And with all the OSes I have to choose from, I use Win98SE modified by 98lite. Not because it's better than anything else--it isn't--but because it runs more games.
The same will be true of WinXP when it comes out, and therefore it will be a success, like it or not. Pragmatism usually wins in the end, although idealism looks prettier.
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."--Tacitus, *The Annals*
when I read the following paragraph from the article:
"Windows has always been designed as an open platform that creates new business opportunities for many third parties, including some of our toughest competitors," Krumholtz wrote.
I suppose that explains their open api, their open standard for COM, their open file formats, etc. And here I guess I had them figure wrong all along.
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
Funny you should mention that... XML is directly descended from SGML (as is HTML), which was created as just such an information exchange device for the U.S. government. I'm just amused by the full-circle aspect of your point...
--Fesh
--Fesh
Kill -9 'em all, let root@localhost sort 'em out.
As much as you open source people hate it, windows XP is its own killer app, add Office suite to it and most people don't need to buy anything other than games for home use.
Most all the drivers people need are built into the OS, just plug in the hardware and it will work. There is CD burning software, zip software, i-net software, messaging software, word processor, basic drawing program, really any basic thing that you need. I hate that people get upset for a company building a product that does what people need. There is no more cost than win2k was so its not like they are even charging more for it. Maybe the result is evil because everyone uses windows but if its because its the product that does the most things well for people can you complain? Its like complaining that ford added more features to its automobile.
So anyways, my point is if you don't want to use windows don't, but advocating a governtment breakup just because the product is best is WRONG and ruins business in this nation.
"You can now flame me, I am full of love,"
XP is just Windows 2000 with themes and a few other insignificant changes, mostly cosmetic. There are a few bugfixes and more game compatibility is there, as well.
:D
There is no reason to say anything to XP that you couldn't say to Windows 2000. Sure, it might put Stardock (of WindowBlinds fame) out of business, but who gives a shit? Linux has had themes for a long time and nobody ever said that was evil
This Yankee has probably just realized that there's reason behind the antitrust case and wants to seem like he's leading the crusade instead of bandwagon-jumping when it's too late.
Sorry about the offtopic but take into consideration the fact that in the beginning there was no command line. Command line as an interface came much much much later. In the beginning there were hard wiring interfaces (seriously, people actually had to connect wires to change memory), then various switches, then the punch cards came along and then keyboards and printers and later monitors made possible to come up with an idea of a command line.
You can't handle the truth.
$50 million is not a lot of money for a company as rich as Microsoft.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
More on #1: A criminal hacker targetting a system could use the activation mechanism against a PC.
And #7. Potential for the US Gov't to get Microsoft to disable the PC of a "troublemaker" in real time.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Remember, copyrights and patents are NOT pro-free market. Monopolies enforced by law are not part of pure capitalism. Something a lot of extreme pro-capitialist cheerleaders forget.
Free market means free for all, not just free for those in power.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Pure capitalism requires
free (voluntary) trade
perfect information
no externalities
I'm a rabid advocate of free trade, because I'm a rabid advocate of liberty. But I can also see how the powerful abuse their power to enslave the weak, and would just as soon do so even more. Need I remind you of the DMCA? The history of the labor movement? These guys didn't just throw people in jail for tampering with their business models, they had people killed!
The cheerleaders for so-called "free market capitalism" really need to be out there campaigning for perfect information and eliminating unpriced externalities, but I don't see that happening much.
Microsoft is doing it again, but with Messenger, Windows Media Player, Photo printing services, and other technologies in XP.
Last I saw, OS X comes with CD buring software, a pretty decent movie maker, DVD authoring software, a decent mail client, and much more. Where do you draw the line? Microsoft can add all the value they want to their OS. The problem used to be that OEM's couldn't add/remove certain things. Now they can.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
The boycott, involving a simple refusal to upgrade to Windows XP, would probably have a great effect on what really bothers me, and that is MS foray into .NET. I think the Senator is talking about stuff like this, Windows Media Player 8, Windows Movie Maker, and Digital Photo Support...
.NET empire.
Here is some good "white-hat" FUD from zdnet (whom I always thought was somewhat of a lackey for MS, being descended from PC Magazine, but yay for them for speaking truth). A quote: Among the new features: an Internet firewall, an integrated media player with CD-burning and DVD-playback features, remote access tools, moviemaking and photo-editing software, wireless capabilities, broadband networking and Internet messaging.
The long list of new features potentially puts an even longer list of companies in Microsoft's crosshairs, including Adobe Systems, Apple Computer, AOL Time Warner, Corel, InterVideo, MGI, Netopia, Network Ice, RealNetworks, Roxio, Ulead, Zone Labs, Symantec and as many as 20 other companies.
Oh, and the article reminded me that XP seeks to reduce the quality of MP3's in half (how do they do that? I mean, isn't Winamp Winamp?), and that DVD's won't work with MS Media Player alone.
So, yah, boycott by not upgrading. I read somewhere that people are afraid to buy new boxen because they feel they will lose half their data and capabilities in the transition. Maybe they should be afraid to lose half their identity, their privacy, their rights, and quite possibly their mind (er, BSOD reference here) by upgrading themselves into the
SDMI: Finally! Music that won't rip or burn! Brought to you by the fine folks at RIAA.
Linux quite happily does raw sockets.
Just a thought...
"The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
Out of 4 rulings, the appeals court threw one out, sent two back to be entirely reconsidered, and upheld one.
Close, but no cigar. Out of the four original charges against Microsoft, Judge Jackson only found Microsoft guilty of three, and only those three were appealed (MS wasn't going to complain about it, and DOJ didn't bother to cross-appeal). Of the remaining three, the appeals court: reversed one (not the same thing as "throwing one out"); sent one back to be partially reconsidered (the existing trial record is kept intact, and there are limits on what further evidence may be introduced); and upheld one.
Hey, want to sell that Macintosh you aren't using?
I could always use another good machine around the house!
(x86 architecture need not apply, I have enough of those.)
Do you hate the platinum appearance theme, or do you hate MacOS 9? You can change the appearance of MacOS 9 to look like that of Aqua (yes, apple legal forced the themes to be pulled but I still have them.) And if it's the dock you like, you should check out A-Dock, which has the same functionality for OS 9.
If you hate Mac OS 9 and don't want to wait til september for X.1, sell me your Macintosh, no?
A host is a host from coast to coast, but no one uses a host that's close
err... like Mozilla's XPCOM or Gnome's Bonobo (heavily inspired by Microsoft's OLE2)
hang on, if winXP doesn't introduce any useful new features then how can it adversely affect microsoft's competitors?
I hate getting into these kinds of discussions where people say "have you tried this or this yet?" but in this case I can't help it.
Regarding hardware set up and control panels. Have you used Mandrake 8.0? It provides all of this and makes it even easier to use than windows IMO.
For example, my little cousin got a new video card. He wanted me to install it for him because he's lazy and doesn't want to learn anything, so I told him no. When he plugged the thing in Mandrake detected it on startup and even set X's resolution and bitdepth to something more comfortable (he only had an old 2MB cirrus logic so it was running at 800x600 8bpp. It re-configured X to run at 1024x768 16bpp).
The KDE control panel in Mandrake 8.0 also has added sections for configuring and detecting hardware after startup. The only thing I don't like is that a lot of the stuff appears even if you're not root, possibly confusing the user into thinking that he/she can muck with the settings when really they can't.
--
Garett
>Why? I found your comment informative and helpful.
Mainly because they usualy have to do with distro wars or KDE vs. GNOME stuff.
I'm waiting for the usual response from someone that goes "Yeah well RH this" or" "Debian that"...
--
Garett
If the "capitalist system" will survive on its own, maybe the government should stop interfering in interest rates, stop doing social engineering with taxes, stop building tax-supported infrastructure, stop providing national defense, stop regulating consumer safety in goods, as well as food and drugs, stop inspecting rental properties, stop subsidizing public education (which is why we have a workforce that can read and write), stop printing money to be used as a medium of exchange, stop enforcing contracts, stop imposing sanctions on infringements of "intellectual property" restrictions. I mean, this government interference. It's unthinkably horrible stuff, let's let private business just be private!
Is it any wonder why neo-socialists like Ralph Nader get more votes than libertarians? Could it be that most libertarians make no sense, whereas the socialists at least have an emotional appeal to people's better natures? Could it be that you may as well just call anarchy "anarchy" and be done with it? If the government does not exist to assist the public in regulating rogue citizens (like those that direct the activities of Microsoft-- after all, Microsoft does not exist without the people who work there) then what possible purpose does it serve?
The law that Microsoft has run afoul of is required to actually have capitalism work. When you have one company in a market you do not have a free market. At that point, since capitalism can't work, it is useful to have rules and regulations about just what is appropriate... and Microsoft got caught going beyond appropriate. They therefore forfeit their right to continue unimpeded.
I do not have a signature
I'm following this interesting thread and would like to point out that for RedHat 7.1, installing my HP Deskjet was as easy as plugging it in (USB) and running the printtool program. I can't remember if it detected the model for me or if I selected the model from a list. Either way, it was very simple and worked correctly the first time.
Keeping
Careful. It's not as cut and dry as that. Out of 4 rulings, the appeals court threw one out, sent two back to be entirely reconsidered, and upheld one. The one that was upheld had to with monopoly maintenance. For example, Microsoft gave OEMs large price incentives to sign their contract, which determined what the OEMs could and could not add to / remove from the desktop.
Regarding the bundling of software (one of the two being reconsidered), the appeals court noted, among other things, that the lower court may have overlooked the presence of an economic justification for such bundling. In other words, would it be a better deal (money, convenience, etc.) to the consumer to buy the two products together, rather than separately. This was sent back, partly because the lower court simply assumed there was no economic justification. The appeals court cited several examples, including: 1) decades ago, when starters begam to be sold as part of the car. 2) stain protection being sold built in to the carpet. In both of these cases, there was an economic justification, even though it may have diminished an existing market for the separate product. Bundling MSN messenger would likely fall under this category.As for the Kodak issue, it may not be the issue we think it is. The Wall Street Journal wrote a long article about this, making it sound like Microsoft would prevent Kodak's software from being able to run when a digital camera was plugged in. Near the end of the article, the writer finally noted that later betas of Windows XP do not do this. When the camera is plugged in, an alphabetical list of imaging programs is displayed, and the user chooses which one he/she wants to use. It's likely that many people would not have read that far. slashdot readers excluded, of course.
Donate background CPU time to fight cancer.
On one side I don't want the government stopping any os release because of possible anti-trust inplications. WHat can ms include in its os? Why should I have to pay for seperate products? What scares me even more is the possiblity of government regulation of Linux itself. For Example RedHat and Debian might have to cripple their own products because they might include software that might criple a competitor. After all, the arguement could be made that MertoX's X11 system and CDE would die because of free bundled alternatives. Redhat/debian both have XFree86 and kde which are free with their distro's. I don't have a high speed internet connection so if its all debundled then I am screwed. I don't want the government to take away my right to the communites right to innovate.
.net as the answer. Anyway what can and can't be included in a os? Sure I don't like the goverment involved but I am afraid of scared OEM's filling out abusive EULA's to cripple microsofts competitors.
.mpg movie file from the web and when you click on it a dialog box pops up asking you if MS passport can charge you $1.50 for using its media.net player! This kind of situation is what microsoft dreams of. After linux is crushed due to lack of drivers and no real competition in media players market, then you must click to play. When will it stop? Infact Microsoft's delaying its next windows os for next year called Windows.NET because of this hearing in the senate. What if you were charged every time you booted your computer? Or could your computer even boot without an active isp connection? No isp, no computer. Thats the windows.NET platform in all that its designed to be. Try to look at the hearing not as what comes with the os but why ms is doing this? They are doing this to kill competitors to screw you all over. Just look at the price of MS-OFFICE PRO for comparison. They almost gave it away in the mid 90's, then it goes up 3x in price, then its the same price for only one year and you must repay every year. For 3 years thats 3k, for a formal $275 product! After they takeover a market via bnulding they will then charge you every time to use it or debundle it and charge a fortune to use it seperately.
The other side is I have seen what happened to poor netscape. If netscape didn't die off I bet the internet would be a little bit different then today. The internets innovation accerlated when netscape was in control. Netscape was develoiping its own api's and way of internet centric programming. I bet ms saw this and created
Whats stopping microsoft for writting an EULA for a driver development kit that states "NO DEVELOPMENT UNDER VIRAL GPL LINUX OR X-11 SYSTEM"?
If this happens then linux is DEAD! No sound, no 3d graphics, NO NETWORK?
Shit, my guess is microsoft will use this and then the rent scheme will come to play after they takes over. Imagine this scenario?
You downloaded a
http://saveie6.com/
From the article...
AOL Time Warner (AOL: news, chart, profile) and Eastman Kodak (EK: news, chart, profile) are both based in New York.
Yup, he has seen the light, he has to protect home businesses. What do you think the probability that these companies lobbied this senator and convinced him to take action?
Normally, I don't reply to my own posts, but from the responses so far, I gather that the only good new features are ClearType (ripoff/who cares?) and the .NET framework (only good to MS programmer drones).
I must say that I am now very much compelled to upgrade. Riiiiiiiiight.
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
If XP were blocked, the computer industry might not recover at all this year.
It's not the duty of consumers to prop up criminal monopolies or support a business sector that isn't innovating and providing products that are actually useful. Period.
Heck, we need a break from "Upgrade-itis" anyway. :)
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
Trolls throughout history:
Trolls throughout history:
Jonathan Swift
That's why they don't start actual prosecution until they have enough of the evidence. They can't get an indictment and possibly even bail, you walk. That's what innocent until proven guilty means.
Not being completely sure of your nationality, this may not be the operative principle of your legal system (most European legal systems, for instance, build at least a slight presumption of guilt into the process), but it is the principle of the American legal system, and is therefore the only principle relevant to the Microsoft antitrust case.
Which has no bearing on whether or not Windows was to be made a closed system (the debate in the posts preceding yours). If making a closed system were illegal, then Apple would be guilty of this.
Playing devil's advocate, and putting on me flame-proof jacket, I honestly wonder how people can attack Microsoft for putting IE into the operating system and defend Apple for putting iTunes as a standard part of many Macintoshes.
The precedent that is set by deeming stunts such as bundling IE is ludicrous. This implies that adding any feature to your product, if it was previously considered an add-on, is anticompetitive. For instance:
- Any 2-D card maker that came out with a 2-D/3-D card was behaving in an anti-competitive manner to 3Dfx, because it obviated the need for a separate 3-D card.
- When WordPerfect integrated a grammar checker into its software, it destroyed the market for other grammar checkers.
- Netscape, by bundling an email client with the web browser, reduced the need for a sepearate program.
- Most Linux distributions (at least of the boxed variety) contain a commercial web browser, namely Netscape 4.x. However, a demonstrably superior commercial browser (Opera) has yet to be included (as far as I know) with any distribution that includes Netscape. This is the exact analog of the IE-bundling issue.
- When TVs started integrating cable tuners, thus hurting the market for Scientific Atlanta et al, was this considered illegal? No, it wasn't.
The ultimate problem that I have with considering IE to be an antitrust violation is this: the makeup of software packages then becomes an issue in which the government now has near-veto power over.Ultimately, and it pains me to say this, in the name of Software Freedom, the Microsoft IE debate must be opposed.
That said, I do think Microsoft has behaved in an openly anticompetitive manner (especially regarding OEM licensing and such).
I'm no lawyer. I'm no expert in USA Law. I'm not even an american.
That being said, lemme tell you why I don't think that is the case.
When MacOS X started shipping, there was no native program for it that did these functions (at least, not a single one branded MacOS X compatible). So, not including this set of tools would cause many potential users don't buy it couse they would not have the software to do these tasks (sure, just wait a few months til someone else creates the software you want). So, it was not hurting competition, nor imposing a monopoly.
---
morcego
Just FYI: Apple's default applications (iTunes, iMovie, QuickTime, etc) are installed with the OS, although I think a few of them can be turned off during installation (although not all).
However, beyond that point, choice is indeed the operative word, as there is nothing binding between the operating system and the programs. I easily removed internet explorer and replaced it with omniweb on OS X, and replaced iTunes with Audion as my default mp3 player. No problem at all, and no need for re-installation. No jumping through loops to get the job done either.
Now, some can say "it doesnt matter, because Apple isnt a monopoly" but I disagree. Bad behavior is bad behavior, regardless of who does it. I know that in a legal sense, the laws may see it differently, but I personally am more interested about what I am able to do, rather than what the company is legally able to do.
In my opinion, Apple does a good job with their bundled software in that they make it available to anyone who uses their OS, but they don't crap it down their throats like MS does, or bind them directly into the system the way Windows does.
It sounds as though Linux follows pretty much the same route, so I don't really see there being a conflict of ideologies in this -particular- regard.
I don't know about all the legal niceties involved, but this smells to me like the type of prior restraint that is endangering programmers who crack encryption, DVD copy-protection, etc etc. Microsoft's side is the free-speech side in this case, methinks.
Careful. It's not as cut and dry as that. Out of 4 rulings, the appeals court threw one out, sent two back to be entirely reconsidered, and upheld one. The one that was upheld had to with monopoly maintenance. For example, Microsoft gave OEMs large price incentives to sign their contract, which determined what the OEMs could and could not add to / remove from the desktop.
You are correct, and this is my point exactly. This case has not been completely decided yet. But Microsoft is allowed to continue on without restriction or scrutiny while the new judges try to figured out what exactly happed here.
If I am a notorious cat burgler, (A Digital Big Pussy if you will), I have been hunted and chased for many years and finally the authorities gets enough clues to prosecute me. Let's say they found forenesic traces of a material at the crime scene that points to me as the perpetrator. If you combine this other trace evidence they found, it makes me look pretty guilty. I'm probably the culprit but a few more forensic details have to be worked out before the prosecution can continue foward.
While the details are being hash out by the legal beagles. Imagine now that I am left by the authroties to continue freely without being followed on scrutizeded at all any further. Well, my first motivation would be to clean up my trail as quietly as possible. Frame other burglers,put forenisc evidence in other un robbed museums. I then learn from my past mistakes when I got caught and improve my skills in the art of thievery dramtically. Now I leave fake art behind when I steal . My victoms don't even know they are being robbed. I used new tools and steal differnet types of art. By the time the lawyers figiure out what happened, I will have covered my tracks and implemented new methods of covering my tracks.
If my activities were restrained and watched during these procedings I won't have much of a chance to do any of this. Unless the authorties didn't understand the nature of my tactics in the first place. It looks greek to me! press on! nothing to see here!
Another experienced magician can figure out how the others tricks are performed.
Two Towers-Two Worlds.One seeks triumphs and freedom for man.The other deems man unworthy and wrecks them.
Microsoft is guilty. Why should they be allowed to morph thier guilty product during an appeal?
It's like the justic department is saying'I know your are guilty of making a product to enhance your monopoly but it's okay to keep selling it and improving your monopoly position while we decice how punish you." HELLO! "Yes, are a mass murderer and are guilty. You may still practice and improving your murdering skills while we decide what to do with you." Am I off base here?
Two Towers-Two Worlds.One seeks triumphs and freedom for man.The other deems man unworthy and wrecks them.
Sad to say boys, but you've all forgotten that Windows BELONGS to Microsoft and they have every right to make it as closed a platform as they'd like.
Actually, no, the courts say they don't. If they want that right, they should do business in a different country. You may argue whether anti-trust law is a good idea, but we do have it here in the US, they are violating it, and I don't think that we're looking at civil disobedience on Microsoft's part here -- just good old-fashioned megalomania.
I don't believe that the government should have a say in how companies go about doing their business.
Really? Should businesses be able to engage in libelous advertising? Pollute indiscriminately? Kill people who protest their actions? Can them and sell them as food? Where do you draw the line?
The whole point of having a government is to set up a power structure to compete with the power structure of business -- I think it was Jefferson (?) who talked about government balancing the "monied interests". We should be very careful when we limit the freedom of corporations, but we should still be willing to do it.
of course. let's hardwire our os to only run our software. see you get *more* choices. remember that less = more!
in other news, i found this commercial that scares the living daylights out of me. You'll see why.
Got Freedom?
Thinking?
This is not a direct benefit to consumers and is a protectionist action on behalf of other corporations located in NYS, like Kodak.
Perhaps someone should point out to Sen. Schumer that the consumer edition of XP will include a remote deactivation backdoor placed in the OS by Microsoft that could be used to leverage their monopoly position to force users into unnecessary upgrades at Microsoft's whim.
Considering Microsoft's "stellar" security record, even Sen. Schumer should be able comprehend the danger of having a backdoor capable of deactivating your OS in so many voter... err... users machines...
It won't apply unless one of these other OS's becomes a monopoly. People forget that U.S. law puts monopolies in a special category that's different from other enterprises. The government is not arbitrarily picking on some random business for being too successful.
If they really want to continue to practice their current hardball business tactics (which are legal for you and me, but illegal for monopolies), nobody is stopping them from voluntarily splitting themselves up into independent non-monopoly corporations. These entities could compete and "innovate" as hard as they please. Otherwise, they should either stop their illegal actions, or lobby to get the laws changed ASAP.
Read the findings of fact from U.S. v. Microsoft. Microsoft, in an attempt to prevent IBM from shipping Lotus SmartSuite with their computers, conducted an audit, and refused to license Windows 95 to IBM until the audit was resolved. The story begins at paragraph 115. In paragraph 125 we see that Microsoft extorted $31 million from IBM.
Maybe you should all send him a email to apologize and ask him if he's feeling all right...
The senator isn't the only one seeking injunction .... this CNet article indicates that InterTrust is also seeking injunction in addition to their lawsuit against MS.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
But what if Microsoft were to flounder? Does the open-source crowd really want that?
The wintel gravy train is responsible for affordable i386-based hardware. Compare Wintel to the only existing equivalent: Apple. (though we all still shed bitter tears now and then for the ill-fated Amiga) Years after PCs broke the sub-$1000 market, Apple is still catering to moneyed non-geeks (How many rich, non-geek kernel coders are there?). Windows should be seen as a boon to the efforts of the open-source movement if the basic precepts of OSS are true: namely, that OSS products will steadily, inexorably improve until they eclipse Windows in its own market space, on the same hardware. Until that happens, Microsoft is keeping the hardware cheap by putting it in the hands of non-geek consumers. I say, go forth, XP, and further fuel the demand that keeps Moore's Law happening!
Imagine a world where Windows hasn't beaten the Mac and Apple has been running the show all this time. Motorola/MacOS is still slower and more expensive than the wintel platform. Without independant hardware vendors releasing specs, development on the Linux drivers would be much slower. Also, think of all the geeks who have had access to a pseudo-unix command line all this time, and especially before 1995. There are certainly other factors I'm not thinking of as well.
I know I'm jumping into the furnace when I say so, but Windows should be acknowledged at least for its place in making cheap computers economically viable.
If people think XP is worth their money, they will buy it, regardless of the miniscule effect their individual purchase has on microsoft's behaviour. Boycotts assume that people, in mass, will behave in an altruistic "for the good of everyone" way, and that has been demonstrated time and again to not be reality.
What does Schumer get out of this?
1)"points" against the pro-business bush republicans.
2)"points" in his own state politically, especially for sticking up for Eastman Kodak. Kodak has been hurting recently, and also happens to lie in a somewhat Republican-leaning Rochester area - an area that relies a little too heavily on Kodak.
So, somewhat ironically, scores partisan points within the Democratic party for being anti-bush (anti-bush == anti-microsoft) while perhaps winning a few republicans in UpstateNY because he's sticking up for their company.
think about it, Almost all microsoft products have been delayed due to one reason or another. Now assuming that the injunction happens Microsoft has a reason why XP is delayed (and they can continue to get rid of last minute bugs!) while still saving their image saying that "We were delayed because of the court injunction".