Slashdot Mirror
Dan Gillmor on WinXP
A reader writes:There's a new column from Dan Gillmor on SiliconValley.com about Windows XP. The column calls for an injunction stopping the shipping of WinXP. Dan's got a well thought out list of reasons why and how it would work."
Let Microsoft spend all that cash on their uber-marketing campain. Then pass the injuction. :-)
MS has listened to those people and has removed their OWN JVM from the OS. Fair deal, right?
I guess not. Now there is NO JVM bundled with the OS and it's again foul play? What do you want then? bundling/integration or unbundling/not integration?
Java is not their tech. They can include whatever they please with their OS. Last time I checked, Sun isn't shipping their Solaris product with IE either.
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
wtf? could you at least give it a little time before making an ass of them, you anonymous fuckwad?
Doesn't Dan Gillmor look like the father from Different Strokes. Nice to see he's doing something useful after all these years.
/. rock
I can't believe there are beowulf trolls that don't even know what they're talking about. I take that back, I can. But you should really have a look at the beowulf faq anyway.
"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance" - Derek Bok
Some of us actually LIKE using it. Don't get me wrong, I can think of a half dozen better OS's than Windows, technically speaking. But as I am FORCED to use Windows for work during the day, Windows XP is -- bar none -- the best Windows OS. I've been using XP since beta 2, now at RC2. It's crashed perhaps 3 times, and I use it non-stop during the day. I rarely have to reboot it.
Posting anonymously so that I don't feel the WRATH. (Just pretend you see the +2 Karma points.)
The greatest trick the Devil ever did was to convince everyone he didn't even exist. The greatest scam the corporations have pulled off was to convince the consumers that they could actually effect the rise or fall of a major company by "voting with their wallets".
The sad truth is that a) the better product doesn't necessarily win the competition and b) when a company grows big enough it doesn't need to pander its clients anymore and can dictate all the terms it wants instead (the largest companies can tell governments what to do!).
1-It's what is left over when macrobugs squeezes your head till it pops, just like a pimple. Look at it sideways. 2-eXtra Pungent, rotten to the core. 3-the death of consumer choice. Ya I know I can just refuse to use it but I got a feeling that my linux will have a hard time working on a MS internet. 4-something you don't need, don't want and have no use for. 5- xp shortform for the command fdisk, works everytime. 6- You have been assimilated. Resistance was futile.
The whole problem is that Microsoft aren't fighting on grounds of which OS is best. They're doing everything possible to avoid that, since they'd lose. The court cases are to prevent Microsoft from using unfair tactics to reinforce their monopoly.
I don't want to come across as one of the "everything /. posts about MS is biased" crowd, so I won't comment on the decision to post this. However, some of the points in the article made me laugh.
.NET. Their attempts to do something with Java, rightly or wrongly, resulted in them getting their wrists slapped. No-one at MS that I've talked to really cares that much about Java. So why should they include it?
Microsoft has added ''code-signing'' measures -- verification, supposedly, that downloads will be safe -- that could scare customers away from using software that competes with Microsoft's offerings.
How do you spell FUD? This is just silly. Microsoft have added code-signing (which I thought had been around a while) - which they could use to scare people away? How? I suppose they could do something by only allowing MS code to get signed or something, but that's pretty damn unlikely. The idea is that you can be certain where the code has come from, and then it is up to you to decide whether you trust it. Microsoft add *no* commentary on whether they think you should trust it or not, and to assume they will do is just paranoia.
Microsoft removed the Java environment from XP, thereby breaking thousands of Web sites that use Java. XP customers will face endless downloads to replace the functionality they'd come to expect.
While I'd rather the JVM was still in XP (but I hadn't noticed it was gone, will check that tonight when I get home), I don't feel any anger towards Microsoft for removing it. They have a competing platform, in
Microsoft is bundling all kinds of services into XP in ways that block competition, from photography software to video/audio playback. If customers want to use other vendors' products they'll have to jump through Microsoft-designed hoops
Slightly more questionable this. But I do like having ZIP folders natively as part of Explorer. But I've never had any problems with replacing functionality with the alternatives. I am an *informed* user. It is my business as a user to remain informed, and to make the choices that are right for me.
I could go on, and the article makes points about the OEM market that do sound pretty worrying to me. But all this article does is regurgitate some of the common fears and rumours surrounding XP, without *any* real and substantial justification of this strange injunction idea. I agree with authentication of XP, since you can control what is being posted, and I don't think piracy is good. I haven't had to use my Passport once, and I've been using XP since Beta 1 (as in never - have never even typed in the password).
I guess I just don't understand why people are making such a noise about fairly minor complaints. My cynical side is telling me that it's indicative of a jealousy of success, but I don't think that's always the case.
Henry
i don't do sigs. oops.
You're wrong.
MS can still ship Java. They can still use Java.
They just can't take Java, make changes to it so that it's incompatable with real Java, and continue to call it Java.
What, you just look crude to Europe? What about:
Cuba
Iran
Iraq
Australia
Japan
China
Turkey
India
??
Fair go, not only do you look crude, but America tends to be far too concerned about itself, jingoistic and indignant than most Europeans I know!
It seems to me like people are continuing to attack the Microsoft problem from the supply side, as if there was no demand for the Microsoft products. There are a few problems as I can see with the current approach to fixing the MS problem:
(1) People use Microsoft because it is what they know, not because it is the only thing out on the market. The time investment required to learn to use software is a *real* investment. So, in my opinion, one of the keys to competing against Microsoft is to lower the cost (in time) of learning to use your product. In other words, make Linux "look and feel" exactly like Windows -- control panels and all -- and more people will probably switch. I know this is painful, but it works. Just ask Apple.
(2) People use Microsoft because it is the only thing that they have used. In other words, Windows comes pre-installed on most new hardware. However, demand for Linux-based machines is so small that even devotees like Dell have been forced to drop the offering. Perhaps if we accomplished (1) we might fare better in combatting (2).
(3) People use Microsoft Windows because other people use Microsoft Windows. This is known in economics as a network externality, and there is no way to battle against this with injunctions against future sales. Over 80% (perhaps more) of the world's computers currently run some windows-type OS, which has obvious effects on the number of software packages available and on people's propensity to buy. We would need a task force set up to sneak into people's homes to install other operating systems in order for injunctions to work.
Anyway, the point is that the nature of software encourages monopolies, so there is really no way to get rid of them (especially not with injunctions). No matter what product it is, it will feature high barriers to entry, network externalities, etc... the real question is whether the monopoly hurts consumers, not whether the monopoly should exist. And if it does hurt consumers, then how do we fix the problem. An injunction presumes the former, and does nothing toward the latter.
w o r l d w i d e w e b e r
The software industry, the hardware industry and the users. The software industry isn't enthusiastic about having more capabilities bundled into wXP since that's less that they get to provide. The hardware industry, at this particular point in time, would welcome anything that would help move hardware through the channels. The users would welcome more capability in their OS, bundling if you will, and a more reliable platform which wXP provides.
So 2/3rds of the "industry" would not want wXP delayed. Those that see themselves as competitors to Microsoft and who spend so much time, it seems, bashing Microsoft (which is, face it, an easy target in some circles) rather than thinking about how they can improve their own offerings would want wXP delayed since it appears to be an excellent product.
With my "user" hat firmly in place, I have no sympathy with the software industry trying to compete in court rather than in the marketplace.
The case isn't really about trying to help another OS establish itself in the market. Indeed, Microsoft has every right to have a monopoly position in any particular market. What they don't have the right to do is to use that monopoly position to aquire market share in another market. While the fact remains that MS has a desktop OS monopoly, they have the ability to prevent other companies from fighting it out in the marketplace, and from their claims to manufactorers that DRDOS wouldn't work with Windows to their refusal to license Windows95 to IBM unless IBM stopped putting their own OS on machines as well (with the actual phrase "who else are you going to go to? We're the only game in town." being used in one communication submitted as evidence during the trial) to using preditory pricing on their Internet browser and then bundling it as an included application in their os to the current efforts to include everything from firewall software to video editing software, that (using their desktop monopoly to prevent other companies from fighting it out in the marketplace) is exactly what they've done and continue to do.
That's what the case is about, and why even an appeals court that has shown itself to be very pro-marketplace upheld the full verdict of guilty.
"Why should they be expected in include the VM if they don't have any control over it."
So by extension, why should they include anything in the OS if they don't have control over it?
I am sure they would love to have proprietary versions of TCP/IP, DNS, and SMTP, but at the moment they do not have any control over these things, and yet the OS still supports it.
Why should a JVM be any different?
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
wow, didn't realize MS made a single perfectly safe product. let's see, there's the whole office suite, with macro viruses up the ass and sideways.
then there's the win9x series of OS'es, which put you online in the goatse.cx position, ready for action.
oh yeah, about outlook, i think it might be vunerable, but i forgot how exactly. i think i might have read it at Gibson's site..... something about viruses.
then there is crap like code red, designed to go after MS servers.....
MS has a really bad track record behind it. they have a large, intelligent computer geek base who hates them, as well as some of the crappiest security/coding in the business.
i think the last quality MS product i used was scandisk.exe for DOS. now that was a nice little program.
That will never happen. It has been said multiple times here and elsewhere that there are no plans for OSX to run on x86 hardware.
Gee, if Microsoft can't sell Windows XP maybe SGI should release IRIX for x86. Something to think about SGI...
But who cares about facts when you are a silicon valley journalist and your readers will suck up anything thats anti-Microsoft even if it is utter lies.
The guy sounds like he wants to be the Rush Limbaugh of the tech sector. I guess next we will be hearing how Microsoft own the media and negative views of microsoft can never be heard.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Sun simply told Microsoft that Java would NOT be "embraced and extended", that their Java tools had to be compatible with the standards Sun set. Microsoft got pissy about not being able to make an MS Java that was only compatible with windows (forcing companies to block out other OSs or code more because most internet users are windows Users) and decided to come up with C# to kill Java. Suprised that all the Java programmers did not instantly flock to C# (after all it IS made by MS) they decided to take all Java support out of XP and force a large download for users that want Java. MS hopes this move will for webpage designers to use MS langauges rather than Java, thus accomplishign the same objective they had before....stop other OS users from using the web effectively.
"
This has been said before and I'll say it again: Microsoft has been found guilty. They've been breaking the law and they are still breaking a law. This means that they should be punished.
I am not really sure whether this MS break-up would do any good, but I think I would rather see WinXP delayed by the US goverment and MS forced to alter WinXP. I'm all for WinXP, as long as it doesn't have Product Activation and Passport and as long as I can choose whether I want to install WMP 8, MSN Messenger, MSIE during the actual installation of the OS. Although it would be "OK" if I could actually remove all these components after the installation without breaking anything.
And don't start telling me that "Microsoft is a private company! Nobody has business telling MS how to make their products!" and all that BS. That statement would be correct if MS didn't break the law, which they did. At this point, the goverment HAS to do something to the way MS makes their products.
I just hope they just won't sit on their asses and will actually DO SOMETHING, before WinXP gets out of the door...It was scheduled to go RTM when ? On 27th of August ? Little time left...
naw. had it for like an hour, then got one comment modded down, and lost it. then there was some time that I didn't even care, so I lost more. I'm gettin' back there, though.
What gives Microsoft and other companies like them their power isn't so much a monopoly as the fact that they take advantage of ignorance. Those of us who are somewhat knowledgable about computers can see the problems with Microsoft and their practices. However, the average Joe Blow doesn't know or care that there are better alternatives. They buy their computer and turn it on and use what they're given. They don't want to bother downloading or installing new stuff. They just want it to work.
Microsoft and AOL know this and use this to their advantage. Thus, as long as Microsoft is the defacto OS, they can use the ignorance to their advantage. The normal customer doesn't realize what they're missing, and in most cases they don't really care. The savvy ones can always find ways around MS's control, but we're not the majority of Windows users. Only when the government steps in will MS be called into check, since the populous on whole has demonstrated a particular apathy to the situation.
This whole issue with XP will demonstrate once and for all if our government really supports the people or not. If nothing is done and XP goes to market as is, it will be obvious that Congress is nothing more than pawns for the mega corporations like Microsoft and AOL Time Warner. This will be a sad day in America, for we will be witness to the beginnings of the coporate government culture so many writers have predicted.
Electronic Frontier Foundation for online civil rights information
That sounds fine, but it won't work. I hate to say it, but most people are really stupid. Have you ever talked to a layman about the problems with XP, and watched their eyes glaze over. No, people will buy PCs with XP and not know any better. They will all sign up on passport and that will be that. I fear that a law protecting the common public is in order here.
We as the Tech savy should take it up and inform as many people as we can about XP and the evil that it is. But again, the public at large will eat it up. And the Linux freaks might just make matters worse. Remember most people still don't understand what the DOJ case is about.
I can just picture a strategy meeting deep inside MS headquarters ....
Bill - "gentlemen, how can we rake in even more money for next year? I want to buy Russia and parts of Africa and turn them into a giant water-park for my kid"
Lackey Marketing Yes Man - "ummmm how about we start deciding what's best for users, make them call us every time they add new hardware to their system or try to reinstall the OS, automatically redirect their web links to places WE want them to go, and remove stuff that people have come to expect in an OS to make their lives even harder!"
Bill - "I like it!"
They're never going to learn that they can't have it all. Every time someone trys to win at their game they just change the rules and hope no one notices. I have hopes that XP will more stable and easier to use than previous versions of windows, but all these new "enahncements" are making me think twice.
You obviously don't realise: SDEM is a troll. You've just been trolled. Asshole.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
The Ideal Windows XP
No Internet Explorer It stifles competition. People can download the browser of their choice.
Java Plugin Loaded Windows XP should support Java out of the box so that people do not have to download it.
No MSN Icon on the Desktop Windows XP is already one Microsoft Product. They cannot use it to 'push' other products they produce.
AOL Icon on the Desktop AOL Time Warner should have a right to advertise on and windows desktop. After all they are not Microsoft.
Passport should be removed If people want a crappy free e-mail account or Instant Messaging they should refer to the above AOL Icon on their desktop.
Code-Signing is bad Microsoft should not be allowed to tell people what drivers/software have been proven to run under windows xp. They can find this out on their own.
Windows Activation Microsoft has no right to attempt to stop piracy. After all piracy much like death is inevetible. Any attempts to prolong life.. err I mean stop piracy should be stopped.
In conclusion I also feel that the word Microsoft should be removed from WindowsXP. After all it's just an operating system. Obviously the internet is much more important therefore WindowsXP should be labeled accordingly as AOL Time Warner Windows XP.
But on your point about the best product not winning, I think you need to look at it from another perspective. The product that succeeds in the marketplace is by definition the best product.
I think this is where slashdot readers go wrong. They are so full of indignant moral outrage, they cannot see the fact that for most Americans, Microsoft make the best software.
The reason Micro$oft removed Java from XP was because they weren't allowed to "extend" Java with thier own incompatible extensions. The court ruling would have make Microsoft support Sun's java implementation. Rather than support an open standard, they have decided to try and kill java. Thier strategy will probably work as well.
return 0; }
eXtra Price
While I agree with the article's author that Microsoft's motives are specifically to damage Java's hold on the market, I agree with your underlying point that they have every right *not* to include anything they don't care to include. I think I remember correctly, however, that the Sun-Microsoft settlement only required that any MS Java runtime system conform to the definitions Sun has set out, something MS's early attempts did not do. MS has chosen to produce such a Java Runtime for the last couple years, and has now chosen to stop doing so.
While this is, of course, designed to harm Java, I rather agree with the position of... umm... maybe it was Stallman, but I forget exactly, that this could actually be good for Java if machine makers take the very reasonable step of installing Sun's JRE for Windows with all of their units. It would be a nice value add (like including all of the other stuff that's often included on PCs these days) that would cost nothing and actually be more useful to their customers than the 3 different photo-album programs typically included on a new retail machine. This way, every shipment of XP would either a: come with a standardized Java runtime from Sun or b: be purchaced by someone comfortable installing or upgrading an OS, who won't mind downloading it herself.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
a way to beat anything that is thrown at it. I dont know if we will be able to ever beat them by using the legal system. They have to many lawyers searching for ways to stall things so that by the time they do get into court, the item is already obsolete. Look at the whole Netscape IE thing. By the time the court ruled they were a monopoly Netscape had shrunk to about 15% market share. And now the appeal has gone there way (somewhat) and the next judgement will not be heard for years. The legal system is to slow. We will beat them by making a better product. They seem to find ways to shoot themselvs in the foot, look at all of the bugs in IIS. I think the legal system is a waste when it comes to microsoft. XP will ship on time, I would bet on it. But we will have a better desktop OS in about a year or two (would be sooner if KDE and GNOME could work things out) and we already have a better, more stable server OS.
"If ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people in the world?"
Actually they frequently do if the the crime was a white collar crime.
"If there is nothing you are willing to die for, then you are not really alive." Myself
Let them release their software and maybe, just maybe, people will finally see through Microsoft's PR smoke screen and refuse to buy it. Or if they get it in a bundle with their new computer, refuse to use it because of all the hoops Microsoft makes them jump through (what, this new OS I bought won't let me trade MP3s? Who the hell do these Microsoft people think they are?!). Maybe this is wishful thinking, but I still hope that at some point consumers themselves will get tired of being herded like cattle and start making their own decisions. Damn, *this* would be a good time for a x86 port of MacOS X...
..but personally, I could never support a court injunction preventing a company from shipping their product. Isn't this a little like Dmitri being arrested for the "innovation" that he did? I think that the day that we allow the government to keep a perfectly safe product from shipping is the day that we have finally undermined all our principles of capitalism and the free market.
The only problem with that is that in the findings of fact, it was found that Microsoft had abused their monopoly position. While it is not illegal to be a monopoly. It is illegal to abuse that power. The time that it takes for a court case to go from findings, to sentance, through all the appeals is just too long. If Microsoft is allowed to continue business as normal until the appeal process is over, any punishment given will be worthless. The punishment will fit the situation as it exists now, and will not be appropriate for the new sitution.
Warning, cape does not enable user to fly
Hey SDEM, since when were you trolling without your +1? Moderators finally catch wind of you?
I'm astounded that Apple hasn't gone down that path. With the name recognition of "Apple" and the developer pool for *BSD, as well as commercial giants like Microsoft and Adobe, OS-X on the PC could definately compete. However, one would have to think that those hundreds of millions of dollars Microsoft invested in Apple came at a high cost....
The argument that code signing is bad is entirely specious. I don't know how many times I've messed up my own machines by installing beta hardware drivers. Fortunately, I have the knowledge to fix it. My clients on the other hand call me :)
All code signing does is warn the user (earlier versions actually blocked the install and I believe that can be set for enterprise use) of the potential consequences of their actions and recommend they check the vendors web site. Click install anyway and you're set to go. You can knock Windows compatibility testing all you want (slow, expensive, somewhat pointless come to mind) but when you see the garbage that many second and third tier hardware vendors produce without it its a long time coming.
Real must have gotten used to Microsoft pushing Media Player by this point -- I doubt Photoshop is quaking at a souped up Microsoft Paint. In former years, we called the arduous hoops competitors had to jump through to compete against these powerhouses software installation.
Dan Gillmor needs to stick with the key arguments (how online registration will be enforced, Java, Passport) and quit trying to pad his laundry list.
That means fourth (or fifth) post.
If there is an OS out there that is actually better than XP, let it fight it out in the marketplace. This is the USA after all.
I hate microsoft products, but I use them all the time. This is because at this moment in the development of the information revolution, they are the best tools for the job.
If there is a better alternative, I am sure American consumers will vote with their wallets as they always have done.
Surely the last thing we need is for the lawyers($$$) to get involved ?
Java may not be in the shipping version (beta)
of Windows XP. But it is one of the first
choices of things to install for IE from
Windows Update.
Also, as I understand, if IE detects a page that
has Java, and has not already installed support,
it can prompt the user to install it at that time.
Just like support for flash, shockwave, and other
plugin technologies works. So I don't see this
breaking Java functionality for the Web.
Where this might have an impact is for Java
applications that are written in-house, or
to be run without the browser. In which case
the user is probably better off trying to install
the latest compliant Java engine anyway.
- Say something in any way pro-microsoft: get modded up by the windows posse, modded down by the linux zealots.
- Say something in any way anti-microsoft: get modded down by the windows posse, up by the linux zealots.
- Say something pro-linux: get modded up by the linux zealots, ignored by everyone else.
- Say something anti-linux: get flamed to death by the linux zealots, probably get ignored by everyone else.
- Say something pro-conservative: get modded up by the Loyal Repuplicans, down by the liberals.
- Say something pro-liberal: get modded up by the liberals, get flamed to death by the Republicans.
Notice a pattern?According to the Register in this article from yesterday, the DOJ tried to get the case expedited for the purpose of getting said injunction, but was denied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
If Microsoft is going to get told not to ship WinXP... This would be the perfect chance for Apple to release osX on x86 hardware. Something to think about Apple...
I think they should have stepped in to block the release of Quake 2 without deathmatch maps. Now *that* was a travesty.
Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
What MS is failing to do is give te consumers ability to use a different program for in a lot of cases. Getting those other programs to be the default for the formats I want took hell.
Apple has already provided QuickTime within OS-X, so MS could make the argument 'Why isn't Apple being tortured?' Because QuickTime will allow another program to use it's formats. If MS would recognize that, then MS would still be the pet peeve they are, just not on the audio/video front.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
And I get soooo tired of all of the crackheads that think Microsoft does no wrong. Microsoft is the single most influential organization in the history of the world, outside of the Roman Catholic church and some governments. Everything they say or do can and should be subject to intense scrutiny. They are a convicted monopoly that shows no remorse and by all indications every has intention to continue and accelerate their monopolistic behavior. Contrary to some misguided fools beliefs, Microsoft does not have any desire to do anything for the benefit of the consumer. They will provide such features as will allow them to continue to extend the reach and grasp of their monopoly. Make no mistake Microsoft has only one intent. That intent is that eventually every bit of information in the world be created, evaluated, and used by, for, and with Microsoft products.
"If there is nothing you are willing to die for, then you are not really alive." Myself
Intervening in Microsoft's business practices, while it may give the suffering Microserfs some kind of satisfaction, won't really solve anything, and it certainly sets a bad precedent. Personally, I don't see what everyone's complaining about. I use Linux on a daily basis, and I certainly have seen nothing that would drive me back into the waiting arms of M$. We have a great operating system, what is everyone so scared of M$ for?
Is your company running tools written by ma
Just to save some time, I'm listing all the standard rebuttals that go with any Microsoft monopoly story. Please pick one:
( ) Oh, great, now every company is going to have to ask the government's permission before they add any new features
( ) Why does the government want to punish any company when they become successful? Sun, Netscape, Apple, Kodak, etc. are all just jealous of Microsoft's success
( ) If you don't like Windows, DON'T use it! It's not like their forcing you to use it
( ) I'm not a big Microsoft supporter or anything, but I like how they're giving me free stuff. Do we really want the government to force us to pay more for stuff Microsoft wants to give us for free?
( ) Oh, yeah, well Apple has a monopoly on PowerPC-based Macs as well. Try to buy a Mac without Apple's OS and see who REALLY has a monopoly
And to save time for the moderators, here are the mod points: Moderation totals: Troll=1, Flamebait=1, Redundant=1
On a completely unrelated note, remember the story that the LA Times reported back in 1998 where Microsoft "was secretly been planning a massive media campaign designed to influence state investigators by creating the appearance of a groundswell of public support for the company"? Every time I read the same tired arguments as above, I can't help but think about that story.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
I do. My mom doesn't know it exists. My dad is pretty sure it's just a myth. My older brother does. My little brother doesn't. My professors got frustrated with the .005k/sec download rates and don't even bother. The head of my school's computer center couldn't be bothered to. My other roommate does. My neighbour couldn't figure out how to work the damn thing.
Common strain among all of us who do? We're *NOT* in Microsoft's target market for XP, and are the kinds of people who are still using Win95 if we can get away with it, and paid for the triple-digit-price-tag-driver-update that Win98 is if we happened to have a use for USB.
Whatever anyone thinks morally about WinXP including java support, I see this more as an issue of getting "iMacs have no floppy drives" style bad press (albeit in a much smaller form). I have a feeling lots of people who end up using XP at work will notice their stock tickers and AIM QuickBuddy and all that don't work when they are using Windows XP and from that alone will by wary of making the upgrade.
Somehow raw sockets come to mind.
but the biggest reason by far is that he is trying to short some microsoft stock.
:)
Maybe what really happened is that when all the dot coms melted all the SV people tried shorting microsoft and are pissed off it didn't work.
Take this personaility test.
hate MS all you want, that's fine. but don't you think its ridiculous that the govt. would step in to stop blocking of code! I mean, half the time I hear the argument that the "code" doesn't exist, its just 0's and 1's in the memory of a machine, a certain state, and that's why we shouldn't have software patents etc...but yet you want to legally block the spread of code?? You didn't want that when it was DeCSS did you, then code was free speech! Look, people have choices, they could choose to run Linux. Heck, its FREE! No money. Free products that are superior tend to take off in this economy. By getting an injunction, it seems FSF is just "giving up" Saying ,we tried! Now let the govt stop them for us. Come on guys, we can do better. Let MS ship the code for the love of God!
I wonder if MS would like XP's delivery to move way out, and blame the courts for it.
Microsoft removed the Java environment from XP, thereby breaking thousands of Web sites that use Java. XP customers will face endless downloads to replace the functionality they'd come to expect.
I may be wrong, (Trust me it wouldn't be the first time) but isn't the removal of Java from XP stem from a court settlement between Sun and Microsoft. I don't think the settlement explicetly made Microsoft remove it from the operating system, but instead didn't allow Microsoft to develop a Java compiler or products anymore. Why should they be expected in include the VM if they don't have any control over it.
It will still be available for download. So while it may temporarily render sites using Java useless -- they aren't broken forever.
Microsoft removed the Java environment from XP, thereby breaking thousands of Web sites that use Java. XP customers will face endless downloads to replace the functionality they'd come to expect.
Then: Microsoft is bundling all kinds of services into XP in ways that block competition, from photography software to video/audio playback. If customers want to use other vendors' products they'll have to jump through Microsoft-designed hoops.
I see a contradiction here: first they remove some tech 'people have come to expect', which hurts the customer and then second: Microsoft bundles all kinds of tech, which seems to hurt the competition. So which one will it be, Dan: 1) remove it or 2) include it.
Or, Dan, are you afraid XP will be so rocksolid, users will never be asking for another Desktop OS again, not from any vendor/coder-group ?
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
You have a point...
But one thing to be scared of...If you hold your point up fully then you could be arrested for a lot more things then you can imagine (especially in the UK where a lot of old laws are still in the law books...). Indeed I was informed by a police officer in the UK that you would probably break laws merely walking down the street.
I am not was not intending my post to say, "go ahead and break laws you disagree with".
One other difference I tried to make clear, MSFT was convicted, Dmitry *has not been*. Big difference their. You're meant to be innocent until proven guilty. I was not clear enough in my post obviously.
This is one of the funniest posts I've ever seen on Slashdot. Slashdot is almost entirely inhabitated by "M$ Windoze" hating Linux zealots that will mod-up any rumor or half-truth that is negative about Microsoft or Windows, and will simultaneously mod down anything that questions or disagrees with anything regarding Linux, Stallman, ESR, the GNU, etc. Your proposterous notion that saying something that sympathizes with MS gets instant-karma is absolutely hilarious. Oh quite contrary.
As an added touch you'll constantly see the marginalizing of non-Linux loving/non-MS hating opinions by waving them all off as "MS Employees". Hey, wonder of wonders, your post is a perfect example!
You are definitely right about old laws being on the books, I live in the US, not far from a town called Aberdeen, where (technically) it is illegal to spit within city limits. Although I'm not so sure that's a strong argument in this case, since the DMCA is new, especially when compared to monopoly laws.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
greed
The glyphs they use when displaying "xp" look a lot like the greek letters chi () and rho (): Chi-Rho
Way back in 1993 or so there was a lot of talk about how Microsoft was working on a new version of Windows 3.1 available Real Soon Now code-named "Chicago", which became Windows 95. There was also talk about an "object oriented" OS being written from scratch that would not be available for a while, code-named "Cairo".
That's my guess.
With all this licensing based on hardware stuff in XP, I am left to wonder, why not just go to a hardware based key that, in the event of it being broken, can be flash upgraded as well? Plug it into the USB/serial/paralled port. Other companies have been doing this for quite some time.
The appeals court reversed the sentence not the findings.
For the most part, I'm an M$ whore. I actually paid money to be in the XP preview program, and I must say this $10 appraising fee was well spent -- there's no way I could spend even $100 for an "upgrade" to this piece of crap.
The minor enhancements they made to the shell as it currently works are nice, but I could do without the more dramatic changes.
--
E2 IN2 IE?
I'm tired of reading this trash. The world seems to be full of ignorant journalists and lawyers who love to stick their noses into areas where they really don't have a clue. Here goes: 1. Integrated Internet Explorer Haven't we beat this one to death... In today's internet-crazy world the integration of Internet Explorer certainly doesn't harm the consumer. If I wanted to run Netscape or any of the other mickey-mouse browsers out there I'd just install them, nothing is stopping me. Oh.. and I switched away from Netscape years ago after downloading one-too many truncated files (does anyone remember that bug?). 2. AOL and it's Icon I have a wall lined with useless AOL CDs, I certainly don't want the bloat-ware integrated into my OS. As for their icon on the desktop who cares, the desktop cleanup wizard will sweep it up within a few days anyway :-)
3. Java...
I don't get it... I thought that bundling was a bad thing, now it seems that un-bundling is also a crime. If Sun weren't such jerks about the whole Java thing then maybe it would still be integrated.
4. 'Force users to sign up for passport'
Garbage!, if you don't want to use Passport then don't!. Instant messaging is kinda useless without some kind of identification, and if you don't like Microsoft's offering then use another one, there are plenty out there!.
5. Jump through hoops!
Is running Setup.exe now known as a hoop!. If I don't like Microsoft's integrated photography or video/audio playback software then I simply install something else, and it works very well!. Oh.. and the integrated support for photos in XP is VERY nice!. Now I won't have my mother on the phone once a week asking how to print three 4x6 photos on a single sheet of A4... very simple, very elegant.
6. Code signing...
This one is true garbage. It's been out there for years, and when it comes to device drivers maybe manufacturers will start producing signed, tested drivers that don't hose the system until version 9.99 comes out. After all, it's MS that gets blamed for unstable software each time that Windows crashes... and in my experience it's crappy third-party device drivers that are responsible most of the time!.
7. Unauthorized copying of software...
Ok... this one I don't quite get. Why on earth shouldn't a software company be entitled to protect their revenue stream. Any why would this be a good reason to prevent Windows XP shipping?
XP is a very nice system. It shows in many places that MS has listened and learned over the years.
I'm looking forward to October 25th, and I hope that ignorance and greedy lawyers don't get in the way of this product getting out the door.
The obvious guess would be eXtreme Prejudice.
Any others?
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
Then Kelley tried to repeat the trick and wrote a book about the UK Royal familly, oh dear. The problem was not that people did not want to hear bad things about the Royals, quite the contrary, after the soap opera divorces, familly feuds etc. the monarchy had become very unpopular. But Kelley's book made a whole series of unsubstantiated tabloid rumours that the Buck house PR team could explode with little difficulty. At the very time when the country was sickened by their reaction to Princess Diana's death the Kitty Kelley nasty-ography brought them undeserved sympathy.
I think that the Gillmore article and others like it are likely to cause the same reaction. It is very noticable that the Slashcrew have got seriously out of sync with the readership on this one. Most of the posts are saying 'why give us this ill informed made up crap?".
After all if we are going to start attacking MSFT on the basis of made up stuff it might as well be good made up stuff.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Everyone laughed except C.B. of Voyetra.
healyourchurchwebsite.com - WWJB?
In theory, their is nothing wrong with Windows XP that the market couldn't fix, the problem is that the company Microsoft is illegal. Instead of punishing consumers, we should punish Microsoft and break it up into Baby Bills. This way the market can fix it for us.
I propose breaking MS into 3 operating system companies, 1 content company, 2 internet access companies, 2 productivity application companies and a game company.
I'd suspect we'd start to see some consumer choice.
Yep. Those are exactly what I'm talking about. I've seen them on some high cost software.
:)
Not that I like them.
So Mr. Gates doesn't like these structural remedies? Perhaps he'd prefer a Mitnick-style behavioral remedy.
Gates and his descendant Mr. Ballamer are never again to run a technology company in any way, shape, or form. No CEO, no "head technologist", no shareholder, no V.P., no nothing. They've demonstrated that at the helm of a technology company they have no restraint. They will break the law every time.
Mitnick can't use a computer, they can't run a business. Fair is fair.
-Erik
* Microsoft removed the Java environment from XP, thereby breaking thousands of Web sites that use Java. XP customers will face endless downloads to replace the functionality they'd come to expect. and passport to get updates:
* Microsoft will force XP users to sign up for its Passport authentication system if they want to use key XP features. This is a dagger aimed at all kinds of other businesses, and despite Microsoft's claims to the contrary it represents a potentially massive threat to customers' security and privacy.
and MS Signed software
* Microsoft has added ''code-signing'' measures -- verification, supposedly, that downloads will be safe -- that could scare customers away from using software that competes with Microsoft's offerings.
most folks don't have broadband, they have to download for a LONG TIME to get java, furthermore, will they be able to without a passport? How about being able to verify a MS Signed package without a Passport? If I write a great JAVA VM in my spare time (well not me but somebody could) how much would it cost for MS's stamp of good/safe software ? Who controls where IE goes for JAVA? MS does. get a new pc, open website with JAVA in it, Visit Windows Update to have your system registered, passport assigned, and Hardware/software scanned and indexed by the evil empire!!!!!
"The Most Fun Possible on 4 wheels" is at SunBuggy in Las Vegas
I just got on a machine yesterday with XP for the first time. It appears to be all about more pretty pictures and less usable powerful functionality. I guess I am being a little cynical..but I just feel ill when a little dog appears wagging his tail when I am trying to locate files.
Thanks for dumbing me down. AGAIN. When will they learn? More importantly.. when will WE LEARN!
The best software will always be developed for dominant OS. Therein lies the conundrum.
If the people (tm) really want something, then let them choose on their own, or you could take the logical approach and analyze the common problem. Whether from FUD, willfull ignorance or just plain stupidity the common problem is ignorance. Perhaps education is the answer? Perhaps taking a look at what and why the people choose what they like and dislike? If they want and like the ease of use and simplicity, then you can either give them those features or be a rampaging bull and force them to use another method.
Open source will work because it is superior. If your arguments and tactics must resort to lies, FUD and draconian strong arm policies then you obviously do not care or have faith in Open Source.... since it does not need or want such tactics.
Don't confuse this will blatant M$ and $un (aren't I hip!) tactics that restrict what their users can do... as that is indeed a problem. Just like with cars... if Ford had 90+ % of the car market, then it would be foolish and frivolous to try and stop them from releasing a new year model series based on their market share and that you simply do not like them. However, on a case by case basis, if they sold crap (doesn't work, crashes from design NOT pilot error, and is incompatable with existing roads, gas and driving liscenses) then people should then be given their money back (including taxes, shipping (yes that is done with cars) and other fees involved). A blanket strategy that stinks of whiney competetors (whether for profit or not) that are too incompetent to really compete only hurts you and me and Joe Blow.
Compete by making a better product, and save your communism for China and Russia... oh wait, they seem to be noticing that communism/socialism doesn't work... hmmmmmm.
The way I get around creeping dongleitis, is to have a 3 foot paralell extension cable attached to the back of my box. The dongles attach to the end of the cable, which is stuffed out of the way...
Taken from an article strangely linked to by someone trying to criticize Microsoft's removal of Java:
In a news conference, Sun executives said they were able to use Microsoft as a distribution tool to get Java into the hands of users when the software was in its infancy. Then Sun's lawsuit froze Microsoft's plans to modify Java for its own benefit, and Java became established in the meantime.
.Net," Sueltz said. "All in all, it's a very good day for Sun."
"I don't think we gave away anything. They're writing a check for $20 million. They're continuing to distribute an outdated version of the technology, but they can't use it for
Sounds like Sun got exactly what they wanted, and it looks like just another attack on Microsoft because they're successful. They shouldn't include IE and should force users to do a big download to get a browser, but at the same time they should include Java (despite being restricted to using an ancient version, a "right" which Sun can revoke at any time) to save the user from doing a download. Wahhh!
Worry about something worth worrying about for a change, like violent crime....damn polotitions
Kiss my shiny metal ass
So, now MS is being put into a position where it will have to beat a possible injunction by pushing XP out the door even faster. Never mind all of the anti-competitive reasons, my bigger concern is the open access to the raw TCP/IP stack, as discussed by Robert Cringely.
Now, not only are these machines going to have an easily compromised stack, they are going to be even more buggy and vulnerable. The US most likely would not act fast enough to prevent this.
IMHO, anti-competitive reasons will not prevent the release of XP. However, preventing its release on the grounds that it is of danger to the consumer sounds a lot more feasible.
Ryosen
One man's "Troll, +1" is another man's "Insightful, +1".
Preventing the release of WindowsXP will not help to "turn the tides" against Microsoft. I think the majority of Windows users, frustrated over Microsoft's poor quality or not, will find contempt for an injunction against XP's release. I think that it would be best to let Microsoft push the envelope as far as they can in this case until the consumers get absolutely fed up on their own accord. Don't tell them they're fed up. People will reject MS trash when they want to and in due time.
Why bother.
Anonymous and Cowardly and proud of it.
Horse* theHorse = new Horse(theStory);
Kill(theHorse);
while (theHorse.IsDead())
{
Post(theHorse.GetStory());
Beat(theHorse);
}
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
There have been people shouting 'Stop!' at every major Microsoft release in recent years.
I remember the whining and carrying on about the MSN icon when Windows 95 came out. All the pissing and moaning when Windows 98 came out.
Geez, it gets old after awhile.
MS is not restricted from distributing new versions of Java with their browser. They are simply not allowed to distribute their own customized version of Java, thereby breaking compatibility with the authorized (aka standard) versions.
It is Microsoft's own choice, in an attempt to thwart Java's acceptance, to not distribute Java. It has nothing to do with being locked into an older version.
Ryosen
One man's "Troll, +1" is another man's "Insightful, +1".
cuz, cuz... then the article would have some standing in that place we call reality.
/. should be journalistically responsible should point your flame throwers at sivalley.com
I honestly think that if someone posted that article here as a comment it would have merit b/c it's just a comment. Saying MS is bad/evil is fun/great/perhaps even accurate. Saying what they should and shouldn't do is also good for debate but imploring the Gov't to penalize a business....All you people saying
Think about it, you ask the gov't today to tell MS it can't release an OS really means, "Write a law so MS can't do X (assuming there isn't one on the books already." Does MS violate any privacy laws with XP? I dunno and after having read the article I still dont! MS is possibly guilty of being immoral for XP (I say possibly cuz I haven't touched WinXP) but being criminally liable to the point of injuction? Either tell me why or STFU.
BOSTON SUCKS!
you are as hard as a 90 year old man's pee-pee.
while everyone has been distracted by the MS antitrust court hoo-ha, Microsoft has been moving into the background and positioning themselves for rear-entry into the ass of the government.
-- Betting on the survival of the media industry is a serious risk. I advise investing elsewhere.
They don't?
I like your idea. The government needs to do the same thing they did with AT&T, break them apart and develop standards. It would not be that hard to make a set of standards so that computers running different OS's could run the same software. The OS would have to have certain featurs and then they would be at liberty to add additional things for competition. I like the idea though, break up the company and let some competition come through.
~ now you know
"It finally brings a crash-resistant OS to everyday folks." Who does he think he's kidding!
- Sig this!
The question (and one of the main points of antitrust law) is whether a monopolist should be allowed to use that monopoly to leverage a monopoly in another area of the market without any competition at all.
The problem is that since much of the software market is subject to network externalities, having a monopoly in one market could potentially lead to one company swallowing the entire industry if they are allowed to continually leverage new monopolies from existing ones without any competition.
The original monopoly was obtained because, at least to some extent, MS was competing on the basis of product features. If they are allowed to leverage this monopoly into other areas in an unrestricted way, there is no guarantee that the new monopoly products will have good quality or reasonable prices because there will have been little or no competition; yet, most of us will be forced to use them because of the so called network externalities. By that point, the cost of switching to a higher quality competetor will be outweighed by the cost of being incompatable with everyone else. This is already the case with operating systems and office suites.
Many people are reluctant to punish Microsoft because, so far, they are percieved as a "benevolent" or "beneficial" monopolist in some ways (e.g., uniformity and homogeneity can make computing easier for many users), but if they are allowed to completely take over the industry, how long do you think they will remain benevolent and beneficial?
As soon as they are allowed to take new "increasing returns" markets without any competition, you can be sure that quality will drop and prices will increase.
I personally am not too fond of MS software, but use Win2k, Office2k and XP everyday because I need to.
Beauty is truly in the eye of the tiger
Horse* theHorse = new Horse(theStory);
theHorse->Kill();
while (theHorse->IsDead())
{
SlashDot->Post(theHorse->GetStory());
theHorse->Beat();
}
Oh, and since Horse* gives away that you are using C++ instead of Java, you need -> instead of .
... even posting a comment on a site whose users are, for the majority, supporters of a certain OS (which I also use), but my irritation compels me to do so. MS is competing in an open market. So is everyone else. If the removal of the Java VM makes your software break - do not install XP. If you do not like Passport, do not use it. If the licensing scheme for Office XP torks you (as it does me) - don't buy Office XP. Don't you think MS would drop their licensing practice if the software sat on shelves? Personally, I want the market to decide - not the federal government.
This whole issue should be fast-tracked thru the Justice Dept. Once the genie (XP) is let out of the bottle, it'll be alot harder. Microsoft is in a monopoly position and that needs to be corrected. To BillG and SteveB, you have only innovated in marketing. Technically, you have not.
If a friend who was not computer savvy asked what he/she should get, I'd point them at Apple and OS X. If they are savvy, Linux.
What's my Karma Mr. Burns? "Excellent"
I'm serious, and please excuse my ignorance!
What to do with Microsoft? It's very simple really. Just make them sell the major components of Windows separately. Sell the OS for $50. Sell the browser for $20 or $30. Sell the media player (and encoder) for $20. Sell the... Well, you get the idea. When someone has to choose between Microsoft's CD burning software or Roxio's, instead of getting it force fed to them, then we'll see what the market really thinks about Microsoft's products. That's it. No need for breaking the company up; no need for tying their hands as to what they can make. Just don't let them bundle. Just make them market each major add-on like their competition.
Acts 17:28, "For in Him we live, and move, and have our being."
all of the stuff integrated together. Don't want to have to worry about doing different deals with different vendors. The more things are integrated in the better I like it. The more the technology disappears the better I like it. "Civilization advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking about them. - Whitehead" Ship it!
MSFT broke the law and should be punished, yes. Why should they get away with breaking a law?
Anyone who compares this to the Dmitry case need to get bonked on the head, hard. They are two totally seperate things. (Whilst I have your attention, free Dmitry!).
MSFT have never learned one thing:
If you are a monopoly you have to act differently, a few too many complaints backed with evidence and you are in the sh*t. MSFT are going to get what they deserve by the law. Its going to be up to the judge.
XP should be delayed and investigated, no doubt about that. As eeveryone knows, this OS is aimed at trying to wrest control of the Internet and then suction money out of its hapless victims. Talk about an Internet Vampire.
Matt
It's not installed by default, but it is featured prominently on the Windows Update page. Here's the description Microsoft has for it;
This is a hypothetical situation that may happen if MSFT achieved what they are setting out to do:
Husband: "Oh look honey, according to the news the Internet got hacked again and according to our bank statement $1000 dollars got withdrawn by an account in Siberia".
Wife: "Oh my love, this is just our modern world, guess we could call the bank and see if this is covered".
Husband: "Yes dear, as that IT consultant said on TV, the software is so complex those engineers over at Microsoft could not possibly cover every base with their QA. I am sure if they saw this they would have stopped shipment!".
Don't think that is much different from the current virus excuses.
Matt
Aren't dongle's vulnerable to theft? A USB dongle is, by its very nature, small and external... Plus, the extra expense might just bite in to MS's precious profit margins.
It's not too difficult to imagine a MS Passport account linked to a USB based card reader, though.
One bad thing about the threat of injunction is that Microsoft is now scrambling to get Windows XP out the door so they can beat it. This will lead to more bugs and more mistakes being made. Or, its bad for windows users anyway.
I have been using rc1 2505 for a couple of days and I am quite impressed.
My compy has always been a bit skitzy but now games that didn't work do (and yes I have used both 9x and 2000). I'm willing to put up with big buttons, bright colours and a less efficient control panel for that.
It also seems silly that people are critiscing them for removing the jvm and keeping IE. Both products have to compete in their field and if they don't do the job then they can be replaced by rival products.
Also AFAIK you don't have to have ms passport to access any key features (including windows update).
Microsoft pretended to allow more competition on the desktop by saying -- now that Internet Explorer is totally integrated into the operating system and has an 80-plus percent market share -- that PC makers could remove the IE icon, but not the software code.
How does having code on a machine that doesn't do anything call for an injunction. If MS removes the icons, good enough. Otherwise we end up with courts trying to determine what libraries should be included, that's just taking things too far.
With transcendant hypocrisy, Microsoft complained about the damage to consumer choice when AOL said it would pay Compaq to put AOL only on Compaq desktops. Then Microsoft maintained its requirement, which flies in the face of supposed desktop flexibility, that PC makers give its Microsoft Network at least equal billing with any other online services.
I'll agree that it's somewhat hypocritic of Microsoft to be the ones saying it, and requiring MSN isn't justified. However, I do thing that AOL making exclusive contracts like this is bad for consumuer choice, and in general a bad thing.
Microsoft removed the Java environment from XP, thereby breaking thousands of Web sites that use Java. XP customers will face endless downloads to replace the functionality they'd come to expect.
People bitch when Microsoft integrates things, and people bitch when they don't. I think not including Java has something to do with MS's settlement with SUN, but I don't know the details.
Microsoft will force XP users to sign up for its Passport authentication system if they want to use key XP features. This is a dagger aimed at all kinds of other businesses, and despite Microsoft's claims to the contrary it represents a potentially massive threat to customers' security and privacy.
Back to people bitching about MS integrating things. If you don't want to use the features that require Passport, don't use them. There's features in almost every software package you buy that you won't use. If you want the features, but don't want to give MS that much personal information, then you can choose to lie like other people do. Your choice.
Microsoft is bundling all kinds of services into XP in ways that block competition, from photography software to video/audio playback. If customers want to use other vendors' products they'll have to jump through Microsoft-designed hoops.
So what should MS be allowed to put into an OS. Is a TCP/IP stack ok? They didn't have one in Windows 3.0. Would consumers really be better off if they hadden't added one? How about adding hooks for Audio, and 3D video? How about a text editors, simple email, a calculator, disk defragmentor? Should everyone have to purchase everything seperately. If consumers only had to pay and average of $10 each for the things they get for free in Windows (just the ones most people use), how much would it cost them? It's also just not cost effective for Microsoft to make dozens of Windows distributions so that you can just buy the features you want. The courts didn't determine that MS was overcharging consumers. Let Microsoft continue to add the things people want to Windows. If allows MS to update their OS as the market changes, and it's good for consumers.
Microsoft has added ''code-signing'' measures -- verification, supposedly, that downloads will be safe -- that could scare customers away from using software that competes with Microsoft's offerings.
People bitch about MS's lack of security, and then they bitch when they try and do something about it. People downloading malicious code and running it is a serious problem, and code-signing is a way of warning people. Yes it can possibly have a detremental effect on some developers. There's almost nothing Microsoft can do that won't have a detremental effect on some developers.
Windows XP contains harsh controls on users to prevent unauthorized copying of the software. If you reinstall the OS after upgrading your hardware in ways that Microsoft considers questionable, you'll need Microsoft's permission.
I can understand that some people find these controls irritating and offensive, but how do they really hurt anyone. You've got a reasonable period of time after you load the OS before it becomes a problem (30 days maybe). SO people testing and reviewing hardware shouldn't be effected. You can upgrade a couple parts without a problem, and if you're going to upgrade more you just need to revalidate your license. How does this really hurt anyone who isn't trying to pirate the OS.
If you haven't guessed, I think MS should be allowed to add new software to their OS including IE. I don't think they should be able to enter exclusive marketing agreements which tie Windows licening to other products like MSN and Office. Obviously there's a thin line there. I don't want to be forced into a subscription that includes MSN, Office, and Windows. But I don't want to have to buy everthing I need to use my computer a la carte either. Where would I draw the line? There isn't a very large market for Systems without a web browser, test editor, or even and IP stack. These are quickly becomming essential features in an OS distribution, and don't add significant cost to the OS. Let MS bundle / integrate them. Most home users don't need a full fledged office suite and it would significantly increase the cost of the OS. MSN also would greatly increase the cost of the OS, and most people really don't need the junk it offers, they just want an internet connection. Keep it seperate. This is a hard thing for a court to determine, which is why the courts should keep out of these thing unless there is clearly harm to consumers.
How do you spell FUD? This is just silly. Microsoft have added code-signing (which I thought had been around a while) - which they could use to scare people away? How?
see previous reply. you seem to know this yourself, which is probably why you dont sound too sure of yourself I suppose they could do something by only allowing MS code to get signed or something...
They have a competing platform, in .NET. Their attempts to do something with Java, rightly or wrongly, resulted in them getting their wrists slapped. No-one at MS that I've talked to really cares that much about Java. So why should they include it?
no one at ms cares about java?! is that why theyve spent years first arguing that it was irrelevant, then jumping on the bandwagon, then trying embrace and extend, then fighting cases in court, and now coming up with c#? the only thing they dont care about is their inability to control it. um, and yes, if they did something wrongly (they did) they deserve more than a wristslap. and removing a popularly used feature, espcially when you are a monopoly, is serious
I am an *informed* user. It is my business as a user to remain informed, and to make the choices that are right for me.
within reasonable limits. i like to think i am an informed consumer too, however i do not and can not be expected to know the details of competitiveness in the electric generation and distribution system or details of monopolies or safety in the aviation industry. thats why utilities are regulated, to make sure they dont abuse their monopoly powers, and airlines checked for safety. asking the general public to fight for mp3s and not use wmp when they barely know what how to rip has been shown over and over not to work, which is why ms behaves this way in the first place
I guess I just don't understand why people are making such a noise about fairly minor complaints. My cynical side is telling me that it's indicative of a jealousy of success, but I don't think that's always the case.
reread the article. people are making noise because ms has been found to me a monopoly, and instead of showing remorse and changing their actions, they continue their behaviour unabated
the animal doesnt even have opposable thumbs, focker!
Reading about Windows XP doesn't make me wanna change from older MS OS's
Anyone has a reason to switch?
The reason their dropping Java is that they were prevented from extending it with propriatary calls and then incorporating it into the OS (as C# is/will be). Since they could co-opt it and control it to tie folks into Windows-only solutions, they're dropping it altogether.
Sure they have a right to do this, but the reasoning for people complaining are not hypocritical.
I AM, therefore I THINK!
If they did release it on x86 arch, I would be more than glad to replace 2000 as my desktop. I wouln't replace my Linux server though. :)
You can't enforce good taste. If people enjoy the sort of music/cinema/literature/software that I consider crap, should I have the right to distort the marketplace by suppressing those "popular" items and assisting "higher quality" alternatives? No. The only eventual hope for the eventual victory of aesthetically and functionally superior "product" is human genetic modification. :-)
First I admit that I make my living with Microsoft products on a Microsoft OS. I like only one thing about Microsoft's products:
They are _everywhere_.
When you go to a warehouse they are using NT (or 2000 in some of the more progressive companies). Home (l)users use Windows '98 (Except for the masochists that moved to ME). In my dealings I come across NT greater than 80% of the time. As we all know NT is now several generations old. Most companies still have not assimilated W2K. And now Microsoft is debuting a new OS. This is going to fragment the Microsoft camp. Already NT commands and procedures do not work in 2000. Adding XP into the mix will only exacerbate this. Like the Linux Distribution flame wars the Microsoft camp will fragment and fight against one another.
Maybe this is the best thing Microsoft could do for Linux and BSD.
More of my thoughts
Rare is the symphony orchestra, ballet, or opera company that survives without a deliberatively distorted marketplace; the performance buildings are usually publically subsidized, and in many countries there are ongoing operational subsidies as well.
So yes, goverments subsidize the arts, sometimes even from sales taxes on concerts by the Brittney Spears and N'Sync :-).
If you haven't guessed, I think MS should be allowed to add new software to their OS including IE. I don't think they should be able to enter exclusive marketing agreements which tie Windows licening to other products like MSN and Office. Obviously there's a thin line there.
They should be able to include everything they want on the Windows CDs that are distributed with OEM PCs. But the PC makers should have the right to determine what icons are on the desktop and in the start menu, and what third party software to preinstall and make the default as opposed to/in addition to what MS preinstalls. OEMs should have the right to make any changes an end user can make. And if MS wants to garuntee that the IE icon, MSN, etc. are on the desktop, they should pay the OEMs like AOL is doing. Most importantly, they should be forced to offer the same price to all OEMs, allowing only for volume.
This would eliminate most of the anti-competitive complaints, without breaking up the company or making them take stuff out of windows. The other thing would be to force them to publish all of their file formats, but that's another topic :).
-jimbo
"Hold me Bob!" "I would if I could man!" -Bob and Larry from VeggieTales
But good luck.
I have a lot of libertarian political philosophies, but I disagree with the libertarians on this one.
When you say that things will basically end up the same whether there are controls on monopolies or not, there is some truth to that, perhaps even in a market where the network effect tends to favor monopolies. It's possible that quality will get so bad and monopoly prices will get so high that people will begin buying into the competition even if the transition itself is very painful and causes them to temporarily be incompatable with everyone else.
The problem is that there will have been a long time during which people will have lived with much poorer quality (translating into lost productivity) and much higher prices than there might have otherwise been if competition was present all along. In other words, the result of the large swings in quality and price that results with no controls (or damping, to us engineers) is lower economic efficiency.
The Sherman act is not about "big bad government" bashing the hapless corporations, it's about economic efficiency. The Congress which passed the Sherman Act realized that a competitive market leads to greater economic efficiency, and so it puts in place some damping on the large swings in quality and price (and hence poor economic efficiency) that would result if runaway monopolies and lack of competition were the norm.
from the story:
Microsoft has added ``code-signing'' measures -- verification, supposedly, that downloads will be safe -- that could scare computer users away from using software that competes with Microsoft's offerings.
Does this mean MS is now legally responsible for problems? I've would imagine they're legally responsible for the software when they pop up a dialog to the effect of "this software has been verified for compatibility with Windows." Something like that, by my understanding, would make MS liable for the actions of that software.
± 29 dB
And Sun Microsystems, ... can change Java to make it incompatible with anybody else's implementation. And they can call it Java(tm).
Yes.
Because they own it.
Duh.
Hank Bain. Last seen in the company of Guy Caballero
Man, I thought I would be the only one to remember that..
Of course Hank was really a spy for aliens from another planet.. it's been so long since I saw that one, I can't remember if he really was Conrad's brother..
I'm surprised nobody has thought of the most obvious solution to this whole mess: make the operating system a separate cost item.
That way, when you buy your computer you will know right up front how much it will cost to install each OS into your system. Something like that could convince some large IT organizations to install a commercial Linux distribution on a one-time low-cost site license instead of a much more expensive site license for Windows XP/XP Pro.
... for the fire: http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010802. html
-- t_kiehne
It's interesting that Microsoft chose to use Red Rider's song "Lunatic Fringe" to promote Windows XP on television. The Jargon File defines "Lunatic Fringe" as "Customers who can be relied upon to accept release 1 versions of software."
I am using it now, it kicks ass. It even destroys Linux Mandrake in terms of desktop computing.
Here's Mickey Kaus, of Kausfiles.com, with an argument that the release of XP will mark a turnaround for our sinking economy. Interesting argument.
Someone explain to me how the hell my post is a troll. It gives facts explaining that the courts did not tell MS that they couldn't use Java and why MS decided to get rid of Java. If you want to mark it redundant or overrated fine, but marking it as a troll is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. BTW, this is a legitimate request for information....I truly want to know how that post is a troll.
"
Ford recently announced that all their new cars will have "turn signals". These turn signals will indicate which direction the customer is planning to turn their car, and will even shut off without user intervention, restricting the ability for the customer to keep it running!
GM recently announced they will only maintain warranties for repairs that use "approved" GM parts and are done by "approved" GM mechanics.
Vehicles will come "bundled" with feature "packages", such as fancier radios, bigger speakers, and other advanced features such as theft protection. Customers have the option of buying these components themselves, but do we really think anyone will go through the hassle of adding these items themselves if GM provides it for them?
It's time to force these automakers to allow customers to do what they want. An immediate injunction halting all new car sales is required until customers get the choices they deserve!
Somedays it's just not worth chewing through the restraints...
Gillmor is a simplistic moralist. He doesn't have much to contribute to any of these discussions beyond "naughty, naughty businesses, bring in the gov to protect us poor consumers/competitors"
Jon Katz is less predictable.
If you don't like Microsoft (and I don't), then don't buy their software.
Until then, please note that Oracle is far more immoral/unethical/sleezy in the way it treats customers, bribed itself to prominence,
Lew
"The Constitution, the WHOLE Constitution, and nothing but the CONSTITUTION."
TCO is everything in the corporate arena. This year and next XP will have more impact on home users then corporate users.
Linux and BSD can't or won't succeed until they can drive TCO down (Licensing is minimal here BTW) and a *nix user can open a MS Office file, modify it and send it back in the same condition w/o jumping through hoops.
K.
K
And, as long as you're offering people tickets out of the People's Republic of Redmond (Prr), shave a few bones of the sticker and sell them a Linux installation instead. I'd be all over that.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
And Sklyarov will be found GUILTY of violating the DMCA. Now obviously you are one of those fools who believe every verdict of our "justice" system is right, but the fact remains that no penalty has been awarded to Microsoft whatsoever. They have done nothing wrong.
Thanks for the pointer; I stand corrected. So Compaq, when they ship machines with *their* OS, can do what *they* like. Otherwise they have to follow the licensing agreements, and if they don't care for that, they are free to refuse to deal with MSFT. But of course they understand that it is to their economic advatage to play along. It just isn't as *convenient* as they would prefer.
Java is the blue pill
Choose the red pill
The high numbered account is because I didn't have anything I wanted to say over the last couple of years enough to register. Or if I did register I've forgotten the particulars.
The hotmail address is for two primary reasons. The first is that I don't always want my company to read all the email that I send or receive. The second reason is that I want an email service that makes headlines if it is down. I have a couple of other email addresses from services that don't make headlines when they go down and you're never sure what's going on or when it will be fixed.
There are two secondary reasons for the hotmail address. The first is that I can get to it easily by just finding a browser anywhere on the planet. The second is that a hotmail address is needed for a MS Passport and it can't hurt to have a few spare passports around can it?
The canned straight-from-the-mouth of MS spinmeisters opinions happen to be mine as well except in my case they are facts :-) . It is possible for both angels and devils to believe some of the same things to be true, no?
Hmm, we still don't have this Industry thing nailed down yet. You mention "corporate desktop" and "IT organizations" and at the same time equate this with "the consumer, the user community". I do not.
In fact I seem to recall that the motivations of IT organizations are frequently at odds with what I call the true end users.
For example I have had some experience selling platform independent software solutions to organizations. There was a fundamental disagreement between what the organization wanted and what the end user wanted. The organization wanted an identical application that would run the same on all user machines. The users wanted and applications that would look the same as all the other applications on their machines.
Another example is from the release of a couple of Microsoft products in the 90s that caused a fairly obvious flare up between what motivated users and what motivated the IT organizations that supported them.
The first product was Access. This resulted in a widespread demystification of the role of DBA and gave the users the opportunity to fight back against what IT was telling them couldn't be done. It helped move the users' expectations upward with regard to what they could expect from the DBA folks in the IT organization with regard to both the timeliness of solutions as well as how cheap those solutions should be. I recall a great deal of DBA bad mouthing of the product but perhaps I mis-remember :-).
The second product was Windows for Workgroups (Windows 3.11). My gosh the howls from IT support! I mean the users were actually sharing things without needing to get in line and wait on the inclinations (and charge backs) from their IT organizations which followed rather lengthy justification processes. Relying again on my faulty memory, I seem to also remember that many IT organizations actually banned the use of the product. Too late though because once again the users' level of expectations was set higher for what they wanted out of the IT network people.
On another topic let me congratulate you on finally meeting a user who wants the subscription based model of software - namely me. Part of my standard presentation blurb in the early 90's said "you don't own software today you subscribe to it". But it was a cranky subscription where you actually had to go down to the store, if you even knew about it, pick up the latest issue after paying a fairly hefty one-time charge, and install it on your machine. I'm glad the subscription model, which was already in effect then though poorly, is improving by being both more accessible through the internet and more smooth.
Let me take it off and look.
It says "Ass". Same thing as "end" so I must be an end user when wearing it. I do have other hats but I'll put the ass hat back on.
I usually tend to view myself as a de facto employee of the company that happens to be my client at the time. I have a de jure organization, true, but its not the most important thing in my calculations. I guess my order of importance is 1. Myself, 2. My customer and 3. My boss. You can see easily how I've be able to avoid moving into management I think. :-)
To answer your specific question(s), no I am not an employee of Microsoft or of a company that has a close relationship with Microsoft. Given my priorities outlined above I don't even see how it would make much of a difference.
I my particular case, and I wouldn't want to generalize from that particular, the idea that some company I happen to be an employee of would determine my opinions is, well, quaint. It rings of things long past where employee loyalty was an expected exchange of lifetime employment.