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."
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.)
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.
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?
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.
"
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.
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.
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.
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?"
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
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.
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.
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.
Well if you want to deny reality then by all means go ahead. A quick perusing of any thread will bear out the fact that the best way to get moderated up to +5 is to say linux sux, MS rules, or slashdot sucks.
This board once was a great place full of insightful advocates of open source. MS saw this and waged a very succesfull war against slashdot. They did it by flooding the board with anonymous and semianonymous posters with incoherent postings and porn increasing the noise ratio and by organized effort to drown out open source opionions using the moderation system. They were very succesful in that. Eventually most of the early posters left no longer being able to be heard above the noise and sick of being moderated down just for critizing MS.
The fact that MS was able to so effectively destroy slashdot should be a lesson to us all. MS is no slouch when waging astro-turf wars. They have years of experience, tens of thousands of employees who are serously brainwashed every day at headquarters and a leigon of VARs and MVPs and MCSE who get their daily "you are going to die unless you defend MS from all enemies foreign and domestic" mails. MS knows how to generate a seige mentality in their brownshirts and has been doing it effectively for years. If you think that objectivity is lacking in open source advocates go talk to a MS employee. Go ask them their opinions on Open source programmers or RMS I dare you.
MS knows this is a war. We don't. We go on as if this was some sort of a game or sport but MS is out to kill and we are counting coup. In the end we will suffer the same fate the indians did. If you don't fight a war to kill you will be killed.
We lost this battle. Slashdot is dead and by and large only the MS employees hang out here anymore. Chances are the rest of the open source movement will go the same way. It's time to stop whining and start acting forcefully and violently. It's time to fight evil with evil. You can not keep turning the other cheek every time MS slaps you around. Like Machiavelli states we can not be contrained by our sense of morals, war has it's own code and you have shed your perceptions of right and wrong otherwise you will be crushed. The generals in the MS army have no moral or ethical contraints. They lie to the media, lie under oath, cheat, break laws, tamper with evidence, break contracts, steal technologies, excute their enemies and stab their partners in the back. You can not fight these people by tying your hands behind your back with moral or ethical baggage.
If all we can muster against these immoral, well funded, and well connected generals is "irrational venom" then we are doomed.
BTW. I don't think anybody actually believes that you are a "proponent of non-MS operating systems". IF you are then you are one of the most worthless and weak of them. All it takes to dissuade you from reccomending non MS systems is some vauge "associations" with undesirables. Well with friends like you open source needs no enemies. Only an idiot would make a platform choice not on technical merit, cost, or suitability to task but on what other people might think of you if you propose this solution. Why not grow a spine and make the right choice and stick with it. Better yet just shut the hell up and let real men fight this war. We don't need people like you giving everybody a bad name.
War is necrophilia.
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 wonder if MS would like XP's delivery to move way out, and blame the courts for it.
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
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.
Any post praising MS is insighful by definition. This is slashdot where MS employees outnumber open source developers by at least two to one.
War is necrophilia.
The tactic I describe were not used by Amiga and OS/2 people. Unfortunately those people were also naive, ethical and moral. They actually thought that in the end superior technology and the truth would win. They were wrong. The only way to fight MS is with their own tactics and more. Here is how you fight MS.
1) Name calling. Every time an MS executive lies call them out. Not one person in the open source community has dared to call Scott Mundie or Steve Ballmer habitual liars even though they are. Worse yet they all sat around doing nothing while MS called them communist, un-american and a "cancer". While MS troops were going around yelling "open sores" we just sat around doing nothing. Hit them back with the same verbiage. Call them immoral pigs, habitual liars, and criminals because it's the truth. Why doesn't ERS or RMS have the guts to tell Ballmer "I am not a communist and I resent you calling me that, apologize now or face a libel suit". It's becasause they are gutless. It's time to get brave people.
2) Holding MS employees and shareholders personally responsible for their actions. Every time Ballmer goes on a rampage you must hold every single MS employee personally responsible. They make it possible for these bastards to exist and stay in power. Point out that no matter how insignificant your job or how many shares you have as long as you choose to help an evil empire you are evil too. Make fun of them, deride them in public, refuse to associate with them and let them know you are doing it because you don't want to hang around evil people.
3) Go talk to the press. You will never yell loud enough to counterbalance the MS PR juggernaut but you have to do it anyways. Instead of whining on slashdot you need to make calls to the NY times or Washington Post. If they refuse to print your letters take a lesson from Horowitz and raise a stink about it. Accuse them of censorship and worse. Listen to the republicans and learn from them, they know how to fight nasty.
4) Raise money. No you will never have 30 billion in cash or be able to install your hand picked attorney general in office but you may have enough money to slap a briefcase full in front of one or two housemembers. At least your views will be heard on the floor of the congress. It's not much but it's a start
5) Use your imagination. You are fighting a war against an opponent who is better then you, richer then you, bigger then you, and is better organized then you. The odds are against you but it's not impossible. We were able to defeat the British army by adopting the tactics of the indians and by fighting guerilla style while they were marching in columns. In the same way maybe just maybe we can fight them by thinking of things they can't adopt to.
6) Fuck with their heads. Monkey wrench MS operations and buildings if you can get physical access to them. Break into their servers if you can and plant backdoors. Call in bomb threats. Abandon your car in front of the MS campus but put some fertilizer in the trunk first. Scare the shit out them, and up their paranoia to the level where they become paralyzed with fear. Take a lesson from right to lifers and put pictures of MS employees on the web accusing them of crimes against mankind. Plant stinkbombs and other disruptive materials in the MS campus or MS offices near you. Take a lesson from the scientologists and picket in front of them (take a video camera with you). Disrupt their operations every day and make their employees think twice about working there.
7) Shed all your sense of pity, morality, rightness and wrongness and do whatever else it takes.
War is necrophilia.
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.
Bullshit.
Take a look at the Billboard Hot 100. Would you seriously argue that this represents the best music available? Or even the best music being made today?
Do you think that best-selling books, or highest-rated TV shows, represent the best work in these media? You beleive that "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" is the best television show airing in the USA today, and that the lastest Danielle Steel and Jackie Collins efforts are amoung the best works of the written word?
Quality and popularity are completely independent variables.
Microsoft got where they are by riding IBM's coat-tails, by clever business tricks, and industrial strength marketing. They've managed to make the quality of their product almost as irrelevant as the quality of a pair of Nike's is to a well-branded teenager.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
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.
> Sun got an injunction to stop Microsoft distributing Java
Ummmm, IIRC, the injunction was against distributing something and calling it Java that wasn't really Java. To me that means, that Microsoft certainly could have distributed a true Java that conformed to standards, and was indeed, "Java". But they chose not to conform to this particular standard that they didn't control. Don't forget that "Java" is a Registered Trademark, and while I may also believe that Sun should move Java to a standards body, for the moment they MUST aggressively defend a trademark, or lose it.
IANAL, but IMHO Microsoft could have distributed Java with WinXP. It's just Microsoft-Embrace-Extend-Extinguish-and-call-it "Java" that they can't.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
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?
Take a look at the Billboard Hot 100. Would you seriously argue that this represents the best music available? Or even the best music being made today?
I agree completely - but at the same time, the distinction being drawn is between being the best product and being the best music. Quality and success are independent, yes, but the quality of a product - as a product - is measured in its success.
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/
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
And who would buy it? What programs would run on it?
To be astounded at Apple's failure to act must be an exhausting condition. Apple has been sleeping at the wheel at least fifteen years. Even Steve Jobs couldn't think of anything to do with the company that was more innovative than pretty boxes designed for niche marketing to architects and hairdressers.
The idea is utterly crackpot. Jobs has already failled to sell Nextstep on x86 once and almost ten years has gone by since. The sole value in the Apple O/S is that the software manufacturer controls the hardware. So the whole system is guaranteed to work together.
As for the name recognition of Apple, don't be too sure that it has a good reputation outside the US. Resentment over Apple's past discriminatory pricing is still remembered. US Apple weenies might think the company the embodiment of good but I think of it as the company that wanted to charge me $3000 more for a computer because I lived in Europe.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
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!
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.
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.
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!
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.
Quality and popularity are completely independent variables.
They are definatley different, but so is quality and customer satisfaction. You can have the highest quality product in the world, but if it doesn't do what the customer wants, then it's useless to them.
Microsoft got where they are by riding IBM's coat-tails, by clever business tricks, and industrial strength marketing.
Microsoft used many tricks in the process of getting where they are now, but the biggest reason is that they gave users the features they want. A very high level of stability is an exelent feature in an OS, but most people will still choose a reasonably stable OS which does what they want it to do.
Other OS's are beginning to compete with Windows in the features department, so Microsoft better work on their quality. They seem to be trying to address that problem by moving their consumer OS customers to XP which is based on the NT kernel. If Linux developers don't think there's anything they can learn from Windows, then Linux isn't likely to ever gain a lot of desktop market share. In the desktop market, quality and stability aren't enough.
I'm serious, and please excuse my ignorance!
It's not installed by default, but it is featured prominently on the Windows Update page. Here's the description Microsoft has for it;
The final settlement of the case was that Microsoft could continue to distribute the JVM with existing products for up to six years. However the question of whether Windows XP is a new version of an old product and thus covered or if it is a new product is arguable. Given Sun's previous behavior attempting to get an injuction against Microsoft releasing products despite a contract clause specifically denying that relief I don't see why people would expect Microsoft to do anything else.
The settlement was not about naming alone, it also covered the code that Microsoft had written. What the settlement came down to is that Sun now has sole control over the future of Java. Microsoft has no say in the future of the language, nor does anyone in the 'open source' community. Why should any company be forced to distribute a closed proprietary system in the name of 'open standards'?
The removal of Java from Windows XP is due soley to the lawsuit. The party that started the lawsuit is Sun, so blame Sun for the removal of the Java VM.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
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.
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.
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!
Should Microsoft be penalized for breaking the law, yes. Should Dmitry be penalized for breaking the law, yes. Should the law in Dmitry's case, no, but it did, he flaunted it, hopefully his case will aid in the removal of the law, but he did break it, which means he should be punished just like MS should.
I don't believe in the DMCA, I believe it's wrong, but what I won't stand for is the attitude that anyone can break a law because they feel it's a bad law... withot suffering the consequences that is. If you choose to break a law for moral reasons, then prepare to face the consequences of your actions. If you're right, then hopefully that law will be changed.
The instant we start deciding that people should be allowed to flaunt laws at random just because some people don't believe in them is the instant that this country completely degenerated into chaos.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
uhhh... your joking right... MSNBC ring a bell? Oh sure if they really owned the media Microsoft would probably have to add to their name, AOL-TimeWarner.
No joke. One of the distinguishing features of an idealogue is that they cannot process contrary views. This is is called in the propaganda analysis field a 'stoccoma'. This then leads to the claim that all contrary views are due to 'the liberal media', a phrase that Murdoch's Fox news repeats several times an hour. Murdoch owns a larger media empire than Hurst, but he can't be heard because of the 'Liberal Media', yeah that would be Salon.com.
Notice in this thread people are already accusing anyone questioning the article as being a Microsoft PR flack. The point raised about MSNBC is important, yes Microsoft do own half of a calbe TV news station and do have an alliance with an infulential media owner. However their opponents Time Warner/AOL-Netscape happen to own more cable stations, channels magazines etc. than anyone else.
The same mindset could be seen on both sides during the 'red scares' orchestrated by Hoover and McCarthy. The communists refused to believe anything bad about Stalin's regime, denouncing the capitalist press. The scare-mongers believed that anyone who opposed them for any reason had to be a communist.
As I pointed out elsewhere, the original piece is an opportunity for Microsoft. If I were a Microsoft flack I would have written the original piece so others would knock it down and with it other anti-MSFT views that might be valid. The trial fell victim of the same problem, a perfectly reasonable tying claim was hijacked by Netscape et. al. and a turned into a vehicle for a bunch of their own complaints which is the reason the appeals court sent it back down.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
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.
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."
What actually happened (and as was discussed at length on ./ already was that Kodak and a bunch of other manufacturers agreed on a standard for hooking up a camera. Microsoft installed a default driver for the standard in the O/S. Clearly an evil thing to do.
Kodak wanted to distribute a modified driver that when tested was found to register the Kodak image software as the default for all manufacturer's cameras using the format. Needless to say the driver did not ask the user before reconfiguring their machine. The assumtion being that anyone who bought a Kodak camera was somehow Kodak property.
There is a big different between getting a bunch of pesterware drivers from the vendor of the O/S and getting them from everywhere. First thing I do with a windows box is to throw the MSN icon and the rest of the junk in the recycle bin and pull the chain on it. Then I know that they are gone for good. The Kodak driver is like the original Netscape browser, it reinstalls itself over your defaults each time it runs.
Personally I think the Kodak scheme to drive consumers to their web site to buy printed copies is somewhat naive. The first thing I discovered after buying my Nikon Coolpix was that I stopped using film for snapshots. The second was that with electronic pics you load them onto a Web site and bore your relations remotely. The print out on dead tree step can be omitted entirely.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
actually you didn't pay for the software, you paid for a license to use that software. The usage of the software that you install is legally bound by that license agreement. the license is mostly designed to prevent crime, such as copyright theft. if you don'y like it, you don't have to buy it. it's quite simple really.
It's a troll because you actually dared to critizise Microsoft. Anybody who says anything negative about MS gets modded down. You can easily get you karma back up by doing a "sure windows used to suck but I haven't rebooted my W2K box in a year and XP is even better" post. While you are at it also mention that "I love linux but I gotta have my (fill in the blank) app and windows never crashes anymore". These two formulas are guaranteed to get you a +5 from all the MS employees who troll slashdot and mod up pro-MS posts.
Really try it sometimes it works every time.
War is necrophilia.
"This board once was a great place full of insightful advocates of open source. MS saw this and waged a very succesfull war against slashdot. "
Heh. That's not true at all. I think I should know since I'm both a MS supporter and i've been here longer than yourself.
The reality is that Linux had it's day in the sun back in '98/'99. A lot of media hype went into it, and caused people to perk up.
They then investigated and found it to be unworthy.
Now you see a string of articles in the media pointing out why it is unworthy.
And the reaction of your crowd is not to go forth and fix those problems, but rather attack the messenger with venom and paranoia. Calling them "employees of MS" or whatever.
You know, Linux was so much more fun back before it attracted the anti-Microsoft crowd. That started to occur back in '96/'97 and coincided with the death of OS/2.
That was also the time when I abandoned Linux in favor of other alternatives, including Microsoft.
It's this ignorant attitude, the paranoia, the hysteria that seriously damages Linux more than any other item. It's the same problem the Amiga had, as did OS/2.
Interestingly I was a user of both of those systems as well.
One of the things that remains a life lesson was when I found out that there existed a problem in the AmigaDOS 2.04 upgrade which caused a large amount of my existing software to not function. This problem was only apparent on 68000 based machines. It was partly a fault of bad coding on the apps part, but even so the behavior changed from v1.3 to v2.0.
I posted this to comp.sys.amiga.misc back in the summer of 1992.
I was attacked with a vengeance for suggesting that there might be a problem with AmigaDOS. This consisted of approximately 400 messages to the newsgroup, and around 200 messages to my mail box.
The lesson learned. It's best not to deal with zealots.
I sold my Amiga the next month.