Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Du Jour - Talks, Upgrades, Salaries
Jeff writes: "CNN is reporting 'In a dramatic move, the new judge in the Microsoft case Friday ordered the government and the software maker into five weeks of intensive settlement talks, until Nov. 2.'" Other MS submissions coming in today: USAToday discovers the new upgrade scheme, designed to milk every last cent out of those who've locked themselves into Windows; tech-report.com goes a bit more in depth on the same subject; ZDNet hoists the black flag; MS discusses its plans to control how you compute (by the way, the license agreement for Windows Media Player now allows Microsoft to disable any software on your computer - you do read those license agreements, don't you?); Gates got $666,000 last year but won't have to apply for welfare just yet.
(*shakes from fear realizing that probably a large number of people out there are eating this garbage up as if it were as natural as poop.*)
Go Lakers!
Don't like the licensing terms? Don't like the product. Don't f!@#ing buy it! You whiners make it sound like Msft is forcing you to buy and eat a shit sandwich.
Although you may have trouble convincing your friends and family not to buy it.
Here's our opportunity....guys...if Linux is ever to be a viable operating system (at least to Corporate America) - it needs to take advantage of this....
CFO's do listen with their wallets...make Linux EASY to use, even at the expense of some of the more configurable options...and secure, and you'll see it become a viable file/web server in the market...I laugh when I hear people griping about MS service packs and a kernel has to be recompiled every week.
Follow the cue of Linux embedded devices...easy for users and admins.
----------
ah honey, we're all resplendent - Bill Mallonee
Rant warning...
People, this is no longer news. This just proves that everybody trusts Big Brother because Big Brother is always Watching Us and Caring For Us. To prove my point: How many people use the phrase Big Brother who have never read 1984 by George Orwell?
How many people know that George Orwell was just his pen name?
Democracy sounds like a good idea: the will of the majority has to be the right thing. Even though the majority is wrong it's still right.
Microsoft is right. Open Source is unamerican. The American Way is to make as much money as possible by screwing as many people as possible. Ignorance is now a virtue.
C'mon America! Microsoft is tarnishing your reputation! Stand up, show us that you care about something other than yourselves.
Heck, I should talk, I come from South Africa. At least we only pretend to be leaders in stupidity.
Where do you people come up with this tripe?
1) Intensive settlement talks:
A) The government doesn't want to lose face by ripping into the economy via tearing MSFT apart. "Let's find some way to coexist peacefully," is what they are saying. This is all going to blow over when Microsoft pays a couple billion in fines and loses its ability to make vendor-exclusive deals.
2) Upgrade Scheme
A) Any company that has the money to upgrade every time Microsoft comes out with a new OS is one I'd like to be an executive of. There are many many companies who are still running Windows 3.11 and doing fine. The upgrade treadmill isn't one that you need to be on all the time. Stop complaining every time your company feels the urge to splurge on the latest and greatest.
3) ZD commentary on XP system upgrading
A) Hasn't this horse been beaten to death? Readers of ZDnet should be fully aware of the XP system change restrictions. Hell, the talkback articles all bitch about it all day long. This is not news to anyone.
4) Control computing...
A) Uh, this article was about the Microsoft e-Reader and its increased usage and benefits. Can someone explain how "MS discusses its plans to control how you computer" was interpreted into this?
5) $666,000
A) Heh heh heh. Now that's funny.
6) Welfare?
A) I hope Michael isn't implying that anyone not in the top 15 richest people are somehow in need of welfare.
Jeez...
"Linux must be this..." "Linux must be that..."
The reason most of us are drawn to this particular OS is because of all the different flavors to choose from. Let Corel or Red Hat make their "standard" Corporate Distro, and the rest of us will use Slackware to learn and play, and Debian for our personal projects. The PPC geek will run yellowdog, &c, &c.
Standardizing Linux will make it the new Windows. This is the most frustrating thing about Linux zealotry: Linux should NOT replace Windows! It should compete with it -- be different from it.
Screwdrivers and wrenches are separate tools for a reason.
ms
"No fingers. Just thumbs."
Please... for the love of God. Document your OS programs as if you were speaking to retards. Make little pretty diagrams. Make installation instructions for the layman. If GUI, then have tooltips. Make a tutorial. Even a flash demo with instructions....
Just document. Any documentation is better than none, but unfortunatly, in OSS none is often what is to be found.
-Kraft
Live and let live
Can someone please explain how regulating an abusive monopoloy like Microsoft hurts the economy?
Can someone please explain the linkage that this Judge sees between the WTC attack and allowing Microsoft to continue its crime spree?
Microsoft and the Microsoft Tax is, in fact, a drag on the economy. Microsoft was fairly successful at making millions of dollars for a few of their share holders and employees. Other than that, they pay no taxes and only leach money from the economy and corporations that they have enslaved on the upgrade treadmill.
What products does Microsoft make that aren't commoditized and couldn't easily be replaced? None.
The only hope that we have now, once this Judge and the DOJ have capitulated is that the States will seek redress of this case. Perhaps companies like AOL will take it upon themselves to file legal action following this settlement debacle. Also, the US legal system will be looking rather pathetic after the EU and places like Korea crack down while Microsoft skates in the States.
How many of you remember when Scully left Apple and Micheal Spindler was large and in charge?
He stood in front of the assembled masses and said "We are committed to maintaining high shareholder value."
Microsoft is now doing exactly what Apple did. Microsoft is working to maximize its cash flow, and that means taking as much as they can from the pockets of its customers. Doing anything BUT this might subject them to shareholder lawsuits.
Just like IBM once did. And Apple once did. Both companies had a crash and burn phase, and have had a rebuilding phase. Microsoft is now heading to the crash and burn phase. They will eventually rebuild, as they are a cash rich company.
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
it's nice to think the market will do to MS what it did to IBM, but you must remember that with IBM viable alternatives which functioned *identically* to IBM's product were available.
with MS there is no 'windows clone' to switch to, the only way that the market could take care of MS is by switching to another product, and right now there is nothing. linux is not what most people need. i doubt it ever will be.
...dave
Think different? I'd be happy if most people would just think...
The truth is, the new upgrading scheme might become a boon for other "movements", including Open Source. IT directors will see the new scheme and make one of two choices:
1.) Follow it, and receive the "discounts" incurred with every 2-year upgrade.
2.) Not purchase anything.
This is different than previous licenses, where "not purchase anything" meant skipping an upgrade cycle. If Microsoft penalizes IT directors for skipping a cycle by charging more for the next cycle, IT directors will simply skip that one too. They aren't stupid. They will wait until they have enough money to purchase the latest and greatest upgrade, and move everyone at that point (at a much longer base than every 2-3 years).
"Locked in" means absolutely nothing. In fact, if this plays out logicially, the opposite will come true.
"There are a lot of (angry) chief information officers out there," says Steven Steinbrecher, CIO for California's Contra Costa County. His 3-year costs will jump to $651 per desktop from $335.
Q.E.D.
Okay, but look at it from Microsoft's perspective: price almost doubles, by the clients' own calculations. Even if HALF the Windows users jump ship (not likely!), they'll still have broken even. Of course, break even isn't what they're going for, but do you really think HALF of the market will abandon windows in the next 2 years?
What you might call 'bias' many others might simply call upholding the law.
That said, Microsoft seems to be simply protecting its file format. They can only affect software that can read protected WMA files (which, at this point, only includes Media Player). It would be silly to assume, especially in a lawsuit-driven atmosphere like copyright infringement, that Microsoft would allow other software to visibly change/take over rights management from the OS. Just think if record companies started getting into a lawsuit war with Microsoft!
Bottom line: it's their file format, not an open one, people. They are free to control it however they wish. If you don't like it, don't use it.
Let's say that's correct -- so what? The issue (as far as antitrust is concerned) isn't how much money MSFT makes, it's their monopoly. If they lose a significant chunk of users, their monopoly is gone regardless of whether or not profits are down.
I certainly can't argue that getting the government involved often seems to do more harm than good.
However, my faith in the free market to address issues effectively and in a timely fashion is not as strong as yours. For example, some would say that the free market forced airline fares below where they could afford reasonable security. Well, the free market has acted and the airlines are now in danger of folding due to an increased fear of flying. So what happens? The government steps in and bails them out. Free market in action, not.
Since Microsoft software is needed to keep the government and industry running, we could face bailing them out if their stock collapsed after a really malicious worm. Will you be complaining about government interference then?
Either we need to get the government proactively involved to avoid disasters, or we need to let those business with shoddy practices and irresponsible policies fold up their tent when they are caught. Even if it means the economy tanks into a depression and people die of hunger. It seems to me that a litte interference is better than random economic disasters that may not occur until decades after the corporate policies are formed.
The free market only cares about money. Things like freedom, human rights, and a viable ecology for our grandchildren are not factored into decision making. That's what the government is for, whether it is currently doing it's job well or not. If businesses didn't influence the government with their money, it would probably run much better, for starters.
Female Prison Rape in NY
The market may or may not take care of MS, but it didn't take care of IBM without the governments help... ...sort of.
IBM was so wary of antitrust suits they hamstrung themselves. They would have acted very differently if there was no antitrust threat. MS seems to be doing the exact reverse, they seem to be ignoring the whole antitrust thing, and hoping it will go away.
In addtion to the Windows, Office, and Exchange upgrades that Microsoft is trying to make mandatory, they have instituted a similar scheme covering a product over which they have much more control. By "expiring" MCSE certification for hundreds of thousands of users, they are trying to force people to upgrade to Windows 2000 or Windows XP certification. This provides instant revenue from people paying to take tests and buy test prep books, but it also dovetails nicely with the software upgrade scheme.
Forcing MCSE upgrades creates a pool of people qualified to support the new software that companies are forced to purchase. They actually have the leverage to force IT people to learn new software so companies will have people qualified to install and manage the new stuff, thereby removing one of the biggest roadblocks to constant upgrading.
Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
Why should I bother to read all these agreements when:
1) They are printed to be intentionally difficult to read.
2) They are not intelligible to anyone not schooled in the twisted, mangled version of the English language they are written in.
3) I can't afford to pay a lawyer to interpret them for me every time.
4) I would probably still miss the sentence that negates all my rights.
Edward Burr
Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
"There are a lot of (angry) chief information officers out there," says Steven Steinbrecher, CIO for California's Contra Costa County. His 3-year costs will jump to $651 per desktop from $335.
Aren't these costs fairly insignifcant with respect to the costs of actually having the employees? $600 over the course of 3 years isn't much at all, when compared to a minimum wage salary.
Also, I suspect in their outrage, these CIOs are intentionally choosing their worst case scenario to make the situation look worse than it is.
I'm not supporting microsoft here, but it would be nice if you didn't have to consider what OS version / Browser / Linux Distro / Toaster Specification the user had when developing software.
Captain_Frisk
This is great news. I've had a theory about the inevitable doom of Microsoft for some time now, and it seems to be holding up.
Let's look at the facts:
This creates an interesting dynamic. Microsoft needs to make more money, but they already have really fat margins and a monopoly. Solution? Charge their existing customers more money. Since consumers purchase according to a cost/benefit tally, Microsoft must convince consumers that the benefit of paying more money for upgrades outweighs the costs.
Inevitably, the continually increasing cost will outweigh the benefits. That's what you're seeing now. Windows 2000 is "good enough", and people just don't want to pay any more. Microsoft is trying to force people to upgrade, and people are starting to consider alternatives with a better cost/benefit ratio. End result? Linux and MacOS will thrive because they are more affordable alternatives. The Microsoft monopoly will eventually fade away and Unix will inherit the earth.
This
This is really infuriating IT people -- a lot of large companies wait months, or even a couple of years, before doing an OS upgrade, mainly because they need to see if the new version will break anything. As it is, a lot of companies are still using NT4 over Win2K, because they haven't gotten around to upgrading, or because they're waiting for XP. If Microsoft had already instituted their proposed license changes, they would have to pay full price for XP, not just the price for an upgrade.
Ooh, there's a good idea, let's trust Microsoft to decide what "disable" means. The examples you're giving don't actually disable the software -- they just change file associations. While you may be right -- maybe they just mean changing the file associations -- I don't want any software to come bundled with an OS with that kind of clause in the license, because it gives them a blank check to use in the future. And given the legislation they've pushed for, like the UCITA, I wouldn't put it past them.With the deprecation or removal of an API, they can put people out of business, or send companies into bankruptcy.
MSFT has already done that sort of thing already, at least with 3D rendering APIs, and of course, to Netscape.
Industry analysts acknowledge this sort of thing. Go here, and look for the Dan Kuznetsky quote:
.The old Software Publishers Association knew about it. They issued a white paper on the topic. Read pages 12 to 15 of that document for an older view of the problem.
Let Microsoft price itself out of business if they want to.
Frankly, as a personal user of Windows, I can care less whether or not corporate users get sweetheart deals by buying in bulk. Hell, maybe if they paid the same price for Windows XX that I did each upgrade, then maybe the price for everyone else would be less. (then again, maybe not)
Sure Habitat for Humanity could take it in the shorts, but under the new pricing scheme (yeah, it's a scheme) they STILL will pay less than I do.
Here's an idea: Maybe I should incorporate in order to get a better deal out of M$...
144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!