Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Would Settle For The Children
The news from MSNBC
is that Microsoft wants to, er, settle for the children. Take that
whichever way you want. They propose to settle civil anti-trust cases (not the DoJ suit) with a $1.1 billion (retail value) spanking (they
have $36 billion in the bank), consisting of free computer goodies to our nation's poorest schools (the first hit's free, kids). I'm sure Microsoft will upgrade those old computers to keep them current, in perpetuity, for free, out of the kindness of their hearts, but in an apparent oversight that was left out of the news report. Of that $1.1 billion, $0.9 billion will be software presumably valued at whatever Microsoft wants to charge (see "monopoly"). For hardware and (laughable) training/support costs, Microsoft will be docked three weeks' worth of interest on their cashpile; they will seek matching funds for the remainder, I am not making this up. Some lawyers opposed this but "concluded that Microsoft's monopoly already is so pervasive that students would have to learn to use these products anyway in the workplace." Update: 11/20 21:22 GMT by M : Heh. Red Hat offers an alternative to Microsoft's settlement proposal - you provide hardware, we'll provide software.
... at wired: http://www.wired.com/news/antitrust/0,1551,48543,0 0.html
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
"You are a monopoly. As punishment, you must provide free software to the public schools, so that you can spread even further. Bad Microsoft! Now get back to replacing those foreign operating systems."
You're very right, Jamie. The double-meaning in the title *is* hilarious.
Their punishment is to help ensure that the monopoly they have continues to the next generation?
While I really don't have a problem with microsofts products, their anti-competitive business stance is very disturbing. .9 billion given back to them. How sad.
DOJ sues them for giving their products away and crushing competition all the while increasing their monopolistic presence.....so as a remedy MS is forced to give away their products to school kids thus crushing competition and increasing their monopolistic presence. Sounds fair.
Joe Chemo would be proud. This is exactly what antitrust laws are supposed to prevent.
No SIG for you!
Microsoft has a way of making "viable court-imposed punishments" out of shrewd business moves.
If they really wanted to show us how sorry they are, they would put Macs in the schools.
perhaps i'm an idealist but i find it totally disheartening that my beloved US of A is punishing its citizens by supporting microsoft's practices.
Nosce te Ipsum
How about Microsoft has to spend the money to buy the computers, but must put free (as in speech, not beer) software on the computers. Microsoft then helps out the schools without having to spend all that money on expensive software. That is what it's all about, right? Helping out the schools?
At least all the money is directed toward a good cause.
that's interesting, because jamie said that Of that $1.1 billion, $0.9 billion will be software presumably valued at whatever Microsoft wants to charge . so i would say that nearly all the money is directed back to Microsoft.
but i guess whether or not that is a good cause is up for debate.
-sam
burn the computers. go back to the abacus.
At my most cynical, I don't think I could have come up with a more worthless settlement...
__
Do ya feel happy-go-lucky, punk?
This is so bad because of what you said. It's a business decision that Microsoft might make, it's not in any way something that should be a settlement for lawsuits. "As a penalty, we'll engage in a massive marketing campaign...".
...And furthermore, we here at Microsoft will allow this group of thirty-one geishas to massage us as we skip a week's worth of board meetings! Harsh, you say? We haven't even told you about the part with the spankings and the oral sex!!!
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
Can we concentrate on either loving or hating Microsoft? All this wavering back and forth is making me dizzy!
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
I bet they write off the whole 1.1b as a bussines expense and save on taxes this year.
A real penalty would be 1.1 Billion in hardware. If you let them include the software, credit it for it's actual value (7 cents per CD).
SD
âoeWho knew something as harmless as willful ignorance could end up having real consequences?â
Everyone who believes this giveaway actually "costs" them anything please raise your hand. So the penalty for overcharging millions of consumers is to allow them to "upgrade" all the schools (start them young!) with software that has an explicit forced march built into the license.
And this was a plaintiff's attorney who came up with this? Oh yeah, the lawyer was only looking at dollar signs. And who wants to bet the attorney's fees will be based on a percentage of the $1.1 billion MS is claiming this will "cost" them?
Nope, no sig
<obvious>Why not hook the kids up to CocaCola and BigMac's, IV'd.</obvious>
.. don't let your kids get left behind by forcing them to think "My Documents" is where their files are, no matter which computer/OS/etc they are on.
/surely/ be stuck in places when they grow up when only Coke is available).
This is kind of backwards if you want your next generation to be tech-saavy. Windows ABSTRACTS computers, removing the need (for most people) to actually know how a computer (and software) operates. In this respect, the world will be FORCED to at least have a small understanding of the technology
At any rate, it's insane. Would we let Coke donate lots of Coke to kids as a settlement (knowing that they'll
What strikes me the most is the acceptance that Windows will be the dominant platform for the next 80 years. Fortunately, this will not be true. Very few companies even stay in business that long.
"Old man yells at systemd"
That reminds me of an old forward, the difference between drug dealers and programmers:
Drug Dealers:
-Refer to their clients as "users"
-"The first one's free!"
-Have important South-East Asian connections (to help move the stuff)
-Strange jargon: "Stick," "Rock,", "Dime bag,"
-Realize that there's tons of cash in the 14- to 25-year-old market.
-Job is assisted by the industry's producing
newer, more potent mixes.
-Often seen in the company of pushers,pimps and hustlers.
-Their product causes unhealthy addictions.
-Do your job well, and you can sleep with sexy movie stars who depend on you.
Programmers:
-Refer to their clients as "users"
-"Download a free trial version!"
-Have important South-East Asian connections (to help debug code)
-Strange jargon:"SCSI," "RTFM", "Java," "ISDN".
-Realize that there's tons of cash in the 14- to 25-year-old market.
-Job is assisted by the industry's producing newer, faster, more potent machines.
-Often seen in the company of salesman,
marketing people and venture capitalists.
-DOOM. Marathon. SimCity. Command&Conquor. 'Nuff said
-Damn! Damn! DAMN!!!
Either hell has frozen over or I missed something. Microsoft has not triumphed over the government, as MSNBC claims. AFAIK, the 18 states involved are still in discussion about the goverment settlement. Just like MS, portrarying themselves as the victim. "We won the case against the government, now we just have to work out these little suits. The big, cuddly teddy bear you as Microsoft will not give in... we will fight to stay strong". Yeah, bite me. Microsoft is not good for the consumer, yet they're parading themselves around like the consumer is on THEIR side.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
I imagine MS is looking to do the same thing here. It will be a good thing for MS, a good thing for the schools, what the hell right? Wrong. I am really disapointed that they would try and do this a means to reach settlement, makes the whole thing rather hollow. If they had done this just because they felt like it I'd probably support them in it, now they just look slimy.
Errr, more slimy.
Are they kidding? This doesn't solve anything; it makes it worse! By providing software _for free_ to such a large number of people, the software now becomes the defacto standard for yet another group of people. These students will grow up in Microsoft(TM) America and like so many people before them be hooked into software that they'll be reluctant to leave in the future.
And using poorer schools... that's good. These schools would have previously been a good "target market" for OSS... can't beat the price. Now MS gets three victories for the price of none... they get the plaintiffs off of their backs, they get the PR boost that always comes with helping poor children, and they get a win against OSS. And what does it cost them? A "virtual" $1.1 billion. They're giving software to people that probably wouldn't have bought it in the first place, and they're giving away a product based on its RETAIL value; it costs MS very little to give this software away. The realized cost to MS will probably be less than $100 million. Much less.
Another Seattlement, if you ask me. I think I'm going to give up and be a rice farmer now... until Microsoft (TM) Wheat pushes me out of the staple foods market.
-- Minds are like parachutes... they work best when open.
Hi! I am sending you this CD-ROM as part of an antitrust settlement...
But seriously--if Microsoft is to be punished, shouldn't Microsoft be forced to give all the poor children a PC with Linux on it? If Bill Gates was forced to do 100,000 RHL 6.x installs w/o kickstart, I bet he would never ever ever ever again stifle competition or build a vertical monopoly.
The proposed settlement is equivalent to giving a burglar keys to every house in the neighborhood, or giving a gun and rubber gloves to a murderer. The principle of punishment is to deter the perpetrator should the desire to commit crime arise again.
"What is the sound of one belly slapping?"
Jamie's ignores the inconvenient fact it is not clear that any harm to consumers could be proved at all. The unanimous Appellate Court decision in US v. Miscrosoft was pretty clear that any plaitiff representing consumers would need to prove net harm according to a stiff set of tests. I'd bet on Microsoft's odds to win that test in a court of law. (In fact, I continue to do so, since I'm not only an employee of the company, but continue to hold on to the bulk of the shares I've ever bought or been granted. My money is where my mouth is.)
However, even ignoring that, the key computation lay in asking how much each consumer would collect even if the most generous award were handed down. It turns out that the total payout would be less than $10/consumer before legal costs, and negative afterwards. The court isn't willing to go forward with a class-action lawsuit that will harm the plaitiffs even if they win.
This is a solution that makes everybody with a legitimate stake in the outcome win. Consumers benefit by getting something, the lawyers benefit by getting their costs covered, and Microsoft benefits by not having to go through another trial. The only losers are the third parties that make money off the continued controversy. I don't have a lot of sympathy for Larry Ellison or Scott McNealy, though -- do you?
This is brilliant! It's too bad that the cigarette companies doled out all that cash to various parties in their settlements. What a waste. They could've just sent a years worth of cigarettes to the nations poorest schools.
Where was this Michael Hausfeld fellow when we needed him?
-Erik
Maybe I'm being cynical, but Microsoft providing the software for these institutions for free would be a very good move on their part to slow down the adoption of alternative operating systems and office suites. It's here, in schools that cannot afford the MS pricing anymore, that the erosion of MS monopoly will begin, and Microsoft has proposed a very effective counter measure to it. They slow down Linux and OSS adoption, and get DOJ off their backs. Both with one strike.
Then again, maybe they're just doing it for the goodness of their hearts...
you have to see this as a good thing for schools.
i agree, schools getting free computers and software is a good thing. but what i do not understand is how this is supposed to punish Microsoft or deter them from doing it all again. it is like distracting a small child (the US government) with something shiny (money for schools) while you take the rest of their toys away. okay, so it's nothing like that. but anyway...
-sam
burn the computers. go back to the abacus.
Will, for a long time it has been common practice here at /. to bash M$ -- and doing so for good reasons after all I strongly believe that that this community is responsible, directly or indirectly to have M$ face justice. But now it seems to me that the love to hate M$ is getting everywhere and out of control.
The article reported by MSNBC is focusing on small part of the whole settlement and just like any bad report taken out of context, if the report is focused on one element, it tend to paint a picture that this *is* all what the subject is all about where it isn't.
Karma stuck at 50? Add 2-5 inches.. err.. 2-5x Karmas Count to your pen1es.. err.. Karma all naturally and private
In other words, this (i) helps Microsoft strengthen their Monopoly, (ii) costs Microsoft little more than $200 million, and (iii) probably harms children.
The only way any kind of settlement with Microsoft will accomplish anything is if the people who make up Microsoft's leadership actually alter their behavior.
This latest proposal shows that Microsoft is fundamentally incapable of changing its core DNA to suit a new paradigm. While all public businesses are driven by valuation, Microsoft doesn't realize that when a corporation reaches a certain size and power in the marketplace, it carries additional responsibilities.
Microsoft prides itself on providing boundless upward value to stockholders, but it seems to have a huge mental block when it comes to assessing its role in the larger culture.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
In this day and age, I think most of us have more important things to worry about than wheather the disadvantaged poor kids will be using Microsoft or non-Microsoft products.
Really, who gives a shit! I mean, why not just say:
"Wow, that's really a nice thing to do for kids who would otherwise probably not get a chance to use a computer."
and go on about your business? I have really come full circle in this whole anti-Microsoft thing. I liked and used MS products, then abandoned them in favor of their *nix counterparts. Lately, though, I've come to realize what a load of crap most of the *nix software is.
The fact is, the Internet, and computer software in general are not some magical thing that doesn't have to follow the rules like the rest of the world. Companies like Microsoft are in this business to make money, and frankly Bill Gates does an extremely good job at making money. His company makes a product that people want, and he has every right to promote it and try to get people to buy it. Just like any other product.
People, you need to realize that just because a company actually wants you to *pay* for something, that doesnt' automatically make it illegal. I mean, why should they be a company if they can't make any money?
Getting back on topic, I think it's great that Microsoft is doing this, as it will give a chance to kids who wouldn't otherwise have one.
"A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but doesn't have an air force." -William Blum
Sorry. This presupposes that the children will benefit from being inundated with MS software. In the long run, they won't. Neither does the rest of the world: that's what this case is about. Your statements sound reasonable, until you realize that they presuppose what they're trying to show. That doesn't work.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
Over the course of the last couple years I've reached the conclusion that Microsoft doesn't really care about money except for it's use as a catalyst for acheiving World Domination(tm). It seems as if they're always sacrificing large amounts of cash simply for the purpose of dominating yet another market - even when that market isn't very lucrative. I don't look forward to the day that MS stages their coup and forces their enemies into work camps.
I'm really only half joking.
"Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
That way you can have a settlement with the DOJ in which you give away free copies of Linux.
-- SIGFPE
According to this idea....
-MS gets to increase it's market share(by displacing Macs in schools)
-Does not need to change it's monopolistic practices
-Gets a $1.1 billion tax writeoff(They will try to write that off)
Wow, sounds like a great deal....for Microsoft and states idiotic enough to sign this(Kickbacks anyone?)
-Henry
"Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
If I was in charge of IT at the school, I would certainly push to take the computers and immediately reformat the drive and install Linux. I wonder if Microsoft would allow that?
ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
About twenty bucks.
.iso's "valued" at fourty bucks a pop?
Ain't the software business grand?
Can I pay MY legal fines by donating Red Hat
KFG
Today, Phillip Morris, manufacturer of cigarette products, agreed to settle all pending lawsuits that allege that they (PM) sold cigarettes to underage smokers.
The generous $1.9B settlement provides for Phillip Morris to provide, free of charge, a lifetime of tobacco products to every Junior and Middle school in America. The settlement would consist of $1.1B worth of prepared tobacco products, and $800M worth of reconditioned ashtrays and smoke detectors.
Phillip Morris attorney Hugh Smokem commented that "This is an equitable settlement which answers our critics charges that we sell tobacco products to minors. Clearly, no tobacco will be sold here."
30
$1.1 billion worth of software does not cost Microsoft anything. It's essentially free for Microsoft to crank out more software since the R&D has already been paid for. That reduces this so-called "settlement" to just a Microsoft marketing campaign.
Best solution: they must contribute $billion or so of cold, hard, cash to a fund for school technology improvement. Then independent technical experts and educators can suggest uses for the money that don't necessarily benefit Microsoft. This settlement is a total victory for Microsoft - I'd hate to see what happens when they actually win a case...
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
I can get a very basic PC setup with no software for about $600 and if I purchase XP for $100 and XP Office for another $500 then I have a potential free system for the needy that cost a total of $1,200. So about 50% of the cost is for MS software and the other 50% is for some lame hardware. By the MS calcualtions the software will cost just over 80% of the total. Which leads me to wonder what kind of hardware they are purchasing to give to the needy for free?
*notes it is not April 1*
You gotta be shitting me.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
those are just a start. and okay, so number 3 was not noble at all... can't blame me for trying, right?
-samburn the computers. go back to the abacus.
Someone at MS marketing is a genious. How can you say no to giving free software and computers to the poorest children in the country?
I'm so disgusted by this prospect I can hardly hold back the bial.
How can Americans take this abuse? It's rediculous. This isn't a remedy to Microsoft's monopoly, it's a ploy to give the remain state's lawyers a way to exit this case while leaving MS with almost no pain. What's it really costing MS to print up some more software and give it away? Nothing. In fact it grows their business.
This whole case has stunk badly since the new administration took over and there's little hope that it will start smelling like a rose now.
Redmond, Washington's Microsoft corporation today signed a deal as a part of their antitrust suit settlement for a record $1.5 billion worth of Macintosh hardware and software from Apple Computer. This purchase is supposed to go to schools, where the majority of WORKING systems are already Macintosh computers anyway. When asked about the deal, Microsoft's iconic despot Willy Gates replied "I go way back with Apple, so I figured I would throw them a bone. This is just a slap on the wrist anyway, so why not give some of this to charity?" No word on whether or not Gates was referring to the schools, or Microsoft's sometime partner Apple computer as the charity. Apple Computer's iCEO, Steve Jobs, was unavailable for comment, but is rumored to be in satisfactory condition and recovering from the shock of seeing the Purchase Order in a Bay Area hospital.
- Freed
"Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love." -Turkish Proverb
This is as if Exxon had offered to sink another tanker to settle the Valdez case...
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
the fate was sealed for this entire case
well considering this is not the DOJ case, instead this is a class action case for those who were overcharged for windows licenses, who is president becomes much less of an issue. it is being prosecuted by lawyers, not the government.
what IS interesting is that this settlement separates the attorney's fees from the amount of the settlement - microsoft pays money on top of the settlement fee to a tune of whatever amount the judge decides the attorneys should be paid.
my vote? the judge accepts the settlement, prescribes normal attorney's fees, and another couple billion in 'miscellaneous court costs'.
-sam
burn the computers. go back to the abacus.
No, according to the article, they wouldn't be getting better computers, they'd be getting reconditioned(!) computers and MS software.
Oh dear, I guess I'm "Microsoft bashing" now. And when I say that it was grey and cloudy here this morning, I guess I'm "weather bashing". I'm such a meanie.
I'm sure this is an offer direct from Billy's heart, and the fact that it amounts to a slap on the wrist and would be a grab for more early mindshare and -- thanks to XP/IE defaults -- would enable MS to collect info on a lucrative market segment is purely accidental.
Bullshit. These kids need better computers in their classrooms the way staving Afghanis need shiny new Air Jordans.
These kids need school buildings that aren't falling down, schools that are free of violence, teachers who are competent and well-paid, and textbooks that are up to date. Computers in the classroom (other than in progamming and clerical classes, of course) is a fad that will ultimately have as much revolutionary impact as educational filmstrips. (Beep.)
This is a loss for everyone except Microsoft. In any sane nation, their corporate charter would have been revoked long ago, their corporate HQ razed and the ground salted, and Gates would have spent a week in the pillory, being pelted with rotten tomatoes and old DOS manuals.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Let's face it: Being familiar with MS Windows is a much more useful skill for most school-leavers than being familiar with Linux is. This software and these computers are going to the schools with kids who are the least likely to have access to a computer at home, so learning this stuff at school is very important to them. If they want to dual-boot these computers with Linux, there's nothing stopping them from doing that, but the idea that these poor kids would end up being forced to learn something that for most intents and purposes is useless to them in the job marketplace simply because a load of computer programmers with lofty ideals would rather that they learn a free operating system instead of one by 'Old Bill' is abhorrent to me.
concluded that each member of the plaintiff class -- at least 65 million computer buyers -- would receive as little as $10 in a settlement or court victory. That would be less than the cost of identifying class members and sending payment, meaning most of the money from Microsoft would be swallowed by administrative costs -- and attorney fees. IANAL, but how can this be considered a reasonable settlement?!! How about punitive damages of three or four times the actual damages plus MS pays the administrative costs. But given what's been decided, can someone come up with a Scarlet "M", as in MONOPOLY, to use as the Window's splash screen and an explanatory note to the effect that Microsoft provided the computer as punishment for criminal behavior.
It doesn't matter how many schools microsoft "gives" software to. These kids aren't going to learn marketable skills. What matters are the quality of teachers and the student's willingness to learn. My kids attend a private school and have a computer class. What are they learning? Typing. Because the teacher doesn't know anything else. What do you think happens in poor schools? We'll be lucky if they're even turned on. And from that point on, it's math blaster and mavis beacon. This won't add one bit to the user base of microsoft tools. The lucky kids learn word, which is knowledge transferrable to another product anyway.
Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
MS are actually not charging ridiculous prices ... They abused their monopoly by bundling Internet Explorer with Windows, hurting Netscape.
While at the same time charging $40-$50 more for Windows (according to their own internal documents) than the market should have supported. So let's do the math:
Windows = $49
Netscape = $25
Windows + monopoly + Internet Explorer = $99
Canecel terms and we have Internet Exporer = $50. If the things they give away are subsidised by an illegally leveraged monopoly, the real cost of the things "given away" is actually the cost overcharged by virture of that monopoly.
Nope, no sig
First off, I should say that I *am* a lawyer..though I no longer practice (tech is far more entertaining):
This is an archetypical pro-business civil settlement. MS appears to be minorly rebuked, yet comes away with a PR and marketing triumph. On one hand, you have *seriously* needy public schools getting new and arguably functional hardware and software. That is, overall, a really good thing (N.B. I see nothing addressing issues of integration, support or training and am thus inclined to think that much of this, if it comes to pass, will be largely un-under-utilized..but that is another matter). Any settlement that touches addressing these shortcomings is at least worth considering...
However, as was pointed out elsewhere, MS is sitting on about $36BB cash and what is largely being "offered" here is in the form of software and hardware ($900MMish based on MS valuations) and here is the rub. That $900MM has an actual cost of somewhere in the neighborhood of $50MM (I have nothing to base this number on and I wager it will be lower than than...), that is to say that the actual cost to MS is de minimus.
In exchange for this minor offering to the legal gods (or demons), MS will *gain* a really substantial marketing coup...market penetration in a very young, eager and hungry market group..school children. (aside: I am sorry, I have this great image of RJ Reynolds handing out cigarettes at schools to settle one of the marketing class actions they have faced...) This is truly a win-win for MS...very little actual cost and a huge marketing upside.
The entire idea behind class actions and/or punitive damages is the idea of *punishing* a corporation for wrongdoing at the corporate level. It is always a matter of ratios. As a percentage of income/wealth, a $100 speeding ticket *hurts* the recipient to a certain extent...as it should. Here, we are faced with a situation where MS will receive the equivalent of a $1 fine *and* win Man of the Year.
If they are to be "punished" for corporate wrongdoing (rather well documented, at this point), then do so...make it meaningful and make it *hurt*. Otherwise, it is simply a cost of doing business and a cost that they have long demonstrated that they will willingly bear.
best,
/rootrot
--
Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, most do.
- Bertrand Russell
Uh, the alternative is not a lump sum payment to any government. This is a settlement of the *private*, class-action, civil suits brought againts the company by users purporting to have been materially harmed by the monopoly. The alternative is a lump payment to any SOB who wants in on the class. Wired says about $10 bucks a head after attorneys' fees.
This is eerily like big tobacco settling their suits by providing free cartons for distribution in schools. Locking in another generation of lusers.
The size of the MS monopoly is starting to generate a gravity-like field which distorts perception of reality in its presence. Even ostensibly unbiased media coverage of MS seems boggled as to how to speak about them. I can't imagine any other entity in any other industry even suggesting such a thing. And now MS is dictating security policy on Capital Hill. Its like GM setting emmissions standards. Thankfully, the Fates look askance at such hubris.
And lately I do too. Until a few months ago I liked to imagine that I understood peoples fear of the unknown, their reliance on the familiar; I took a gentle, only slightly patronizing tone with Windows users. Now I regard them all as moral beggars. If you run Windows you are wrong, and should be shunned from polite society.
illegitimii non ingravare
Have you not been reading the case? at least one of the points at issue is that M$ has been forcing hardware vewndors who sell its product to not carry competing products (ie. if you want to make a PC with Windows on it you can't sell PCs with Linux or Be, or etc on it).
The result - I couldn't buy a laptop with Linux, or even a blank one to put Linux on myself - now because of the DoJ suit things have changed (a little). That's called "leveraging a monopoly" it's illegal
So long as a customer goes to buy a PC at a brand leader like Dell, or Compaq, or Gateway and they don't have a choice of a non-M$ OS, or of one without an OS (at a lower price of course) then we don't have a choice.
PS: you want to buy all the old copies of Windows I was forced to buy with my last few computers? oh wait I'm not allowed to sell them - I was forced to pay for them, declined to accept the license but seemingly am still bound by conditions in the license I didn't accept that bar me from selling it
concluded that Microsoft's monopoly already is so pervasive that students would have to learn to use these products anyway in the workplace.
and start teaching concepts!!!
no one needs to know how to use MS Word, they jut need to know the basic fundimentals of how to navigate a computer GUI, how to use a mouse, how to type, and some general features that are intrinsic in all applicationslike save, copy, paste, ect. then terach them how to use a wordproccesor, ie how to pick a font, hoe to pick font size, how to type, how to save, etc. these skills will teach children what they need so they can have a much easier time moving from one platform to another or from Word to Word perfect or star office. it is more valuable to be cappable of picking up a piece of software, looking at it for a few min while you apply your previouse knowlege, and then begin to use it than it is to just know how to use a spesific piece of software.
I am in desktop support, I don't know everything, but if a person asks me how to do somthing, I can figure it out even if I have never used the application before (I work for a state agency, lots of diffrent custom crap software).
skills like that are what is important, not memorising how to save a document in word, but to know what to look for when you want to save somthing.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
I do believe that Microsoft deserves a harsher punishment than donating software, but it's a decent start.
Unfortunately this isn't the start. It's the end. It's not like the deal is going to get any better for the prosecution. It's not even a punishment really. Microsoft will most likely end up MAKING MONEY on this deal. That's pretty screwed up. This has GOT to be something that MS lawyers dreamed up.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Suppose for a moment that Disney has been convicted of lacing their movies with illegal, subliminal messages to trick viewers into purchasing Disney products. Suppose that to make ammends they offer to donate $1B worth of "educational" videos to schools but that these "educational" videos also contain the subliminal messages. Would you support the Disney "settlement" in this case? Sure kids may learn a little more with the new videos, but as a side effect the original problem of subliminal messages not only persists but is actually made much worse through the expansion of their audience into these schools. Now replace "Disney" with "Microsoft" and "subliminal messages" with "anti-competitive behaviour" and you have the situation with Microsoft.
-----
Free P2P Backup, Windows & Linux
A local school for "difficult children" was awarded a grant to get these kids all new laptops. The kids then got to learn a valuable lesson about economics via the resale of said laptops to unscrupulous others.
What is a school going to do with these computers when the teachers aren't trained on how to use them? Is someone going to pay for these classes?
Instead, invest money into teacher salaries so that they can afford to bring in the better candidates. Considering many parents leave it up to the teachers to essentially raise their kids anyway, we should be paying these folks accordingly.
This agreement is such bullshit that it boggles the mind.
Microsoft gives away some of it's software to schools that could not have afforded it anyway (so they are really not losing potential revenues).
The real kicker of this settlement is that it sounds like Microsoft will get to value the software at its reatail value and not at the actual marginal cost to Microsoft
Microsoft loses almost no money from giving away the software, except the cost of distributing the cd's. So they get to write-off $1.1 billion in profits, value the give-away at $1.1 billion, but their actual costs are only pennies per installation. So if they value windows XP at $200 but the actual costs of distribution and media on that one istallation are (let's be generous) $5, you can see that this $1.1 billion settlement really costs them only $25 million dollars (taking the $200:$5 ratio of stated-value:actual-cost used earlier).
Now since this $1.1 billion dollars is subtracted from their income, and assuming Microsoft pays about 15% corporate taxes, we can see that they get a $165 million write-off for about $25 million dollars. In other words, Microsoft ends up $140 million dollars richer from this deal.
Now there is $128 million in training and support they are promising (again, real cost to Microsoft is probably less) but even that leaves them with a profit. There are vague promises of setting up a foundation with up to $250 million, but that is not a firm number.
Also they will be trying to obtain matching funds from other charities, to leverage this operation.
And when you get down to brass tacks, this deal benefits Microsoft in a very important way. This gives them an excuse to train millions of schoolkids on how to use their stupid software so that when these kids eventually look for jobs their employers will have to buy software from Microsoft because that is what their employees have been trained on.
Also Microsoft gets good P.R. for "helping disadvantaged kids" (ha!) and don't have to spend millions more staying in court and risking a truly costly jury award.
In summary, Microsoft gets to escape any future civil liability, while instituting a training program that makes their software more valuable at virtually no cost, or even a cash gain for themselves. And all the lawyers will get fat fees.
Sounds like a great deal for Microsoft. Now what would be really good is if Microsoft had to spend $1.1 billion dollars deploying other companies software in disadvantaged schools. Wouldn't it be great to know that the Linux or FreeBSD or Oracle, etc., etc., installation at your local school being paid for by Linux?
evanchik.net
It's getting rediculous when you don't even bother to read the articles properly before posting the headlines, thus biasing people. You are far from an unbiased news source...
... this is NOT EQUAL TO $1.1B.
$900m in software + 200,000 reconditioned computers + $90m in teacher training + $38m in technical support + $250m for the foundation + $160 to teach kids how to work with computers, guys, basic math.
900 + 90 + 38 + 250 + (est $40m for the computers) + 160 = $1478m
I watch all of the people here who complain without even reading the articles, and believing word-for-word what the editors post in the headlines and it makes me sick. You are a jouralist outlet that serves half a million pages a day, and you should be a lot more responsible than that.
Let me also call this fact into light:
The settlement proposal came from one of the lead plaintiffs' lawyers in the case
Oh interesting, so it was the prosecution's idea to do this...
and also:
Estimates of the value of the settlement ranged from $1.1 billion to as much as $1.7 billion, one source said. "It's going to get money to the people that need it the most," this source said.
And as I counted, the $1.7B is a lot closer to the value than the $1.1B, and this is also not counting the costs of actually figuring all of this stuff out for MS. And don't think that for each copy of windows handed out they don't have any costs either, they're not free once you consider everything into account (you add up all costs of developing and divide by the number of products made)... It's not going to cost them $900mil, but it will cost $400mil or so...
I just get tired of people who hate Microsoft and blindly believe everything that they're told (partially because they want to believe), and yet are being completely hypocritical. We're in a capitialistic society ladies and gentlemen... In this society man exploits man... If you were in their shoes, can you honestly say that you wouldn't do things any differently?
---
Having said all of that, yeah, they're being overly monopolistic, and yes, this is a rediculously small punishment for what they've been caught doing. I mean, not that $1.5B is a small chunk of change, that is a large chunk of money for any corporation, but they're not really being restricted hardcore from repeating the same "mistakes"/"crimes" in the future. And as anyone knows, the companies that survive don't do so because they're magnanimous, they just learn how to hide their mistakes better the next time.
But then again, with the court's track record lately, could you honestly have expected anything different? (sigh)... Justice will have to be postponed for yet another day.
If God gave us curiosity
But they aren't going to give up 'cash' to install a couple of thousand copies of Windows on these school machines. It'll just be the ammount they decide to 'charge for it that they claim they 'lost'.
Force Microsoft to donate $1.1 billion among the Free Software Foundation, the OpenOffice project, KDE and GNOME projects, the Linux kernel team, and various others. That'll pay all the significant Open Source developers out there for hmm.. at least the next 10 years.
>what about the hardware to support them? That's not mentioned at all
Yes it is.
Microsoft also would be responsible for making available 200,000 reconditioned computers and laptop computers during that period, $90 million in teacher training and $38 million in technical support.
Makes me wonder though who is lining up to get this contract for 200,000 'reconditioned' computers? I've always wondered what happens to the leased machines like the ones our company gets. We have a 3rd-party leasing company that gets the boxes from Dell which we lease for 18 months. We ghost the drives and put them on people's desks. When they go off lease, we wipe the drives and the leasing company takes them away.
My first guess would be that MS is going to source these from multiple leasing companies that operate in the areas where these 14,000 schools are?
If electricity is produced by electrons is morality produced by morons?
Apple's educational market-share is rigid, teachers don't want to learn new systems. We're always having to make sure everything works on Windows and Macs because we know that the majority of school computers are made by Apple. That's why Macromedia's authoring products (Flash/Director/Authorware) are so popular for games aimed at the younger audience - they allow easy cross-platform development.
First, Microsoft gets off with paying just over 200 million. That's it. That 1.1 billion figure is garbage. That alone is a travesty.
Second, Microsoft receives no incentive to change it's business practices, which means that it is still perfectly free to go about reaming its customers and using its monopoly any way it pleases. That will allow them to make the money back many times over.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
I think M$ should donate 100mil to eduation per year anyways. They can afford it and it would be well used.
they need to know how to juggle more then one PC (running Linux with DVORAK keyboards)
Its strange to read that with such a biting sarcastic tone because I'm running Linux with a DVORAK keyboard right now, both at home and at work...
(I popped the keys out and rearranged them about 6 months ago, for fun)
(Work == stack programmer for a satellite isp)
My preferred outcome is anything that involves those vampires going away empty handed. In fact, they are pocketing some unstated amount but the less they get the better.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
I wonder if copywrite law will become a sizable part of the computer curriculum.
Chapter 1: Understanding the EULA
I could imagine Microsoft supplying textbooks that arrived in sealed envelopes with EULAs on them...
"Timmy, you got a 0 on your test!"
"But mom, disclosing any of the information I learned from my Microsoft textbook is a violation of the EULA! I could get in trouble! Microsoft could send people out to remove the part of my brain that retains the disclosed information!"
~Philly
Let's see... at $30 per RedHat CD...
I'm a bloodsucking fiend! Look at my outfit!
Short version:
Most of the people posting against the settlement know not what they say.
Long version:
Most of you seem to have this knee jerk reaction to anything with M-I-C-R-O-S-O-F-T printed anywhere within. I think MS has a monopoly. Wow, what a revelation. Whooda thunk MS would ever be accused of such a thing?
Here's some info that I'd like some of you to consider before you flame me mercilessly and kill my karma:
1) MS didn't sprinkle pixie dust on PC users and magically become a monopoly. You and I MADE them a monopoly. And don't give me bunk about "the OS that people saw growing up was Windows, so that was the only OS in the universe". Whatever. When I was in school, we had teletype terminals and IBM DOS machines. There was no MS monopoly back then. I'm in my mid 30's so it's not like I'm talking about the dark ages of computing.
2) If you put Windows machines in schools, Apple will piss and moan about it. If you put Apple machines in schools, MS and everyone else will piss and moan about it. If you put Linux in schools, BSD folks will piss and moan about it. Face it, there is no OS on the planet that can go into schools that will get a 100% endorsement even within the free/open-source software world. Period.
3) Let's see what's more benefitial: average PC users receive a check for the $20 determined to be the "damage" we sustained as a result of MS's monopolistic actions, or kids in poor neighborhoods/schools get access to training, hardware, and computer related education that they would not be given access to otherwise. Hmmm... Let's see... (If you have to honestly think about it, you need to work on being more human and less greedy.)
4) I don't give half of a rat's ass if students learn to do word processing on Word instead of Abiword. I started off with DOS, then I moved to Windows, then I moved to Linux, and now I'm working with BSD and UNIX. I started off the same way these kids will start off, and despite all of that I'm not a Windows user. Gee, could it be possible that I had -- *GASP* -- freedom of choice? Reading comments posted here, you'd think that if MS puts Windows in classrooms that the people in those classes will nevereverEVER touch anything other than Windows. Get real, folks.
5) Windows is -- on the whole -- easier to use than Linux, *BSD, or UNIX. I say that as someone using these latter OSes daily and the former OS almost never. I don't let my preferences cloud the issue or induce prejudice against Windows, though. I don't care if you're more familiar with the latter OSes. Windows is easier to deal with for newbies than any of them. And until developers start putting the end-user experience in front of developer coolness (take a hint, free/open-source developers), this will continue to be a true statement.
5) Windows experience is more marketable right now than Linux/BSD/UNIX experience, and will continue to be that way for quite some time as far as I can tell. Unless companies completely ditch Windows and start over with a new OS (which will not happen, no matter how many op-ed pieces you read saying the opposite), it's going to be a long, long, LONG time before Linux/BSD/UNIX experience makes you more marketable on a global scale than Windows experience. And with the web services wave just about ready to rise, the OS people use will become less important than the browser it's running, so people will have less incentive to go through the IS/deployment/training nightmare associated with a company-wide OS switch.
Flame away...
Won't someone please think of the children?
Celebrate the finer things in life
...after being legally found a monopoly, accused of strongarming their way into markets and gaining marketshare by squeezing out competitors, as part of the proposed solution, Microsoft wishes to give away over a billion dollars worth of their software to the nation's poorest schools.
And Apple (or other software vendors) can compete with this how? And this avoids further penetration of the educational software market exactly how? This prevents them from pushing other software vendors out of markets how? This avoids cyclical dependencies on their software precisely how?
I want some of what the state AG's are smoking.
Now, putting on my reality cap, I understand that to have to tell your voting public that you turned down the opportunity to have a one billion dollar infusion of software and computers into the poorest schools simply because you thought it would be wrong to let a company get away with something, and that overall, the people who are making money with the company will still make a lot of money with it after you "win", is something akin to political suicide. But it is still laughable.
But then it could be just me.
Rhetorical question: How can a case like this be settled against M$ without any meaningful relief for the plaintiffs?
So, 900 million out of a 1.1 billion settlement is actually just the retail value of a product that costs Microsoft next to nothing to produce. I never thought that the Justice department would accept Monopoly money for payment. And Microsoft will probably be able to write off the entire settlement in this year's tax statement.
I wonder if the IRS will accept Monopoly money for MY taxes next year.
Cartman: Seriously, you guys, I am, so, pissed off...
include $sig;
1;
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/011120/202744_1.html
Why doesn't Microsoft give these same poor schools 1.1 - 1.7 billion in cold hard cash to hire the best teachers on the market.
Which do you think would make a bigger difference?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Thanks, Microsoft -- you've just effectively intruded on the iMac's in schools trend from the last few years. My 12-year-old is in a public school with a really amazing iMac network. Here I've been thinking how wonderful this is, but you can just see this "donation" as a way into a sector that they've completely FUCKED for the last few years.
I'm really, really pissed about this.
---- Please be nice in case my Slashdot karma ~= my real life karma.
Microsoft is a business. They want to make money. I think this is a smart business decision...
:)
Mr. Gates, we're asking you nicely. Please stop trolling slashdot. Thanks.
-----
"The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad." - Salvador Dali (1904-1989)
Better yet, create an independent foundation for the purpose of advancing computers in poor school districts and have MS pump some steady cash into it over a period of a few years. The goal being that the foundation would have a perpetual flow of funds for years to come.
A one time charge on some soon to be out-dated equipment is a crock and cheap for MS. If all this anti-trust BS is going to come down to money let's make sure we as consumers and taxpayers get some return on it.
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
Red Hat has just released an
alternative proposal.
Basically, it comes down to "Microsoft can put all the money in hardware, we'll provide the software for free".
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
Anyway. Of course an overriding goal is to increase the company's bottom line. However, traditionally, companies have also followed the constraints of the particular nation's laws. If not follow them to the letter, than at least to not directly oppose them.
how many of those boxes will be set up with red hat after windows XXXP won't install on them, and they don't say what machines will be given and in what condition either (hey, could be a "$2000" 486 they had in the junk closet that wouldn't boot up right you never know) I bet the percentage that the children would actually see of this settlement would be around the percentage that artists see off their CD sales. Then again, is your sould worth free computers. I'd have to call this settlement a sellout. It looks like the DOJ is going to let them off easy, I urge the people in the civil suit not to do likewise.
Don't call my crazy, that's what they called me back in the home!
I think the best course of action is to expose kids to a variety of platforms. I have always been a PC person, and had the inherent extreme dislike of Apples and deference to anything non-Windows (e.g. Linux). Then, in my first year of college, my programming class used Linux. After an initial "No Windows? How Cheap!!!", I progressed to "Hey, that's not so bad." I'm even giving Macintosh a second thought, though not enough to go out and buy a box today.
The worst course of action, in my opinion, is to lock people into a singular mindset. Why not install different systems in the same school and let people decide for themselves which ones they prefer? Make it all accessible.
The biggest hurdle, IMHO, for all things non-Windows today, is a lack of openness and familiarity by primary Windows-users. "Windows is all there is" seems to be the dominant mantra by people who have only used Windows, because that's all they know. The same goes for Linux people and Mac people, etc., who have worked primarily with one system.
I think the best aspects of all systems should be used for what they are.
-- I prefer the term "karma escort."
This Microsoft page suggests there are at least 40,000 computers on the main Microsoft campus (search for the first "40,000" on the page). Since they want employees to use their latest and greatest version of Windows, Microsoft needs to replace computers frequently. Old boxes are just too slow. Replace each of 40K computers once a year for 5 years -- how many old boxes do you need to dispose of?
200,000
What a coincidence.
Email: slashdot3@FreeMars.org (Address will be abandoned when it gets spam.)
This is a very simple equation. It just requires keeping more than one fact in one's mind at a time.
It is not illegal to have a monopoly. It is illegal to leverage your monopoly to expand it and crush up-and-comming competition.
It got absurd when MS tacked "If you ship Windows, you must ship IE" and "If you ship Windows, you must not ship Netscape" onto the end of the equation.
And please stop abusing the word "FUD".
f so, then anyone who have access to software in high demand could give out a discustingly huge number of licenses and take care of their taxes with almost *NO* real cost to them...
I think in that case it is technically true, but BillG doesn't own Windows, Microsoft does. So any donations from Microsoft are tax-deductable for the company.
Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Most of the people posting against the settlement know not what they say.
Or not.
1) MS didn't sprinkle pixie dust on PC users and magically become a monopoly. You and I MADE them a monopoly.
Well, I didn't make them a monopoly. I didn't buy a PC for my home until about '96 and I've never run anything but Linux. Pardon, I'm on Solaris 8 now. The greatest contributor to MS current monopoly position was user fear and MS decisively built their system to manipulate, contribute to and console that fear. Users didn't want to be reminded at every turn that they didn't know anything about computers *I just want to do my job.* They were masterful, but they built a crippled OS that now dictates de facto standards across the industry, from UI to browsers to security, authentication, yada yada.
Face it, there is no OS on the planet that can go into schools that will get 100% endorsement even within the free/open-source software world. Period.
So what. Who needs 100% endorsement to achieve something bright and beautiful.
3) Let's see what's more benefitial[sic]...
4) I don't give half of a rat's ass if students learn to do word processing on Word instead of Abiword....
5) Windows is -- on the whole -- easier to use than Linux, *BSD, or UNIX....
What's most beneficial is not for people to learn to use computers: *I just want to do my job.* People should learn to work with computers: *What can I make the machine do, today.* You tell me the best way to learn to work with computers: a) closed APIs, thousand dollar development tools, total lack of system documentation, indifferent support; b) open system, open code-base, reams of documentation at every level, avid user support world-wide. Focus on the end-user experience means dumbed-down tools, closed interfaces to *protect users from themselves.* This is fundamentally wrong.
There is no way I would be in a position as a software developer today without OSS. I was asking my wife what a right-click was five years ago. Today I'm lead developer on a system to make 1.5 terrabytes of aggregate US census data available on the web. I'm in my mid-thirties. I have a few humanities credits. Am I painting the picture for you?
5) Windows experience is more marketable right now
Bullshit. The tidal wave of web services you anticipate means it doesn't make a hill of beans what I develop in/on and the focus on the browser means business can swap the OS out from under without disturbing functional business systems. MS is over and supporting this settlement means saddling the nations poorest with obsolete userland skills which will have no value in three years. It smells like public housing.
illegitimii non ingravare
Microsoft did NOT gain its monopoly solely legitimately. It has used coercive secretive anti-competitive contracts with OEMs to keep any other operating systems off desktops. So yes we grew up with it, but we didn't have much of a choice in the first place. Who's to say that, e.g., if BeOS was allowed to flourish on desktops it wouldn't have a large chunk of desktop users. There is no real technical reason Microsoft is a monopoly. It's just that it has been able to leverage its position into other markets (yeah, ok it has great marketing and a good relationship with the developer community).
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
"Overly monopolistic"? I'm sorry, you might just be stupid.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
It's been decided in a court of law that MS is a monopoly under the legal definition of the word.
My main objection is that your point is mostly irrelevent to the value of the proposal. Microsoft has caused real damage to consumers and to the software industry. There is a real structural problem with much of today's software market because of MS manipulation, because they leverage monopoly powers. This problem will not go away if MS donates stuff to schools, sends all americans a $20 rebate, funds an african wildlife reserve, or engages in safe-sex education. Arguing the merits of windows vs. linux in schools is just offtopic. Debating wether MS "bought" or "earned" their initial monopoly is also offtopic.
We should be proposing real remedies to the current problem, such as:
1. Disclosing the terms of oem contracts with microsoft.
2. Punishing contracts which discourage/forbid oem makers from pre-installing other OS's or rival media players, authentication systems, etc. At the least, these contracts should be declared anti-competitive and unenforcable. At the most fines should also be paid for this collusion.
3. break up MS into a division that sells office software, a division that sells other stuff, and a division that sells an Operating System. The fact that MS even opposes this is evidence that they believe they can leverage their OS monopoly to increase their dominance in other areas. That's illegal. Even if it means subsidising your xbox sales by the minions who shell out cash for Office XP. This is a general and sound principle: As soon as you achieve dominance in one area, break it off from your other businesses. This levels the playing field.
4. Publish protocals, interfaces, and all system calls. For free, fully, to all interested parties.
5. No fucking with file formats. see above.
6. No EULA's forbidding reverse engineering. When you have a monopoly, reverse engineering shouldn't even be necessary. You should be forced to disclose all specs, validation schemes, etc. because they are defacto standards and standards need to be accessible to all comers.
This is how to deal with MS. Not by giving away free wheelchairs or whatever stunt is being proposed. You can debate the merits of my points, but that is what you should be debating. Not whether schoolchildren should learn MS Office.
When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.
I was just listening to NPR, and a comment was casually dropped that the money can be used to buy non-microsoft software. Is this true? Who chooses what software, the schools? The article also said that it would _cost_ Microsoft 1.1B; I hope it's in cash and the schools can spend the cash as they best see fit; no strings.
This is for the civil lawsuits. The thing that will most benefit 'the people', for having been screwed by Microsoft all these years, is for Microsoft to fund development of alternative OS's.
Now THAT would hurt them in the pocket book now and later! That is a punishment that fits the crime!
Fine them $5 billion. Give money to competing OS groups, including Apple, various Linux groups/companies, Palm, BeOS groups (ala OpenBeOS), BSD groups, etc. Set aside about $1-2 billion for a foundation that will distribute money and grants to computer science OS researchers for future technology to supplant Windows.
"And like that
Bill Gates' reaction to the settlement
Notice the poor innocent youth to his right...
I'm not a journalist, but I play one on slashdot
Jamie's comments were perfectly understandable. This whole idea is ridiculous and insane. It may even happen, too, which is shameful.
It's all in how you look at things- you're looking at this obviously from the "free market" and "free will" school of thinking. Sorry to say, it's not applicable here.
MS has deals that prohibit most of the machines being sold as complete machines in most retail outlets without their software.
Most people don't care about the software and just use whatever is provided them, so long as it does what they need of it. Really, there's nothing wrong in that.
Because of this, MS has this massive network effect that is difficult to break out of- which makes it more "reasonable" to use their software than other software for many.
At which point is abuses (key word there...) of this situation the fault of the companies bundling or the people using the stuff since they are either bound up (like the OEMs) or know no better?
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
I'd dump just as many millions into funding a vast horde of paid propagandists with loads of audiovisual support and authority to take teachers on pilgrimages to Redmond to see how capitalism really does bring happiness and prosperity etc etc... and I'd have the propagandists at the beck and call of the teachers at the slightest whim... and I wouldn't stop at application training, I would make damned sure all the teachers also were won over to the Microsoft view of free market capitalism, not to mention security and the proper limitations on freedom of speech.
I can see Ballmer now: "teachers, teachers, teachers! teachers! Teachers! Teachers! TEACHERS..."
You've got to be crazy if you don't see the opportunities here. Microsoft's interests, in the present-day world, go WAY beyond getting people to use Office. This is just what they need and if I was them I'd be ready to spend BILLIONS in excess of what we're talking about, just to control the teachers and through them, control the fundamental truths children are taught. It's INCREDIBLY important. And you don't control teachers by bossing them about. Look at what MS does to get business- they don't go 'fall in line or else', that's for when they HAVE your business. When they're getting you to buy in, they will throw whole teams of people with elaborate, detailed presentations supporting their position, and if you look at the proposal in isolation and treat their word as honorable, you've GOT to buy in.
It will be the same when they send teams of people into schools: it's just that the message will be different.
"What good is giving a computer to a kid if he can't read, or do math?" First off, profiling is not a very nice thing to do. Kindly cut it out. Second, have you ever considered that a computer can *help* kids learn to read and write? Did you know that you can do more with computers than compile source code and read Slashdot?
As for using the money to get other things... That would be find and dandy, but I know enough people who are older who got all of the things you're mentioning (books, nutritious lunches, decent teachers, etc.) but freak out when they sit in front of computers because they don't understand them. Ask the average mom over 40 who's getting back into a career how scary things are nowadays with the emphasis on computers (and computer oriented knowledge that they don't seem to possess), and I'm sure you'll get an earful. Besides, I've been to school. Nutrition, books, decent teachers, etc. don't guarantee jack as far as education goes. Give students something they want to learn and you'll get results. Kids like computers. Kids tend to not like books, at least not as much.
What Microsoft is really proposing is simply to have Bill donate a lot of money to his existing Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation? If you look at the grant breakdown, you'll see that $1.6 Billion has already been "granted" to Education. Increasing that to $2.7 Billion over five years makes an excellent tax write-off, although I'm not too certain that it wouldn't have reached $2.7 Billion in five years on its own anyway.
BG: I know! I'm giving away money each year to education anyway; let's tell them that I'm going to do it to settle this. Mwahahaahaha!
It's also worth noting that $160 Million goes towards what is essentially an MSCE-primer school, and then $38 Million goes towards paying those MSCE-primer students to support to new computers. And 200,000 reconditioned computers and laptops? In other words, they are simply redirecting what would otherwise be either landfill or freely donated anyway. I don't understand the $90 Million in teacher training either, unless it is not how to use computers, but how to make use of computers in an educational environment. Wasn't Windows XP supposed to be as easy to use as a Mac? They copied everything else, why not ease of use? (Microsoft doesn't have R&D, only D.) And yeah, $900 Million in software probably has a real cost to Microsoft of $1 Million. People need to know that the cost of duplicating software is nil.
It's nuts- open invitation to insert chaos into a working system. And, I do believe that there IS something in the works for this sort of thing for desktops.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
What about the ownership cost of all this hardware and software? If the schools cannot afford to buy computers, they surely cannot affort to support them. I don't think Microsoft is going to provide on-site or even regional admins to keep the computers running.
read the findings of fact in the case
Microsoft Windows never refers to itself for bad things, only good things. Ex: Windows has detected new hardware, and must restart your computer [not windows]. You have installed new software; you must restart your computer [not windows]. Your computer [not windows] has crashed. People then associate all the annoying things with the whole computer and not the operating system itself.
Got friends?
I'm serious. This isn't meant to be flamebait or a troll. I post this same question regularly in various forums and have yet to get an answer.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
Yes, MS was found guilty of abusing its monopoly. And yes, giving away its own software is not what I would consider punishment. But I'll point out what I pointed out to someone else in this thread that I started: the DOJ case is where actual company-level punishment happens, not class action lawsuits. These kinds of lawsuits are meant solely for financial restitution, not breaking up the company, or forcing MS source code to be opened up, or any other organizational/procedural punishment. This settlement is meant to make MS spend $$ in response to their monopolistic actions, plain and simple. Whether it's $1 billion cash or $1 billion in software, it's still $1 billion in value that MS must cough up.
People here are bitching about it going to schools in the form of software, hardware, and training. I'm saying this should not be an issue. MS is proposing to dish out their $1 billion this way (as far as I know, it's still just a proposal). Knowing what I know about lack of computers in schools (and the antiquated state of computers in those schools that do have them), I know that there is actually some benefit to this. It's amazing how much people here are against this, and as far as I can tell it's just because MS is part of it. If Borland decided to donate tons of copies of C++ Builder (a proprietary system, I might add, that doesn't help all that much in teaching people non-Windows programming), something tells me people here would cheer even if they didn't care for Borland's products. It's strange.
Here is CNNs take of the whole thing.
o so ft/index.htm
http://money.cnn.com/2001/11/20/technology/micr
Not only does it cost them next to nothing to make $900 mil of software, they said it had a retail value of 900 mil, but they are giving it to educational institutions which would otherwise have received an educational discount. So even the actual value of the software is only about $400 mil.
"Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
NPR just had coverage of this on all things considered today. There they stated that it would cost Microsoft 1.1 billion. Here is my letter to them...
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 18:12:38 -0500
From: "Clark C . Evans"
To: atc@npr.org
Subject: Incorrect Statement about Microsoft Settlement
You mentioned the Microsoft settlement on your
program this afternoon. And I'm afraid I heared
two mis-representations:
1. This program will cost Microsoft 1.1 Billion.
FACT: This program will cost Microsoft $300 Million.
The CD-ROMs and paper that the licenses
for their "$800 million" of Microsoft
software won't cost Microsoft more than
a few thousand dollars.
Further, since these schools are too
poor to buy the software, you can't
argue that it is a loss in revenue.
FACT: Having Children learn to use Microsoft
software, instead of open soruce
alternatives (such as open office
and linux) increases the value of their
software; since more people are familar
with it (the value of software is
proportional to the user base). It's
hard to buy new recruits.... costly
actually.
Having thousands of children learn how
to use Microsoft software "for free" is
hugely valueable to Microsoft. This is
worth more than $300 million alone...
2. This money may be used to buy non-Microsoft software.
FACT: The software licenses "retail value
$800 million" are for Microsoft
software.
Perhaps some of the $300 million can
be used to buy non-Microsoft software,
but I doubt it.
I'd like to mention that RedHat has an alternative [1]
if Microsoft *really* wants to spend 1.1 Billion.
1. Microsoft just buys the hardware instead.
2. Open Source software is used (for free).
I'm afraid that Microsoft's play is just a mechanism
to extend their monopoly. It doesn't help anyone
but Microsoft.
Could you please air a correction?
Best,
Clark Evans
[1] http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/011120/202744_1.html
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Red Hat's whole deal is free software, so why didn't they help out poor school districts a couple of years ago? Does anyone really think stunts like this are going to be enough to stop RHAT's downward spiral into dotcom obscurity?
civil anti-trust suits are not restricted to monetary damages, although since monetary damages can be tripled, they are often the plantiff's focus.
For instance, in Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services "The ISOs[Independent Service Organizations] alleged that Kodak used its monopoly in the market for Kodak photocopier and micrographic parts to create a second monopoly in the equipment service markets. A jury verdict awarded treble damages totaling $71.8 million. The district court denied Kodak's post trial motions and entered a ten year permanent injunction requiring Kodak to sell "all parts" to ISOs.
Personally, I think purely seeking monetary damages against a company with as deep pockets as microsoft is a mistake; they can just jack up their site-licenses and roll with the punches. And civil suits are a valid way of addressing most of the structural problems I cited above.
Another note, even if the plaintiffs only sue for money, they have great flexibility in using the threat of a fiscal award to force microsoft to agree to modify its behavior in a settlement. Surely settlements aren't limited to cash only, are they? Even in this settlement proposal, MS has agreed to set up an independent agency to oversee the plan, to provide support, and to provide software as well as hardware. That's not just "financial restitution" is it?
When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.
You think we should teach kids to use MS products? Heh. It'd do the average person about as much good if the course taught them to use McDonald's cash registers, for the jobs they'd be likely to get with those skills.
Instead, kids need to learn about computers in general, how to work-process in general, and so on. Then if they're bright enough to find a real job they'll have the basic skills they need to pick up the specific word processor their new company uses in a matter of hours, as opposed to being tied to a specific dead-end package.
Really, for all that 95% of people do, they could pick up any package in a few minutes. Most people never touch the advanced options. Not because they can't but because word processors are becoming page-layout programs and very few people have the need to do anything like that to write a memo.
It is a fallacy that sending checks for $20 or seeding the market are our only choices. Look at Red Hat's counter-proposal, for example.
Yet you support the ability of a major corporation whose goal is to remove that choice from you to bribe their way out of changing the way they do business? Makes no sense. Most of them won't, and even if they do, will they be in a position to use Linux in their day-to-day computing? Will this be more difficult or less difficult if Microsoft continues to use their revenue stream to advocate for absolute intellectual property rights? Remember, the typical American thinks no farther into the future than their next paycheck and has a very poor opinion of their own judgment. I agree, to a point. I personally have no desire to put crappy plastic baubles with simulated LCD displays on my desktop. I also agree that UI consistency and elegance is of far greater strategic importance to desktop Linux than making the desktop look like a dance club flyer, and I observe that platforms with published style guides, consistently followed (Macintosh) are easier and less aggravating for the neophyte to learn and use than platforms with loosely followed style guides (Windows), and platforms with three different UI toolkits, none of which behaves exactly alike and none of which satisfies a user's expectations anywhere near all the time (Linux/X11) come in dead last. Nokia cell phones have a UI that avoids surprises. Almost every button on the phone does something, and 99 times out of 100 it's exactly what you expected the phone to do when you pressed that button. Motorola StarTAC requires lots of manual reading before you can get your preferences dialed in, let alone make "power use" of the phone, and documentation, no matter how copious, is not acceptable in lieu of design.That said, consistency and elegance of programmer-level internals is important to reduce user aggravation through reducing the number and severity of unpleasant surprises a programmer has to work around and reducing the amount of work a programmer has to do to deliver consistency and elegance at the UI level.
Not necessarily. Public corporations are driven by valuation. Companies will switch to Product L when Price M is greater than Price L + Price PHBHP (an imaginary dollar amount representing the price of the pointy haired boss's head on a platter). Company M, being a public corporation and obliged to maintain its indefinite existence as well as its valuation, is obliged to maximize, over the medium term, Price M * Purchases M and to maximize the perceived Price PHBHP through FUD. The market failure is that Purchases M is a very large number, thus Company M has wide latitude in setting Price M. Company M can therefore offer very high prices to build a war chest on the backs of retail and small-volume customers and bargain almost any other vendor without such a regular revenue stream into the ground.I have to hand Rush Limbaugh one small word of praise: at least he practiced what he preached when he bought a computer and failed to fall for "symbolism over substance".
I call bullshit. MSIE's application service technology is nothing more than providing a lightly authenticated download service for Win32 applications, which for the most part still require Product M to run, for both technical and legal reasons. Not much choice when you're stuck buying something from unfriendly Company M because the law removes your choice. This is all the more reason to spank them hard, because not only do they own the license to exclusively deal in their software product, but they can attach conditions to and charge for the use of your physical goods as a result. MAI v. Peak was a sad, sad day for the independent researcher.As for OS switching, the Mozilla/Netscape 6 user interface is (now) almost identical on all platforms, and is asserted to behave similarly from a user perspective no matter what the underlying platform. Right-clicking now more or less consistently does what you expect it to. The only problem in the IT department is dealing with users who demand to use unauthorized software, and unfortunately sysadmins generally have little power to see even relevant company policy enforced.
-jhp
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
By giving away their software to schools, it continues Microsoft dominance because these kids will grow up only knowing Microsoft.
BAD idea to allow this because it only extends their influence.
Apple tried this in the past remember?
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Who wants donations of software? WE all know it will be for Microsoft windows and most likely be made by Microsoft.
woohoo free Promotion for Microsoft.
This doesnt help anyone but Microsoft. I dont want to hear such BS.
What Microsoft should do is donate that money to open source projects, or better yet, allow the PEOPLE to decide where the money goes.
But the last place i'd want it is to go to schools so More people can be hooked on Microsoft.
Almost as bad as cig companies promoting it to kids, now Microsoft is trying to do it.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
School is about learning.
Linux is open source.
What better OS to learn than linux?
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
They CANT read because they dont go to private schools like you did with fancy computers etc etc.
Dont you think a computer is more valueable to someone whos poor and in the inner city who actually needs it, than someone whos rich and uses a computer just for fun or to play quake?
Think about it.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
This is a settlement to the private lawsuits against Microsoft. This has nothing to do with the governments case.
Mmmm.. Donuts
Once again The Register brings up some good points:
Poor children in rich countries what do they need?
Here's our incomplete list. Somewhere safe to live; three meals a day; parents who love them, who don't beat them up, and who maybe even read read to them occasionally; somewhere to play outside; a good school which doesn't treat them as failures because they are poor; books; swimming lessons; friends. And when they are a little older? A credit card. This is how one gains membership of the Digital elite, not through owning a poxy computer decked out with poxy software.
If Red Hat really wants to help the indigenous poor, why doesn't it pay for free breakfasts for all children of primary school age in poor areas? And why doesn't Microsoft restock the public libraries with books, or pay for a hundred thousand class-room assistants. Or dole out free pianos, a cause we have urged since 1997.
Why free pianos?
Musically trained children will also make more clued-up employees. Recent research shows that young children who practice as little as 10 minutes a day on the piano are more intelligent than their non-music playing counterparts. They have better powers of concentration and are more confident too. In the University of California, Irvine study, 78 children aged three and four were tested on their ability to assemble at four-part jigsaw. The children were divided into three groups: the first were taught how to play Mozart and Beethoven: the second lot received computer tuition: and the third group - poor lambs - had no teaching at all.
Nine months later, the children were tested again. The performance of the piano-playing group jumped 35 per cent, compared with little or no improvement in the other groups. What's the betting this news will ever make its way in to the marketing material of educational CD-ROM publishers or PC vendors.
So what do these poor kids need more? A full stomach and music lessons or a talking paper clip?
Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.
"Microsoft has been convicted of raping the customer and the industry. A settlement has been reached. Please bend over, and let Microsoft do it right this time."
--The basis of all love is respect
It did not take Microsoft long to act on this. They have already reported the cost against this quarter's earnings.
Microsoft Corp. today announced that it will record a pre-tax charge of approximately
$550 million in the quarter ending Dec. 31, 2001, resulting from the
settlement of more than 100 class action lawsuits.
On an after-tax basis, the settlement will result in a charge of
approximately $375 million, which represents a $0.06 to $0.07 reduction in
forecasted diluted earnings per share for the quarter ending Dec. 31, 2001.
It is not clear if they are writing the total cost off all at once(in which case they it is costing them alot less) or this is the first of five instalments(which would make it more than the $1.1 billion reported).
Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.
MS is spending the money on itself: this "fine" will show up on the advertising/marketing books, I can assure you.
-Legion
Just think, the schools could sell $0.9 billion in premium licenses that MS is legally required to keep track of for the holders to businesses having license problems with MS, buy whatever they want, avoid using software which will be out-of-date and totally useless when the students graduate, and save everyone except MS a whole lot of trouble.
Personally, I think the plantiffs should just go for $10b and actually get refunds for the software that MS forced on them. Or settle for (highest price of Windows - $30) for each plantiff. If MS wants to raise prices later or go to a subscription model, they can just keep paying the plantiffs. After all, the issue at hand is MS overpricing their software, so something should be done about it.
While we applaud Microsoft for raising the idea of helping poorer schools as part of the penalty phase of their conviction for monopolistic practices, we do not think that the remedy should be a mechanism by which Microsoft can further extend its monopoly.
Instead, we believe the remedy should be a mechanism by which Red Hat can create its own monpoly, on Linux Operating Systems.
ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
If people _really_ want computers that are easy to use why do you think mac is such a failure ?
Because Deer Hunter doesn't run on a mac?
Because the mac software didn't do what they wanted to do?
Because they didn't find the mac easier to use? (there is no 100% objective usability rating)
Because Macs don't come in a funny (huh huh) cow-print box with cute commercials?
Apple had a chance with the iMac to whip the PC and didn't because they marketed in an elitist fashion. Joe Sixpack, who was buying computers at the time, doesn't respond to that and is, in fact turned off by it. Apple may be proud to cater to a "higher class" of users, but you can bet their shareholders aren't..
Most people have only ever tried one OS, they have no idea how easy or difficult another system is.
Why SHOULD they try anything else when what you have does everything they could possibly conceive of doing with a computer? (Notice the THEY in that sentence, we're geeks and don't count)
I've got a friend that's a network engineer. He prefers Linux and other Unixes. His wife is a graphic designer. She prefers Mac and MacOS.
She can use a PC (I used to work with them both) but prefers a Mac because it's most familiar to her. Her computer reflexes and thought patterns reflect the mac way of working.
I find MacOS interface a bit counterintuitive, OS X is better but still not the way I prefer to work. My friend is perfectly content sitting at his linux box, running in text mode, and reading his email with PINE and only occasionally going to a windows machine to surf some message boards.
People want to use a system that is FAMILIAR to them, difficulty is based on experience, its rediculous to say that the average user wants to be treated like an idiot and have the software second guess everything they do.
The average user DOESN'T KNOW what the software is second-guessing!! If they see "are you sure you want to delete that", nine times out of 10 they didn't even know they were going to delete that. You've got to forget what you know when you're talking about the average user and think like someone who doesn't know anything.
Pick something you don't know anything about (for me, I'd say, um, rebuilding a jet engine). Now imagine being stuck in a situation where you have to accomplish this something ASAP, PDQ, and pronto. You don't want the computer to get in your way, you want it to help you.
Here comes the car analogy again: gearheads will only drive cars that have stick shifts, because that gives them direct interface into the car's powertrain. That's why we use CLIs and don't like "are you sure".
Am I getting through yet?
For example, a few weeks ago I was trying to turn in an e-mail assignment to a teacher, and KWord wouldn't allow me to cut and paste into Mozilla.
USE THE MIDDLE BUTTON, moron!
Fine example why kids shouldn't be allowed to play with Microsoft software.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Even though the parent article is a troll, and is written by a moron, I agree that business success, being antisocial in its nature, is bad. Healthy society functions by distributing its functions and flow of goods more or less evenly among similar by their nature institutions and organizations, and "business success" that reaches the extent of drastically uneven accumulation of wealth in the hand of one monopolist is a sign that in the best case he is feeding on some disease, in the worst one he is a disease.
One should distinguish between the ability of system to accomodate evil (the idea, placed in the foundation of capitalism) and being evil (what monopolies are).
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
If this was a charitable donation to the schools from Microsoft, made without pressure or ulterior motive, then you would be right.
But this is supposed to be a punishment. They are supposed to make good for their illegal behaviour as was established as fact in a court of law.
Giving away $900 million or more of Microsoft software is not punishment. It's product dumping. Where's the punishment? Where's the justice?
People want to use a system that is FAMILIAR to them, difficulty is based on experience, its rediculous to say that the average user wants to be treated like an idiot and have the software second guess everything they do.
:)
'Do you want to continue'
'You will have to reboot'
'Do you want to shutdown your system'
They probably want someting more like "override code: shut up and do what I tell you!"
SCHOOLS are for teaching kids to use the tools that are most prevalent in the business world.
Not only is this implying training rather than education it is also impossible (without use of a time machine). Because there is no way to know what will be most prevalent in the business world in 10-15 years time.
Let alone that once you remove all the hype any marketing to an end user a word processor is a word processor a spreadsheet is a spreadsheet, etc. Indeed there is probably more difference to the USER between different versions of Windows than between Windows and KDE/GNOME.
In contrast, most schools are just "teaching" the kids to "use the tools most prevalent in the business world", all nice 'n' ready for their career-chip implantation as another mindless corporate drone
Except that it simply won't work. They'd end up with a "career-chip" which was 5-10 years obsolete...
MS did not FORCE PC makers to do anything, and they didn't say they could not sell other OS's. What they said was "we will license to you Windows for price X (a very cheap rate) if you agree to sell it as the only OS for that model PC, or we will sell you licenses for price Y (a more expense price) if you don't want to agree. The PC makers than rubbed their greedy hands together and made your decision for you. Then, when the DOJ came calling, they cried "OH BIG BAD MS MADE US!". The PC makers decided that their profits were more important than your choice, not MS.
Actually the problem here would be with government (specifically legislature). Who actually passed laws requiring companies to maximise profit. But didn't pass laws against such pricing.
I have to say that I'm a little disappointed by Red Hat's response. While it doesn't appear quite as slimy as the MS Seattlement, it still stinks slightly of opportunism to me. RH is aware that MS would never accept these terms; they're simply trying to make MS look bad as well as to make their red hats turn white.
If either company really appeared to care about helping poor children I'd probably feel differently, but both seem more concerned about public relations and court settlements.
-- Minds are like parachutes... they work best when open.
This is laughable. Microsoft says they'll give them the hardware and software, which is a great deal. Red Hat will give them just the software; "You figure out how to get your own hardware kids."
You don't understand how far from useful Red Hat's offer is. Every dollar in education is hard earned and hard to replace. Should that money really go towards software that will not provide the learning opportunities that are available for Windows based platforms? Whoever is requisitioning these machines needs to make sure that everything down to 2-button mouse vs 3-button mouse with wheel is properly considered so that every penny is put to something that will be useful. While I advocate Red Hat for server software, I cannot in good faith recommend it as the desktop platform for everyone and certainly will not recommend it for kids to learn on. The introduction of these many thousands of machines into the industry means that someone in the future is going to have to budget some real money to getting more software for them and thus injecting more cash into the economy which it really needs right about now.
It doesn't matter whether or not Microsoft plans to upgrade those machines. The kids are not going to be playing Half-Life or Quake 3. They're going to be using educational software which doesn't require a GeForce card and an Athlon 1800+. This means that whatever they buy will be useful for a longer time without being upgraded. This means that the computers can be cheaper and thus they can get more computers to the kids. Certainly you can argue that Red Hat software is free to get now, so there's nothing magical behind the offer. That's a lot of software, but without the cold cash to buy hardware, these kids, and many around the world for that matter, cannot afford to be smart. By now, we all know what happens in the parts of the world where countries ignore the education of their people and leave them to be ignorants. For the kids that are lucky enough to be getting the computers, the here and now is what is important. I would say that these machines would likely have a 5+ year lifespan and for those kids that is five+ years of exposure to computers that they would not otherwise have. Nothing is perpetual.
If this weren't the punitive solution to the monopoly case against Microsoft, I would tell people to stop knocking Microsoft when they're finally trying to do good. It's just a shame that this is what it took for Microsoft to do something that benificent. Because of the profits that they'll have in five years, it might not be a bad idea to force them to repeat the process in five years. And someone better keep an eye on what they're "charging" for the software since we know that some corporations get a sweet discount on that stuff and these kids deserver no less. They're obviously going to be fined for their monopoly tactics, but what does the government do with that fine? It's nice to see a direct benefit instead of wonder what part of the coffers it disappeared into.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
Middle button? I have a 2 button mouse.
Only avid windows users buy 2-button mice.
KWord help files don't say anything about copying and pasting, and I looked.
It's not in KWord docs. It's convention that applies to all X11 toolkits and applications, and the most basic piece of knowledge a person knows after he sees X11 -- however it is spelled exactly in xterm manual page, something that only a moron can miss:
If someone can't understand this, he should be kept as far from computers as possible.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
If your mouse has two buttons, middle button is "clicked" by pressing both buttons simultaneously -- and again, this is taught to users immediately after they learn to hold a mouse, unless, of course, they "learn" on Windows.
And, if you are a true dumbass, and can't find a middle button on a mouse with a wheel, PRESS THE WHEEL.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.