Slashdot Mirror
California Takes Issue With Microsoft Settlement Idea
Deepfoo writes: "Note from CNet on the California challenge to Microsoft's attempt to settle the 100 civil cases on file against it by donating equipment. The dissenters will argue that those harmed in the lawsuit aren't getting compensated directly in this way, and that the ploy of donating equipment to schools is a transparent effort to further extend its monopoly. The dissenting California lawyers estimate the actual damages due to Californians alone could be on the order of 3 to 9 billion (wide range, but that's what they've said). Is Microsoft a do-gooder, or up to no good?"
... sounds like a rhetorical question...
-pyrrho
I think they are trying to extend the monopoly and get Apple and others out of the schools...
My two cents.
Procrastination; I'll think of a sig tomorrow.
Don't ever tell anybody anything.
If you do, you start missing everybody.
-Holden Caulfield
The Catcher In The Rye
should be http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7978672.html
501 Not Implemented
> "Is Microsoft a do-gooder, or up to no good?"
Does anyone expect an objective response on Slashdot?
Don't forget the "H" in http . . . http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7978672.htmlt ag=mn_hd
is that California would ask Microsoft to take the approach RedHat suggested. (In short: MS buys the hardware and RedHat gives away the soft)
I heard somewhere that Carnegie used to do the same thing with all of the money he donated for libraries and the like - the catch there was that the money came back to him because they were forced to buy all the steel & books and whatnot from his companies.
Why even ask the /. crowd this question? Is there any doubt in anyone's mind on how it will be answered?
Enigma
Imagine if a monopolistic software company decided to help out by putting all its software into educational establishments, so that kids grew up only knowing their software, thereby extending its monopoly.
Who would propose should a thing?
I think it's quite interesting that under RedHat's proposal (where Microsoft puts all that money to hardware, and RedHat gives all the software for free) that was mentioned here the other day things change the settlement from giving 200,000 computers to giving over a million.
That alone should make one pause at the "stink test". At the very least it should point out the valuation of Microsoft's software in their proposal.
MS may just be wanting what Apple was doing during the 80s and early 90s: Trying to get people familiarized and hooked young on their platform. However, if California really wants MS to pay, why not have MS pay for the hardware for public schools and libraries to upgrade or implement computers for the classes, and then have another company, say Red Hat, etc., provide the software and training, at MS's expense. That way, they're not getting anything out of the settlement, and they can't possibly profit from it. Seems fair to me.
Human nature is the same everywhere; the modes only are different. -- Earl of Chesterfield
To be honest, I think Microsoft is just trying to slide their tentacles around another area they try to crush their competition (i.e: Apple, Unix, Novell). I also think that Microsoft should also pay back their other customers since the businesses and home users also got shafted by the Microsoft monopoly.
The settlement agreement is way too little, too late. Microsoft should not be allowed to include their software on the computers that they donate.
Firestone announces it will be donating surplus "Wilderness XT" tires to Afghanistan's Northern Alliance, as well as any Goodyear employee involved in R&D or Marketing.
I am become Troll, destroyer of threads
It's just like going shopping for your wife and getting her a digital camera beacuse *she really needs it* and you end up using it all the time. The gift, or the donation is really for you. Only you benefit for it.
I find it hard to believe that donating a bunch of windows software and hardware to communities on a limited basis is going to resurrect the BeOS, put Sun back on the line as the company of the internet or put money into developing better products for less money for billions of people. This think of the children ploy is as transparent as those "feed the children in 3rd world country" foundations. Most of the money goes to to the Not for profit administrator and a scant few cents actually makes it past the us border.
what a joke
http://cincyboys.blogspot.com/ Everything Cincinnati. Including the word 'Finnih'
This agreement only becomes free Microsoft advertisement because no other alternative will be considered by these schools.
I don't know who all remembers the mid-90's that well, but Microsoft gave away its Internet Explorer to millions of Windows users. And what happened to then fledgeling Netscape?
"sir, we're a monopoly, we get to set the price"
Not to mention that education is the last Mac stronghold. I just wonder what'll happen in five years when the 'free stuff' runs out. Will MS continue to provide low cost solutions? Didn't think so.
Drug dealers always like to give out free samples
"The conduct of neither [party], if strictly examined, will be irreproachable." -Elizabeth Bennet
Fining Microsoft in something that is really only costing them the price of CDs and packaging is not a fine. Do they not realize that any figure measured in the cost of software is nothing to the manufacturer?!
This whole thing is ridiculous and I wish that we could actually do what is right to develop a healthy computer market.
Microsoft should be dealt with like the monster it is.
In this case I see their attempted settlement as something that is good for PR(what is less loveable than donating computers to be used by kids in schools?), that is less expensive than some other alternatives, and which will cause the least damage to their reputation and ability to turn a profit in the future. If they thought that forking over $9 billion was the only way they could continue to make a profit they would do that. However, they will exhaust all alternatives before resorting to that and hope to find one which is preferable(like donating to schools). It's a simple, logical fact.
What's in a Sig?
I personally think Microsoft is just a cheap-ass company and looked for the easiest and cheapest way out. Someone suggested the school donation idea and the monopoly extension was just a big bonus.
Reminds me a lot of Andrew Carnegie. There were an awful lot of mistreated workers in his companies. He ruthlessly used individuals and destroyed competetors. He was a beleiver in social darwinism.
On the other hand, in his later years, he was a noted philanthropist. Or at least, he gave money to various causes he liked.
At its deepest level, this is a question about whether or not you're good if you're selective about which kinds of good you live up to. Carnegie could have gotten a good image by actually just treating his employees well. Microsoft could get a good image by just agreeing to only compete on the merits of their products (well....). But that wasn't their preference.
I wouldn't mitigate the fact that giving computers away or founding charitable organizations is a good thing. I just think that true goodness sometimes has to respond to demands outside its own interest.
And it's especially disenchanting, though, if the only good you choose to do is that which does you good, and you'd like to look noble for it.
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
I'm still amazed at the pair of brass balls needed to even suggest a settlement like this.
Can you think of any other company that would see flooding the market with their product as a good solution to a monopoly lawsuit? If AT&T had suggested adding free phone lines to schools in reponse to the goverment saying they already had too much control, they would have been laughed out of the court room.
That which makes it past the us border crosses into them territory. You can't trust them. After all, if you're not with us, then you're against us.
Hmmm, let's take a common marketing technique and call it punishment. How can anyone think this a remedy?
That sounds exactly like a convicted arsonist who proposes to make up for his deeds by distributing matches in the schoolyard, then sets up an extinguisher manufacture. As much as I hate M$, I have to say I admire them and their attorneys for having the guts to even think about proposing a deal like that, that's classic Microsoft. If the DOJ goes for that, it sure won't be their finest hour ...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
However, this decision sets a new standard for abuse and irony. My wife's a worker's compensation attorney, so I get stories of liars and shenanigans in courts every day. It's never anything close to this, however.
The settlement is supposed to punish Microsoft for abusive practices, but actually rewards them greatly:
1. No real cash payment - they "charge themselves" for software, rather than paying penalties. win.
2. Cash from the US government - that same self-charge comes as a business expense and a loss against an MS business division, thus it is treated as a TAX WRITE-OFF. The write-off value is far greater than the charge, thus they MAKE money on balance.
3. The schools - Schools are one place alternatives still ahve penetration. (They used to be the bastion of Apple...)
4. The children - Lo', the children! In the silliest irony of all, the sacrifice one monopoly for bringing MS products to the schools. These guys make Big Tobacco look good.
5. Perception - The public will see this as an overture to help those same children, thus improving the MS image.
In the end, Microsoft wins at every turn. How could this settlement possibly have come about? There is literally no aspect of punishment at all. Microsoft even makes money on the deal.
This is a sad day for our courts.
Any action that Microsoft doesn't accept kicking annd screaming will never be effective. If it doesn't cause Mirosoft to implode, it didn't work. They're already too big, the goal shouldn't just be about preventing them from growing any bigger
Before I start this post, let me just say that I hate Microsoft as much as the next Slashdotter. I have an extreme distaste for their 'friendly GUI' and monopolistic business practices. But I think the Red Hat proposal is hypocritical and brings into action the exact same thing it is trying to stop.
Let's say Red Hat wins and we have a bunch of computers installed with Red Hat. We are attempting to breed children on linux. But why is this better than breeding children on Windows? Because a bunch of people that like linux and that own companies related to it said so. By doing this, we would only be starting a new monopoly, rather than defeating the one in place and promoting choice amongst people that use computers.
As for a better proposal: I think Microsoft should be forced to pay for several different kinds of computers in schools. Give these schools not only Red Hat Linux, but MacOS, and Windows even, but let the children choose, because in the end, that is what we are trying to protect. Make Microsoft pay for EVERYTHING and the suit will have screwed them a fair amount too.
I very much dislike Microsoft. But I don't want to fight fire with fire, and I think anybody that does so will get burned.
Just my two cents.
Typically(as I understand it) in a lawsuit the whole idea is restitution of damages. I love the idea of Microsoft giving technology to underprivilaged schools, and if they want to do it then full steam ahead. But... their donation of resources shouldn't have any bearing on the actual civil litigation going on.
Companies donate money and services to charity all the time. In marketing that's called PR. Make the rest of the world think that you're allright. I'm from Southern California and I remember that when the Indian Gaming tribes went under fire during Proposition 5, they were donating money to charities left and right. Still do as a matter of fact.
Does anyone *really* think that the poor school districts are the ones who were hurt by Microsoft's Monopolistic(tm) practices? No, of course not. They wouldn't have been buying computers either way, it's the hardware that's too expensive for them--not Microsoft's inflated prices and crappy software. So after years of bullshit the average consumer has put up with by dealing with Microsoft's business tactics, as a settlement we get a company donating to an unrelated charity. Well, sign me up Frank.
There isn't any need to debate whether this sort of thing is going to extend Microsoft's monopoly or not. They do that kind of stuff all the time. It's the fact that people are willing to accept it as a term of a lawsuit settlement that pisses me off. Give'm hell boys.
What would be fair in this case? 9 billion to California? You've got to be kidding... or maybe California is trying to find a way to pay the electric bill?
I wonder how much the lawyers would get out of this deal vs. how much would actualy end up in the hands of ? Who would you give the money to? Sun, BeOS, Oracle? the public?
Use this link instead. ("ttp://" => "http://")
wasn't that just posted on slashdot and then it dissapeared and this article appeared? a news post talking about redhat's proposal? *POOF!* ?? why would they do that?
Please help! I'm stuck inside my virtual reality headset!
How about everyone hold their tounge for a month, let them do their "remedy" thing.
After it is completed, get them for further anti-trust violations, monopoly extensions and find out how much the "donated" software they will probably claim for tax exemption puropses and *nail* them for tax evasion/fraud!
Hell, the got Capone that way... it could work, perhaps.
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
Bill Gates is giving away some of his fortune; look at, for example, his considerable donations to Cambridge University. (Though quite why he wanted to support them instead of a worthier cause, I can't imagine.)
But he shall probably do things the "American Way", and that does mean cutthroat business followed by philanthropy in later years. Better that way than that none of his profits are ever given back. Maybe there is another way still better - but could Microsoft actually change?
First of all, Microsoft gets to give away something that virtually costs them nothing. I assume they get to write it off at it's full retail value as well. Hell, they might even be making money on this.
Second, I'll bet the lawyers, who are supposed to be representing the folks who got overcharged, didn't include their contigency fees as the "compensation too small to be worth paying." They'll be raking in dozens of millions.
And the folks who these clowns are representing? They get nothing. The whole point of a class action suit is that the lawyers are supposed to reprent the class as they would a client-- what client would say, "keep 50 million for yourself, but give any money that I deserve away." These guys should be disbarred for even considering that offer.
As weird as it is to say, California is the only party here speaking sense.
Who is RTFM and when will he help me with Unix?
Does anyone remember going to school in the late 80s, 90s?
Everyone was using an Apple computer to do everything. Everyone learned the Apple Operating System. My parents bought an apple computer so we could do our homework at home. It was our first "PC". This is because apple *donated* the hardware and the software.
But actually, this is what microsoft is trying to do. They're going to donate computers and software and teach children, the new-generation consumer base, to learn their operating system. It's a difficult thing, to unlearn an environment. An operating system is an environment. Microsoft is directly manipulating a ruling.
Let's make this clear: they are going to make money off of poor schools while coming off as altruistic at the same time. Can you imagine the M$ software audit nazis shutting down a school because it couldn't afford to upgrade the site license to their "free" software? I'm glad to see that the State of California, home of many good things, has the balls to stand up to this crap.
Which reminds me of another thing: how the hell is "giving away" software to poor schools going to help all of the victims of the M$ monopoly? How long have these lawyers been away from the outside world, that they would lose sight of their objectives? I guess since its all money to them, they don't really give two shits one way or the other...
Friends don't let friends use multiple inheritance.
Somehow, i don't think slashdot "thinks" anymore.
What good is california going to do with making this decision? Do you think poor schools in california will get computers with software pre-loaded on it?
Do you think a kid will be more well off With Linux over Windows? Does that teach them anything else other then the philosphy of free software?
I personally want my kids to understand Word and Excell and possibly how to use Photoshop and applications like that for when they go to work. I would want linux to be an afterthought, as it has never occured to me to run it as a core os.
Somehow i don't see Redhat or california providing the means that Microsoft can. Monopoly or not, microsoft has the money and power to provide an education for our kids. Monopoly aside, California has no right deciding this fate.
Put the computer and the software at the kids choice, if RedHat has the means to do this then don't take a free ride off microfts problems, go out there and support our schools.
I think they are trying to extend the monopoly and get Apple and others out of the schools...
Providing low-cost or free computing equipment to schools and universities - so a generation of graduates comes up pre-trained on your stuff - is an old hack.
IBM did it. DEC did it. Amdahl did it. Cray did it. Apple did it.
But to use such an anti-competitive activity as a SETTLEMENT of an anti-trust conviction... Now THAT takes GUTS!
If they get away with it, it will qualify as the legal hack of the century.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
I'm sure this will get modded way down b/c /. is anti-microsoft, but it's not their fault they're a monopoly. If IBM had bought DOS from MS instead of just licensing it, or if Apple were more competent or if *NIX hadn't become so fragmented, or if consumers had a clue about anything computer related.
In short stop picking on Microsoft. They are the embodiment of capitalism and they got where they are mostly out of pure good luck. Hell, Bill has admitted hundreds of times that he was simply in the right place at the right time.
Slashdot, the site where everything's made up and the points don't matter
The settlement offer was donating 1.1 billion in software and hardware to the "poorest" public schools. 900 million in software alone, which after 5 years the schools would have to renew the licence! On the otherhand, Redhat has offered to distribute and support all software needed if microsoft only provides the hardware instead. With the 5th largest economy in the world Cailforina has the ability hold out against MS until a cash settlement is provided.
"Get them before they get....
Remember, preview before you troll :)
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
I'm unsure the motives of either party are the most important factors in this discussion.
If I were paying a hefty tuition for my child, I'd expect that their education was based upon solid principles.
How solid are these principles if nearly school in existence sells its curriculum to the highest bidder?
Of course, corporate grants are nothing new, but they do serve to highlight one of the greatest questions of our education system today - is it REALLY there to educate everyone to the highest degree possible?
Sigh..........
M$ wants to give schools free stuff, but....
I can't find one donor to give me $500 to build a server for my Ph.D. studies!
PS - If you know anybody willing, let me know. :)
I'd rather have someone respond than be modded up.
I believe Microsoft is up to no good.
Suppose they decide to donate 1 billion dollars worth of equipment. Think of the advantages of donating computer equipment to schools:
Microsoft would choose the schools and then supply the cheapest computers available on the market. The cost of these computers would be deducted from the 1 billion dollars. Microsoft would then install their own software on these computers. This would definitely include one of their operating systems and a bunch of office productivity, educational, art applications and games. Microsoft would then deduct their suggested retail price of the software from the 1 billion dollars.
If each computer costs Microsoft $500.00, and then they deduct $2000.00 for software (the more software they install on these computers, the more they can deduct), Microsoft actually spends only one fifth of the 1 billion dollars. The rest is money they never spend. They would be giving away copies of their own software. This does not cost them anything, since software is not a tangible product, and they don't actually have to manufacture those copies (other than putting them on a CD, the cost of which is negligible at their high quantities). Microsoft ends up spending 200,000,000 instead of 1,000,000,000--a huge savings!
But wait, there's more! These computers would simply serve as an advertisement for Microsoft. Furthermore, they'll probably put a different spin on the donation, making it appear as an act of good will, instead of a punishment for an abusive monopoly. Most folks would think Microsoft is very noble, as they don't follow the lawsuits. And I haven't even gotten started yet. Here's the best part! Microsoft would write off the entire 1 billion dollars as an expense, and end up not paying taxes on that money, even though four fifths of it never left Microsoft's bank account! (Microsoft has some genius accountants. They will somehow manage to do this, and the government won't be able to do a damn thing about it.) There are probably another ten or so huge benefits to Microsoft. They would essentially turn this "punishment" into a marketing ploy, and further expand their monopoly.
My suggestion for a real punishment follows: The government should decide which schools most need free computer equipment. Then, the government will decide on an amount of money to be spent on that school. Microsoft will be required to give the school a cash grant, which the school can use to purchase anything in the realm of computer equipment. The total amount of money spent by Microsoft on grants should be not less than 2 billion dollars.
Here's where my suggestion gets interesting: The schools have 100 percent choice as to which products to buy with the grant money. This could include scanners, printers, monitors, speakers, any computer hardware, etc. They could buy a PDP-11 or an SGI Onyx, or anything in between. Furthermore, they could get any software they want, whether it is IRIX, Windows 2000, Linux, or anything else out there. But here's the catch: If the school decides to use software products from Microsoft, Microsoft may NOT charge for them. They will be required to give the school a special, 100 percent free, totally unlimited, site-wide license for that product. (The license is special in that any faculty member or student of that school would be permitted to install that piece of software at any number of computers in their home at no cost. This prevents the grant from being used as an advertisement, which would benefit Microsoft instead of punishing them.) To close another loophole, if the school wants a software product made by another company, and Microsoft would somehow profit from this (through licensing fees, by owning shares of the company, or any other method), Microsoft is not allowed to make that profit. In other words, the ruling would prevent Microsoft from IN ANY WAY profiting from their products being given to the school. And finally, this requirement lasts forever. If Microsoft is still in business 200 years from now, and that school wants to use some software of theirs, Microsoft must still follow this rule.
In other words, the school may purchase (or obtain freely, if applicable) whatever computer related products they want, including Microsoft products, if they wish, but Microsoft may in no way profit from this punishment. If these were the terms of the punishment, I would agree to it 100 percent. Otherwise, I think Microsoft is playing games again.
Oh well.
This is getting less and less funny every day. :/
According to lawyers and others briefed on the deal, Philip Morris would provide tobacco products valued at about $900 million over five years to schools where most students qualify for free federal lunch programs. Philip Morris also would be responsible for making available 200,000 reconditioned ashtrays and tobacco pipes during that period, $90 million in teacher training and $38 million in technical support. It would provide as much as $250 million to set up an independent foundation to meet project goals, and would seek an additional $200 million in matching funds.
If the settlement goes through, Philip Morris's brand name and products will gain even greater presence in the nation's schools. Some of the lawyers in the class-action cases were uncomfortable with this but concluded that Philip Morris's monopoly already is so pervasive that students would have to learn to use their products anyway.
ttp://, is that the "tele-transport protocol, or what?
Please, PLEASE editors CHECK the submissions!
Wait!
It's um . . . uh.
Crap!
Let me check my copy of "Slashdot Answers to Microsoft Questions For Dummys". Here it is!
What was the question?
---------
Launch all sig
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Are you telling me that filling up computers with FREE SOFTWARE (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) is going to create a monopoly?
Please tell me of ONE monopoly that has succeed selling something that can be obtained for free...
I guess I don't even have to mention that only Free Software truly educates.
if you
a) can provide some sort of proof that you are in
fact a graduate student pursuing a PhD in a field that would require such a server
b) are willing to pay shipping charges
-and-
c) don't mind that it doesn't have a CDROM
Then I have an AMD K6-2 450 with 64MB of ram and a 4gig hard drive that you can HAVE... be warned it is an oldish Aptiva, but still very workable.
shattersword@hotmail.com
-----------------------------------------
Remove the Greed which plagues mankind.
how bout microsoft sends us poor geeks some hardware and redhat mass mails some cds out?? sounds like a plan to me...
oh santa bill wont you give me 256 megs of ram this year??
(improve the economy and solve microsoft whorring)
The Plaintiff's lawyers proposed the settlement, not Microsoft.
I've never had to u$e Micro$oft $oftware, lucky me I $uppo$e. But I $till don't see the point in all the ba$hing I $ee from day to day. It make$ me laugh every time I $see people po$t "Micro$oft".
Mod me down, it'$ not like it really matter$.
This is extremely off-topic, but isn't the point of a comic strip supposed to be that the strip is funny, or has some form of humorous value to it? Does anybody find UF funny? Rehashed, boring, tired old Microsoft jokes, linux pandering, etc.
I won't even bother saying anything about the art, as anything that can be said about it already has been.
A two-word phrase that should never be used in this context
C'mon!
They've entrenched themselves in a monopoly.
Now the government's soloution is to further EXTEND that monopoly?
What do the THINK putting a bunch of Windows machines in school is GOING to do?
Yeah. MS takes a licensing loss.
BOO FRICKING HOO!
Like they don't lose at least that much to people who ALREADY install their products on multiple systems?
They still have primary imprint on kids at school.
Basically hooking them into the MS cycle of endless bugfixes re-dressed into expensive upgrades.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
If the deal went through, Microsoft would be really getting a sweet deal. Consider that the majority of that 1.1 billion dollars, somewhere around 80% - nearly 900 million - would be to supposedly "pay" for their own software. But how much does it cost them to produce that package, the CDs, and the (ever shrinking) enclosed printed documentation? Have you ever seen the prices for products in their company store? $50, $60 for even their highest-dollar packages, and you can bet that's well more than the materials cost.
So, they lose (let's be generous) around $300 million (around $200 million in PCs, somewhere about $100 million in materials costs on the software and its packaging), to get themselves absolved of any wrongdoing. For a company that has supposedly billions of dollars in cash on-hand, that's chump change.
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
The poorer schools would never have bought Microsoft software at retail anyway. The cost to Microsoft is, therefore, not the retail price nor even the cost to sell at retail, but just the cost of the CD and its packaging, which, judging by the 47 distinct AOL CDs I have mounted on my wall, is probably well under a dollar.
But that's the least of it. Microsoft has been diligent in making contributions to non-profits that might otherwise use free software. Anyone who thinks this is entirely because they are such kind souls is invited to purchase some (slightly damp) land in Florida that I have for sale. Microsoft generosity is intended to prevent people who spend time on computers at nonprofit institutions from discovering alternatives. This is because many of them will eventually end up as computer professionals or paying end users of one sort or another.
Maybe competing with free software by giving proprietary software away to nonprofits is fair play. I don't know. But it isn't a penalty at all, never mind a penalty of the proportions they are claiming. They would be doing this anyway.
mt
"Children's software, Mandrake. Children's software..."
First, the total population of California is 33,871,648. This is based on the info from the following web site:
here
Based on this, 9 billion divided into the total population of california gives you 265.70894926635987714562928854244, meaning that this would be the refund for EVERY single person in California if the settlement was 9 billion. So if every person had been over charged by, say 50% then they are saying every single person in California spent at least $530 on Microsoft software. Every 1 year old. Every 90 year old. Every single person everywhere spent $500 on MS software.
Somehow I just don't think that is right. And on top of this, what is the lawyers % of a settlement? If it's 10%+ The lawyers would be getting 1 Billion dollars. And there's also the financial problems California is having because of the power problems (thankyou deregulation), the $1 million a day they are paying for people to guard bridges that aren't even being threatened. And then of course there is Silicon Valley and all the California computer companies there and elsewhere. Wouldn't it be nice for California if MS went away and all those good old California companies could start generating some serious tax money?
The point: Neither California, Microsoft, or the Laywers are doing anything for anyone's benefit. But out of the whole equation I'd rather see school kids get free software with the MS settlement than lawyers get richer and politicians line their own pockets with money from other companies. Look what happened with the tobacco money. Put to good use huh? Yeah, in someones pocket.
Hmm the irony of free speech zealots. Its only their speech their interested in sponsoring.
:-)
Seriously, how many positive MS stories do you guys post here? Um zero, but 99% of the home PC world uses windows. They can't all be unhappy customers, otherwise why would MS be so popular?
Slashdot, the forum of unhappy Linux users. Why are they unhappy? Because they can't figure out how to setup Linux!
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
I do volunteer work in several elementary schools in a middle-of-nowhere city. I have worked in about a half dozen schools now, and the best one at fighting illiteracy is the one with the most computers (that are actually used). The majority of the computers in this school are all rather old, many of them running on ancient macs or win3.1 machines. However, they are well used in the 'Accelerated Reader' program. I have seen this program make a sharp difference in the children's willingness to actually pick up a book with this program. Getting a child willing to read is a big part of fighting illiteracy. This isn't someone else's rhetoric I am regurgitating; I have seen this myself.
Then I have seen other schools where the 'Clinton computers' just get stuck in a corner and get occasional use from teachers and teachers' aids only. That sure helps...
Ironically, the other schools in this area get more funding than this one because they have a higher percentage of low-income students (90% is the average, the one I am praising has 'only' 30-60%). However, the extra money doesn't seem to be well spent. Just throwing money at the problem doesn't even make a dent. All of the problems you listed will not be affected at all by putting more money in the system; it all depends on how the local government apportions it and handles it. For example, it doesn't matter if $X of extra money gets apportioned to schools if it takes > 6 months to get anything approved. 'Need a new boiler? No problem! You just have to call a long list of people and then wait another 6 months and hope for no additional delays. Yes, you will get that new boiler; it is guaranteed by law... just not when you get it.' This is the real trouble I have been dealing with.
So what we really need are local responsive governments (including school boards), sane teachers (You wont believe some of the oddities I have seen; Well, maybe you might. Your childhood memories probably weren't exaggerated...) and good school equipment that actually gets incorporated into the curriculum. Meet these three needs, and our schools will actually be pretty good despite other problems. As long as these needs aren't met, throwing money or books at the problem won't cause much change at all.
"Never, never suspect the dreams within the dreams of dreaming children." ~The Amazon Quartet
One of the things the strikes me about all the comments I see regarding this proposed settlement.
They are all of the tone "Bah! Microsoft should really pay! This is lame!"
But all of these responses make an assumption, that Microsoft would lose this case. Honestly, I don't think they'd lose the case. The evidence just isn't there to convict.
So from that stand point this is a fairly good win-win for both sides. The alternative is to go to court, and maybe the California lawyers will lose.
MS would be supplying the hardware. What's to stop them providing hardware that Linux has little or no support for. Or worse, buggy support.
So if MS doesn't actually pay out $550 million, and the stockholders don't see it... Where does the money go? Forgive my financial ignorance.
IANAL, but . . .
In most states, only "direct consumers" can sue for anti-trust damages -- e.g. typically this means Dell or Compaq, not the end-user. The suits involving these states are going to get thrown out anyway, so they are willing to settle for anything .
In CA (and some other places), indirect consumers can sue. So these states don't want to give in. But, MS cleverly made the settlement contingent on all suits being settled.
The class-action lawyers for the consumers in states that can't really sue are trying to force this settlement down the throats of the other groups. What will the judge say? Who knows.
According to Microsoft, they've already settled the class action lawsuit! And I quote: "...[Microsoft] has reached a nationwide settlement of more than 100 class action lawsuits..."
I didn't realize there was little discrepancy between "reached" and "proposed".
if M$ had to pay for CDs of things like StarOffice, Linux, Free-BSD, MacOS or whatever the hell THE PEOPLE want to use, not that crap from Redmond.
Ballmer, of all the assholes you are the King!
about trying to educate anyone
with these computers!
{try and eqaute that with dollar amounts!}
the literacy rate is already bad enough!
you think flash popups are going to help?
reminicent of the deals
the textbook publishers
did in the late 60's
ah those were the days
back in the day we didnt have no old school
I guess my point is that even though I don't agree with the business tactics that Microsoft has taken, even though I think that Windows XP is overpriced for what you get, I believe that there are alternatives out there.
Here's the hard part: to get what you really want takes a little work. So I built my own computers and installed my own operating systems. And I can honestly say that Microsoft hasn't harmed me, hasn't stifled my innovation and basically has had little to no impact on me.
My personal opinion is that much of the Microsoft bashing goes on for a few reasons:
1. You're jealous of Bill Gates because he made a lot of money.
2. Microsoft is a big (relatively speaking) company and big companies are easy to hate.
3. Microsoft aggressively protects its intellectual property interests.
It seems to me that only the third reason *might* be a position to argue from, except that, from a legal perspective, MUST protect their IP interests.
As far as the "innovation" issue, I'd say that's a red herring. Innovation, at least in the sense that most people bandy the word around, really doesn't exist. Very little work in any industry is innovative, regardless of what the marketing flacks might say. For the last several years almost every "new" product or idea has really been nothing more than an evolutionary improvement on existing work. Now that's not a bad thing...it really is how new products get introduced. But I don't think it's appropriate to say that Microsoft stifles innovation...the very complexity of many of the "things" that we use today really limits true innovation.
And just as a bonus...for everyone who rails at companies who (mis)use US patent laws to protect their patently obvious software developments, remember that the antitrust laws that Microsoft was accused of violating were put in place to combat the excesses of the railroad barons of the 19th century...just as poor an application of the law to the Microsoft situation as the application of patent law to software and "methods". Read your history!
And finally...the "Windows tax" isn't necessarily a Microsoft invention. Consider the economies of scale. I was part of management for a major computer manufacturer and one of the decisions that we had to make regarded the shipment of systems with no OS or a custom OS installed. From a cost perspective, it simply was too expensive to delete Windows from our configurations and create a special process for the small number of orders that required no OS. It wasn't a contract requirement, it wasn't Microsoft leaning on us to ship Windows, it was economics plain and simple. To knock $40 off the cost of a system and ship with no OS cost well over $40 to implement on such a small volume of computers. Want to blame somebody on the "Windows tax"? It's the corporate bottom line. Oh, and the company is still in business. And, in a sea of red ink, actually made a profit last quarter.
-h-
Most people tend to be indifferent or side with Microsoft because they think Microsoft is on trial for being a monopoly. While this is true, to most people monopoly merely means that a company has little or no competition. They think that Microsoft is on trial because they are TOO successful. Now, although Microsoft is very successful, they are really on trial for MONOPOLISTIC PRACTICES! Which means they are committing unfair business practices and costing you as the consumer LOTS of MONEY! I think that phrase needs to be used more often in the media because saying Microsoft is being sued for being a monopoly makes Microsoft seem like the victum.
There up to no good...
"It takes many nails to build a crib, but one screw to fill it."
$ bash microsoft
--
The Cap is nigh. Time to get a fresh new account.
Second, for people like you and I who see right through the ploy, we get caught up talking about who should give how many of what to schools. Even RedHat jumps into the fray. This just distracts everyone from the issue at hand: MS must be punished for violating anti-trust laws. They (MS) have cleverly inputted a line of discussion that will distract us from the issue and stretch out the time to the eventual sentencing to an even more distant date.
Duh yeah, daddy-o! What he said...
Employee Of the Month - Cyberdyne Systems Corporation - September 1997
No matter what the reparation MS makes, it will not change the current situation. Sure, they could use Redhat's suggestion of reparation. But I think what will happen is that people will eventually go out and buy Windows XP to replace Redhat. Only when Sun, BeOS, and other OS producing companies actually get on their asses and start to produce a superior OS, and market it aggressively, would things change. Has the slashdot community noticed, Windows (2k/XP) is the only non-unix-based OS out there? The rest of the world should get on with unix... it's a 30+ year old technology that seriously needs to be updated. Win2k and XP are superior OSes for the average consumer. It has an excellent GUI, easy to use, stable, fast, and large libraries of drivers supporting a large variety of hardware, not to mention huge software library as well.
The case against MS is outdated. It used to be the case that MS used unfair business tactics to sell an inferior OS (Win 3.1, Win95, etc.) That is no longer the case. (perhaps they're not using unfair tactics to sell a superior OS.) But why would tons of ppl rush to buy WinXP? MS is a monopoly because the market choose to let it be. Has MS sabotaged say.. Sun's ability to develop Solaris? No. I think Sun sabotaged themselves by basing Solaris on unix, a dead-end technology. Sun should spend more resources and come up with their own OS, something from scratch, maybe.
Here's an underreported fact to chew on: Schools have the choice of using non-Microsoft software under the proposed terms of settlement. Further, many of the donated computers will be Apples. So if schools would like RedHat software, they can ask for it. It's up to the schools to choose. That's why the software valuation under the settlement is a broad range.
If Gates said to hell with all this trouble "I hereby withdraw all licenses, everyone who has MS software or operating systems on their computer must remove them at once. You don't own the software, read your EULA, I do." Each use would be a copyright violation under which they could receive up to $150,000 for each infringment. That's a little more than we pay now.
Think of the ensuing chaos that would take place. (I would have to teach dear old mom Linux, she wouldn't be happy.)With the current state of copyright law in the country where corporate copyright holders have 125 year lock on their IP and no requirement to make it available during that period, Bill Gates and Paul Allen could just sit back on their billions and laugh. Be careful what you wish for you may just get it.
On the other hand I can visualize that other developers would be scrambling like starving cats in a room full of baby chicks trying to fill the gaps. Caffeine sales would go up. Medical costs would rise (insomnia and carpel tunnel related) and eventually we would have another viable semi-user friendly OS.
One thing I figured out early on was that I could fix any Windoze problem by doing a complete reinstall.
Why did this insightless "me too" post get modded up? It's really not insightful at all, and his strained incoherent metaphor just makes it worse. Blech
The judge in this case has invited comments to be faxed to him on the proposed settlement. So, tone it down, keep it short and civil, and fax the judge at this number (faxes received by tomorrow qualify as "public comments" on the case and may have some bearing on all this):
Hon. Judge J. Frederick Motz
H.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Fax #: (410) 962-7574
It is nothing but a transparent ploy to extend monopoly. I can't believe anyone would fail to see it, or ignore it. It's blatent and it's obvious. And it's predictable. This is precisely the way we've all come to expect MS to behave.
No one seems to have noticed that the "settlement" encompasses $0.1 billion in hardware and $0.9 billion in software. In other words, for every dollar that Microsoft actually has to pay from its own pocket, it will claim 9 additional dollars in tax credit.
This, of course, does not include the huge benefits that Microsoft otherwise has to spend for marketing to schools.
ok, I read the article. On yahoo. I seem to remember that people have been paid by microsoft to get on chat sites and fight for them. Interesting, huh... Oh well, fud is good....
article: Judge to Weigh Private Microsoft Antitrust Deal.
Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
So... Ballmer thinks that even if people were given the choice they would still install Microsoft software.
What is depressing is that he is probably right. Microsoft does have a monopoly on the desktop after all.
I think that Microsoft should just give the schools the money and let them do what ever they want with it. Buy desks or chairs. New basketball uniforms... What ever the schools wants.
It's ridiculous to pretend that giving a billion dollars worth of software to schools costs Microsoft anything. Probably it costs them 4 million dollars in packaging. But they can more than make that up from the advertising they get as a result... Microsoft has probably spent 500 million advertising XP and 2k already.
That isn't even a punishment. And they have been convicted, right?
Another problem that no one seems to have noticed is that Microsoft's donation of its software, valued at nine times that of hardware, will expire in five years.
In other words, if those schools most of which are on the brink of bankruptcy, do not come out with the money to continue the licenses, they will be legally forbidden to operate their own computers in five years!
Not two weeks ago I wrote our (CA's) attorney general, supporting his decision to not settle...
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
You obviously don't read them much.
Today's is a riot btw!
link
I agree. UF is horribly unfunny. And yet, the jokes are perceptive and accurate. They have a good eye for certain kinds of stupidity, but they lack the talent to make something funny from it as Scott Adams does.
UF always reminds me that although I am a geek compared to the majority of the population, there are many who are geekier than me. And I don't mean that in a nice way.
On another note, I have no sympathy for the "poor" school districts--they are anything but. Just like the state and local governments that always claim a lack of funds for their needs, the school districts in fact have HUGE investment portfolios, just like the state and local gov'ts. The income would more than pay for all their needs. Sorry, I just had to say it.
Sadly, I have only this to say:
me too
If this works, maybe I'll try it myself next April:
"Dear IRS, Instead of a check, enclosed please find 800 copies of my latest shareware valued at $40.00 each. I'm sure you'll agree that the benefit to society of making my software available to hundreds of schools serving hundreds of thousands of children far outweighs some petty cash payment."
I could save a fortune this way. Go Microsoft!
Linux is too unstable and difficult to maintain and difficult for a fifth grader to use (sorry KDE and GNOME, maybe in 3 years).
Make MSFT buy 200,000 iMacs instead of PCs. If they want to write off the free Mac Internet Explorer, fine by me.
---- Smokin' another sig.
The fool who reverses the situation fails to realize that Steve Jobs and Woz looked at building a company like HP, something important and still see it this way. Gates was only concerned with dominance and profiteering. He did not care about fundamentally changing the way people used computers. Even after being thrown out of apple, Jobs still brought NeXT and great tech to the world.
Just where are they going to get qualified teachers? Or the money to pay them? Why don't they just provide a multi-boot system, where they can choose between RedHat and Windows? Why are they providing hardware and software to poor schools, when what they really need is food, books and better study places? How exactly is this compensating for the damages that they have done to friendly competition, to the other rival companies and to the development of technology? If this goes through, how exactly is this going to affect the U.S.A. economy? How will be the Microsoft's employees affected by this? And the IT in general?
The major difference, as I understand it, between the corporate vision of software and the FSF/Open Source vision of software is this: In both cases 1 overarching interoperable standard is a Good Thing, leading to overall compatability. The difference is that in the MS ideal, this overarching standard is controlled by MS, whereas in FSF it is controlled by developers and users.
One advantage the idea of kids learning computing on boxes with Red Hat Linux is that from a user's perspective frequently there is no difference at all between distrobutions. My own Red Hat system looks on the outside a lot like my friends' Yellow Dog, which both look similar to the SuSe system I once had, which is like the Debian another friend has... you get the idea.
Red Hat's proposal is, yes, exactly the same marketing ploy that MS suggests. but if it teaches kids about open standards and the choices they have about OS's, I see some advantages. Heck, even distros going around and talking to schools about learning on Linux might lead to some good new software and some more people freed to choose their own OS.
i feel that teaching children all platforms is important as each is a standard in different places. People in the sciences in engineering have to know Unix and are at a distinct disadvantage at the University level where unix knowledge helps. For art, film, architecture and prepress apple is where it is at and it is important that students are familiar with these industry standards. For business applications windows apparently is best so that should be taught as well. but it is important not to isolate students because each platform is important for different tasks. While windows also does engineering software, professors have been using Unix for a while and often prefer Sun or Linux to windows which they have rarely used. In my university Math and Engineering computer applications are mostly used on suns and many people have trouble using them although they have years of computer experience. It is bad when these IT idiots want to standardize because they hamper the children's ability to learn. Any who if you are standardizing on anything it should be OS X because it is Unix and mac but also offers common business apps. i think MS is doing a bad thing and should not be allowed to monopolize by giving free software, let the children learn.
Supplemental:
http://www.astroglide.com/freesample/index.html
-----
Yes, I'm a troll, please mod me down, Natalie pr0tman, hot grits!
According to the register, Britain has a central MS buying agency for close on half a million licences.
The civil circus is screaming blue murder over 50% licence price increases, threatening alternatives? Whoopie - tens of millions of dollars savings? is what , a measly 20 bucks off the full list price? California is right, they are being duped.
But back to the stink test, and already ripped off users getting nothing, while the seattlement nicely puts back/retards new entrants, and further enhances market share. Paying 5% of income (PA, while market share > 98%) to be dispersed to open source projects should be the go.
This seattlement is akin to the Tobacco companies giving out free cigarettes, as a way of saying 'sorry'.
penny arcade - there's an answer for everything
I was beginning to worry since almost 24 hours went by without a gratuitous anti-Microsoft story posted on slashdot.
Is Microsoft up to no good? Well, does a Bear.. you know.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - The Celtic - =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
This settlement illustrates why it is important to fight drug lords: any monopoly with enough cash *will* corrupt governments. >>>Don't trust anything with back *Gates*
Of course Microsoft is just trying to extend their reach into other areas and get more kids hooked on their 'crack'.
Everyone knows that poor schools have no money for software purchases.
Everyone knows that Apple used to rule the education market.
Everyone knows that Linux deployment in schools and 3rd world countries is the only alternative to flat out software piracy.
So, Microsoft gives away current versions of software that costs them nothing. They display Apple. The keep Linux at a distance. They get the kids hooked into an OS that provides no development environment, is not as manageable, is harder to administer, is a petri dish for viruses, and requires that the schools eventually bow down to Micros~1, and sign up for SOFTWARE ASSURANCE support.
That's the real agenda -- Microsoft is semi-secretly moving towards a subscription software model.
No more upgrades, just by a year's support contract. Heck, they can give away the software for FREE! Just pay them support every year, and you'll get the newest software. If you don't join Software Assurance, they're not going to fix your bugs in old versions, so you'd better upgrade! If Microsoft doesn't make enough money, they can just threaten a site audit for license compliance, and that's enough to scare organizations into lock-step with Microsoft's subscription software model.
Giving Windows software to a poor school is going to end up costing the US taxpayers money.
Catch-22 - Microsoft wins either way.
Nope, not funny. Sorry.
Wow! Thank you for sharing your incredibly insightful opinion. Everyone who likes UF must be wrong, because you don't find it funny.
Disclaimer: I don't read UF. I have no opinion on its humor either way. However, I know that PvP and PA's creators hate Illiad with a frothing passion and thus, like sheep, PvP and PA fans tend to hate UF with the same frothing passion.
You know, I haven't seen Illiad attach either of these two authors. Says a little something about his maturity.
And you know, I see a lot more UF links posted on Slashdot than PA or PvP links. Obviously it has a fairly large following of people who think it's funny enough to share with others. But, I guess they're all wrong. You no doubt are the authority on humor and thankfully have come along and schooled the lot of us. God forbid we might make the terrible mistake of breaking from the herd.
If you find something else to be funnier and more relevant, submit that. Don't insult what other people submit. It just shows you to be petty and immature. You like the Katz bashers who are too stupid to block his articles if you find him that offensive.
...thus guaranteeing that these machines will never run Windows, and also helping to work against Intel's monopoly.
Intel does actually innovate, as well as monopolise. In this respect they're ahead of Microsoft.
Also, $1.1G is literally petty cash for Microsoft. If California suffered $3G-$9G, let's call it $3G and figure out the value per capita, then amortise that across the whole world, call that the spend, and make sure it gets spent worldwide too. (-:
Can anyone improve on the justice of this proposal? (-:
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Come on - this settlement isn't that bad. If you read the cnet article , Ballmer says that the money can be used to buy any kind of software (include Redhat) and the computers can be either PCs or otherwise - it doesn't specify what kind they have to be. "But Ballmer insisted the deal does not specify PCs running on Intel processors. "The benefits we provide can be used for PCs or Macintoshes," he said. "It can used for PC software or Macintosh software. Certainly the money can be used for non-Microsoft software, so I don't view it as some big thing about market share."
Last time I heard anything, they believed the flawed tires came out of a plant run by managers who were busting a union strike. People reported when bubbles would form during manufacture they managers would simply pop the bubble. Normally, when people who knew how to do the job did the job, such tires were destroyed as defective...
They should consider donating some computers and software to the red cross. It seems like they were in need of more modern technology.
While i give you mad props for quoting the templars, try punks and skins by the casualties:
punks and skins are out every night
punks and skins not looking for a fight
punks and skins just wanna have some fun
punks and skins will always survive
chorus:
skins and punks.. with spikey hair
we don't care
punks and skins
x2
(Hey everyone, This is my first troll. I know its not what you're used to, but I wanted something original. I promise that future posts will be about Malda and the rest of the slashdot tea room boys.)
What do you think of when you look at the Apple?
Most people act shocked and step back when asked this question. However, Apple is important in all of our lives, and this is a question that must be considered.
There is chocolate to vanilla. The mouse to the keyboard. Mac to PC. God to satan. Yin to yang. Something to nothing.
I have always been made to feel like an outsider. Apple does not follow the norm and is therefore considered an outsider. As a Mac user and a professional Mac-fixer (for the extreme rarity that they would somehow fail or break), I am a part of Apple.
When I look at the Apple, and think of everything Apple has done during my lifetime -- from the utter defeats of the Newton and the Pippen, to the glorious, eternal victories of the iMac and Mac OS X. I think of Adam and Eve. They fucked up by taking a bite out of one of God's priceless Apples, yet that did not stop them from continuing their trek on the road to enlightenment. God did not throw their souls into the Lake of Fire. They even got to have sex a few times.
The Apple is glorious because it ideally represents the human condition. We all fuck up sometimes -- but we use the erasers on our pencils and move on. In doing so we better ourselves and excel to the ultimate level.
Apple does this, and those who wish to crush it have no choice but to emulate it. Theiving, pathetic scoundrel technologies such as M$ Windows, and PC makers who now have "pretty cases" are nothing but parasites, leeching off of the superior technology that sustains them.
A new Apple computer running with the latest version of Mac OS represents the acme of human-computer acheivement. Everyone knows this, but few will admit it.
Now is an extremely exciting time for Mac users. We have regrouped, rearmed, and are ready to launch a massive assault on our parasitic enemies.
Our last blow to the evil empire was the iPod. An excellent mask for a fast punch to the face. The black eye is beginning to show.
October 24th, 2001. Apple releases an intresting but non-revolutionary device. News coverage of this arguably "yawn-inspiring" device is everywhere.
October 25th, 2001. Microsoft releases Windows XP, aka "Windows' os X riP-off".
A man stands lonely in front of hundreds of copies of XP, realizing that nobody wants to spend more money on a computer which displays an ugly OS, and serves oftentimes as a confusing tool that they must use in order to get their work done and survive.
People care more about the iPod because it is designed to add pleasure to its owner's life. This is technology that says "Let me make your life a little easier, more enjoyable, and better".
XP is technology that says "People like OS X because its more beautiful!? Fuck! Throw a nice candy-store coating on 2000 and name it something else. By the way, I want users to rent their Windows operating system from now on".
Throwing a candy coating onto Windows is like an Arby's manager ordering his pimply-faced teen fry-guy to put on a fucking smile.
... And people realize that this is bullshit. They see XBoxes crashing in toystores (my NES, SNES, Game Boy, and N64 NEVER EVER CRASHED). They see XP being proclaimed as stable on TV, then crashing ten seconds later.
They work at their crummy jobs punching numbers into on ugly monior with a stupid grey bar at the bottom of their monitor all day, every fucking day. The boot to a M$ OS, launch their M$ email client, their M$ web browser, connect to their M$ ISP, and create files in M$ applications. The go home and watch MSNBC. Now M$ has slapped a color onto their OS, began selling it for $100, and makes plans for its owners to begin RENTING it.
Why?
Because somebody beat them bad, and they now have a fresh creature to leech off of, and they are saying and doing whatever it takes to make a fucking buck from it.
People and Apple are coming together, because they both share in a common human problem -- making a mistake, yet learning from it, trying hard, and winning. They are realizing that they wasted a good part of their lives punching numbers into a cheap PC running a commodity OS. They want something better. They want a Mac.
Users no longer want to pay for something that will help them work faster. They want something that will help them acheive the same thing that work does -- a better life.
The world is starting to recognize that Apple has always operated under this philosophy. Apple represents the good of mankind, and those who wish to make the world a better place.
If we don't do it, then it won't get done. Even a one page letter ("This is a bad idea, don't do it!") will be helpful.
The letter should be FAXed to
... if the dissenting states voted with their feet? Made some kind of a committment to Open Source for their internal systems and tried (at least STARTED as a feint to scare MS) to wean themselves off of MS software?
I bet that would scare MS more than the lawsuit has. And the exercise of doing so could be quite instructive to the states and the OpenSource movement as well.
I think it would be beneficial all round.
Regards, your friendly neighbourhood cranq
what is good and what is not good, phaedrus, need we ask of that?
Plato: Phaedrus-- Rolf Lindgren, cand.psychol
that's all I got. Just do so.
I guess that's most of what I've got. To clarify somewhat, I guess I'd say that simply failing statistically to be below the US-government-defined 'poverty line' and being poor enough to live an _exceedingly_ difficult life are not the same thing. Fuckhead.
Ok, correct me if I'm wrong, but the majority of these lawsuits are centered around the idea that MS "over-charged" them for their OS. Does this sound rediculous to anyone else?
But before I go any further, lets just get this out of the way. MS is BIG. MS IS a monopoly. And MS isn't innocent of the FEDERAL charges.
Whew, now that was tough, but back on task... Ok, so these people claim MS charged them too much. Whoop de doo. If this is true, they're entitled to what? A whole $40?!? (just a guessimate as to what they were over-charged by) To me, the facts do actually speak for themselves in this case. 1) The majority of the people in on the lawsuit purchased their PCs from an OEM. OEM's purchase MS's OS's at an extremely discounted price. So how is it that MS is the one that "over-charged"? Couldn't the OEM's be held liable instead? 2) This is an OS (quality is not an issue here) that is under $200 (and no, comparing price to linux is not an issue either). MS Office suite costs more than any of its "Home Edition" OS's. Photoshop costs more. I could name many other pieces of software that cost WAY more.
So again, I ask you... What are these people really entitled to? In my opinion... Nothing. They do not deserve any of the money (assuming MS loses) that would come from the lawsuit. All of them can easily be compared to ambulance chasers. If they do actually pull this off (which I really hope they don't), this will be the biggest con in history.
But aside from that, I'd wish that everyone would just take a step back and look at the issues objectively instead of fanatically. This industry was conceived by individuals who did not strictly adhere to the status quo, and since all these lawsuits have surfaced... a new status quo is blindly being followed.
If Uncle Firestone hadn't wasted all that effort strikebreaking, they might well have managed to emit a quality product. Y'know, the kind of tire that _doesn't_ randomly explode?
Answer: No, these schools are broke. There is no loss to Microsoft other than the production cost (about $3 in bulk). Even that can be minimised by giving only one set of media per school and the rest a 'licence to copy'.
The last point is training. A school isn't exactly the place to attract geeks, particularly a poor one. If the teachers don't have the expertise to handle the equipment then forget it! You end up with a very expensive ornament that sits in the corner (until it is stolen).
See my journal, I write things there
I hope you can say either that you're a hard core crack addict and that's why you wronte all that nonsense, or that you do no have the benefit of any real perspective of the world pre-Microsoft-monopoly.
I don't claim to be an old-timer by any stretch, but my computing days started on an Atari 800 in the early 1980's. Back then our computers didn't crash. You could buy tons of games for every platform EXECPT the PC. (Yes my friend, there used to be alternativES (sic) to the PC) and Microsoft actually was a cross-platform oriented software copmany (see Microsoft Basic).
Thanks largely to IBM and Compaq, Microsoft's worm-like leader got a pretty easy break into an industry thet was hot with competition.
Riding on the coattails of IBM's monopoly of corporate IT mindshare, Microsoft was largely shielded from comptition in the medium- and large-business marketplace.
(Please compare with the competition among the other platform vendors. Criminy, they were still selling the CONCEPT of a personal computer in the office, when MSFT could easily tread in on all of IBM's business relationships from THEIR monopoly.
And WTF kind of math are you trying to use in your Windows Tax analogy?
Are you telling me you've got to give money to Microsoft in order to save money on your process?
Are you telling me that leaving Windows off your computers wouldn't save you the license fee?
Are you telling me that a one time proces refinment to allow bolting in a blank HD instead of one with Windows cost more that the reoccurring cost paying for Windows licenses you don't need or want?
You're contradicting basic economics. Your old company may have been doing this, but please don't try to pursuade anyone else it's a good idea.
(e.g. If you pay for only 100 Windows licences that your customers don't want and assue you pay $40 to MSFT per license, that's $4000 wasted. Take that $4000 and reengineer your process to allow for blank-drive sytems, tehn every time you sell a blank drive system after that 100th machine it's money in the bank and *more satisfied* customers.)
How to expect any reasonable outcome when those in charge of making these decisions can't tell the difference between a computer and a camel's ass?
No amount of punitive damage will solve the problem. This whole process has been rather pathetic as we heard both sides of the debates talking about absurdly small details compared to the real issues involved. They can only talk about these things because these are the only facts with some sort of analogies to be made. Otherwise the public in general would not be able to consume it in front of the six o'clock evening news.
Microsoft keeps telling they are in favor of innovation and that they have tough competition. How many different software packages can you see on store shelves? Can you name one really good new software title that came up in the last five years? As a software developer, how can you compete with this company? If you write anything with the slightest popular interest, Microsoft will turn around, copy your program, and offer for free. On top of that, they will do things with their version of the program that you can't have access to as only they have access to the source code of the operating system.
Nothing short of splitting this company in two is enough. Absolutely anything else will be just nonsense and we're going to be here in a few months talking about the same things this company is doing.
Hon. Judge J. Frederick Motz
H.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Fax #: (410) 962-7574
With all due respect, there is no amount of punitive damages that will solve this issue.
I am a software developer. I write a computer program. People start to like it. Microsoft notices it. Microsoft copies it. Microsoft puts its copy for free in its operating system. I try to make the software better so I have some chance of competing with free software. Microsoft turns around and changes the operating system in a way that I cannot do what their version of the program can do. I'm stuck. I shut down. Microsoft starts charging for the free software.
This has repeated over and over for the last 12 years. Small companies went out of business. Large companies went out of business. Those still in business today are too scared to talk about as they so much depend on Microsoft and cannot afford to upset them.
This is a sad day for our courts.
This is a happy day for money-buys-justice business as usual. Shoot all the lawyers!
Back in the days when the typewriter was king of the office, IBM's office products division was accused of monopolising the market, and asked to propose a solution, before one was imposed on them.
No worries, they said, we'll just double the price. And they did. And guess what? They sold more units than at half the price, because people figured that the more expensive product had to be better...
Microsoft haven't actually doubled the price of Windows here, but there proposed remedy reeks of similar or worse chutzpah, what with getting a full-price tax break on what they supply for peanuts, swamping the schools with their monopoly product, and proposing a ``penalty'' that amounts to a few weeks' interest on their cash holdings, and at the end of five years leaves the poverty-stricken schools dependent on paying licence fees in order to keep using their now-established software.
As another poster said, it's like tabacco companies handing out free cigarette in apology for luring people into using a product that kills them slowly and painfully.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Judge Motz's office's fax number is (410) 962-7574 - let them know this will only help M$, maybe a lot of messages can convince them to do the right thing(tm).
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
I love Google.
= Go ogle+Search
http://www.google.com/search?q=7+June+1099&btnG
Fourth link.
Cool site.
--
E_NOSIG
Hey scumbag, I come from a family of emigrants. When my grandparents came from Germany and Russia they didn't jump off the boat and receive a bunch of Government handouts and expect everyone to learn German and Russian. In those days there were a lot of them as well. When in Rome act like the Romans. When I lived in Europe for three years I didn't expect everyone to learn English and cotnrary to popular belief there were a lot of people that weren't bi-lingual. Guess what genius! I learned the language !!!! It is fricken insulting when people come to this country now and just exploit it rather than embrace it! Die you liberal scum!!!
What did you expect? He is from Canada!! All those kooks are just jealous of the U.S. and always are quick to tell us how we could do it better or should be living our lives. Shut up and keep your dumb ass comments in Canada!
Maybe this has been posted before but according to this
Australian news item Microsoft are not really keen on NGOs using their software. Certainly "support" does not seem to describe their behaviour.
The first problem I have with this guy is that he tries to claim that doing a little volunteer work validates his pronouncements that computers promote avid reading habits by children. To what extent this is true I don't know but I do know that parents have the most influence on a child's educational habits - followed by teachers. If parents want their children to read they need to switch-off the TV AND the computer and get some books in the house. Parents need to set the example by reading books themselves!!! My wife tries to motivate her 4th graders by devoting classroom time to her reading out loud. She takes the time to find great books and tries to act-out the parts. The kids love it. But things like this can not help if the student's home life is not one where education - and reading - is valued.
As for the remark about the "Clinton computers"
I want to be alone with the sandwich
...who screwed up their electricity?
Gimme a break.
The anti-microsoft rant here is absurd. There's not one company who has done more for personal computing than Microsoft. Period.
What has Oracle or Sun ever done for the consumer? Not jack. I'm not rushing out to Best Buy to buy a java app am I? Why not? Because it's shit as far as the consumer is concerned.
There is no monopoly. You are all using Linux. You can buy Mac OS, so the desktop is not controlled by anyone. The average consumer does not want Linux or Mac, they want Windows and that's why Microsoft is successful.
You've been hoodwinked by the govt. that had nothing better to do but try and screw one of the most successful US companies in history, instead of chasing down terrorists like they should have been doing.
To schools....take a huge right-off. everyone is happy. All the kids have to sign up on passport to use them. Then MS will charge a fee to access "educational" content. Then MS will charge a maitenance fee for patching the x-box. Disney will partner with MSN to provide educational curriculum to schools. McDonalds will partner with Microsoft as MS centralizes the school lunch program and using the X-boxes as a portal to purchase meal tickets for happy meals promoting Disney's next cartoon.
The value of my proposal is hidden in the details. You see, all of these class action suits could be settled without giving anything to the plaintiffs. According to me, this entitles their lawyers to 40% of what the plaintiffs receive, which is NOTHING. Of course this means no meaningful relief to the plaintiffs and no punishment for the defendants, but that's a small price to pay if it means pulling the plug on litigation, which seldom provides anything other than a paycheck for the lawyers.
The bottom line is that this "settle by charitable contribution" trend will eliminate anyone's motivation to pursue a class action suit. Since there are only so many political patronage jobs to go around, putting the lawyers out of work would force them to pursue meaningful employment elsewhere, thus resulting in a benefit to the economy. Without the threat of those pesky class action suits, just imagine how many jobs these benevolent corporations would create! This could stop the recession!
Disclaimer: This article is for entertainment only; not to be taken seriously. I am not a lawyer. This not an offer to settle anything. Any copyrights/trademarks belong to their respective owners. The companies mentioned here may or may not be involved in a current or past class action suit. Use as directed. Your actual mileage may vary.
M$ already has the great PR on the $ for schools thing. Now if the DOJ rejects the offer then the DOJ looks bad am M$ looks good.
What I think would do the most damage is for them to expose the hooks they put in LDAP for Active Directory so the good people at SAMBA. This is the direction that I believe would lead less M$ control.
Just my 2 cents.
Pedro For President!
Every conversation on this subject seems to leave out one key item of the proposed settlement, that MS will provide training to colleges for support. So not only will they be indoctrinating future microsofties but they will be indoctranating the next generation of IT departments as well.
Unfortunately I cannot quote directly from the above URL as the MS site appears to be DOWN.
Yes, the california residents need 9 million dollars in damanges. Primarily because because they are too lazy to learn how to use Unix, or because Windows is so easy to use that it actually outperformed it naturally as a home/office computer... and still does. ANYBODY CAN MAKE THE SWITCH. THE MASS MAJORITY DOESN'T WANT TO BECAUSE IT-AINT-BROKEN. THIS WHOLE THING IS STUPID LAWYER BULLSHIT. ADMIT IT- WINDOWS IS WHERE IT IS BECAUSE THE AVERAGE IDIOT CAN USE IT WITHOUT TRYING TO HARD. THEY WON. END OF STORY.
You wanna *REALLY* fight Microsoft? GET OFF YOUR ASS AND IMPROVE THAT CRYPTIC-ASS PENGUIN.
Which successful corporation will be next to succumb to the army of lawyers. Let's see who else overcharges...Seen the price of a BMW lately.
This whole thing is nothing but a bunch of politicians and lawyers getting together and stealing from MSFT.
The foundation will use these funds, in part, to establish technical support programs at community colleges and to enhance and expand an existing program that successfully teaches students how to support the technology systems at their schools.
The cultivation of new devotees works best for them if it can happen at all levels of the education system.
For having the guts to take a stance against this particular settlement.
Apart from Californian resistance, much of the gist of this story has been covered by an earlier one.
Likewise, my opinion has been expressed there, including why it takes a great deal of courage to stand up to this settlement.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
And can you believe they will be allowed to take a $500 million write down (if the deal goes through)in the quarter for giving away software which has ZERO cost for them...it stinks
A few issues here. Any states that opt out of the settlement are ultimately going to just end up having to go along with a court imposed deal. Whether they like it or not, that deal is most likely to be structured almost identical to the federal settlement. The bottom line, the hold-out states aren't going to get a whole lot more than the current settlement agreement.
Second, if CA does prevail in winning $3b from Microsoft (for example), then all Microsoft is going to do is pass those costs on to consumers. They will call it the "California-tax" and charge software dealers in California an extra $5 to purchase Windows. This cost will be passed on to the consumer. Financial penalties in this situation serve only to punish the people you are trying to protect.
Finally, I have seen some people talk direct and indirect consumers as reason for some states going along. They assert that in some states only Dell and Compaq and others have standing in anti-trust cases. That is simply not the case. Anti-trust laws are designed to protect the consumer, not protect the competition. Competitors are not even in-line to receive awards from this case, nor will they ever be, nor should they be.
Look, it's pretty much standard to settle class actions by paying the plaintiff's lawyers and paying the class close to nothing (thought that's more than they should get in many cases). Here, the class gets nothing. Zilch. Their attorney's hve *no* authority to do this, and are violating their ethical duties in doing so. The attorneys in states with stronger laws are objecting. There's no basis for microsoft handing things to schools instead of the plaintiffs. It's an even farther stretch for them to send the schools a check. . .
hawk
The point is that it's an abuse of power which result in the loss of rights by the common person. Whether it is the right to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness is irrelevant. This country was founded on a few simple principles which were aimed at preserving individual liberties. What good is living if we're forced into a Brave New World where we'll take what we can get and like it because that's what the entity with all the money (and hence power) says we'll do? Should we adopt the one-out-of-three-ain't-bad approach to choosing our freedoms? Huxley was right. Orwell was right. Their timing and direction that were a little off: they were worried about governments, when they should have been worried about the corporations...governments are really just the puppets of those with wealth.
Believe me, the proposed Microsoft settlement is a far larger step towards this kind of world than most are prepared to believe. Many people (like the author of the post to which I'm replying) will not understand the validity of comparing Microsoft to Tobacco companies because they're simply too comfortable. It is this comfort which allows the false assumption that an individual can judge the relative importance of what we have agreed upon as Inalienable Human Rights.
How many of you (truly) would offer your life for the freedom which allows the expression of discriminatory (e.g., racist) ideals? By the way, responding to this post is prohibited.
moto411.com
hawk
Looks like writing shareware is pretty profitable. Man, I picked the wrong career.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Email the law firm that has Michael Hausfeld, one of the lawyers that helped arrive at the settlement. Their email is:
1 527.htm
lawinfo@cmht.com
To read a quote by Michael Hausfeld, read http://www.siliconvalley.com/docs/news/svfront/01
The problem (well...solution for us M$-haters) with that is that once those licenses run out and come up for renewall, the low-income school districts won't be able to afford it. They'll have to switch to something they can afford.
The good thing is that a lot more people will have heard of Linux by that time, and hopefully won't associate it as "for servers only"...They may switch to Linux.
Now, even if M$ gives them free licenses until they stop supporting XP altogether, the kids in those low-income districts won't be able to affor the latest greatest hardware with XP on it...they may very well get their hands on second-hand equipment and put something free on it. Legally, they can't buy second-hand M$ software because the EULA prohibits the transfer of title. They may very well try Linux.
So, this is pretty much a win-win situation for Linux in the long run.
What's this Submit thingy do?
CNN has Steve Job's opinion on the Microsoft deal. He says, "We're baffled that a settlement imposed against Microsoft for breaking the law should allow, even encourage, them to unfairly make inroads into education -- one of the few markets left where they don't have monopoly power"
I guess anyone could have guessed this would be Apple's view of the settlement.
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
This is a good idea. I think that a bunch of Linux companies should get together and donate a bunch of CDs to schools and such, and pretty soon thousands of kids know how to use Linux!
All your school are belong to us, MS!
Excuse me, but seems to me someone pointed out the obvious loop hole around this:
The plaintiff's attorney proposed the settlement.
FYI, a settlement is a settlement because both sides agreed.
The people who has enough guts to actually SUE the big bad microsoft decided it was a better deal, but we have the text protestors online crying foul. Gee.
And guess what the responses to that dude's 'revelation' of great truth? silence.... cannot compute...
I thought as much.
Then there is this whole argument about how much it really costed Microsoft. It once again comes back to the concept and the value of intellectual properties, and I'm not surprised you people run around saying that its bunch of BS and costed MS next to nothing. Of course! What did I think you people were going to do, hanging around this 'open source' community where everything seems to you should be 'free'?
"The schools wouldn't have bought those software anyway, so MS doesn't really lose a penny"
Gee, mister, I seemed to hear warez monkies making THAT particular argument whenever they steal something.
While we are at it, why don't we make Microsoft give everyone their software for free since it costed them next to nothing to mass produce the cds anyway, then we'll be all happy camper, right?
"We'll just make them buy computers and make them equipped with Red Hat Linux"
Excuse me? What about BeOS? What about Mac OS? What about the half dozen no name OS out there? Weren't you people the ones yelling for 'fair' competition? Now you want to make the choice FOR the kids, while accusing MS of trying to buy young kids early?
Pot calling kettle black.
I have an idea for a much better punishment for Microsoft. They would continue with business as usual, BUT the following must change: Microsoft must completely stop advertising its products. Instead, Microsoft would be required to double the amount of money it spends on marketing... half of this money would be spent on vigorous marketing campaigns to benefit Microsoft's competitors, such as Linux. The other half would be spent on elaborate advertising campaigns bashing Microsoft's products. They would be required to outright tell the world how much their products SUCK, and heavily discourage anyone from using their software. Not only that, but all their programs would be required to contain a ton of annoying popup ads advertising their competitors, and every minute, a window will pop up that will block the entire system, and it will bash Microsoft and try to persuade the user to switch, and this window would be on the screen for a random amount of time between 30 seconds and 2 hours before an OK button appears to hide it, and that button would only be visible for 1 second, and if you miss it, the window will stay for twice as long as it just has, and it will be impossible to shut down your computer properly while this window is up, and if you turn the power off, there will be a 5 second delay between every machine instruction during the scandisk that will take place, which you won't be able to cancel, just to make things more cumbersome. In other words, Microsoft would be required to make their software VERY annoying so that their users will have no choice but to switch to something with more choice. Furthermore, Microsoft would be required to pay 100 dollars (USD) to anybody who switches from Microsoft programs to a competing product. (100 dollars per program switched, that is.) Furthermore, Microsoft would be required to release all of its software to the public domain, including full source code. Furthermore, Microsoft would be prohibited from continuing development on their software. Their programmers would be paid to work on Linux full time. Of course, Microsoft would put all of their programmers through extensive UNIX training before beginning this work. Microsoft would be required to pay a one million dollar fine per bug found in their code. Bill Gates would be required to go on tour, praising the FSF, GPL, Linux, etc., and heavily bashing Microsoft and their trash products. Oh yeah, and to make things fair, all computer hardware in the world would be free from now on, because Microsoft would be required to pick up the tab for whatever hardware anybody chooses to buy. Oh yeah, and Bill Gates and all of Microsoft's executives and shareholders would be required to give all their money and material assets to people who make free software. Yeah. That's a good punishment for Microsoft. Because they suck. But it probably won't happen. Oh well.
But they really don't know how. Look at all those Macs, clearly these people have misspent money in the past.
:)
Oh jeez. The 12 year olds aren't l33t enough.
Believe it or not, Macs are easier to maintain and use. This is especially important in schools with younger kids and limited IT staff.
All of us cool adult people can compile our own kernels on our self-built hardware bought for slightly above cost at Fry's.
- Scott
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Slashdot is the home of the big-bad MS bashing, but worse than Big Tobacco?
I think it was intended to compare courtroom practices, not end results.
- Scott
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Good 'computer teachers' are definitely a big issue too. If it were my decision, microsoft would have to pay the least biased "training service" to get more teachers to be beyond computer literate. I'm not by any means suggesting that all teachers be more than that, but those that wish to be should most certainly have it made as easy as possible. Let's face it, one educated computer user + a 1980's model computer amounts to more than 80 computers made yesterday and plenty of teachers who can't use the school's smtp server.
At my school (Taylor Allderdice in Pittsburgh) and all of the PPS (Pittsburgh Public Schools) have a huge deficite even on their TECH STAFF, not to mention computer literate staff in any given school. I finally got out of the pedantic academia racket so I no longer attend. But I'd still like to see'em get helped out this mess with MS.
I agree that this is not a good idea. The Redhat proposal makes much more sense. I see on CNN that even Jobs has come out against this idea, claiming it alows M$ to strongarm into their last stronghold: education. But the more i think about it, the less it seems to matter. ... not too shabby.
I've realized that the students of these schools aren't the ones that'll have much cash to spend on pc's. So, their purchacing power in the future isn't expected to be much. A PC for most them will be a luxury. So, while it's true that it halps m$ make inroads into education, it don't really matter. Now, if they were to give this stuff to ALL schools, it's antother matter.
Still, being a manapoly, and having control of the price of the camadity don't make it look good. I mean, it's not gonna cost them much to give away $500m of software (unless they are forced to pay for some kind of taxes) Then again, this danation could be a great tax writeoff. So, it's not costing them much but they get to write off $500m as a danation
Ayup. Why d'ya think I chose Alpha and PPC? (-:
Would have chosen MIPS too only they're getting kind of hard to get. I remember something from about a year ago to do with a MIPS-based ATX motherboard, though.
IA64 Linux is now shipping from several places. The next release of Mandrake looks set to ship for at least IA32, IA64, PPC and Alpha, if Cooker is any good as an indication. There's also some discussion of a 386/486 backport (standard Mandrake needs at least a Pentium).
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing