Slashdot Mirror
Talk to the Man Who Wants to Oversee Microsoft
Imagine "campaigning" for a job that doesn't exist, may never exist, and is sure to be full of heartburn for anyone who takes it on. Stephen Satchell is a self-declared candidate for the three-person committee the Feds might appoint to ensure Microsoft's future good behavior. Satch is certainly qualified; he's been online nearly forever, he's worked with computer operating systems darn near as long as computers have had operating systems, and he's certainly not afraid to speak his mind. But even the best-qualified job candidates need to be interviewed before they are chosen, and Satch has consented to have Slashdot readers conduct the initial interview in this hiring process. One question per interviewer, please. We'll email him 10 of the highest-moderated questions, and post his answers next week.
Do you have any special agenda to get across or have anything for/against Microsoft that would make it so you were not impartial in your oversight of any federal rulings? As much as most people hate them this needs to be done in a fair and impartial way. WIll you be able to be fair and impartial?
Do you Gentoo!?
What do you think of Microsoft's C# language compared to Java, is MS just cloning Java in an attempt to make it extinct. And if so, could you do anything to stop it if you had the position?
Shh.
What is in place to prevent Microsoft from potentially bribing you or other members of the commitee? Would you turn down 7 figure offers for the good of the computing community?
Are you concerned that tying yourself to Slashdot, a known haven for us *nix freaks that are generally hostile towards Microsoft's actions, will harm your chances of obtaining this position, as it would require that those appointing the position perceive you as "objective" ?
In what areas/functions must Microsoft be resricted in order for it not to violate anti-trust rules in the future?
So long and thanks for all the fish . . . !!!
Given their previous disregard for laws and authorities, what processes would you need to see in place to be confident that Microsoft was doing what it told you?
You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
In a typical capiltalist world, businesses are kept in check by the market and the government, and can't become monopolies. How do you believe Microsoft surpassed thse checks?
What would you define an OS to include. If it includes utilities such as a defragmenter that is also sold separately by another vendor, is that really so bad? In essence, how much of Windows, the OS itself and packaging would you remove to make it not violate antitrust laws?
The fact that MicroSoft has a monopoly seems to be self evident.
I have attempt to introduce other products into my business and have been unable to do so, primarily due to formating errors when viewing MS Office Documents.
How viable an option would it be to, rather than breaking up MS, force them to release just the specs on how their office documents are coded?
This would give users a choice and could allow for some competition.
Laugh at my ignorance while I learn Rails - a Real ne
...the masses of America, the Joe Sixpacks, the MCSE's, and the VB developers want you to remember just who it was that brough a GUI to America.
Yep. Remember everyone - it was Xerox, Apple, Commodore, Atari, Sun, SGI...er...just about everyone. But the first consumer-level GUI would be that of the Mac. (Yeah, ProDOS and Lisa were first, but they weren't consumer-level.)
...but it's being eaten...by some...Linux or something...
Microsoft has managed to avoid scrutiny by companies, courts, governments and even users. Many allegations made in the trial, such as "knifing the baby" remarks alleged by Netscape, would simply not be visible, by simply looking at Official Policy Documents. In fact, probably very little actual policy DOES appear in their Official Policy Documents.
In short, you can't hunt ghosts with an electron microscope. You need knowledge of what the right job is, and then you need the tools to do it.
Do you even remotely imagine that this is even possible?
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
As I see it, the job of overseeing Microsoft can only succeed if it has a definite goal in mind that involves transforming the company and then relinquishing control. If Microsoft is still overseen by the government in 30 years, while its competitors are free to manage themselves, this will not have been a success.
What things have to take place at Microsoft before it will no longer be a special exception that the government has to personally regulate?
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
Or slashdot is getting less internet savy.
Given the abundance of galaxy-sized egos at Microsoft (especially when you start approaching the top), are you at all worried that your ability to deal with these people will be hampered due to plain and simple personality clashes (never mind the natural reticence to even talk to you)? Or are you expecting that your mandate (if and when it comes) will be enough?
Do you already have specific changes in mind you would like to implement and, if so, what are they and what process do you intend to use to ensure success?
Microsoft is leveraging its monopoly with Windows and it's strong position with Office, MSN, and Hotmail to force or coerce everyone to use their Passport service. How can you prevent this leveraging of one monopoly to gain another monopoly? Especially given the fact that Microsoft has already gotten away with such leveraging several times before. (Also, can you comment on Microsoft's statement that they want a cut of every Internet trasaction?)
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
Shouldn't that be Microsoft's concern and not the oversight committee?
Do you feel that forcing MSFT to make versions of Office for other OS's will help? Office seems to be a key business application that is a barrier to IT departments choosing Linux or even the Mac OS (since its new versions often follow windows versions by a significant amount of time).
"I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX
If and when Linux or some other open source system becomes commonplace and can be found on every desktop, should we make sure that the federal government is right there, carefully regulating everything it does?
My questions are:
Under what conditions would you support the release of Microsoft source code?
Which programs would you support the release of source code for? Windows XP? All currently shipping versions of Windows? Explorer? Office? Back Office? Or every single product Microsoft sells?
How would you ensure compliance for the release of Microsoft source code?
Would other programmers/companies/geeks etc. be able to use Microsoft source code for their own projects, or would they only be able to use it engineer backwards compatability with their own programs?
Would computer manufacturers be able to compile and load their own version of Windows NT/XP/Whatever on machines without paying Microsoft?
What sort of license would Microsoft source code be released under? GPL? BSD? GNU? Something else?
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
Do you think that interoperability is (or can/should be) the norm for software?
In the unix world, it was always assumed that there would be multiple flavors of unix, if only to accommodate multiple hardware architectures. From that grew the assumption that interoperability between systems was a worthy persuit.
The 'killer apps' of the internet (email and www) are marvels of interoperability, and the realities of a networked world are making interoperability more and more important.
It seems that Microsoft's approach to interoperability is for everybody to be running the same software. Only their huge market share makes this even remotely feasible.
So...
How important do you think software interoperability is?
Should it be a goal in application design as well as communications and infrastructure?
Can Microsoft be convinced to adopt these goals, and if not, can they be achieved?
Do you think the government should 'encourage' movement toward interoperability?
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
Why in the world would you *volunteer* for this no-thanks sort of job? Keep in mind that one-third of the population will think you're doing too much, one-third will think you're not doing enough, and one-third won't care.
Simple. Anyone taking this job would have Bill Gates by the short-hairs.
"And like that
It is one thing to be able to observe, quite another to be able to impact the organization. Nothing like being given a job and then not given the appropriate tools to get it done. For example, how will you stay in the "inside-loop" when the upper management will have a vested interest to keey you in the dark? What sort of punitative mechanism needs to be in-place so that your word has some teeth? In short, what sort of authority is needed for this position and how could power sharing be best distributed?
Please categorize define who should get to decide which of the following components are installed on a PC - (ie. the OS maker, the OEM/consumer, the device manufacturer, or some other category that I didn't think of. ...)
.wav or raw sound files.
.mpeg or open video codecs.
1) Semaphores, locks, mutexes.
2) Virtual Memory Manager.
3) Threading and thread manager.
4) FileSystem (NTFS, Ext2, Ext3, ReiserFS, NFS,
5) basic / general Device drivers.
6) optimized Device Drivers (sound, video, pci bridges, keyboard, mice, etc.)
7) IP Stacks (TCP/IP, UDP/IP, RawIP, etc.)
8) USB/Firewire manager.
9) USB/Firewire device drivers.
10) A command line interace.
11) A GUI.
12) A basic text editor.
13) An advanced text editor.
14) A WordProcessor.
15) A compiler.
16) An Integrated Development Environment.
17) Operating system security Manager.
18) Document access manager (Digital rights manager? as well as user/owner/security).
19) Ability to upgrade the system.
20) Ability to patch security holes on the system.
21) Ability to detect malicious programs attempting to run/install/arrive on the system.
22) A spreadsheet.
23) A database.
24) An HTML document reader.
25) An XML document reader.
26) An Pluggable/Extendable Markup Language Reader (aka a full featured Web Browser).
27) Ability to read help files.
28) A PDF document reader.
29) A Java script execution environment.
30) A VB script execution environment.
31) A C# execution environment.
32) Requiring a special number to install the OS, where the special number is tied to the hardware configuration.
33) Play
34) Play
35) Play proprietary sound formats.
36) Play proprietary video formats.
37) Internet Access.
38) Accounting Software (Quicken, Quickbooks, etc.)
39) IP Port blocking, filtering, verification.
40) A crippled wordprocessor capable of reading and editing older versions of MSFT Word documents.
41) A CORBA client/server.
42) A COM/DCOM client/server.
43) CORBA/COM objects for HTML, XML, Text, Graphics, Video, Sound, PDF, Proprietary formats, etc.
I know that's a lot of items. But I want to know what you think is essential to an OS, what is bundled as part of a useable OS, and what is better left to the OEM/consumer.
Thanks
Jeremy
---- Smokin' another sig.