Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Settlement For Private Suits Rejected
Lumpish Scholar writes: "Reuters story here. The judge "could not endorse the settlement ... Microsoft will have to start from scratch in negotiating a new settlement or fight the scores of suits in court."" Reuters also has an article from yesterday that looks at the positions of the various parties prior to this news. You will recall that Microsoft was proposing to settle the civil suits brought against it by donating free Microsoft software and old computers to schools. And do remember - because this always seems to confuse people - that the case brought by the Department of Justice and state governments is distinct from these suits filed by individuals.
To tie this up in the courts for years. Or atleast long enough to push out a few more OS versions....
Do it doug.
I have friends that know Judge Motz here in Baltimore. He was described to me as a person with "A strong sense of fairness" and a good judge. I had a feeling he would reject that BS settlement ! woohoo !
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
Gooooood!
My faith-o-meter in this planet just rose a little. That would have busticated me had MS been able to lock in the next generation of kids with their products as a 'punishment'.
"Old man yells at systemd"
This is awesome... the deal that was reached was so totally beneficial to Microsoft it would have made more sense if Microsoft had been suing the schools and the judgement was inflicted on them!
A flat-out $1 billion cash sum should do it.
There really isn't anything to say to this, though, other than "Thank God". This was the most ridiculous idea that I've ever seen in the courts, and I almost thought the system was going to allow this mockery through.
If it had been allowed, how much damage do you think would have been done to Apple? Apple bases a signifigant portion of their business in Education... Would Microsoft have been able to break Apple's tenuous hold on the market?
When encryption is outlawed, ?o'AZ-,++o+i++##4AoA+-/-C++bI+/.+~
That the settlement and the Red Hat Modification (ie MS buys the computers and RH donates the free software) would be accepted
The lawyers are the true victors. Corporate attorneys and trial lawyers alike; they will have to be doing stuff all over (and get paid again).
This is a quote from this Yahoo article.
I'm really happy to see that the judge didn't cave in!
299,792,458 m/s...not just a good idea, its the law!
Galileo: "The Earth revolves around the Sun!"
Score: -1 100% Flamebait
Apple and others had objected on the grounds that by letting Microsoft give software and cheap hardware to schools, they were actually not out much money (since they just have to replicate their own software) and were reaping giant marketing benefits by pushing out Apple or other vendors.
It's at least a small victory.
that Judge Motz didn't blab to any reporters in his chambers that the settlement was patently unjust or that the microsoft execs were behaving like spoiled children.
(Don't mind me, but I've been burned before with false-relief that the truth will out.)
U.S. District Court Judge J. Frederick Motz said he could not endorse the settlement even though it would have committed Microsoft to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on software and computers for poor schools.
Like the software costs them anything beyond the manufacturing cost (what is it, a small fraction of a penny for each CD pressed?)
Seriously. Their idea of a settlement was to donate computers with MS software to schools? I read about that before as their proposed settlement and didn't really pay much attention to it, but now that they actually took it to a judge I'm just speechless.
Here's why I'm laughing inside: MS gets sued by individuals for unfair competition and illegal business practices, and then MS proposes a solution where they will appear to be doing a public good, but in fact they will be cementing their platform in the future computer world by brainwashing children. What a joke!
Like many others on here, I would love to see them donate all this hardware only for RedHat to volunteer and install Linux on it all, but I seriously doubt MS would let that happen. Given their attitude and actions in this case so far, I'm sure they'd write up some wordy contracts about proper use of the equipment they donated. I wouldn't be surprised if they even claimed everything produced by the computers and software would then become IP of MS. Anyhow, I really think the judge should have fined them for wasting the court's time.
~ now you know
It's already happening, and will continue. Have patience.
www.HearMySoulSpeak.com
From the article: "Class-action attorneys from California have argued the money should be reimbursed directly to customers who were overcharged for Microsoft software."
This is interesting. How does someone actually determine the worth or 'price' of software? Generally you want to take all your overhead, add some profit, and take a good estimate of what your sales will be. Then you'd determine a price. (I realize this is very OVER simplified) You would also compare your product against competitive products and see where you sit in comparison to them price/value wise.
Since Microsoft essentially had a monopoly on the PC market for sales of Operating Systems, their competition was none. They could charge any price to the OEMs and Consumers for the retail packages they felt like, which at least appeared to be a reasonable price to most customers.
But how would they determine if someone was overcharged by Microsoft? Is the very fact that when you buy a PC, you automatically have Windows installed on it and are also paying for the OEM version of Windows that was installed on that PC?
This could easily be argued as a 'value-added' feature of that PC. Where the customer ultimately benefits because the cost of an OEM Windows license is less than the Retail Windows license.
I personally loathe Windows, and don't use it. But I'm more curious on how they determined that Microsoft overcharged it's customers.
The judge was unhappy with the "private suits?" Great. Now MS will just release "public suits" for us to buy. In a year from now all of our clothing will be covered by .NET!
And if that's not bad enough, consider the goon squad that will repo your underwear when you neglect your license fees...
------
Today's Top Deals
This was a pre-trial settlement. Microsoft has not been found guilty of the allegations of over charging consumers.
These cases will now go to court.
But it's up to the claimants to prove that in a more competitive market the price would have actually declined. That was the allegation that Judge Jackson made in his court that spawned these lawsuits, but it was more of an assumption of the nature of monoply than really supported by facts.
It's highly unlikely that Microsoft will lose these cases, they simply tried to get a pre-trial settlement because it would have been cheaper than the legal costs of fighting in court, as well as derailing the negative publicity a court case causes.
That is why the proposed settlement cost seemed so low. It was a hedge, not a punishment.
But not because it was Microsoft. I'm not sure I understand it all, but from what I gather this was Microsofts remedy to 100s of individual lawsuits, brought by individuals (not the DOJ or the States).
So Microsoft is sued by individuals for overcharging them for Windows (AFAIK)(?). Microsoft then says - "Hey, psst Judge, why don't we get rid of all these pesky little suits tying up your courts. And in return I'll do, oh, say, a little community service. On my own terms of course. Whadda say?"
I'm glad the Judge told them no - it would have been quite a travesty for the aggrieved to have gotten no compensation.
for a computer seller and this deal would have gone through .. I would have
made a haul!!!
-- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
MS may have lost this one, but they are patient in seeking complete market domination. There are many palms to grease in DC. Eventually someone will rise up in Congress and ask that we brush aside this blight on the profits of such a fine company as Microsoft.
I'd like to believe that won't happen. But too many legislators have the techincal comprehension of a sea slug. Nothing substantive will ever happen to Microsoft at the behest of any branch of the US Government. Eventually the dissenting states will be forced to give up the fight because they simply can't afford the up-front cost of litigation.
I saw this in someone's .signature on some random mailing list that I can't remember at the moment. I think they attributed it to a Mac website.
...someone is caught breaking into your house, offers to repair the
damage instead of going to jail, if they can put up a massive billboard
for their house maintainance business in your front yard for six
months...
woof!
Wait. Donating old computers and software would cost almost nothing to Microsoft and would guarantee a new generation of people dependent on using only Microsoft software. This would be more of a benefit for Microsoft rather than a punishment. Perhaps a better punishment would be to offer rebates from Microsoft. This would immediately benefit people who have bought Microsoft software (those who are allegedly ffected by the monopoly.)
It's interesting to look at the various links to the right of the main story on that page. The one titled "Experts Question Microsoft Action," for example, has yet *another* example of Microsoft's dirty tricks: violating the Tunney Act by trying to make deals with legislators (totally aside from their attempts at deal-making with the DoJ) and not informing the court about it.
Then there's the way MS wants to bar the public from the proceedings... while it's heartening to see that they can still lose (maybe -- the case isn't over yet!), it's also kind fo scary to see that they're actually starting to learn more about how to (try to) manipulate the process in Washington. Compared to their bumbling in the political arena a few years back, they've actually made giant strides. Which does not bode well.
We may have just one won battle (though actually, I'd prefer to think that *justice* just won a round), but we need to keep our eyes on MS. They're not about to roll over and play dead, and I think they're getting wilier.
Kai MacTane: Web developer for hire in San Francisco
I have always wondered about this. If I had only two choices; Microsoft and Apple, I think I would prefer a world ruled by Microsoft than by Apple. The only thing Apple has going for it is that they are the underdogs and people like underdogs.
:)
Apple's philosophy has always been about domination and control and they have never encouraged tinkering and hacking by individuals. At least Microsoft freely release GW-Basic in the early days and how many people first became interested in programming due to the availability of Basic. Microsoft has also supported the porting of Perl and Python (via Activestate) to the Windows environment. Also, Microsoft's software has been typically cheaper than Apple's
Also, Apple has shown to be very anti-competitive in other ways. Remember Apple 's sordid attempt to foster clones? As soon as the clone manufactures became a little too efficient and began competing a little too well and delivering products to consumers at lower cost; Apple put their foot down and revoked licensing.
I am glad tho that I do not have to pick between the lesser of two evils
I was just talking with someone today about how something like a speeding ticket to Bill Gates is no punishment at all.
But a public whipping would be pretty punishing no matter who you are (well maybe not to masochists)
So rather than come up with some arbitrarily large sum of money to punish Microsoft, maybe all the execs on the board should be publicly flogged.
I never have to read another MS settlement/court case on slashdot again.
I paid for software that I could not use. I still have not got my refund from Microsoft for the garbage they forced on my system.
They should have to pay the people who lost money, not be allowed to give it to people not effected. If I run into your car and damage it, do I get to give my girlfriend a spare computer instead of paying to fix the harm I did to you?
Of course Microsoft says that the settlement would cost them lots of money, but it would be retail including retail price of software...not actual cost to them.
But, even so, it gets MS products infront of children -- advertising???
Fight Spammers!
Microsoft got a slap on the wrist from the Feds. They figure that the Bush administration will be firmly in their corner. Because of all the fallout and implications between Enron execs and the Bush administration. Bush may want to do something to show that he's not a pushover for business. Even if he doesn't pull strings to go after MSFT, I'm sure that he won't do anything to help them. Congressmen will probably think twice about helping out a huge corp in the near future as well.
Jesus used to be my co-pilot, but we crashed in the mountains and I had to eat him.
How about a compulsory $37-billion donation to the Free Software Foundation as punishment?
From cnnfn there is a mention that the judges reasons are:
Judge Motz said he was not satisfied that there was enough value to the settlement and that the charitable institution would have been insufficiently funded.
Further, Judge Motz said the settlement "would raise antitrust concerns from the perspective of other software manufacturers" because the donation of free software could be construed as "court-approved predatory pricing."
Both these issues have been raised by many people and posted here on slashdot in the past.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
... underdogs, and people like underdogs...
:)
I'll agree with this piece.
[apple] never encouraged tinkering and hacking by individuals
The entire development environment and documentation library for Mac OS-X is both free and pretty darn spiffy. Visual Studio is something like $500 to $1000 depending who you are and how you get it. Heck, my first Apple came with schematics and ROM assembly listings.
At least Microsoft freely release GW-Basic in the early days...
Apple gave away Basic before Microsoft even existed. Never for Macintosh, but I believe that was more for strategic reasons. Apple needed to force the applications to a dramatically higher level of usability. This required the armys of evangelists and much arm twisting. "modern" mid '80s gui applications were not going to be thrown together in the Basic of the days.
Microsoft has also supported the porting of Perl and Python (via Activestate) to the Windows environment.
Yes, now we can see if that was the embrace before the extend.
Microsoft's software has been typically cheaper than Apple's
I have no idea in what universe this is true. Actually, there is very little in the way of good comparisons. Office $400, Appleworks $99. But Appleworks is feature poor compared to Office. It does everything I need, so its a good deal for me (well, $0, I buy low end Macs where it is included). If I needed the extras Office has this would be a worthless comparison. IE? No comparison. Apple is still forbidden from suggesting that there may be other browsers much less making one. iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD? No competition. Likewise there are loads of MS apps with no comparison. OS prices? Upgrades are similarly priced. Development tools? No contest.
Remember Apple 's sordid attempt to foster clones?
Yes. Apple gave them the hardware reference designs and OS in the delusion that the cloners would make a wider variety of machines and attack niches. The cloners just built the reference designs with minor tweaks and sold them in to apple's highest margin market (early adopters) because the cloners could start selling the newer faster processers while they were still in short supply and Apple with their larger market had to wait for production to ramp up. (I believe at one point Apple was buying all the initial production of higher speed processors at a premium and warehousing them so they could get the fast machines out first. When you have to pay a premium to keep faster processors away from your users in order to promote your platform something has gone wrong.) The media savaged Apple for offering slow machines. Apple lost sales. The platform didn't gain . Apple didn't revoke the cloners licenses (except one, they bought that back) they just raised the OS price so the cloners paid the same per machine for the OS as apple. Without the OS subsidy to pocket the cloners left the business.
I am glad tho that I do not have to pick between the lesser of two evils
Me too. I suspect any corporation with a 90%+ market share will be bad for the users. God knows what GPL v9 will look like when free software has 90% of the market.
Micorsoft-opoly...
BillGates: [rolls dice] = 8
BillGates: sweet, doubles!
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8.
Chance: "Place token to nearest anti-trust judge. If he is unowned you may buy him from the bank, otherwise come up with new settlement plan."
BillGates: damn!
BillGates: [rolls dice] = 5...
Step 1: Go to law school, become a lawyer.
Step 2: Realize that step 1 took so long that [the trial is long over | MS.gov will have you put to death for that filing]
Step 3: There's no step 3!
That's it! Settle for $1Billion Cash. To be divided equally amongst all plaintiffs. Bill Gates should personally have to write out (by hand) and sign (by hand) each check. No computer printing or rubberstamping of either signatures, amounts or payees.
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
And he should be kept awake with a cattle prod until it's finished.
actually cost Microsoft... about $.10 a CD....
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
IANATA (I am not a tax attorney), but I don't think the IRS lets software companies write off the "value" of "donated" software. (Any more than I could write off $75 an hour in time "donated" to charity.) That's just too big a loophole.
Furthermore, I'm pretty sure that you can't write off civil damages (or criminal fines, of course), whether or not the case was settled out of court.
Somebody with a law degree correct me if I'm wrong.
Ya, but between whippings Ballmer would shout
"Developers! Developers! Developers!"
Please, spare us the spectacle...
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
...a judge that didn't get snowed by Microsoft legal sharpies and PR flaks. I'm surprised that MS's laywers didn't drag out a ``we're doing this for the children'' argument. Heck, donating to schools was only a step away from that. And the judge didn't fall for it. There may yet be hope...
I think I'm gonna have a few beers in celebration tonight.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
The way class action suits normally are resolved in the U.S. are as follows:
Company X illegally overcharges consumers, say one million consumers at $100 each. Class action lawyers file suit 'on behalf' of consumers. After many years, and many appeals, a settlement is reached and damages are awarded. Consumers are asked to fill out 20 pages of paperwork in order to receive a $25 off coupon the next time they make a purchase of $3000 or more from Company X. Offer good for next six months. And the class action attourneys split $25 million in fees.
Having Microsoft donate money to poor schools is a great idea -- iff it can be done in a way that that doesn't reduce competition.
[Insert pithy quote here]
In my opinion, this is not much different than offering a bribe to the other side's lawyers to get their support in settling the case for peanuts. Would it be OK if the plaintiffs offered to pay M$ lawyers to persuade M$ to make a $5 billion cash settlement offer??? I think not.
M$ is not the only company that is allegedly trying to settle class action suits with charitable contributions & paying the plaintiff's attorneys. To me, this is a dubious practice that should be squashed.
This article here discusses how Microsoft's decision to release only it's lobbying of law makers in the executive branch, and not Congress, probaby was detrimental to it's case.
Yes, now we can see if that was the embrace before the extend.
Sure, Microsoft will be able to embrace and extend Perl and Python, but because those programs are copylefted, Microsoft will have to release the source code to any modifications the company makes, preventing the third step (extinguish) from happening.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The tobacco industry did not "just get tired of it."
They had successfully defended every suit, basically arguing that either nobody knew smoking was dangerous, nobody had proved that smoking was dangerous to their satisfaction, or the "victim" was an idiot who ignored the warning labels on every package of cigarettes.
Then they lost a case. Too much evidence that they targeted teens unable to make an informed decision, that they deliberately made the product addictive, it doesn't matter.
Suddenly they were looking at hundreds of thousands of suits every year from people with lung disease. Their reputation as a "hard target" was in tatters. Many potential jurors were pissed off at their decades of foot dragging, at their use of cartoon characters - Joe Camel was recognized by something like 98% of 6th graders, comparable to Mickey Mouse and far more than any real figure. They were looking at potential liability in the billions of dollars.
So they made an informed decision - something they denied their customers - to settle with the government. One massive payment, and immunity from further civil suits. It was nothing more than a decision intended to minimize their costs.
MS knows that the judgement that they violated antitrust law makes them a far "softer" target than before. They tried to short-circuit the process with a similar settlement, but they got greedy.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
If the federal judge accepts the DOJ-M$ "settlement", then none of this will matter.
.NET vs Java, etc... then preventing that company from dominating a single segment of the economy: education, will be practically meaningless.
The potential impact of Microsoft getting off virtually scot-free by the DOJ will overwhealm the positive impact of this settlement being struck down.
Should Microsoft be allowed to continue these exclusive arrangements with OEM's, the leveraging of Windows into other margets, gauging for Office, leaving out Java support in XP as well as plguins for IE, forcing users to ask for permission to upgrade their PCs on XP home edition, rigging ZD Net polls on
How many entrepreneurs have been dissuaded or discouraged from writing software because of Microsoft stiffling innovation? (hardly any commerical companies make consumer operating systems anymore) How many once dynamic and cutting-edge products have stagnated once Microsoft gained a 90% share? If they dominate more of the industry, we're going to see even more inferior products. The only good software M$ ever came up with was when they had to compete with another company.
Having the school settlement struck down is a small victory, one that pales in comparison to the potential losses that would occur if the colluded DOJ settlement is accepted.
This space left intentionally blank.
How about when they make an API from perl and python to the Windows APIs? How about when these APIs so attactive to the windows python and perl programmers that they depend on them?
Sound like J++ yet?
It won't be about owning the interpreters. Thats just code and anyone with $36B in the bank can have code written. It will be about owning the minds of the developers. They need the bulk of software developers to believe Windows is integral to computing.
The Register's article adds a good quote from the judge:
A district court judge has rejected Microsoft's proposed settlement in the private law suits brought against the company.
Microsoft's $1.1 billion giveaway of computers software to US schools would constitute "court-approved predatory pricing," if approved, said Judge Motz. He didn't, and it's back to the drawing board for The Beast.
The cynical proposal was criticised on the grounds that would extend Microsoft's monopoly into the education market, which has been a loyal Mac stronghold. Over 40 per cent of US schools use Macintosh computers.
Motz gave a strong signal that Microsoft's revised proposal would have to be a lot more generous: he deemed there was "insufficient value" in Seattlement (Private Edition)Version 1.0.
A year ago Motz dismissed 38 suits from customers who had acquired Windows as part of an OEM bundle, even though state law allows such an 'indirect' acquisition to be treated as a direct relationship.
Bootnote:The term 'Seattlement' was contributed by a reader from the Lichtenstein.
"
Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.
I believe you misunderstood.
I'm not certain if the retail prices amount to overcharging, because it is common practice in all industries for a vendor to give OEMs signifigant pricing discounts over what they charge Retail customers.
As far as corporate sales, I don't see someone who has made a choice as being a victim. You need to clarify that argument.
The goal of any business is to get billions in the bank. I don't see how you can make a comparison between Enron and Microsoft. Enron clearly had bad management and was not disclosing all of their liabilities and partnerships appropriately to investors.
Hoo-ray for small miracles, an actual judge with sense not to be bamboozled by 300 lawyers (and a complicit prosecution) in a case involving MS. I think Apple, Red Hat, et al. deserve credit where credit is due in this by effectively presenting to the court why this would've been a bad deal. C|net also has an updated story on this, sugesting the possibility of a greater-than $1B penalty for MS now from Judge Motz' comments.
But this case, like the antitrust case, is not yet over. While we can't do anything to influence the next flimsy settlement for price-gouging MS will probably try to come out with here, maybe we can make a difference in the antitrust case by writing the DoJ. Public comment period ends January 28, 2002. Do write, but polite & reasoned letters only, please.
Well, in Europe, the ECDL (European Computer Drivers License, an award for basic computer usage skills) which is a certificate status program (and a minimum for any secretarial work) is conducted entirely using MS-Office.
You do a test in Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and Access if I recall correctly.
Rational thought is the only true freedom
Does this mean I can sue Coke for all that ink on the outside of the can I didn't want?
If you bought it, YOU BOUGHT IT. You paid their price. The fact that it was part of a package including a computer is inconsequential.
Besides, wouldn't the damages be limited to the price paid? How much, exactly, did Windows cost you? I doubt it's as much as you're wanting back...
The point was that schools don't need more handouts from anyone. There is a brand new high school here with 600 students. It cost $36 million to build. Excuse me, but WTF!?!? If the building stands as a school for 20 years, that's $12,000 per student (for four years) just for construction costs. Give that money to a private school and they'll probably educate three times as many students twice as well.
The emphasis has shifted from spending money on hiring good teachers and good supplies to building impressive buildings so that taxpayers can "see" where their money is going.
BTW, 580 Billion is about $12,800 per student if you assume that during that time about 1/6 of the US population attended school. Keep in mind that's ONLY federal money and doesn't include state or local contributations.
You want to know how to fix schools? Pay teachers. Pay them well enough to attract some real talent to the area. I mean something in the neighborhood of $80,000-$100,000 for those with Masters degrees and teaching certificates.
Then, you tell the Federal government to F!#& off. You open it up so that if a parent is not happy with the school, they can remove their student and send them to another public school or even to another district or a private school. This way, the bad schools are driven out by market forces and the good schools are rewarded by more students. Reward the good and let the market drive out the bad.
The system we have now rewards schools and teachers who perform poorly.
You also encourage (by tax credits, which != tax deductions) private citizens to contribute to private schools.
I agree that the education system in this country is seriously screwed up. It's not for lack of money though, it's because that money has been grossly mismanaged, partially by the beaurocratic regulations associated with federal funding.
¦ ©® ±
Did I mention there were booth babes involved?
Micrsoft didn't propose that settlement.
Someone on the other side did. It must have sounded good to MS, so they ran with it.
So, the judge said No to a settlement that MS was agreeable to, and that the OTHER side proposed. Had he/she said yes, it would have been over.
Instead, a bunch of lawyers will make more money, a few political careers will be furthered, and really, nobody will get any money out of MS except some lawyers (on both sides).
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
"I sprained my eyes, your honor. That's right, the eyes were sprained."
</eddiemurphy>
-Legion
When I first saw this settlement, my first thought was Ï hope it is not put through!" Then I realized it had absolutely no chance of gettign through. A judge simply won't prevent a plaintif from being able to claim damages in many non-related cases (exception being class-action suits).
This was just legal posturing, IMO, but then, IANAL.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
I can't even imagine the jubilation and high five's that must have happened back at MS HQ after hearing of the proposed settlement. If you fall for conspiracy theories you could easily believe that Michael Hausfled was a paid double agent. He took a page out of Apple's marketing book, fine tuned it and called it a punishment. Roger Kay, an analyst with IDC, called the settlement "a huge victory" for Microsoft. "It's amazing to me how favorable this is to Microsoft".
Fortunately the judge saw this and put a halt it. He realized that +95% of the refurbished machines would run windows and that most school districts would choose Microsoft since they are interested in educating and it makes sense to teach the dominate prevalent technology. This would have done nothing to establishing competition in the market place, in fact, the opposite.
Gates and has wife have made very large charitable donations. In particular they've given a lot of money to pay for vacinating people in poor countries against diseases that have been all but wiped out in the developed world. It's a case where they've managed to really leverage their donations to do a whole lot of good.
As for the class action settlement -- agreed, the judge saw it as the con that it was. However, in most class action suits, the lawyers make a ton of money and the consumer gets screwed a second time. If kids and schools could benefit from the settlement (and if Apple and other companies weren't damaged in the process), it would be a good outcome.
[Insert pithy quote here]
Don't kid yourself MS is playing the same kind of accounting tricks enron did.
War is necrophilia.
You don't have to believe me. Go do the research yourself.
BTW. When I was in high school there were all these kids who would argue about ford vs chevy, or nike vs addidas. Somehow these poor fucks had deluded themselves that they were cool because they pledged allegience to one corporation or another. They would wear the logos all over themselves thinking perhaps that they were not as lame or ugly with them on.
What I find astounding is that mentality is still alive and well. People like yourself have somehow convinced yourself by rooting for a corporation like MS you are cooler or better looking then you really are. Take my advice you are not. It makes you look like a dupe when you extoll the virtues of some large corporation which does not give a flying fuck about you or your feeble efforts on slashdot.
I may be a troll but at least I am a troll for ideals not some fucking corporation.
War is necrophilia.
Easier said than done. M$ has exclusive contracts with all the large OEM's that effectively FORCE all their customers to pay for a copy of Windows, whether or not they choose to install the system. They will refuse to sell you a "naked PC".
This something which is quite simple for government (legislature or judiciary) to fix.
Thus strengthening the monopoly M$ abused, hurting consumers, businesses, progress, and stifling innovation along the way? No thanks.
Then I guess the next question is "Who is the Japanese equivalent of the FTC and how does one report these things to them?"
Heh.
I think maybe you need to talk to the doctor about your meds.
I have not pledged myself to any corporation, I have only pledged myself to protecting truth. I grow so tired of juveniles such as yourself going around spreading FUD, lies and other crap.
If you are going to make a claim, back it up with fucking facts. It's not my job to do your research.
Troll.
You're thinking Applesoft basic for the ][+, not Woz's original Integer basic for the ][... which was open source, with all the code publically available. If I'm not mistaken the entire source in assembly was listed in the first manuals?
If everyone was taught the 'pravda' that Gates invented BASIC and wrote the first Basic for Apple etc. ad nauseam, would it be true?
You are going around spreading FUD by telling lies about the JVM and the .net CLR.
"I have not pledged myself to any corporation"
If not then what possible pleasure do you get from lying for them on slashdot. Perhaps you are getting paid to do so but if you are not then what are your motivations?
"I grow so tired of juveniles such as yourself going around spreading FUD, lies and other crap. "
First of all I am not a juvenile and secondly I did not lie. This is stark contrast with your posts and of course every press release by every executive of MS. I have not read one press release, one speech, one debate or one snippet from Gates, Ballmer, Allchin etc which did not contain at least one lie. Apparently you are very comfortable about corporations lying to you and by advocating for them here on slashdot you are encouraging them to keep lying to all of us. Of course in the light of all the lies of Gates and his mafioso your claim of "I have only pledged myself to protecting truth." seems a bit silly doesn't it? If you are dedicated to the truth perhaps you can explain your lies about the java VM and object inheritance. Is it possible to write an object in python and inherit it from java in the JVM? If so why did you lie about it. Could it be becasue you were spreading FUD for a corporation?
Corporations lie pathologically. Every advertisement is a lie, every press release is a lie. If they were forced to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" they would have to shut up.
" It's not my job to do your research"
yes it is. It's the job of every investor to see how MS is cooking the books to inflate their values. In the wake of Enron it's especially important to see how many entities are used to hide debts, how MS buys and sells it's own stock to pad nubmers, and how it makes shady accounting decisions about the stock options. This information is available on the web I urge you to check it out before you lose all your money.
War is necrophilia.
"First of all I am not a juvenile and secondly I did not lie."
When you tell the truth, I'll let you know.
You are a sad example of what is wrong with the computing industry. Someone with barely a clue can spread lies and bullshit and find their way to gainful employment. Sadly after a few months, maybe a year, perhaps your employer will wake up and realize what an absolute fraud you are.
Perhaps after losing your job several times you'll finally wake up and realize that this is not the industry for you.
Personally given the skills you have demonstrated in your trolling of slashdot, I would recommend a job in Vegas. Perhaps as a dealer at a blackjack table.
I guess resorting to ad hominem attacks means you were not able to dispute any of my points.
1) Do MS executives lie consistently (or pathalogically).
2) Were you lying when you stated that the java JVM did not enable objects written in one language to be inheritable by another language.
3) Does MS use use "entities" to hide the extent of it's debt.
4) Does MS buy and sell it's own stock to manipulate earnings.
5) Does MS play accounting tricks with stock options.
War is necrophilia.
What is it with you GPLers? If Microsoft wants to embrase and extend anything, no license is going to stop them. If they want perl with their own extensions, they'll essentially reverse-engineer it.
Windows 2000 & XP have IPSec installed. They could easially have added propritary extension onto it, but have not.
Your argument that the GPL is stopping ANYTHING BAD is really quite baseless.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant