Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Trial Wends Onward
Sinistar2k writes: "Showing remarkable restraint and an unwillingness to shout 'Give it up for me!', Steve Ballmer comes across as a poor, beat down soul in the video deposition (Windows Media or RealPlayer required) released today by US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. Also available are text depositions of Ballmer and Allchin." gouldtj adds: "Here is a
timeline on the Microsoft trial. It is pretty complete, and it goes back to 1990. It is nice to see all of this in one place, I'd almost forgotten about the old stuff. It just reminds you how long this stuff can take." Finally, ackthpt writes: "The nine non-settling states have modified their requirements, rather than Microsoft having to sell various versions of Windows, they would have Microsoft Windows sold as a modular platform, where the user could opt for different vendors software for different uses.
Just days ago the nine settling states were rattled by Microsoft's end-around, challenging state attorneys' general participation in anti-trust procedings." And if your own computing (or career) depends on a Microsoft operating system, Roblimo suggests that you
stop using it, because Steve Ballmer says Microsoft may take it away.
Microsoft Corp. plans to argue in court hearings next week that if antitrust sanctions sought by state prosecutors are granted, the company would be forced to pull its latest Windows computer operating systems off the market and be unable to develop new systems.
Oh please, please, please!!!
Nah, that sounds just too good to be true.
I am a genius; therefore, you suck.
Slashdot uses the word "wends" properly.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
In case you were wondering the nine states that are not settled yet are:
:-)
1. California
2. Connecticut
3. Florida
4. Iowa
5. Kansas
6. Massachusetts
7. Minnesota
8. Utah
9. West Virginia
Also the District of Columbia.
I wish they would state this in each article.
Fuck Slashdot
The only thing that keeps you from removing IE is the WFP, Windows File Protection.
:)
.dlls but you can just simply insert them into your SYSTEM32 directory and voila.
1. Disable WFP (registry hack)
2. Delete IE files
3. Wohoo!
You can also create your own Win2k install media where the file lists & install scripts do not even originally have IE along. WFP will not worry about IE being absent
What's the catch? SOME programs require IE to run. Not because they really really NEED IE, but because the developers have re-used some components that come with IE. For instance Media Player requires some
Some programs though check for IE and if absent, just prompt you to install it back. You will have to stop using those programs, but there are always options.
Note that Microsoft can claim that WIN2k requires IE to function properly since some included tools and applications such as the Media Player require its presence. Most likely it will go through in the court as well.
cf. "Last November, Allchin presided over the launch of Windows XP Embedded, which consists of about 10,000 components that can be assembled into custom products..."
Can't, won't or don't?
.:the truth is a lie undiscovered:.
The way I read that is quite simple - he's a guy who might actually understand a little bit about the SCOPE of Windows as an OS and knows what an incredibly monumental task it would be to go in and clean up all the little kludges and hacks and all the general design changes it would take to make Windows compliant.
He's not saying "Screw you, DOJ" he's saying "WTF, do you think we're gods?"
The states are being unreasonable and probably indeed bought by the companies he mentioned at least in part - don't you think that Oracle would love to see MS take a fall? I KNOW they would.
AOL? Same thing - I'm sure they would love to market an AOL Windows or their own crappy version anyway. They've talked about it in the past (their own OS) as has Netscape.
Bottom line - MS is not always the evil empire. Sometimes they're the ones getting fucked.
Cheers,
Backov
In the law there is no overlap between theft and copyright infringement whatsoever.
And I don't even want to start thinking about the $$$'s involved... -JT
It occurs to me that Microsoft might actually be pleased by this never-ending legal "battle". Besides the nearly constant news coverage which is easy advertising that comes with the relatively marginal cost of the lawyers fees (from a multi-billion dollar corporation's standpoint), it also allows them to continue doing as they please without anything such as an injunction to prevent them from continuing to expand their monopoly and snuff out would-be competitors. During the past 6 some-odd years of high-gear courtroom battles, Microsoft has only had to contend with a single injuction (circa '97) which was later thrown out on appeal. This means they've had plenty of time to virtually wipe out Netscape, Be, and a slew of other companies by using the same illegal tactics they continue using today.
It's been shown for years that Internet Explorer can be removed safely from Windows with only a minimal loss in functionality, yet it remains. Participants have been after the Window's source code for years, yet it remains safely locked behind Redmond's doors. Illegal, anti-competitive practices have been on-going, if not accelerating over the course of the lawsuit. The simple fact is that this on-going court battle has yet to solve a single problem with the software giant, and has probably only helped it. Let's not forget that were some sort of settlement reached with the Federal government some time this year, (don't hold your breath) it would almost certainly have absolutely no real consequences, and if the initial settlement proposal is any indication, may only serve to allow Microsoft to further force its products into the marketplace, giving it further penetration in such areas as schools where it has been lacking.
Then one may look at the other nine states, who appear to be seeking a much better legal settlement against Softzilla. They want the source, they want IE out, and they want other versions of Windows available at a lesser cost without the unwanted "features" Windows buyers pay for. Well first of all, this would probably drag on for years, meaning no changes would take place. Were there to be a settlement, I doubt Microsoft would aggree to anything which does not eventually come out to their benefit; ie. selling a stripped-down version of Windows at a cheaper price would probably increase rather than decrease their sales figures. Were there a judgement issued against them, they would most certainly appeal time and time again, adding yet many more years to the total length of this litigation, by which time, any possible good coming forth from the judgement would have long since lost any tangible meaning.
In all this, I've come to the conclusion that perhaps we should be trying Microsoft and large corporations like it in a tribunal much like the ones being used around the world for war crimes. A swifter, more final form of judicial proceeding is obviously needed for a company who's resources allow it to drag on court battles for year apon year, thereby pretty much defeating the judicial system in place. Draconian laws obviously had to be updated to deal with high tech companies, perhaps the courts should take a note from the legislators and realize you can't treat M$ like Standard Oil.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
Imagine if Microsoft actually did it, though. I have no doubts the backlash will be Companies and consumers reaffirming their love (addiction) to Microsoft, and making the DoJ look like the bully.
It would be exactly what Microsoft wants, because they know they have their clientele hooked like a heroin addict. Microsoft's presence in the government's agencies would be a signifigant mount of pressure when their support contracts and computer systems are in the hands of a corporation they themselves are trying to censure. I personally wouldn't be surprised if they did it, or at the very least, use this to get favorable media attention and the sympathy they want.
The simple fact of the matter is that if Microsoft had honored the first consent decree they probably wouldn't be in this mess. Instead they thumbed their nose at the court and went straight back to business as usual. They deserve to have their products pulled from the market at this point. The industry would be far stronger if it had to figure out how to live without Microsoft.
"The reason the non-settling states have proposed relief that is significantly broader than the [settlement agreement] . . . is no secret," Microsoft attorneys wrote. "They seek to advance the commercial interests of Microsoft's competitors."
Nine seperate states out to aid Microsoft's competitors? Who would that be, the rest of the computer industry and anyone who's ever dreamed of programing so much as a digital watch? Pathetic paranoia, or rampant propaganda. It's almost as good as today's earlier anouncement that the US government would fail, Universities would stop researching, and the world would end if M$'s software model failed to earn lots of money hawking the same old shit forever to a gullible clientel. From Mr. Mundi's Zdnet quotations:
If there is not commercialization there (because the big bad GPL supposedly denies this, bzzt - wrong!) , a company can only exist based on ancillary manufacturing or services. If commercialization was cut down, investors would not support research and development in the IT sector, less projects would be developed, less taxes paid and the government would have less money to run universities, and all the other things that governments do," said Mundie.
They really are afraid, but why? What do they know that we don't? I've read that M$ is a kind of ponzi scheme with the emloyees being paid in stock options, that pay no dividens, instead of cash... Could the Enron disaster be hitting home?
Blah, enough irresponsible speculation tonight. As I sit here at a Debian powered 486 with a big 24 megs of ram and a 420MB hard disk used as an Xterminal to a more reasonable computer, I know it just does not matter. Microsoft can dissapear tomorow and I would not notice. If I can do it, anyone can. Really.
Go away Micro$haft, you have earned your beatings and are begging for new ones with the new XP licensing system, SSSCA, DCMA and other unAmerican activites.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
37 billion in the bank and even today, M$ still insists that they are offering consumers "Value".
If they cut the prices in 1/2, they'd still make money hand over fist.
It is quite suprising to me that a company "Clearly convicted of a Monopoly in these United States", can sit there and dictate what they think is clearly harm to consumers. It's like AT&T saying, "If you break us up, who will offer long distance?" "Who will offer phone service?" "Who will supply any type of quality and price competativeness?"
Well, that just goes to show that even AT&T was wrong in there arguments. We still have phone service, and yes mom, we have some, though not alot, of competition.
M$ would have us believe that this ruling would cause a major buckle in the computing industry, but in fact, it would put the M$ developers on the same playing field as the rest of the world.
Live on competition, destruction to monopolies. Innovation exists not in monopolies, but in competition.
Then Steve Balmer is the alien that says "You are smart, you can make us go"
(B) + (D) + (B) + (D) = (K) + (&)
His position only makes sense if MS management is so weak that they haven't been able to force their programmers to document their internal interfaces and file formats... in which case they should thank the courts for coming in and making those bastards document their work since they're blowing off billg and Balmer.
Yeah, right.
I'm sorry, but this is should be a non-brainer. Every major API and every file format should already be documented - or the person in charge of that group should be fired on the spot for incompetency and his/her replacement's first task will be getting that documentation in place. The same managers should also have in place a review and approval process for changes in that API.
Bottom line - either Balmer can produce the requested documentation by releasing internal documentation, or he's incompetent. Or he's taking his lead from the Enron leadership and deliberately lying because he figures that jail time for perjury and contempt doesn't apply to the likes of him.
(Of course, I'm sure that the internal documentation includes hundreds of unpublished calls that they've denied exist. Tough shit - they made their bed and it's time they lie in it.)
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
The fact that they CAN and apparently are willing to use pulling their "premiere" product from the market place, I think, shows that they know they are a monopoly. They are essentially thumbing their noses and saying, it's our way or the highway; and while wo know there ARE in fact alternatives, it is not feasible, nor is it plausible, to have the entire world switch away from Microsoft. Yet the fact that they can leverage their monoplolistic stronghold in their own antitrust trial is amazing! just my 2 cents OctaneZ
I disagree. Microsoft's "natural" monopoly developed because of our copyright laws. In my view, this makes Microsoft a state-sponsored monopoly. If our copyright laws required disclosure of interfaces and/or source code, others could develop software compatible with Microsoft's, thus destroying their customer lock-in strategy and the entire basis of their monopoly.
No, consumers might all go and buy the full version, but big businesses and government might well use the smaller version. Large businesses typically spend a lot of time creating a build to roll out to their desktops, and then deploy thousands of identical machines with an identical image blown onto them. And this is where, for example, Staroffice might make significant inroads - as part of a corporate standard build.
Assuming that the smaller version was cheaper.
And consider this: You're a large company wanting thousands of identical utility desktops, configured in bulk to be desk ready, and you're going to spend several man years developing this build. All of a sudden the seeds of doubt are sown in your mind as to whether you will actually be able to deploy this build, because the people you must get licences from are suggesting they might pull the product from the market at some point. Would this make you more or less likely to consider developing a desktop build which doesn't depend on getting licences from this company?
Dunstan
The last scintilla of doubt just rode out of town
So what you're describing is much easier to do with Windows.
While I agree mostly with what you've said -- both Windows and Linux have kernel based modular device support -- the ease of use part is not correct.
Under Linux, most distributions are pre-configured with the kernel consisting of modules. If you want to remove any module, you can without rebooting safely as long as it is not being used. Hotplug support and manual enabling/disabling of parts of the kernel using insmod/rmmod or runlevels make module management simple if not automatic.
Drivers under NT serve the same basic function as modules under Linux. NT Drivers are usually loaded at boot time and can not be unloaded. The exception are hot plug devices...just like they are under Linux.
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
An internet browser and/or HTML renderer is NOT properly part of the OS. It is an application that runs ON TOP OF the OS.
[You're obviously a bought and paid-for apologist of the envious competitors of Microsoft (Sun, Oracle, IBM, etc.)]
You technical people think you know so much! Let the knowledgeable and capable innovators from Microsoft, one of the true American success stories in business, saving jobs for working families, paying taxes^H^H^H^H^Hlobbyists^H^H^H^Hgrass roots procompetition advocacy organizations, reducing America's trade deficit, enlighten you about the wonderful things you can expect from your PC that come from Microsoft.
Not only is an HTML renderer one important innovation to an operating system, but there are many important MS Innovations© in the operating system of a computer.
I, for one, like the convenience of automatically signing up for MSN, even if I forget for a few minutes, Windows reminds me of the necessity of doing this important thing. You have to admit that is an invaluable service to the Consumer®.
Also, as part of a patriotic effort to stop piracy, curb terrorists and the preying pedophiles dead in their tracks, Windows also is on a crusade to sign up Americans® to Passport! I look forward to the day when all Americans have to present their MS Passport at airport ticket counters to reduce terrorism. Remember 9/11!
Finally, I'm looking forward to new services from a single convenient and innovative supplier that knows what customers want - Microsoft®®.
I've purchased all of my latest consumer electronics to insure that it Works Best With® genuine Microsoft Windows, a brand name that I have come to know and to trust.
But excuse me. I have to run MS Talk© to tell my MS Spouse® that the MS House© needs to be rebooted.
"Provided by the management for your protection."