Slashdot Mirror
Allchin Admits MSFT Violated the Law
An Anonymous Coward writes: "CNN is running what amounts to a two part article about the nine states who are continuing their case against Microsoft in which Jim Allchins admits Microsoft violated the law.
The first part of the article deals with Jim Allchins assertion that there is no way for Microsoft to remove Internet Explorer from Windows without crippling the OS. However, he admits that the demonstration in court which showed this crippling was in fact rigged and that they have not done studies to se if it would be possible to produce an OS without the browser imbedded in it.
The second part of the story involves Allchin admitting that Microsoft has violated the law but refused to specify the violations. 'I don't think that I can summarize those,' Allchin said. 'I'm not an attorney.'"
"Somebody could say, 'Look, I want to make Microsoft's life miserable; so I'll tell
you what, I'll pay you $10 million a year to torture Microsoft."'
I'll do it for $5 million a year!
'I don't think that I can summarize those,' Allchin said. 'I'm not an attorney.'"
;)
So?
'Nuff said.
-- Is "Sig" copyrighted by www.sig.com?
Stupid sexy Flanders.
I can just imagine the conference call going on in Redmond ... "Hey, Allchin, save some for the consent decree, willya?" The transcripts of Allchin's meeting with the attys general have got to be right up there with Jeff "Not Taking The Advice Of My Lawyers" Skilling.
Oh, and hey! There's one of those big ads Malda was talking about. I can live with that.
-Baka!
The second part of the story involves Allchin admitting that Microsoft has violated the law but refused to specify the violations.
;-)
LOL
First time ever in history!
I thought this would never, ever happen.
I've finally read someone at Microsoft admit it did something wrong at something!
And I always thought Microsoft believed it was always correct at everything it ever ventured into.
is like a fish without a bicycle.
With apologies to Gloria Steinem.
-- Is "Sig" copyrighted by www.sig.com?
I had use on windows 98 it and it work great. remove all fuckling baster and stupid dll and Internet Explorer Crasher and all the stupid toolbar etc.etc.etc.
Cantankerous old coot since 1957.
And to be honest, no, I don't know why it's called "at".
I'm sorry, you must not be familiar with the english language. In our language, the following statement would be analagous to the operation performed using the at command:
at a certain time, perform this task.
Hence the name, "at."
Now obviously "cron" is a much more clear descriptive verb for this function... er...
Please take Linus's cock out of your mouth before you speak, you are mumbling
"technically I just couldn't do it" can be parsed a number of ways.... Consider, for instance, the following possible interpretations
(my PC was turned off when I tried), so "technically....."--- emphasis on "technically"
(I haven't studied the nuances of the relevant programming language), so "technically I... " ---emphasis on "I"
(I signed a contract agreeing not to), so "technically I just couldn't..." ---emphasis on couldn't
Just call me paranoid...but they may still be out to get me
Imagine. If Tim Berners-Lee hadn't invented the World Wide Web, MSFT would have this huge component of their operating system hanging around with nothing to do, and there would be nothing they could do about it.
MS Guy #1: What's this program over here?
MS Guy #2: I call it "iexplore.exe"
#1: What's it do?
#2: Well, nothing yet. I mean, it sends requests
to servers, captures the results and
displays them, but there aren't any servers
it works with, so...
#1: So.... why is it here?
#2: Well, I'll be damned if I know why, but the
operating system just kept crapping out until
I wrote the thing. So, I guess we're stuck
with it.
#1: Sounds good to me.
gawk; talk; nice; date; wine; grep; touch; unzip; finger; gasp; suck; lyx;\
slurp; mount; fsck; more; yes; gasp; umount; make clean; make mrproper;\
sleep
How can Microsoft state..
..that they can't do something that anyone else can do? Easy: they just have to admit that they are inferior.
"The modified measures should deflate Microsoft's overblown rhetoric and apocalyptic predictions about the proposed remedies," Blumenthal said.
This would require a smaller ego, would it not?
Yes, the Web Browser is the killer app for desktop operating systems. Yes it makes sense for MS to include one in their system.
What they did was use Monopoly power to kill a competitor. Netscape (with all its problems) was building a user interface system. A cross platform, internet aware system for running applications. Sincer it was crossplatform, you could write an application (albeit a simple, HTML one) and run it anywhere that the system was supported. Mac, Solaris, OS/2, Linux, BSD, Amiga...this was a real threat to Microsoft. By bundling the broswer with their OS, they used their monoply to kill Netscape. The court stepped in to tell them to stop, and they lied to the court. Perjury is a felony, up their with Rape and Homicide in the legal levle. Why is it such a highly prosecuted crime? Because it is the underpinning of our legal system that is at stake.
Open Source Identity Management: FreeIPA.org
Do I have permission to quote you literally?
I think I'll prepare a memo for upper management. I'll say 'this is the guy who thinks we should heavily modify our standard corporate desktop (based on Win98).' They'll look at the thrust of your message, and we'll be through worrying about it, finally.