Slashdot Mirror
Professor Testifies Windows Is Modular, Separable
circlejtp writes: "Princeton University professor Andrew Appel said in written testimony that modular design is an accepted standard in the industry, and Microsoft has already created a version of Windows for interactive television boxes that has removable functions. The full story can be found on the Tacoma Tribune website." At issue is Microsoft's claim that separating Windows' components would cripple the OS.
This is amazing.
I've found that people who share this attitude typically do so because of a complete lack of understanding. I konw people who dislike Linux, and have reasons to back that up. Everyone I know with this attitude have it because they fear and don't understand Linux. This sort of attitude typically comes from MCSE types who have plugged thousands of dollars into a certification which still fails to increase any knowledge of computers. Some of the most inept sysadmins I know hold MCSE's. Most of the best are self taught.
Knowledge is learned, not purchased.
The title says it all.
I think this says it all. We shouldn't fear that Microsoft is a monopoly - we should be afraid that Microsoft is looking to extend that monopoly into areas other than just software - they want to control everything digital.
What Microsoft would like to do is make it impossible for companies who don't purchase their software to do e-commerce. By retaining control of the browser market, they can effectively do this. It is a very simple matter for a browser to detect which server software is running on a server, and Microsoft could easily put hooks in IE which prevented from loading pages from a non-IIS server. Companies that had previously been UNIX-based would then be required to buy PC servers (running IIS, of course) in order to sell to PC users. Or worse, Microsoft could start up its own web-services division, and require that all IE-enabled e-commerce come through them.
What I find most interesting is that they have been able to extend their monopoly position because their earnings enable them to effectively thwart the judicial process. They can drag the antitrust trial out for so long that any remedy taken would be ineffective.
A more effective remedy against Microsoft would be for the government to fund OS development, and place the software produced in the public domain. If there was a free alternative to Windows (which didn't require learning UNIX), Microsoft would have a very difficult time retaining its monopoly position.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
Pardon me, what time is it? I need to set my chronograph.
I'm SHOCKED...
Simply s h o c k e d.
I don't think I shall ever recover from the shock.
MS actually used *some* common sense when designing their OS?!?!?
Oh dear Lord, what IS this world coming to? Next thing you know they'll find some miniscule part of IE that is standards-compliant...
Woe is me.
Ha ha!
</NELSON>
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased