Slashdot Mirror


MS Putting the Squeeze on Alternative Audio

renard writes: "Some interesting developments during the last two days of the Microsoft antitrust trial, as reported by AP: MS Executive Linda Averett has admitted that Internet Explorer trumps user preferences for audio playback, and explains away a failure of IE6 searches to find RealAudio sites as a "mistake by the search team." My personal favorite: an MS-internal email exchange where one employee suggests that everyone "Remember the 'embrace and extend' campaigns we've used in the past," and an MS executive admonishes that "We need to keep all of this off the airwaves." See also related stories at Yahoo, CNN, and the NYT."

441 comments

  1. This just in: power corrupts by sensate_mass · · Score: 0, Funny
    In other news, water runs downhill.

    --
    --- Submission is feudal.
    1. Re:This just in: power corrupts by smagoun · · Score: 2, Interesting
      In other news, water runs downhill.

      Well, usually.

  2. Just gets worse for MS by R2.0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Judge Jackson may have been so personally pissed at MS he did something legally questionable, but now MS is showing their stripes to an "impartial" judge. I don't think Judge CKK is going to be the pushover they hoped.

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    1. Re:Just gets worse for MS by dattaway · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, MS will find some way to anger the judge and cause him to do something that will get the case dismissed. Its worked every time.

    2. Re:Just gets worse for MS by IQ · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Ummm Not this time. See this time the Judge is a Her not a Him. And she is showing a very mellow temper. This is going to be very interesting indeed.

      --
      Adults are obsolete children. - Dr. Seuss
    3. Re:Just gets worse for MS by Eryq · · Score: 5, Funny

      MS line of reasoning:

      "The judge found us guilty... that *proves* they were biased against us!"

      --
      I'm a bloodsucking fiend! Look at my outfit!
    4. Re:Just gets worse for MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it was Microsoft's audacity and flat out lies that drove Judge Jackson to make the statements he did. Their abuses are flagrant enough to enrage any judge.

    5. Re:Just gets worse for MS by ahaning · · Score: 0

      Slashdot line of reasoning:

      "The judge said something good about Microsoft... That *proves* that she is biased against *us*! Any impartial judge would always be on our side!"

      --
      Withdrawal before climax is very ineffective and those who try this are usually called "parents."
    6. Re:Just gets worse for MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Im not so sure. I think CKK will unleash a nice, hefty blow towards microsoft. I think shes trying to avoid the impression of biasedness that Judge Jackson clearly showed, at all cost by giving Microsoft every opportunity to present themselves in the right light. This will even raise the impression that shes pro-Microsoft or doesnt really listen to the states.
      And forget how Gates acted. The mere fact that he didnt explode like everybody exptected doesnt turn him into a favour for MS. Basically what he said was : "It is bad for Microsoft if the settlement goes through.". Well, this is what this whole thing is about. You could go even further and translate what he said into :" Ok, even if we were a Monopoly, were such an important one and already got too far so that ripping us apart now would turn America and the world into the lower levels of hell." Miss CKK could still, and i believe she will, turn into Mr. Gates personal purgatory. Wait and see !

    7. Re:Just gets worse for MS by sheldon · · Score: 2

      We'll see. K-K has been tough and fair. She certainly has not been the pushover for the states that Jackson was. She's taking the time to understand the technical issues, she isn't falling asleep in court like Jackson did.

      From reading the testimony, it's pretty clear the states remedy proposal won't be adopted as it's just too full of holes. You can never really interpret the actions of a fair and impartial judge, because sometimes they ask counter questions just to try to help enforce a point on the record, rather than really questioning it.

      But I suspect the end result of this trial will be much closer to the DOJ settlement than the anti-MS contingent would like. Which probably means another round of appeals.

    8. Re:Just gets worse for MS by dhogaza · · Score: 2

      Boy, we can tell you're paying attention. Hint: the judge is a her, not a him.

    9. Re:Just gets worse for MS by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 3, Interesting
      "Her".

      The judge is a woman- and she seems to be well aware of this strategy of theirs.

      I would be very surprised if she isn't sitting back, watching carefully, and getting mad at the States every time they stumble or screw up. If they make an error, she pounces on it and refuses to let them put any weight on the error.

      I think she sees quite plainly that Microsoft is an illegal monopolist running amok- and she's damned if she's going to screw up like Jackson did, by betraying any sort of bias that could be used to vacate her judgement. She's gonna put forth a very _controlled_ judgement that happens to make MS very, very unhappy.

    10. Re:Just gets worse for MS by qeL3-i · · Score: 1

      That's exactly right. Gates said that even though he was running a monopoly and doing lots of bad stuff, he should be allowed to keep his ill-gotten gains and keep operating. It comes down to should some person or group be allowed to act in a criminal way if they are also providing a useful product or service. I would say "no".

    11. Re:Just gets worse for MS by Shuh · · Score: 0, Troll

      Hey, mod me down like the previous two posts too so you can prove what a great Microsoft supporter you are! Fight for that poor ole misunderstood multi-billion dollar corporation! Only you can save it here on Slashdot!!!

    12. Re:Just gets worse for MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im not so sure. I think CKK will unleash a nice, hefty blow towards microsoft. I think shes trying to avoid the impression of biasedness

      "Biasedness?!?!?!" Try this word: Bias.

    13. Re:Just gets worse for MS by Decimal · · Score: 1

      My thoughts exactly. Moderators, please moderate parent post up!

      --

      Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
    14. Re:Just gets worse for MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She certainly has not been the pushover for the states that Jackson was

      You are confusing your talking points again. This is the last is in long series of mistakes. Please return to Redmond and turn in your Xbox.

    15. Re:Just gets worse for MS by mpe · · Score: 2

      I would be very surprised if she isn't sitting back, watching carefully, and getting mad at the States every time they stumble or screw up. If they make an error, she pounces on it and refuses to let them put any weight on the error.

      How much rope do Microsoft need to hang themselves?

  3. Ok, maybe I am naive.. by xtermz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...but does anybody else get the impression that this whole 'anti-trust' trial is just a big giant dog and pony show to keep everybody happy and make the government look like they arent all up on big biz's jock ?

    Sorry, but if I tried to pass off some of the crap that MS has in these trials, i'ld be in jail on contempt charges.

    Maybe i'm naive, but i think the gov doesnt really give a fxck about MS or their 'anti-competitive' practices, they just brought out the smoke and mirrors...

    --


    I lost my concept of community when my community lost all concept of me.
    1. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by I.T.R.A.R.K. · · Score: 0, Interesting

      The States came after Microsoft because they had dollar signs in their eyes.
      Nothing more, nothing less. They just wanted a piece of the pie.
      MS's competitors are just as bad. Why do you think all of MS's competitors are suddenly coming out of the woodwork and bringing on lawsuits? Because they know MS is in a state of weakness. What better way to eliminate your biggest competition than through litigation? Not to mention, being ruled a monopoly is a surefire way to ensure every con artist and halfwit who can't make it in the market on their own will slither out of the woodwork and make bogus claims against you. Oracle and Sun are a big example of this.

      --

      "Adequacy.org: Where congenital stupidity is not an option, but a requirement."

    2. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You appear to have been living under a rock or a bridge to not know the abuse going on around you. Wake up and stop trolling.

    3. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by greenfly · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, the govt. used to care, and used to want to bring anti-trust charges against Microsoft, but then, Microsoft used to not donate money to any political party.

      It's interesting to see how both policies changed around the same time.

    4. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by andcal · · Score: 0, Troll

      MS is no worse than any other company in the abuse department. MS just has more to abuse (i.e. a "monopoly in the Windows computer market as of 2 years ago).

      --
      --something witty
    5. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by 4of12 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Your premise might have a great deal of substance.

      But remember that MS has not just been using its monopoly to tax a broad base of small individuals.

      It has been extending its means of taxation by leveraging its monopoly to trounce other large businesses.

      While those businesses have no where near the financial resources of Microsoft, they are businesses nonetheless(Netscape, Sun, Oracle, AOL/TW), and therefore entitled to at least some of the same bent political process favoring businesses.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    6. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2, Funny


      > The States came after Microsoft because they had dollar signs in their eyes. Nothing more, nothing less. They just wanted a piece of the pie. MS's competitors are just as bad. Why do you think all of MS's competitors are suddenly coming out of the woodwork and bringing on lawsuits? Because they know MS is in a state of weakness. What better way to eliminate your biggest competition than through litigation? Not to mention, being ruled a monopoly is a surefire way to ensure every con artist and halfwit who can't make it in the market on their own will slither out of the woodwork and make bogus claims against you. Oracle and Sun are a big example of this.

      So... What exactly do you do at Microsoft?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    7. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hasn't Microsoft ALWAYS had a monopoly in the Windows computer market? :-)

      --
      Murphy was an optimist.
    8. Re: Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > ...but does anybody else get the impression that this whole 'anti-trust' trial is just a big giant dog and pony show to keep everybody happy and make the government look like they arent all up on big biz's jock ?

      If that's the case then the DoJ needs to hire some better actors, because it sure as hell looks like they're all up on big biz's jock.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    9. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Sorry, this belonged here, just copied it here:

      Im not so sure. I think CKK will unleash a nice, hefty blow towards microsoft. I think shes trying to avoid the impression of biasedness that Judge Jackson clearly showed, at all cost by giving Microsoft every opportunity to present themselves in the right light. This will even raise the impression that shes pro-Microsoft or doesnt really listen to the states.
      And forget how Gates acted. The mere fact that he didnt explode like everybody exptected doesnt turn him into a favour for MS. Basically what he said was : "It is bad for Microsoft if the settlement goes through.". Well, this is what this whole thing is about. You could go even further and translate what he said into :" Ok, even if we were a Monopoly, were such an important one and already got too far so that ripping us apart now would turn America and the world into the lower levels of hell." Miss CKK could still, and i believe she will, turn into Mr. Gates personal purgatory. Wait and see !

    10. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You speak the truth, but do they dare listen?

      For anyone who doesn't believe, look at the tobacco lawsuit & settlement. The states sued tobacco companies. Nevermind that
      a) tobacco is legal
      b) everyone knows it's addictive and that it's bad for you. Or is a liar or stupid.
      c) the states have been profiting on it for years via incredibly high tobacco taxes.

      So, the tobacco companies settled and agreed to hand over a huge chunk of change for the next 20 years, which the states were supposed to use to pay for anti-smoking campaigns and to offset the medicare/medicaid burden caused by smoker's health problems.

      As if.

      The money went straight into general fund accounts and was spent on whatever state legislatures spend money on. Discourage smoking? That would be tantamount to killing the golden goose.

      I'm sure this time it will be different.

    11. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by DustMagnet · · Score: 1
      Sorry, but if I tried to pass off some of the crap that MS has in these trials, i'ld be in jail on contempt charges.

      Sometimes judges just have to ignore contempt to avoid openning up an appeal based on bias. Microsoft was very contemptous to Jackson, he reacted, and look what happened. The new judge, Kollar-Kotelly, will just keep her cool, so this sentance might actually stick.

      Look at what happened with Traficant. That quy was nuts. He went way beyond contempt, but the judge did little more than ask him to keep his voice down. Now he's been found guilty and doesn't have much hope for an appeal.

      --
      'SBEMAIL!' is better than a goat!!
    12. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by the+Man+in+Black · · Score: 2

      What better way to eliminate your biggest competition than through litigation?

      I think that works better than "Where Do You Want To Go Today" as a Microsoft tagline.

    13. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The tone of the trial seemed to change around the time that we elected a Texas oilman as our president.

      -B

    14. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Zeinfeld · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Well, the govt. used to care, and used to want to bring anti-trust charges against Microsoft, but then, Microsoft used to not donate money to any political party.

      I don't work for Microsoft, but I had a member of Newt Gingrich's staff tell me that the 'problem with Microsoft is that they make all this money but they do not play a social role'.

      For anyone who knows beltway speak that is code for 'give campaign donnations' in the same way that supporting the 'right of southern states to cellebrate their heritage' is code for 'we are racists and would like to see the return of the KKK and segregation but we will settle for flying the stars and bars from the capitol' etc. etc.

      At the time Gates had recently donated the first $100 mil. to his foundation and announced his intention to donate substantially more so the 'social role' considered was not charitable in nature.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    15. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by xonker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sure, some of Microsoft's competitors are using this as a way to harm Microsoft. This is the first time Microsoft has been even slightly vulnerable since Windows 95 has been released. Sorry, but I don't buy the whole "oh, they couldn't make it in the marketplace" argument. Admittedly, some companies that have complained about Microsoft may have failed eventually - but Oracle and Sun are not amongst them.

      If you're one of those idiots who think there should be no rules in business then let's take that to the logical conclusion. If someone gets in my way in business, I have every right to have a guy named Vinnie show up on their doorstep and put a moon roof in their skull. If you don't like that option, then get real and admit that business is legislated and Microsoft has broken a quite a few rules in doing business. I'd be happy to play it either way, though.

      The court has already decided that Microsoft broke the law - now is the time to decide what the just punishment is and what will prevent future abuses. It is fully acceptible that the punishment should harm Microsoft's business and benefit their competitors - it is the level of harm that needs to be decided.

      When a person is convicted of a crime - as Microsoft has been - the court has a responsibility to mete out punishment that will deter the criminal from doing so again, protect society from that criminal and set an example for anyone else who might consider breaking the law. Therefore Microsoft should receive a punishment that is stiff enough to make Bill and company think twice before abusing their position, protect their competitors and the public to a reasonable extent and make it unattractive for other companies that hold monopolies now or in the future to follow Microsoft's example.

    16. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by JordoCrouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know this is a troll, but I am in a arguing sort of mood.

      The States came after Microsoft because they had dollar signs in their eyes.
      Nothing more, nothing less. They just wanted a piece of the pie.


      What, so you think that the states will see any settlement money? Did you think that Bill G was going to show up with a huge novelty check with the memo "Sorry for fucking you over"??

      I don't know about the other states, but Utah joined as a result of the ongoing litigation with Caldera over DR-DOS. Many of the experts in the case are at the University Of Utah, and after reviewing the facts in the case, they all advised the then attorney general to join the case.

      If nothing else, it was an effort to punish Microsoft, and maybe drum up a little more support for the hometown heros Caldera and Novell.

      Not to mention, being ruled a monopoly is a surefire way to ensure every con artist and halfwit who can't make it in the market on their own will slither out of the woodwork and make bogus claims against you.

      Right - you know I really hate it when I have to go out and pick a telephone provider, or gas station, or what kind of car to drive. Wouldn't it just have been easier if we all drove Ford cars filled with Standard Oil gas while talking on our AT&T phones?

      Maybe because if we had let those monopolies stand, AT&T would be charging you $2.00 a minute instead of 15 cents, Ford cars would breaking down ever 10,000 miles forcing you to buy a new one, and gasoline would be at 10 bucks a gallon.

      Yeah, these anti-trust laws really suck.

      --
      Do you have Linux and a DotPal? Click here now!
    17. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could it be that the gov't only "cared" because MS's competitors contributed to a political party first?

      Moderators: mod this as -99999999999999999999, Uncomfortable Fact

    18. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by I.T.R.A.R.K. · · Score: 1, Insightful
      I don't condone a lot of what Microsoft has done. Some of their tactics are downright dirty. But you can't tell me that the same competitors who are sueing them now wouldn't have done the same thing if they had that kind of leverage.
      These companies aren't seeking damages. They're seeking revenge. Plain and simple.

      What, you think AOL bought Netscape because it was a good browser? Man, I want to know who your dealer is. That must be some prime smack he's selling you.
      They bought Netscape for the right to sue Microsoft. A nice card in their hand, if you ask me.

      --

      "Adequacy.org: Where congenital stupidity is not an option, but a requirement."

    19. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by curunir · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No...that's not what changed.

      There were two things that changed the government's position towards microsoft...the views of the content industry and the views of Computer makers (Dell, Gateway etc).

      The content industry realizes that it is unlikely that they'll be able to force hardware to include DRM (not that Fritzie will stop trying). However, they don't need that as long as MS controls 95% of the desktop OS market. If they can get DRM onto 95% of desktops, they'll be happy. If MS's monopoly position weakens, then consumers might start to look for an OS without a DRM solution.

      The PC makers used to want MS punished. They were sick of MS's overly-restrictive OEM license agreements. But then the bottom dropped out of the PC market. People didn't feel the need to upgrade their computers since they could run everything they needed to on their current setups. There was no killer app driving people to upgrade their computers. This is where XP's bloat starts to work in its favor. XP, to PC makers, is the killer app that will drive people to upgrade.

      So, when Intel, AMD, Dell, Gateway, Compaq, HP, the RIAA and MPAA call their favorite senators and tell them that they'd like Microsoft to get a slap on the wrist, the government complies.

      --
      "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"
    20. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So... What exactly do you do at Microsoft?"

      IIRC, he throws rocks at retarded kids. Better duck.

    21. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you should not search into the government as a whole but to who runs the goverment...REPUBLICANS!!!

    22. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by bitrott · · Score: 1

      Sure, and they also used to not employ thousands of Americans, stimulate large portions of a massively successfull industry, effectively creating more jobs, and creating a decent quality of life for many many people. It's called ensuring a good sure thing. It's not always for the best, (unless you have a real problem with people providing for their families) and isn't always fair, but there are men in black suits out there to ensure that things don't get worse than they are now. Can things get better? Prove it. Show me where an industry has been so enlightened when the status quo WASN'T supported.

    23. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Kindaian · · Score: 1

      I just think that the problem is that they don't really know what should be done with M$.

      If it was a personne, it would have been already charged with death sentence (ups... companies are personnes in US - killing a company isn't a capital offense? like killing a personne?)...

      ROFL... and that's American gift to mankind... Legal entanglement...

      Cheers...

    24. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by ichimunki · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it just have been easier if we all drove Ford cars filled with Standard Oil gas while talking on our AT&T phones?

      Actually, it would be easier. But we would complain about not having any choices.

      --
      I do not have a signature
    25. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by shades66 · · Score: 1

      here here

      It is blatently obvious that nothing is going to happen at the end of the trial. Microsoft is bribing the world with 'I'll remove Windows XP/ME/2000/whatever from the shelf's if you try and stop me'. He is controlling what the court hears by deciding who has their say (I was hoping to hear about their dealings with computer-vendors!!!). I expect at the end of the day they will just get a slap on their hands and told not to do it again, which they will in turn find ways around anything and keep on doing what they are good at (Forcing crap on us before people think I am saying a good OS).

      Anyway only time will tell. But I do hope the judge realises that MS are walking all over them and spring a nice surprise on them (Like a major rule saying that they MUST allow competition or be heavily fined (remember they have $40 billion in liquid accets so the fines must be heavy like donate 5 Billion to cancer research (At least then MS will of done one good thing in their life!)...)

      Mark.

      PS. Yes I know my spelling is bad so don't bother telling me!

      --
      ---- There are 10 types of people in the world. Those that understand binary and those that don't
    26. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by kaehler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OK, here is my cospriacy theory for today.
      Lets see, after 9/11 we (the US Govt) is trying to find a way to "monitor" all "terrorist" computers. They have their magic lantern program or what ever which will monitor everything on your computer (every keystroke). Wouldn't it be nice if we could make it a part of the O/S of almost all computers (90+%). If we could only get some big O/S company with a big market share and, of course, closed source so you cannot see the code. Do we have any leverage with any company like this? I wonder why the Justice Department is backing off of MS???

    27. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Znork · · Score: 2

      IIRC, anti-trust trials tend to be more about rectifying the situation and restoring competition more than about penalties. Penalties can be exacted through civil suits by those who have been harmed.

      Of course, actually restoring competition would probably be more painful than any punishment even a really angry judge could dream up; both because competition is something Microsoft fears and loathes more than anything, the company wants one thing and that is control, and because it would likely entail something like splitting MS into several dozen smaller companies to actually have some real competition again.

    28. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by I.T.R.A.R.K. · · Score: 0
      "Right - you know I really hate it when I have to go out and pick a telephone provider, or gas station, or what kind of car to drive. Wouldn't it just have been easier if we all drove Ford cars filled with Standard Oil gas while talking on our AT&T phones?

      Don't get me wrong, my remarks had nothing to do with companies competing. Competition is great. This has everything to do with companies colluding to litigate a stronger competitor out of the market.
      Castrating Windows won't hurt Microsoft in the least. If anything, it will hurt the consumer who just wants to turn his machine on and get E-mail. Oops, Joe sixpack needs to download a mail client to get his mail. What? There's no browser installed? Joe is fucked unless he knows how to use telnet or ftp. But wait.. They weren't allowed to include those either. Oh well. But at least Sun et al got their way.

      --

      "Adequacy.org: Where congenital stupidity is not an option, but a requirement."

    29. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by FredBaxter · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, I modded this down by accident, damn scrolly wheel f*cked me again, I should be more careful. Please mod parent up, I just wish I could mod the same comment twice. I'm sorry polar_bear', good comments should be always rewarded [if not for karma then] so more people will read them.

    30. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm hoping and praying that the whole USA goes 100% MS despite the fact that I use Linux exclusively. Reason: I figure the resultant collateral damage (amongst various industries) resulting from such a b0rken setup will finally motivate enough of the masses to actually learn how to read and understand a dialog box. When that happens, things will start changing.

      --
      C|N>K
    31. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by jonabbey · · Score: 2

      Oops, Joe sixpack needs to download a mail client to get his mail. What? There's no browser installed? Joe is fucked unless he knows how to use telnet or ftp. But wait.. They weren't allowed to include those either.

      The issue isn't that systems should be sold without Internet software, it is that Microsoft should not have the power to force everyone to take their lovingly integrated Internet software instead of anyone else's. What's wrong with buying a Gateway that comes with Brand X browser rather than IE? What's wrong with Dell bundling Eudora with their PC's? What's wrong with IBM bundling Bulletproof FTP?

    32. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Denjiro · · Score: 1

      You said it exactly. It is easier. Definitely not better though.

    33. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't it just have been easier if we all drove Ford cars filled with Standard Oil gas while talking on our AT&T phones?

      Actually, it would be easier. But we would complain about not having any choices.


      The license agreement with the phone would prohibit complaining about the lack of choices. Problem solved.

    34. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by I.T.R.A.R.K. · · Score: 0

      There's nothing wrong with that at all.
      The thing is, no one is forcing you to use it.
      Download Mozilla if that is your fancy. There's no lock on the OS telling you that you are not allowed to install x browser. And there is no software preventing you from doing so.
      Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing some of these choices come with windows. It saves Lazy Joe Sixpack the trouble of finding it himself. Because we both know that he (he, being the 90% majority) isn't going to go looking for it himself.

      --

      "Adequacy.org: Where congenital stupidity is not an option, but a requirement."

    35. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well you aren't exactly being honest here are you... Standard Oil was the ONLY game in town. There is a variety of other OSen that will run on your computer. As a lot of people that frequent this site can attest to.

    36. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by zeno_2 · · Score: 2

      I don't even really see why this is an issue at all. Of course no one is forcing anyone to use anything really, thats not why they are in trouble.

      The reason they are in trouble is mainly because of the OEM contracts that they essentially forced OEM's to agree to. See, the OEM's are really going to be the largest distributer of OS's that there is. This is basically how a lot of the contracts went:

      OEM: We want to bundle Windows(tm) on our computers that we sell.
      MS: Sure, just sign this.
      OEM: But it says here that for every machine sold, I have to pay for a windows license. Currently most of our computers come with this other OS.
      MS: Thats too bad, we can maybe work out a deal but its going to cost you twice as much for each copy of windows.

      This is the scenario that the OEM's were in. They had to decide what to do, and they went the Microsoft way. It probably got harder and harder for those oems to agree to something like this when microsoft is buying up the competition, or creating competition, and then including this into windows. This of course is not 'good' for competition, because Microsoft has a great leverage of the OS and how much they sell it for with the OEM's, and the ability to take out one sector at a time in the pc industry.

      I am amazed even today, Microsoft doesn't seem to be altering their way of buisness whatsoever because of this lawsuit. Today, there was a story on slashdot linked from theregister.co.uk. Now, I don't know the whole picture im sure, but pretty much Microsoft has this new licensing scheme for educational facilities, where they would pay a yearly subscription to software. According to the story, the educational establishment would have to pay for this software for *every* computer at the said location. Even if it wasn't running microsoft software. Now, these places do have some more choices when it comes to that, but does it sound like a very competitive-type of way of doing buisness?

      This is what I would like to see out of this whole thing. Id like to see windows come on 2 cds, one being an OS cd, and one being an Applications cd. When someone bought a new computer, it would come with the applications cd that the customer (and remember thats who we are trying to please) could then *chose* (there's that nasty word) to install that cd, and get IE, Windows Media Player, the Windows cd burning software, Outlook Express, and the list goes on. During the Windows setup, it could simply ask the customer, do you want the Microsoft Applications installed with Windows.

      This seems fair, and you could simply use other applications from other vendors with not many problems. The problem is, Microsoft, in their 'embrace and extend' mentality, have essentially built a wall around XP with these things like IE, and Windows Media Player. They try to testify that its impossible to seperate the 2 without system instability. Your trying to tell me that my system is going to be more stable with this huge hunk of code (ie) that I may not even ever need or use? Thats a pile of crap, and anyone who has ever done much windows troubleshooting knows that a lot of problems stem from IE. I'd say that it would probably require a good amount of work to take IE and all the other stuff out of XP, but I wouldn't say impossible. The only, and this is important, reason that it would be tough is because Microsoft has made it that way. I know windows fairly well, I work someplace that involves windows troubleshooting for about 4 years now. With winxp, id say that IE isn't a needed item. Im pretty sure its used for the help system within XP, are you trying to tell us that this 'help' couldn't be accomplished any other way? You can pretty much look at anything in XP that IE does and find ways to not do it that way.

      Well that turned into quite a lot, I just find it a drag when people bring up these 2 things about the trial:

      a - No one is forcing you to use it
      b - Why punish a company for doing really good

      That being said, try to understand that Microsoft has been legally found a monopoly. This means that they used anti-competitive practices, and along with their leverage in the industry, to build a wall around themselves and stay number one. One key factor to competing OS's is the ability to get it onto OEM machines (and preferrably a large one). If you can't, you really aren't able to compete on the same playing field, and microsoft gets to sit in their own area that no one can even touch.

    37. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by I.T.R.A.R.K. · · Score: 0

      And in a perfect world, every OEM would simultaneously switch to an alternative OS, and Microsoft would pay for their sins in one fell swoop.
      Microsoft isn't as powerful as they think they are. If windows doesn't ship by default, their marketshare dies. Albeit slowly, but surely.
      Who cares if they're the standard. Change is a beautiful thing in the eyes of those willing to take that risk.

      --

      "Adequacy.org: Where congenital stupidity is not an option, but a requirement."

    38. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by chfleming · · Score: 1

      GW made him self clear in that he is against government intervention.

      The man likes a free economy, and to some extent I must agree. Microsoft's monopoly really only hurts the slow and stupid. The world of Microsoft products seems to have no bearing on my life and the Open Source movement is doing what no company or government could ever do against it.

      But it's not really up to GW or myself, so WGAFF!

    39. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by gowen · · Score: 1
      we elected a Texas oilman as our president.
      When you say "we", I take you mean that you're a Supreme Court judge.
      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    40. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe because if we had let those monopolies stand, AT&T would be charging you $2.00 a minute instead of 15 cents, Ford cars would breaking down ever 10,000 miles forcing you to buy a new one, and gasoline would be at 10 bucks a gallon.

      IF SO was selling gasoline at $2 what would stop someone from starting to sell gasoline for $1. They would soon steal all the customers from SO. The only way to create a monopoly is for the government to pass a law saying only company X can sell merchandise Y. Without that law anyone can start compete, and if they can deliver a better product they will survive and capture marketshares.

      The real problem here is that Windoze is the best OS there is (except for us nerds who know how to configure ). Unless there's a new user-friendly OS around, MS will have 95% market-share. It's not good, but it's the best available.

      darn.farrell

    41. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Omnifarious · · Score: 2

      IF SO was selling gasoline at $2 what would stop someone from starting to sell gasoline for $1. They would soon steal all the customers from SO. The only way to create a monopoly is for the government to pass a law saying only company X can sell merchandise Y. Without that law anyone can start compete, and if they can deliver a better product they will survive and capture marketshares.

      There are many ways in which a monopoly can keep this from happening. Like buying out any competitor. Or, telling railroad companies they'll stop shipping oil using their tracks if the ship oil for their competitor too. Or convincing car manufacturers (by adding the additives and making 'non-compliant' cars break down) to make their engines reliant on additives to your gas that you've patented.

      In short, a monopoly has many options for eliminating competition and creating a permanently distorted market. So, in the interest of a truly free market, it's in our best interests for a government to break up monopolies that pursue agressive strategies for maintaining their hold on the market.

    42. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We all need to remember that Al Gore and his fundrasing crew went to Microsoft to raise money for the 1996 presidential campaign.

      They did not get any money...hence the 'anti-trust' assault on Microsoft.

      Thanks Al & Bill for forcing the IT industry into a slump for the last two years.

      Thanks for contributing to the economic slowdown.

    43. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by rgbrenner · · Score: 2, Informative
      George W. Bush and the Republicans recieved $449,600 from _just_ Microsoft. I don't think there are to many people who wouldn't be against government intervention or who wouldn't be for letting MS off the hook for that much money.


      References: CNet - Election 2000: High-Tech Politics

    44. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by rgbrenner · · Score: 1

      Im sure that all the money MS gave to the Republicans didn't have anything to do with it. See my other post.

    45. Re:Ok, maybe I am naive.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That comment on the southern states is BS.

  4. Not like Realplayer is saint-like by MikeOttawa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This really isn't much worse than the hoops that RealPlayer makes you go through to remove it as your default media player. After about 4 "Are you really, really, really sure you want to Disalbe StartCenter" messages it lets you. Besides - they make you upgrade about once a month so that all your preferences get reset to RealPlayer again anyway... I don't know who would actually PAY for their crappy product.

    1. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by reaper20 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yep, Realplayer is jumping on the "Please feel sorry for us, we're getting h0sed by MS too!" bandwagon.

      MS is probably at fault for some of this - but if Real would just realize that their software sucks, and that might be a big reason for people not using it in the first place.

      Open message to real: I'm a Linux fanatic. At work, when my Windows users ask "which do I choose at radiowhatever.com, real or ms?" I tell them to use the MS format.

      That's how much Real's software sucks. At least we have ogg.

    2. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Flower · · Score: 4, Interesting
      True. But there is a big difference between being nagged about "are you sure you don't want to use our product" and "I don't care if you want to use PlayerX you're going to be using our Player."

      In one instance, I can always find a different product that doesn't irritate me and at least tries to dwim. In the other, I'm not given any choice at all. Tack on the fact that choice is being eliminated by a convicted monopolist and actually it is much worse.

      --
      I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
    3. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God I hope MS drives Real out of business. I hate their goddamn format and their goddamn player so much. I haven't installed it in a year and will never do so again. It just pisses me off that so many sites use it. I will only order CDs from CDUniverse because all of the other big CD companies insist on using real.

    4. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by StiffMittens · · Score: 2, Interesting

      True. And I agree that their product sucks buttocks, but consider this: If Microsoft wasn't trying to shut out the competition, then maybe companies like Real could spend more time improving the way their software functions rather than devoting so much time and energy to devising ways to confound Microsoft's desktop fascism.

      --
      Some are given suckers and some get lollipops
    5. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by nvrrobx · · Score: 3, Informative

      Also notice when you're installing RealPlayer and choosing your Spam Preferences, by default, all the checkboxes you see are unchecked. Scroll down to the bottom of that box, the rest are all checked.

    6. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by MindStalker · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hey, have you tried out any of the new movies encoded in realplayer 9 format. Amazing stuff.

    7. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS driving Real out of business is bullshit and only reinforces their monopoly status. How about Real driving themselves out of business?

    8. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Marqui · · Score: 1

      I've gotten to the point that I don't even have Real's products installed on my systems anymore. The only way they creep in is that they are bundled with Netscape. At least I can uninstall in most cases. And with P2P sharing I can usually find the same thing in Mpg,AVI, or MP3 anyway so I havent felt that I am losing anything except the annoyances that some with Real products.

    9. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their product sucks. That's all you need to say. Microsoft makes a superior product, so consumers benefit.

      Real (and Netscape) had an enormous head start on MS. In fact, they monopolized their respective markets. But they got arrogant, and made crappy software. Instead of fixing bugs, they added dubious features (blink, "shop" button, etc). MS should be applauded for busting up their monopoly with quality software.

    10. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by ahaning · · Score: 1

      I don't know who would actually PAY for their crappy product.

      Simple. The people who pay for RA are the ones that don't have 2 hours to maneuver their site looking for the little link that goes to the free Real Audio player.

      It was rather humorous once when I was in a local computer shop and a tech told the customer to just download and install Real Audio (to do..whatever). After a while, I noted to the tech that the link on their site IS there, but is also very difficult to find. So, the customer and tech went over to a net-connected PC and started searching on the Real site. I was in the place for 10-15 minutes, and when I left, they were still looking. Actually, it's probably easier to just download Netscape 4, which gives you Real Audio as an option.

      --
      Withdrawal before climax is very ineffective and those who try this are usually called "parents."
    11. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "That's how much Real's software sucks. At least we have ogg."

      ogg is dead.

    12. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful


      Yep, Realplayer is jumping on the "Please feel sorry for us, we're getting h0sed by MS too!" bandwagon.

      MS is probably at fault for some of this - but if Real would just realize that their software sucks, and that might be a big reason for people not using it in the first place.


      Umm...excuse me, but the article is pointing out that MS, which has been ruled an illegal monopoly by two high courts for similar behavior, is preventing users from playing Real content even when they want to, and preventing them from even locating a competitor's products.

      That's irrelevant to whether or not Real sucks relative to WM (I beg to differ on that). It's illegal, unethical, and dangerous. Real may do things that are frickin annoying, but those things are not illegal, and don't threaten the entire IT economy.

    13. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2
      I've gotten to the point that I don't even have Real's products installed on my systems anymore.

      I regard it as just another type of malware. I don't mind the ads, but I do mind the stupid blinking icon in my task bar telling me to upgrade. And I sure as heck dislike the way Real try to hijack a large part of my registry to make it hard to uninstall.

      Sound should be treated no differently from image processing. Nobody expects IE to pop up third part image viewers to display JPG or PNG. Why should the browser hand off sound to a separate program that is going to pop up an unnecessary additional dialog panel?

      If Real think they are providing value to the user they can always write their own browser shell. It is not that big a deal if you use the windows built in HTML widget, transports etc. In fact they have a lot of the code already.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    14. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Stephen+Chadfield · · Score: 1

      Amazing isn't it? Just reeks of desparation to me...

    15. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by StiffMittens · · Score: 1

      LOL. That's some funny stuff, man. Hoo boy! "consumers benefit." Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha! Oh Jesus, I'm gonna' piss my pants! Hee Hee Hee Hee Hee! [snort] Hehehe, Ooooh brother. ahem. . .

      Oh, you were serious?

      --
      Some are given suckers and some get lollipops
    16. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's strange----because I am still using older RealPlayer and RealJukebox products.....I refuse to upgrade beyond where I am at right now, for all the reasons you mention and more. I actually did download RealOne a couple of months ago,soon followed by my removing it and going back to previous editions...since it was doing a great job of "taking over" everything, even worse than MS does.

    17. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      I'm not a fan of either Window Media player (does this POS ever actually succeed when it tries to open media in the browser? I've had it fail endlessly on several separate PCs, when the same stream opens fine in a standalone media player) or Real Player (because of exactly what you mentioned), and long ago vowed to never install RealPlayer again, but recently I did because of a local radio station that has an internet radio broadcast at a lowly 32Kbps : The Media Player feed sounds horrendous, but the Real stream at the same rate sounds very acceptable. I don't know what they did or how they did it, but at the low bit rates I'll take Real over Media Player any day.

    18. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen to that, Real's software is horrid. Can't even go through proxy servers properly. That's the prime reason I use windows media to play anything streaming. It is really better!

      who woulda thunk it,
      Real sux... go MS in this case....

    19. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by qeL3-i · · Score: 1

      Two hours? You've got to be kidding. How about 30 seconds on Google? Is this it?

    20. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Suppafly · · Score: 2

      yeh and every other version of realplayer restate the question with double negatives to confuse you.. "Are you sure to your don't want to not disable smart center?" that and if you if notice in the installer where they ask you to pick prefs, they have a scroll box with the visable options unchecked and all the ones you'd have to scroll to see checked.

    21. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by zachdms · · Score: 1
      I can't believe this got modded up. Who's moderating?


      The article does not say that anybody was prevent from playing Real content, just that the IE Media Bar is an annoying piece of cr*p. Which gets in the way of people who like WMP, too - so we all suffer due to bad design. Tain't nothin' like you said.

    22. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One word: WOW. I've never seen anything that clear at 34kbps! Totally *incredible*!

    23. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that 1Mbps stream is *totally* indistinguishable from DVD, at least to me. it looks pretty DVD like at 750kbps already...

    24. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Ilgaz · · Score: 2

      Startcenter "protects" file extentions registered to Realplayer. Against "someone" changing it. Guess who someone is?

      Seems many of the annoying stuff about Realplayer exists because they have to do it.

    25. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      Wow... Amazing... Comparing it to MS-Video , we can understand why MS wants to conspire Real on every kind of aspects

    26. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by CProgrammer98 · · Score: 2

      Nope, that's the 14 day trial for which you have to register and hand over a plastic number. You can call up to cancel withing fourteen days if you don't wnat to be charged the $$$$ each month.

      --
      And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
    27. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      I don't know, its frames per second is kinda low, its very jerky during fast movement. But what do you expect at 1Mbps

    28. Re:Not like Realplayer is saint-like by phoenix123 · · Score: 0

      hehe, ONE question gentlemen,

      Why_did_Winamp_succeed__against_eeevil_monopolist_ WMP_and_realplayer_did_not?

      people don't like crap. realplayer is crap. so people don't like realplayer.
      i never listen to mp3's with WMP, only brain-amputees would. 20+MB RAM-hog bloated WMP to do something winamp needs only 5-7 for.

      i am soo glad, netscape, aol, realplayer et al. have no chance against ms. if you like ms or not, but products of hahaha netscape, aol, quicktime and realplayer are inferior tools of homo neandertalensis compared to even the ms(mediocre) quality.
      in WMP i can switch to non-perverted display mode. realplayer, quicktime etc. load 3 times as long just to present me with a fucking dialog asking if i want Premium_BullShit Pro Ver.4 that will surely load much longer and have their windows cluttered even more.

      before you bitch about ms, take a moment to think of a world, where AOL *shiver* would produce the OS that every mom+pop is forced to buy with their pc's. just imagine what horrifying programs of doom realplayer's realnetworks would produce, if they were to code the next windows-shell like "explorer" aka "program-manager" etc..
      think about HUNDREDS of blinking "CLICK HERE FOR BULLSHIT" icons on your desktop. icons that cannot be killed, your screen resized in 80% workspace for your spreadsheet or c++_IDE and 20% PERMANENTLY occupied by instant-messenger/advertisement to "realexplorer PRO"/bonzi-buddy/random_unneccessary_bullshit and desktop-firewalls/ad-aware disallowed. eh and your internet-connection is permanent, spying and cannot be filtered or shut off...

  5. MS's heavy-handed tactics are so bad..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..they've crippled Real's performance across every platform. That's how bad they are. It sucks on Mac and Linux too, and that's Microsoft's fault.

    I love how they're in on the lawsuit too, with something like 4-5x the market share vs. WMP. Hey, free money. Better get in on the action before they lose out due to their own incompetence like Netscape.

    1. Re:MS's heavy-handed tactics are so bad..... by apt142 · · Score: 0

      RealPlayer is like a cockroach. You don't want it on your system and it is a pain to get it out. To say that M$ crippled it is pretty spooky

  6. Stupid Employees! Bad! Bad! by Lokni · · Score: 1, Funny

    Interesting.. Once again Microsoft proves just how stupid their Rhode's scholar winning, 4.0 GPA, full ride to Haaahhhhvaaad (MIT, Cal-tech, Yale, etc.), over achieving, 1600 on the SAT, employees really are.

  7. Browser part of the OS? No... by Smallest · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    ...the OS will soon be al wrapped up in the browser. Already, PDFs, Word docs, image files, FTP sites, audio, video clips and more all open directly into the browser window.

    And, how convenient: as soon as .Net gets going for real, apps will be ditributed and you won't ever have to leave the browser to do anything.

    -c

    --
    I have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this margin is too small to contain.
    1. Re:Browser part of the OS? No... by Soulfader · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And, how convenient: as soon as .Net gets going for real, apps will be ditributed and you won't ever have to leave the browser to do anything.

      That wouldn't bother me overly much; I don't plan to need to use it. I'm more worried about not being able to leave the browser for anything.

    2. Re:Browser part of the OS? No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Won't ever have to leave the browser..."

      Sorry, pal, you got it wrong. Try, "won't be ABLE to leave the browser".

    3. Re:Browser part of the OS? No... by jgerman · · Score: 1, Redundant

      The browser STILL wouldn't be the OS in that case.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    4. Re:Browser part of the OS? No... by Gid1 · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      Why bother calling it 'Windows' anymore? Seems that 'Microsoft Window' might be a better name...

    5. Re:Browser part of the OS? No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >..not having to leave your browser for anything...
      Isn't this already possible with emacs?

  8. Sneaky by delta407 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How can you "accidentally" not show Real Audio search results? Huh, whoops, guess all y'all have to use Windows Media Audio now...

    1. Re:Sneaky by miguelitof · · Score: 3

      How can you "accidentally" not show Real Audio search results?

      Well, a programmer accidentally writes a filter along the lines of:
      if strSrchResult == ["rm"|"ra"] then strSrchResult = null

      Then a programmer accidentally copies this filter into the source code.

      Then a programmer accidentally enables this part of the source code.

      Then a programmer accidentally compiles this (along with the rest of the program).

      It's all accidentally easy, dontcha know!

      --
      --- Biffster.org
      "Bite my shiny metal ass."
    2. Re:Sneaky by tink00 · · Score: 1

      The same way a text search of all files on Windows doesn't search .java files...

    3. Re:Sneaky by zachdms · · Score: 1
      I've never seen details of this, but I bet it's a generic Search for Media function. Since proprietary types such as RealNetworks files aren't really of use to anyone without the RealPlayer installed, I'd assume they just weren't listed - and neither were Liquid Audio, QuickTime, a2b, etc. files either.


      So the "fix" in that case would be to make the search filter extensible - that way you don't find files you can't play.

    4. Re:Sneaky by Reziac · · Score: 2

      I'd guess it's more an error of omission, something like this:

      if strSrchResult == ["MP3"|"WMA"|"etc"] then run "WMP plugin"

      or maybe

      if strSrchResult !== ["MP3"|"WMA"|"etc"] then strSrchresult = null

      (where "etc" are all those filetypes I'm too lazy to remember or look up)

      Which could be either accidental ("Ooops, I forgot to include all the filetypes I never use myself") or conscious ("Make 'em forget those naughty off-brand types exist"), and no way to *prove in court* which way it happened.

      BTW thanks for publishing the source so I could fix it ;)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    5. Re:Sneaky by miguelitof · · Score: 1
      BTW thanks for publishing the source so I could fix it ;)

      No problem. I fully support Open Source projects!

      :)

      --
      --- Biffster.org
      "Bite my shiny metal ass."
  9. Is this legal?? by dolphinuser · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "... She said the problem was fixed two weeks ago -- over a month after the states' top lawyer, Brendan Sullivan, showed the search problem during opening arguments as evidence of Microsoft's wrongdoing,

    So the "problem" was presented as evidence of wrong doing, so they went ahead and fixed it. Is this similar to tampering with evidence?

    John

    --
    The drops of water don't know themselves to be a river; and yet the river flows.
    1. Re:Is this legal?? by beleg777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More to the point, the problem was presented, and they seem to think that fixing it makes everything better.

      "You can't punish me for that, I stopped doing it when I got caught!" Bah.

      --

      Science may someday discover what faith has always known.
    2. Re:Is this legal?? by Soulfader · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's silly. The problem does not constitute evidence that must be preserved. If the states have documented the issue properly, that should be all the evidence necessary.

      If MS were defending themselves from a "Your software is crappy and insecure" suit, I don't think anyone would be arguing that they shouldn't be able to try to fix any bugs or holes until after the trial was over.

      Besides, I suspect that testifying that the problem was resolved qualifies as an admission that a problem existed. No need to prove something that both parties agree to.

    3. Re:Is this legal?? by Creedo+Kid · · Score: 0

      Ahhh yes..the Jimmy Swaggart defense!!!

      --
      Business is Business and Business must grow, Regardless of crummies in tummies you know... -Onceler
    4. Re:Is this legal?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess - you're not a lawyer, right?

    5. Re:Is this legal?? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      In the words of Senator Palpitine, "I will make it legal".

      So long republic, hello Empire.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  10. Embrace and Extend? by Nept · · Score: 3, Funny

    Share and Enjoy!

    --
    "Teachers leave us kids alone ..." - Roger Waters, Pink Floyd
  11. RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugins! by BenJeremy · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I'd be appreciative if M$ would kill the invasive practices of Quicktime and RealPlayer from taking over the duties of simple wav playback from the perfectly capable default media player applet.

    Very annoying.

    All I want Quicktime and RealPlayer to do is play back ONLY their respective proprietary formats.... nothing else!!!

  12. As Nelson would Say....... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 3, Funny

    HA HA.

    anyway.......

    my god, is it just me or do MS execs seem to just not get prosecuted for purgery?

    --



    I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    1. Re:As Nelson would Say....... by calags · · Score: 3, Funny

      ...Purgery...??

      As far as I'm concerned MS execs can take as many laxatives as they want.

      --
      Never attribute to stupidity what can be construed as a monopoly preservation tactic.
    2. Re:As Nelson would Say....... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      my god, is it just me or do MS execs seem to just not get prosecuted for purgery?


      Purgery Noun, meaning ``the act of purging''.
      1) Administering emetics or enemas. Be aware that this is prohibited by law in most civilized jurisdictions, with the usual exceptions for large contributors.

      2) Removing unwanted elements, usually violently.

    3. Re:As Nelson would Say....... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you'd think they were the President or something.

    4. Re:As Nelson would Say....... by jvmatthe · · Score: 2
      my god, is it just me or do MS execs seem to just not get prosecuted for purgery?

      I do believe that's what the Enron execs are going to get nailed for. Wrong corporate behemoth, but I can understand getting them mixed up.
    5. Re:As Nelson would Say....... by spectecjr · · Score: 3, Informative

      my god, is it just me or do MS execs seem to just not get prosecuted for purgery?

      If MS execs were to be prosecuted for perjury, then the Real execs would have to be as well.

      Remember; Real Networks are the people who stood up in court at the start of the trial and claimed (under oath) that Microsoft had crippled their RealPlayer G2 installer.

      The real story?

      RealPlayer G2's Installer was badly written, and contained bugs.

      Microsoft demonstrated where the bugs in the installer were, and hey presto - it worked fine. Any good installer engineer would have been able to fix that - I guess the Real Networks ones are too busy embedding spyware to get the basics right.

      So... when are the Real Networks guys going to be prosecuted for perjury?

      Simon

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    6. Re:As Nelson would Say....... by medcalf · · Score: 2
      my god, is it just me or do MS execs seem to just not get prosecuted for purgery

      I hope they get prosecuted for perjury. I don't even want to think what the proof would be for 'purgery'!

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
  13. My Turkey-Baster Baby With Hemos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    I am a lesbian, deeply involved with a woman of lusty beauty such as most men will never know. Her hair is short and blonde. Her face is bold, with a nice sexy square jaw. She has small breasts, and muscular arms and legs, and even a slight hint of a six-pack. Just the mere thought of her body gets my juices flowing.

    She and I have been carpet munching for well over five years now. We love each other deeply, but it seems we've reached an impasse in our relationship. Every night, I lick and I lick and I lick. I finger, finger, finger. I also get the attention back with all sorts of creative ideas from my partner. Everything from dildos, to finger paints (when I am on my period), to meat tenderizer. However, no matter how much sexual gratification we exchange, it seems to be wearing down.

    One day, while surfing on Slashdot, I learned about an interesting technique involving a turkey baster. The basic idea is that you fill a turkey baster with semen, then insert that tool into the vagina, and squeeze out its contents. With this in mind, I contemplated the idea of getting pregnant with this method, and having a baby with my partner.

    I approached my beautiful mate and asked him if she wanted to have a baby. Her face lit up! She seemed to be excited; imbued with new life! However, the euphoria rapidly dissipated when she came to the realization that she did not possess the proper equipment to get me pregnant. I quickly responded that "indeed you do have the right equipment! It's in the kitchen, I'll show you." Promptly, we waltzed into the kitchen and out of a drawer, I produced the turkey baster that would bring a new life into world.

    The next job was to find a source of sperm. Sperm is not hard to come by. Men ejaculate tens of thousands of gallons of it every day. We figured it'd be easy to acquire a nice hot, steaming load of cum from virtually any man. One day, I stood outside the door of our home, close to the sidewalk, top-less, and perking my lively breasts at any man who passed. Most simply gawked, but some actually tried to touch, but quickly walked away before doing so. Pretty soon, a nice young man came along who took such an interest in my tits that he seemed to forget about all else! Before long, I had him in our house and I was giving him a blowjob before he even knew what happened. As soon as he shot a big load into my mouth, I grabbed the baster and spit the load into it. He looked puzzled, but quickly realized the bizarre situation he was in and left immediately. I paid him no mind.

    "Quickly," I shouted to my lover, "fuck me with this thing!" My lover grabbed the baster, thrust it into my eager beaver, and began to thrust like she was a man. I rubbed her clit and fingered her and she tweaked my boobs and fondled my own clit. When we were both about to climax, she squeezed the bulb of the turkey baster, squirting the whole load deep into my uterus. The warm, thick feeling of it drove me wild! When we were done, we rubbed oil all over each other's bodies, praying to the Lord Jesus that we would get pregnant.

    Over the next few weeks, signs of something unusual began to show. As it turns out, I was not only pregnant, I had herpes too. Fucking Hemos! My life was turned upside down, but that story is for another day...

    1. Re:My Turkey-Baster Baby With Hemos by StiffMittens · · Score: 1

      I had no idea the Microsoft anti-trust suit was this exciting. Are they broadcasting it on C-Span?

      --
      Some are given suckers and some get lollipops
  14. Re:Stupid Employees! Bad! Bad! by Jodaxia · · Score: 1

    no its not that their employees are stupid... its just that they're all laywers

    --
    crowbar??
  15. I can see how it could happen... by Eric+Damron · · Score: 5, Funny

    "It was clearly a mistake by the search team..."

    This is true. The code is very complex and mistakes can easily be made...

    if player != realplayer
    addList(player);

    It could happen...

    --
    The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
    1. Re:I can see how it could happen... by SeaCrazy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I know, my cat walked over the keyboard and typed in the EXACT same thing!

      It happens all the time.

      --
      .sig? Get your own damn .sig!
    2. Re:I can see how it could happen... by pi+radians · · Score: 1

      Haha, I don't know what is funnier, the parent's post or the fact that it was modded "interesting".

      Ahh, you moderators sure are funny.

      --

      sin(6cos(r)+5A)
    3. Re:I can see how it could happen... by |<amikaze · · Score: 1

      how is this interesting?!?! +4 Funny perhaps, but interesting?

  16. Re:Stupid Employees! Bad! Bad! by redfieldp · · Score: 1

    Somebody sad that they didn't get a job at MS??? I worked as an intern there for two summers, and let me assure you that most of the employees are NOT snooty, private school grads. A lot of them are just the opposite, in fact.

  17. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by awx · · Score: 0, Troll

    Then go back to Windows95 with IE4. Not a hard descision.

    --
    Feel that power? That's mah MOUSING FINGER
  18. Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by Confessed+Geek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've been reading this for months... and you know it still seems like of all the things you could do to punish microsoft or increase competitiveness, this has to be one of the most trivial.

    Ignore the propriatary file formats, ignore the "microsoft tax" contracts, ignore the insane EULA's, Ignore the nasty anti-OpenSource traps in their code releases, (your prof in CSI 101 saw our code so your open source project 5 years later violates our IP...) Ignore all the other dirty tricks they are playing and make them take out the ability to download files, or listen to music out of the box??? what the HECK! The whole organization must be stifling giggles and telling the lawyers to fight it out just so the court doesn't realize how easy athey are getting off.

    1. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by hattig · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Sadly, I must agree completely with the parent poster.

      Real Remedies for the Real Problem

      1) Microsoft must license products on a RAND scheme (reasonable and non-discriminatory)
      2) Microsoft must release full API documentation detailing all APIs that non-OS tasks can call.
      3) Microsoft must release full file format documentation
      4) Microsoft must NOT release any source code. That won't solve a thing - it will in fact make Microsoft a larger monopoly in the future as people cannot code competing operating systems due to having seen that code!
      5) No internal cross-subsidy, similar in function to the limitations the British monopoly BT has

      There is more that I cannot recall right now. A possible split in the company: OS vs. Apps & Services to put their application teams on a more level footing and to expose the true cost of the "free" software they give away.

    2. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by blakestah · · Score: 5, Informative

      ...make them take out the ability to download files, or listen to music out of the box???

      No, that is not what the proposal is about. The proposal identifies 9 key areas - browser, email client, and media player are three of them. For each key area, the Microsoft user tool must be removable and replaceable by an OEM without penalty. So, essentially, the OEM buys the stripped Windows and some subset of the 9 components from Microsoft, and gets the other components from other vendors. The OEM is free to configure Windows however it sees fit with respect to the 9 key areas.

      Microsoft is NOT forced to ship an operating system that cannot download files. This responsibility has merely shifted to the OEM to configure these 9 tools.

      Also, all the Microsoft add-ons must be priced at a pro-rated value relative to the stripped down Windows. That means the OEMs pay for Windows, and pay separately for each add-on based on value added.

      With this proposal, and full disclosure of relevant APIs for each of the 9 key areas, competition for userspace tools would be restored to these key markets. Microsoft's leveraging power would be stripped, and its software could only compete on its own merits.

    3. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by sheldon · · Score: 2

      Points 1 and 2 are part of the DOJ settlement. Most of the anti-MS points on slashbot seem to ignore that.

      For some reason point 3 is not part of any settlement, it's not part of the state's remedy proposal either. I cannot figure this out, but the states would rather force Microsoft to release the source to Office than just have them document a bloody file format, yet the file format would be far more useful to existing applications. Releasing source would only further entrench an Office monopoly.

      My theory is that since the MS competitors wrote the state's proposal that they were looking for a way to get a leg up without having to do much work. Getting the source makes their job easy, writing import/export support for a file format spec is hard work.

      As far as point #5. I would have requested a Chinese Wall between OS and Apps&Services group, similar to what now exists within Financial companies between Venture Capital and Investment groups. i.e. the OS team cannot tell the Apps team anything that isn't already available off the public MSDN website. The Apps team has to submit requests in the same manner as any other group would.

    4. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by JPriest · · Score: 1

      Well stated indeed.

      --
      Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    5. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      Nope, they must release source code. And the Product must be licensed under some OSL once official support is dropped.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    6. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by vondo · · Score: 2

      Because MS isn't on trial for being a "bad company." They are on trial for excluding Netscape from the browser market. The states are trying to show that MS did to Netscape they are now trying to do to other companies.

      Of your very valid complaints, only proprietary file formats bears directly on MS's wish to exclude other competitors. Correct me if I'm wrong, but even in the agreement with the DOJ, there is some provision for releasing these formats to other companies (but not to OSS makers).

    7. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by MSG · · Score: 2

      2) Microsoft must release full API documentation detailing all APIs that non-OS tasks can call.

      I wouldn't stop there. Some of the best products are OS add-ins. New filesystems, security products, even drivers depend on the OS API. Why would you want to leave it out?

    8. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by nehril · · Score: 2

      I think point #1 (non-discriminatory licensing to resellers) is in the DOJ settlement but with a loophole: MS does not have to license new versions at the same time for everyone.

      Thus, if Dell does not agree to only preload Windows, then Dell may not get Windows XP SE (or whatever) for 6 months-1 year after HPQ gets it.

      these are the kinds of loopholes the states are fighting.

    9. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ummm, 2 and 3 were already required the LAST time we all went through this with MS... remember the Consent Decree?

      Hopefully any penalties/judgements will actually be enforced this time around...

      I know, let's force them to cover Bush's budget shortfalls instead of trying to pull $1+BILLION from student loan programs...

    10. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by sheldon · · Score: 2

      Could you point out which section this is in? I can't find it.

      http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/nov01/1 1- 06revised-annotated.asp

      licensing is covered under III.B

    11. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and then the tooth fairy should give everyone $1000 and santa clause should give everyone the pony they always wanted. Wake the fuck up you moron, no judge is ever going to demand that a company give away their product. They may demand that they stop producing it, or issue compulsury licenses. Of course the OSS community would love to see windows open sourced, then they wouldn't have to try as hard to rip off MS functionality (gee, KDE 3 sure looks a lot like XP, funny that. I am so glad there is so much creativity in the OSS scene).

    12. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is $1 billion really being cut from student loans or is the INCREASE just less than was hoped? That is a rhetorical question, as you don't know the answer. While we are at it, why don't you WORK your way through college? That way you don't have to worry about any student loans.

      Of course, student loan programs wouldn't require ANY funding if deadbeats like yourself just paid the loans back.

    13. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 3, Informative
      2) Microsoft must release full API documentation detailing all APIs that non-OS tasks can call.

      I wish. I seem to recall seeing a former MS employee saying though that often there is no documentation even inside the company. Thing is you see, because of the internal structure of the company product teams often don't document their work so as to ensure their project isn't killed or they aren't split up. By keeping the docs inside their heads, they help increase their job security.

      This leads to the "secret" APIs in Windows/Office/whatever that Microsofts enemies like to jump on - it's not really an evil conspiracy (though MS do enough evil stuff as it is), it's more an indictment of their internal corporate organisation skills.

    14. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would add another: all computer sellers must include the bundled price of ANY OS in the price list of a computer for sale.

      This would give people pause before committing to a computer purchase without any of the consideration of what they're getting.

    15. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by MisterBlister · · Score: 1

      Some of your suggestions make sense, but I've never understood the people crying about full API documentation. From a developer stand-point, Win32 is the most well documented API ever in the history of the world. Have you ever looked at MSDN? If someone could give me one example of a real omission in the Win32 API documentation within the last 5 years that seems to be related to suppressing competitiveness, I'd love to see it.

    16. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by beme · · Score: 1

      Hanlon's Razor!

      --

      -beme
      1971
    17. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by shren · · Score: 2

      2) Microsoft must release full API documentation detailing all APIs that non-OS tasks can call.

      Heh. Big fat hole here. What defines an "API that non-OS tasks can call"? It's not you. It's not me. They're all technically callable - even if it's just a chunk of assembly code buried in a disused directory in a file called "Beware of the Lepord.dll", I can parse it or bring it into memory and far jump to it. So the only thing that decides what is and is not callable is ... you guessed it ... Microsoft. I'd have a feeling that we'd have a technical difference of opinion as to what is and is not callable, which means back to court!

      --
      Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
    18. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      because of the internal structure of the company product teams often don't document their work so as to ensure their project isn't killed or they aren't split up. By keeping the docs inside their heads, they help increase their job security.

      How do you know that?
    19. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by Darby · · Score: 1

      gee, KDE 3 sure looks a lot like XP, funny that. I am so glad there is so much creativity in the OSS scene

      Actually, KDE3 looks exactly like KDE2 which looks just like Win95 which looks just like every version of MacOS prior to the latest.
      There is little creativity in any UI stuff in the computer field sadly.

    20. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by Methuseus · · Score: 1

      How about an API to create another window manager? or use another file browser by default? Those are both things that Linux people bitch about in KDE and Gnome from time to time.

      --
      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
    21. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, whatever dude. Nothing gets done at MS without it being approved. Do you think Office is developed ad-hoc by a bunch of XP teams? Windows? Without design documents? And full spec? Without testing and peer review? You're not talking a 2 man operation here, and no one's sneaking entire APIs into Windows without proper documentation and approval.

    22. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...all APIs that non-OS tasks can call.

      Since everything except Office ships with the OS, and Office seems to replace half or more of the system libraries anyway, this could be an extremely small set of APIs.
    23. Re:Why this fixation on Modular Windows? by norwoodites · · Score: 1

      I would also open up the API that INTERX uses, and win32.dll uses.

  19. Wishful Thinking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny


    I wish a beautiful memeber of the opposite sex would give me an embrace and extend campaign.

    1. Re:Wishful Thinking by OpenSourcerer · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, the third E is extinguish. And ofcourse the "licensing fees" will be astronomical. After using the software, your hardware will be left vulnerable to viruses. Ofcourse, the "Trojan" she installs may be too sticky to remove.
      Just not worth it!

  20. Re:what's the big deal by sheean.nl · · Score: 1

    anybody saying such an evil thing should be pissed on

    --

    If at first you don't succeed, then sky diving definitely isn't for you.
  21. How can 'open' win against this? by km790816 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When Microsoft has billions going into research and a dominant desktop position, how can one expect an open AV standard to become prevelent, especailly when one considers the effort that goes into creating good codecs.

    Don't get me wrong. If I had to pick between Real, QT, and Windows Media, I'd take Windows Media. QT asks me every damn time I look at something if I want to buy it. Real runs hidden applications when Windows loads and only recently stopped its practice of asking me if I want to upgrade.

    Is the problem with universities? Are any researcher doing work on codecs that could end up in the open forum? Does Ogg Vorbis do everything that we need?

    1. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      well, I will take an MP3 and iTunes...I realy don't watch that much streaming video like it matters though, Quick Time comes with my Mac :-)

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    2. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by inkswamp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't get me wrong. If I had to pick between Real, QT, and Windows Media, I'd take Windows Media.

      Why? If you object to MS, why give in to their products so easily?

      QT asks me every damn time I look at something if I want to buy it. Real runs hidden applications when Windows loads and only recently stopped its practice of asking me if I want to upgrade.

      That's the price you pay if you want to steer clear of MS (at least for now.) As long as none of these things are doing harmful activities on your machine, I can't see what the big deal is. Yeah, they nag you. So does your mother. ;^P

      It any case, QT is what, $30? That's not bad especially when you look at all the extras you get when you pay. Oh, but the incessant cries of outrage follow those kinds of statements.

      BUT I WANT IT FREEEEEEEEEE AND IT HAS TO BE CONVEEEEENIENT AND MICROSOFT IS FREEEEEEEEEE AND CONVEEEEENIENT!!!!

      MS is like the local drug dealer... gives you the good stuff quick, but just enough to get your addicted. Eventually you'll be paying the big bucks for it and you'll notice the damage only when it's too late. So, pay the piddly-ass $30 of whatever for another media player and get over it. You'll be paying eventually... one way or the other. You may as well ensure that your cash goes to support someone/something who is tolerable.

      Besides that, there are known tricks for getting around some of those problems, not all of them illegal either.

      --Rick

      --
      --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
    3. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by Lxy · · Score: 1

      What's worng with m3u? I use Quicktime's server on linux to stream m3u all the time. It's lightweight and fast, and you can use ANY client (Windows Media Player, Winamp, Realplayer, Musicmatch, itunes, XMMS, the list goes on...) to listen to the stream! Game over. There is a standard, it's called m3u.

      --

      There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
      :wq
    4. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 2

      Ah, but Windows Media already got you to pay in SOME way, and WM doesn't have to bother running hidden programs - it's got the whole OS running underneath it. And while WMP isn't always asking you to upgrade, you pretty much have to anyway, so you can play all the new content of the day.

      Me, I boot into Linux to watch most non-streaming media. I actually have better luck with decoding most things.

    5. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MPEG (MPEG 1/2/3/4) for video and MP3 for audio. all open standards.

    6. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by Nurf · · Score: 3, Informative

      Is the problem with universities? Are any researcher doing work on codecs that could end up in the open forum?

      I agree with you, and have decided to do something about it. OIC is a video codec I am writing. I hope it will be ready for prime time in a matter of months. No promises though. :-)

      Check my sig for a link if you are interested.

      --
      ---
    7. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't get me wrong. If I had to pick between Real, QT, and Windows Media, I'd take Windows Media. QT asks me every damn time I look at something if I want to buy it. Real runs hidden applications when Windows loads and only recently stopped its practice of asking me if I want to upgrade.

      This is a good point. If Microsoft made a modular Windows, every 3rd party module added would be just as annoying as Real and QT are. Imagine being asked to buy something everytime you clicked on your new RealMediaPoweredStartButton.

    8. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by JZ_Tonka · · Score: 1
      "BUT I WANT IT FREEEEEEEEEE AND IT HAS TO BE CONVEEEEENIENT AND MICROSOFT IS FREEEEEEEEEE AND CONVEEEEENIENT!!!!"

      Pardon me, I'll probably be modded down, but this sounds exactly like the same argument for open source software. Many people here don't want to fund what they perceive to be an evil empire (capitalism) and look for a free alternative, such as Linux and FREE-BSD.

      Don't fault people for wanting to use something that's free and convenient, especially when you apparently want the same thing.

    9. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by scott1853 · · Score: 2

      WMP does ask you to do a free upgrade. That's how they sneak all the digital rights management crap in there. The first time WMP asked me to upgrade, I looked at the list of features FIRST. DRM was the first one and I've been clicking "Upgrade Later" ever since.

    10. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by Score+Whore · · Score: 1

      The problem I have is that it doesn't use my OS' standard APIs to interface with the rest of the system. It has nothing to do with being free or not.

    11. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by Riskable · · Score: 2

      Real runs hidden applications when Windows loads and only recently stopped its practice of asking me if I want to upgrade.

      Actually, Windows Media Player spies on you too. It's just hidden within the operating system and there's no way to turn it off. This is an abuse of monopoly power because if Real had the same access M$ does, they'd have just as good spyware built-in.

      Here's an article with the details.

      --
      -Riskable
      "Those who choose proprietary software will pay for their decision!"
    12. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by kdhas9 · · Score: 1
      If you're actually willing to buy the 3rd party software (instead of the free versions), and assuming it was from a reputable vendor, you probably wouldn't be asked to buy something everytime you used it

      Asked to upgrade . . . that would remain to be seen.

    13. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by nanoakron · · Score: 1

      *MS is like the local drug dealer... gives you the good stuff quick, but just enough to get your addicted. Eventually you'll be paying the big bucks for it and you'll notice the damage only when it's too late.*

      Sorry, but that piece of War-on-Drugs propaganda has been disproven many times over. Basically, why would a dealer, with no guarantee of continued custom, give away a free sample of a very expensive substance?

      Don't use examples unless they're valid.

      -Nano.

    14. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by Methuseus · · Score: 1

      Hey, I wonder how much the other updates are being downloaded compared to the DRM update. I know that I and most of my friends aren't downloading that one.

      --
      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
    15. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by Tony-A · · Score: 2

      why would a dealer, with no guarantee of continued custom, give away a free sample of a very expensive substance?
      guarantee. Doesn't need a guarantee, just a reasonable probability.
      very expensive substance. Retail is expensive, not wholesale.

    16. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Real runs hidden applications when Windows loads >and only recently stopped its practice of asking >me if I want to upgrade

      ???? You've been sniffing glue or what?
      I'm using Real Audio 8 right now to listen
      to the hockey game and haven't seen a single
      commercial yet. I hear commercial over the
      radio but they ain't originating from Real.

      Try the command line trplayer, it's better
      yet than the gui version. If you have problem
      with Real it's either that you're running
      winblows or that you have a garbage ISP.

      In either case you ought to get rid of that
      shit.

    17. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by zachdms · · Score: 1

      It builds a media cache, it don't spy. Read the source article that started the mess rather than the distorted version written up there.

    18. Re:How can 'open' win against this? by norwoodites · · Score: 1

      When you run an office program on Mac OS X there is stupid background app that runs and takes up memory and cpu time, I say it is useless, why don't they just use a shared library and put the code in each app. I think it used for OLE but there mach messages for that.

      Also Office should start using mach messages for OLE instead of just shared memory because mach messages can go between computers, not just between apps.

  22. Slightly Misleading by datastew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The quote in the story is a little misleading. Here is the full quote:

    Another Microsoft executive, Dave Foster, cut the discussion short: "No more replies," he wrote. "We need to keep all of this off the airwaves."

    The Microsoft executive is stating that the discussion of what they are doing and why needs to be kept off the email "airwaves." In my mind, this is actually more damning, because it intimates that he knows what they are doing could get them in trouble.

    1. Re:Slightly Misleading by kirbyt · · Score: 1

      Another Microsoft executive, Dave Foster, cut the discussion short: "No more replies," he wrote. "We need to keep all of this off the airwaves."

      Reminds me of that scene in Casino where the mobsters did deals in a parking lot so they couldn't be bugged and with hands over their mouths so the feds wouldn't be able to read their lips.

    2. Re:Slightly Misleading by 5KVGhost · · Score: 2
      In my mind, this is actually more damning, because it intimates that he knows what they are doing could get them in trouble.


      Taken out of context it's hard to say what he meant. Perhaps he's just sensible enough to realize that the conversation could easily be misrepresented by other parties.

      Haven't you ever decided that it might be preferable to continue a sensitive discussion offline, rather than in email?
    3. Re:Slightly Misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this a sensitive conversation again?

    4. Re:Slightly Misleading by error0x100 · · Score: 1

      You know, for all the many many times Microsoft has been caught doing this sort of thing, found guilty in court, etc, I find it interesting that so many people still jump to their defence.

      If ever any company has ever showed a "pattern of behaviour", its Microsoft.

      There comes a time when you simply *have* to stop giving them the benefit of the doubt.

      That time passed long ago already.

  23. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Sorry about the AC post, but I don't have my password here to login.

    I agree that RealPlayer is a nasty program that really messes up a lot of things in your computer, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that QuickTime is just as bad as RealPlayer. During the install of QuickTime, a dialog is displayed with checkboxes of the file formats to associate with QuickTime. If you don't want it associated, its easy enough to uncheck the box, and your done.

  24. Let's not forget ... by TheViffer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Real Audio + Quicktime + Windows Media Player + Win amp all installed on the same machine is complete cluster f*** and a battle ground. I am sure there are a few more that I am forgetting, but this is a good start.

    If a computer had emotions and I installed all these applications at the same time, it would be begging me to format its hard drive to stop the suffering.

    --
    -- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
    1. Re:Let's not forget ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously you know nothing, so shut up. Just because MS crap goes psycotic with little or no provocation, does not mean that real OS do. I have had xine, mtv, realplayer, and xanim all going at the same time on my PPro running a 2.4.18 kernel w/hacked vm, while also running netleak AND mozilla ( though moz eventualy took a dump).

    2. Re:Let's not forget ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a computer had emotions and I installed all these applications at the same time, it would be begging me to format its hard drive to stop the suffering.

      Computers DO have emotions, didn't you know? That's why Windows blue-screens all the time. It's not the OS, it's the computer fscking with the memory to rearrange the bits to read "HELP ME." Unlike with people, a computer's emotional problems are easy to cure. :)

    3. Re:Let's not forget ... by ari{Dal} · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Amen to that.

      That's one 'feature' that i'd love to see beat into the ground. Just about every product that has competitors (as most do) include those stupid @*()#&@( popups to reassociate them with format x. If i wanted program y associated with format x, i woulda left it checked when i installed the bloody thing.

      At least most have the option to never show this again... realplayer is just a complete bitch for this, which is why i don't use it. ever. i'm also quickly getting fed up with quicktime's 'UPGRADE TO QUICKTIME PRO', adobe's "THERES MORE TO ACROBAT THAN JUST READER!", and winamp's "VERSION XXX IS NOW OUT! DOWNLOAD?".

      but what pisses me off the most is no matter how often you uncheck or say no to all these things, they somehow get mysteriously 'reset' every few weeks.

      And is it just me, or are those 'never show this message again' buttons getting fewer and fewer? nowadays they're buried somewhere in the nether regions of the user preferences section, with ever more obscure wording.

      --
      Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - H. G. Wells
    4. Re:Let's not forget ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Funny. I have Real Audio, Quicktime, WMP, and winamp all installed on the same machine. No problems at all.

      Of course, I pay attention when doing software installs and make sure it's not going to take control of media types that it shouldn't.

      My Realaudio plays nothing but realaudio. Quicktime plays..well, quicktime. Winamp for mp3's and wav's. I actually use Gdivx for most other video, but fire up WMP occasionaly.

      No problems. Nothing battling over file types..no sweat.

      I think people are just whining too much.

      If joe blow user uses WMP because it's there by default and plays everything itself, fine.

      If he comes across something he wants to view/listen in realaudio, he's going to click the little button that says "download real audio".

      If he blows through the install without thinking about what he's clicking, and realaudio starts playing everything (not to mention sending him all kinds of crappy email), sucks to be him.

      I betcha he'll look more closely at those installation options next time.

    5. Re:Let's not forget ... by roseanne · · Score: 1
      At least most have the option to never show this again... realplayer is just a complete bitch for this, which is why i don't use it. ever. i'm also quickly getting fed up with quicktime's 'UPGRADE TO QUICKTIME PRO', adobe's "THERES MORE TO ACROBAT THAN JUST READER!", and winamp's "VERSION XXX IS NOW OUT! DOWNLOAD?".
      While I agree with Quicktime and Real (pain, both of those!) Winamp has a checkbox in the Preferences dialog (node: Setup) for `Check for new versions of Winamp at startup'. And also for `Allow Winamp to report basic, anonymous program usage information'. It is never reset when one upgrades. The crowd at Nullsoft are reasonably decent, considering they give away a tightly written (680k?) media player for free. Their setup makes obligatory AOL icon on the desktop optional too -- for those upgrading.
    6. Re:Let's not forget ... by sharkey · · Score: 2

      Winamp+Kazaa. Hangs the Win95 shell if you try to use Winamp while Kazaa is running.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    7. Re:Let's not forget ... by shades66 · · Score: 1

      The problem is that these emotions come out in a soothing blue colour. MS just filled in all the gaps with the same blue colour and put some random message/numbers there to stop you seeing that your computer really wants you to use fdisk to put it out of its misery. :)

      --
      ---- There are 10 types of people in the world. Those that understand binary and those that don't
    8. Re:Let's not forget ... by 5KVGhost · · Score: 2

      Yeah, same here. Quicktime, RealPlayer, and WMP all installed with no conflicts whatsoever, along with a couple other misc audio and video applications. Any of those apps will attempt to comandeer various filetypes during their default installs if you let them. Blindly clicking "OK" is never a good idea.

    9. Re:Let's not forget ... by espilce · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Remember this is Joe Blow User you're talking about. Of course he's not going to look more closely at the installation options next time, he will just bitch at his computer-literate friend that his "music stuff" isn't working, (acting as if it's inherently his friend's fault since, if he knows all about computers, how could he let this atrocity happen?) until said friend fixes it for him, and Joe Blow will promptly forget what was done and how (if he even payed attention in the first place) so that he can repeat the mistake verbatim the next time he installs a program. And the poor computer literate friend finds himself increasingly distancing himself from his Joe Blow User friends in an attempt to escape the strange phenomenon that whenever a semi-intelligent mammal gets near a computer he/she becomes a complete moron capable of no logical reasoning whatsoever.

      sigh...

      --
      :q!
    10. Re:Let's not forget ... by macinslak · · Score: 2

      They paid people to make that stuff, they want you to pay them to use it (or at least look at ads in winamp's case).

      The only reason Microsoft makes it a point to not annoy you is because they have lots of money to lose and are trying to create a monopoly with all of their respective alternatives. When all the competition is dead, they'll just start charging for all of it and likely make you lease it instead of buy as well.

      So stop yer bitchin.

    11. Re:Let's not forget ... by edbarrett · · Score: 1
      And also for `Allow Winamp to report basic, anonymous program usage information'.
      And 'No connection to the Internet'.
    12. Re:Let's not forget ... by Suppafly · · Score: 2

      Not to mention that quicktime messes up IE's ability to render png files correctly and it asks you to upgrade to the pay version every single time you run it.. I just install quicktime and tell mediaplayer to use the quicktime codecs to pay .mov files..

    13. Re:Let's not forget ... by Suppafly · · Score: 2

      realplayer is just a complete bitch for this, which is why i don't use it. ever. i'm also quickly getting fed up with quicktime's 'UPGRADE TO QUICKTIME PRO', adobe's "THERES MORE TO ACROBAT THAN JUST READER!", and winamp's "VERSION XXX IS NOW OUT! DOWNLOAD?".


      Except winamp makes it batantly obvious how to permanently turn off update checking while the others don't actually let you permanantly turn that "feature" off and don't even let you choose to delay it during the install process.

    14. Re:Let's not forget ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Real Audio + Quicktime + Windows Media Player + Win amp all installed on the same machine is complete cluster f***

      That's odd, I have all those things (except Win amp) installed on the same machine and they work just fine - oh wait, I'm not using any type of Windows OS! Maybe that's where the problem lies....

    15. Re:Let's not forget ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hint about Quicktime (works on Mac OS and Windows): Set the date to something like May 7th, 2010. Open up Quicktime Player and get the standard "Upgrade to QT Pro now" dialog. Close Quicktime Player, set the date back, and you won't see the message again until either 2010 or you upgrade, whichever comes first.

    16. Re:Let's not forget ... by Alex+Thorpe · · Score: 1

      Better yet, do like I did and register the sucker. Pay the one time fee, and make use of the extra features, like full screen display and saving to disk the movies in your browser. You shouldn't have to register ever again.(though I make no promises)

      --
      "Common Sense Ain't" -Unknown
    17. Re:Let's not forget ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, considering that I don't really need any of the pro features (I don't edit movies, full screen pixellation isn't very enticing to me, and right-clicking the link to save works 99% of the time) and if the pro version for Windows is even half as slow and unstable as the free version (works great on a Mac, but I don't have one anymore :( ), it's not worth $30 to me. I'm all for paying for good software, but in this case the non-free version isn't worth it for me.

    18. Re:Let's not forget ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just what non-Windows OS do you have Windows Media Player installed on?

    19. Re:Let's not forget ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screenshot! Screenshot!

    20. Re:Let's not forget ... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Win95? Win95? OH MY GOD.

      Someone needs to find you and promptly shove you firmly underneath a moving bus. Do you realize waht a security risk your "Win95" machine is? To say nothing of how horrid and unstable it is.

      Nobody, in a perfect world, should be using Win9x any longer. Most dfinately, nobody on slashdot, even in this unperfect world, should be using them. While I'm not saying people should use Win2k or XP, necessarily (or even linux), Win9x is straight out.

      I can't believe some people!

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    21. Re:Let's not forget ... by norwoodites · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has Windows Media Player out for the Mac, it should have been just called NetPlay and not changed its name

  25. My Experience with it by billatq · · Score: 1

    This was one of the things that used to piss me off about windows. You'd tell it "do not open things up in the browser" and it would happily ask you "do you want to open things up in ie". It made me want to break the damn thing. As for realplayer, I refuse to use realplayer one, and don't like the registration crap either. You can prevent having to type that in by searching for the registry key ERegistered and seting it to a nonzero value in versions of realplayer before the new one.

    1. Re:My Experience with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      go to 88lite.net, get the freebie that takes IE offen your machine. Install Netscrape. RealPlayer works mucho better without IE, as does any version of WinBlowze.

    2. Re:My Experience with it by lordkuri · · Score: 0

      erm.... maybe this page?

    3. Re:My Experience with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, why didn't I just use your link? 98lite.com is a pr0n site. As they say over at Not Safe For Work.

  26. Two sides by KDENCE · · Score: 1, Troll

    There seems to be 2 sides to this arguement. One side hates MS and the other loves it, both sides of course are guilty of being wrong. We need a ruler to measure MS. In this instance they are doing something that is simple in their minds. They are trying to make the user XPerience an easyness in using their computer, "one stop shopping" of the 21st century. Is that wrong? Sure they muscled different companies out of business. Sure they are arrogant jerks who just want to make money with a good product. Welcome to America!

    Here is the another thing, so you want to use Netscape, Opera, or any other webbowser or mediaplayer, or unzipper, or pdf file opener go ahead install it and never, ever click on the IE icon or the Media Player icon, or any other, click on the other one that you lie silly! Really simple stuff man.

    We have people trying to make MS give them their barebones version of XP so that they can use it as they please. That is like going to McDonald's and just buying a big bucket of their secret sauce or like getting upset because your Ford Expedition didn't come in Neon green and asking them to sell you an Expedition without any paint on it. Gimme a break, sure they are a big company and "we" do not like that, but let's be fair even to them. Sure, not all of you feel this way, but if you do please think it over!

    If you want to mod down go ahead, I have a -3 karma so freedom of speech is no longer up to par with the rest of the world for me.

    "Entertain the Brutes"

    1. Re:Two sides by GMFTatsujin · · Score: 1
      There seems to be 2 sides to this arguement. One side hates MS and the other loves it, both sides of course are guilty of being wrong. We need a ruler to measure MS.
      I am that ruler! I am King GMFTatsujin! And using the wisdom of my biblical predeccesor, I say cut the fucker in half.

      I have spoken.
      King GMFTatsujin
    2. Re:Two sides by FooBarWidget · · Score: 1

      Oh, it would make a difference if McDonald's owns 95% of all regular/fastfood restaurants and supermarkets in the world.
      Only give people the choice to use McDonald's sauce, and let the supermarkets sell McDonald's sauce only, and there: a Microsoft-like situation.

    3. Re:Two sides by akc · · Score: 1

      There seems to be 2 sides to this arguement. One side hates MS and the other loves it, both sides of course are guilty of being wrong. We need a ruler to measure MS. In this instance they are doing something that is simple in their minds. They are trying to make the user XPerience an easyness in using their computer, "one stop shopping" of the 21st century. Is that wrong? Sure they muscled different companies out of business. Sure they are arrogant jerks who just want to make money with a good product. Welcome to America!


      Whilst that may be true, you forget one thing. This company has been convicted of being a monopoly. Using that monopoly to wipe out another competing business area and turn that into a monopoly is illegal. In the longer run, its also against the interests of the consumer because without competition there is not incentive for innovation.

    4. Re:Two sides by mrycar · · Score: 1

      Yes there are two sides. Yes both are wrong and each is a little right. Yes standards are SOMETHING WE NEED to solve these problems. How are these standards going to develop? Open Source? A third party? The problem with MS and their monopoly is that it is frighteningly impossible to start something new in the industry. Suppose a group of us form a company that makes X a super media player for an Operating system. What are our options to make X work? Open Source, niche player, Join the MS crew? If we choose Open Source, we need to have a business model that keeps us fed while we battle the borg of MS. If we choose niche Player, we need to do really well and hope to alley ourselves before we are battling MS. Or we just cash out and sell to MS. No matter how bad or good Realplayer, Quicktime, etc are, the majority of the software users will choose the free software from MS. The easy software to install, the default heir to the throne. This model will make it extremely difficult for the competitors to succeed, even if their products were good. That is the battle we need to MS to task for. Though if we examine history Monoliths like Ms eventually will start failing on their own. This will probably be our only recourse.

      --
      Gator/Claria is Spyware.
    5. Re:Two sides by StiffMittens · · Score: 1

      They are trying to make the user XPerience an easyness in using their computer, "one stop shopping" of the 21st century. Is that wrong? Sure they muscled different companies out of business. Sure they are arrogant jerks who just want to make money with a good product. Welcome to America!

      Well, who says America is a good thing? Growth without limit is cancer. Microsoft is the cancer of America. America is the cancer of civilization. Civilization is the cancer of Earth. Time for a global radiation treatment, I say.

      --
      Some are given suckers and some get lollipops
    6. Re:Two sides by EzInKy · · Score: 1

      Interesting that you picked Ford as an example. At one time the saying was "you can get a Model T in any color, as long as it's black".

      Simply not clicking on an icon is no answer either.

      You wouldn't take a Big Mac to Burger King and plop Whopper sauce on top of your sandwich, would you?

      Neither would you have people simply take a roller and paint the Expedition neon green over the original finish.

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    7. Re:Two sides by KDENCE · · Score: 0

      I SAY AMERICA IS A GOOD THING! Where are you? If you are in another country then you must have not lived in America to know better. If you are here in America then you must have not lived elsewhere to appreciate this country. I have done both and know for a fact that America is a great country, not perfect, but great none the less.

      Like they say in America "wake up and smell the coffee."

      "Entertain the Brutes"

    8. Re:Two sides by ArticulateArne · · Score: 1

      I would definitely agree that there are two sides, and Real has engaged in its own deceptive/evil/annoying practices. Frankly, I dread installing RealPlayer (or whatever they call it now) because of the junk that it will install and that stupid program it loads on startup all the time. I go through and manually delete its file-monitoring thing so it doesn't keep trying to update itself, etc. I actually do prefer the MS media player for some things, though it's annoying for others.

      I think a lot of people are missing the point, which isn't so much that IE is integrated, but that MS has control of what companies can put on desktops, and also the onerous OEM agreements, etc. Frankly, an integrated browser is nice in some situations, and if MS wants to integrate HTML into the OS, more power to them. Making it mandatory that IE be placed prominently, however, is going too far.

      Just my $.02

      PS - Somebody should give the parent a few karma points so he can rejoin us in the real world.

    9. Re:Two sides by StiffMittens · · Score: 1

      The American Dream

      I dreamt I was the center of the universe
      And that the fate of all dangled from my balls
      So I threatened everybody with a fabricated enemy
      And the toiling of the masses fattened up my purse
      Because:
      I am an American - I am
      I am an American - I am
      I am an American - I am
      I am an American
      And I, an American, I live in a dream.

      I dreamt I was the important to the cosmic plan
      And God gave me permission to further my ambition
      So I stepped on everybody that I could get a boot on
      But somehow I managed to keep them eating from my hands
      Because:
      I am an American - I am
      I am an American - I am
      I am an American - I am
      I am an American
      And I, an American, I live in a dream.

      But when the rooster crows
      It'll all come to a close
      At the rising sun I'll be undone
      And left to fend for myself
      Oh, it's going to sting when the morning dove sings
      'Cause when the dream is over, the nightmare begins
      Because:
      I am an American - I am
      I am an American - I am
      I am an American - I am
      I am an American
      And I, an American, I live in a dream.

      --
      Some are given suckers and some get lollipops
    10. Re:Two sides by KDENCE · · Score: 0

      I am glad that you partially agree with me, however it is their product and like the "Soup Nazi" they have the right to refuse service unless you follow the buying rules. You know I have noted that they have muscled their way to the top, but hasn't Walmart? This is America and that is how we play business here. You know if I were to invent a kick-butt (no pun intended) toilet seat and chose to make some companies sell my toilet seat exclusively i don't see the problem, we get that in our markets all of the time. But since it is MS and they are the "big dogs" then we must hate them.

      I wonder how many people have converted once they get employed by them.

      Remember all of our comments are like peeing to the wind, sure it gets it out of the system, but were it goes is not really practical.

      "Greed is Good." Micahel Douglass, Wall Street

  27. Stop whining about MS.... by southpolesammy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...and go use something else. This is the kind of thing that drives me a bit insane, since this fuels the fire of people thinking that using Microsoft products is the only way of using a computer. "I can't use this because Microsoft won't let me....wahhhhh...." There are other products out there. Don't like Internet Explorer? Go use Opera. Don't like MS Office, go use OpenOffice. Don't like Windows? Go use Linux or Mac OSX, or FreeBSD, or etc...

    If enough people start using other products, perhaps Microsoft will take notice and start building things that people actually want. It's called market tendencies folks...not exactly rocket science.

    --
    Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    1. Re:Stop whining about MS.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yea, and what happens when, say, your Gov. requires you use MS to do business with them "just like everybody else?" Go ahead, tell me "If I'd just use Linux, those pesky market forces would solve the problem".

      No, more likely, I'd end up broke and in jail for not paying my taxes or such.

      Anti-trust is about, like it or not, the economic *fact*, that market forces cannot resolve certain issues, or sustain continued advancement in the art, once the network effect of diminished competition occurs.

      Anyway, market forces can't save Real, and didn't save Netscape. These options died not because MS had a "better" options in those markets, but because MS used it's *prior* gains to simply terminate these *emerging* options without recourse of the consumer.

      Insane, or not, I think you'll find your Macro Economics are a bit rusty.

    2. Re:Stop whining about MS.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is...the average Joe buys a computer from Dell, Gateway, HP, or Compaq. There is no way to get a computer from them without Windows, so even if they get it and then put Linux on it they still payed for Windows.

    3. Re:Stop whining about MS.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's a market force for you...

      In a world where monopolies are free to do as they please, I would never invest in any research or technology just to have it taken over.

      Just think. Those "market tendencies" you're so proud of would have resulted in a world where Browsers wouldn't exist. If Netscape knew MS would break the law, or were legally allowed to abuse their monopoly position, thay would have known better than to invest in anything that would just be taken away.

    4. Re:Stop whining about MS.... by southpolesammy · · Score: 1

      Not true. Walmart is now selling "Windows-less" PC's with a price-reduction for not having to pay the Windows-tax. There was a thread about this not too long ago here. It's up to the user to get an OS, install it and support it, but at least there's an option.

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    5. Re:Stop whining about MS.... by t · · Score: 2
      They have yet to succeed on a long term basis. If MS the monopoly continues unabated, I'd bet money that this "Windows-less" option will suddenly cease one day.

      To restate the same damn thing for you knuckleheads, you can't open a business that sells linux boxes (or OS-less boxes) and claim that MS does not have a monopoly because of the existence of your company. (VA Linux anyone?)

      t.

    6. Re:Stop whining about MS.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      most home users get their PC's with windows preinstalled, of course, and as long as they click there and that thingy opens over here, they don't care otherwise...You'll never, ever, convince these people to switch to linux, etc., if they don't like something, never EVER. If you can get them a preloaded machine with an alternative OS, well then you might have something...

      As for pc's in the office, most shops are locked into ridiculous micro$oft licences, etc., and most sys admins at places like these don't know their way around a bash prompt - lots also shelled out $10k for MCSE training, which got them that high paying job...you are are also not likely to switch these boys over either...

      Last place I worked got a "deal" on huge discounts for the next round of office apps. in their agreement...they've already "prepaid" in part for this, or so they think, and nothing is going to switch them to OpenOffice or otherwise for the forseable future!

      The techs, some of which have 10+ years experience, have nill with linux...a smattering of AS400, a touch of Mac and Novel, sure, but nada for linux...convince a place like that to switch!

    7. Re:Stop whining about MS.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not true "now," but where else do you see this happen? After 10+ years of abusing their monopoly, somehow it all doesn't apply now?

  28. When I went to college ... by TheViffer · · Score: 2

    the computer room had a nice big red button. It was the power shutdown for the entire data center.

    It had a nice sign over it.

    "Do not accidentally, on purpose, press this button."

    I believe the same concept applies here.

    --
    -- Knowing too much can get you killed, but knowing who knows too much can make you rich.
  29. More power to MS!! by Mulletproof · · Score: 2, Funny

    As a friend of mine so eloquently put, "Blocking Real Audio is a bad thing?"

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
  30. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by BenJeremy · · Score: 1

    It's been a while since I've installed it as a plugin, but I don't recall being given the choice on WAV files the last time I installed it - I seem to recall only being allowed to deselect image formats, again, Quicktime had NO BUSINESS handling formats the native software could already handle; why should Quicktime need to handle my JPEGs and BITMAPs?

    No applet or plugin should associate itself with a media type without some means to undo that specific association. Another annoying one was Beatnik, IIRC. That one was shareware that died after 30 days and then prevented you from listening to WAV files until you uninstalled it.

  31. Re:Stupid Employees! Bad! Bad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Microsoft hires anybody and everybody with a pulse. You'd have to be one dumbass to get MS to reject you.

  32. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amen.

  33. This is a bigger issue than you think by dingo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If ie is monitorring what you do on something as trivial as a type of music format then that means that it "is" monitoring you. Now they have more of a liability in general. I know it is far fetched but ms only defence when their products are being used for kiddie porn or to cicumvent national security is that they dont monitor what goes thru ie. Now they cant use this defence because they "are" monitoring ie they have already removed thier own "moral" objections to monitoring their customers.

    --
    The Borg assimilated my race & all I got was this lousy T-shirt
  34. It WAS a mistake.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    And I imagine that the dialogue went something like this:

    Judge: "What about searches?"

    MS: "Oh, that was a mistake"

    Judge: "and the bit about IE ignoring preferences?"

    MS: "That was a mistake too."

    Judge: "Is there anything that you did that WASN'T a mistake?"

    MS: "No, your honor."

    Judge: "Can you explain these mistakes to me?"

    MS: "Umm, we got caught?"

    1. Re:It WAS a mistake.. by tdemark · · Score: 1

      Homer: "Lisa, no where did I claim it is an angel."
      Lisa: "What about the sign?"

      [Lisa points to a sign bearing the word "ANGEL" and an arrow pointing in the direction of the angel]

      Homer: "That's a typo."

  35. Re:Stop whining about MS.... QWZX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    The subject is beginning to show independent thought. This cannot be allowed. He must be made to follow the Slashdot edict that people whine about Microsoft and how powerless they are. Take him away and begin the reprogramming.

  36. lather...rinse.. repeat... by ari{Dal} · · Score: 4, Insightful

    *shock* *gasp* *amazement* MS used underhanded tactics that were exposed in the trial and/or corporate emails. I feel like we're caught in a timewarp.

    I wish once and for all that the general public and the US Court would realise that this is just another day at MS, and that we likely won't see the end of this type of MS BS til they actually implement either a breakup, or some other REAL sanctions.

    If they won't play nicely with the other children, take away their toys. That's what parents do with spoiled children (at least they did when i was growing up).

    --
    Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - H. G. Wells
  37. I'd give my left arm by Markvs · · Score: 1

    To know how many of these "internal Microsoft e-mails" are frauds. I mean, I see an *awful* lot of them, and I'm not really looking for them.

    --
    46. The Hobo smiles, his eyes glaze over, and he burps. "Beware the man who has lived longer than the Wasteland."
    1. Re:I'd give my left arm by stoolpigeon · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      34.5 are fraudulent.

      (The half is one that was authentic but slightly modified)

      Please pack the arm in dry ice and send by the fastest method of shipping available to:

      3443 N. Central Ave.
      Suite 1100
      Phoenix, AZ 85012

      thanks.

      .

      --
      It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  38. RealOne Player is actually worse, IMO. by Jayde+Stargunner · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Really, the first time IE 6.0 pops up its media window, it gives you a "Do you want to use the Media Bar to play all audio files?" prompt. I chose "No", and IE never bothered me with file associations again.

    On the other hand, I installed RealOne a few weeks back and desipte unckeck a huge list of files it wanted to take over, I still grabbed quite a few. I attempted to reassociate them with Media Player and other programs, and guess what happened...

    Next time I opened RealOne player, it popped up some "File Associations Agent" which said: "Another program or programs have attempted to associate RealOne Player-assoicated files with themselves. RealOne Player has re-associated all files."

    WTF???

    Nowhere did I choose to have these files associated with RealOne Player, nor did I choose any "maintain file associations" button. Not to mention, you can't even get rid of the resident aspects of RealOne Player. Just about every time I boot my computer (which, admittedly, is very rarely) I get some "RealOne Player Critical Notification" box that pops up. As far as I can tell, the best you can do is make it only show up "A few times a month"--there is no "GO AWAY YOU FSCKING ANNOYING POP-UP WINDOW!!!" option that I could find.

    So, yeah. As evil as MS may possibly be, I don't feel bad for RealPlayer on this one. =P

    -Jayde

    --
    What's a sig?
    1. Re:RealOne Player is actually worse, IMO. by indiigo · · Score: 1

      Real also doesn't work on Windows with user permissions

      IE will prompt you again for playing in the browser unless you go into advanced options to specify not to.

      Real also runs various background tasks that eat up memory, spam you, and can bring a low-to medium end system to it's knees.

      Here at work we install real only for certain presentations, then uninstall them right away, and they are not allowed on work machines.

      --
      fslg503-985-8686503-985-8686503-985-8686503-985-86 8650 3-985-fdsg8686503-985-8686503-985-8686503-9
    2. Re:RealOne Player is actually worse, IMO. by Sawbones · · Score: 2

      Tell me about it. A useful link then (admitedly easily found via Google, but whatever): download older versions of Real Player (all the way back to v3, I run 8 but whatever works for you).

      http://proforma.real.com/real/player/blackjack.htm l

      --

      Ad in classifieds: Pandora's Box (no box) $5
    3. Re:RealOne Player is actually worse, IMO. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's hardly mature behavior for multi-billion $$ companies, now isn't it?

      Here's a fun one: install a few different commercial CD burning applications. What the windows fly when you insert a blank CDR!

    4. Re:RealOne Player is actually worse, IMO. by wortelslaai3434 · · Score: 1

      Realplayer suck!, but if this is the only stick to beat M$ with, then so be it. That doesn't mean that I'll use it when it's available, since they'd still have to trump vmpeg, my favorite .mpg player.

    5. Re:RealOne Player is actually worse, IMO. by Iffy+Bonzoolie · · Score: 1

      At one point, RealPlayer had some evil trickery in it's install. There was one step which was "Which spam do you want to sign up for?" and the interface was a scrolling list of checkboxes next to "newsletters" you wanted to subscribe to. You could only see 4 newsletters at a time, and all the newsletters were unchecked by default... or SO YOU THOUGHT... if you took the time to scroll down, EVERY spam that was below the scroll window was CHECKED by default, so if did not notice that it scrolled, or assumed they were decent people and wouldn't do such evil things, you were inadvertently opting-in for a barrage of spam!

      So I decided never to use them again, regardless of all the other annoyances that they fob off on potential customers.

      -If

      --
      Run a pencil-and-paper RPG campaign with your far-off friends: Gametable!
    6. Re:RealOne Player is actually worse, IMO. by mpe · · Score: 2

      At one point, RealPlayer had some evil trickery in it's install. There was one step which was "Which spam do you want to sign up for?" and the interface was a scrolling list of checkboxes next to "newsletters" you wanted to subscribe to.

      Be "support@real.com" got signed up to quite a few :)

  39. IE needs to learn to take "no" for an answer by generic-man · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've been using Internet Explorer 6 for over six months now, since I got a computer that was pre-loaded with Windows XP last year. Whenever I click on a link to an MP3, AVI, or other media file, I always get a dialog box saying "Would you like to play this in Internet Explorer?" I always check "Never ask me again," and click "No." However, for some reason, I keep getting asked this very same question every time!

    I haven't tried it, but IE must only stop asking if you finally say "Yes."

    --
    For more information, click here.
    1. Re:IE needs to learn to take "no" for an answer by spectecjr · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've been using Internet Explorer 6 for over six months now, since I got a computer that was pre-loaded with Windows XP last year. Whenever I click on a link to an MP3, AVI, or other media file, I always get a dialog box saying "Would you like to play this in Internet Explorer?" I always check "Never ask me again," and click "No." However, for some reason, I keep getting asked this very same question every time!

      Your OEM screwed up the install. Your user security database is most likely hosed; other symptoms will be passwords not being remembered in Outlook Express.

      Unfortunately, I can't remember the exact fix. But I had to do it on my Gateway system when it arrived at work. It's in the MS knowledge base though - search for "outlook express" "user authentication", and you should find something about it.

      When I installed my own copy of Windows XP (beta, full release, whatever), it didn't have this issue. Makes you wonder what the software Gateway preloaded is doing with the system.

      Simon

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    2. Re:IE needs to learn to take "no" for an answer by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2
      I have a similar problem with Outlook Express in W2k Server. There is no option to get rid of it in Control Panel -> Add/Remove -> Windows Setup. I've deleted the icon, but ever since I got SP2 and the hotfixes, the icon keeps re-appearing in Start -> Programs every time I log on/off. What kind of a numpty would activate Outlook Express on a PDC anyway?

      And anyone have any idea why Activesync contacts Microsoft.com every time I synch my PDA?

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
  40. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by el_chicano · · Score: 1
    All I want Quicktime and RealPlayer to do is play back ONLY their respective proprietary formats.... nothing else!!!
    All you have to do is remap the file assocations in Explorer.

    Why don't you get off your rear and learn how to do that rather than whine about it?

    Most Windoze users are so lazy that they want everything done for them...
    --
    A man who wants nothing is invincible
  41. the future? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's a prediction for ya's. All future computers will be sold with read-only filesystem, hooked up to Microsoft affiliate servers via NET. Attempts to alters the filesystem will be a violation of the DMCA

    this will centralize file storage on to centralized servers where they can be easily monitored for IP violations and Anti-American activities.

    Seem ridiculous? How about if measured from the perspective of the CTPDASDFGA?
    During a time when lawmakers even /consider/ special interface cables as deterrants for Ip violations, anything is possible.

  42. "Open" Needs Standards by goldspider · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I'll probably be modded down as a troll, but I think the parent touched on the real problem here. Standards.

    The one crippling characteristic of OSS is that there are few (if any) standards. When there are few standards, and everybody is using something different.

    That in itself isn't a bad thing, but if the OSS community wants to overthrow M$, or at the very least claim market (user) share, standards have to be established so that there is one clear and very public alternative to the latest M$ offering.

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    1. Re:"Open" Needs Standards by schon · · Score: 1

      I'll probably be modded down as a troll

      Only because it's true.

      The one crippling characteristic of OSS is that there are few (if any) standards.

      OK, so what (exactly) do you call HTTP, DNS, SMTP, DHCP, RPC, FTP, etc, etc?

      Standards are what define Open Source.

      It's the closed-source world that is lacking in standards.. with VERY few exceptions, there are no standards to be had.

    2. Re:"Open" Needs Standards by goldspider · · Score: 2
      A good point, but the public perception ignores those behind-the-scenes functionality. Instead the public sees the absurd "emacs vs. vi" and "KDE vs. GNOME" arguments perpetuated because there is no accepted standards in desktop environments.

      If the OSS community can get behind something and stop arguing which one is better, they may be able to actually send up something that can really compete with Microsoft.

      They say divide and conquer. The OSS community is doing half of Microsoft's work for it.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    3. Re:"Open" Needs Standards by pmz · · Score: 2

      OSS is only about standards. TCP/IP is one. POSIX is another. ASCII is another. X Windows is yet another. Even the licenses are standard: GPL, BSD, etc. It's just that these kinds of standards don't happen overnight.

      The variety among open source software will only get better with time. KDE and GNOME are always getting better. Open Office and Mozilla are always getting better. The OS distributions are always getting better. Etc.

      Computing is still young, and natural selection is keeping OSS stirred up, for now. It will stabilze, and the result will be really nice. We just need to be patient.

    4. Re:"Open" Needs Standards by catfood · · Score: 3, Insightful
      [T]he public sees the absurd "emacs vs. vi" and "KDE vs. GNOME" arguments perpetuated because there is no accepted standards in desktop environments...

      What better, more standard, standard could there be? Both EMACS and vi read and write the universal linefeed-delimited plain ASCII format by default. That is a hell of a standard!

      (I don't know enough about Gnome to comment on KDE vs. Gnome.)

      You seem to be using the word "standard" in a Gatesian way, where a particular application is called "standard" if you can get everyone to use that application. When Open Source and Free Software people say "standard" we mean practically the opposite--that you can use any application you want because they all share the underlying APIs and file formats!

      Gatesian "standards," when properly implemented, mean no choice. OSS and FS "standards," when properly implemented, mean unlimited choice. Know the difference.

    5. Re:"Open" Needs Standards by platypus · · Score: 2

      Well, setting a standard costs money.
      Lots of, from the perspective of an open source project. And it costs more, far far more the any fees for licence bodys.
      How much had microsoft to pay for IE till today, to get its functionaliy to a quasi standard. Note, I said "quasi", but seemingly both Netscape & MS back then thought they might loose if they are "only" standards comliant.
      And they surely both invested a lot in that wsr.

      Unless you define entities like IBM etc. also as members of the OSS community, chances are rare that the OSS community can achieve something like that. It happend, but it's unlikely.
      On the bright sight, companies see the power of open source in setting standards (IBM says so since some time), and now things like openoffice make it interesting again.
      Man I really hope and think OpenOffice/Staroffice can get big.

  43. criminal by tps12 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    This has gone too far, IMO. Moderators, excuse me if I sound angry, but, well, I am. I can't believe M$ would actually go so far as to prevent searches for RealAudio files. Remember, the computer user is supposed to be in control, not the software manufacturer!

    This just emphasizes how hard Open Source companies like Linux and RealMedia are going to have to work to overcome the scourge that is Micro$oft. We have made great strides, and Linux and BSD combined now account for a full 1% of home computers (including OS X and discounting dual booting and versions of Windows pre-2k). These are numbers to be proud of, but still M$ treats the "Hacker" (not a bad term!) community as an insignificant force.

    If you ask me, it's dirty tricks like these, trying to make their own proprietary mp3 format the standard, that indicate that they are actually afraid of Linux and Open Source. We have them on the run, now let's go in for the kill.

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    1. Re:criminal by pain_loathing · · Score: 1

      "We have made great strides, and Linux and BSD combined now account for a full 1% of home computers (including OS X and discounting dual booting and versions of Windows pre-2k. These are numbers to be proud of..."

      discounting win 95 and 98...don't you think that's fudging the numbers just a wee bit?

      --
      - Entropy Happens...
    2. Re:criminal by _typo · · Score: 2
      This just emphasizes how hard Open Source companies like Linux and RealMedia are going to have to work to overcome the scourge that is Micro$oft.

      Since when is Real Media an open source company? Real is a proprietary technology (and a pretty crappy one too) and Real Media is just another proprietary software maker. They're not any better than Microsoft.

      --

      Pedro Côrte-Real.

    3. Re:criminal by t · · Score: 2
      This has always been a problem in english, that of affinity. e.g., we could rewrite the sentence using parentheses to demarcate phrases to get an interpretation that is factually correct.

      This just emphasizes how hard (Open Source companies like Linux) and (RealMedia) are going to have to work to overcome the scourge that is Micro$oft.

      So we could interpret it as "how hard A and B are going to ..."

      This is similar to stating "We have cats, dogs and fishes." Logically you know "dogs and fishes" are separate and is considered valid english but I personally prefer the extra comma for clarity, "We have cats, dogs, and fishes." Another example is "We have hotdogs, burgers, chips and dip." Should that really be "We have hotdogs, burgers and chips and dip." since "chips and dip" can be considered one thing?

      t.

    4. Re:criminal by Salsaman · · Score: 1
      Yes. Even including Win 95 and Win 98, Linux counts for at least 1%.

    5. Re:criminal by unitron · · Score: 2
      "I can't believe M$ would actually go so far as to prevent searches for RealAudio files."

      Nothing new here. Windows 95 breaks DOS compatibility. Go into (File) Explorer and try to find anything with a .PIF extension. Sure you can use the "Find" feature (but it still won't show the extension), but if you just look at the file listings all you see is the file name without the extension and in the "type" column it doesn't call it a "Program Information File", it calls it a "Shortcut to MS-DOS Program". You can't use the "Options, File Type" windowlet (they should change the name of the OS to "peephole") to change this, either. There is no way (except perhaps the always risky regedit) to force (File) Explorer to show the .pif extension.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  44. The drops of water ... by bubbha · · Score: 1

    ...don't know themselves to be a river...

    ssshhhh!!! Don't tell them!

    --
    I want to be alone with the sandwich
  45. Its not all bad by rtkluttz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I actually prefer MS's player over all the others... ESPECIALLY Real player. Its nearly the only one left that doesn't carry add-on spyware. At least you can disable the tracking on WMP. Most of the others take over the system and try to take control of every media type out there and carry pop-up banners and other crap I don't want to deal with.
    .

    --
    Digital is, by definition, imperfect. Analog is the way to go.
    1. Re:Its not all bad by a_n_d_e_r_s · · Score: 1

      Well, ever heard of Linux. Several if not all of these player in that platform does not contain spyware.

      --
      Just saying it like it are.
    2. Re:Its not all bad by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      Realplayer carries spyware (oh, it must be quality of network and anonymous usage for RADIoS/TV servers) and can't be disabled?

      Oh I am afraid. Now I have to use wmedia which comes with those options clicked by default.

      Did I find a secret build or something? It came with those explanationary buttons and they were clicked OFF by default. Also can be disabled later.

      I hope because of those rumors, Wmedia kills Real like it did to Netscape 4.x once and all those linux geeks have to use some sort of Wine to play wmedia files... Than in 6 months, microsoft makes a interesting trick to make it non-playable on any Wine platform. So you'll have to dual boot into Windows to watch a stinking film trailer. I REALLY hope it.

    3. Re:Its not all bad by markmoss · · Score: 2

      I actually prefer MS's player over all the others... It's not a matter of which one is best for you, or for most people, it's that MS does not allow you to choose. This (1) prevents competition, which will eventually provide a better program, and (2) messes up anyone whose particular needs are better met by a different program.

      Its nearly the only one left that doesn't carry add-on spyware. Maybe if you were willing to pay a few bucks you could buy a program from a company that doesn't have to support itself with spyware or pop-up ads.

      I'll leave it to other people to comment on how far you can trust MS to not sneak in spyware, or to not leave gaping security holes for third parties to take over your computer...

  46. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by BenJeremy · · Score: 1

    Hmmmm.... and EXACTLY where is that done, short of messing with the registry directly?

    I've tried to do that in the past. It doesn't use the same associations as the File Explorer; instead it loads the plugins and determines what to associate from them, at least that was the case when I tried to deal with it some time ago.

  47. Re:Stupid Employees! Bad! Bad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And you would know this how?

  48. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by generic-man · · Score: 0

    I installed QuickTime 5 earlier this year, and I was able to remove the associations between it and everything except QuickTime-specific types (MOV, QT). Although the interface is still hideously nonstandard, like all media players since Windows Media 6.4, you don't have to lose your file associations when installing it.

    --
    For more information, click here.
  49. How to shut up QuickTime's upgrade reminders by cpeterso · · Score: 5, Informative

    QT asks me every damn time I look at something if I want to buy it.

    1. Set your system time many years ahead (like 2010)
    2. Run QuickTime
    3. When it asks you if you would like to upgrade, say no (of course!)
    4. QuickTime will then write some secret registry key to remember when it should next remind you to upgrade. Fortunately, your next reminder is now scheduled for the year 2010! ;-)
    5. Be sure to set your system time back!

    1. Re:How to shut up QuickTime's upgrade reminders by jred · · Score: 1

      thanks.

      --

      jred
      I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage...
    2. Re:How to shut up QuickTime's upgrade reminders by Wumpus · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey, that circumvents a technological measure that controls access to copyrighted work!

    3. Re:How to shut up QuickTime's upgrade reminders by IAmATuringMachine! · · Score: 2

      Then again, if you use it so much that the "please buy me" message annoys you, you may wish to consider paying for it. I did that and it does wonders at getting rid of the message.

      The best things in life ARE NOT free.

      --
      "Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes."
      -E. W. Dijkstra
    4. Re:How to shut up QuickTime's upgrade reminders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Quicktime is the best thing in your life buddy, I got nothing but pity...

  50. Embrace and Extend by DarkHelmet · · Score: 1, Troll
    Remember the 'embrace and extend' campaigns we've used in the past.

    Oh, so does that mean future versions of Windows will Embrace Open Source/Linux, and Extend support of Windows Programs so that other OSes can run them?

    In the words of Young Darth Vader, "Yippie!"

    --
    /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
    1. Re:Embrace and Extend by Quixadhal · · Score: 1

      Actually, what Microsoft seemed to have meant by "Embrace and Extend" is a little different that what most of us mean.

      What they meant was, let's hurry up and release a version of our web browser that does everything the (then current) standards say, plus our own versions of things that are currently being discussed for inclusion in the next standard.

      The intent was to get their version of the future standard in use out in the marketplace before the official version (which other vendors would follow) came out.

      This is why, even today, you have to circumvent the original design goals of HTML and special-case your web pages if you want them to look decent in both IE *and* Netscape. If they had waited and followed the standard, things would have been simpler.

      If you're going to HAVE standards, than they need to BE standards... for everyone! M$ didn't get their standard approved by popularity, they got it out there by having a virtual monopoly on the browser market and pushing it on everyone.

    2. Re:Embrace and Extend by nhavar · · Score: 2

      I'll have to agree to most of what you said. I do think that MS used it's position to get better product placement and further their own goals.

      But, I don't really agree that you have to special case your web pages in order for them to work. I currently design web pages for a large corporation that are strictly standard web pages with no special browser handling instruction that work equally well and display identically in both IE 5/5.5/6 and Mozilla/NS 6.2. We use CSS1/2, XHTML, XML, XSL and Javascript. I've seen plenty of pages out there that stick to the standards and work just fine and are good advocates for how to operate within the standards.

      The problems mostly are that in the beginning NO-ONE stuck to the standards, and NS had the same agenda that MS did. The problem was that MS used it's already established products to further it's grasp while NS had no previously established in-roads or leverage to perform similarly, otherwise it would have (See AOL, ORACLE, SUN, IBM, INTEL etc.).

      Thank you for the clean and concise conversation and for refraining from calling me names or demeaning my character.

      --
      "Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
  51. Media player replacement... by Stoutlimb · · Score: 2

    The first thing I do when I roll out a new windows box, is point the browser to winamp.com. It's a decent player once configured properly, and plays almost everything under the sun. I just wish it had better video support. Winamp would be the best Media Player replacement I've seen yet.

    I heard there's a really cool media player out of Hungary or something, that comes with neat extra programs too. Perhaps we should bundle that with Windows instead.

    1. Re:Media player replacement... by Angron · · Score: 1

      I've become addicted to the NiceMC plug-in for winamp. It lets you use winamp to play videos as well, so you can use all the normal functions (playlists etc).

      -A

  52. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by BenJeremy · · Score: 1

    Thanks.... maybe I'll give it a shot once more.

    Overbearing plugins have made me a bit gunshy about using them.

  53. I tried Linux!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It didn't understand my monitor!

    So I scrapped it!

    And went back to Windows!

    It understands all my hardware!

    Gates Rules!

    1. Re:I tried Linux!!!!! by YeOldeCurmudgeon · · Score: 1

      I am concerned your comment may be more reflective of your ability to try than it is of Linux's capabilities. You don't give any particulars regarding distribution of Linux or the monitor type. Linux not understanding the monitor doesn't mean Linux wouldn't work at some level on it. It is highly likely that there are adjustments that could easily made to make it behave optimally. If you are saying you wished you had help, describe the problem, people will voluntarily give help or point to an informative resource. Next time your Windows misbehaves, or welcomes in a new virus, try getting help from Gates without paying for the time. However, you might find people here who could point you to good help. Since you chose to remain under Bill Gate's rules, I presume you are duly diligent in conforming to all his software EULAs, and have all your software receipts, original media, proofs of purchase, and keep that check book open for upcoming upgrades. If so, you are fully ready to respond to the BSA in case of a software audit and have a lawyer on stand by.

  54. Re:Stupid Employees! Bad! Bad! by miguelitof · · Score: 2
    Interesting.. Once again Microsoft proves just how stupid their Rhode's scholar winning, 4.0 GPA, full ride to Haaahhhhvaaad (MIT, Cal-tech, Yale, etc.), over achieving, 1600 on the SAT, employees really are.

    Actually, I thought this showed that some of their executives actually are honest enough to tell the truth when under oath. If the employees were stupid, they would be trying to lie while they are up on the stand.

    What I think this does show is how unprepared M$'s lawyers are for some of these witnesses. The lawyers should have spent a lot of time prepping the witnesses; they should have expected these questions and coached the witnesses on how to answer truthfully without hurting the case.

    --
    --- Biffster.org
    "Bite my shiny metal ass."
  55. It's a feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MS Executive Linda Averett has admitted that Internet Explorer trumps user preferences
    We've eliminated user preferences in an effort to make the system sympler. There's only one preference now, ours.

  56. Further bad testimony from Microsoft by burgburgburg · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Attempted to submit earlier today:

    Microsofties testifying poorly for the company. Yesterday, Microsoft's Will Poole, vice president in charge of the company's Windows New Media Platform division, conceded that he couldn't think of anything Microsoft had done with its audio and video capabilities to address a trial court's April 2000 findings against the company.

    The states also brought out an email from a different Microsoft employee, Kurt Buecheler, who wrote that when Microsoft went to distribute market development money to computer manufacturers, "a key criteria will be shipping Windows Media Player."

    Today, when the states lawyer enquired as to why IE6 played music files with WMP technology even if the user had selected RealPlayer as their default, Microsoft executive Linda Averett said Microsoft could use RealNetworks software to play music in Internet Explorer, but chooses not to.

    "The reason it is not replaceable is that Microsoft does not allow it to be replaceable, correct?" Schmidtlein (dissenting states attorney) asked.

    "Correct, it is an integrated feature," Averett testified.

    She also testified about the complaint by RealNetworks that the XP search program couldn't find RealNetworks files. She claimed it was a mistake that had been fixed two weeks ago. This would make it a month after states' top lawyer, Brendan Sullivan, showed the search problem during opening arguments as evidence of Microsoft's wrongdoing.

    Yesterday's testimony: http://news.com.com/2100-1001-900213.html
    Today's testimony: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/technology/AP-Micr osoft-Antitrust.html

  57. amusing chunk of the article re: IE integration by pmineiro · · Score: 1

    Lacovara asked Madnick if the fact that the academic couldn't name another operating system without a browser that couldn't be removed was important. Madnick said it was not, and said a remarkable feat had been performed by software engineers at Microsoft. "The fact that they have designed it this way is a benefit," he said.

    hehe, sure, it's been beneficial in crushing competition. this is from the same guy who thought kde and gnome were operating systems, btw.

  58. Re:Stupid Employees! Bad! Bad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    he works there, dumbass.

  59. Put up or shut up. by HoaryCripple · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This (hopefully) teaches everyone here not to use microsoft products. And yes I do take into consideration the fact that many of you have to use microsoft tripe at work. Just don't use it at home. Please. And by this, I mean no more office 2000 purchases, no more purchases of computers with windows pre-installed, nothing. Just cut them off. One geek at a time. It will eventually work.

    Thanks for your cooperation :)

    1. Re:Put up or shut up. by liquidsin · · Score: 1

      In addition, stop tech supporting friends who use MS products. "Sorry, I can't help you with that, I don't use windows." I'm sure most of us end up as the tech support hotline for friends and family. Just explain that you don't use MS software and aren't familiar with how to do stuff in it. Then tell them you'd gladly help them if they used something you were familiar with, like KDE on RedHat.

      --
      do not read this line twice.
    2. Re:Put up or shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right on daddy on!

      Make Gates eat that $40 billion with ketchup!

    3. Re:Put up or shut up. by HoaryCripple · · Score: 1

      I completely agree. I have stopped running windows tech support for my non technically inclined friends, but I feel bad saying that to my parents. Maybe i'll sneak into their house one day and just install Linux on their computers. Or replace them all with Macs. They'd probably be happy with the Macs

    4. Re:Put up or shut up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I recently replaced my wife's windows machine with a new mac. Part of the reason I did this was to get familiar enough with it so that I could recommend macs to family and friends. (The press looked good, but until I got my hands on it I couldn't recommend it in good concience.)

      Linux is great, but it's nowhere near the point where I would recommend it to non-techie family and friends.

      My suggestion to people is to start recommending new macs...they're excellent machines, very easy for non-techies to use, and provide all of the stuff windows users expect, (except all the crap we've been reading about in these posts :-)

    5. Re:Put up or shut up. by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Read this: Compulsory Windows

      If you cannot comprehend a world where something like Microsoft can hunt down and make use of ways to use some people's need or desire to run Windows, to strike bargains where EVERYONE is required to pay for and get Windows like it or not... even to the extent where, as in the Reg's report, Macintosh seats in the edu market are required to pay for Windows Upgrades they cannot even run, then how about you shut up?

      I mean, it's like you're talking about a free market or something.

      When a Microsoft can say, "Oh, you have to buy copies of our stuff for EVERYTHING, in fact every person who sets foot on campus, including dogs and pigeons" and get away with it because the 70%-90% of Windows seats MUST be served...

      When those seats MUST get current Windows OSes because Microsoft bundles stuff with the OS and makes it compulsory to make use of other aspects of the Windows environment, whether that be IMing or a new media codec or web pages in the wild that require the version of IE only bundled with the system...

      Then you don't have a free market anyway, so enough with your 'just choooooose something else'. It won't work. Without a free market choice is vanity. Trust me on this, I've exercised the vanity of choosing Macs for _years_ and look where MS is now! Like I hurt them. Sheesh.

    6. Re:Put up or shut up. by HoaryCripple · · Score: 1

      You're argument fails, because someone had to agree to the microsoft terms. If there are more people with backbone that will not put up with this, it will eventually hurt them. Keep using your Mac and I'll keep using my Linux. At least in good conscience you can say that you didn't sit idly by while Microsoft tried to dominate the world.

    7. Re:Put up or shut up. by mph_sd · · Score: 1

      You can't really expect someone to change OS or buy a new machine when they have a technical problem with one piece of software. I think the best way to promote open-source is to show and recommend some of the higher quality packages available. Example: My dad recently asked me for an Office97 disk I had laying around from who knows where. I'm going to recommend OpenOffice instead--free, legal and looks good on Windows (fonts suck on my Mandrake 8.0 though). Example: Everyone loves the tabbed browsing and popup suppression on Mozilla. Also visit the opencd project

    8. Re:Put up or shut up. by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 2
      You're not listening, and you're talking like some sort of libertarian- by this I mean, the sort that makes Randites look well-adjusted.

      It's like being mad at OEMs for permitting horrible Microsoft terms. I suppose in somebody's insane fantasy, the OEM could say "Hah! A is A! And furthermore, we will roll our own operating system with Linux and compete in the free market against you!"

      In reality, for an OEM, making PCs without permission to ship Windows is suicide- so there can be no 'agreement'. It's a kind of force some of you guys seem ill-equipped to comprehend. It's the reason antitrust law exists.

      For the edu market, refusing Microsoft terms is less obviously suicidal, but it is still dangerous to try and sell students and parents on a computer department that is all Linux or Mac, particularly for non-CS departments. It's far from the suicidal hopelessness of being an OEM sans Windows, but it's still going to lose you money, by having some students and parents rejecting the school simply on grounds of their not using Windows. The difference is, this is more of a risk that can reasonably be taken.

      Backbone is all well and good. It is not always enough. There are situations, like with the OEMs, with printer manufacturers, possibly with ISPs over .NET, in which backbone means nothing because the power relationship is so out of balance that no amount of volition or free will could possibly matter. It's like a really PISSED OFF ant having a fight with a human over whether it should be stepped on. It really doesn't matter.

      There are too many situations now where the Microsoft/world power relationship is completely one-sided, and it's only getting worse with every new area Microsoft seizes. I think it's great that you show backbone! However, we also need governments everywhere to recognize the situation and forcibly balance the power relationships.

      It doesn't matter one bit how hard Microsoft may have worked to establish such unbalanced power relationships- operative phrase is 'sucks to be them'. They could have just delivered value propositions instead of being masters of establishing unbalanced power relationships and leveraging them. In order to have a functioning market, the power relationships have to be brought back nearer to balancing. Otherwise, you only have a nice example of how free markets are not a stable structure, and left to their own devices can only produce their benefits so long as there is liquidity and risks as well as benefits to all parties.

    9. Re:Put up or shut up. by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      Just cut them off. One geek at a time. It will eventually work.

      No, it won't, because Geeks are a small minority of the desktop computer market. Only if geeks were the majority would this be an effective tactic against Microsoft.

      What will eventually work is to have a Geek (or a flock of Geeks) design an operating system that is both technically sound and easy to use for Geeks and Grandmas. And on top of that, the Geek(s) will have to market their product as something that works better than Windows and is both easy and fun to use.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
  60. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by JPriest · · Score: 1

    Hold shift, right click the file, select open with... Check the box that says always use this app for these types of files.

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
  61. Re:Ha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Better get a mac before you invite yourself over. And be sure bring enough cold Guinness beer for everyone.

  62. Operating Systems.... by Groovus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Slightly off topic....

    Allright, so I'm reading through the Chapter 4: Processes section (brushing up on my basic threads and synchronization concepts) of the Silberschatz/Galvin "Operating Systems Concepts" (you know, the dinosaur book) and it hits me. Fundamentally, all this garbage MS bundles in its "OS" is extraneous to an operating system. Looking through the book, there's no chapter on Media Players, no chapter on Web Browsers, no chapter on personal information managers....no chapter on WINDOW MANAGERS!!! These things are not part of the OS proper.

    Has anyone at any point in these hearings ever offered up a working defenition of a computer operating system? Don't you think that would go a long way toward determining exactly what should and shouldn't be "part of" an operating system? It seems to me like everyone involved is working backward by looking at individual, extraneous components and querying whether it is or isn't "part of" the OS. Shouldn't they really figure out what an OS is and then look at the components to see if they belong?

    Truly, the book provides a very basic, somewhat low level, and very academic view of operating systems (basically the OS facilitates IO, Storage Management, Process Management, Security and possibly Networking/Distributed Computing in using a given collection of hardware). I would grant that at this point having some kind of GUI environment for an OS is pretty much a requirement in order to make a machine "useable" by an appreciable number of people. But after that how much further do you have to go?

    It seems to me that looking at things from this perspective would make it abundantly clear to everyone involved that MS has gone way beyond the bounds of what an OS is in their Windows product. It would also probably provide obvious deliniation points for breaking up the business (for instance there is no good reason for the window manager to be integrated with the underlying graphics routines). It would also highlight just how spurious all of MS's arguments are in regards to how breaking things up would ruin MS Windows, by highlighting either that MS has no clue about what an OS actually is and their code is incredibly flawed as a result, OR (more likely) MS has gone to great lengths to obscure what an OS actually is to further their own ends at the expense of the user and other application developers.

    Admittedly it is not as all cut and dried in practice as it is in acedamia, but I do believe that attempting to establish the basic notion of what an OS is would further illuminate the problems presented by MS's current approach to its "operating system" in relation to the States' (and our) concerns in this case.

    See I knew paying attention in class (or at least keeping the books I was supposed to have read for class) would pay off some day....

    1. Re:Operating Systems.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a binder which was used in some intro course of what an OS is published by Microsoft which spells out the 7(?) things an OS is.

      I don't have it in front of me (at work) but essentially MSFT itself describes an OS as software which manages the resources of your computer.

      The question then is: what part of an OS does IE manage?

    2. Re:Operating Systems.... by Tony-A · · Score: 2

      "... but essentially MSFT itself describes an OS as software which manages the resources of your computer.

      The question then is: what part of an OS does IE manage? "

      The user, silly. The user. Can't have unmanaged users now, can we?
      (* ducks and runs for cover *)

  63. Re:Stupid Employees! Bad! Bad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are we talking about Microsoft or Rambus here?

  64. Modularity => Bad Software by (void*)cheerio · · Score: 1
    Is MIT going to fire this Madnick prof? I think he has embarrassed the school enough.
    Lacovara asked Madnick if the fact that the academic couldn't name another operating system without a browser that couldn't be removed was important. Madnick said it was not, and said a remarkable feat had been performed by software engineers at Microsoft. "The fact that they have designed it this way is a benefit," he said.
    What ever happened to modularity of code being one of the pillars of software engineering?
  65. Implied Intent by nhavar · · Score: 2

    I don't see anywhere in your quote where the gentlemen acknowledges why they need to keep it off the airwaves nor do I see anything that implies that he thinks the discussion implies guilt or wrongdoing.

    It would seem to me that alot of people are implying some evil intent where it's very possible that none may have been. Often when you get a group of people discussing a topic, especially one like "embrace/extend" you get into discussions that should not be had. Additionally you get people responding that know little about what they are talking about or who think they know or who've heard from a friend of a friend. What started as normal business conversation can quickly turn to rumor, conjecture, and assumption. Then when records get supoened the lawyers go through and find a statement like "I heard on the internet that Bill said he was poised to take over the world with some new hidden code". The whole thing gets put into evidence but they only mention "Bill said he was..." and noone ever has the time to put it all in context. Hence you get alot of implied intent by statements that really don't have anything evil behind them. Maybe the veep just didn't want to see "Tom" (the guy who has an opinion about everything (usually a negative one)) get into the discussion and turn it into a flame fest.

    Additionally the "Embrace, Extend" ideal is not a bad one. It's the premise that almost everything that we have is built on including opensource. How could we ever progress without embracing what we have and extending upon it. The problem is that there is a last word that keeps getting added to the conversation "Extinguish". I'm not sure that this is something that can be directly attributed to MS or not as I see it passed only by Anti-MS zealots.

    "Extinguish" is an ambiguous term. As you embrace a concept and extend it eventually the original concept is replaced by it's newer extended and in theory better counterpart. The original concept is not destroyed, it remains, just unused. But if the "extinguishment" of an object is for the control of the object then you get into the wrongfulness of the practice.

    My point is that in order to show wrong doing you have to do more than just throw in a couple of disparate statements made by who knows. You have to show a consistent pattern of intent. You have to have a focus, because if you take 40 different statements by 40 different people in a 1000+ person company you can't really equate that to a conspiracy or evil. On the flip side if you take 40 different statments by 4 different people in the same company and they are of sufficient rank and privilage to motivate the company towards certain practices then you MAY be able to show intent.

    Personally I'm just tired of buzz word bingo and buzz phrase bingo where the media and people take statements without qualification and read deeper more meaningful intent into them.

    It's like if I said "I want to feed the world" and someone started conspiracy theories about how "I want to rule the world". Oh it all makes perfect sense. If I want to feed the world I could only do it if things were in proper order and how can I get them into the proper order if I don't control everything.

    sophistry - 1 : subtly deceptive reasoning or argumentation

    --
    "Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
    1. Re:Implied Intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      personally I'm tired of Microsoft'ies such as yourself staunchly defending a corporation that has ALREADY been found guilty. Implied intent is just that, implied. The conversation is obviously going into territory that Microsoft has been in constant legal trouble over, and the boss obviously likes his stock options and so he tells folks to keep it off the airwaves, aka stop sending emails and talk directly to each other, don't create more evidence. Whats wrong with you? Don't you see the obvious? Basic Logic and the ability to apply it is all it takes my friend.

    2. Re:Implied Intent by thelexx · · Score: 2

      "It would seem to me that alot of people are implying some evil intent where it's very possible that none may have been."

      You see it as "very possible", while most of the rest of the people here see it as "bloody unlikely" based on the past exploits of the company.

      ""Extinguish" is an ambiguous term."

      I'm still not sure if you're a just a troll or an outright shill, but certainly one or the other.

      MS has been found GUILTY. TWICE. They are a PREDATORY MONOPOLY. They didn't get that way by management just being a regular bunch of Joe's who play by the rules and are simply misunderstood if/when they don't. Have you ever read the Halloween docs? Big difference between being competitive and sociopathic, which is exactly the kind of behavior exhibited, in aggregate, by MS.

      LEXX

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    3. Re:Implied Intent by nhavar · · Score: 2

      First I'm not a "microsoftie". I hate how people attempt to disuade an argument simply by putting a label on someone hoping that the label will make them seem stupid as opposed to arguing the facts. Additionally where in my statement did I say that MS had done nothing wrong in the past or where did I state that MS had not been found guilty by the courts. I didn't. Did I ever state "MS rules", "Gates is God", or "IE is the best"? Then how can you imply that I'm an "microsoftie"?
      Again the conversation doesn't say anything quite so obvious. If it had said "Hey guys because of the pending legal issues we need to keep this offline" that would be obvious. Or "Let's stay out of trouble here and take it offline" that might have been obvious. But to simply say "No more replies" "Let's take this off the airwaves" could just as easily be "Stop wasting time with this ignorant waste of resources and get back to work". Of course you don't want 50 workers going and talking to their lawyers saying that the veep called them ignorant so you have to be more diplomatic about it. If the gentleman had made any statement about the trial or legal issues or "recent problems" then I might be inclined to agree that squashing the conversation was due to the trial.
      My other problem is that he doesn't say "Stop this discussion" or site any company policy that would prohibit further discussion. He simply states - take it offline. Now the offline conversation might be hear-say in a court of law but not always. So I still can't say that this one line statement is a clear indictment of wrong doing by the VP.

      --
      "Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
    4. Re:Implied Intent by Darby · · Score: 1

      Let's stay out of trouble here and take it offline" that might have been obvious. But to simply say "No more replies" "Let's take this off the airwaves" could just as easily be "Stop wasting time with this ignorant waste of resources and get back to work"

      No, not at all.Your last statement says that the discussion will stop, whereas the first two specifically state that the conversation *will* continue, just not where it will leave evidence.

      He simply states - take it offline

      As it would seem you well knew.

      So I still can't say that this one line statement is a clear indictment of wrong doing by the VP.

      Certainly this is true. Luckilly, unless you have spent your entire life under a rock (or a bridge perhaps?), you have a whole wealth of evidence at
      your disposal. Given the fact that almost every decision they have made in the entire history of the company has been poor from a technical standpoint, but very good from a (quite often illegal) marketing standpoint, it becomes reasonable to look at anything they do with a great deal of suspicion. This isn't prejudiced in any way. To not assume until proven otherwise that anything they do is slimy is the act of a fool since that is their standard operating procedure.

    5. Re:Implied Intent by nhavar · · Score: 2

      So then we are going from the "guilty until proven innocent" point of view?

      --
      "Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
    6. Re:Implied Intent by Darby · · Score: 1

      So then we are going from the "guilty until proven innocent" point of view?

      Not at all. First of all, I am not the justice system and neither are you. Second, people and almost every other animal on the planet have the ability to learn from experience. MS was (presumably) innocent at some point in the distant past. Since that time they have over and over and over *proven* themselves guilty of various illegal acts. Further after admitting their guilt and signing decrees stating that they would no longer do them, they promptly went right on committing them.
      Now does this mean that they are automatically guilty of the next thing of which they are accused?

      Of course not.
      What it does mean though is that anyone who has more intelligence than a bug will accept that the possibility of them being guilty of doing what they have done every other time is a real one. Also having 2 brain cells to rub together would force one to look at any action they take whether there is any obvious illegal implications or not with a great deal of suspicion.

    7. Re:Implied Intent by GSloop · · Score: 2

      Someone else said this recently.

      "The fact that Margaret tortures little kittens for fun really has no bearing on her skills as a babysitter..."

      The fact that MS has a very long history of immoral and illegal acts SHOULD color the judgement of us when we look at what they say. You would be an IDIOT if you didn't. Perhaps it can't be that way in a court of law, but it sure as heck will be in my book.

      If you act like a dick 90% of the time (I'm not referring to you...) and something you say could be construed as offensive, it's reasonable to figure that you're just being your normal self, a prick.

      Sure, I might get hit by a metorite, but it's not bloody likely. Sure, MS could be just a innocent sheep, and we're all just way out of like, but again, it isn't very bloody likely!

      Cheers!

    8. Re:Implied Intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am coming from the "already found guilty by two courts with a failed appeal to the Supreme Court" point of view. The scary part about you is you actually believe yourself.

    9. Re:Implied Intent by Tim+Doran · · Score: 2

      Repeat after me: "Microsoft has been found guilty twice. This is the punishment phase."

      Say that to yourself before every article you read about the trial and it'll help keep things straight.

  66. MS Media Player not bad, but no excuse by dh003i · · Score: 2

    I use Windows, and I like MS' Media Player. It is good. It's not the best audio player, but its a good audio/video combination.

    MS Media player is vastly superior to Real and Apple players. However, in terms of sound, its not nearly as good as WinAmp or FreeAmp. MS Media Player has managed not to become as bloated as Apple's and Real's products, but its still bloated. What's the point of those large buttons on the left side of it? MS should've stuck with the classic format.

    Anyways, it isn't as good as WinAmp for music, and isn't as good as DivXPlaya for video.

    Despite Media Player being good, that doesn't justify MS' abuses of its OS position to force people to use Win Media Player. People and OEM's should have the choice about what software the OS uses to play media file, NOT MS.

    1. Re:MS Media Player not bad, but no excuse by kennedy · · Score: 1

      You could always just select the classic skin...
      it's under the skin browser, 2nd selection.

  67. Which is worse...MS or Real?? by billmaly · · Score: 2

    Speaking as a Windows whore...I'll take MS over that virus posing as software that is Real networks. Install them once...then try to do ANYTHING related to audio that they don't try to get their hooks into. Hate it...I'll take MS "integration" over that POS any day!!! Thus endeth my rant.

    1. Re:Which is worse...MS or Real?? by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 2
      Is it perhaps possible that if there was a 'market' for this sort of software, and no monopolist turning the screws, there might be choices BESIDES WMA and its evil twin and the determinedly-trying-to-play-just-as-rough Quicktime?

      Imagine interoperability O_O

  68. KarmaWhore Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Karma Whore Analysis:

    I'll probably be modded down as a troll, but I think the parent touched on the real problem here. Standards.

    Our potential KarmaWhore (tm) starts off with the classic "I'll probably be modded down...", a sure fire way to start the Karma rolling. Who can resist the in-your-face defiance and the pandering to the would be skeptical moderator that this self-declared act of rebellion implies?

    Our potential KarmaWhore quickly moves from preliminary moderator-greasing to the meat of his post:

    The one crippling characteristic of OSS is that there are few (if any) standards. When there are few standards, and everybody is using something different.

    Our KarmaWhore quickly follows up his rebellion with a sensible statement. What moderator wouldn't say "Why, yes, just what I was thinking Standards - act of mutiny averted - heart rate returning to normal. This is one poster I could +1: Agree with.

    We should note the lack of clarity in the second sentence and hence temper our thusfar rosy analysis of Mr goldspider.

    Our unwary moderator will not be likely to notice the completely vacuous nature of the KarmaWhore's statements. Duh, standards are important. The sky is blue. Etc. Oh, our KarmaWhore is truly a slick operator. He continues:

    That in itself isn't a bad thing, but if the OSS community wants to overthrow M$, or at the very least claim market (user) share, standards have to be established so that there is one clear and very public alternative to the latest M$ offering.

    Another credible sounding set of statement. Who could disagree with that? Closer reading might reveal that our poster hasn't given any examples or counter examples of a lack of standards, nor has Mr goldspider-the-would-be-karma-whore even established that "the OSS community wants to overthrow M$" or "claim market (user) share". Nothing stronger than mild assertion has been offered, but for the moderator with little time, this is surely enough.

    Further notice our KarmaWhore's use of 2 paragraph tags (the simplest html tags) to expand his 4 vague statements to cover more slashdot real estate. That is truly a powerful move. Visual presentation often counts more than content. Mr goldspider, like our duped moderator, has little time to spend on individual posts in his hunt for Karma. Use of the derogatory M$ label, while effective in the past, should be avoided as a sure way to attract replies which might encourage negative moderation

    In summary, a noble though not perfect effort on the part of Mr goldspider to whore more karma: +1: Whorerrific

    This has been has a service of the KarmaWhore Analysis (tm) Group KWAG

    1. Re:KarmaWhore Analysis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      very nice

  69. Hehe.. by Zonekeeper · · Score: 0

    Hehe hehehe...He said Extend... Heh hehehe

  70. Not like that's an excuse for MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even though it's RealNetworks complaining, MS's behavior applies to every company in the industry. It's idiotic to post a complaint about RealNetworks under an article about Microsoft and even more idiotic that it's been modded up that many times.

  71. Don't rely on the news stories... by sheldon · · Score: 2

    Read the trial transcripts yourself:

    http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/legal/nonsett li ng.asp

    I've noticed a lot of the reporting has been pretty bizarre, taking points out of context and so forth. When you actually read the full testimony you see it within the context. The lawyers are often trying to press a point, and it may take them 10 questions to lead into it. Often the witness may seem to be playing dumb, but really it's because they have to be very careful and answer tightly worded questions with pertinent answers. Generally a witness is only brought in to testify on a very specific subset of information, and questions outside of those bounds are not allowed. It's a cat & mouse game because the lawyers are always trying to set up the witness, and I find it quite fun to watch.

    1. Re:Don't rely on the news stories... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you believe a full reading of the transcripts puts microsoft's arguments in a better light, then you must be getting paid.

    2. Re:Don't rely on the news stories... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you believe they don't, then you must be getting paid by anti-MS competitors.

  72. I still have trouble by SkyLeach · · Score: 2

    getting IE to play my .mp3 links in WinAmp instead of Quicktime. The garsh-darn thing just refuses to do it.

    Of course, that may be a Quicktime trick but stil..

    --
    My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so :-p
  73. History of Real by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

    Alot of posts point out that the RealPlayer does many of the "Questionable" things MS is so famous for. This is no coincidence. Rob Glaser, founder and CEO of Real, was a MS employee in their multimedia division (such as it was at the time). I read about him in 1995 when Real first launched and how he had a vision to bring multimedia into the Internet mainstream but MS evidently hadn't yet caught the vision. Apparantly Rob knew once MS did get "The Vision" he would have a fierce fight on his hands. Because he had worked for MS for so many years he knew pretty much what to expect and put many wheels into motion to keep Real alive during the fight. Whether it was enough is up for debate but one thing is for sure. What that is I have no idea.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  74. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by BenJeremy · · Score: 1

    Hmmmm... I just tried it, to test, on an mp3 file link, and got no "Open With..." option in my context menu.

  75. Common Sense 101 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You get a big fat F. Use your head, anyone with an IQ over 10 knows what he was implying.

    1. Re:Common Sense 101 by nhavar · · Score: 2

      So let me get this straight since I disagree that it's clear cut based on the on-liner evidence then suddenly I'm so low on the IQ chart that I can't even support life processes with my inadequate brain power.
      Why is it that when someon disagrees with the "mob rule" here on slashdot that they get insulted and accused of being a shill or a "microsoftie" or worse a troll. One is not a troll for having an opinion that's unpopular, one is a troll for taking a stance contrary to the popular one for the sole purpose of being unpopular. I'm attempting to get people to use their brains in that a ONE LINE STATEMENT is not an HUGE evidence towards guilt. I never implied that MS had not done something illegal or that they had not been found in a court of law guilty of crimes. What I stated was that people are going overboard taking one line statements and adding their own implied intent to them. Much like everyone took my statement and suddenly implied that I'm a shill, or a troll simply because I like to try logic first.

      --
      "Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
    2. Re:Common Sense 101 by t · · Score: 2
      "Extinguish" is an ambiguous term.
      You destroy all credibility that you may have had by making idiotic statements. This is equivalent to saying "I did not have sex." means that blow jobs and such are not sex. Or by insisting "what do you mean by 'is'?" You ask a hundred people what "Extinguish" means and you will get the same answer. The wordnet dictionary has four definitions of "extinguish", two are related to putting out fires. The other two are of the kill nature. Yes KILL. If you still don't get it, here is definition 1:
      1. snuff out, extinguish -- (put an end to; kill; "The Nazis snuffed out the life of many Jewish children")

      So why is "embrace and extend" equated to "embrace and extinguish"? Because history has shown that whenever MS uses that strategy it ends up with the victim being extinguished.

      And your simple explanation that that topic would get all types of conjecture etc is crap because this was not a public mailing list, it is an internal mailing list at MS that their boss reads. And your "Tom" wouldn't be working very long at MS if he usually had a negative opinion about everything.

      Your entire argument reeks of illogic. I could continue but it is pointless.

      t.

    3. Re:Common Sense 101 by nhavar · · Score: 2

      Actually to say that "I did not have sex." when referring to a blow job is accurate. To say "I did not have sexual relations" when referring to a blow job would be the innacurate statement (I won't go into defining 'is' that's truly moronic). The definition of sex is tied to penetration and the act of copulation usually for reproduction. Sexual intercourse can be seen as sex and can include acts like a blow job. But when you lump all things sexual into sex you lose some of the meaning of sex. Masterbation isn't sex it might be a sexual act but it's not sex. Masterbation, cunnilingus, fellatio, etc. could be considered sexual acts or acts of a sexual nature, but cannot be considered 'sex'. Therefore it's your argument that fails.

      Extinguish also means to dim, nullify, or to reduce to silence or ineffectiveness. Lovely throwing in the Nazis in all this. Makes a nice little comparison MS == Nazis. It's the comparison that so many MS bashers love to use.

      When I'm talking about MS or anyone else "embracing and extending" I'm talking about embracing and extending a methodology, practice or standard. I'm not talking about a company or entity. In your wording you act as if MS "embracing and extending" a standard is tantamount to them walking into an office building and hacking all the workers who worked on the standard into little bitty pieces. I think you can see that MS has embraced and extended several languages, standards and ideals without the necessity of those standards bodies or creators to themselves be silenced (W3C, ECMA, ANSI, c++, etc.). I see plenty of evidence to suggest that MS did little that extinguished their "enemies" while I see plenty of evidence to suggest that the "enemies" caused a significant amount of their own downfall.

      I never said that "embrace and extend" was equated to "embrace and extinguish". I stated that somewhere the phrase came up "embrace, extend, and extinguish" and I didn't know where it came from and couldn't assign to it being directly from Microsoft because I haven't seen evidence to suggest it (doesn't mean that evidence doesn't exist).

      And do you actually work in any type of large business. I see e-mails getting floated all the time and hear discussions daily that have all kinds of conjecture. I've worked for several companies that this happens on a regular basis. Additionally I've worked in plenty of companies that have hired loud mouthed argumentative and opinionative employees and they seem to be the last to get fired usually because the management A) Likes the go getter attitude or B) is afraid of lawsuits and bad press. Point in fact I sit an isle away from a guy who does nothing all day but bitch about the stupid stuff his boss makes him do, complains about how his benefits are screwed up, moans about the government, and craps on his fellow employees. He hasn't been fired yet because nothing he's done is against company policy, but people avoid him like the plague and try not to bring up his "hot topic" issues within ear shot. He's annoying and could probably be written up as "disruptive" but it would be a hard fight and cause more problems than management wants to deal with.

      My question is "Why are you so vehement?" at any point have I insulted someone, spoke down to, or demeaned. I'm simply stating what I see and I'm getting insults and barbed responses.

      While it might rightly be said that MS has pursued "predatory" business practices and has been convicted of such, that's not what I'm arguing here. I'm arguing that you can't use one line from an e-mail without any corroberating evidence and say "See! There! I told you so, their guilty!" and that's what most people are doing. They are taking one line at a time and making up their own stories about what happened/is happening at MS without any thought for the accuracy.

      --
      "Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
    4. Re:Common Sense 101 by t · · Score: 2
      Actually to say that "I did not have sex." when referring to a blow job is accurate.
      Yes, tell your girlfriend that and see what she says. When she is screaming at you, tell her "it's your argument that fails." Later you can ponder on your own whether masturbation is sex.
      Lovely throwing in the Nazis in all this. Makes a nice little comparison MS == Nazis. It's the comparison that so many MS bashers love to use.
      sigh... Perhaps you should query wordnet yourself. It really is the first and primary definition. But then, I thought you weren't one to make assumptions.

      the rest of your argument analogy etc... is pointless to respond to. Especially your comparison to the dipshit at your company, MS gets oodles of resumes and would not have to tolerate that type of behaviour. What is your company? I bet you won't say since it would prove how weak your argument was.

      You are getting so much backlash because you did the same thing, you took their one line and came to the opposite conclusion which is in apparent opposition to the facts at hand.

      t.

  76. MS' new theme song -- to replace "Start Me Up" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Number of the Beast
    by IRON MAIDEN

    I left alone my mind was blank
    I needed time to think to get the memories from my mind

    What did I see can I believe that what I saw
    that night was real and not just fantasy

    Just what I saw in my old dreams were they
    reflections of my warped mind staring back at me

    Cos in my dreams it's always there the evil face that twists my mind
    and brings me to despair

    The night was black was no use holding back
    Cos I just had to see was someone watching me
    In the mist dark figures move and twist
    was all this for real or some kind of hell
    666 the Number of the Beast
    Hell and fire was spawned to be released

    Torches blazed and sacred chants were praised
    as they start to cry hands held to the sky
    In the night the fires burning bright
    the ritual has begun Satan's work is done
    666 the Number of the Beast
    Sacrifice is going on tonight

    This can't go on I must inform the law
    Can this still be real or some crazy dream
    but I feel drawn towards the evil chanting hordes
    they seem to mesmerise me...can't avoid their eyes
    666 the Number of the Beast
    666 the one for you and me

    I'm coming back I will return
    And I'll possess your body and I'll make you burn
    I have the fire I have the force
    I have the power to make my evil take its course

  77. Free Software: you have an itch? Scratch it. by FreeUser · · Score: 2

    When Microsoft has billions going into research and a dominant desktop position, how can one expect an open AV standard to become prevelent, especailly when one considers the effort that goes into creating good codecs.

    There are already good codecs out there, and more on the horizon. Nuppal or xvid come to mind as two excellent codecs (I'm encoding all of my Max Headroom episodes into xvid, and using this methodology under GNU/Linux I end up with quality video that exceeds the quality of the program on the television as I was watching the broadcast, easilly burnable onto a data DVD to boot.

    Absolutely phenominal, and the xvid (a variant of opendivx if I'm not mistaken) can be scaled down as much as needed for web pages (at a cost in quality and/or resolution).

    So, if you want a good, open audio/video codec write a Netscape/IE/Mozilla plugin that supports xvid video with oggvorbis encoded audio. The tools to make the video are already free and exist on virtually every platform ... if you want a web browser capable plugin, write it and free yourself from the Microsoft monopoly. Then you at least have a comfortable codec you can use until the Asbolutely Free with No Ifs, Ands, or Buts Ogg Tarkin codec is released.

    I guarantee you many (perhaps most) web page authors who are doing this sort of thing as a hobby (most websites) and want video would take a free(dom) codec over a non-free one given the choice, similiar capabilities, and the opportunity, and there is no reason for us to be beholden to Microsoft, Apple, or anyone else with all the free tools and implimentations available on just about every platform at this point in the game.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  78. Another co-mingle ? by velociraptor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I hope this is reasonably on-topic, in that it relates to MS tying features together in what seems a monopolostic way...

    I was trying to set up web-cams with my bro-in-law and started with MSN Messenger. After signing up for a Passport (guess I sold my soul...), I then signed in, but was prevented from broadcasting my Webcam. Why ? Because I run Win2k.

    MSN Messenger informed me that in order for it (a stand-alone application, one would think...) to work with a Webcam I had to upgrade to XP.

    So we just used Yahoo instead.

    However, the more I think about it, the more it annoyed me...to get an application to work I have to upgrade the OS, when other vendors are perfectly able to provide the same features without the upgrade ? I suppose it's what they call great marketing...

  79. Re:HA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No this is my first post I'm higher on the food chain. Giove it to me or I'll dance the dance of brotherly love. In a city by an ocean. With a clock tower. That is so high off the ground you don't know what the time is unless you are in an aeroplane. That will help you see it ,but you'll go fast. So fast, it will be hard to read individual numbers on a clock style thing. So in conclusion, be good to yourself, and each other.

  80. Completely Legal by toupsie · · Score: 2
    So the "problem" was presented as evidence of wrong doing, so they went ahead and fixed it. Is this similar to tampering with evidence?

    No, this is not evidence tampering. The version of Windows used to present this "bug/feature" is still intact. What Microsoft has done is released a patch to fix this "bug/feature" for the general public. The copy of Windows submitted into evidence is still in the same state as it was upon being submitted.

    However, fixing this problem does make Microsoft look more guilty (if that is possible).

    --
    Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
  81. Let me tell you about IE6 by Rareul · · Score: 1

    If you miss type a URL on the address line, IE6 default configuration is to search MSN.com for
    the misstyped URL. Of course, you can turn this address line searching off in the
    tools>options>advanced menu, but if you mistype another URL, it'll turn itself right back on.

    No shit -- try it at home.

  82. not to be paranoid, but... by EccentricAnomaly · · Score: 2

    "We need to keep all of this off the airwaves."

    You always see stuff like this in leaked microsoft emails / memos, whatever...

    This makes me wonder if there's anything else out there that they've successfully managed to keep off of the airwaves... I mean, since they keep saying to keep things hush hush it must be working or else they wouldn't even bother to send an email out and trust people to keep it quiet... So far everything that's been leaked is about things that are already know like FUD...

    I just have to wonder what other secrets are lurking in Mordor...

    --
    There are 10 types of people in this world, those who can count in binary and those who can't.
    1. Re:not to be paranoid, but... by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 2
      Of course. Unless you figure they're all really stupid. Don't you think some of the people at Microsoft are smart enough to keep things under wraps? It's a mercy that some of them ARE stupid enough to break 'radio silence'.

      That, or the culture they're in is so utterly 'kill everybody else, rule for 1000 years' that it's a constant struggle for them NOT to publically go "hey, wreck the competing software! Embrace and extend, jerk them around, run them out of business and be the only person making commercial software anymore! 100%! 100%!"

      These are the people who were led in chants of 'Microsoft, kill 'em!' by Steve Ballmer. You have to wonder what they're really after? Wonder, instead, what they consider a legitimate boundary. Are they satisfied with ruling only all software and computers?

    2. Re:not to be paranoid, but... by shren · · Score: 2

      They're obviously a cult. And since computer code can be munitions, and we never know what they're hiding in the depths of thier hard drives, it's time to send the BATF and FBI in to kill them all and burn the place to the ground, in whichever order they'd like.

      --
      Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
    3. Re:not to be paranoid, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You always see stuff like this in leaked microsoft emails / memos, whatever..."

      Microsoft has had the government rooting through their e-mail system since 1992 at least. You'd think they'd eventually get the idea.

  83. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by el_chicano · · Score: 2
    It's been a while since I've installed it as a plugin, but I don't recall being given the choice on WAV files the last time I installed it
    Fair enough, but when installing Real or Quicktime you do get asked about the associations. I am very careful to make sure I choose the right associations but if a non-expert is installing these products then they could possibly run into some problems.
    No applet or plugin should associate itself with a media type without some means to undo that specific association.
    What is wrong with uninstalling the old product? Also, installing the new program will reset the associations for you. I prefer WinAmp for WAV files, so I just install WinAmp. I don't even have to uninstall the Windows Media Player.

    And speaking of the Windows Media Player, I don't see where your complaint is coming from. Simply upgrade the player at the Windows Update site. If you upgrade IE you also get offered a chance to update your Windows Media Player. It is really not that hard.

    The big problem with doing it this way is that you will have to fix the associations that Microsoft so thoughtfully broke for you afterwards... :-<
    --
    A man who wants nothing is invincible
  84. Perhaps you meant 10%? by Silverhammer · · Score: 2

    Since it is default OS on all Macs now shipping, OS X alone is at least 2 or 3 percent of the home computing market.

  85. anger HER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kathleen is a woman's name, generally, in America.

    1. Re:anger HER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kathleen is a woman's name in Ireland, but what has that got to do with THIS story? Huh huh huh? Huh? Huh?

  86. Geez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moderator who modded this down: do you have any clue what 'overrated' means?

    Dictionary.com says:
    To overestimate the merits of; rate too highly.

    This was posted with a user who has +2 by default. You were the first person to moderate this post. How then, do you deem it as overrated? If no merits have been estimated (moderated), how do you come across as marking the post as overrated? YOU WERE THE FIRST ESTIMATOR!

    I won't go into the value of this post, I think it's a valuable, insightful post but that's just opinion. If you don't like it, at least moderate down as troll or something respectful. By marking it as 'overrated' you have shown that you have no idea what the word means, and therefore are not the most intelligent moderator on Slashdot. It's because of moderators like you that the moderation system is under fire. Please, think before you moderate.

  87. Divide and Conquer by PM4RK5 · · Score: 2

    Let's divide this project in to sub-components, so when we get conquered we will be able to can the entire (insert team here) team and claim "those people were lying sons of b*tches. We've canned 'em and we're clean now. Now leave us alone to hire another equally bad team." Not to mention that the (insert team here) was instructed to do so, and as such - if they DIDN'T program it in, they'd get fired. And when M$ gets caught, they're fired anyway.

    Bah. "Mistake on the part of the Search team." It's more like "Netscape found... and removed. Press OK to apologize."

  88. Re:Yeah, that will work... sure. by HoaryCripple · · Score: 1

    Nope, I don't get the point. Everything that you say is FUD. People need to understand this: Good alternatives exist.

    Now go get yourself a real operating system.

  89. Has anyone else noticed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has any one else noticed what ie does not find?
    Try the auto complete web address feature to auto complete the url for slashdot and see what happens.

    M$ say it aint so!

    1. Re:Has anyone else noticed? by gamorck · · Score: 0

      It works fine - so please attempt to come up with a better anti MS troll next time, okay?

      J

      --
      I love idealists not because I am one, but because they make life bearable for pragmatists such as myself.
  90. hoping you are wrong by Alien54 · · Score: 2
    I hope you are wrong.

    The way MS eecutives and apologists are screaming reminds me of the way Republicans were protesting the innocence of Richard Nixon, right up to the day He pesigned as President due to the threatened impeachment. There is a similarity in the nervous hysteria.

    Of course, clinton showed it is possible to survive if you have your partisans in a row, and people are going after you for the wrong reasons. Mind you, I think Clinton should have been nailed, but not for the reasons that were used.

    Keeping on point, the appearance in some quarters is that of superbly restrained terror.

    These folks don't get it.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  91. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's because the luser parent poster assumed you had the same OS; try just right-clicking on the file, that was the way the older MS OSs brought up that context menu.

  92. I wanna replace everything with every other thing by edbarrett · · Score: 1

    Man, the way things are going, MS might be better off resurrecting OpenDoc or something.

  93. Real Sanctions by FFtrDale · · Score: 1
    If politicians and lawyers often fail to understand technological issues, there is something they will understand: a sports analogy!

    When the University of Oklahoma was found to have committed recruiting violations in connection with its football program, it was punished with a five (?) year suspension of eligibility to participate in end-of-season Bowl games (note to non-U.S. readers: these are very popular, extremely lucrative showcase exhibition games, and the potential to play in them upon making the team is a motive for choosing one school over another by prospective University students who play football). Oklahoma's football program was effectively crushed by this penalty; it was only assessed after proof that the violations had been serious, pervasive and persistent over years. That's kind of the way it's been for Microsoft, except they still act as though they can never be assessed a penalty serious enough to make their company change its ways.

    An analogous penalty to punish anticompetitive behavior by a monopoly: No Enforcement of Copyright for Microsoft products for One Full Year!

    --
    Think, write, think, edit, think...then post.
    1. Re:Real Sanctions by HiThere · · Score: 2

      Why reward them?

      This would only increase their market penetration. Granted, it's nearly total now, but this is what they did on purpose for many years as a marketing ploy.

      If you want to hurt them, expire their copyrights.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  94. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Quicktime had NO BUSINESS handling formats the native software could already handle..."
    Excuse me? So, if you install Photoshop on a computer, you're going to be upset that it starts handling .JPG and other image files which are already handled natively?
    Quicktime is not an audio player, it is a multimedia engine. It is DESIGNED to handle a large range of file types, and yes, many of them are handled "natively". But, the installation allows you to choose what file type Quicktime is allowed to handle, so you're free to edit your JPGs in MS Paintbrush .

  95. Is this any different than Google delisting sites? by dave-fu · · Score: 2

    Google listing scientology sites ostensibly means they'll get sued and lose money in the process.
    Microsoft listing Real Audio links means their users will have to go through the agony of installing that godawful media player and possibly fricking up their systems, causing someone along the lines lost money and time trying to get that parasite off the machine. Worst-case (and you're grasping at straws here if you believe it) is that MS' _free_ media player is losing mindshare to Real's buggy, crash-happy, costly media player, which somehow translates into, uh. Lost revenue for Real in the same way that delisting scientology sites on Google translates into lost money for scientology?
    Either that or shame on Microsoft for not advertising its competition.

    --
    Easy does it!
    This comment has been submitted already, 276865 hours , 59 minutes ago. No need to try again.
  96. Why 'Your Rights Online?' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod me as a troll, but why is this 'Your rights online?' Is Microsoft legislating this search filtering? Is the Gub'mint endorsing this practice? Are Russian hackers going to jail for figuring out a way to circumvent the search engine?

    Nigga please.

  97. Re:I wanna replace everything with every other thi by BeeShoo · · Score: 1

    Oh man, I wish. I loved OpenDoc. No, the concept wasn't fully developed yet, but it had SO much potential. I really wish Apple would bring it back.
    ...but not to bail out MS :-)

  98. and what about ms-media-only radio stations ? by fea · · Score: 1

    A case in point, my favorite station is www.wdvx.com (americana) which only plays microsoft media because the time is donated and that is their only choice. So, I have to use vmware to play my favorite internet radio.

  99. Hardly FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He/She actually raises several valid points. Although MS is responsible for burying the good OSs that could have competed with it, and limiting the OEMs from bundling other OSs, there really isn't much of an alternative today to an MS operating system for the home user.

    1) Remember, the average home user just doesn't have a masters in computer theory and use. They need it simple. Linux (multiple distros) is the only choice, and not one exists that is not far more complicated and far less 'plug-and-play' than an MS operating system.

    2) Can you run out to Best Buy or EBWorld and buy the latest game or Office XP or just about any other hot title for linux? No. Worse, alot of linux releases on the net of any qualitative value require you to know which distro you have and/or how to recompile.

    3) Slashdot recently posted (rather touted, though I don't think it's anything to crow about) that 1 in 5 hardware vendors today support *nix in someway in their product line and drivers. This is a grim number IMHO... if you can't run out and get that latest/greatest USB device or audio card, etc... to enjoy on your computer, there is a big hinderance to adoption in your home of an alterantive OS.

    As well, alot of drivers are cobbled together by people in the scene who mean well but usually are not qualified to really be doing it. While some guys/girls crank out solid drivers (depending on distro and kernel), quite a few are only partially working or don't work at all except in a very specific configuratino of hardware and kernel/distro.

    4) Standards, standards, standards. Linux is not the king of standards, nor is the majority of software distributed for it. Emulators, plug-in managers and integrators, or just plain non-compliance is the order of the day when running Linux. The browsers, with maybe th exception of the pending Mozilla 1.0, all suck in some way and really don't do a good job on today's web (which is comprised of 75% sites optimized for IE). This is, next to interface/functionality/design the biggest issue facing the Linux world.

    1. Re:Hardly FUD by HoaryCripple · · Score: 1

      1) Remember, the average home user just doesn't have a masters in computer theory and use. They need it simple. Linux (multiple distros) is the only choice, and not one exists that is not far more complicated and far less 'plug-and-play' than an MS operating system.



      Have you seen the multiple articles on the Register and elsewhere comparing the installation of Windows to Mandrake? Mandrake is easier. But that's not the point, because how many users actually install Windows? Very few. Instead, through anti-competitive practices, Windows is thrust upon the general public, who do not know how to buy a computer without a pre-installed operating system.

      4) Standards, standards, standards. Linux is not the king of standards, nor is the majority of software distributed for it. Emulators, plug-in managers and integrators, or just plain non-compliance is the order of the day when running Linux. The browsers, with maybe th exception of the pending Mozilla 1.0, all suck in some way and really don't do a good job on today's web (which is comprised of 75% sites optimized for IE). This is, next to interface/functionality/design the biggest issue facing the Linux world.


      I hope you're not insinuating that Windows is the king of standards. If you are not, then the comparison to linux is invalid. If you are, well, surely you must be joking.

      3) Slashdot recently posted (rather touted, though I don't think it's anything to crow about) that 1 in 5 hardware vendors today support *nix in someway in their product line and drivers. This is a grim number IMHO... if you can't run out and get that latest/greatest USB device or audio card, etc... to enjoy on your computer, there is a big hinderance to adoption in your home of an alterantive OS


      Support from 1 in 5 vendors is a great achievement for the free software community. What, you think that this ratio is going to diminish? What was that ratio just a couple of years ago? The fact is that free software, and Linux in particular is making great inroads, gaining mindshare.

      2) Can you run out to Best Buy or EBWorld and buy the latest game or Office XP or just about any other hot title for linux? No. Worse, alot of linux releases on the net of any qualitative value require you to know which distro you have and/or how to recompile.


      I'll grudgingly give you this point :) But, you are incorrect if you think that a kernel recompile is necessary for good Linux software. Take RedHat for example, the kernel that it ships with has almost everything available as a module. No recompilation necessary. I'm sure it's the same with Mandrake or other "user friendly" distros.
    2. Re:Hardly FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Have you seen the multiple articles on the Register and elsewhere comparing the installation of Windows to Mandrake? Mandrake is easier. But that's not the point, because how many users actually install Windows? Very few. Instead, through anti-competitive practices, Windows is thrust upon the general public, who do not know how to buy a computer without a pre-installed operating system."

      Have you installed this yourself on a computer you bought at say BB or CC? How about just dropping in peripheral after peripheral as an add on and doing a tally on what MS supports and what ANY or ALL linux distros support. Whoops.

      "Support from 1 in 5 vendors is a great achievement for the free software community. What, you think that this ratio is going to diminish? What was that ratio just a couple of years ago? The fact is that free software, and Linux in particular is making great inroads, gaining mindshare."

      You think so? 1 in five vendors, only 2 of which are in the fortune 500. Out of that, less than 10% of their combined product lines (less than 2% if you take out the two *nix centric hardware vendors) are built in part or wholey to run on linux. Worse, some don't get driver updates regularly, if at all, after release to account for updates in distro's and kernels.

      "I hope you're not insinuating that Windows is the king of standards. If you are not, then the comparison to linux is invalid. If you are, well, surely you must be joking."

      MS the king of standards... nope. Better than most, yes. Further, they set some standards, for good or bad, that you cannot escape and which are indeed standards since they are adopted so widely. This may suck, but it's reality, and the only way to get around it is to put forward a good browser and OS that completely meet all standards solidly. Graphics and audio for entertainment, as well as even adhearance to Java and HTML 4/CSS standards are far worse in all but possibly Mozilla (and IE is faster than Mozilla by a huge margin).

    3. Re:Hardly FUD by Darby · · Score: 1

      You think so? 1 in five vendors, only 2 of which are in the fortune 500

      What relevance does the fortune 500 have to the issue? How many of these companies even make *any* products that are at all related to computers?
      I'm sure bummed that I can't use my Caterpillar video card.

      MS the king of standards... nope. Better than most, yes.

      A little advice, making blatantly false statements that are in fact utterly ridiculous is too obvious to make a proper troll. MS is known in the standards arena *primarily* for conciously breaking them.
      I know, I know IHBT

  100. MS Putting the Squeeze on Alternative Audio by dlparker · · Score: 1

    And in the most shocking development in this story to date: people are still surprised by this...

  101. full API documentation by Tony-A · · Score: 2

    full *AND ACCURATE* API documentation detailing all APIs that non-OS tasks can call.
    Bought any bridges lately?

  102. I'm not angry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I don't have the energy for it anymore.

    I have been in the software industry since 1987, and have seen Microsoft criminally screw people over year after year, with no signs of slowing down. When Judge Jackson's penalty came out, I had some hope, but since then I have just completely given up.

    Microsoft can do anything they want. They will keep doing anything they want. The lumbering DOJ will keep trying to zero in on them, but will keep missing the target as Microsoft sidesteps and bullshits them. I see no reason why Microsoft will not be able to keep this up indefinitely.

    No effective actions will ever take place against Microsoft. I'm absolutely sure of this. In this case, more of the usual screw-the-competition stuff is found, they say "oops" and "fix" it, but it doesn't matter: the damage to their feeble competition has been done, they have plenty more undiscovered traps ready to harm the competition, and they will keep planting more.

    Microsoft's competition is being kept half-dead through a thousand small cuts, not any heavy strokes. The environment as it stands is exactly how Microsoft likes it: no competition manages to keep their balance, the DOJ can never find any single serious crimes, but most importantly Microsoft keeps growing bigger and stronger steadily but slow enough that nobody gets alarmed.

    Forget about Kotar-Kelly, or whatever her name is. If she doesn't get bought out, Microsoft will appeal on the grounds that the market and their own behavior has changed so significantly during the course of the trial that her resolution is no longer "appropriate". Or something like that. You get the idea. Microsoft has enough cash, lawyers and most importantly rich shareholders in public office to keep the DOJ sideshow going on for all of eternity if need be.

  103. Re:Modularity = Bad Software by Zeinfeld · · Score: 1
    What ever happened to modularity of code being one of the pillars of software engineering?

    That is actually what the prof is getting at. IE is actually a pretty small EXE that calls several DLLs that are part of the O/S proper.

    What this means is that every program running on Windows can make use of the http protocol module without having to write its own. Every program can make use of the XML parser, HTML display widget etc. etc.

    On a linux box Mozilla is a monolithic piece of code. You can add plug ins into Mozilla, but it is not designed to allow you to reuse the components (except by going to the source).

    What this means is that there are a lot of other Windows features that depend on the IE dlls. For example Quicken and tax cut both use the http and html DLLs. So you can remove the IE shell from the system, but that is only the interface, it is not the application. If you remove the IE DLLs really bad things start to happen (and things you want to happen stop happening).

    --
    Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
    Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  104. Why a by theolein · · Score: 1

    Can anyone tell me why the this parent isn't at 0 or -1 for posting a link to microsoft and teeling us not to rely on the news services?

    1. Re:Why a by sheldon · · Score: 2

      Can anyone tell me why this parent isn't at 0 or -1 for whining about a link he obviously didn't check to see what it was?

      hint: I linked to the trial transcripts. If you know of a better link, then post it. moderation should be based on value of the message, not whether or not it mentions Microsoft or not.

    2. Re:Why a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missed the point entirely.
      Normally when you want to have news about
      a crime you aren't likely to get accurate
      news by asking the criminal for information.

    3. Re:Why a by sheldon · · Score: 2

      Please explain to me exactly how court transcripts can be misrepresented in any way?

      Until you do, you have no point to miss.

  105. Sick of these posts every microsoft story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Well, there's a story in which a Microsoft employee admitted to wrongdoing - time to make some lame-ass joke with the lead-in 'In other news'..."

    Seriously, does anyone else think these posts are fucking lame?

  106. IT IS TRUE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Microslop just can NOT suck enough.

    They make ol' John D. look positively meek in comparison. That's John D. Rockefeller, if you were wondering.

    All you reactionary horse's asses out there, take note: even a notable 'conservative' such as Robert H. Bork knows an outrageous affront to capitalism when he sees one.

    There is precious little in the way of redeeming factors in what MS does as a matter of course, day in and day out, in their quest to eliminate even the possibility of competition. MS is utterly nefarious.

  107. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by i_am_pi · · Score: 1

    Yes.. If you keep QuickTime's checkboxes off, it doesn't go around being evil to other programs, unlike RealPlayer/RealOne/M$ Media player.

    Pi

  108. Here's the VB for the offending search engine by mlamb · · Score: 1

    Yup... looks like they accidentally left out Real.

    Public Sub cmdSearch_Click(Query as String)
    ' (snipped for brevity - this is a pretty long sub)
    else if ucase(Query) = "READING" then
    WebBrowser1.Navigate "http ://search.msn.com/results.asp?q=reading"
    else if ucase(Query) = "READY" then
    WebBrowser1.Navigate "http ://search.msn.com/results.asp?q=ready"
    else if ucase(Query) = "REALLY" then
    WebBrowser1.Navigate "http ://search.msn.com/results.asp?q=really"
    ' (more snipped)
    End Sub

  109. Re:Stupid Employees! Bad! Bad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it's pretty simple to get them to reject you... just say you want to a lead architect on something, fresh out of university...

  110. Huh? by tshak · · Score: 2

    I've been running WinAmp as my default audio player since IE4. I'm running IE6, and MP3's (etc.) automatically play in Winamp when I click on them.

    --

    There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
  111. Now the fun starts. by Tony-A · · Score: 2

    I don't see anywhere in your quote where the gentlemen acknowledges why they need to keep it off the airwaves nor do I see anything that implies that he thinks the discussion implies guilt or wrongdoing.
    Not relevant. The question is whether it could be construed as implying guilt or wrongdoing. Microsoft will find itself increasingly in the situation of having to prove itself innocent.

    Personally I'm just tired of buzz word bingo and buzz phrase bingo where the media and people take statements without qualification and read deeper more meaningful intent into them.
    It will get worse ;)

    sophistry - 1 : subtly deceptive reasoning or argumentation
    It's even more fun when the conclusions are accurate.
    What did Microsoft do wrong today ;)

  112. Re:Modularity = Bad Software by StiffMittens · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Are these DLLs part of the OS or are they part of IE? I mean, I think that is the whole issue here. Isn't it? Microsoft has made it's web browser an integral part of the OS. In other words, if I choose to remove an application (namely MSIE) from my system, it really shouldn't remove part of the core OS along with it. For example, if I want to change the windshield wiper blades on my car, I would be very upset if the distributor cap was connected to the wipers in such a way that if I remove the wiper blades, I also remove the distributor cap. Wouldn't you be?

    --
    Some are given suckers and some get lollipops
  113. Good Riddance to Spyware by Luceo · · Score: 1

    I'm glad that this happened - RealPlayer is accursed spyware anyway. Hopefully it'll drive down their market share and put them out of business.

  114. Does the American majority really care??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These proceedings make for great entertainment.

    But, willl there be a breakup, will there be
    stiff penalties, does anyone listen to Nunez,
    Bork, or others. Can the 'average' American
    really grasp the importance of what is going on???

    Maybe the only thing that will save America is
    the fact that the right to own guns is legal.
    At least until MS says its not.

    Orwell wrote about what would happen in 1984.
    But did not describe how it all came to be.

    We're watching it now...(hopefully not)

  115. Get Judge Judy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about Judge Judy? I bet she could handle it.

  116. ogg by lazelank · · Score: 2, Informative

    this is completely off topic, but, i just recently upgraded to winamp 2.8 and it includes the .ogg plugin. it just made me happy.

  117. The extra cost of making it modular... by malfunct · · Score: 1
    I hope everyone realizes who will be paying the extra cost of making the OS modular if that becomes a requirment. Its the end user both in increased cost of the initial product and in nightmares or usability. Just imagine if instead of real being an application on top of the OS that you installed it as an integrated part? Can we say "My OS doesn't work anymore"? I'm sorry but I don't think any of the other companies have a right to argue that thier products don't integrate as well as MS's.

    On the subject of the "search" problem I think MS did fuck up by hard coding the list of search terms (it may have been for perf reasons I don't know). There should be a registry key or something of the sort that holds "rules" for what is a music file. That way Real could add to that if people wanted it. That is extra development time though and development time that mostly benifits competitors. Its not a great analogy but I don't think it should be ford's responsibility to make sure that all the connections are there and working well so that I can put a chevy engine in my truck. Windows is a unified product that is an OS as well as a number of highly integrated utilities for doing common tasks. In that way its like a whole car. They don't manufacture a chassis that you put your own stuff on top of, its more like they build a full truck that just happens to haul some extra cargo and allow add ons to do more things. I agree this is a MAJOR advertisement against MS for some people, but as far as it goes many people would like to pop in 1 cd (or soon dvd) for windows and know that when it installs they will be able to do almost anything that they want to with no further installs. And knowing that if you install a game or two or a music player on top of that it will work is also required.

    As far as the "in browser" playing of the files, so long as you remember to say no to that feature your user preference is retained (at least mine was). If you say yes when it asks if you want to play the music "in browser" then you are saying yes I want to use WMP.

    What I see is a fight between choice and a unified look and feel for everyone. If you allow choice you blow that unified look and feel all to hell. Personally I don't give a rats behind what program plays my music from the browser as long as it does it well and it doesn't stop me from using a different player to play music outside the browser.

    --

    "You can now flame me, I am full of love,"

    1. Re:The extra cost of making it modular... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not a great analogy but I don't think it should be ford's responsibility to make sure that all the connections are there and working well so that I can put a chevy engine in my truck.

      You're right - it's a terrible analogy. A better "car" analogy would be: It is/isn't Ford's responsibility to make sure all the connections are there and working well so that I can put a non-Ford stereo in the dash.

  118. Re:Modularity = Bad Software by pbuxton · · Score: 1
    Not quite true. Mozilla's rendering engine is used quite handily by Galeon, so Mozilla is at least that much modular, and probably more.

    Hopefully, as Moz and XFree86 mature, as well as GNOME and KDE, component sharing will become only more prevalent.

  119. They're not only scum-bags but dumb fuck-wits. by crovira · · Score: 2

    Do they think all their users are morons?

    Do they think that they can treat people like shit for years and years and have NOBODY wise up?

    Do they think we're all going to put up with this unrepentant behavior without ever exacting retribution?

    Wanna see what happend when you push Americans to far? Look at Afghanistan. The Soviets couldn't do in ten years what the Yanks did in a few months.

    Mr Gates' you're pushing our buttons the wrong way.

    If I owned any stock, I'd seriously think about letting Bill Gate's have it ALL back. (100% of doodly squat is still doodly squat.)

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  120. Not sure which, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...I can understand why you'd not willingly accept what you think is a virus... The software you choose to run lets all the others in anyway...

  121. You are the biggest Moron on Slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The soviets couldn't do nothing in 10 years because it was just like America's vietnam... this is a country that has been over-run through out history and it's people know the land and how to fight. They got knew the ground, they got weapons from the US, and they suffered immensley.

    We went into an area that was ripe for turn over... the Al Queda movement was hated in that country by most. Big difference. Fool.

    You don't have stock (any) because you are a moron who works at McDonalds and plays with your P0rn on your P75 linux box. Grow up, moron.

  122. Re:Stupid Employees! Bad! Bad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prosecution: Did m$ hamper searches to real's products in ie6? Just yes or no please!

    m$'s uber smart and honest worker: Your honor, I can explain. With my "Rhode's scholar winning, 4.0 GPA, full ride to Haaahhhhvaaad (MIT, Cal-tech, Yale, etc.), over achieving, 1600 on the SAT...."

    (interupted)
    Prosecution: Just answer with Yes or No! There is no need for explanations.

    m$'s uber smart and honest worker: But your honor, I can explain, if you give me a chance. I think I deserve the chance due to my "Rhode's scholar winning, 4.0 GPA, full ride to...."

    (interupted)
    Judge (now annoyed:) Yes yes "Haaahhhhvaaad (MIT, Cal-tech, Yale, etc.), over achieving, 1600 on the SAT," but do you understand the question asked of you? Answer with Yes or No Please!!!

    m$'s uber smart and honest worker: The truth, your honor, is I am lying and I am saying No. This is the best coaching truth I can admit to "without hurting the case."

  123. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by dvNull · · Score: 1

    With Real I do not know since I dont use RealPlayer except on my Linux box. Come to think of it Quicktime is also run on my linux box.

    Quicktime asks you to select the files you want quicktime to play when it is installed. Uncheck 2 boxes and Quicktime plays only Quicktime movies.

  124. Not just the exploder, check here --- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft is busy somewhere else too.
    Try to choose Real Audio to listen to
    the hockey game here
    http://www.canadiens.com/francais/

    Choose Multimédia
    Then pick Real Audio as your choice.

    ooppss it gives you Microsoft multimedia
    instead, very usefull shit under Linux
    ain't it?

    1. Re:Not just the exploder, check here --- by MacDaffy · · Score: 1

      There's another longstanding instance of this: has anyone managed to download Netscape Navigator using a Microsoft browser?

  125. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by lpevey · · Score: 1

    If you have a version of windows prior to ME, you may have to Shift + right click to get the open with option.

  126. Lame Justice Department by Jesus+IS+the+Devil · · Score: 1

    Our incompetent government entity, the one they call the Justice Department, needs to be severely delt with. Can't believe they want to settle with M$. Can they see that M$ has NOT changed one bit? The ONLY way to teach M$ to behave is to serve them with a punishment that teaches them NOT to continue doing this sort of thing. So far all I see is M$ thumbing its nose at the U.S. government saying "screw you".

    Let the punishment fit the crime. If I hear another god damn "settlement" proposal from the government I'm gonna go crazy!

    --

    eTrade SUCKS
  127. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hmmmm.. shift + right click will work in win98, win98se, winME, winNT 4 (sp4 & 6), win2k (sp1 & sp2), win XP beta, and win XP Pro. Never tried it in win95.

  128. You are a stupid idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Jealous asshole, America is the greatest
    country in the world.

    We are the best at everything. Gates is
    not America.

    1. Re:You are a stupid idiot by StiffMittens · · Score: 1

      Gates is America! Because as we all remember from history class: "the busines of America is big business". And yes, America is the best at everything. But "everything" is mainly comprised of raping the land, exploiting the masses, and stamping out philosophical differences. And who am I jealous of? You? Certainly not! You're a weak-minded media dupe who's too afraid to stand by you own words, so you post them anonymously. Remember: the king of the idiots is still an idiot. All you seem to see is a king.

      --
      Some are given suckers and some get lollipops
  129. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by BenJeremy · · Score: 1

    I'm running Win2k, and that DOES NOT WORK in IE.

    FileExplorer, certainly. We are talking about IE associations, not File Explorer associations, which are ENTIRELY DIFFERENT.

    Geez....

  130. There's an even better way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Copy and paste the crack regcode.

    Voila! No more nags. And you sort of got the 'pro' version ...for free!

  131. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by zachdms · · Score: 1

    Dude, don't you think people have TRIED that? QuickTime, RealPlayer, MusicMatch, and WinAMP all have anti-user behavior wherein they can proactively take extension ownership without user notification. It's Really Cool to remap the associations in Explorer (or even in regedit) and watch RealJukebox change them back without telling you. Lots of cool user-love coming from RealNetworks there.

  132. Re:RealPlayer and Quicktime are AWFUL audio plugin by JPriest · · Score: 1

    My mistake, you are correct.

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
  133. English usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, I'm pretty sure the word you're searching for is "Biasednessicity". HTH! HAND!

  134. Preview by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, if you previewed that post and fixed all the mistakes, it might have been a good post worth the +1 bonus. Instead, I think you should be modded down.

  135. Re:Browser part of the OS? No... [OT] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > And, how convenient: as soon as .Net gets going for
    > real, apps will be ditributed and you won't ever
    > have to leave the browser to do anything.
    Funny, Emacs is like that to me... :)

  136. CRACK MODERATORS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This should of course been moderated as INSIGHTFUL!
    gawd...

  137. Ford... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Ford cars would breaking down ever 10,000 miles forcing you to buy a new one
    Funny... everyone I know who owns a Ford had it break down after 10,000 miles...
  138. It Should Be Called The Rent-A-Justice Dept by JLucien · · Score: 1

    Because that's sure as hell what it seems like these days.

    If you can pay more for it then the other guy, then it's all yours, plain and simple.

    --
    Audere est Facere
  139. MS line of reasoning by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 2

    Anything bad for MS is evil and nasty and ought not to exist, for reasons of national security.

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  140. How to get rid of QT Pro prompter by hearingaid · · Score: 2
    This works, and it's easy.
    1. Boot your system.
    2. Change the system date to sometime in the future; 2036 should do.
    3. Start QT Player, ignoring the prompt.
    4. Exit QT Player.
    5. Correct your system time, perhaps using an NTP server.
    Now, your QT Player will not prompt you again until 2036.
    --

    my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore

  141. Just gets worse for MS by HardTronic · · Score: 1

    Don't fool yourselves. Nothing is going to happen to Microsoft - they have bought and paid for this new judge who will NOT bring them to justice. It is all just a big show for the public to give the appearance that the US government is willing to protect the people against big corporations. Too many favors, to much campaign money, and too much government back scratching since they got the real judge thrown off the case.

    --
    I use the KISS formula...