Slashdot Mirror
States Drop Planned Presentation of Modular Windows
sketchkid writes "CNBC just reported that the nine states have dropped their planned presentation of a version of Windows XP without certain "middleware". Apparently, Microsoft said the news of this presentation blindsided them and that they would need "an indefinite period of time to prepare its response", but the states don't want to prolong the case any more."
Isn't demonstrating a modular Windows key to the States' case showing it can be done? Maybe they had problems with their version and didn't want to shoot themselves in the foot...
Think of it from the States' point of view: "Yeah, we've got a version of the OS running modularly, but you didn't want us to show it. So no, you can't see how we did it. But you'd better get cracking."
In addition, they don't actually have to demonstrate its stability and all that -- it's just taken at face value that it's stable enough, since that's how it was presented when it was introduced.
This is great. Looks like a win-win scenario for the States.
MS Marketing and sales personnel probably make presentations on XP Embedded every week. Surely MS can just fly a couple of their marketing people to help fill in the gaps where the demo falls short.
Not that surprising really. Having used Embedded NT in the past I was more then a little confused as to what they where going to demonstrate. Sure, embedded windows is modular during the rollout phase. However once installed it cant be changed. In other words you cant install Word onto it once its up and running. In this respect it is not a good example of what the DOJ is after MS to produce, a modular end user OS.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
The states had MS nailed on the modularity issue. They should push on. I smell some campaign funds being spread around.
It's MS's product. How long can it take for MS to study an MS product and work up a defense?
This isn't even as fun as the Wookie defense.
Is anyone else tired of seeing tiny scraps of news about MS on Slashdot everyday? There's two articles about MS today, one yesterday. Thinking back, it seems that there have been one or two stories posted about Microsoft everyday lately.
I like Slashdot for stories about tech, science and geek curios. Could the editors leave reporting every detail of the trial to CNN, and focus on more interesting stuff? Please?
It really would take an indefinite time period to un-fuck windows. Anybody who has done coding for an O/S or a large application knows the difficulties inherent in un-fucking any kludgey pile of spaghetti code.
More problems would be introduced in the process, rendering the final product very unstable. This is exactly what Microsoft wants to demonstrate--that the O/S can not function with IE removed.
"What is the sound of one belly slapping?"
I really, really, really hope this is a good judge. There is plenty of good signs, she allowed this demo, but she's been *really* careful to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt and every turn. Microsoft has been convicted and that conviction has been upheld on appeal, so she has only to set a fair and reasonable sentence.
The real concern I have is that she's been so good there is not going to be much room for an appeal either way ...
It sounds like Microsoft wins this round
Not hardly. Microsot was lying, telling the judge that it is not possible to have WEindows without Media Player and other "middleware". This is about how long it would take Microsoft to come up with a response to the states demonstration that it CAN be done.
The point is made on the judge that it can be done, that Microsoft was lying.
Of course, what it will come down to is whether this judge is a member of the Federalist Society. It won't be about the law.
You need to think a little bit more like lawyer to see how they can score points in the trial.
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
Look, the bottom line is that of course it's modular and of course Microsoft has put connections to try to bind things together (in, many times, a really poor hack as I pointed out in a previous comment).
:-) )
The legal tactic the Gov is using is smart (for a change). They are pulling a "Microsoft" - say they are going to do it, so now people know it can be done, and then not doing it because it wastes time.
Go Gov! (in this case
I was baffeled when I read this. There are time restrictions on these sorts of things. If you are involved in a civil lawsuit with another person, and they present some document evidence that you hadn't seen before, you can't say "Woa! This is gonna take me a year or two to review and come up with a rebuttle for.". You can't hold up the courts and your opponent indefintely with your problems. The judge should recognize that MS has known about the modular Windows project for as long as it has existed, realize that MS has the resources to analyze the project fairly quickly and effectively (they wrote the code originally), and give MS a limited amount of time (I would say no more than a month) to prepare a rebuttle.
This seems like a very irrational action on the state's part, to the point that I would begin to suspect dirty tricks on someone's part (most likely MS). They have been in this legal action for such a long time already, what's a few more weeks up to a month? Unless the judge would allow the "indefinite" amount of time MS claims it needs, which would be complete BS IMO.
If it's necessary, why did Microsoft sign the consent degree NOT TO bundle IE in the first place?
No MS-apologist could answer that question so far....
Perhaps the dear reader of the twice-above post will realize that neither moral justice nor the public's economic interest is best served when justice hinges upon the ability to pay. Or perhaps they will just walk away having recieved the message that "Microsoft is evil." I have no moral qualms about putting that message into people's heads, as Microsoft's behavior record should be what people use in deciding the value to society of a corporation. If and when they finally prove me wrong, I promise to recant. However, with the actions WRT Opera, Dr. Dos, Samba, security through obscurity, planned obselescence and obfuscation of the Word file format, and the proposed school computer settlement, I might as well promise to move to Tibet upon a semblance of a genuine corporate philanthropy.
This Sig is a mnemonic device designed to allow you to recognize this author in the future.
WHO GIVES A FLYING FUCK ABOUT HOW MODULAR WINDOWS XP/NT IS !!!!!!
will it allow OEM's to include multiple OS's on the bootloader without fear of recrimination from MS ?? NO (rip BeOS)
will it allow third party developers to openly interact with MS systems/formats/protocols - without resorting to reverse engineering which is now illegal (DMCA) ?? NO
will it stop MS from embracing and extending open standards and protocols and hence locking out competitors ?? NO
MS is brilliant - they are kicking up a huge fuss over something that at the end of the day doesnt impede their monopolistic practices/status much at all. The choice at the end of the day will still be MS + XYZ modules or MS + ABC modules - ITS STILL WINDOWS!!!!!!
This whole Microsoft trial has given everyone, pro- and anti- Microsoft a bad feeling. The pros because they feel that the world is out to get them and the antis because of all that MS has done to abuse it's position and it's total lack of respect of anyone and anything else. What saddens me is that it seems that MS will never lose any trial because even if they were to be broken up or whatever they would just ignore the judgement, as they have in the past and they would no doubt adapt by by moving all applications into the OS for example. It seems no American government will ever be able to or want to stop them.
In other words I think this trial is a waste of time. I think it would be better to fight MS's abuse there where one can, i.e. when they make a clear cut illegal licence or EULA and above all for OSS people to continue to improve the UI of Linux and to work towards making applications like OpenOffice and Mozilla better. At the same time it would be wise to continue the personal efforts to show schools and businesses that OSS can be just as good if not better.
Apart from that the one legal measure that would be the most telling would be an audit of MS' code to see where it truly comes from.