Slashdot Mirror
MS to Implement Some DoJ Settlement Terms Preemptively
lysurgon writes: "The New York Times (free registration, blah blah blah) is reporting that Microsoft will today announce it is taking some steps in implementing parts of the original DoJ settlement, a settlement which is still under review and not yet official. It's seen as a tactic to influence Judge Kollar-Kotelly's deliberation on the more stringent restrictions asked for by nine states attorneys general. Looks like MS wants to get off making some cosmetic changes (no surprise there), but given their rather stormy relationship with the judge, it could backfire. The other interesting thing is that at this stage, without an official ruling, no matter what they do or why they say they're doing it it's legally voluntary." Update: 08/05 17:00 GMT by T : HeUnique adds a link to another story on ZDnet which tosses in a few numbers while remaining fairly vague on what exactly will be released and under what terms.
I'm not optimistic about the whole settlement, but is it possible MS is changing? Seriously, is it possible MS is taking a different approach and is softening? Given the huge amount of attention on security by the government and the public, is MS actually changing? Not that anyone at /. would for definitively, but what is really happening with the latest move?
The whole MS monoploy lawsuit has come down to removing a few icons from the desktop. Like that is going to create a great deal of problems for MS? The States that oppose the settlement are right. Nothing but an OS, no browser or media player. If you want that then MS must sell it on the open market. MS isn't going away and the lawsuit must force a more level playing field.
Microsoft is about as clear on details as this Monty Python quote on politics:
"I think that all good, right thinking people in this country are sick and tired of being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being sick and tired. I'm certainly not, and I'm sick and tired of being told that I am."
-Valiss
Here's an article from CNET, with an interesting quote from a Jupiter analyst.
d _t op
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-948328.html?tag=f
Given that Microsoft has in the past stated that all of the DOJ's proposed remedies were unacceptable to them, isn't this a dangerous move to suddenly implement these previously unacceptable remedies voluntarily?
What is to make supporting multiple versions of Windows unacceptable in the future, given that these remedies were once unacceptable in the past?
Is there something I'm missing, or could their legal department really be that incompetent?
I hope that *finally*, their arrogance and insane, childish brinksmanship through this whole process comes back and bites them in the ass.
load up the page of comments and see an ad of Microsoft Visual Studio .NET.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
Not that I hope this tactics works.
Personally, I hope it backfires
[shrug]
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
It's seen as a tactic to influence Judge Kollar-Kotelly's deliberation
Rather, one of the terms of the settlement with the DoJ was that the terms of the consent decree would be implemented immediately (in the next release) without waiting for the settlement to be approved.
IIRC, Microsoft would have been in violation of the settlement if it hadn't done this by now.
Mmmm.. Donuts
From the article:
So basically, it's saying that they are just changing the paperwork of their contracts with computer manufacturers (which is no work on their part) and releasing bits of code out to the public (also no actual work being done). But we're not saying which of these we're doing, how much of these non-mentioned goals we will accomplish, or exactly when we can expect these non-mentioned amounts of non-mentioned goals to be completed (or at least expected to be completed).
I will be anxious to hear what is produced from the phone call happening later today, but right now, there is too little information to assume too much.
Slashdot - Come for the creative thought, stay for the lesbians!
The article can also be found on Netscape's news site here.
see this story: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=5 78&e=2&cid=578&u=/nm/20020805/ts_nm/microsoft_code _dc_13
On the other hand, if there is a consent decree, there's no restriction on what the terms of such a consent decree must be.
What bothers me is that the consent decree route is supposed to be an incentive for a defendent to avoid the cost and time of a trial. It hardly makes sense for them to consent at this point, unless they know it's the only way to avoid a harsh judgement.
The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.
Therefore, the purpose of this move would be to antagonize the current judge into doing something which would call her decision into question, as Judge Jackson's was after the trial.
Very very confident if you ask me.
sPh
but is cowed by a multinational corporation that has been demonstrated to be involved in monopolistic forms of terrorism.
I swear that I will never understand people like you.
Her's a free clue: IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT MUCH. Politicians don't care because the public doesn't care. The public doesn't care because IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT MUCH.
If you think you are oppressed by Microsoft, then I suggest you go study some history and learn what real oppression is all about.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
The argument is what an operating system is. MS claims it is basically a full distribution. Most of the Linux companies give distributions as well. Basically, what AC was referring to is allowing alternative distributions different from Microsoft's.
The OEMs want this basically because they can sell placement in their distributions (or at least buy cheaper). Microsoft, of course, does not want this, as it means they have to make each component better than the alternative, instead of just having a better total distribution. It also (perhaps more importantly) allows Microsoft to create full branding across multiple programs, creating the notion of using only Microsoft software ("mind-share"...everything I use is Microsoft, so I should chose Microsoft's version of the next application/server I need).
If you want to create a distribution with kernel-only, that is certainly possible (although it would be of limited usefulness). More important is that you can create a distribution that re-implements all of the functionality currently provided by the other programs and ship your own binary-only Linux (modulo kernel code: I'm not sure what it's license is).
Please don't throw me into that briar patch, your honor!
Monopolistic terrorism? Are you serious?
/. is surprising.
If there's any sad state of affairs to speak of, it's the fact that people deem it necessary to call anything they disagree with 'terrorism' for the sake of sensationalizing. I'd expect it from politicians, but to read it on
Terrorism is murder, death, mayhem. Whatever your opinions on Microsoft (and I'll reserve mine) they are in no way as evil as those who would kill innocent men women and children to further their own agenda.
Comparing a successful capitalist corporation, albeit one that has been found to have violated the law in numerous ways, with those who would kill thousands only for attention is irrational, and makes a mockery of those whose lives were taken from them.
They must have just made the conference call before I wrote this. Logged onto yahoo and saw "Microsoft to reveal Windows source code" and immediately cleaned up the half-chewed chicken melt pieces that fell out of my mouth and onto my lap. anyway, here's the link (sorry, I'm very rusty with HTML)
d =5 80&e=3&cid=580&u=/nm/20020805/bs_nm/microsoft_code _dc_13
r a legal manuevering.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&nci
It's still unclear as to what parts of windows will be "revealed" and under what terms or even to whom. IMHO it looks like play-the-good-guy-and-smile-real-big-for-the-came
Just another freak in the freak kingdom.
for those who don't want to register at NYT:
here's a link at CNET
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Is anybody else sick and tired of the misuse of the word terrorism? I mean next we'll be hearing that Athlete's Foot is a form of fungal terrorism.
Hint. Billy G has yet to order anyone killed. When it comes to bad guy status, he's strictly middle-of-the-pack.
Hmmm... I hope that comment doesn't fire up his competitive side.
You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
-- Colonel Adolphus Busch
This government has bowed to corporate interests at every turn.
I'd have to agree with you there. But whichever side this case goes to, the government is still bowing to corporate interests. Let's try and remember why this whole thing started.
Consumer's rights? No. But when you have Sun, IBM, Netscape (now part of that tiny upstart AOL) lobbying around Washington, then the Justice Department takes notice. This is less a battle of consumers against a corporation then a battle of Corportions against a corporation.
Why, o why must the sky fall when I've learned to fly?
Give me a break!
It's pathetic when the U.S. Government can take a hard line on terrorism in traditional forms, but is cowed by a multinational corporation that has been demonstrated to be involved in monopolistic forms of terrorism.
JonKatz, is that you? OK, you are seriously trying to compare terrorist acts with... bundling a web browser and media player with an OS?
Granted, action needs to be taken (and, it is), but this is NOT terrorism... or even close.
Mark
Wrong, they are just trying gain blind public trust.
As from now, they try to push DRM and positive aspect of company info will probably help them a bit. Same as for every new Win version "works better, works faster..." people read and believe, same game they are playing with this preliminal cooperation with DoJ (there's probably some closing speach that'll show them in different new light).
"always be prepared", yeah but unfortunatelly in negative aspect. MS is a company and tryes to make money. Public interests are not really important. The more they grow, the more they'll try to take such blind steps to gain public into new restrictions that make them money.
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
I think MSFT is doing this on purpose. Much like they force standards by pushing them into the market through the power of their channel (if everyone is using them, they're standards right?), I think they are complying with the weaker restrictions to A) make themselves look friendly, B) to make it look like the case is over, and C) to make the states that are clinging on to stronger sanctions look like bullies. My guess is that it'll work and the pressure for more restrictions will be dropped by the end of the year.
Appearantly, they're releasing some source code.
Most likely under their uber-restricitve shared source license.
Very few details yet...
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-948381.html
If they release a stripped-down version of Windows without a web browser, what good will it do? Microsoft already owns something like 95% of that market, and its only competitor, Mozilla, isn't so much better than IE that anyone will switch back. I suppose that they haven't won the "Media-Format War," for lack of a better term, so maybe a version of Windows without WMP might help. But I don't think it'll make that much difference.
The real reason that the Microsoft monopoly is invincible is that there are no competitors. Linux on the desktop isn't working out too well. BeOS is out of business, and while there are Open-Source BeOS clones, they aren't ready yet. OS X is frickin' sweet but it doesn't run on i386 hardware. None of these options, even if viable, would allow users to run their old Windows programs.
The best case situation is that Microsoft behaves a little better towards the folks they've already beaten. Nothing in the proposed penalties (that I've heard about, anyway) will keep Microsoft from crushing competition in the server/Enterprise area, or from implementing their Palladium project.
In my view, an effective set of penalties that solves current and future problems would contain the following:
- Full Disclosure of their APIs. There should be a mandatory waiting period between the release of a modified API and the release of MS software that implements that API (so that competitors have time to implement them too). Proprietary HTML extensions count as an API for this purpose.
- Ensure that Palladium is a fully open system. It should be compatible with Linux and other Open Source projects both at the technical level and at the legal level. In other words, GPLed software should run on Palladium-enabled hardware without violating the GPL.
- Ensure that
.NET runs on UNIX. Even the graphical applications. - Anyone should be able to write software that understands Microsoft file formats.
- Windows network protocols should be well documented in such a way that other companies can write software that interfaces with Windows clients (like SAMBA) and Windows servers (like Ximian Connector).
These are the penalties that the states should be demanding. These are the penalties that will allow for the creation of competitive alternatives to Windows. Until this happens, we're fucked.It just means that Microsoft will start making the url links to the Windows and MFC API documentation on MSDN BOLD. :)
that with SP3 you can now remove Internet Exporer, Outlook Express, and Windows Media Player using the windows component wizard in add/remove programs... Has anyone tried removing Internet Explorer yet, and how does it affect the system?
Yeah, I understod that. And that's why I said it's not a head start to nicer public relations (or being fair), but head start to new projects. It's a classic "wolf in sheeps...." to hide something not so good with some nicer impressions, combined with chances to get something good out of the DoJ verdict since they've played fair.
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
SHWEET!
'He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher... or, as his wife would have it, an idiot.' - Douglas Adams
So in theory..you can shop around for judges until you find one that will see your side? Interesting..
_______________________________
"I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
This Reuters Market News article says "Microsoft said it plans to disclose 385 bits of computer code and internal operating rules, previously kept secret, that outside software developers can use to write programs to run on Windows."
:^)
I calculate this (385 bits) to be about 48.125 bytes. I'm not impressed.
"If you think you are oppressed by Microsoft, then I suggest you go study some history and learn what real oppression is all about."
I'll get right to it. After my next paycheck I'll be able to download one hour's worth or 100 pages (whichever occurs first) of Official Microsoft Palladium Certified History Of The World on my MS Lemming PDA. I better make sure nobody is reading over my shoulder or that I draw anti-establishment conclusions from history!
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Depends on what they're opening up. Does anyone has a list of protocols that will be opened, and under what license? As with typical big media coverage, there is not a single link to something with information.
They say they're going to open up 113 protocols, somehow I don't see them opening up their crown jewels. SAMBA is already kicking their ass performance and pricewise, without an open protocol, can you imagine if the SAMBA guys got the specs to play with? Imagine every mailer out there being able to play with Exchange server, including all the groupware features. I don't see MS opening these protocols up.
I think what we will see is things like MS_BOB_API.DLL and old COM garbage.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Restriction on free speech? Guess the ACLU better go after NDAs, too. Does this mean I can start posting screenshots of the betas I'm in?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Microsoft isn't a government entity, nor has the government in any way made agreeing to the EULA mandatory (since you aren't required to use MSFT products at all) -- thus, no First Amendment violation.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This is pretty much exactly what I was going to say. Unfortunatly those items are pretty much a wishlist and I don't think they will ever happen. All MS has to do is claim "security" and the DOJ will be forced to roll over for "national security concerns". You also forgot to mention open the MS Office file formats.
IMHO this trial has been a waste and no real change will come from it. The only thing that will break MS's monopoly is when the compter Desktop dies. That is at least 10 years away, so lets hope some of the other handheld/phone/PDA/appliance makers get their shit together. Then again with $40 billion in their coffers, it will be tough to keep MS from competing in any new market.
You know, originally I was against a physical breakup of MS, but now I think they should be broken up into 4 different companies. A desktop/app , a server,a handheld, and an internet company. Maybe that is the only way we can restore fair competition?
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
A convicted child molester awaiting final sentencing has voluntarily stopped giving cherry flavor lollypops to children. He continues to insist that prison time and losing his job as school teacher are unacceptable.
He further argues that it would be inappropriate for the sentence to place any restriction on his freedom to use candybars to lure children. While he admits he has used candybars in this manner, the district attorney got his conviction based on solely on cases where he used cherry lollypops. Candybar evidence was never presented in court due to budgetary constraints the complexity of the numerous brands and flavors of candybars involved.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
WordPerfect 5.2 forever!
Your mind is squeezed by a blast of pain!
Which is taken directly from Sun's framework, and improved it just a bit. .NET's language independence is a bit exagerated. It is not possible to create a VM which would be able to hold all different kinds of languages. It simply does not make sense, since there are many different type of languages. .NET languages are not the real languages. They are crippled and extended versions to fit into CLR.
.NET. Sun's way is much better. By the way, there are Java 3 gossips around. Beware the Gosling's new attack. Remember, he designed Java 10 years ago. :)
.NET 2. Mono will always come with a minimum 2 years lag behind original .NET. .NET to Ecma. ADO.NET, Winforms, and maybe the most important, Enterprise Services framework (which contains very important parts, such as transactions.) are not given to the Ecma for instance. Since MS holds the patents, it is not possible for Mono or any other .NET implementation to implement them. Mono already step back from its previous claim and said they will not implement Winforms etc. So, .NET will never be cross platform. Tweaking? Oh, please don't make me laugh. .NET is there for more than 2 years. Mono is there for 1.5 years, still no release. After the release, nobody will trust it at least until it proves itself. MS even have problems with it. .NET, even on Windows platforms is not moving fastly. Lately Billy_the_McCarty said .NET needs 4 years to mature. Java is already mature, and it is already cross platform. .NET? Why should I care about Mono? Everything it promisses is already available with Java NOW. Which is mature and cross platform already.
I personally don't see anything beautiful in
Mono, actually, do not interest me a gram because of the following reasons:
- MS already started
- MS did not give everything about
- What estonishing speed are you talking about????
- What I am seing is, everybody is moving to Java. Why should I wait for
Dear Bill, do you have a
I know the courts pretty much follow the Id Software philosophy of "When it's done" ... but is there any rough timeline of when a decision is expected in the trial being decided by Judge Kollar-Kotelly?
This is exactly what they will be releasing (from an inside source)
MS actually lied...they only released 384 bits (48 Bytes). The last bit is just null
_______________________________
"I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
Didn't the FTC examine those APIs in the early 90s, and didn't Microsoft claim that there wasn't any reason for them to use undocumented APIs in their applications, or something like that? Internal APIs are hard to avoid, and you can get into deep trouble if someone relies on them (because you cannot change them after that). If Microsoft was using these APIs for applications (and not system components), then they knew that they made two fundamental errors: they violated the previous FTC agreement, and good software engineering practices.
Both errors are hardly surprising, though.
It's supposed to be "Score 3, Funny", dummies.
- The Processor cycle eater (will grow / shrink according to the size of Intel's yearly 'donation' to Microsoft)
I wonder if we're really looking for Microsoft competitors, or just looking for Microsoft to act the benevolent part of being a benevolent dictator.
While everyone wishes there was a viable desktop alternative to Microsoft, there isn't one and NO set of DOJ terms (except, maybe, open-sourcing of Windows) is going to bring forward a desktop alternative.
I think most people would be happy if MS would just appreciate that they own the market for PC desktops and many corporate server installations and quit trying to own the *world*. If MS actually focused on producing quality, secure products, providing sane documentation (more sane than "see technet article xyz123 involving registry key additions and changes...") for products and APIs, and licensing terms that didn't feel like sodomy I think most people could live with it.
The computer biz largely thrives on standards; you don't have to guess or reinvent the wheel every day, and I think the MS desktop standard is certainly not that much worse than any other monopoly desktop standard would be other than the bloodthirsty, all-your-base-are-belong-to-us marketing philosophy.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What I'd really like to see opened up is either the MAPI extensions used for calendaring/scheduling, or the Exchange wire protocol used to do the same. If either were opened up, we'd be able to extend groupware servers like Citadel to handle Outlook calendaring/scheduling with the same capabilities as an Exchange server.
Let's go, Bill: put your money where your mouth is. Is your software good enough to stand on its own merits instead of being propped up by platform lock-in?
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
And I'll never understand people like you either.
MS was proven to have broken the law and yet nothing is being done about it. This is wrong. Period.
Furthermore, using what the general public does and doesn't care about as a final measure of whether something is important or not is beyond facile. By that reckoning Dale Earnhardt would've been elected to office posthumously and King of the Hill would be on for two-hours five nights a week, followed by a Cops mini-marathon.
LEXX
"Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
"Which is taken directly from Sun's framework, and improved it just a bit."
.NET is more inspired by WebSphere than by J2EE, since J2EE wasn't fully spec'd when the design of .NET started
.NET will never be cross platform."
.NET events and EVERY MS employee i've spoken to has told me it will NEVER be cross-platform.
.NET, you shared the kool-aid with Miguel.
actually ALL services frameworks will need to look pretty much alike (call it services "plug compatabilty"). BUT, it is much more likely that
"Sun's way is much better."
bearing in mind that ALL the services platforms are still much more "vapor" (in terms of their "long term" design goals) than reality, WHY is Sun's way much better?
I know hardcore developers who work with all 3 plaftforms and they find that there ARE huge problems with cross-platform compatability (most esp the various clients' JVMs) with J2EE. They've told me that WebSphere is the most stable, albeit the least-featured(HMMMM). Many of them like ASP.NET and the CLR quite a bit, but hate C# desperately. As usual, YMMV.
"So,
Who said it would be cross-platform? I've be to a number of big
If you're think of MONO as the cross-platform version of
MS will NEVER support ANY cross-platform technology that is competitive with their own.
Sun is trying to do the same thing with J2EE, Blue with 'Sphere, HP's is off in the vapor...
Currenty, ALL WEB SERVICES PLATFORMS ARE ABOUT VENDOR LOCK-IN.
They are not about; technology, developer support or customer facilitation.
We just have to pick the best for each specific customer/job/spec we develop and hope that one of these technologies (or another) matures past the "competitive advantage" stage of development.
Ten quid, she's so easy to blind. And not a word is spoken...
"Terrorism is murder, death, mayhem. Whatever your opinions on Microsoft (and I'll reserve mine) they are in no way as evil as those who would kill innocent men women and children to further their own agenda."
From the American Heritage dictionary terrorism is defined as:
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
Preface "force" with "economic", and replace "governments" and "political" with "corporations" and "financial", and it sounds like a perfect description of MS behavior to me. Amoral behavior is amoral regardless of the arena.
LEXX
"Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
So then, what exactly is Microsoft trying to coerce society or the government into doing?
What force or Violence have the used?
Injecting words into a definition like that can seriously change the meaning of a word. Let's say the USA is defined as 'The United States of America' preface "America" with "South" and we've got a definition which is pretty much as similar to the original as yours.
Calling MS's actions terrorism is ridiculous. Is Enron a terrorist organization? How about Worldcom? To me, it's more appropriate to say that the US' actions in WWII, Nicaragua, Columbia, etc.. are terrorist than Microsoft's. We, as a nation (organized group) took part in both unlawful and threatened use of force against people and property, with the intention of intimidating and coercing societies for idealogical and political reasons. Micrsoft's actions might fit your 'prefaced' version of terrorism, but I prefer to stick with the actual definition of the word.
Why do I feel like I'm just fueling the trolls?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
MS was proven to have broken the law and yet nothing is being done about it. This is wrong. Period.
Ever heard of the concept of the "punishment fitting the crime"? I will grant that Microsoft has been found guilty (although it's debatable whether they should have been, particularly from a judge ruled to have made major errors), but that does not mean that the punishment should be some draconian death penalty that people like you seem to want.
For example, the USFL sued the NFL. They won. They were awarded one dollar. I think awarding the damaged part(ies) one dollar would be about right.
And by the way, this is not to defend many of Microsoft's policies or their software. I just don't see that "being mean" to one's competitors (PARTICULARLY completely incompetent competitors like Netscape who produced absolute crap software) is a crime.
The fact is that Microsoft has dominated because their competition has been idiots.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
We're not children, we're adults, and are therefore supposedly capable of choosing for ourselves what software we want to use.
Heh, that was funny... Now let's go back to the real world where the federal government decides for us what software we can buy.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Not that I really enjoy debating semantics, but...
cartel: association of independent firms or individuals for the purpose of exerting some form of restrictive or monopolistic influence on the production or sale of a commodity or group of commodities." -- Britannica
I.e. a cartel is not a monopoly per se, but a cartel is monopolistic.
(On the other hand, the reason I used the word "monopolistic" instead of "monopoly" is that I couldn't remember the word "cartel", so I guess your rebuttal did me some good.)
-a
How to rationalize theft.
How about a different set of rules that depend on whether or not your organization obeys the law?
This is one of the crucial areas that is giving OEMs problems and certainly protects Microsoft's hold on the desktop.
See my journal, I write things there
Fileformats are a key issue and do not seem to be addressed either. It's not just an issue for competitors. How many MS users have upgraded because of changes in MS-Word, MS-Excel, or MS-PPT file formats? Also, if you go over to renting software, License 6.0, the day you give up your subscription is the day you lose access to your own data...unless those files can be read by a non-MS program. Additionally, the DMCA probably could be used as a hinder unless the file specs are public.
Apply Occam's Razor to the ZDNet and CNet articles and you'll see that, like most such press releases, there's really nothing there but a few kernels buried here and there. From the ZDnet article : if other companies got too much access to the inner workings of the operating system. It said that would allow them to "clone" Windows, prompting Microsoft to stop investing in research and development on the operating system. Perhaps this is a form of not complying or a softening up to the end of the MS-Office and MS-Windows product line.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Wrong and wrongheaded, dude.
You don't want to allienate the hardware manufacterer.
Just make sure that any and all new drivers for Windows will have to use UDI, that should make it possible to work on multiply OS.
--
Two witches watched two watches.
Which witch watched which watch?