Competitors Cry Foul At Windows XP, 2K Service Packs
caudron writes "According to an article at ZDNet, a trade group partly funded, not surprisingly, by Microsoft's competitors is claiming that WinXP SP1 and Win2k SP3 contain 6 separate violations of both the letter and spirit of the proposed DOJ Settlement. Equally unsurprising, Microsoft disagrees with them. And so the Case-That-Wouldn't-Die drags ever onward."
the problem is that MS (as part of the deal) was to start operating as if the deal were approved right from the get-go, and not wait for the judge's seal of approval.
This could be used show the judge that the deal proposed is not sufficient in controlling MS's behavior.
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
The Register covered it this morning, here.
In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
The Registers article gives a bit more information, including links to the ProComp PDF document about the issues (ProComp being the "Sun/Oracle lobby group")
I found this charge to be very interesting:
The .Net runtime does not even come included with Windows XP and Windows 2000. Why would they need to include an option to disable the .Net runtime, if it's required that the user of the OS to have downloaded and installed it?
Forget the whales - save the babies.
If *you* can do *your* work *without* Microsoft Windows, then none of this stupidity about their service packs, EULAs, etc, etc, needs to bother you.
On the other hand, if Microsoft continues to expand its monopolies into new parts of the computer industry, that may jeopardize *my* ability to do *my* work *without* Microsoft Windows. For instance, if the CBDTPA (or whatever Hollings is calling it this week) passes, requiring all computers to have a digital restrictions management operating system (which, incidentally, M$ has a patent on), M$ will have a federally sponsored monopoly on computer operating systems. Moving out of the United States has its own drawbacks.
Will I retire or break 10K?
...My impression of the Service Pack's "Set Program Access and Defaults" was that it offered an easy, centralized way for users to make MS products their defaults. Your choices for each item (Browser, email, ect) are something like
... A single place to change to ALL MS. The "Non MS" button would only work if you have 3rd party programs already installed, right? So if you choose it and things get fucked-up, you'd probably want to revert to "MS." The "Custom" option is the Advanced one, and it includes a check box "Enable Access to this Program " which seems to mean that even though you're disabling IE, you have to take an additional, criptic step to really disable it.
Use Internet Explorer
or
Use Your Current 3rd Party browser
The easy, inviting option is the MS ones. The use of "Your Current 3rd Party Brower" instead of "Mozilla" or "Opera" or whatever is detected, lends an air of complexity. The 3rd Party choices aren't laid out, but the MS choice always is.
But before you can choose your specific programs, you need to first choose whether you want to use "MS Windows" "Non MS" or "Custom"
Compared to the process of, say, the "File Types" config, where you choose a program for any file-type, this interface privilages the MS products. But of course, setting a File Type no longer means that a certain program becomes the default...