Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft's New Hurdles

Posted by timothy on from the now-just-observe-the-following-rules dept.

gnuadam writes "The New York Times (free reg. required) is now running a piece about how the recently accepted settlement between Microsoft and the DOJ will affect the ever-so-loving relationship between them and the "worldwide community of volunteer programmers" who work on Linux and associated programs. Of interest, one interviewee quipped, "My prediction is that within three years time, Microsoft will `give away' its operating system to preserve its revenue in the applications business." Would Microsoft give away Windows to sell Office? Stay tuned." Update: 11/04 19:33 GMT by T : In related news, an anonymous reader writes "In an interview with Linux and Main Free Software Foundation General Counsel Eben Moglen reacts to Friday's U.S. v. Microsoft ruling and describes how it and 'trusted computing' will figure in formulating the next version of the GPL, expected in the next few months."

1 of 336 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Never by ednopantz · · Score: 1, Troll

    No, they will depend on:
    1) DMCA
    2) Palladium
    3) Congressional lobbying
    4) DRM
    5) FUD

    to maintain their lead.

    you wish buddy, more like:
    1) Top to bottom integration from handhelds to set tops to desktops to database servers--all easily administered by non-experts. Your developers write code once and it runs on all of MS's products. They figured out how to take Java's appeal and make money at it.
    2) Aggressive market research will produce products that corporate buyers actually want. Lots of box lunches for CIO's bring valuable information.
    3) MS programmers actually get paid for their work. They delivering products while great ideas linger undeveloped on Sourceforge. (Um, where is the OSS version of Exchange? Maybe available in 2004, six years after MS's entry?)
    4) Enough cash on hand to weather any storm.
    5) Absence of RTFM in any documentation.

    Go back and look at what they were selling in 1992 and compare to today. This is not a lumbering, incompetent oaf. This is one smart and mean competitor. Far from using political influence to get ahead, I see political concerns ("software wants to be free, man!" / "damn those Americans and their software too!" / "this company has too much power!") to be the main obstacles to their continued growth.