Slashdot Mirror


Judge Examines Microsoft Settlement Progress

Infonaut writes "The judge who presided over the settlement between Microsoft and the federal government may be starting to realize what a lot of people already know about Microsoft. The settlement was predicated on the belief that competitors would be able to license technology from Microsoft in order to get some relief from Microsoft's desktop OS monopoly. As Kollar-Kelly admitted, 'I think all of us had hoped for more agreements.' Now the judge is asking federal prosecutors to examine specifically why more licensing agreements have not been reached. I'm truly shocked that the settlement isn't turning out as planned, after the Justice Department so shrewdly rolled over when they had Microsoft over a barrel."

4 of 374 comments (clear)

  1. You people are broken (nerdy) records.. by ProtonMotiveForce · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Like, a broken Devo record or something.

    Seriously, nobody in the real world gives a shit about this, and the idea of a "monopoly" based on intellectual property is laughable.

    It ain't oil, it ain't air, it ain't water, and it ain't food. Nobody's dying in the streets over MS's dominance in the OS market.

    What's funny is they, by definition, do not have a monopoly. I mean, there are innumerable choices - this is not an arguable item.

    And yet here you nerds go, all chiming in with your "they got a slap on the wrist"'s and "the law doesn't understand technology"'s.

    Next you'll start in with "won't someone please think of the CHILDREN!!!!". Egads, how ridiculous.

  2. Get OVER IT by Crashmarik · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    The way to beat Microsoft is to beat Microsoft. Bitching the judge, justice dept etc didn't throw the game isnt going to help anyone. Arguing the courts should interfere in business won't win converts or friends.

    The way to beat microsoft is to consistently build better products. Products that do things Microsofts don't, offer choices Microsoft won't, or provide economies that Microsoft can't are the key to dislodging them.

    No one who makes decisions at a company is going to ask if a product is politically correct, if they do they should be fired. They either want something that will help them win against their competition or will mean fewer headaches for them. It doesn't matter if stalin, some crazy leftist wacko, or pat robertson is making it.

    If you want to bitch about microsoft bitch about how they put their users at risk. Bitch about how the complete lack of security in windows products will make companies with sensitive data LIABLE. Bitch about how the lack of security in microsoft products makes certain business crimally culpable (healthcare, banking)

    Don't go on and on about how microsoft pushed the envelope of business practice. Everybody respects a tough competitor nobody respects whiners.

    1. Re:Get OVER IT by Crashmarik · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Intellectual property = Intellectual theft ??

      Well I can see who the fool is.

    2. Re:Get OVER IT by Crashmarik · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Don't be a dimwit. This has nothing to do with politics.

      Microsofts behavior is no worse than most companies its alot better than many software companies. I have never had to buy a dongle to run a Microsoft ( I am not saying microsoft doesn't sell dongles or what have you). I have never had a Microsoft license die on my because I have run a backup.

      On the other had, I have been pissed at their license schemes. Do you remember their old compiler licensing schemes ? I am talking Microsoft C and Microsoft Fortran. If you wanted to distribute the compiled binaries they required a separate license. Do you know what changed that ? Borland came up with their no nonsense license for Turbo Pascal, and priced it at a great pricepoint. For awhile it looked like borland would drive Microsoft out of making compilers for their own operating systerm.

      Novell had the opertunity to strangle Microsoft. Imagine if when they owned 70% of the network installations they required DR-Dos to install netware. They made a half hearted attempt by bundling personell netware with DR-Dos. Why they didn't go all the way ? My qguess is they were worried about damaging the netware market.

      OS/2 warp came damn close. If IBM at the time had of been willing to install it on everything they shipped and had of made it cheaper (read giveaway) it would have been a different world.

      Lotus, Corel, Quaterdeck, Have all been nearly there. My point is simple when businesses/individuals compete to produce better products we all win. Even though the companies I cited didn't win this particular battle we are all better off because they tried. Every one of them has made significant contributions to the state of the are.

      Before you go shouting for the courts to take down microsoft you better realize the courts aren't your friend. There's alot of laws out there and the judge that rules against Microsoft today can rule against Linux tomorrow.