MS May Be Forced To Sell Stripped-Down OS In EU
An anonymous reader submits "According to this article at Infoworld, Microsoft may be forced to sell a stripped-down version of Windows in the EU as a result of antitrust rulings, unless a settlement is reached during the next month to six weeks." (See this post from last week for more background on the EU's antitrust proceedings.)
This is really what it's all about. An OS provides an interface between the hardware and the software and other low level functions (i/o, permissioning etc)
Windows is not just (even?) an operating system - it's a monopolized distribution method for all the associated media and proprietary file formats.
Case in point, even though Internet Explorer is so lacking in security and features compared to any modern browser(tabs?), it is used by the massive majority of Windows users because they don't realise that a browser is NOT a part of the O/S and so don't seek an alternative.
The european governments don't have cosy relationships with Redmond. Et voila!
while sco {
wget -O
}
They've built their entire market strategy around this idea; Just try to ask your Microsoft rep about any one product. The conversation may start with InfoPath, Sharepoint, Office, whatever, but will undoubtedly end up with discussions on Server 2003, MS SQL, Exchange, Commerce Server, ad infinitum until you have seen every single, poorly designed intertwined product they own. The truth is, Microsoft is right - their products only work well with each other.
This is so true it hurts.
Anecdote begin
Back when Windows 2000 was about to be released, I had a big problem with a NT server. I was in a newspaper - a multi-platform shop that happens to have a daily deadline. Besides the PCs running Windows for business functions, there were lots of Macs in the creative and news rooms, along with various other servers on other OSes in the data centre. Anyway, the NT machines (fully patched and updated) kept on corrupting the Servies For Mac file index - and I kept on trying to rebuild it. I called MS support for $200 (or whatever it was) and complained about this problem, and even had an idea for them to pursue in order to possibly get a quick solution. After the "Let me ask my colleague" response from the MS techie, he forgot to turn off the mic. I overheard his colleague snidely remark "Tell him to ditch the Macs. Haha". I knew then that I wasn't about to get any help, since my company had the unmittigated gaul to use Macs instead of Windows.
I bought a server operating system from them for tidy sum, and they were making a joke about wanting to use something else besides thier OS for the clients of that server. Never mind the millions invested in Apple hardware, software, training and methods - they made a joke about thier OS holding up a deadline. To boot, I got the "Upgrade to 2000 when it comes out, SFM is 10X better" line. Nice, since all of the NT boxes were DEC Alphas, for which Windows 2000 support had just been pulled. They wanted me to spend millions in "upgrades", in order to fix a bug in their code. And I paid for the privilege of having them tell me that.
Microsoft earned my eternal scorn that day.
Rant^WAnecdote end.
Microsoft has gotten very, very arrogant - to the point that they believe that no one else on the planet is capable of a good idea. They make some good products to be sure, but whenever and wherever I can, I push OSS solutions ahead of Microsoft solutions, so I can still pick and choose what tools I deploy with a minimum of fuss about whose product that tool is. RedHat 7.2 is still a nice OS on an old AlphaServer 3305, and it doesn't discriminate as to what OS it provides services for. It just does exactly what you ask it to, and asks for precious little in return.
Soko
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous