Microsoft Behind $12M Opera Settlement

This is why we hatessss them by KamuSan · 2004-05-25 00:13 · Score: 1, Insightful

Unbelievably childish business practices. Grow up, Microsoft!

Re:This is why we hatessss them by DrEldarion · 2004-05-25 00:32 · Score: 2, Insightful

Innocent until proven guilty, remember?

Just because they settled doesn't mean they're guilty. They most likely just decided that it would be cheaper to settle than fight it. Settlements ALWAYS includes a "this isn't an admission of guilt" clause.
Re:This is why we hatessss them by torpor · 2004-05-25 00:35 · Score: 5, Insightful

So David is really responsible for the rampages of Golliath, eh?

Opera accepting the money has nothing to do with Microsofts shady business practices. WTF?

By your reasoning, a woman is as guilty as a rapist for the rape committed ... eh? This makes no sense.

A $12million settlement, which is a punishment for having done something wrong, followed by well-propagated news on the reasons for this punishment, is the only safeguard this industry has from future shadiness of this nature... you saying that "Opera are 'as responsible'" for this is just ludicrous, and underlines a serious lack of understanding of the nature of responsibility ...

Microsoft attempted to weild un-defeatable might in an attempt to squeeze competition out of the marketplace, and 'get rid of a company that is clearly annoying them', and the justice system caught this, and ruled for the little guy, as it should, punishing Golliath all the while.

Go Opera! If I wasn't so satisfied with Safari, I'd switch ... but thank you anyway, U.S. Justice System, for ensuring that my rights as a consumer, and my ability to weild choice are protected in the browser marketplace ...

--
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
Re:This is why we hatessss them by the_mad_poster · 2004-05-25 00:36 · Score: 3, Insightful

What, you think they wouldn't if they could? They were beaten to the punch on all the worthwhile patents. The only reason they don't run around slapping people with patent infringement claims is that they know they're on shaky ground in that department, and that's probably one weak spot that Microsoft couldn't throw enough money at to become an industry leader in.

--
Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
Re:This is why we hatessss them by morgajel · 2004-05-25 01:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

You know what they say, 'the proof is in the puding' or something...

compelling evidence

I don't use Opera, but I've seen this firsthand.
I also remember a while back where they flat out blocked mozilla from MSN, but the bad public backlash made them reverse it. I actually tried that one for myself and saw that it was real.

Innocent Until Proven Guilty is nice, but lets face it- we've tried that. they've broke the system countless times. they've keep saying "we'll change, honest. I'll never hit you again" and we keep falling for it like an abused wife.

MS won't stop until we actually PUNISH them... perhaps a $20 billion fine would help?
that might knock some sense into them. and for each breach afterwards, another $1 billion fine.
not in software- they'ed just spend $.01 in CD's and ship a couple thousand versions of their latest and greatest OS.

Someone needs to call shananigans on these bastards.
Honestly, I wish Opera didn't have to settle. Theoretically, they could win the case, but by the time they won, $12 million woulda been pocket change for a hobo.

This is probably one of my greatest pet peeves with Micosoft. They fricken abuse the system.
They're just not trustworthy.

Innocent until proven guilty is nice, but how long are we going to wait to finally punish them for the things we KNOW they did wrong?

(sorry, don't take that as a personal attack, I just get worked up over MS).

--
Looking for Book Reviews? Check out Literary Escapism.
Re:This is why we hatessss them by microbox · 2004-05-25 01:37 · Score: 2, Insightful

The Opera crowd repeatedly asked the MSN crowd to fix the style sheet. The style sheet used for IE worked fine with Opera. The correction involved less work than this post. Say what you want about M$'s motives, but if I were Opera I'd sue too.

--

Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Re:This is why we hatessss them by southpolesammy · 2004-05-25 01:43 · Score: 2, Insightful

But the key is that there's no legal record of them being told they were wrong, nor any admittance of guilt. In essence, this protects them from setting precedent that can be used against them in a subsequent case for much larger damages.

It doesn't matter to the court whether the public opinion thinks they're guilty or not. And the only weapon the public has against actions like this is to not use the company's products, and we don't see that happening at all now, do we?

--
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
Re:This is why we hatessss them by hkmwbz · 2004-05-25 01:59 · Score: 2, Insightful

You mean apart from the fact that MSN is used by millions upon millions of people, and that when they discover that it works fine in Internet Explorer but not in Opera, it gives the impression that it is Opera which doesn't work properly?

--
Clever signature text goes here.
Re:This is why we hatessss them by Geoff-with-a-G · 2004-05-25 02:07 · Score: 4, Insightful

There's some problems with your legal reasoning. Opera and Microsoft sat down together and agreed on the settlement. If it was some sort of foregone conclusion that Microsoft was going to lose big, then Opera wouldn't have agreed.

You can't just assume that any kind of court proceeding will find the ultimate truth of the matter. If you've followed many of the major IP law cases in the last couple years, you'd see that the outcomes are seldom easily predictable. Some judges don't understand the technology, sometimes the laws involved are outdated and difficult to map onto the situation at hand, and sometimes the laws seem to outright conflict with each other (DMCA vs. Fair Use). As a big company going into one of these cases, you won't get a certain victory or certain loss; you're lucky if you can get a fairly accurate guess at the odds.

That's where the settlement starts. If you're talking about a judgement of 20 million, and both sides think they've got a 50-50 shot, then they can settle on 10 million. If the plantiff thinks they've only got a 10 percent shot (which would be the case even if the defendent was pretty clearly in the right) then they'll happily settle for 3 million.

So maybe Microsoft was guilty here, maybe they weren't. All the settlement tells you is that the chance of them being found guilty and the size of the settlement were large enough that they were willing to spend 12 million to avoid it, and small enough that Opera was willing to accept only 12 million to give it up.

As to "paying their way out", it was a civil suit, not a criminal trial. "Paying their way out" was what would have happened if they HAD been found at fault. It's a company, its purpose is to make money. Paying a fine IS defeat. It's not like this is a murderer who's getting out of the death penalty by paying his way out.
Re:This is why we hatessss them by ckaminski · 2004-05-25 02:21 · Score: 3, Insightful

$12 million dollars sure seems a lot more like hush money than simple "stop annoying me and go away" money.

For $12 million, if Microsoft were in the right, they'd have squashed Opera.
Re:This is why we hatessss them by Geoff-with-a-G · 2004-05-25 02:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

Innocent until proven guilty is nice, but how long are we going to wait to finally punish them for the things we KNOW they did wrong?

Actually, "innocent until proven guilty" is for criminal trials, not civil suits. It's referred to as the "burden of proof", and it's different for different things. For some stuff, you simply must prove that it is "more likely than not" that the defendent did something wrong. For others, you have to prove it "beyond a reasonable doubt".

As for punishing them for things you "know" they did wrong, the difference is between the things that a judge knows they did wrong, and the things that you "know" they did wrong. I personally consider this a good thing, but if you have a problem with it, you should run for judge. See if enough of your voting peers agree with your fitness to render verdicts.

Having read only the link that you sent me, I personally believe there's a decent chance (say, 40-50%) that Microsoft broke the CSS intentionally. And you only made it up to 40-50% because I was including other experiences, like their having blocked Mozilla. If you treat the evidence on only its own merits, (which a judge should do) then maybe 20-30% chance that Microsoft intentionally broke it. I can definitely envision someone at MSN deciding that Opera is big enough to warrant their own file, then just doing a crappy job with it.

Or put another way, never attribute to malice what is easily explainable by incompetence.
Re:This is why we hatessss them by hkmwbz · 2004-05-25 02:31 · Score: 3, Insightful

"Opera is getting money, but that's all they're gettting"
Not exactly. Opera gets a lot of press (free PR) from this one. And they all but said that it was Microsoft. It was not a partner or customer, and the settlement wouldn't affect future revenue sources at all. It was not a trademark or patent issue... They gave a lot of details what it was not about. So clearly, that limits the possibilities.
It sounds like it is a competitor, and Microsoft matches that, at least in the mobile market. And who else would be willing to pay just like that to make a problem go away? Who could afford it?
So Opera is getting away just fine. It gets lots of press, and everyone assumes that it's Microsoft, even though, strictly speaking, Opera stuck to the deal and didn't reveal the company.
The rumor that it is Microsoft has not been officially confirmed, but if you put two and two together, MS is the most likely candidate.

--
Clever signature text goes here.
Re:This is why we hatessss them by emptor · 2004-05-25 02:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

The problem with an across-the-board loser pays system, as you propose, is that there are many cases where the plaintiff has a good-faith belief that it has been wronged and therefore brings suit. This plaintiff shouldn't be deterred from bringing a justifiable suit by the penalty of treble cost damages. After all, let's say I invent some new, unobvious technique (and get my patent) that MS then incorporates into their product. I sue MS for infringement, but they, with all their money and lawyers, either litigate me out of business or use their might to sway a judge/jury. All of a sudden I'm looking at potential millions of costs.
Your proposal, IMO, would simply deter poor companies/individuals from suing.
Re:This is why we hatessss them by hkmwbz · 2004-05-25 02:56 · Score: 3, Insightful

GMail doesn't make Opera look bad on purpose, by serving it a special style sheet designed to break it. It says up-front that Opera might not work. I may not like it (actually, I think it sucks really bad), but it is Google's right to choose to do so. They are being up-front about it, which is a good thing. So GMail cannot be compared to Microsoft's actions at all.
I am sure you, too understand why Microsoft gets crap for making other browsers look bad on purpose. To quote another post of mine:
"You mean apart from the fact that MSN is used by millions upon millions of people, and that when they discover that it works fine in Internet Explorer but not in Opera, it gives the impression that it is Opera which doesn't work properly?"
Your examples aren't quite the same as Microsoft's actions against Opera. Not only is Microsoft serving bad code specifically to Opera, but they are lying about Opera to the press as well.

--
Clever signature text goes here.

Follows the trend by lachlan76 · 2004-05-25 00:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

This is starting to happen a lot lately. Microsoft is having money taken, because they try to push the little guys around.
Hopefully they'll learn from this mistake. Probably not, if an AU$800 Million fine from the EU isn't enough to change their business practices, nothing will.

Re:Follows the trend by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-25 00:24 · Score: 1, Insightful

Microsoft is having money taken, because they try to push the little guys around.

No, they are not having money taken. They are paying what is owed to another company for spreading false statements of the company's product.

If the trend continues, which it most likely will, then MS will no longer be able to push the "little guys" around. In capitalism, you play fair or you get hurt.
Re:Follows the trend by adesm · 2004-05-25 00:35 · Score: 5, Insightful

Eight Hundred Million Australian Dollars fine? Gadzooks, have even the EUrocrats given up all faith in the stumble-bum of international currencies?

But seriously folks, the Fine which has been levied has only been done at an early stage, despite some of the premature celebrations. Microsoft will appeal, there will be massive depositions and written submissions etc. and the matter will hang around the EU's 'ahem' Competition Authority like a pair of concrete shoes for a few years.
Finally, after $SUITABLE years have elapsed, the European Council of Ministers, probably Employment Council or some such, will reduce the Fine to some EUR10m or thereabouts, after a closed-door unreportable meeting - following years of extensive lobbying of the Governments in question by Microsoft. That's how things are done in Europe, secretly, without public consultation or justification. See the recent whitewashing of the EU parliament's vote in relation to software patents as an example.
Re:Follows the trend by southpolesammy · 2004-05-25 00:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

Actually, it's been said before, but they're not getting beat down here....they're settling all their open litigation. I'm not sure to what end this is progressing towards, but something tells me that Microsoft themselves is trying to clear all open cases against them so that they can gear up for something big.

I just can't put my finger on what they're up to...

--
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.

Re:This would appear to be... by fuzzix · 2004-05-25 00:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

What's $12M to a company with billions and billions of cash?

Not much, but it means quite a bit to Opera I would wager. If you were to view this settlement as an admission of guilt (a safe assumption in this case?) this means more than the $12M to both parties.

Re:The worst part is IE development has stalled. by October_30th · 2004-05-25 00:21 · Score: 3, Insightful

But the fact is Microsoft is keeping us from adopting things like CSS2, PNG and SVG more than anything else.

Uh. How is Microsoft keeping us from adopting those things?

If people felt that SVG, for instance, is necessary, then they'd download a browser that supports it. Standard HTML, JPGs and PDF download for documents. That's all we need.

--
The owls are not what they seem

Re:The worst part is IE development has stalled. by The-Bus · 2004-05-25 00:24 · Score: 5, Insightful

The worst part? I think it's good news. If this is really true it gives Firefox a long time to catch up (market share wise). I've been using it for a couple of months and can't help but recommend it to everyone I know. It's a lot more stable, the tabbing system is wonderful, and you've got these customizable UIs that people used to using AOL IM and WinAmp should love.

--

Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

Re:The worst part is IE development has stalled. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-25 00:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

Meanwhile we have to kiss web standards goodbye to please 90% of the public using IE.

It's not that bad. You don't have to write non-standard code to get things to work in Internet Explorer, you just have to make sure you avoid the bits of the standards that are just plain bust or nonexistent in Internet Explorer. So basically, they are holding us back in a massive way, but not forcing us to violate standards.

But the fact is Microsoft is keeping us from adopting things like CSS2, PNG and SVG more than anything else.

Some parts of CSS 2 work in Internet Explorer. Most of PNG works in Internet Explorer (just the alpha channel is broken, and there are limited workarounds). SVG isn't supported in the normal builds of Mozilla, Konquerer, Safari or Opera, so you can't really blame Microsoft for not supporting it either.

Far be it from me to defend Microsoft but... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-25 00:28 · Score: 0, Insightful

... they are really *not* at fault here, not by any reasonable standard.

For explanation, see here.

Re:Far be it from me to defend Microsoft but... by REBloomfield · 2004-05-25 00:37 · Score: 1, Insightful

wow, well, that's interesting. But it's obviously not that interesting, otherwise Microsoft wouldn't be coughing up, would they?
Re:Far be it from me to defend Microsoft but... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-25 00:45 · Score: 1, Insightful

Seems to me your point was refuted.

And this is a suprise to anyone at all? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-25 00:33 · Score: 3, Insightful

MS is having to pay out all the time. They always have since their inception. Can anyone count the number of settlements that have gone against MS? (Read, MS paid out) relative to the number that have favored MS?

I'm happy for Opera, but this really is just business as usual for MS.

Nice job US DOJ, you really reined them in.

Re:The worst part is IE development has stalled. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-25 00:35 · Score: 1, Insightful

Standard HTML, JPGs and PDF download for documents. That's all we need.

No, it's not all we need. We need PNG for images with an actual 8-bit alpha plane. We need SVG for inlinable vector graphics (which gives us copyable text from images, for starters!)

People are in fact already using these. It's just that a lot of people don't really know about them, or that they are feasible (SVG more than PNG, PNG is actually taking off web-wise). But if viewing them is such a hassle that it's not worth it for websites to employ them, well, employment, and development, stagnates. That's the problem.

My suggestion: ignore IE and build for compliant browsers. Then you can tell visitors to upgrade, or offer them a choice if they are "still using IE". Note: not really recommended for businesses.

Re:The worst part is IE development has stalled. by Max+Romantschuk · 2004-05-25 00:35 · Score: 4, Insightful

Uh. How is Microsoft keeping us from adopting those things?

If people felt that SVG, for instance, is necessary, then they'd download a browser that supports it. Standard HTML, JPGs and PDF download for documents. That's all we need.

Not true. You assume people are intelligent, able to install things, and interested in doing so in the first place.

The average person is not that intelligent. I'm not saying the average person is stupid, but never the less. It's rather improbable that the average person has the skills or the motivation to hunt for the correct tool.

Furthermore, many people browse at public libraries or similar places where installing software isn't an option.

Add to that the fact that most people are quite lazy. If the page looks weird they just forget about browsing the site and go somewhere else.

If Microsoft actually continued to add standard compliant technology to their browser we'd have a situation where we could actually adopt new technologies at a sensible rate. As it is now this is hardly the case.

As for HTML, JPEGs and PDF's being all we need... you really haven't done much in terms of real world web design have you? Sure, you'll get the information across, but that just won't cut it in the current market (this claim is naturally not without exceptions.)

--
.: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/

Scuse me? by KamuSan · 2004-05-25 00:39 · Score: 2, Insightful

If I borrow and crash your car and I kill a horse (or something), and I have to repay you the worth of the car, and you accept my money, you also accept that you are responsible for crashing the car? That's nice, then you can help me repaying the cost of the horse.

Legal != moral by KamuSan · 2004-05-25 00:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

Alas....

Patenting the hell out of everything is hardly moral and just as childish.

Re:So, they got their come-upence.. by zeugma-amp · 2004-05-25 00:46 · Score: 4, Insightful

make me wonder, what has Microsoft got up its collective sleeve? (Other than continued 'integration' with their operating systems.) They cornered the browser market and now they'll give it up without a fight? Why should they make an effort to clean up their legal image when it didn't seem to phase them for such a long time?

They don't have anything up their sleeves. Microsoft saw Netscape (and other browsers in general) as a threat because of the hype surrounding concepts of the 'browser being the platform'. They feared (rightly) that if true system independence were to come about due to people using a browser as their portal to software, that their windows monopoly would be threatened in some way.

When microsoft sees a threat, no matter how small to it's cash cow of windows, it reacts violently. Now that they feel (again probably rightly) that browsers are not a threat to them, they won't waste a moment of a programmer's time to fix IE defects because they understand that it no longer matters. The majority of uninformed users will continue to use IE no matter how ancient and clunky it gets compared to other browsers out there because the vast majority don't have any idea that Mozilla or Opera even exist, much less how massively superior to microsoft's offerings they are.

--
This is an ex-parrot!

Continue Anyway by denlin · 2004-05-25 00:49 · Score: 5, Insightful

Shutterfly, the online photo store backed by Netscape co-founder Jim Clark, does not support any version of Opera or Mozilla browsers, according to a warning displayed on the site this week.

this is one of my gripes about some websites. i noticed shutterfly has a "Click Next if you wish to skip future warnings and use Shutterfly with this unsupported browser." great, i can make the choice to puruse a sub-"standard" website if i still want to. sometimes i think they forget that they are offering goods/services that i can find somewhere else.

--
Yes, I have RTFA. Yes, I have a girlfriend. Yes, I'm new here. And no, I don't want a free iPod.

Re:Windows Update by peragrin · 2004-05-25 00:50 · Score: 2, Insightful

That's because Windows Update uses those "security holes" in IE to pass the required information back and forth. Can you imagine MS accendently publishing a patch that broke Windows update by fixing a security hole in IE. How long would we laugh?

--
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.

Re:Why would M$ care. by eggoeater · 2004-05-25 00:50 · Score: 2, Insightful

I think you have the logic backwards. They care who is using their browser so MUCH that they were willing to give it away. They care so MUCH that they included the browser with the OS.
The more people who use their browser, the more people they can influence/control how they browse the web.

--
$7.95/mo, 200 GB disk, 2TBxfer, MySQL, PHP, RoR.

Re:Windows Update by Ann+Elk · 2004-05-25 00:53 · Score: 1, Insightful

One could argue (only slightly tongue-in-cheek) that depending on ActiveX controls is also "...deliberately sending broken code".

My point: Microsoft has been forced to open up their browser interfaces (to make it easier to run "competing" browsers, etc). Given that, it is inappropriate for Windows Update to require IE.

Re:The worst part is IE development has stalled. by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-25 00:55 · Score: 2, Insightful

This stuff, as a web developer, makes me kinda cranky. It's like, wee! i can do all kinds of fancy stuff (not fancy as in bloat, fancy as in streamlined and shiny) but hangon... looks like it won't work in ie... okay cut it all out since 90% clients are in ie. it's just another depressing factor in a loveless job...

Answer IBM, HP and all the others by SmallFurryCreature · 2004-05-25 00:55 · Score: 2, Insightful

There is just a tiny little problem and that is all the others have patents too.

You fell prey to one of life's classic blunders. The most famous is, 'Don't get involved in a land war in Asia. Slightly less well known is Don't get involved in patent pissing contest with IBM when money is on the line'.

Look up if you have time a recent setback for MS were they were told to remove the clause from their contracts that stops their OEM's from enforcing their patents against MS.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:

You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

Re:The worst part is IE development has stalled. by garcia · 2004-05-25 01:08 · Score: 2, Insightful

But the fact is Microsoft is keeping us from adopting things like CSS2, PNG and SVG more than anything else.

I haven't noticed a need for CSS2 and PNG but SVG comes via a plugin. I don't see why you think that MS should support it natively.

How many websites out there use it? Only one that I use regularly and it's not exactly something that 99.9% of others will use.

Should MS be forced to integrate Flash into the browser just because some websites use it (you would all go fucking ballistic if they took Shockwave over to do so)?

Only on the PC by SmallFurryCreature · 2004-05-25 01:10 · Score: 2, Insightful

On the mobile phone Opera is a very real player. In fact that is where opera makes it money. Not from PC browsers (wich most people pirate anyway) but from licenses sold to phone makers.

Just try one of the non-ms "modern" phones. Shouldn't be too hard. Most are non-ms. All the nokia ones I seen had an opera browser.

This is something MS doesn't like. It has tried everything it could outside murder to get a foothold in the mobile phone market without success. PDA's are slightly more succesfull but its old reputation of rebooting is really hurting it from the customer perspective. PDA's and certainly PC's we are used to being bugged but we expect or mobile phones to be like our land line phones. Just working.

From the phone makers perspective MS reputation of screwing everyone makes them very determined not to rely on MS software.

So in yes opera is a real threat. If ever that vision where the Mobile phone will be the main computer everyone uses and not the PC then people might also suddenly see that an OS doesn't have to be rebooted and that browser do exist that just bloody work.

So opera is a real threat. So why did MS settle? Even Bill Gates must be learning from all the legal problems MS is having. Sure 12 million is nothing to MS but it ain't 12 million. It is 12 million to opera, 600 million to the EU, close to a billion to various american states, lots of other legal cases being settled all the tune of millions, the case against lindows wich is not going all that well. Each individual case will not be enough but put them all together and MS is losing some real money while gaining nothing.

And each and every case only shows MS as the evil company. Not good.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:

You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

Re:Good... by acebone · 2004-05-25 01:11 · Score: 2, Insightful

OK - I don't know when it was introduced in Mozilla and you may be right, I thought it was the other way around.

Re: 3rd parties - I mean the extension system of Mozilla, Opera hasn't got anything like that. Pie menus is an extension - it was made by a 3rd party.

--
Check out my PHP Url Validator

They are going to purchase.... by gosand · 2004-05-25 01:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

Actually, it's been said before, but they're not getting beat down here....they're settling all their open litigation. I'm not sure to what end this is progressing towards, but something tells me that Microsoft themselves is trying to clear all open cases against them so that they can gear up for something big. I just can't put my finger on what they're up to...

If I had to venture a guess - they're going to buy a big media company. The only business that has more control than MS in their respective field is the entertainment industry. Once you have more money than you know what to do with, what do you go after? Controlling information. MS lost with controlling the internet, so they are going to go for the popular media.

--

My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

Re:The worst part is IE development has stalled. by sfe_software · 2004-05-25 01:23 · Score: 4, Insightful

Not true. You assume people are intelligent, able to install things, and interested in doing so in the first place.

I agree with all but the intelligent part. It's not that people aren't intelligent, it's more that they have little or no interest in learning that much about computers. For those of us where computers are a large part of our lives and/or careers, these things seem obvious, just like a doctor might think some complex medical procedure is obvious...

It's rather improbable that the average person has the skills or the motivation to hunt for the correct tool.

That's a much better spin on it that I can agree with fully. Just remember, skills != intelligence. Nor does lack of motivation imply lack of intelligence; lack of interest perhaps...

Add to that the fact that most people are quite lazy. If the page looks weird they just forget about browsing the site and go somewhere else.

I do that myself, but in my case most times the page was designed for IE exclusively or requires flash, whereas I use Mozilla w/o the flash plugin. These days I find much less rendering problems, either because sites are more compliant (doubtful) or because Mozilla and IE interpret buggy/incomplete code in similar ways...

If Microsoft actually continued to add standard compliant technology to their browser we'd have a situation where we could actually adopt new technologies at a sensible rate. As it is now this is hardly the case.

Agreed fully. IE has, in my opinion, stagnated since version 5 or so, and no major feature enhancements (that I would use anyway) since 4.0. I forget which version implemented Microsoft's idea of CSS2 support, but in any case it's still not complete. Plus it lacks so many useful features that most other browsers have (disallowing unrequested popups, tabbed interface, etc)...

As for HTML, JPEGs and PDF's being all we need... you really haven't done much in terms of real world web design have you? Sure, you'll get the information across, but that just won't cut it in the current market (this claim is naturally not without exceptions.)

Standard and simple technologies are sufficient for many purposes, but in general I agree that we shouldn't be stuck with 1998 technologies. I like knowing that I can use certain advanced features, but in more than one case I've had to pull a cool CSS trick out of a page after finding out that IE doesn't support it (or doesn't support it properly). Often the work-around is to re-implement it using JavaScript, which isn't worth the effort IMO.

Just look at the new features we've gained over the last five years (that are actually being used). Then look at the five years prior to that (1994 to 1999) and you'll notice that things have stagnated around the time IE became stagnant. Granted we're still seeing many technologies becoming more widely used (eg, CSS), but only because the market generally has to catch up. By the time we get anything new (at the mercy of Microsoft most likely), we'll see actual development stagnate for a while, while we wait for the new tech to mature, and for there to be enough users with a newer browser...

At least that's my opinion, based on observation... however I do feel that HTML/CSS is currently pretty darned flexible if you learn the right tricks; it could be worse (it's not like we're stuck with plain ASCII text).

In summary, I fully agree with you and wanted to comment on a few points, and to point out that I don't feel that it's lack of intelligence, but rather specific knowledge that many users don't care to know (nor should they have to, ideally). Computers are tools to most people...

I do believe you used intelligence unintentionally to mean knowledge, as the other points in your post seem to agree.

Oh, and I hate PDF. More specifically, the idea (portability) is great, they print nice, but I cannot stand the Acrobat viewer (I wonder if there's another Windows viewer out there somewhere...)

(I really should get to bed soon; I noticed I'm rambling quite a bit here...)

--
NGWave - Fast Sound Editor for Windows

Re:Opera's finances? by timmyf2371 · 2004-05-25 01:29 · Score: 3, Insightful

Will this $12 million mean Opera can get rid of the spyware that seems to be incorperated into the free version of their browser and move to a more sensible business model?

I see no problems with their current pricing structure:

"Don't want to pay for our software? You can view ads as an alternative."
"Don't like adverts? Pay a low fee if you like the software."

Really, what is your problem in paying for software you like to use if you don't want to view adverts?

--

Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic

Hush money by quisph · 2004-05-25 02:14 · Score: 2, Insightful

Opera has accused Microsoft of deliberately breaking interoperability between its MSN Web portal and various versions of the Opera browser--charges that the software giant has repeatedly denied.

And now they can go on denying it forever. $12.75 million settlement == hush money.

Thanks for taking the easy way out, Opera. Maybe I'll give Mozilla a try.

monopoly money by Doc+Ruby · 2004-05-25 02:53 · Score: 3, Insightful

$12M is big money for Opera, but small money for M$. So of course M$ will do it again, probably even to Opera. That turns Opera's business model into extortion, and keeps M$ a monopoly.

--

--
make install -not war

Microsoft freeing up its legal team by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · 2004-05-25 05:06 · Score: 2, Insightful

Microsoft is freeing up its legal team for the upcomming patent wars. They don't want their legal team tied up in pointless and counterproductive litigation which does not have the effect of destroying open source.

At one time, it was worth fighting companies like Opera. Bleed their cash. Steal their ideas. Sabatoge their product, etc.

But now, it is much higher priority for the legal team to be ready for the new patent wars.

--
The price of freedom is eternal litigation.

Time to think and get informed before posting. by hkmwbz · 2004-05-25 05:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

Opera's bringing in more and more money from their browser products. How exactly is this "a questionable business model"?

And based on the fact that revenues are increasing rapidly, how can you even think about claiming that Opera relies on lawsuits for revenue.

Fact: Opera makes enough money just by selling a browser. Anyone who has followed the company and read a few interviews with the CEO knows that you are talking out of your ass.

Also, this has been discussed before. I guess I shouldn't even mention the fact that Microsoft was spreading lies about Opera through the media, should I?

Man, try to inform yourself before shooting your mouth off like that.

--
Clever signature text goes here.

Re:Not Fair? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-05-25 08:57 · Score: 1, Insightful

RTFC, moron.

Microsoft has been feeding wrong code to Opera on several occasions, making Opera look bad. In addition, a Microsoft exect started spreading lies about Opera through the press.

An honest mistake is one thing, but this showed a pattern of lying, deceit, and trying to make Opera look bad.

And since Microsoft is a monopoly it has certain restrictions that don't apply to everyone else.

By the way, only IE works with Windows Update, but no one is screaming since Microsoft is up front about it.

Re:The worst part is IE development has stalled. by black+mariah · 2004-05-25 10:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

FUcking Christ in a blender I'm tired of this stuck-up, self-aggrandizing, masturbatory horseshit.

People are not stupid. They just don't fucking care. Most people have a life that exists beyond their monitor. As long as they can check their email and go to the few sites they frequent, THEY DON'T FUCKING CARE WHAT THEY ARE USING. They don't give a fuck about standards, they don't give a fuck about MS being 'evil', they don't give a fuck about any of this stupid fucking bullshit you moronic fucking geek.

If people are too stupid to install shit, then how the fuck do you think Flash got so popular? Hey, that's right! When they go to a site that uses it and they don't have it, THEY FUCKING INSTALL IT.

Since you're too damn biased to notice, IE isn't the only non-standards compliant browser out there. In fact, I'm not sure there is a SINGLE browser that is fully standards compliant.

On a slightly different note, when did PDF go from being the devil to being accepted? I thought PDF was horrible because... like... it was made by Adobe and stuff... and they're bad. Or something. *COUGH*

Meh, whatever.

--
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.

Slashdot Mirror

Microsoft Behind $12M Opera Settlement

49 of 331 comments (clear)