Slashdot Mirror
US Government Keeping Close Eye on Longhorn
skrysakj writes "CNN/Money has a new article describing the close eye the Feds have on Longhorn and its compliance with the anti-trust settlement. I wonder how discerning their eye will be considering past decisions and lax enforcement. Also, this prompts the question, what is the EU doing to examine Longhorn?" The longer Washington Post piece has more information.
From the article:
[The feds are monitoring Longhorn] to make sure it is not presented with a "fait accompli" version of the software that would be difficult to change.
The feds don't want Longhorn to be difficult to change. They are making sure they catch any violations before it is unreasonably difficult for Microsoft to change the software to fix those violations.
"Preceded by itself yields falsehood" preceded by itself yields falsehood.
I keep an eye on the court/DOJ/MS interaction for my web site (yes, shameless plug). The federal court requests a periodic (usually quarterly) update on Microsoft's compliance with the settlement. It covers a variety of ground, but usually no specific products. For example, it explains how many more customers (yeah! one!) have signed up for licensing their newly "open" protocols. Basically, the court checks on stuff covered directly (explicitly) in the settlement.
So it's not unusual to see them checking in and meeting with Microsoft. The real problem is the leniency and broad interpretation of the settlement itself. I'm not too surprised to see Longhorn getting a better look, but I would be very surprised if Microsoft's plans are forced to change much.
Developers: We can use your help.
'1. Feds want Longhorn to be "difficult to change"'
Where did you get that? The only thing that I read about 'difficult to change' was this:
'...the government wants to look at the software, code-named Longhorn, early enough in its development so that it is not presented as a "fait accompli" that would be difficult to change.'
In other words, the government wants to watch Microsoft's development, so that, in 2 years, MS can't show up with a 'final' version of the OS which is in gross violation, and then say, "Oh, but it's so hard to change now that we're done." That's basically what MS did with the Internet Explorer integration- they got it nice and stuck in the OS, and then said, "Oh, but we can't take it out! That would be impossible! If only we had known ahead of time that you wouldn't like it, we wouldn't have put it in, but now, what's done is done! We can't undo it!"
...which, of course, is BS, but it's what Microsoft claims, and the government doesn't want a repeat.