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.
Why this is kinda bad for the operating system:
:-)
1. Feds want Longhorn to be "difficult to change"
This means it will be difficult for people to mod their Longhorn OS and reap rewards from having a custom system, beyond what the OS offers by default (like the ability to hide certain MS apps in favour of your own fare). Microsoft is being forced to be inflexible to some extent, and that means bad news for customers of the software giant. Bugs will be harder to fix, updates will be slower, response to threats even slower. This will be the repeated excuse while many suffer the wrath of virus programmers abound.
2. Justice Department lawyers would visit Microsoft's headquarters next week to discuss a variety of antitrust compliance issues
Okay, they're going to spend a week at Microsoft. How is that going to solve anything or be effective at all? They'll have a bunch of meetings over Shrimp and Wine coolers, get liquored up and talk about golf.
3. When the government is involved in any project, it's subject to major setbacks, not to mention built in spyware.
These three reasons will force many to the Linux model of computing. Yay!
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
They should put the Department of Homeland Security on it too. You know, for securities sake.
Microsoft, which has delayed Longhorn's rollout, has not said when it will be released as the successor to Windows XP, the current version of the personal-computer operating system. Several industry analysts have predicted introduction of Longhorn in 2006 or possibly 2007, which is when the antitrust settlement is scheduled to expire. - Washington Post Since Longhorn will be distributed after the terms of the antitrust agreement expire they can do whatever the hell they want. They can show one thing when in reality they mean to implement another. I am not saying thats what they are going to do, its just a possibility.
Longhorn will be expected to deliver phenomenally in terms of 1. Security 2. UI 3. "Seamless" integration of internet/multimedia tool. It is, however, this precise policy of "integration", or rather, forcing users to go with MS software, which is the bee in Microsoft's bonnet. Recent technology previews of mozilla firefox and thunderbird, along with other web content software (shareware as well as open source) are much better in terms of performance than the existing stuff from the MS stable. LongHorn will have to outperform in more ways than one to battle Linux as well as opensource
Probably because it'll come bundled with a complete government, so you won't need the on in Washington DC, state capitol, etc.
Those guys up in Redmond are so thoughtful, but what happens when the first security hole is found?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
No wonder it's taking MS so long to release Longhorn.
From the MSNBC article:
"Several industry analysts have predicted introduction of Longhorn in 2006 or possibly 2007, which is when the antitrust settlement is scheduled to expire."
Also, this prompts the question, what is the EU doing to examine Longhorn?
:-D
Not using it?
Is it just me or does anyone else find it interesting that Longhorn is delayed until just about the time the M$ Antitrust settlement encumbrances ( such as they are) go away.
When the fox gaurds the henhouse, there isn't much need to count the chickens. Whatever happened to anti-trust with balls? A paper tiger is meaningless, and there is nothing that microsoft and company could possibly do that would actually result in real action. Once there was at least enough of a threat to have them work hard at keep Apple afloat, but now with Linux they can act with impunity. If my government won't stop Microsoft, who will?
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.
You're delusional if you think it's just the Republicans. The Dems are just as if not more guilty of it. Al Gore is on Apple's board of directors for christs sake. I'm so sick of the partisanship these days, you honestly think power hungry people i.e. politicians are ever innocent of pandering and profiteering? They ALL do it equally. John Kerry is the richest man to ever grace the senate, he's married to Teresa HEINZ Kerry, you know, the ketchup chick. They have billions, none of it he EARNED. He married the widow of a rich ketchup producer. I mean come on dude, do you not see the total BS you're dishing out?
So they're keeping a close eye on Longhorn, eh? The problem with any of these "enforcement" deals is that usually they're reactive. The product will come out, people will cry foul, then Microsoft spends a few years dancing with the justice department all the while the product has already done its corporate damage.
The only real way to keep an eye on them is to have someone actually be involved from the groundwork. Will such and such feature be anti-competition? If so, scrap it before anyone works on it. Otherwise it'll just be IE'ed into the OS and a teary-eyed Ballmer will have to explain to us that taking it out will kill Windows.
Things to watch out for: DRM and the integration of Media Player, the bundled firewall, an MS Anti-virus, and the Dancing Ballmer doing the "Welcome To Windows" tour.
You'll recall that after the Bush admin took over the settlement between the govmt and M$ was pretty much turned into a slap on the wrist.
More specifically, the Bush administration removed the lawyers most experienced with monopolies at the DoJ from the case before the official settlements were signed. Junior lawyers were assigned to work the trial. Right about that time Lawrence Lessig was removed as independant council from the case by the judge without any explanation. It didn't get enough press, but there's no doubt that the Bush administration had a huge impact on the end of the trial and settlement.
Developers: We can use your help.
I read the shorter article (many words = enemy), and I can't help but wonder how the gov't actually intends on enforcing this issue. Are they really hiring programmers of thier own to look at the code? If not, would the average gov't employee know what he/she is looking at? Even if they were given some sort of a design document (hehhe) would they even be able to determine the true intent or implementation?
I for one welcome our new [insert main topic] overlords.
It's possible, although highly speculative, that Microsoft will not call Longhorn "Windows" after they make the final decision to not natively support the Win32 API. If they don't support the Windows API, it's no longer Windows, in one sense. Developers will be forced to use .NET if they wish to target Longhorn. (Win32 might be supported by an emulation layer, but it won't be completely native if they go this route).
However, none of this has been completely decided yet, so Longhorn is still Windows. I wouldn't be surprised if that were to change as we approach its release.
Developers: We can use your help.
Input:
US Government Keeping Close Eye on Longhorn
Output:
Bush Administration Seeking Campaign Contributions from Microsoft
You might want to check out some of Kerry's Top Donors.
Also, if you're a fan of the DMCA you'll be pleased to see how high up Time Warner is on the list! But then the kowtowing Democrats do to Hollywood is legendary.
Bush is only slightly better in terms of dollars accepted by Microsoft (at least he's mostly free of media companies). Basically you're going to have to vode Nader - or Perot!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Travelling off-topic, but this year's election IS nothing more than Bush/Not Bush. I propose a nationwide electoral change that puts "None of the Above" on EVERY ballot. If that is the majority, all original offerings are scrapped, and each 'party' on the ballot can offer a new person for that position (within 30 days). All losers would be eliminated from consideration. Days 31-60 would be nation-wide debates, and the vote would be on day 61. Continue until "NOTA" is not the winner. Since the term-limit for a sitting prez is 10 total years, they can be lame-duck until the election is over.
When faced with these sorts of forced splits, it is always useful to consider Fisher's Deduction:
"The more issues a person tries crudely shoehorn down into an artificial liberal/conservative dichotomy, the more certain you can be that ther person is an American."
It's not 100%, but it is surprisingly accurate surprisingly often.
Jedidiah.
Craft Beer Programming T-shirts