Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft's Longhorn Faces Antitrust Scrutiny

benore writes "The Department of Justice will be reviewing Microsoft's Longhorn product as part of the company's antitrust settlement. One analyst opines that Mircosoft is appearing to soften its image to become kinder and gentler. 'They don't want people to hate them anymore. They've learned from their mistakes.' Hmmm."

284 comments

  1. One or t'other... by Randy+Wang · · Score: 5, Funny

    So, now, instead of hating them for being the monopolistic, evil, brutish and cruel giant that we all like to think of them, they want us to praise them for their strides forward in the fields of Digital Rights Management, ever-retreating deadlines and anti-crapware stance.

    I, for one, welcome our new (helpful) overlords...

    --
    --- Egads, I glow in the dark!
    1. Re:One or t'other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      MS isn't brutish they're American.

    2. Re:One or t'other... by this+takes+too+long · · Score: 2

      Its brutish, not british.

    3. Re:One or t'other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point you miss is that Americans should use the Fifth Branch of Government (MicroSoft) as a mirror for themselves.

    4. Re:One or t'other... by lxs · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ever retreating deadlnes is a bad thing?

      Some people are never content. For years everyone has been critisizing for not being more like Free Software vendors.

      With Longhorn, Microsoft has obviously adopted the Debian release schedule.

      Go MS!

    5. Re:One or t'other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yeah but with MS, we're still expecting a bug-ridden piece of shit OS.

    6. Re:One or t'other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would like to know:
      Is Microsoft working with hardware and computer manufacturers to make PC's "unfriendly to Linux"?

      Or is this just a case of someone who can't get his favorite linux distros to recognize all of his hardware, and thinks Microsoft has conspired to make the "unfriendly to Linux" item a possibility?

      I have a Dell PC, and of course it comes preloaded with XP. In trying a bunch of live CD linux distros, only SuSE 9.2 Live Eval will recognize my Sound Card. I'm running XFLD now, and no sound.

    7. Re:One or t'other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you really don't have a sence of humor.

    8. Re:One or t'other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you really can't spell "sense".

    9. Re:One or t'other... by agraupe · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nope... if it works on one Linux distro, linux does support the hardware. If there is one area linux needs to work on, it is hardware detection. I'm sure it will work perfectly on every other distro, if you set it up (a manual kernel compile, no doubt).

    10. Re:One or t'other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dammit, why don't I ever have mod points for the funny ones??!? Grrr...

      Très drole...!

    11. Re:One or t'other... by SirTalon42 · · Score: 1

      I think Dell is just good at picking the worst possible hardware for their PCs.

      If you got a common model though you can often find info on google on how to set it up to work on most any distro (if its possible).

    12. Re:One or t'other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any REAL company will deal with DRM or get their pants sued off. Maybe that is the only thing Open Source has over proprietary. You can't find anyone with any money to sue with open source so the DRM folks (**IA) can't touch you...

    13. Re:One or t'other... by randallpowell · · Score: 1

      It'll be out when Duke Nukem Forever is released with special .NET applets. It'll be grand fun for the whole family.

    14. Re:One or t'other... by randallpowell · · Score: 1

      Dell does prefer to sell Windows over Linux. Be nice if they would make drivers for Linux but they won't. Dell sleeps with Gates too.

    15. Re:One or t'other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get back under your bridge, troll.

    16. Re:One or t'other... by innerweb · · Score: 1

      I want a new mod selection reserved for posts like this. Something along the lines of Juvenile Delinquent.

      InnerWeb

      --
      Freud might say that Intelligent Design is religion's ID.
    17. Re:One or t'other... by coaxial · · Score: 3, Insightful

      strides forward in the fields of Digital Rights Management

      You should not call DRM "Digital Rights Management", the term is "Digital Restrictions Management". This isn't just a linguistic trick, it's framing the debate. "Rights" has a positive connotation, "restrictions" has a negative one. The idea is that you define the debate in your terms, so that your opposition has to defend itself using your terms.

      The master of this is Frank Luntz. His way of framing debate with words is called "Luntz Speak". I don't agree with his politics, but I admire his methods tremendously.

    18. Re:One or t'other... by modernbob · · Score: 1

      No, this is just Linux. I love Linux I really do and it really does have more potential than than XP. One of the things that Linux really has to work on is device drivers for new hardware. If you are runing older equipment then you will more than likely find drivers. If you are running something new, good luck!

    19. Re:One or t'other... by schleyfox · · Score: 0

      Come on, its not debians fault that they can't make a release to save their lives, its frozen-bubble's fault. The colorful bubbles make them do it.

    20. Re:One or t'other... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ahahahahahahahhahaah

    21. Re:One or t'other... by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1
      I would like to know:
      Is Microsoft working with hardware and computer manufacturers to make PC's "unfriendly to Linux"?
      In that specific case? Probably not.

      In general? It looks like it. The potential is there to ensure that rival software and operating systems will not work on this hardware:

      At the BIOS level: Microsoft has made a deal with BIOS maker Phoenix Technologies intended to more closely integrate the basic building blocks of the PC with the Windows operating system. The deal would allow the operating system to directly control hardware and raises concerns over who controls the software in microcomputers.
      At the CPU level: LaGrande is DRM at the CPU level. There are similar activities for baking DRM into harddrives and other storage media.
      --
      Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    22. Re:One or t'other... by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      SuSE has the best hardware detection IMHO. It's my favorite because it also seems to make it very easy to configure wireless.

  2. Too late, Bill by TheStick · · Score: 0

    I believe it's way they've been way too far to forgive them. Ever since Windows 98, I understood Microsoft was making fun of us. So I went to Linux...and I didn't go back!

    1. Re:Too late, Bill by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Windows 98 really was a huge mistake. I was happy using NT 4 when it was released. If they had released a Windows NT 4.5 with proper DirectX (not the two-versions-old, and 3D-acceleration-may-work-but-probably-won't version that NT4 had) and with a more friendly device configuration GUI it would have been far more usable than Windows 98. This was even on the MS roadmaps released before Window 95. '95 and NT4 were due to have a single successor. Eventually this emerged as 2000 (I was using it since NT 5 beta 2, and it's not a bad system). Windows ME was a travesty (why did it even need to exist? Windows 2000 was meant to be the upgrade path for '98 users. Instead it just gave game developers an excuse not to support 2K, forcing people to dual boot if they wanted to play games and do real work), and Windows XP is just a whole string of UI mistakes built on top of security holes (many of which come from the Windows 98 era).

      I went to Linux, loathed it, went to FreeBSD, liked it, and finally got a Mac.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Too late, Bill by MoonFog · · Score: 1

      So, if it's too late, Microsoft should just stop caring and do what they want. Yeah, they've done some pretty shitty things, but there is still a chance that they will actually have to comply with the EU and DoJ come Longhorn release date.
      I will wait to cast judgement until I actually see Longhorn, and frankly, I think most people should.

    3. Re:Too late, Bill by eraserewind · · Score: 1

      Microsoft won't comply with anything except in the most meaningless sense until somebody splits into 3, the Office division and the the OS division and the rest. That would be good for microsoft's products, good for consumers, and good for competition.

    4. Re:Too late, Bill by JPriest · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually most of XP's security problems with RPC, default services in listening state etc. all came from win2k. 98se was a brick wall (remotely) after you dissabled netbios. You could run "netstat -a" and get 0 results, try that on XP, 2K, or even Linux.

      --
      Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    5. Re:Too late, Bill by TheStick · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Well, buddy, I'm just saying MS made fun of its customers for years now. And today they're suddenly saying thay they are nice people, and actually make nice products. YOUR post, however, IS useless! Sans rancune!

    6. Re:Too late, Bill by sqlrob · · Score: 1

      And there's the ones that date from (at least) Win 3.1, probably Win 1.0 because the design or lack thereof is completely broken. This is only a local epxloit though.

    7. Re:Too late, Bill by Taladar · · Score: 3, Informative

      The reason you almost never get 0 results with "netstat -a" in Linux is that it lists Unix Sockets in addition to Network (TCP&UPD) Sockets which are used by X11, your systemlogger and other programs but are strictly local.

    8. Re:Too late, Bill by l3v1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You could run "netstat -a" and get 0 results, try that on XP, 2K, or even Linux.

      Oh well, just another ignorant reference, and amateur trial of useless comparison with Linux. You obviously never heard of xinetd, did you.

      There are many thousands of Linux boxes out there which run dozens of services internally or intranet-ally which you couldn't ever access or even know they are available on that remote box.

      That said, you're right.

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    9. Re:Too late, Bill by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1

      Why would splitting MS be good? I've never particularly understood that idea. Is it just so that the companies would be smaller?

    10. Re:Too late, Bill by miscGeek · · Score: 1

      With the way Microsoft keeps pushing back the release date for Longhorn, I might be around to try it, I am 39 after all :) Seriously though, it's too late for Microsoft for me anyway. They've had their chance and failed it miserably.

      --
      May the source be with you!
    11. Re:Too late, Bill by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting the timeframe here. Windows 98 emerged when DOS apps were still inmensly popular and a stopgap between DOS and Win32 was needed. So, they basically extended Win3.11 to take Win32 apps. With issues, given. WinME was simply Win98 with polish.

      Arguably, it did quite well, and by the time Windows 98 took off Windows 2000/XP was arround the corner to finish the transition to a "proper" OS, based on the NT kernel (which is better than most people tend to beleive). It was a bold move but it worked for them.

    12. Re:Too late, Bill by eraserewind · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not so much the smallness, more the seperateness. They would still be 3 very large companies, but they wouldn't cover the whole market individually.

      Office and Windows are cash cows used to subsidise entry into all other markets. If this free cash is withdrawn (due to office and windows being in seperate companies than the rest), then the other microsoft stuff has to compete on something approaching a level playing field.

      If Office is not obliged to lock people into Windows it would (possibly) have more interest in being more cross platform. Anyway, the main aim is to break the vertical relationship with the Windows OS. This will allow better competition in both the OS and Office markets, though I have to say I would expect Office to continue to dominate. Windows less surely so as it would run the risk of becoming a comodity without all the other microsoft stuff tied closely to it, and we are approaching a change in the way computers are architected (more parallelism, less Hz), though with 95% of the desktop market it's obviously in a strong starting position.

    13. Re:Too late, Bill by Orgazmus · · Score: 1

      That would be:
      Production, Marketing and Legal

      --
      The system had the verbosity of HTML combined with all the readability of compiled assembly viewed as bitmap images
    14. Re:Too late, Bill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I get zero results on this linux box save my Xserver which is deliberate.
      bash-2.05b$ netstat --inet -a
      Active Internet connections (servers and established)
      Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State
      tcp 0 0 *:6000 *:* LISTEN
      bash-2.05b$

      Windows relies on RPC but as far as *nix goes, what are you talking about?

    15. Re:Too late, Bill by lanc · · Score: 0

      I went to Linux, loathed it, went to FreeBSD, liked it, and finally got a Mac.

      ...and? what do you run on it?
      --
      "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
    16. Re:Too late, Bill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      I get zero results on this linux box save my Xserver which is deliberate.

      Even that listening port can be turned off with startx -- -nolisten tcp

    17. Re:Too late, Bill by JPriest · · Score: 1
      That is true, I am familiar with UNIX sockets, the syntax of the command on a unix system is different "netstat --inet -a" but it was mostly outside the scope of the post. The point remains though that most Linux distros ship today with a larger remote attack footprint than win98.

      It is my opinion that no operating system should have any network service in listening state upon default install. This should be an undustry standard policy.

      --
      Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    18. Re:Too late, Bill by LnxAddct · · Score: 1

      Fedora Core 3 ships with not a single port open and very good friewall configuration. In addition, it enables SELinux by default. You can't really beat that today unless you disconnect the computer from the internet.
      Regards,
      Steve

    19. Re:Too late, Bill by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      Mainly TeXShop (for long documents), TextEdit (for articles and anything shorter) and XCode. Most of what I do involves writing code (I'm in the middle of writing a Jabber client for OpenStep platforms - GNUstep and OS X in particular, and I also have a few other projects on the go) or English (If you read LinuxToday.com you may have seen an article I wrote yesterday. I also wrote some parts of a book reviewed here recently). Beyond that a few games and the standard apps like Mail and Safari.

      If you meant what OS, OS X. I really like FreeBSD as a platform but KDE and GNOME seem to have been designed by people who haven't got the slightest clue about user interface design (and consider Windows to be something worth emulating). GNUstep is getting there, but it's not quite ready for prime time yet (at least not for someone as pedantic about user interfaces as me - but then, I don't consider Windows to be ready for the desktop either).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    20. Re:Too late, Bill by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting the timeframe here. Windows 98 emerged when DOS apps were still inmensly popular and a stopgap between DOS and Win32 was needed. So, they basically extended Win3.11 to take Win32 apps. With issues, given. WinME was simply Win98 with polish.

      And arguably if DOS had a proper API for accessing the hardware they would not have needed it.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    21. Re:Too late, Bill by prodangle · · Score: 1
      I'm happy to read posts advocating Linux for its merits, as for any other OS, but around here I've seen far too many people advocating Linux for no reason other than because they are sucked into the slashdot-opensource-zealoutry-cult.

      I apologise if that isn't you - and I'm sorry you were the subject of my little vent :)

  3. Lets hope... by orta · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ... That something constructive comes out of this :)

    --
    my band is more brutal techno punk than yours
    1. Re:Lets hope... by TheStick · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yeah, this is a pretty "trollesque" topic ;) I smell "fuck windows" hate messages...

    2. Re:Lets hope... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Was it ever about News for Nerds, Stuff that matters? Or just about page hits?

      Interesting question: Do the editors have page hit quotas? Eyeball bonuses?

      Anyway, it seems to be the Apple topics that are generating all the page hits and all the "controversy" these days. A little MS bash is almost nostalgic.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    3. Re:Lets hope... by l3v1 · · Score: 1

      No, wait, we love them now, so we like "slobber over windows" now :] On the other side, if you can smell the "fuck windows" process... now that's wierd :D :D :D

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    4. Re:Lets hope... by northcat · · Score: 1

      Yup. Hoping that something constructive comes out of this is offtopic. Can't anyone see the absurdity of this????

    5. Re:Lets hope... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um... has anything constructive _EVER_ come out of a slashdot discussion? I mean... have you ever read an ask slashdot? Man. The answers you get there will only server to confuse you more.

  4. Angst by cybathug · · Score: 3, Funny

    "They don't want people to hate them anymore"
    Remember, it's down the road, not across the street. Make it count.

    1. Re:Angst by Danimoth · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      in case he needs a little more advice on this subject http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=ma nly_suicide

      --
      No smoking sigs indoors.
  5. They don't want people to hate them anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's gonna be a hard thing to do... The name of the settlement says it all, "Antitrust", Trust can be broken in a second, but can take years to build back up... If even that. Besides I don't buy that crap, when did M$ learn anything from their mistakes before?

    1. Re:They don't want people to hate them anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Microsoft learns from their mistakes all the time. Look at how they've learned from all their security mistakes? They've managed to turn their lousy codebase into a guaranteed revenue stream - no one dares run unauthorized copies for fear of not getting software updates.

    2. Re:They don't want people to hate them anymore? by zootm · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is gonna sound pedantic, but the name "Antitrust" is derived from monopolistic business cartels at the time that the legislation was written, which were then called "trusts".

    3. Re:They don't want people to hate them anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The thing is people don't hate MS. It's like OGG - restricted to a small group of geeks who can be bothered caring.

      Most people know about MS, know they use their software, some geeks are rabidly anti-MS... and the rest of the world couldn't care less.

    4. Re:They don't want people to hate them anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i bet the group of MS - Haters is bigger than you think...

      including me...

    5. Re:They don't want people to hate them anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yep! human nature never changes... man dosen`t learn from history he only repeats it.

    6. Re:They don't want people to hate them anymore? by l3v1 · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, you most certainly know that people (not you or me or us, but real people, the joesixpacks and the rest few hundred million out there) can very quickly have a change of mind in matters like these, the average people can very easily be convinced about anything. Hey, the whole advertising trade was built on that.

      Besides anything else, nobody should worry about M$'s marketing decisions. They proved to be working for them, no matter what people bring up regarding ethics, policies, or whatever else. Proved it a few dozen billion times in dollar coins.

      when did M$ learn anything from their mistakes before

      What did they learn ? Most probably something like: hey, whatever and however we screw up (or not), money keeps a'pouring. Let's go get some beer.

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    7. Re:They don't want people to hate them anymore? by quarkscat · · Score: 1

      Of course they don't want to be hated. Who
      would (short of SCO Group and the **AA)?

      Please tell me exactly what mistakes MSFT has
      made, because such a statement is confusing.

      They have always made use of deep pockets,
      lawyers, and sufficient delays in court to
      win market share, even if they have failed
      subsequently in court. The old saying of
      "Time is money" has been parlayed by MSFT
      into either (1) market share, or (2) change
      in venue (in court) that has always been
      beneficial to their long term success. Even
      the recent EU ruling and penalties will have
      a beneficial influence on MSFT's bottom line.
      (Think EU software patents here.) Face it,
      MSFT has always strategized very well, even if
      they have taken some minor hits regarding PR
      or buggy vulnerable software.

    8. Re:They don't want people to hate them anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And why shouldn't people give a shit about the ethical ramifications of Microsofts marketing decisions? The fact that it makes Microsoft money does not mean that it is right.

  6. Not again... by Richie1984 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One area that DOJ regulators will be looking at, in particular, is a control panel in Longhorn that facilitates use of a browser and media player other than the Microsoft versions that will be pre-built into the system.
    Does this mean that the next version of IE will be built directly into the new OS, as with XP, ME etc? I sincerely hope not, as I am not looking forward to further years of routine tech maintenance on my friend's PCs due to this integration.

    --
    I'm not stressed. I'm just terribly, terribly alert.
    1. Re:Not again... by erroneus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That control panel thing isn't what they should be looking for. There should be a complete means by which to remove IE from the machine completely. At present, there is no easy or reliable means.

      I recently deployed a bunch of machines with Firefox as the default browser and "removed" MSIE from the machine (as claimed by the removing of the windows components thingy) and yet I can still access MSIE on these machines... more importantly, email software that utilizes MSIE as their HTML rendering libraries can still access the vulnerabilities that still exist. If somehow a bad email gets through, the machine is just toast... possibly more than that in the process.

      The problem is that MSIE is bundled and imbedded in the OS. They need to be forced to extract it or at least make it conveniently possible. The product hasn't been released yet so there's plenty of time. They are dropping features and components left and right from Longhorn, so why not MSIE in order to comply with the DOJ?

    2. Re:Not again... by Ben+Hutchings · · Score: 1
      There should be a complete means by which to remove IE from the machine completely.

      IE is almost entirely componentised, and most of those components are used by third-party applications (and even by some other parts of Windows, such as the Add/Remove Programs control panel in Windows 2000). Remove IE, and you break all those applications. You could just remove iexplore.exe, but what's the point?

    3. Re:Not again... by michaelggreer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It seems totally reasonable that they, like Apple, would have an HTML rendering framework ship as part of the OS. IE uses that framework, as do other parts of the system. Other practices, like making IE hard to uninstall, pre-loading the framework to give IE a startup boost, and others, are more questionable.

    4. Re:Not again... by yanko22 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      As much as I grok the premises of the loudly voiced opinion that IE (or any other browser for that matter) should be separate from the OS, I find myself stuck on this question: do you really need to include a version of your favorite browser (provided that it is embeddable) with every single application you create that requires HTML functionality, however insignificant that requirement might be?
      What if IE were a perfectly secure and stable browser with solid API and conforming to all standarts? Will you be still able to defend this stance given the potential benefits?

      --
      The atheist,by merely being in touch with reality,appears shamefully out of touch with the fantasy life of his neighbors
    5. Re:Not again... by Richie1984 · · Score: 1

      I understand the benefits of integration should there exist a totally secure and compliant web browser, but I'm afraid there just isnt one. Security holes are found in all browsers all of the time, and I feel that tying an OS too closely with a program that is specifically targetted due to its insecurity is foolish.

      Perhaps the new IE will be incredibly secure, or the open source community will create a browser incapable of having security flaws, etc etc, but I would still prefer some degree of separation of browser and OS, if only for security reasons. It only takes one small flaw for someone to capitalise on before a fault in a browser could potentially bring down a whole OS.

      --
      I'm not stressed. I'm just terribly, terribly alert.
    6. Re:Not again... by mcnadeau · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Until M$ comes up with a way to totally uninstall their "pre-built" IE problem child, I will remain unimpressed.

    7. Re:Not again... by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      The problem with windows is that everything is bundled and deeply tied into the OS. You can't focus on making a good operating system if you have to be constantly thinking about browsers and media players and desktop environments. This is where open source software wins. Each of the individual programs is better because they have defined boundaries and goals. The only problem is how well they work together. But open source programs work pretty well together now.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    8. Re:Not again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This would be a good argument if open source userspace software didn't suck shit compared to proprietary, for-profit software.

    9. Re:Not again... by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Yes, because we all know firefox sucks compare to IE, Gimp sucks compared to MS Paint, (lets leave out photoshop cause there's no point comparing a free tool to something of professional level. It's like comparing a shovel to a backhoe in terms of digging ability.) OpenOffice sucks compared to MS Office (arguable however I think OpenOffice is 1000 times better because it has a proper drawing program, and the files are human readable after you unzip them.) Evolution sucks compared to Outlook (Isn't a program that just reads email better than one that reads mail while propogating viruses.) Am I forgetting anything here?

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    10. Re:Not again... by yanko22 · · Score: 1

      As I said earlier I understand and fully embrace most of the commonly announced concerns in this regard. However, I still think that an HTML rendering framework is (or should be) part of the basic infrastructure that every developer targeting a particular OS (and why not across OSs) should be able to rely upon. Some of the individual implementations are bound to be of poor quality as is the case with MS IE. What I do not agree with is the litigious side of this discussion. Otherwise, what's stopping them to request removal of the TCP stack implementation in Windows? How is that any different? Maybe there are tons of vendors willing to sell their own implementations of TCP stacks based on whatever they deem necessary APIs be it sockets or something proprietary.
      If there was a standard API, approved by independent international body like IETF, for accessing arbitrary HTML frameworks the case against IE would've been much more convincing. Since there is no such thing available, I tend to agree with MS that it is responsible for providing this functionality to its developers across all versions of its OS.

      --
      The atheist,by merely being in touch with reality,appears shamefully out of touch with the fantasy life of his neighbors
    11. Re:Not again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Firefox sucks compared to Safari, Gimp sucks compared to Photoshop, OpenOffice sucks compared to Office, Evolution sucks compared to the iLife suite, and you're forgetting that you're a blind, hypocritical fool for making excuses like "there's no point comparing a free tool to something professional" and "files are human readable."

    12. Re:Not again... by Your+Average+Joe · · Score: 1

      Tell your friends you do not work for free anymore. Bill has enough money to have a tech support line answer those questions. Tell your friends that if a Windows machine is too hard to use they can buy a Mac. The Mac Mini is $499, so the too expensive bit will not work anymore.

      I finally upgraded my Windows 2000 box at home, I bought a Mac Mini...

      --
      Your Average Joe
    13. Re:Not again... by Exatron · · Score: 1

      How is having human-readable files an excuse? That's a point in favor of OO.o because it's easier to get something useful out of a file in that format with another tool. OO.o also tends to do a better job reading MS Office files (older versions in particular) than MS Office. I've even been able OO.o to recover corrupted MS Word files that MS Office couldn't read.

      There is a blind, hypocritical fool her, but it's you, not him. Firefox is just as good as Safari (which is partially based on Konqueror), Evolution is a perfectly fine program, OpenOffice.org is actually better than MS Office, and Gimp is adequate for the needs of most normal people.

      --
      "I think so, Brain, but 'instant karma' always gets so lumpy." - Pinky
      "Decepticons FOREVER!!!" - Ravage
    14. Re:Not again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is Firefox "just as good as Safari"? The user interface is slow and unrefined, particularly on the Mac. With the sole exceptions of tabs and typeahead find, ALL the major Firefox user interface features were ripped straight from Safari. It might have turned out all right, too, except that nobody from Ben Goodger on down realized that rote mimickry can't substitute for fit and finish.

      Also, why does it matter to you that Safari is based on Konqueror? I freely grant that open source excels at this; a rendering engine is not a user interface.

      Evolution is perfectly fine, but not as good as the closed-source alternatives (iCal, Mail and Address Book), especially in user experience.

      Gimp may be adequate, but the point is that it's FAR inferior to Photoshop in both features and interface. "Gimp is adequate for the needs of most normal people"--that's such a fucking typical excuse. Yes, it's an EXCUSE, meal-for-brains.

      Face it, turdface. Only by comparing OSS products to their Microsoft equivalents can you claim that OSS comes out on top in terms of user interface--and usually not even then. OSS? More like ASS.

    15. Re:Not again... by EvilJoker · · Score: 1

      Technically, it sounds like you're referring to MSHTML, not just the shell, IE.

      Would it be possible to replace MSHTML with Gecko? That seems to be a more accurate question, since the shell itself isn't really tied into the OS (and certainly isn't where the problems are)

  7. Mircosoft ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oh great, there is another monopoly called Mircosoft?

    One monopoly, we could handle... but this is just ridiculous...

    1. Re:Mircosoft ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How could there be more than one monopoly?

    2. Re:Mircosoft ? by mirko · · Score: 2, Funny

      I am not a monopoly !

      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
    3. Re:Mircosoft ? by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      Oh great, there is another monopoly called Mircosoft?

      Isn't that the outfit that the guy was from who tried to pay $50,000 for a BSD license for Linux?

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  8. Whats the point ? by naden · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All third-party browsers e.g. Firefox and media players e.g. Quicktime ask whether you wish to make them the default when they are opened for the first time. So what is a control panel supposed to achieve ? The effort for the user is in the downloading and installing of the third-party software.

    The DOJ should be instead insisting that Microsoft bundle third-party alternatives with the OS not just providing a control panel.

    --
    Funtage Factor: Purple
    1. Re:Whats the point ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, you want more software that you will never use installed on your computer by default?

      And you want the DOJ or Microsoft to decide what software that should be?

    2. Re:Whats the point ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The DOJ should be instead insisting that Microsoft bundle third-party alternatives with the OS not just providing a control panel.

      Right, but do you expect Microsoft to bundle with their OS the 10,000 sharewares created last year to play mp3 files, or the 100,000 sharewares, freewares and OSS softwares written to edit your photos, view text files or play stupid little games?

      Apple has never done this and I do not see why Microsoft have to do it. It is THEIR operating system and they do what they want with it. If you don't like it, don't buy it, use Linux or grab a MacMini if you really want to spend your money.

    3. Re:Whats the point ? by jwcorder · · Score: 1
      "The DOJ should be instead insisting that Microsoft bundle third-party alternatives with the OS not just providing a control panel."

      This statement is overrated. As a general rule, in a free republic, you can't force someone to give away competitor's products with their goods. What would make more sense would be to force Microsoft to remove their bundled applications from the core installation. Then allow them to include a second cd with a Windows purchase that has IE, WMP, and other "bundled" apps on the disk. That way, you can install what you choose and forget about what you don't want.

      I don't think that a ruling forcing Microsoft to provide Quicktime, Mozilla, and Winzip with their Window products would ever hold water in a court of appeal. It works with *nix because it's free.

      --
      http://jayceecorder.blogspot.com
    4. Re:Whats the point ? by bersl2 · · Score: 1

      It's not so much that Microsoft should, it's that computer retailers should bundle more 3rd-party software.

    5. Re:Whats the point ? by say · · Score: 1

      So what is a control panel supposed to achieve?

      System-wide defaults and blocking access to specific programs (like OE) on a system-wide basis. You know, Windows has become a multi-user OS these days.

      --
      Roses are #FF0000, violets are #0000FF, all my base are belong to you
    6. Re:Whats the point ? by Nate+B. · · Score: 1

      And it's not that retailers should, rather it's that MS should be forced to allow retailers to bundle third party software. This is where the DOJ and pundits get it all wrong.

      --

      "Insanity is doing the same thing over again expecting a different result."
    7. Re:Whats the point ? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For boxed copies of Windows, I agree 100% - it should include anything MS wants to put in the box. For OEM copies it's a different matter. It should include the kernel, basic subsystems, Windows Explorer, and very little else. OEMs could then be free to decide what media player, office suite, browser, etc. they bundle, and customers could then buy from differentiated OEMs. MS should not be allowed to use their effective monopoly in the OS market to create monopolies in other markets (e.g. the web browser market), and this is exactly what the antitrust laws state.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    8. Re:Whats the point ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The current version of the control panel doesn't block anything. It just removes start menu shortcuts.

      Why a half-assed control panel when an uninstaller is what everyone wants? Would you be satisfied if the uninstallers that come with other programs just "blocked access", but left the program itself, its file associations, shell extensions, etc. in place?

      Just fucking remove IE from the default install already, and make it an option at install time.

      Then, I wouldn't mind if they still included a basic HTML engine for use with help systems and third-party apps, as long as it didn't automatically have internet access, potential security holes (positioning text and images should NOT be a risk), or a "browser" frontend.

      Oh, and "multi-user"? Hah!

      Microsoft has done nothing to encourage developers to make their apps multi-user friendly, and much of the consumer-level software works just as it did when designed for Win 95/98.

      Unless you are only using high-end/corporate type software, Windows' multiple user types are useless.

    9. Re:Whats the point ? by strider44 · · Score: 1

      Good point Nate.

      and perhaps they should not force retailers to put the rediculous "... recommends Windows XP Professional/Home Edition". I can't see that being anything but trying to oust competitors in the operating systems market.

    10. Re:Whats the point ? by ltbarcly · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You totally miss the point, like most people.

      Microsoft isn't using it's monopoly in OS to get monopolies in media players, web browsers etc. It is using it's web browsers and media players to force proprietary standards, like WMF, WMA, ms java, etc, which will only work on windows. This then reinforces the windows monopoly.

      For example, microsoft licensed java, then added extensions to intentionally break compatability with any other OS. They created internet explorer to kill netscape, because netscape was the killer app at the time, and was available on every platform under the sun. Then you have a situation where IE is at version 5, meanwhile the only reasonable browser on other OS's is netscape 4. This is before Mozilla and Firefox came along, and greatly hurt the competitiveness of alot of platforms, as using netscape 4 is just slightly better than eating razor blades.

    11. Re:Whats the point ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is you that miss the point by confusing cause and effect, they only reason the proprietry protocols, extensions and file formats take hold is because of Microsoft's violation of antitrust law.

      You do understand how this induces a "feedback loop" that makes MS "the one true path", but there are no laws against bottom feeding.

    12. Re:Whats the point ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes, but who's fault was that? Netscape pretty much stopped all development of their browser at 4.7, which was a decent browser. Microsoft then went on to release IE 5.0 later which was a breath of freshair from the crap that was IE 4.0, and Netscape did, well, not a damned thing.

      I'm sorry, in this industry if you don't release a product for many years while your competitor continues to refine their product then it's not the competitors fault.

      And see what happens when the tables turn? Microsoft got lazy and stopped development on IE at 6.1. So now competitors are catching up and the result is that they, in a fairly short order, have made up serious lost ground in market share.

      Also, adding extensions to Java is not against the spec in the least. All companies that have licensed Java have added their own extensions and libraries which add value to their implementation and the solutions that operate against it.

      Microsoft's problem with Java wasn't adding new things, it was not supporting existing portions of the specification. It wasn't that J/Invoke existed, it was that JNI didn't exist. It's a shame, however, because Microsoft did, at the time, have one of the most complete and most performant JVMs is existence, along with a plethora of tools to support it.

      As for what MS releases, I do believe it should be entirely up to them what comes in a boxed retail version of Windows. The OEMs, on the other hand, reserve the right to include other products, including third-party products, because they assume the support liability. OEMs now routinely install RealPlayer, AOL and Sun's standard JRE. There is nothing in their contracts stopping them from releasing FireFox, especially with the DoJs antitrust measures in place.

      However, the removal of IE and WMP don't just affect Windows. The libraries that make up both programs are reusable modules that have been incorporated into many other programs. By removing the IE HTML rendering engine, WinAmp will fail. So you get into the conundrum that while you could remove the wrapper program that makes up IE, iexplore.exe, removal of the underlying components is not so easy and would lead to a great deal of software failure.

      You can't directly compare Windows to Linux. Linux is, effectively, just a kernel. The kernel in Windows is something few people ever get exposed to, and Windows itself resides in one of several user-mode subsystems (alongwith an OS/2 and a substandard POSIX subsystem). But Windows is a full platform, like KDE. And like KDE you can't really just remove KParts and expect anything to work.

    13. Re:Whats the point ? by ImpTech · · Score: 1

      To be fair to Microsoft (yeah, I know), as of SP2 OEMs or anyone else are free to decide what media player, office suite, browser, etc. they bundle. Oh its true you can't actually get rid of the MS programs (except office, which has always been a "choice"). But if you select alternatives via the framework MS added in SP2, you never hear a peep from the offending programs again.

      As much as I'm disappointed in the antitrust settlement, getting this functionality in Windows is a decent bonus. Its made it very easy for me to convert family members seamlessly over to Firefox/Thunderbird.

    14. Re:Whats the point ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's gonna stop microsoft from discounting the ms software bundled version for OEMs?

      With microsofts track record, it may not be worth the bother to most OEMs.

    15. Re:Whats the point ? by spectecjr · · Score: 1

      To be fair to Microsoft (yeah, I know), as of SP2 OEMs or anyone else are free to decide what media player, office suite, browser, etc. they bundle. Oh its true you can't actually get rid of the MS programs (except office, which has always been a "choice"). But if you select alternatives via the framework MS added in SP2, you never hear a peep from the offending programs again.

      As much as I'm disappointed in the antitrust settlement, getting this functionality in Windows is a decent bonus. Its made it very easy for me to convert family members seamlessly over to Firefox/Thunderbird.


      As of Windows 2000 SP2, you mean. That "Set Program Access and Defaults" thing has been around for a very long time.

      A company I worked for in 1997 bought a packard bell system for me to use. It came with a 3rd party media player (namely, Real Player). I'm not sure what the big deal is.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    16. Re:Whats the point ? by shawb · · Score: 1

      I've always viewed the "...recommends WIndows..." as just a sort of advertising. I don't know if Dell/whoever gets paid to put that up or a discount on volume liscensing, but I'm pretty sure that Microsoft doesn't say that they just won't deal with the OEMs if they don't put that up. Now that... that would be annoying.

      I don't see it to be much different than a beer company giving neon signs to a bar for display (In this case the beer company is paying for the sign, and the bar gets something to put on their wall.)

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    17. Re:Whats the point ? by Xyrus · · Score: 1

      What about developement software?

      That's one of the things that irritates me about windows but love about linux. :)

      ~X~

      --
      ~X~
    18. Re:Whats the point ? by DavidD_CA · · Score: 1

      So that Microsoft can field the support calls or get blamed for the [just as] buggy software? What about when a security issue is found with QuickTime or some other app that they would be forced to bundle in?

      Not to mention the argument that, in what way would it ever be fair to force a company to include its competitor's product in with your own?

      If Ford sells a car with a built-in Ford radio, should they be forced to include Clarion and Pioneer radios too and give the user a choice?

      --
      -David
    19. Re:Whats the point ? by mythicflux · · Score: 1

      Yes, but who's fault was that? Netscape pretty much stopped all development of their browser at 4.7, which was a decent browser. Microsoft then went on to release IE 5.0 later which was a breath of freshair from the crap that was IE 4.0, and Netscape did, well, not a damned thing. Netscape never stoped development of a competing browser, they tried to produce a new Open Source based browser to combat IE, what happened unfortuntely is that they took too long, but technicially speaking they "did a damn", they started development of Mozilla. A Mozilla based browser is currently viewed as the potential competitor to IE's crappiness, it would be Mozilla Firefox.

    20. Re:Whats the point ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Netscape never stoped development of a competing browser, they tried to produce a new Open Source based browser to combat IE, what happened unfortuntely is that they took too long,"

      Which, in the market, is equivalent to doing nothing. 3D Realms can't bitch for Doom 3 doing better than Duke Nukem Forever.

    21. Re:Whats the point ? by fermion · · Score: 1
      Advertised version numbers are meaningless, MS numbers doubly so.

      I have been using browsers since Mosiac. The situation with Netscape 4 is the same as it is today. The complexity and malfomedness of MS sanctioned and generated HTML tends to break non IE browsers. This coupled with the fact that the ignorant masses confuse a text markup language with a page markup language meant the end of the generic browser. The proffesional sites like Amazon, Yahoo, most banks, most retail stores work with all browsers. Only the hick web sites, in which someone suddenly has the bright idea that we need one of those website thingies, need IE.

      [To be clear, i am not talking about companies writing application front ends for internal or established customer use. IE is legitimate, although seldom really needed, in these cases.]

      Mozilla and Firefox and most other browsers still have trouble with the IE malformed code and the silly complexity that MS introduces into a medium that is meant provide a guaranteed simple way to reach a userbase, whether those be potential customers or fellow crackpots. What MS has done is contrary to the reason people make websites. Nearly impossible navigation and flashy screens is not going to make people come back. A search box that works in any browser and a simple login is the basic need. And anything that cannot do this is simply useless.

      Back to the point, the parent is right. What MS did was limit what OEMs could do with the software. The OEMs needed windows, and in the world of falling PC prices needed it cheap. MS was willing to compy only if the OEMs participated in the marketing program of MS other properties. Whether the properities are applications or formats is an arguable point. However, the upshot is the same. MS used OEM to create a monopoly. Util OEMs are free to pick and choose, the monopoly will remain.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    22. Re:Whats the point ? by strider44 · · Score: 1

      It's a requirement to put "... Recommends Microsoft(r) Windows(r) XP Professional/Home Edition" (depending on what type) on an advertisement whenever a business sells a computer with an OEM version of Windows. It used to be for any computer sold (even if it has an alternate OS such as linux installed) until a civil suit made them relent. I would have the source URL but I can't find it using google - you get an enormous amount of computer ads should you search for "recommends Microsoft Windows XP"!

    23. Re:Whats the point ? by EvilJoker · · Score: 1

      A big part of that is allowing choice, and monopoly status. MS, being a recognized monopoly, is not under the same laws as Ford, or even Apple.

      Furthermore, a better analogy (even though analogies are bullshit) would be if that Ford car also wouldn't allow you to remove the old radio (at all) and was still using power and taking space, while your new stereo still had to use the old Ford speakers, and there was no way around this.
      Oh, and Ford had a monopoly on cars, and was trying to force people everywhere to use Ford radios (because then they have to buy Ford cars, and their monopoly is further secured)

    24. Re:Whats the point ? by DavidD_CA · · Score: 1

      Just for the sake of asking a question, if we accept Microsoft as being a monopoly, then what would have to happen for us to change our mind?

      How much market share would MS have to have in the OS market to rival OSes like OS X, Linux, etc?

      Or how much market share would MS have to have in the server market? Etc?

      --
      -David
    25. Re:Whats the point ? by EvilJoker · · Score: 1

      Well, after hitting google briefly, I found this:
      http://www.ncpa.org/iss/ant/1999/pd041299h.html

      But again, having a monopoly (or being declared to have one, as in the case of MS) in and of itself is not illegal, but has a larger (legal) burden to not abuse its position.

  9. than they had better mend their ways by Interfacer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have to use linux at work as a developer.
    it has its good sides and its bad sides. so has windows. some tools are better on linux, some on windows.

    but the main advantage on linux is that at least, there is some adherence to standards. most of the protocols are open, and you are basically free to do with it what you want.

    if microsoft wants to be 'not hated', they had better start sharing information and decoupling olexpress, media player and iexplorer from windows.

    i think that the OS market is a bit like fine sand in their hands: the more you try to hold onto it by force, the faster it slips away.

    Since the 2.6 kernel and better USB support, linux is becoming a feasible alternative for businesses, and microsoft is scared as hell of that.

    i bet that we will start seeing more huggy type marketing as longhorn nears its release.

    1. Re:than they had better mend their ways by micolous · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I'm still waiting for ReiserFS support, natively. Even just read only. The alternative isn't terribly nice.

      --
      SSdtIGFzIGJvcmVkIGFzIHlvdSBhcmUK
    2. Re:than they had better mend their ways by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Since the 2.6 kernel and better USB support

      Oh, this made me laugh. We have a room full of SuSE Linux machines here, and since they were upgraded to 2.6 kernels USB pen drives haven't worked.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:than they had better mend their ways by PoprocksCk · · Score: 1

      "if microsoft wants to be 'not hated', they had better start sharing information and decoupling olexpress, media player and iexplorer from windows."

      I do agree with you---but that will simply not be happening. Windows Media Player maybe (but not without extreme persuasion) but IE will absolutely not be separated from Windows in any foreseeable future. One of the problems is that so many people who have tried to sue MS for the anti-competitive acts of integrating IE have pretty much all just accepted settlements from Microsoft.

      "i bet that we will start seeing more huggy type marketing as longhorn nears its release."

      Yup, that, combined with plenty of anti-Linux FUD.

    4. Re:than they had better mend their ways by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.

      - Princess Leia Organa, 1977.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:than they had better mend their ways by bubbha · · Score: 1

      i bet that we will start seeing more huggy type marketing as longhorn nears its release.

      Maybe they should change the name to "Softhorn"

      --
      I want to be alone with the sandwich
    6. Re:than they had better mend their ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's more than just the standards, I find "the Microsoft way" of doing things to be totally unappealing. I'm talking about their peculiar case of "not invented here syndrome" that causes me to reach for non-MS languages, libraries and toolkits when I'm writing a "windows" application.

      Our CTO put a policy in place than bans .NET apps on our desktops, he knows about mono and PNET but also knows about those MS patents. In one memo he accused MS of "harbouring a desire to hold technology hostage", which is about the clearest I've seen anybody put it.

    7. Re:than they had better mend their ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i bet that we will start seeing more huggy type marketing as longhorn nears its release.

      How bout this as a warm, fuzzy feeling in a slogan:

      Microsoft and Longhorn, A kinder, gentler way to take the computing world by the horns.

    8. Re:than they had better mend their ways by bvankuik · · Score: 1

      Somewhat off topic, but which tools are better on windows? I have had problems with database development tools in the past, but I wonder what other people struggle with.

    9. Re:than they had better mend their ways by mytec · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm going to play the ignorant part for a bit...

      ..there is some adherence to standards. most of the protocols are open and you are basically free to do with it what you want.

      A Windows user sitting beside me stated that he can watch any movie content, listen to any music, access any web content, and has an enourmouse choice of software to choose from to get his work done. What is this obession to a kernel and protocols? Where is the obsession to application layer?

      Since the 2.6 kernel and better USB support, linux is becoming a feasible alternative for businesses, and microsoft is scared as hell of that.

      I bet MS is more scared of the free applications that are more and more capable than a free kernel. How many people are saying, "Wow! I can get this great kernel!"? The OS seems to be the least cost when compared with tools that run on top of it. MySQL/PostGres vs MS SQL in license cost. Development tools on the Linux platform vs IDEs from Borland and Microsoft. Office Software on MS brand new vs Open Office or StarOffice or whatever. License costs are what hurt myself and other coworkers not kernel 2.whatever. Can we do the same task for far less money? That'll work every time and I think that in the long run is what scares MS most.

    10. Re:than they had better mend their ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not try a vanilla kernel. That should be the first thing you try if you have a problem with a vendor kernel, so you can decide who to report the bug to.

    11. Re:than they had better mend their ways by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Strange... My USD16 USB thumbdrive works on my SuSE 9.1 and it's a 2.6 kernel...

      You looking in the right directory? e.g. /media ?

      You have to have the hotplug stuff on in order to automount the stuff etc.

      --
    12. Re:than they had better mend their ways by caluml · · Score: 1
      Oh, this made me laugh. We have a room full of SuSE Linux machines here, and since they were upgraded to 2.6 kernels USB pen drives haven't worked.

      Can't be important to you though - I mean, otherwise, you'd have tested one machine first, and not upgraded if there were problems, right?

    13. Re:than they had better mend their ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow... you work for someone who's not an idiot??? Or is _HIS_ boss still about as sharp as a bowling ball when it comes to this stuff?

    14. Re:than they had better mend their ways by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Well, if I were the system administrator, I would have done. Fortunately, I'm not and so I just get to bitch when things don't work.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    15. Re:than they had better mend their ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to use linux at work as a developer.
      it has its good sides and its bad sides. so has windows. some tools are better on linux, some on windows.


      And apparently the Shift key is a tool that is good on neither.

    16. Re:than they had better mend their ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is just the point he was making about adherence to standards. The windows user sitting next to you can play any files he wants, even those created on a linux machine.

      The opposite is not likely to be true, or only true after some hacking. A linux user (or MacOSX, Unix, etc) is not going to be able to play the latest media player format or word doc format until someone hacks the windows protocol.

      If microsoft would adhere to standards or published their protocol/format so it could become the standard, people would not be so obsessed with it. They use their position as the dominate desktop OS to attempt to force their protocol/format above all others thus ensuring their OS stays dominate.

  10. How can the US DOJ ... by twilight30 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    'review' a product that hasn't been released yet?

    And why is the Yahoo article writer so keen to get opinions from that twit of an analyst Laura DiDio? I'm sure someone else here will point out her lovely work defending SCO ...

    Finally, why the hell do I care about this? Oh yeah, that's it: because every single one of my clients continues to use MS. Arrgh.

    --
    ========================================
    Death will come, and will have your eyes
    -- Pavese
    1. Re:How can the US DOJ ... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Maybe the DOJ just asks to see it? Remember, this review is part of the settlement, something MS agreed to, so as not to be split up into different companies.

      I've got no clue as to why Didio, Enderle, and others are so often sources on tech articles. Possibly they've mastered the art of the soundbite and they're always available, while most real analysts are busy actually doing work.

      Too bad you can't nudge your clients toward a better OS. [coughcoughmacmini]. Well, it was a thought, but probably not applicable, otherwise you'd already be doing it.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    2. Re:How can the US DOJ ... by twilight30 · · Score: 1

      Your first point: Ah, that must be it. I still have problems with it, on principle (I am now repeating myself, sorry).

      I honestly believe these analysts would a much better time of it if they changed their titles to 'software shill'.

      Your last point: Yeah. I had to give up on Linux advocacy when I realised that hand-holding is 95% of the job. Even with a restricted client base (such as I used to have) and a supportive-but-wary management I found myself losing weeks on simple things like, 'OK, click on the Red Hat Update icon in the lower part of the screen'.

      As for Macs, they still are comparatively more expensive here in the UK, and my clients have half of the time balked at anything that isn't XP-stupid (ie/ dumb, not simple) in design and function. The other half of the time they reject macs simply because they are different.

      Sigh.

      --
      ========================================
      Death will come, and will have your eyes
      -- Pavese
  11. It's been in Alpha by Ironsides · · Score: 1

    It's easy for the DoJ to review software that isn't out yet. The thing has been in alpha for years. And MS has already shiped demo versions to testers a year or two ago. As for further review, MS has continued to refine the programming (what, you think it takes only a month to program an OS?) and the DoJ is most likely reviewing the most recent build. They are probably also taking a look at what "features" and add ons MS intends to include in the OS.

    --
    Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    1. Re:It's been in Alpha by twilight30 · · Score: 1

      You're right, of course. (Digression: I actually tried to install a cracked alpha/beta/whatever months ago for the hell of it. Wouldn't boot. Yes, I'm a hypocrite. Sue me.)

      I meant, though, about the principle of review by government. Although it would make life much more difficult for the DOJ to control once Longhorn is released, I am wondering about the principle of fairness -- though I do not trust Microsoft at all, this smacks of software development by committee and I do have a problem with it.

      OK. I live in the UK now, and while I applauded the European Commission's judgement against bundling Windows Media Player with Windows, the important detail or difference between the two cases is that in this the DOJ is trying to impose controls on Microsoft before they have even released the software. Doesn't that strike you as strange, in principle?

      --
      ========================================
      Death will come, and will have your eyes
      -- Pavese
    2. Re:It's been in Alpha by Ironsides · · Score: 1

      the DOJ is trying to impose controls on Microsoft before they have even released the software. Doesn't that strike you as strange, in principle?

      In principle, maybe. BUt think about IE/Netscape here and remember that along with WordPerfect/MS word. (MS is convicted of illegaly abusing the monopoly already, the DOJ has to make sure it doesn't happen again) Still, I'd have to think about that a lot more. However, in practicality it is the only way that they have a chance of enforcing the anti-trust setlement. Honestly, how much use is it going to be in Europe, with the EU requiring that MS release Windows without Media Player at the same cost as the regular windows. I don't know about most, but I see no reason (from any point of view) not to get the bundled version as opposed to the un-bundled version. That is one reason of practicality.

      Another is that once MS relases it as a feature, the damaga has already been done. Once a feature has been included and already released, "the cat is out of the bag". People might use the new feature, they might not, but the DOJ can not require that MS no longer sell an OS with that feature. Think CD burning in this case. XP ships with it, I use NERO since I think it is a superior program (comes with the burners I purchase). However, John Doe is going to use whatever he already has (like with IE).

      The last reason is to ensure that MS has proper third party support so that competitors have a chance. This is, to me, what I think they are trying to keep as their primary goal. They want the third parties to be able to compete with MS's other products as the settlement requires. If MS release the OS to begin with, it would screw over the competitors as MS would have to release a new version and or patches so that the third parties could (work/work as well) as the MS version since the MS version would automatically have access to all their APIs where the competitors would not. Hope I got my point across there.

      As for software designed by commitee. Can't say much about that. But MS had to have agreed to something allowing this during the trial. Otherwise I don't think the DoJ could do it.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
  12. Microsoft giving us a hug? by Regnard · · Score: 1

    Putting us in their palm is more like it.

    --
    Need a color? Try 100 random colors
    1. Re:Microsoft giving us a hug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well they are giving us a "hug" of sorts.

      Except that it involves us bending over with our pants dropped and is still illegal in most southern US states.

    2. Re:Microsoft giving us a hug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      is that a masturbation joke?

  13. i HATE microsoft! by zahg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I admit I 'hate' Microsoft even though their products are useful and enjoyable enough to use now. But their aggressive business style and the (successful) way they lock consumers/industries into using only their products as well as forced upgrades, unfriendly software and malware intrusions has now left such a bad taste in my mouth that I've been wanting to turn my back on *anything* Microsoft related for a couple of years now.
    Mac mini arriving will allow me to eagerly switch from MS's world to that of Apple Macs and Unix/Linux OSs and tools. Over the next couple of years I plan to seriously limit my MS use to that of 'as and when needed', and will be advocating limiting the use of MS products to anyone who will listen (friends/family/businesses/schools)!
    -zahg

    1. Re:i HATE microsoft! by roxtar · · Score: 1
      Mac mini arriving will allow me to eagerly switch from MS's world to that of Apple Macs and Unix/Linux OSs and tools.

      Why did you have to wait for the arrival of mac mini to be able to switch over to Unix/Linux.. You could have switched before.

    2. Re:i HATE microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this the bit where we flame him for not using linux?

    3. Re:i HATE microsoft! by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No offence, but this is offtopic; congratulations on getting modded up to +5 for a post that has almost nothing to do with the article. I don't blame yo, but the sheep-like moderators, modding up anything anti-MS and pro-linux.

      Two things I sort of take issue with, though:

      as well as forced upgrades

      What forced upgrades, how? My company is still using Office 2000, and have not been "forced" to upgrade, despite some clients using Office XP; the documents still open just fine. There are still machines running NT 4; similarly, nothing is forcing us to upgrade them. Sure, support is running out/has run out, but the same is true of older releases of Linux distros. Without a leet C hacker or two on staff, businesses using them are similarly "forced" to upgrade if they wish to have continued support.

      will be advocating limiting the use of MS products to anyone who will listen

      Rather you should be advocating the use of the best tool for the job. If that tool happens to be from MS, then so be it. MS isn't the answer to everything, but then neither is Linux.

    4. Re:i HATE microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shutup and drink the koolaid...

    5. Re:i HATE microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      We're running 2.6 on a bunch of original pentium desktops with 32MB, of course the machines are headless but the OS runs very well. These machines are employed as firewalls/routers and as departmental mail servers (the hardware has prooven more reliable than modern desktop components). If we were running windows on these boxes, we'd be forced to upgrade our hardware!
      Rather you should be advocating the use of the best tool for the job. If that tool happens to be from MS, then so be it. MS isn't the answer to everything, but then neither is Linux.
      Microsoft isn't the answer, Microsoft is the question. The answer is no! --Douglas Adams
    6. Re:i HATE microsoft! by newdamage · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is, I'm been a faithful mac user (1ghz G4 iBook) for about a year now, and absolutely love it. Yet what do I use for my email program? Entourage. I'd be willing say that Mac Office 2004 is a necessity ($150 student edition, or get a friend at college to get it for $10). I have yet to try Pages or Keynote, but Appleworks just isn't that good, and there really aren't any other alternatives on Mac. And quite frankly, Entourage does a much better job as an all-in-one PIM than the combination of iCal, Mail, and Address Book. And the best thing is, I think mac users actually get the better end of the deal, as most people I show office 2004 to seem to prefer it to Windows Office 2003.

      --
      ce n'est pas un Sig.
    7. Re:i HATE microsoft! by zahg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sorry i didn't mean the Mac mini would enable me to switch to Linux, I meant it would enable me to switch to a Mac OSX/Unix platform.
      I have only dabbled in Linux a few times over the years and admit that I'm not knowledgable enough nor have the time to learn about what is required to get an equivalent to my WinXP system up and running, would love to be able to - but for me its just too high a learning curve for a clunky unelegant desktop (sorry not tried latest improved flavours).
      Mac hardware and OSX has me drooling in terms of quality, artistic detail, intuitiveness, eye candy (quite a big deal to me) and its whole elegantly executed philosphy of switch on - work/play/create - switch off.

    8. Re:i HATE microsoft! by zahg · · Score: 1

      I dont see it as off topic, my comments were related to the article sayin Microsoft wanting people to stop hating them so much - I am one of those haters.
      MS's whole bubble of ship crap, make money, try and squeeze more money for crap, dont let any competitors get a look in - is starting to burst I reckon. Too many as good or better alternatives to MS products are appearing and gaining interest (Gmail, Firefox, OpenOffice.org, Linux, OSX).
      A couple of years ago MS knew that the loud haters mattered very little since "what the hell can they do, they're still gonna use our shit" - now Microsoft NEED to tune into those hate vibes and do something about it.
      -zahg

    9. Re:i HATE microsoft! by freemacmini · · Score: 1

      I disagree with the premise of your post. When making purchasing decision you should always take ethical considerations into account. As consumers we can shape the world in the way taht we buy our sutff.

      I don't shop at wallmart, I don't buy MS products for the exact same reason. I want to make the world a better place, I want to reduce the amount of evil in the world.

      So I encourage everybody to stop buying and using MS products and start using cometing products even if the competing products are inferior. It's a little sacrifice on your part but you are making the world a better place and not rewarding unethical sleazy companies.

      Until we stop rewarding MS for their monsterous behavior they will keep doing it. The DOJ hasn't punished them but that doesn't mean we can't.

    10. Re:i HATE microsoft! by tu_holmes · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't know if that bubble is really bursting.

      Here's why I say that... Keep in mind that I'm not a huge fan of all microsoft's products, but do realize when they do something "good".

      I agree that there have been tons of viruses that utilize MS exchange. However, as far as calendaring and email is concerned, business environments would be hard pressed to find a solution that is set up as easy as the MS exchange one. Exchange is an easy to use product and isn't all that bad (minus some of the security issues).

      The small shops won't have the expertise to utilize linux, as the desktop environment is still not solidified to the point of EVERYTHING always working together at least with some semblance ease. If something doesn't work natively in windows, chances are, the manufacturer of a product has made a windows driver that will work with it.

      The larger environments won't be willing to risk an infrastructure change of that size.

      Large shops have tools in place to monitor software and files on users computers as well as be able to upgrade the software on those computers through network tools and other items.

      Yes, Linux has these tools, but your Windows Administrator in a certain environment doesn't have the time to learn "yumm" (Is it 2 M's or one) when he's dealing with the issues he already has to deal with. There is, unfortunately a learning curve associated with the migration away from Windows.

      I work in what I would consider a relatively decent sized environment and I have responsible for some relatively big servers and services, but even I can't run Linux on my laptop. I've done it, and it works fine (for me, but I've used Linux for awhile) BUT, I am technically not responsible for the on-going support and service of my laptop and as such, the guys that are responsible, refuse to let me run linux on my machine because they don't have the experience with supporting it.

      If they let me do it, then they have to let everyone do it, and that can end up being a support nightmare for them. Will they probably have less issues, sure... technically, as the software issues will lessen.

      The question is... Will they make up for in user problems? Someone not being able to mount that floppy in linux, or that CD-ROM not mounting correctly or whatever... whether it's really Linux's fault or not.

      It's just a stretch to think that people will leave MS because they cost money. Businesses expect them to cost money and they are willing to pay for what they consider "piece of mind".

    11. Re:i HATE microsoft! by Kethinov · · Score: 1
      Rather you should be advocating the use of the best tool for the job. If that tool happens to be from MS, then so be it. MS isn't the answer to everything, but then neither is Linux.
      It's more than that. There is sufficient argument that Windows is the best tool for the job in ANY computer related task by nature of the monopoly. People should not buy Windows and instead use FOSS (or Mac) on mere principle. Many of us here on slashdot understand this, and do it, but we're constantly complaining that getting the masses to switch is a chicken and the egg problem. It's really not. Convince as many people as you can to switch on principle. That makes chickens. The more people you convert for moral reasons, the more eggs you hatch.

      Besides, there are oogles of people out there who could do all their daily tasks on unix systems without a problem, in some cases better, and they just don't know it yet.
      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    12. Re:i HATE microsoft! by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      Zahg,

      I recommend getting your high school diploma and/or college degree first. Computers are a tool. The "high cost" of Windows software is irrelevant compared to the cost of the computer and maintaining it. That's true for Windows users, that's true for Macintosh users, it's true for Linux users. (like me)

      Use whatever best suits you. I use Linux because my profession leans heavily towards web servers, email, and big databases. I use Linux because it's cheap, reasonably secure, and very stable. (I enjoy sleeping at night) Notice I did not say anything about ease of use?

      Linux is free, the market will correct itself, and Linux itself is proof.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    13. Re:i HATE microsoft! by lordDallan · · Score: 1

      And do I have to pay for those new Linux distributions? Or that new version of Open Office?

      And do you not have to pay for the new version of Windows or MS Office?

      Not that I'm against paying for software, but let's compare apple's to apple's.

    14. Re:i HATE microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > What forced upgrades, how? My company is still
      > using Office 2000, and have not been "forced" to
      > upgrade, despite some clients using Office XP;
      > the documents still open just fine. There are
      > still machines running NT 4; similarly, nothing
      > is forcing us to upgrade them.

      There are also still machines running CP/M.

      The fact that there is still a minute percentage of boxen running obsolete and/or Microsoft software is besides the point.

      Eventually a majority of desktops and servers will be running Linux and other Open Source software in one way shape or form - it won't happen overnight, IMHO, but it will happen.

    15. Re:i HATE microsoft! by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      Mac mini arriving will allow me to eagerly switch from MS's world to that of Apple Macs and Unix/Linux OSs and tools.

      Unless the size aspect of the Mini is of great importance to you, shop around for a second hand dual ~800Mhz+ G4. You'll get a much nicer OS X experience _and_ a much more useful piece of hardware.

  14. longHORN ^^ by jamesbuko · · Score: 2, Funny

    strenghtens the fact that Microsoft is the devil!!

    1. Re:longHORN ^^ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no! M$ only works for him!! he! he! but bill is working hard for a promotion ...

    2. Re:longHORN ^^ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Longhorn will have 7 versions.

      Do a search on the "seven headed beast" (with horns).

    3. Re:longHORN ^^ by BabyDave · · Score: 1

      I think it's more that they're trying to make up for years of Micro-soft penis jokes by talking about their incredible Long-horn.

    4. Re:longHORN ^^ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're getting a little long in the horn ...

  15. Interesting tactics... by Cynical_Dude · · Score: 2, Informative

    One analyst opines that Mircosoft is appearing to soften its image to become kinder and gentler. 'They don't want people to hate them anymore. They've learned from their mistakes.' Hmmm."

    Yes, renaming the company is a good, first step.

    Dunno if that croatian naming touch will get them very far though...

    Probably don't want to have to rebuy all their corporate "M$" branded coffee mugs, calendars and Mercedes-Benz's...

    1. Re:Interesting tactics... by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      You didn't hear? Croatia is this year's Korea. Although this is liable to backfire on MS:

      In Croatia, only old people use windows.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    2. Re:Interesting tactics... by bcmm · · Score: 1

      I saw this spelling on a sign outside a software shop in Malaysia. It was in the right font, colours, etc. to be the actual Microsoft logo. Needless to say, none of the software inside was legal.

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
      Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
    3. Re:Interesting tactics... by stanleypane · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one that sees the "Informative" moderation given to this comment? Hmmm, maybe the moderators are still hungover from a late Friday night... Oh wait, this is Slashdot. I give up, I've got nothing.

  16. Re:OLD News for Nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some of us aren't obsessed with anti-microsoft news and this is news to us.

  17. they might have learned (something) by da_matta · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't think MS should underestimated about learning from their mistakes, they've done it before (both of them). It's also something FOSS circles should be concerned about, because a more humble MS could reduce the amount of interest in the alternatives.

    I believe that the arrogant and hostile attitude of MS has been the number one reason corporations and governments have been looking for alternatives, not for example the arquable quality and price of their products. If we for example look at the EU sanctions concerning Media player, I find it hard to believe that anybody was interested in MS hurting the "media player industry" or that there's something wrong with OS including a media player. More likely the EU just wanted to show that they have the political will to confront MS if they don't get the co-operation they want.

    1. Re:they might have learned (something) by lew3004 · · Score: 1

      I agree, however why didn't they start with something a little more high profile like the web browser? Sure, anyone can use a third party software package in either case and run it as default to replace WMP or IE but the media player is actually less intrusive (so far) than the browser. I for one would rather have seen less or no interaction between the OS and IE. I think that would have hurt MS 3x as much. Who knows though, maybe that'll be their next target.

      --
      I still can't get the screen shots of Castle Wolfenstein for the Apple IIe out of my head.
    2. Re:they might have learned (something) by da_matta · · Score: 1

      At this point it's probably hard to require Windows without IE, because you need it to get started (everybody with installation CD's of some usable browser raise their hand).

      What I'd like to see is forcing MS to give Dell and others the freedom to customize their factory installations without effecting the licensing fees... IANAL, but that's definately abusing a monopoly, but probably really hard deal with legally (nothing wrong in rewarding exclusive partners)??

  18. Texas Longhorn Recipe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    As a Texan I'd like to catch and rope that Longhorn, kill it and roast it slow over a nice camp fire while discussing the latest Linux and BSD news with my friends.

  19. Spelling nazis by isny · · Score: 1

    You would think that the editors could at least spell "Microsoft" correct in the article. Especially since that company is discussed "fairly often" around here. Or at least use one of the common misspellings, i.e. M$.

  20. ME was a step forward, though small. by BigDogCH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Windows ME needed to exist for the same reason that all other MS products exist. For $$$. But, on an optomistic note, while I only used it because 2k wouldn't run on my defected Asus system, I found ME to be MUCH more stable than 98. Also, installing hardware and software was much easier.

    And about the XP UI, am I the only one who immidiatly changes it to the "Classic View"? Supposidly MS spent a ton of time and money looking at user efficiency when they designed the UI for XP, but I just don't see it. Am I the only one?

    1. Re:ME was a step forward, though small. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      No, you're not the only one. I put XP Pro (I get a free license for being a CompSci student - MS are really into the 4 year effect) on my ThinkPad to play some old games. It is more usable in classic mode. I find it hard to believe they spent any money on UI research. Given any `improved' part of the XP UI, I can reference several UI studies / papers / books explaining why it's a bad idea.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:ME was a step forward, though small. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you are not the only one. The XP UI is widely ridiculed and loathed. The classic version is not only more familiar, it is actually more useful.
      I assume M$ performed little research in developing the UI for XP.

    3. Re:ME was a step forward, though small. by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      I always thought the only use of the default UI for XP was the "whoa! it looks new and spiffy! gotta get me one of that!". Otherwise, i agree, it's pretty useless. Almost everyone i know switches to Classic Mode in time.

    4. Re:ME was a step forward, though small. by Columcille · · Score: 1

      Strange, all the comments about many people switching to classic mode and I can't recall a single person I've met using classic mode. The XP UI is fine with me, took a little getting used to but it works just as well as the old UI once I was accustomed to it.

      --
      I love my sig.
    5. Re:ME was a step forward, though small. by BigDogCH · · Score: 1

      I asked because all the "people" i know use the classic view, but the computers at their place of work all have them in the XP view. I can start to feel the gag reflex start when I see that darn Telletubbies Green Hilly Background. The file is named "Bliss" or something like that. If that is bliss........

  21. Impolite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's rather rude of you to mention nazis by name this close to the commemmoration of the liberation of Auschwitz.

  22. Um, Trusted Computing? by SirGarlon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One area that DOJ regulators will be looking at, in particular, is a control panel in Longhorn that facilitates use of a browser and media player other than the Microsoft versions that will be pre-built into the system.

    Great. We have government "experts" who think the choice of media player really important and they aren't even looking at the whole Trusted Computing initiative and the monopolistic implications thereof.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:Um, Trusted Computing? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Oh, they've looked at Palladium all right ... looked at it, and found it "good". But they have to be seen doing battle with the current evil Empire, so they pick something like the media player and go after it. Can you say "red herring"?

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Um, Trusted Computing? by miffo.swe · · Score: 1

      I dont really see that as a big threat anymore. With the huge uptake linux has right now alienating itself with that kind of technology could as well create an island for Microsoft. Im not that certain it wouldn result in people just avoiding Microsoft instead because it would cement Microsoft as a supplier for life. I see many people wanting off the train today that cant because they are locked into MS. Imagine what a migration would be like with trusted computing putting all kinds of barriers up?

      --
      HTTP/1.1 400
  23. Shedding a Name, Shedding Hatred? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    One analyst opines that Mircosoft is appearing to soften its image to become kinder and gentler. 'They don't want people to hate them anymore.'

    Does that include changing their name to Mircosoft?

  24. Pudding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    while discussing the latest Linux and BSD news with my friends.

    If you really were a cowboy you'd be eating pudding and exploring your sexuality with your fellow cowboys.

    1. Re:Pudding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you really were a cowboy you'd be eating pudding and exploring your sexuality with your fellow cowboys.

      Cowboys don't eat pudding! But if I were pudding I'd be exploring my sexuality with your shemale friends, you're right.

    2. Re:Pudding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy dog shit! Microsoft? Only steers and queers come from Microsoft, Private Cowboy.

  25. Don't pay to have someone keep secrets from you. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Insightful


    A government that uses closed-source, proprietary software is not an independent government. A company that uses closed-source, proprietary software is not an independent company.

    Yes, Microsoft is abusive, and will remain abusive until its abusive leaders are gone, but that is not the point. The point is that you should not pay someone to keep secrets from you.

  26. Too Bad, Too Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Making the complete switch to Mac this year. Getting a PowerMac from my Apple Stock earnings. Tiger, here I come!

  27. Open source fanaticism at its finest... by October_30th · · Score: 3, Insightful
    A government that uses closed-source, proprietary software is not an independent government. A company that uses closed-source, proprietary software is not an independent company.

    Sigh. And since I use Windows at home and at work, I am not a free man? Even if I chose to use Windows.

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
    1. Re:Open source fanaticism at its finest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RE: Sigh. And since I use Windows at home and at work, I am not a free man? Even if I chose to use Windows.

      only as free as your file formats...

    2. Re:Open source fanaticism at its finest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sigh. And since I use Windows at home and at work, I am not a free man? Even if I chose to use Windows.

      Sigh. And since I live in a totalitarian state, I am not a free man? Even if I choose to live there.

    3. Re:Open source fanaticism at its finest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess I am only as free as my 80's GIF pr0n.

    4. Re:Open source fanaticism at its finest... by October_30th · · Score: 1
      And since I live in a totalitarian state, I am not a free man? Even if I choose to live there.

      Ahahaha! Are you seriously comparing Microsoft to an evil totalitarian state? Talk about delusions...

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    5. Re:Open source fanaticism at its finest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ahahaha! Are you seriously comparing Microsoft to an evil totalitarian state?

      No, are you? The point is that choosing to live in a prison doesn't make you free.

    6. Re:Open source fanaticism at its finest... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it does. You chose to do whatever resulted in your incarceration. That is called free will, free choice, etc. It sounds like you might be suggesting anarchy and anything else is totalitarian? Would you prefer murderers and rapists roaming the streets and not in prison?

    7. Re:Open source fanaticism at its finest... by cronius · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Well come to think about it, you use your software under the mercy of MS. If they chose to release a new Windows and make something you use in windows incompatible with the old version, you're forced to spending money on upgrading, eventhough what you have is currently working just fine.

      You might be forced into buying some program you use in a new version, since the software developers aren't supporting the old one for the old windows, in addition to buying a new windows. Ofcourse, your old computer isn't capable of using the new windows, so there goes a new computer as well.

      This is how it works with properitary software, you really are a much more free man with free software.

      --
      Life is Reality
    8. Re:Open source fanaticism at its finest... by fermion · · Score: 1
      No your not. Many slaves chose to stay in slavery. Many slaves chose to become the slavedrivers to earn the perks. They believed they could do best to help thier brothers and sisters by becoming part of the oppresion.

      The implicit assumption of freedom is dangerous. Freedom is a gradient, and we chose the level of freedom that we can tolerate.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  28. So? by thogard · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The DOJ has no balls unless they are dealing with individual people and MS isn't people so its business as usual.

    If the DOJ had a clue they would have split up MFST into two+ companies that each had an OS and had to compete with each other. And the company with Word would be competing with the company that had Excel and they wouldn't be allowed to talk to each other except via a public blog. And most of the game divisions would all now be working for different companies.

    But the current DOJ people never bothered to look at the Standard Oil case or were bought off.

    1. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should the DoJ split M$ into different companies? If people haven't noticed, there's a trend towards anti-competitive behavior, at least in the US. It's not a recent trend, either. If the DoJ split M$ into multiple companies, it would be treating M$ differently than other business in the telecommunications and industrial sectors.
      Eventually, forces will either spur M$ to make better products, or it will end up on the scrap pile. There are superior products out there. There are superior products available for free.

    2. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the stupidest thing I ever heard.

    3. Re:So? by thogard · · Score: 1

      There was a time when the US made sutff and its technical workers were the best paid in the world. Now even its food is being outsourced (the oreo cookies I have here are made in China)

      There was a time when Ford and Boeing were the tops in their field.

      The US can get back to being fair or watch what's left of its production leave. Once the farming is gone, there isn't anything that can prop up the tax base.

    4. Re:So? by Synbiosis · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, Microsoft is famous for treating its employees well and giving them freedoms rivaling that of Google. I don't think MS's 'monopoly' is any threat to working conditions. EA, on the other hand....

  29. Don't smile at this crocodile by petrus4 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    >One analyst opines that Mircosoft is appearing to
    >soften its image to become kinder and gentler.
    >'They don't want people to hate them anymore.
    >They've learned from their mistakes.' Hmmm."

    They might not want people to hate them any more, certainly...but it'll be a very cold day in hell when I believe Microsoft have "learned from their mistakes."

    Bill Gates is a raving megalomaniac who wants to take over the world more passionately than most, and his second in command, Dr Evil AKA Steve Ballmer, isn't far behind him on that score either. I will keep using XP for the time being...at least until I can figure out WineX to a greater degree anyway...but I don't trust the evil genius who produces it as far as I could throw him...and neither should anyone else if they know what's good for them.

    1. Re:Don't smile at this crocodile by ScrewMaster · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Just for the record, Steve Ballmer appeared as the Monster in the film "Young Frankenstein". While many people believe that Peter Boyle played this role, I have it from a reliable source that Steve Ballmer actually starred as the Monster, as Boyle was unable to appear due to contractual conflicts. While there is a distinct resemblance between the two men, Ballmer was an ideal replacement for Boyle because very little makeup was required for him to play the Monster.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Don't smile at this crocodile by DoctorMO · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a funny irony that as Linux has grown, simply because of Microsofts attitude, that Billy and Steve have become almost obsessed with Linux. that they have in my eyes ended up looking like silly cartoon villians.

      I'll get you next time Linux! just you wait!

    3. Re:Don't smile at this crocodile by spectecjr · · Score: 1

      It's a funny irony that as Linux has grown, simply because of Microsofts attitude, that Billy and Steve have become almost obsessed with Linux. that they have in my eyes ended up looking like silly cartoon villians.

      They only appear obsessed if Slashdot and The Register are your only news sources.

      Perhaps you should broaden your reading selections.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
  30. PARENT IS NOT A TROLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which moderator has never had to use a Microsoft OS?

  31. Antitrust by Elektroschock · · Score: 1

    Still I may not use Visual Foxpro with WIne thanks to MS EULA. And of course competition law is always weak. After 4 years of examination they order somthing which is then further delayed in court.

    See the EU agreement in whcih MS is forced to license a Windows without media player. They provide it to the same price....

    MS is a anti-competitive company.

    1. Re:Antitrust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never understood this point of view...
      Ohh, Microsoft is sooooo evil, they are trying to give me a decent media player and internet browser for free with the purchase of thier operating system.
      IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, GO BUY OR USE SOMETHING ELSE!
      If you like Visual Foxpro, and insist on running Linux, then get a group of ppl together and make an open source alternative!

    2. Re:Antitrust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They abused a monopoly position in the OS market to move into other areas, that's why we have antitrust laws.
      IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, GO BUY OR USE SOMETHING ELSE!

      I was until Microsoft abused a dominant position in the OS market to inflict IE on the world.

  32. Making OSes and Monopolies play nice by zogger · · Score: 1

    I think that one of the "standards" that needs to be implemented, even to the point of legislation and law if it isn't done voluntarily, across the board with various companies/monopolies/distros whatever should be an easy-peasy default "play nice" provision and implemented design that respects other OSes on the hard drive. You shouldn't need to jump through any hoops whatsoever to multiboot beyond "do you wish to save the existing installation, yes/no?". Automatic default over writing is teh e-vile.

  33. At home you have far greater security... by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2, Insightful


    At home you have far greater security that comes from the fact that no one cares what you are doing with your computer.

    Remember the Vietnam war? The U.S. government killed more than 2,000,000 people, none of whom threatened the U.S. directly. Since then, the U.S. government has killed at least 1,000,000 more who did not threaten the U.S. directly. (Most people in the U.S. find these facts so painful that they refuse to learn about why they occurred.)

    Don't think that a government that spends an almost endless amount of money on war-making capability suddenly becomes moral when considering invading the computers of foreign governments or companies.

    1. Re:At home you have far greater security... by October_30th · · Score: 1

      Of course not. That's why governments or companies who do not air-gap their sensitive computer systems (regardless of the OS) from the public net have only themselves to blame. Not Microsoft or any other entity.

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    2. Re:At home you have far greater security... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Don't think that a government that spends an almost endless amount of money on war-making capability suddenly becomes moral when considering invading the computers of foreign governments or companies."

      So, according to the logic in the article you linked we also need to include money spent on Education in the defense budget (good math and science students are essential to developing future weapons programs), welfare should probably be included also (we need a healthy citizenry to join the militia when the King of England tries to invade again), Department of Transportation (can't get our troops from coast to coast without good roads and rail systems!), FAA (have to keep the airways clear for jets and bombers and such), FCC (regulations to secure military communication frequencies, civilian emergency broadcasts related to defense, etc).

      Need i go on? The article is rediculous.

  34. NSS by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

    "One analyst opines that Mircosoft is appearing to soften its image to become kinder and gentler."

    I guess that would be why there are a sudden rash of MS Ads on the TV lately and why Mr Gates is appearing with Mr Blair explaining how they are jointly going to save all the poor, ill people in the world.

    Why anyone would think that appearing with Mr Blair is going to do anything to improve their credibility is beyond me but no doubt they will have found plenty of time to do 'business' backstage.

  35. I need more sleep! by blackmonday · · Score: 0, Troll

    I did a double-take when I read this is "Microsoft's Longhorn Faces Antitrust Sodomy". I guess it would have been a funnier article.

  36. F microsoft by krray · · Score: 1

    I won't efin' hate Microsoft anymore when I have a check in my hand, signed by BILL himself, paying me back for all the licensing that I had to buy for hardware that IS STILL RUNNING LINUX to this day.

    Fuck Microsoft. Now and forever.

  37. Product Delay? by charlie763 · · Score: 1

    I wonder what effects a Longhorn product delay would have? Could people be more compelled to upgrade to a *nix as the *nix's improve and XP ramains stagnent? I wonder...

    --
    Welcome to the land of the free...pay toll ahead...no photography...please open your bag...
  38. Total war... by johannesg · · Score: 1
    Well, fortunately we have our kinder, gentler friends at Microsoft to teach us about rudeness. This article (Dutch) explains how Bill Gates has declared a "total war" on internet crime. To explain his new vision he will travel to... Germany.

    Because obviously Germany is the home to all "total war" efforts, and the germans really appreciate being reminded of it again and again. Good call, Bill!

    Hell, why didn't he call it the "endlosung for spam" while he was at it? And he could present his new DRM efforts under the title "DRM macht frei".

    Maybe Microsoft is really a hotbed for nazism. For years I thought their Windows logo looks a bit like a swastika. As does the Developer Studio logo. As does the MSDN logo. All coincidences?

    Coming back for a moment to the mentioning of nazis being rude when remembering Auschwitz - no, it is not. The nazis _must_ be remembered and named as the monsters they were, not hidden and ultimately forgotten.

    1. Re:Total war... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Uh. I've often wondered why the Nazi atrocities were so special? Hell, genocides are taking place all the time. More people were slaughtered under the Soviet rule in gulags and various other concentration camps than under the Nazi rule. Who holds commemoration days for them? Why is it that every time someone compares a modern day (or a past) genocide/atrocity to the suffering of the jews, he/she gets shouted down for being an anti-semite and "insulting the memory of the jews who died". It seems like the jews have reclaimed the entire term "genocide" to themselves -- nobody else's suffer can never ever equal or even surpass that of those who died in Auschwitz and other camps.

      I am sick of this hypocrisy.

    2. Re:Total war... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes good points AC. And it wasn't only the Jews who suffered in the holocaust anyway. Don't expect Jews to give much thought to non-Jews who died or died trying to protect them though.

      You rightly mention that there have been plenty of other genocides too throughout history that don't get the same attention. Jew's argue though that the particular set of circumstances in the holocaust made it unique in history.

    3. Re:Total war... by johannesg · · Score: 1
      You are putting words into my mouth. I never said the nazi attrocities were unusual or worthy of particular consideration; just that we should remember them. That doesn't lessen our need to remember or condemn other atrocities.

      In Europe we choose to remember Auschwitz because for us it is a bit more personal, and because it is an event that happened in living memory. As for you, it is entirely up to you if you give a damn or not. Maybe you are in the former USSR, and know the horror stories of your grandparents. I'd understand if you cared more about that, then.

      Hell, genocides are taking place all the time.

      There's a fine piece of commentary on the human condition...

  39. What did they learn? by Hosting+Geek · · Score: 0

    I don't see any where them learning anything beside delaying longhorn even longer seems like their giving FOSS enough time to kill them.

    --
    For FREE NO ADS! 1GB/20GB PHP MySQL With a Control Panel Hosting
  40. LOL by H9000 · · Score: 1

    LOL

  41. So they've changed, have they? by Presence1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Microsoft's early mission statement was "A computer on every desk, running Microsoft software".

    Their current mission statement is: "To enable people and businesses throughout the world to realize their full potential."

    Before October 2002, it was "To empower people through great software -- any time, any place, and on any device."

    The early mission satement was far better, and more representative of how they actully do business. If you were an employee, which statement gives you the most clear goals? If you were an investor, which company's stock would you buy? Of course, there's no mention of integrity, quality, ethics, but nevermind that...

    Back to the topic, has anyone seen any real changes in behavior (not just some analyst saying they want to be nicer)?

    1. Re:So they've changed, have they? by Iriel · · Score: 1

      Back to the topic, last I heard, Ballmer was still trying to convince server opperators to run Windows Server 2003 because it was more secure than Red Hat 6 (not mentioning that RH6 is over 5-6 years old by now).

      Actually, though, I like the pre 10-02 mission statement. It actually helps describe how things are starting to change on the front of 'any place'. True, Windows CE is still running a lot of handheld devices, but there are quite a few companies that are starting to sell PDA's, compact PC's and other small gadgets with modified Linux distros on them due to the mutability of the *nix systems and lack of code bloat.

      So while it is true, that if your company makes a portable electronic device with a winmodem, you're probably dealing with CE, some people are slowly starting to see the advantage that MS does empower people to run great software any place. When they can only use X amount of space to install a system, CE may end up being too bulky and cumbersome, hence comes great software.

      --
      Perfecting Discordia
      www.stevenvansickle.com
    2. Re:So they've changed, have they? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Of course, there's no mention of integrity, quality, ethics, but nevermind that...

      Try reading further down the page of the same link you posted: http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/mission/

    3. Re:So they've changed, have they? by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      Funny. The early mission statement was a more accurate and complete description, but one which more people would disagree with (namely, competitors). The early mission was factual and specific.

      The latter mission statements are agreeable and vague on the details of what specifically the company does. You can say "I'm doing X to uphold the principle of Y" and get a free pass a lot of the time.

      It's a lot like like

      "Spreading freedom and democracy throughout the world"
      - almost everyone likes that principle and would like to see that happen, but the devil is in the exact details of what is done to achieve that goal.
      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
  42. Re:i HATE microsoft! turn to APPLE?! by dioscaido · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mac mini arriving will allow me to eagerly switch from MS's world to that of Apple Macs

    I've always found it quite interesting that people choose to switch from MS products to Apple products. Apple is quite possibly the most restrictive company of the three. They don't only lock you in with their software, but they lock you in with hardware as well! They force high hardware prices on people because there are no alternatives (although many mac zealots, suprisingly, love to defend the high profit margins Apple pulls in for hardware). Their software practices just as much lock-in and integration as MS. Yes you can run unix apps on OSX, but you can do the same in Windows. Don't kid yourself, if Apple had the market share of MS, they'd be slapped with a massive anti-trust lawsuit too.

    If you are leaving MS on principle, move to Linux. A fantastic, full-featured OS, with none of the capitalist 'dirtyness' to marr it.

  43. Learned?? by 0utRun · · Score: 0

    "...They've learned from their mistakes..."

    Learned? They've *profited* from their mistakes.

    WinME, Win9 & 98, IE, Office ...

  44. Strategies by cookiepus · · Score: 1

    Microsoft indeed realizes that they have an image problem in some respects (of course they're percieved much worse in places like Slashdot than they are in the market as a whole) and they're trying to change that.

    One of the things that stood out when I listened in on their earnings call the other day is that they're showing a temporary drop in revenue from MSN search due to decreasing of the number of paid results that are returned.

    Consider that. They're saying no to money in the bag, in order to attract a certain type of users (not the type that's wet over Google, like the /. crowd, of course.)

    They're doing the same with an apparent focus on security in their products. Increased development time looks bad "this quarter" but they're betting that overall it be better for them to have the image of a security focus.

  45. You know what by Phantasmo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Here's what I'd have liked to see:
    Windows XP Professional, at the Home price, shipping with SP2 preinstalled. The product also includes MS Antispyware and MS Antivirus with free updates for the life of Windows XP.
    The default install comes locked down - firewall on, IE security cranked up to High, Messenger and other unnecessary services turned off, user accounts are by default Users and not Administrators.
    There is no nagging about associating your Windows account with your Passport, and IE will cleanly uninstall with no complaints. Explorer does not treat you like an idiot and lets you navigate into any folder you choose without having to opt in.

    Then I would say that Windows is OKAY. So, maybe these antitrust guys can keep Microsoft on its toes and get them to produce an OKAY Windows.

    Great insurance against future antitrust stuff: port Office to .Net. Then just say, "Look, our stuff runs on OS X and that Linux thing! Mono!" At least they'll still be selling copies of Office.

    --

    The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
    1. Re:You know what by Triffid_Hunter · · Score: 1

      such a thing isn't hard to do. google "streamlining windows xp"

      I have an XP cd pre-patched to sp2 lying around somewhere, and another that has that, plus all my most common software also streamlined in (firefox, opera, zonealarm, avg, nero, notepad++, putty, etc etc) - also has IE disables as much as possible, a completely different to default service on/off set, "web view" in explorer off and tree on by default. the only part of your description i haven't done is user accounts != admin by default...

      if you decide to make such a disc, vmware/equivalent is your friend!

      i believe you can even streamline your xp key into the process.

      its a pity so little of the info required to do this is released by ms itself - it'd be interesting to see "distributions" of winXP available in shops...

    2. Re:You know what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean slipstreaming. Streamlining would be to make something smaller or more aerodynamic. But anyway, the point of the grandparent post was that normal people should have the benefit of SP2 without having to know elite haxors like yourself.

    3. Re:You know what by burns210 · · Score: 1

      A lot of software(including games) REQUIRE Admin level accounts to be run.

  46. Yahoo has a sense of humor by ICECommander · · Score: 2, Funny

    Longhorn is scheduled for release in 2006.
    Cracks me up every time.

    --
    All your Sybase are belong to us.
  47. hate? by mrm677 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Who hates Microsoft? Only techno-geeks that have an open-source agenda.

    On the other hand, talk to older folks and they see Microsoft as the company that brought usable and affordable personal computing to the masses. They see Microsoft as one of the companies that fattened their 401k or mutual funds.

    So you see not everybody hates Microsoft.

    1. Re:hate? by Yaa+101 · · Score: 1

      bullshit... Most "normal users" are also getting fed up with MS.

    2. Re:hate? by miffo.swe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only people who thinks it was Microsoft who brought cheap PC to the market is those who have no knowledge of computers whatsoever. The PC became cheap because the open standard that let anyone do a clone without expensive patents and copyrights standing in the way except for the bios. The competition that enabled was what drove the PC price from 8000$ down to todays prices.

      Software had absolutely nothing to do with the price. Infact the price of software hasnt fallen much at all. Go figure.

      --
      HTTP/1.1 400
    3. Re:hate? by idlake · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, talk to older folks and they see Microsoft as the company that brought usable and affordable personal computing to the masses

      Yeah, isn't it amazing how a few billion dollars in marketing and advertising can so completely rewrite history?

    4. Re:hate? by mrm677 · · Score: 1

      The only people who thinks it was Microsoft who brought cheap PC to the market is those who have no knowledge of computers whatsoever. The PC became cheap because the open standard that let anyone do a clone without expensive patents and copyrights standing in the way except for the bios. The competition that enabled was what drove the PC price from 8000$ down to todays prices.

      Gee, do you think the masses have "knowledge of computers". The OP says that everybody hates Microsoft. If somebody did a nation-wide poll, the percentage of Microsoft "haters" would be less than 10%.

      And it is arguable whether Microsoft had nothing to do with cheap computing. If IBM OS/2 won, things might be different today. Microsoft is not a hardware company, and because of that, hardware is a commodity. If the hardware company that developed the PC wins the OS monopoly, things might not be the same today.

  48. DOJ has failed on action on bundling so far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft is still strongarming hardware manufacturers in almost mafia style and forces them to bundle Windows with their computers and to charge customers for it against their will.
    This is clearly one of the most unfair and monopolistic practices in history and I simply cannot understand how the Department of Justice has not done much about this for that many years. Is there anything(serious solution) that people like you and me can do about that?

  49. Let's not kid ourselves... by FridayBob · · Score: 1

    There's no reason whatsoever for the government to suddenly change its strategy regarding M$. This is just an another opportunity for some M$ management types to meet up with their buddies at the Justice Department and talk about old times. After that, Longtime will get the thumbs up and M$ will be allowed to continue unfolding its evil plans unhindered.

  50. Mistakes, what mistakes? by hazee · · Score: 1

    Exactly what mistakes has Microsoft made then? They are the biggest, most successful computer company on the face of the planet. The antitrust settlement was no more than a slap on the wrist; profits continue to climb, and show no signs of doing otherwise.

    Before you flame away, note that I'm not passing judgement on any moral issues or suchlike, I'm just saying that, from Microsoft's point of view, as a business, any mistakes they might have made pale into insignificance compared to their spectacular successes.

    We here on Slashdot may hate DRM and IE and a dozen other things that MS is pushing, but to claim that they were mistakes on Microsoft's part is just daft.

    So this "learning from their mistakes" business seems to be nonsense, except in the sense that they're gunning for the 1% of the market that they feel they missed out on.

    1. Re:Mistakes, what mistakes? by game+kid · · Score: 1
      Exactly what mistakes has Microsoft made then? They are the biggest, most successful computer company on the face of the planet. The antitrust settlement was no more than a slap on the wrist; profits continue to climb, and show no signs of doing otherwise.

      Indeed. The big reason why Windows/IE/WMP/Microsoft InsertAnyWordHere is popular is because they are in so many school PC's, especially here. The schools consider it a necessary knowledge.

      Combined with Gates' donations to schools and Justice Dept. folks who believe "hiding a shortcut to IE" == "removing IE", that will help Windows take its shoes off and stay a while.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  51. Why was it a problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I don't understand is why was it a problem to bundle in IE, but it's not a problem to bundle in a word processor (Wordpad), calculator, media player, etc, etc???

    1. Re:Why was it a problem? by FusionDragon2099 · · Score: 0

      Word processor - Wordpad is CRAP, it's only there for basic text editing. Calculator - Nobody bothers to make calculator software, it's not worth anyone's time and money. Media player - It was a problem in the EU.

  52. I wouldn't say soft, more like sneaky. by Iriel · · Score: 1

    So we've all talked about the foibles of the Microsoft products and Windows opperating systems and still we question if they're going for a 'softer image'.

    Does 'soft image' include floating Sun Microsystems (who was about to go under) a $2 billion dollar check with an attached note that reads "I'll let you live as long as you agree to never bad-mouth us again. EVER." Or how about then using their newly purchased ally to jointly bash IBM and Linux after realizing that MS is starting to lose some of its grip on the server market?

    Bill Gates is much less of a coder than he is a businessman. He knows how to protect his assets, and I wouldn't put much of anything past him in terms of the lengths he would go to for the sake of deceiving who he has to to keep the company alive. Donating to charity is a great thing overall, but I have to wonder about the motives. Bill Gates has an extremely intelligent business model for the long haul, part of which has been unoficially 'buying' competitors to keep them afloat just so they don't get more antritrust issues than they should for about 20 years now.

    Softer Image? I'm not buying it.

    --
    Perfecting Discordia
    www.stevenvansickle.com
  53. It's OK with me, by lanc · · Score: 0


    Test XP/Longhorn.
    Fix the freakin' bugs you find.
    Don't deny (in)security issues, if having some. Fix them ASAP.

    And I won't be disgusted and won't use the "M$" tag anymore.

    Shortly: Fix the balance between marketing and technical resources.

    You do have tons of customers.
    Windows could be a good product.

    I am a linux user - but pls create an alternative to linux. A linux-monoculture is nearly as bad as a win-monoculture. MacOS is aiming now for this, but hey. The more usable OSs - the better.

    --
    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
  54. Puhleez... by jav1231 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Products aside, MS had built a reputation of intimidation. The Dept.of Justice should have broken the OEM contracts. That would have leveled the playing field a whole lot quicker. As long as they have OEM's at their mercy they'll remain a monopoly. Yes, OEM's have a choice in the outset but what are they to do? I dislike MS more for their "business" practices than their OS's.

  55. [OFFTOPIC] mircosoft? by Triffid_Hunter · · Score: 1

    anyone remember the "Advanced Mircofusion Generator" in Tyrian?

  56. Don't they get it? by ahziem · · Score: 1
    The government [...] chided [Microsoft] for releasing the documents in a format that can't be annotated and only work with Internet Explorer.

    -- DOJ Takes a Long Look at Longhorn, January 26, 2005

  57. Let's Hope by had3l · · Score: 1

    Let's just hope Microsoft follows Mircosoft's example.

  58. MSDN subscribers can DL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone with MSDN subscription (well, at least for Universal), can DL and install it. The .ISO image only fits on DVDs.

  59. Correct, as far as you go. But... by abulafia · · Score: 1
    I bet MS is more scared of the free applications that are more and more capable than a free kernel. How many people are saying, "Wow! I can get this great kernel!"? The OS seems to be the least cost when compared with tools that run on top of it. MySQL/PostGres vs MS SQL in license cost. Development tools on the Linux platform vs IDEs from Borland and Microsoft. Office Software on MS brand new vs Open Office or StarOffice or whatever. License costs are what hurt myself and other coworkers not kernel 2.whatever. Can we do the same task for far less money? That'll work every time and I think that in the long run is what scares MS most.

    All true - apps bring the users. But what brings the apps?

    As much as he was (rightly) mocked for the monkey dance, Ballmer's "developers, developers, developers" rant had a real message behind it, and I suspect what has MS running scared at the moment, from a strategic standpoint, is just how hackable and generally developer friendly Linux is.

    This is why MS _loves_ companies like RedHat and Novell. Not only are they companies, and therefor attackable, but they also provide a static target. There is also the ossification that is natural to a profitable company, but that is harder to define. (When the Board is happy with profits and there's a strategy plan for the next year on the table, and there are a few shining star salesguys around, start saving money. cf Sun circa 1998.) MS gets it, though, and knows how to attack it.

    Modulo the coming patent war (which I don't think anyone can predict how that will play out), the biggest threat to MS is the hobby coder, to whom (ironically enough) they started off catering. Debian, Damn Small Linux, etc. are things they can't kill, because they don't play by the same rules. Rule one of incumbent defense: watch the low end.

    --
    I forget what 8 was for.
  60. Grow up by melted · · Score: 1

    And move out of your parents' basement.

  61. $450.586 Billion dollars is enough justification. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1


    Slashdot personality: If you can possibly find something remotely wrong with something someone said, focus on that. Ignore the central meaning and how what was said could be correct.

    If you want the same answer above from the U.S. government's Department of Defense, look at this PDF file, located on a U.S. military web site: National Defense Budget Estimates for the FY 2005 Budget.

    What's 100 Billion one way or the other? The 450.586 Billion U.S. dollars listed there as the 2005 U.S. government money for war-making capability is enough to justify my argument.

    If part of it doesn't go for spying on other countries, where does it go? The think they don't have to tell you, and if they did say something, they don't think they don't have to tell the truth.

  62. "If" and "might" by October_30th · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If they chose to release a new Windows and make something you use in windows incompatible with the old version

    Yes, but that would be rather a lousy way to run a business, now wouldn't it? Maybe, if there weren't any competition, Microsoft could break compatibility every few months but that's theoretical.

    I haven't had any Windows compatibility problems in the past and if I ever do I'm perfectly willing to upgrade. I don't understand why paying for a version upgrade is such an anathema. After all, Microsoft is not billing you for the service packs and patches you can download.

    To me dropping Windows completely is not an option even if I wanted to do so. At home I want to be able to play games and at work I work I have to deal with MS Office documents. No, OpenOffice does not import/export documents properly.

    Now, don't make a mistake. I am running Linux on my home "media server" and I've been running Linux and BSD variants since 1992. I am just pissed off at the kind of self-righteous false dichotomies offered by some people like the parent poster. The world is not black and white. It is not "you're either for free software or you're against it". His reasons - like those of RMS - for pushing free software are political, not practical, and I will not have any part in such shenanigans.

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
  63. Re:Not again.. by spectecjr · · Score: 1

    Gimp sucks compared to MS Paint, (lets leave out photoshop cause there's no point comparing a free tool to something of professional level. It's like comparing a shovel to a backhoe in terms of digging ability.)

    Gimp also sucks compared to Paint Shop Pro.

    Nice to see you agreeing with the previous poster though. As he said, the free versions suck shit compared to the professional ones.

    --
    Coming soon - pyrogyra
  64. Re:$450.586 Billion dollars is enough justificatio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Slashdot personality: If you can possibly find something remotely wrong with something someone said, focus on that. Ignore the central meaning and how what was said could be correct."

    Could be correct. But anything "could be correct" if we don't bother to check the facts. Your "facts" are a matter of interpretation as I demonstrated by showing that nearly all federal spending (maybe all?) can be construed as defense spending if you choose to interpret it that way.

    I'm not avoiding your central argument, I'm showing it's a baseless argument not grounded in reality. Of course we spend part of our defense budget on espionage. Intelligence is key in making good decisions. Would you prefer we just randomly decide on a defense strategy and proceed to implement it? I think we all know what bad intelligence leads to...

    As far as DoD numbers vs. Whitehouse numbers vs. Congressional numbers:

    1) The only numbers that matter are the ones from Congress. They, after all, control spending. Not the Whitehouse, not the DoD, DoE, FAA, etc.

    2) No politician (I hate using absolutes unless I'm absolutely sure, but I'm fairly absolutely sure about this) has any clue about *actual* federal expenditures. It's all a shifting morass of phony numbers and projections. The CBO probably has at least half a clue, but who can really know?

    Which leads me to the last part of your post. How do you know if they are lying (intentionally not telling the truth) if they themselves don't really know what's going on? That's like asking somebody who is delusional for an accurate account of the evening news and then calling them a liar when they get it wrong.

    We're way off topic here...

  65. Hatred of Microsoft... by westlake · · Score: 1

    Hatred of Microsoft diminishes by orders of magnitude the further you get from Slashdot. Fundamentally, the reason anti-trust prosecutions stall out is because they don't have any popular support.

  66. what kind of fucking idiotic argument is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is the most idiotic argument that i've ever heard of.

    so using your same logic, this means that halliburton is an angelic company that everyone should be fawning about because they made someone money on their stocks...

    same with the military industrial complex that makes billions and billions of dollars off the backs of the average american's taxes every year.

    This kind of 'bottom line is the only line' argument is the most closed minded ignorant way to view the world. what ever happened to ethics? what ever happened to morales? apparently all tossed in the trash heap because they didn't make you enough money.

    1. Re:what kind of fucking idiotic argument is that? by mrm677 · · Score: 1

      Talk to me when you are 45 with kids in college.

  67. Teaching the DOJ by rlp · · Score: 1

    Now that Bill's taught the DOJ to rollover, do you suppose he'll teach them to shake and fetch.

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
  68. It Isn't Working... by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    "They don't want people to hate them anymore. They've learned from their mistakes."

    But, then, nothing else Microsoft does (or makes) works, either, so that's no surprise...

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  69. DiDio quoted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've never heard of Millard but the people she quotes are well known MS propogandists. I take it Millard is trying to get on the gravy train?

  70. No, that answer would be *bsd. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go bsd and you probably won't go back.

  71. Seems there is a lack of knowing what longhorn ... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    ...is by many of the slashdot commentors.

    Soooo try this tree of links out for insight as to what is planned for in longhorn

    Of course there is the DOJ having already established their bias in MS favor regarding punishment and MS's attitude of what fines and claimed constraints have been made are just the "cost of doing business"...

  72. Current DOJ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You might want to look into the '94 consent decree before making comments about how the current DOJ might have been "bought off."

  73. love him or hate him... by sp0rk173 · · Score: 1
  74. Hate them? by saur2004 · · Score: 1
    They don't want people to hate them anymore

    Oh really? Then I guess removing the WPA for XP is not out of the question hu? (All of /. chants snowball-hell)

    Ive heard it before. "Whats the problem? Its just a number identifying you and there is no personal identifying information."

    Now where did I hear that before? Oh ya Intel.

    The sad thing is I might just purchase XP if it werent for the WPA.

    1. Re:Hate them? by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      "Its just a number identifying you"

      No, it's not. It's a one-way hash of your MAC and other hardware information, combined with your product key.

    2. Re:Hate them? by saur2004 · · Score: 1
      No, it's not. It's a one-way hash of your MAC and other hardware information, combined with your product key.

      It still boils down to numeric identification, the same thing Intel was crusified for and MS can shove it.

  75. Cough by XxXoldsaltXxX · · Score: 0

    They don't want people to hate them anymore. They've learned from their mistakes.' Hmmm.

    They already broke their new years resolution:
    http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/05/01 /29/1511218.shtml?tid=109&tid=172&tid=106

    They should stop trying to get people to stop using their comptetitor's products (*cough* firefox *cough* gmail *cough* linux), and start making their own products better.

  76. MOD PARENT UP - Insightful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  77. buddies at justice by flacco · · Score: 1

    probably just a pre-empive rubber stamp from their pals at justice.

    --
    pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
  78. Then get VC-1 the f*k out of HD DVD and BD-ROM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Don't like a single company pushing its expensive pay-per-use formats and codecs into your living room TV or stereo?

    Then get VC-1 the heck out of the HD DVD and BD-ROM standards. And push now for getting open codecs into standards for storage and broadcast. Also push radio and television stations to offer streaming content in an open format. BBC, NPR, DR1, YLE, SR, etc. all would be candidates.

    Remember also that audio codecs are separate from video codecs. The audio codecs for BD-ROM have not been chosen ... yet. Ogg Vorbis would benefit all producers and consumers, except the one we won't mention. Think lower manufacturing costs because Vorbis is royalty-free. Think greater flexibility and speed of development because of the flexible license Vorbis uses.

  79. Surprising But Not Really News by lifespan · · Score: 0

    I don't see how that's news. Microsoft has managed to abide by the terms of it's anti-trust settlement, surprising but not really news...

    --
    -- Howto: Get +5 (1) Whine about M$ (2) Namedrop Gentoo (3) Casually Abuse Mods (4) Namedrop Early Computer Model