Microsoft Source Code Still Not Enough for EU?

wjsteele writes "The BBC is reporting that Microsoft's offer to allow rivals access to its software blueprint may not be enough to prevent European Union action." From the article: "Its offer to open up its software blueprints 'underscored its commitment' to meet the European Commission's demands, Horacio Gutierrez associate general counsel for Microsoft Europe said in a statement. However, Brussels has warned the offer may not go far enough. 'It would be premature to conclude that offering access to source codes would necessarily resolve the problem of compliance," said EU anti-trust spokesman Jonathan Todd.'

Comments

Re:When...

[Tim C]

No, they're trying to stop MS having an unfair advantage. If the US government had any balls when it came to MS, they'd do the same.

Misleading

[LuckyStarr]

The EU didn't ask Microsoft to open up it's source code. It asked Microsoft to open up it's protocols! Thats not the same!

Upon Microsofts declaration that it selflessly "overfulfilled" the EUs demands someone of the EU stated explicitly that Microsoft has no say in when the demands are fulfilled. The EU has. Right they are.

Someone trying to implement an interface to Microsoft products after seeing Microsoft's "opened up" source-code could face severe legal problems. Heck, even Microsofties are not allowed to even look at free software (be it GPL, MIT or BSD licence).

So I suggest we move along. Nothing interresting to see here... yet. :-)

Re:Code is not a Standard

[LuckyStarr]

Do the right thing. The thing you are asked to do.

Read: Free Software Foundation Europe: "Microsoft offers poisoned apple" - "Praises premature in hindsight"

Re:What is the stinking problem?

[Ernesto Alvarez]

Honestly can someone educate me on the matter?
What does the EU comission really want? Cheap Windows? Crippled Windows?

Mainly they want full specifications of the protocols and interfaces used in windows by MS, including any "secret" APIs, to be made available on reasonable terms to others. There is also a EUR 500 000 000 fine.

Crippled windows would be of no benefit.
They're not interested in cheap windows directly, but the idea seems that if someone can make "cheap windows" components, they should be able to do so without MS stepping on them (that's what the APIs are for).

Can't they just fine them for their monopolistic practices and get over it?

Sure, they did. The problem is that the one time fine is only part of their punishment. MS could comply simply by paying EUR 2 million a day forever, but it would be crippling to MS and also not useful in solving the openness problem. Since opening the protocols as the EU is saying is very bad (cheap windows parts) MS does not want to comply. Hence the negotiation going right now.

If one is to suggest they move to *X, then EU would complain, well that is too hard, we'd just rather stick with MS.
And you don't need to talk to me about proprietary formats.
I work for a state institution, and let me tell you, proprietary formats are the least of our worries and inefficiencies.

Maybe you're not getting bitten right now, but proprietary protocols bite whenever you're weak. What are you going to do in a few years if you try to get away from MS apps? I'm getting bitten right now by active directory myself.

I am also from Europe, so I don't have "Yankee's are the best" attitude either.

You know, I like my OS with a browser, media player and text editor (OS X). If EU has a problem with that, fine them or take your business elsewhere...

I think you really want an OS, a browser, a media player and a text editor. Them coming with the OS is just a convenience, unless it's not the ones you want (like IE) and you cannot remove them. I also like these apps in my machine, but I like a way for me to choose what I want (SUSE and Debian in my case). Anyway, you're using OS X, you're not being precisely locked in. What would you say if you were stuck with outlook and IE?