Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft to Allow Competitive Search
Aviran Mordo writes to tell us Reuters is reporting that Microsoft is announcing a voluntary policy to help guide the development of Windows in the future. The policy, which Microsoft senior vice president Brad Smith said was 'committed to creating a transparent system that allows open competition,' will start by allowing other search engines like Google to be set by default.
They're allowing OEM builders and end users to change some basic settings on their own computers? Oh my, how thoughtful of Microsoft! What's next, "allowing" system builders and users to install competitors' web browsers and office suites? "Allowing" system builders and users to change their wallpaper?
I'm sorry, I just don't see anything groundbreaking in this "news." I read it more as spin on the fact that if they don't allow such settings to be changed, they'll find themselves in the antitrust hot seat again.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
"Microsoft cares about Microsoft (and whoever pays them the most money).."
...as do most companies. Indeed, any company that does not is begging for a shareholder's lawsuit for malfeasence. Hey, I hate MS too, but this is normal.
MS only has a few moves in its 20 year old play book.
Embrace, extend and extinguish is one of them.
Re read it as
"committed to creating a transparent system that allows us to extinguish the competition"
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
If they really want to show that they have learnt then they need to soften their position, as well as say things in a way that sounds at least half genuine.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
How about for a change letting the consumer to decide which browsers, office suites, media players etc they want to use? How about providing more than one choice?
And with the basis of your utopia being that consultation is worth more than development, don't be surprised when consultants are making big buucks while programmers have to take jobs on the side. Also, don't be surprised when programs are intentionally made difficult to use, so as to drive up the necessity for consulting/customization and the fees incurred from that.
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
And I suppose Microsoft shouldn't be able to sell their software in stores, either, since they're a monopoly and all, right?
You're going way overboard in my opinion. If a company illegally leverages their monopoly, stop them from leveraging their monopoly and fine them. Bidding in a market, however, is not leverage. It's...a fair market.
"8. Open Internet access. Microsoft will design and license Windows so that it does not block access to any lawful Web site or impose any fee for reaching any non-Microsoft Web site or using any non-Microsoft Web service."
What did they have planned before?
Preventing Microsoft from being one of the bidders only hurts OEMs, as a smaller bidder pool results in smaller bids. You would have Dell settle for 5 million from Google, when they could've gotten 6 million from Microsoft, or 7 million from Google having to outbid Microsoft (for example).
Since we're talking about the hypothetical benefit of Microsoft being able to bid here, let's consider the hypothetical harm. If Dell would have gotten 5mil from Google, or 6mil from Ask.com, why would they consider those when they could accept Microsoft's bid of $2mil under a threat to renegotiate their per-copy fee for pre-installed copies of Windows? So who's benefitting again?
When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.