Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Softens Up On Competition
shaneFalco writes "The BBC is reporting that Microsoft, prompted in part by their recently legal woes in the European Union will allow vendors to set non-Microsoft applications as the default on Windows computers. This initiative is part of a dozen 'tenets to promote competition' that the company is adopting in the face of stiff criticism of business tactics in Europe. Other tents include not retaliating against businesses that promote non-MS software, and a relaxing of restrictions on licensing Windows-related patents." From the article: "The principles might mean that some manufacturers will promote search engines other than Microsoft's own, Mr Smith said - an apparent reference to Google, which has looked to be on a collision course with Microsoft over search engines. 'There are certain steps we can't take that would have been permitted a decade ago,' the executive added." We touched on this announcement yesterday, but details on the '12 tenets' were less clear at that point.
The article gave me a warm and fuzzy feeling for Microsoft. They really are nice people after all. They are even going through a twelve step program to make themselves better.
Just install the apps and select the preferences you want...
So this is either just pure marketing, or someone at MS half-arsed an app to automate default file and protocol associations.
Now with 50% more junk preinstalled with every PC.
One of the 12 tenants is 'Promising not to retaliate against computer makers that support non-Microsoft software.'
Hmm.. does a slightly higher pricing structure count as 'retaliation', or is that just good business sense? I guess it's a matter of semantics.
-
Is there any requirement that we won't see a replay of the Opera-Bork-Bork-Bork fiasco in Microsoft ensuring competitor's components are noticeably more clunky than their own?
i still don't like it, keep the playing field a bit tilted
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The hell? They will ALLOW them? Where does it say that Microsoft has a say in what is set up as default in the OS? Do they seriously think they can make people only use their searches/office/whatever?
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
How precisely do they propose to differentiate between "retaliation against a computer maker" and "business decisions" due to any other little thing the maker may do that they decide they don't like? Would it be possible to argue that regardless of the actions of the maker, Microsoft could never stop selling to them or change pricing ever again without risking constant litigation? Seems like a disaster waiting to happen either way once a precedent is set(either against or for Microsoft).
Ice Cream has no bones.
I mean, say what you like about the tenets to promote competition, Dude, at least it's an ethos.
I hail Microsoft's perceived "softening" as a positive step albeit driven largely by legal fiat. However, one need only read this article on Microsoft and their stance against Google to realize and recognize Microsoft retains its hubris and aggressive stance.
Consider from the above article:
The hubris is Microsoft's assumption anyone getting business is taking food off of their plate, or something they consider rightfully theirs, as opposed to customers who make choices in a free marketplace. Fortunately the marketplace is tipped somewhat more towards a level playing field (not all the way, but better than before).
The hubris is Microsoft's assumption anyone getting business is taking food off of their plate, or something they consider rightfully theirs...
You bastard! Your post denied Microsoft from making a compatible post which is their right!
From now on all posts to /. regarding Microsoft will come from Microsoft, however in the interest of fair competition, you may forward your post to Microsoft for inclusion in their post to ensure compatibility.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
All this will do is start a bidding war on the oem's end. Besides, installing the next version of messenger (or a MS download of any kind) will have a screen that will have all the default options revert back to MS's settings. .mp3 will be associated with Musicmatch jukebox or some equally bloated shitty app. I think we can all agree that is a loss.
It doesn't really matter what browser they use, if the homepage is msn.com, they still get their unique visitor and ads displayed numbers bumped.
OTOH,
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
I just went through a bunch of hits from Google news as well as the TFA - hundreds of stories all saying Microsoft has published these 12 tenets, not one actually listing them. WTF?
Oh no... it's the future.
1. The first principle goes to the installation of any software.
"We will ensure that Microsoft will design Windows in ways that make it easy for people to add non-Microsoft features," Smith said.
No. 2 is easy access: Computer manufacturers are free to add icons, shortcuts and the like to the Windows Start menu and other places used to access software programs so that customers can easily find them, Microsoft said.
No. 3 is defaults. Microsoft will design Windows so as to let computer manufacturers and users set non-Microsoft programs to operate by default in certain categories, such as Web browsing and media playback, Microsoft said; computer manufacturers can set these defaults as they please when building new PCs.
No. 4 is exclusive promotion of non-Microsoft programs, Smith said.
"This is an important new issue in regard to things like media and Internet search, as we are broadening to adopt this for Internet search as well," he said, indicating that Microsoft's fierce competition with Google aside, the company is dedicated to this principle.
Guru Jakob Nielsen offers advice on designing applications for usability. Click here to watch the video.
No. 5 is business terms: Microsoft will not retaliate against any computer manufacturer that supports non-Microsoft software, Smith said.
To provide transparency on this point, Microsoft will post a standard volume-based price list to a Web site that is accessible to computer manufacturers, as it has under the U.S. antitrust ruling, he said.
Principle No. 6 deals with APIs. Microsoft provides the developer community with a broad range of innovative operating system services, via documented APIs (application programming interfaces), for use in developing state-of-the-art applications.
And the U.S. antitrust ruling requires that Microsoft disclose all of the interfaces internal to Windows called by "middleware" within the operating system, Smith said.
Principle No. 7 involves Internet services, where Microsoft is contributing to innovation in the area of Internet services with services that the company calls Windows Live, Smith said.
"Microsoft will design Windows Live as a product that is separate from Windows. Customers will be free to choose Windows with or without Windows Live," the company said.
No. 8 is Open Internet access, where 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, Smith said.
Principle No. 9 is "no exclusivity," Smith said.
The U.S. antitrust ruling provides that Microsoft may not enter into contracts that require any third party to promote Windows or any "middleware" in Windows on an exclusive basis and Microsoft has pledged to continue this, Smith said.
Next Page: Microsoft's pledges.
Principles 10 through 12 deal with interoperability for users and say that Microsoft will make its communications protocols available for commercial release, the company will generally license patents on its operating system inventions, and the company is committed to supporting industry standards.
Oh no... it's the future.
These nice people really do remind me of a large aggressive dog that lashes out at everything. If a master gets jack of it (EU) and gives it a punch square in the nose (I'm against animal cruelty!) it will back off hurt while it works out The New World Order. Then the dog will work on a way to then correct its wrong doings (these 12 steps) and after a short time completely ignore them and go back to what it was doing after forgetting that the threat of being punched is real. Moral of the story is it wont last.
I ate your fish.
Really, what's wrong with Microsoft setting it's own programs as the default? I mean, if I made an OS, a browser and a search engine, I would bundle the browser with the OS as the default (because I own it, so no one will complain about me selling their browser), and I'd set my search engine as the default because I think my search engine is the best and I want to give my customers the best. Sure, IE isn't that great, but Microsoft is GIVING IT AWAY. If I'm missing something, someone please explain this because I don't get it at all..
"We touched on this yesterday, but the 12 tenets weren't clear at that point ... ", so we touch on it again tdday, but still fail to provide the official URL to the actual 12 tenets (a URL which was released yesterday, so the 12 tenets were indeed clear).
Anyway, here's the official link:
Windows Principles: Twelve Tenets to Promote Competition
(Note that according to the text, the tenets are in keeping with and following the spirit of the MS/USDOJ settlement, rather than having to do with EU fines (though the latter likely played a role).)
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
...means "padding the crowbar" in this sense...
Looks like you didn't have any Economics classes in College, otherwise you'd know that a Monopoly is bad for an economy, and that's the reason why leveraging a monopoly in one market to gain an advantage in another market is forbidden.
Other articles on this subject state that Microsoft intends to publish a volume-based price list for OEMs. As long as they conform to that price structure, they can't be accused of retaliation.
Mmmm.. Donuts
Wasn't there recently an article about Microsoft telling Google to not compete with them?
Sorry to break it to you, you're not a capitalist. Capitalism is primarily about the private ownership of the means of producion. Under the free market school of capitalism, which is what the US follows, anybody who is making disproportionate profits, like MS, is rapidly brough back into line by the competition. If the market becomes distorted by a monopoly or a oligopoly, it is the duty of the government to bring the balance of power back into check so the the free market may operate. The approach you describe is called anarcho-capitalism, that's the brilliant school of thought that leads to depressions and support for it basically all but died in 1930s.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
Mmmm.. Donuts
That as the old gaurd begins stepping away, MS is becoming more rational.
I can't speak for MS, but in other companies this happens after the board becins quitely suggesting that the people on top find mre to do with there time. Nothing big as to not upset stock prices, just someone to point out how flat growth has been.
Please mod +1 pure speculation.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
1. Installation of any software. Computer manufacturers and customers are free to add any software to PCs that run Windows. More broadly, every computer manufacturer and customer is free to install and promote any operating system, any application, and any Web service on PCs that run Windows. Ultimately, end users are free to choose which software they prefer to use.
This means that any vendor can sell a computer that dual boots Windows and Linux, right?
Microsoft doesn't have to sell its software to vendors. Vendors sign a pre-sale contract promising to do and refrain from doing certain things with the software they resell to customers. A market economy wouldn't force Microsoft to sell their software except on their own terms.
from the article:
Giving outside software developers the same access to technical information that Windows developers have, so "competitors will know that they can plug into Windows to get services in the same way that built-in Windows features do"
I wonder just WHAT technical information microsoft is talking about?
"If the market becomes distorted by a monopoly or a oligopoly, it is the duty of the government to bring the balance of power back into check so the the free market may operate."
But then it's not a free market.
Huh, maybe their respective 95%/5% market shares have something to do with that decision?
""But then it's not a free market.""
The 'free' in free market is relative. Not absolute. At least when you want a workable capitalist economy.
If a single business dominates others and sets the barrier for entry into a market so that that nobody can start a new business and compete then that business eventually becomes a psuedo-government.
Capitalism depends entirely on having a low barrier to entry into markets. You need compitition for it to function properly. Otherwise it's not realy different then a state-run monopoly.
In fact you end up with a great deal of collusion between government and economic forces. This is in fact one definition of fascism.. when government and businesses become essentially one large orginization to work together to profit off of controlling populations.
This is the danger that we face with the current government. I am all for corporations, even big ones. Without them we would not have most of what we have today. No nice safe automobiles or computers or international communication or cheap healthy food. None of that. BUT what we have to be very paranoid of is when government works to protect businesses and to protect business interests at the expense of other more important things. If a business (hint: airplanes or trains) are going out of business due to unmanagable workforces, expenses, or (usually and more likely) bad management then it's critical to let them simply die. IF there is a market, if there is a purpose, if there is somebody willing to pay to use a service then a new business will form that will do a superior job and take over for it.
Microsoft, due to it's abusive nature of it's monopoly, was able to dictate to Dell and other companies what they are allowed and not allowed to sell on their computer. If, as a computer reseller, you did not follow Microsoft's rules the price of software on your PC dramaticly increases and you get a huge delay in when you got your software.
So it was either do what Microsoft says or you go out of business. Microsoft specificly did this to prevent other software manufacturers from having a chance at competiting in areas were Microsoft didn't approve. (MS Office, MS Windows and other core products)
That is NOT a free market.
A free market is were a business is allowed to choose, people are allowed to choose, and people are allowed to create new products without be penalized for it.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/newsroom/winxp/ WindowsPrinciples.mspx
... crush the competition (which is OSS) in the courts.
11th tenet: "11. Availability of Microsoft patents. Microsoft will generally license patents on its operating system inventions (other than those that differentiate the appearance of Microsoft's products) on fair and reasonable terms so long as licensees respect Microsoft's intellectual property rights."
This means that OS will not be licensed patents. Neither will anyone be licensed patents for free.
The MS strategy has not changed
That because Microsoft didn't actually did the promises, lead to a trial loose by the company?
That lead to another agreement with the new administration (bush) to soft the terms of the trial and Microsoft compromissed to allowing third-part software on windows, and not using restrictions on contracts again?
And only now they start dloing it?
Strange... I tought they should had started in 1994...
How precisely do they propose to differentiate between "retaliation against a computer maker" and "business decisions" due to any other little thing the maker may do that they decide they don't like?
What makes you think they mean it? The fact that they have admitted the practice should convince you they can do it again.
As in so many cases in the past, this is just another damage control press release and no one should expect change. In the court prooven case of DRDOS, they planned both the technical and PR attacks in advance. In that case, internal emails show they programmed Win3.1 to error out for anything but their own DOS and planned to astroturf the newsgroups to blame DRDOS. It worked and DRDOS failed. Ditto Netscape, Word Perfect, Correl and all other private "competitors". When a new net nasty takes out every corporate network, they issue statements about how "security is job 1" and hype their patches. Now that they are being tagged by the EU for trying to lock down the world of media and computers in general, they issue this bogus and confusing release. They think they can talk their way out of anything.
They need a good old fashion hanging judge to say, "For getting smart, boy, I'm going to double your daily fine until you comply." The lenient stance of the Bush administration and the EU so far are just short of ludicrous. In the mean time, I'm waiting for sales of Vista to tank and the sun to finally set on M$ and non free junk.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Maybe I'm being too hopeful, but perhaps we'll see things like Opera, firefox and vlc preloaded with our dells now. Or dell browser and dell media player.
Check out #10:
"10. Communications protocols. Microsoft will make available, on commercially reasonable terms, all of the communications protocols that it has built into Windows and that are used to facilitate communication with server versions of Windows"
That closes out Open Source, no?
It's not fine to make any company give up internal information to competitors, of course.
But, when you find yourself in the very comfortable position of a monopoly, you have to play by other rules. These rules help protect other companies that would be completely unable to thrive in a saturated ecosystem.
And, in this case, we are talking about a monopolist that has not restrained itself from leveraging one monopoly to extend it to other business areas, sucking competitors dry after promising them business in return to knowledge and leaving a trail of corporate corpses in its wake.
So, yes. They have proved, time and again, their anti-social attitude and they must be contained.
I don't know if they will be able to sidestep it, but watching them try will sure prove entertaining.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
Lets put it in terms you will understand
in a fight between platoons you can expect certain things (rifles grenades maybe at4s/other shoulder launched missles and other such things)
but what happens if some jarhead decides to call down an airstrike or Naval Gun fire?
That is the problem with Microsoft (not to mention a few WMDs like Office and IE and ISS)
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
Does this mean I can get my dual boot BeOS/Windows computer now?
What?
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
So, you're playing a game of football. It's OK to grab the other guy by
the helmet and throw him to the ground? Break his neck?
Shouldnt be punished for winning, even then? Is the
competition "whiny crybabies" for insisting that the rules
and regulations of business be followed?
emt 377 emt 4
Now it makes sense;)
Just put a nipple and 5 pounds of FAT looks way better.
All I can see on the list are;
- the pretty obvious (eg we "allow" other firms icons !)
- what they have been *forced* to do under US and EU antitrust rulings (eg interoperability and equal deals to OEMs).
Or am I missing something ?
There have to be elements called "demand" and "competition" as well to drive a market economy.
The question I have is, how many of these OEM's are actually going to bother changing all the possible options?
Okay, so someone like Dell might because they can make some extra money but if the large majority of the others simply don't bother then this change of policy by Microsoft won't equate to much for the average purchaser.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
"See, we had made Vista the most secure operating system on the planet, but then you bozo's made us weaken it by allowing our competitors better access."
Did any one else read this and think, "Wow, I wonder how many computers will now be, by default, infected with viruses and spyware, when they get a new PC in Europe." Yeah, it sounds good to have all these felxibilities in place, but is there anything that prevents an unscrupulous computer dealer from placing spyware as a default when selling a computer? The user would probably blame Microsoft for this. At least with Microsoft originating these defaults, you can point your finger and Microsoft would be to blame. Now it is anyones game.
If the EU forced OEM vendors to ship "clean" PCs.
Responsibility would be on the OS manufacturers to ship easy-to-use, no trouble, no options install disks for usage on the first install. These would have a standardized, regulated procedure that would be open to any OS company.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Considering the sheer amount of absolute crap software these vendors already install on the pc's by default, I am personally afriad of what will happen when default application are in the hands of said vendors.
I hope Apple will also be forced to allow you to use other web servers, other than .Mac, when publishing stuff with their iLife software.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
My bowel movements are free and I'm GIVING IT AWAY. But I somehow suspect you may not want it.