Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft's 12-Step Program

NevarMore writes to tell us eWeek is reporting that Microsoft, after almost 30 years of Windows, now has 12 philosophical tenets outlining Windows development. From the article: "Smith said the principles largely come from things Microsoft picked up in the consent decree the software giant signed in settling its landmark antitrust battle with the federal government, but that more recent developments led to the crafting of some of the other principles. The 12 principles are based on three main areas: choice for computer manufacturers and customers, opportunities for developers, and interoperability for users, Smith said."

8 of 169 comments (clear)

  1. Actions Speak Louder Than Words... by the.metric · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...need I say more?

  2. OK, nice philosophy. When's the release date? by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When do these 12 principles take effect?
    Surely they're not implying they're already in operation.

    --
    No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
  3. They sound like a reform plan by DeadSea · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The list could be titled: Twelve ways to avoid being a monopoly or Twelve ways to avoid pissing off customers and third party developers.

    If Microsoft really takes these twelve items to heart, it could be a big shift for them. It would certainly go a long way to change my perception of the company. I might even consider using Windows again at some point.

    The cynic in me says that something is forcing them to say this and that they possibly don't really mean it. The options seem like:

    1. The anti-trust litigation is finally changing them
    2. Competition from Apple and Linux has them over a barrel
    3. They want good publicity and they don't really mean it.
    1. Re:They sound like a reform plan by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Insightful
      no one ever considers the idea that maybe Microsoft is trying to actually change it's old business practices.

      Maybe they are, but you wouldn't know it from these "commandments".

      Numbers 1-4 are already a fait accompli from a technical point of view. There's been nothing to stop OEMs or customers from adding their own software as defaults to any version of Windows, apart from Microsoft's shady business practices. Maybe Vista will make the process simpler, but complexity was never what stopped the Dell/Gateway/Toshiba etc of the world from changing defaults.

      Numbers five and six are significant, if they happen and are not bypassed in practice, but it's really just Microsoft saying "We're not going to keep breaking the law."

      Number seven and eight are non-sequiturs. Were they ever planning to incorporate Windows Live into their OS? Given the security implications, it would be an insane thing to do - so maybe they were... And what about not blocking access to non-MS websites? Gee, thanks guys. I'm glad you've decided to let us keep our Slashdot. Seriously, what the hell were they planning to do that would make it necessary to make that a core tenet?

      Nine, they're saying they'll stop breaking the law again.

      Ten and eleven are sneaky. They'll license communications protocols and patents "on commercially reasonable terms". Given the extremely flexible nature to the term "reasonable" you can pretty much bet they'll use the licensing terms to block all real competitors, particularly FOSS.

      Number twelve, well we've seen from their behavior with ODF that Microsoft is committed to standards, as long as they're their own, and as long as they can retract the compliance if it gets in the way of their format lockin in the future.

      All in all, there's a lot implied by the tenets, but the only ones which actually commit Microsoft to any changes are the ones required by law. The rest are carefully phrased to allow plausible deniability. Note also that they've said nothing about their key lockin tool - file formats. If Microsoft were serious about fair play they'd commit, in a legally binding way, to maintain fully open protocols, formats and APIs. They have not done so, so these "tenets" are nothing more than yet more spin and misdirection.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  4. That's eleven more than I knew about by Archtech · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hmm, having followed Microsoft's activities closely for the past 20 years, I had come to the conclusion that the Windows operation was guided by one principle. In its entirety, it reads as follows:

    MAXIMIZE REVENUE

    Analysis of Microsoft's behavior and the characteristics of Windows shows them to be fully and satisfactorily explained by this one hypothetical mandate.

    --
    I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
  5. Re:Let me guess by Doug+Merritt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    They are twelve ways to deny all of those?

    Pathetic, isn't it? I had expected to see a list of issues like, perhaps

    • Huge and bloated is beautiful
    • Ship a prototype as soon as possible
    • Embrace captive user interfaces
    • Write programs that do thousands of unrelated things
    • Write programs that don't particularly work together
    • Write programs that handle lots of proprietary data formats, but not text streams
    • (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy)

    Instead their list of "philosophies" is more like

    • Don't poison the customer
    • Don't shoot the customer
    • Don't bomb the distributor
    • Don't ignore direct orders from the court
    etc. Unbelievable.
    --
    Professional Wild-Eyed Visionary
  6. It does not bode well by denoir · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It does not bode well when a company calls "computer manufacturers may add shortcuts to the start menu" a philosophical principle. It is such a sad statement of no core beliefs or belief in the future. Compare it to Google's naive, but uplifting "Do no evil".

    Microsoft badly needs a reboot with people in charge who can give this company a real vision.

  7. Re:Let me guess by Dolda2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    They are twelve ways to deny all of those?
    Not too far from it, from what I can see:
    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. To facilitate this, Microsoft will document protocols supported in Windows as part of the product design process. We will also work closely with firms with particular needs to address interoperability scenarios that may require licensing of other protocols.

    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.

    (From Microsoft's site)
    So in other words, it's a no-go for free software.

    I also found the 12th point interesting:

    12. Standards. Microsoft is committed to supporting a wide range of industry standards in Windows that developers can use to build interoperable products. Microsoft is committed to contributing to industry standard bodies as well as working to establish standards via ad hoc relationships with others in the industry.
    What a commitment! I think I can pretty much count all the open standards that Microsoft can be said to be committed to support on one hand: the IP stack, DNS and HTTP. Even their FTP implementation is half-assed, to say the least (considering how one cannot get out of the initial cwd), and I doubt anyone would argue that Microsoft actually "supports" any of the web standards (that is, if one isn't viewing support of the version of 10 years ago as a "commitment").

    The second sentence is interesting in its own right. I, for one, cannot interpret it to mean anything but inventing their own, new standard instead of the ones that already exist and work. "[W]orking to establish standards via ad hoc relationships with others in the industry" doesn't even need a comment...

    All the other tenets were pretty well summed up by another poster as "don't poison the customer", "don't shoot the customer", "don't bomb the distributor" and "don't ignore direct orders from a court of law". They are probably reserving the rights to boiling the customer, burying the distributor alive and following order from a court of law at their own pace, however.