Slashdot Mirror
Google Says Vista Search Changes Not Enough
akkarin writes "Following Google's complaint to Microsoft regarding Vista's 'desktop search,'
Google claims that Vista's search has not changed enough: 'Google said yesterday that the remedies don't go far enough. Google chief legal officer David Drummond said in a statement, "We are pleased that as a result of Google's request that the consent decree be enforced, the Department of Justice and state attorneys general have required Microsoft to make changes to Vista."'"
I really like Google. I don't understand why they have to do this though.
TLF
I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
Just cuz most versions of windows come with paint doesn't mean people don't buy photoshop and you couldn't pay me enough to use that crappy wav editor that comes with windows instead of Wavepad. If you think your product is better, don't complain that something like it comes with Vista cuz it won't matter. And if you know your product is worse and want to get rid of the better one, then you can also stop complaining because it's your own fault people won't use it and you shouldn't try to elimiate your competition. It's idiotic in general to say you want your main competitor's product eliminated (so you're the only one left) for antitrust reasons.
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
Is it really that hard to make an open api with replaceable components. That way google could just plug in their search and have it open to the whole os. MS still seems to be stuck in the monolithic, tightly coupled programming era.
Where were they during the 5 years of Vista's development? Microsoft was touting the integrated, universal search abilities pretty much since day 1 of Vista development. There's no excuse for Google not to know about this, since there were preview and beta builds of Vista available for nearly two years prior to release. If they had a problem with this feature, they should've brought it up then, not 5 months after Vista shipped.
"Google says Vista Search Changes not Enough"
Oh good God fuck off already. I hope Microsoft undoes any planned changes just to put Google back into its place. Now they're just whining like babies. It's an operating system. I can understand concerns over Windows Media Player but the file searching mechanism in Vista is almost a necessity when it comes to finding your files. Since when was including a file finder an antitrust violation?
Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
Look, Google, release your own OS already, and shut up. We know you've been working on one.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
They could stop complaining and get back to developing web-based apps that crap over anything MS has to offer (I'm thinking search engine, image search, webmail etc). Not to go Web 2.0 on anyone, but why do they care about the desktop? No advertising dollars there (yet).
Between the falling angel and the rising ape
Sec 12 Para 2: "Vista startup sound must now be sound of someone getting spanked."
Currently bidding on sig
Why doesnt Google go after Apple for putting SpotLight into MacOSX? They havent even tried to run their desktop search on a Mac, would love to see how SpotLight handles priority of Google Desktop Search.
Let me turn this around.
What if Microsoft turned around and demanded that Google open up their online sites/applications so that the default search engine could be changed to Live search?
Or what if Google is setting a precedent to allow some other spyware developers to demand that Mac OS X or another operating system must have an easily extensible framework for crapware to hook itself into?
It is Microsoft's operating system and the modularity of the system should be entirely up to Microsoft to decide. If Microsoft don't want anything modular/replaceable in Windows then that is fine by me. It is time that people became responsible for their software purchasing decisions. You want to be able to install 3rd party replacements for various software components? Choose a modular operating system. You are worried about your traditional applications not working on the new operating system? Get out of vendor lockin before the problems get even worse. Choose file formats which are open and standardized.
Also, it is hardly as if Google isn't playing some of the old Microsoft tricks with getting their search engine made the default in Firefox, bundling spyware installers with other applications (which are checked ON by default), etc.
you can't turn it off
YOU CAN.
I quickly discovered that searching it automatically called up MSIE
I have no idea why that happens. I don't have GDS (no need for it), but I tried to set Firefox as the default and EVERYTHING passed to Firefox. Search results from the Start menu, URLs in emails, HTML files, EVERYTHING. The problems actually does seem to be GDS.
Why is everyone calling Google cry-babies? Does no one remember history?
You kids are probably too young to remember Stacker, but basically it was a way of compressing files to increase harddrive space by compressing on-the-fly. They were doing great until Microsoft decided to include a similar product in DOS, and then they were fucked. Victims of Microsoft's "Oh, sorry about including a feature that fucks up your business" mentality.
This is Microsoft's modus-operandi. I do not put it past Microsoft to have deliberately fucked with Google's desktop software on purpose because they have done this before. They know they need to get a leg-up on Google any way they can, and by limiting Google's desktop software, it represents a small victory at decreasing Google's brand. Look up anything related to Dr DOS, etc, and look at all the secret APIs that Microsoft would use to fuck up their competition.
I applaud Google for leveraging the anti-trust settlement to force Microsoft to be more open and fair.
Yes, it is pretty obvious that the little blue 'e' was an abuse of Microsoft's total control of the OS market but I always though the clear cut, slam dunk antitrust violation in that regard was that they made it impossible to use a different browser to download updates for their OS.
They basically said, "Sorry but you can only get support for our OS if you use our browser..." Now how did that get past the DOJ and why hasn't it been nuked out of Windows since then?
Has this tagging thing been opened up again?
For a while there, the tags almost meant something.
Max.
I just treat googles toolbars/desktop search the same as any other crapware/adware/spyware when i find it on a customers machine and remove it, 99.9% of ordinary users have no idea it was installed except that their system runs like crap due to the hundreds of apps that insist on adding themselves to HKLM run/ startup
if they didnt bundle it in things like Adobe Acrobat (with the install boxes already ticked on the installer) and the like i would probably treat it differently but as they use the same tactics as many of the crapware suppliers they get treated like one after all you lie with dogs your gonna get fleas
iam still suprised commerical Spyware removers dont flag it, why anyone in their right mind let an advertising company install anything on their machine is beyond me
lol @ the crybaby tag....that's a riot.
Wish it was easy to take a chevy 350 motor and dump it into a ford pinto.
Maybe I should piss moan and whine until ford retrofits any new vehicle they make to allow whatever engine I want to put into it...
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
Stop crying about the tags.
Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
Google Actin' Like a Whiny Little Bitch
eom
First: that MS indexing can't be turned off in Vista.
Debunked. At least 3 ways to do so.
Second: that the search box does not show Google results even when MS search is turned off. (It reverts to an XP-like slow search instead.)
No shit. I would expect MS results if I'm using MS's search program. If I wanted to use GDS I would use Google's program.
Now: that Vista search gets a performance boost.
Hereby debunked. Vista search runs at a low priority -- both CPU and I/O. So if GDS doesn't use low priority, GDS will get a performance boost compared to MS indexing.
Next?
Read this and come back:l eId=264
http://www.lamlaw.com/tiki-read_article.php?artic
Microsoft pulls the same cheap trick every time they find themselves in this jam. To wit, the progression of the standard MS anti-antitrust gambit:
1 Competitors: "Hey, MS is violating black letter contractual obligations established by their last antitrust settlement."
2 Microsoft: "Fuck off, crybabies. We aren't a monopoly and if we are it's because you suck."
3 Competitors: "DOJ, are you hearing this?!"
4 DOJ: "MS, abide by the terms of your agreement. We're on your side and we'll try to find some way to help you out of this pickle, but you guys make it tough by being so blatant and intransigent."
5 Microsoft: "OK, we'll pretend that such-and-so self-selected half-ass measure is sooooo hard on us and bitch, bitch, bitch. Why don't you try being us for even ten seconds? Believe me, it's... not very good and all these legal bills would put you in the poor house. Seriously. Freedom to innovate, faggots!"
6 GOTO 1
ILuxRamen would taunt Google with obviously false blather.
If you think your product is better, don't complain that something like it comes with Vista cuz it won't matter.
No one can really be oblivious to the actual problem here: M$ has sabotaged yet another competitor on "their" OS. It does not matter how good your program is when you try to port it to Winblows and M$ decides they want your "market". Remember DRDOS, Lotus, Word Perfect, Netscape and non M$ antivirus programs? All of them were far better than the M$ junk that eventually triumphed due to sabotage and vendor manipulation. Their demise has been meticulously documented in several anti-trust trials. This is no longer a matter of partisan bickering or fanboy ranting, it's court proven fact.
Protecting real competition is what antiturst is all about. The judgement and findings of fact against M$ were supposed to take care of these problems but did not because they left M$ intact. Their attack on Google, iPod anti-virus makers and even Wikipedia is more of the same. All of these other companies are just as legitimate and important as M$ and all of them are going to be slaughtered if things go as they did before. That's people who lose their jobs so that M$ can rack up more monopoly rent. Government action has failed miserably.
Fortunately, the market is correcting itself. People are avoiding Vista even though that means using ancient software on aging hardware. Dell is still selling XP, despite M$'s wishes, because people just don't want Vista. It's hurt hardware sales and everyone who trusted the usual business predictions are feeling the burn. Businesses and government offices continue to look for escape and they are finding it in Mac and free software that runs their existing equipment. With vendors like Dell selling free software, the dam has burst on M$. There's a reliable hardware path out of the mess. People who want what competition really has to offer are going to steer clear of M$ for the forseeable future.
All M$ can do is advertise, but that's not working like it used to. They can't polish the Vista turd. After six years, they can't produce much better, so it's all downhill from here. Everyone knows it too. Bye Bye M$.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Google is scared shitless of Vista's search capabilities, and here's why:
Vista Search (which is about 100 times better than Google's Desktop Search) is only one step away from searching ON THE INTERNET, just as it searches on the desktop now.
If Microsoft gets users used to Vista Search, and then makes it easy for people to use that same GUI to search the internet, Google is suddenly out of business overnight.
Google's popularity right now is based largely on momentum and the "fad" of using its name as a verb. Yahoo's search, for example, is pretty damn near as good as Google's. Since Google's entire business model of search supremecy relies on user laziness and momentum (like most monopolies that aren't enforced by governments like utilities, etc) then their ultimate worry is that Microsoft will incorporate search directly into the OS which will be the ultimate "lazy" option for users.
Why do you think Google pays Adobe $1.25 for each download of Flash or Acrobat which default installs their search toolbar? Why do you think Google pays dell 5 dollars for each install of Google toolbar that ships with all Dell computers? Because Google knows that the way to keep their search monopoly is to make it so the user doesn't even HAVE to make a choice of search engine- it will be there in their face when they update Acrobat or buy a new Dell or download Firefox.
But if Microsoft can make it even EASIER for people not to even need a concept of a third party search engine, then Google is finished.
This is why Google will fight this battle to the very end- they will spend every penny in their coffers to try and stop microsoft from getting users to stop thinking of search as a "site you go to" rather than something that is just built into the OS. I mean literally- Google has absolutely nothing to lose by spending every penny they have to fight this- because if they lose, then the company might as well fold up shop and go home.
Any time they try to do something good, the government steps in and says it's anti-competitive. Meanwhile, Apple and Linux implement similar features and brag about how Windows doesn't have them.
I'm not trying to take sides in the OS wars, but I'm really getting sick of the government bullying Microsoft. If there's anything worse than a company bullying someone, it's the government bullying someone, regardless of who they are.
something in the news that Google is doing that is just plain stupid, ethically questionable or outright wrong. From the jacked up toolbar installs, recent privacy concerns, the bush league promotional attempts at EBay's conference, to whining about MS features that were part of the OS's plans since day one. How long will it take before the "Google are the good guy's" sentiment is going to wear thin? Surprise Google wants your desktop, they want your eyeballs, they want to pummel you with ads, they want to control your online experience, and they want to control your email and documents. Google may have started years ago with the best of intentions but as it went public it had to answer to shareholders which are for the most part greedy bastards by nature if they care about their money. I like Google, I even liked the toolbar until they kept bloating it with crap, bundled software and "customer experience" features but lately things have changed. In the long term, I think there is more to fear from Google than there is from Microsoft. Yep MS wants you to buy stuff, but Google wants to give it away in the hopes of getting so engrained that they control every aspect of your online life and when it gets to that point its already to late. The worst part is they seem to be willing to use any tactic available to get there.
I sincerely hope it's just the tinfoil hat in me that's talking but I do worry that one day Google will be synonymous with Tyrell or Skynet only this time it will be real.
Google will modify its motto to "Do no evil, but let a little justice slip out occasionally" and keep MicroSoft alive.
Why? Because to vanquish would be merciful, and Redmond deserves to wallow in the wreckage of its APIs for as long as possible.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
So, how would you explain that on this computer, the indexing service is disabled, and there is no index AT ALL? Anywhere? How would you explain that when I type in a couple of letters into the search box in Explorer, it actually searches the directories instead of the index, and tells me that indexing is off, and to turn on the index for faster searches?
How dare Microsoft create such a great feature like their search. I used to use google desktop but got tired of it's limited abilities. I couldn't tell it where to store it's massive database and unfortunately did not have enough space on the C: drive to keep it.
Google's "indie street cred" is about as bogus as Apple's. They are both companies and for one second if you think that their main concern is anything but profit, then I have a bridge to sell you.
Karma means nothing to me, so suck it...
Set aside all the crap about whether you can or can't completely turn WDS off and ponder this:
Microsoft made a clone of Google Desktop, then used its monopoly position to send it to everyone to hurt Google's business. They did the same with Netscape, Stacker, and a whole host of other old products too. It's classic Microsoft: find a competitor you want to hurt, clone one of their most important products, then include it in the OS and integrate it in ways that no one else can.
Now, if they wanted to do it right, they'd have made an easy, user-accessible way to choose your desktop search application from the start (i.e. a control panel, not net stop whatever).
If you look at the original lists of what Vista was supposed to come shipped with and compare that list to what it was actually shipped with, I think you'll see how worthless 'day 1' development features are. One of the major motivators to switch to Vista was their new file system, but as it is we're stuck with NTFS for Windows and a plethora for *NIX.
They used to transport people around the city everywhere until those automobiles came along and fucked everything up. Now they are only good for betting on and dog food, unless your mongolian in which case they all also great during cold nights.
This is Ford's modus-operandi. I do not put it past Ford to have deliberately fucked with horses on purpose because they have done this before. i have proof damn it!!!!
get real dick head
Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
On Apple, the google toolbar is nothing more than a security and privacy risk, with little extra value. Pop up blocking, ad blocking, search engine choice, system search, are all available on the standard browsers. This situation was only improved when MS let IE lapse and Safari took over the default Mac browser.
OTOH, MS left basic functionality out of IE to monotize customers by sending everything through MSN, and making sure that all ads are shown. This left the gates open for the yahoo toolbar, the google toolbar, which simply modified IE to customers needs, in exchange for information.
The trouble is they still want to produce products that tie customers to MS, not through superior solutions, but embedded solutions. Just like IE, where after many years MS reluctantly added features, they have finally added search capability to the OS, but in standard form they cut everyone else out. Is the MS solution superior? Probably. But couldn't they have provided the solution years ago when customers needed it, rather than now simply as a method to cut out those that provided past service?
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
So Google wants to use anti-trust laws to try and extend their internet search monopoly onto the desktop? What's wrong with this picture?
Once again, we have a battle of the titans. Huge monolithic company against huge monolithic company. All altruism aside, the only goal is who can squeeze more out of the customer at the end of the day.
The one thing I've found fascinating about all of these battles is that for about 15 years now, Microsoft has been one of the titans. Even when they lose, they don't die, which makes me think that damage control is as good as a win, as far as MS is concerned.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
What I can't figure out is when Google started believing they could start telling Microsoft what they could do with Windows.
Oh wait, maybe that all started when Netscape and Apple and Real and every other asshat with some tiny application started telling Microsoft they had to protect their marketshare.
That's the problem with the kind of protectionism the FOSSies have been pushing in their rabid anti-MS zealotry: it may hurt Microsoft, but it also hurts everyone else. There was just an article the other day about why someone couldn't make a "perfect" film. Well... that's because the Slashdotters were cheerleaders for MS getting nickled and dimed by every stupid little application maker who was whining about MS adding more applications into the base OS.
What I can't understand is why they don't pule when Apple starts adding features to OSX. Oh wait, I know... it's because they're short sighted hypocrites.
I am someone appauled that some of you still dont get it. Google's bitching to Redmond is the exact same thing as if they went to Torvalds say "We want in or we cry to Mommy". If you code your own OS, but by George you better not have an integrated file search program or you might find Google knocking down your door. Are YOU obligated to provide Google anything? Of course you are not, and neither should Microsoft.
Google capitalized on some areas where Microsoft's offerings were lackluster or nonexistent. Thats cool.
Now the gravy train has run out and Google shouldnt have a case. Its offerings are not as great as Microsoft's and Microsoft should not be forced into supporting it. As long as they dont break patent laws, let them do whatever the hell they want since it is legally their code.
For the record I would love to see each and every Windows OS replaced with Linux.
Read this and come back: http://planetlinux.no-ip.org/
Rumor has it that Yahoo will not have an independent search engine for long if News Corp takes stake in them, supposedly the search will be outsourced using Google's search index, like it was in the old days when Yahoo was an actual popular "search engine"...and in my experience Microsoft and Google's search engines turn up results that are way better than Yahoo's in regards to relevance...and Live and Google actually turn up nearly the same thing. Google is just more comfortable and faster. Live used to have this AJAX interface where you never had to change pages when it was in beta, I actually liked that feel. As far as I know they no longer offer that though. The only problem with Live I really have is that Google crawls many many more pages. I think Google has secured a huge chunk of the search market with Gmail, which still remains the easiest to use email service, at least in my opinion.
Back in the day a disk came that had your browser (netscape) when you signed up for internet service. Nowadays your DSL/cable modem still comes with a disc in most cases, so why not have an easily installable firefox, netscape, or opera, whatever on there?
Wow, now I know who for sure not to hire when I need an attorney. ...tho curiously, according to the california bar association, he hasn't been eligible to practice law since 1/1/01. ...Plus, there's this other little thing: he doesn't appear to know what he's talking about.. Forgive me if I find this guy less than credible. (and of course, since I'm posting AC, you shouldn't take my word for it. Look for yourself.)
I am still not able to understand why has Google not yet come up with a version of Google Desktop for Linux.
Something is getting lost in all this talk about searching. Google is not really a "search" company, they are a targeted advertising company. Searches are just a means to build profiles on us, as is gmail. Microsoft and Google are fighting over who gets to profile us and collect the targeted advertising revenue streams.
I get that Google's peeved and everything -- but since when did it become improper for an OS to index the harddrive? Why should Microsoft allow that to be disabled?! What, then, if GDS is uninstalled later on and Vista search doesn't start back up, for example? It just seems like a basic thing that should be part of an OS.
While you do have some valid points, remember that Google is at the care an ADVERTISING company. Their prime revenue comes from the huge volume of ads embedded in individual pages, not directly through search.
Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers
To paraphrase a quote from a certain movie/book:
... but it is NOT this day! This day, we FUD! We come after all that you hold dear, Men of Redmond!"
"Men of Redmond, my brothers! I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me. A day may come when they call Google an illegal monopoly... when we run around trying to defend ourself, wondering how in Arda we are going to sell our shiny new product
Hey, where are all the replies? Did iluvcapra's facts get in the way of your argument?
The problem is that Microsoft is (ab)using its market dominance in order to kill a product (Google Desktop) by replicating it in a new version, and then making it harder for the original to operate/compete.
I think it's despicable behavior that needs to be cracked down upon. Abusing your near-monopoly position in order to cheaply undercut competition is not acceptable. The end-result will be inferior products, as competition is stifled when the OS locks out competing products. And no matter whether Google or Microsoft is the most evil or childish, it's the end result and the lawfulness that matter.
Stop the brainwash
Have been a microsoft hater long enough to recognise a new one emerging. I'm sure that if microsoft allows an external search engine to run on vista, that is good enough. No, you cannot disable vista's indexing. And why should you ? If Google wants to prove that they have a better desktop search algorithm, let them take the small step of creating a market for desktop OSs in the first place.
Will Google ever allow an external search engine to run from within their "OS" - I mean, their webpage ? Can I use, for example, the super smart Mobissimo for travel search rather than stupid, one-size-fits-all google.com search ?
Strange to hear words like "trust" from a company that has all your personal details - carefully classified, indexed and available at the tap. And not just personal details - also, your country - where are the airports, the power stations, the nuclear installations - and oops, also the exact positioning of your home !
I think the pot is calling the (gray) kettle black. Not that microsoft is an angel, but surely Google is not an angel either. If I have to choose between the lesser of the (d)evils, I'd rather go the redmond way.
One sentence : Google, cease and desist
I think I should sue google....
I want to be able to use my own search-algorithm inn Google.
I want to be able to use Microsoft Outlook in my gmail !
I want to be able to use the MSN network in Googletalk..
Obviously I should be allowed to decide what and how things work in Google software and solutions, that's obvious.
Well, come now. Tell me you didn't expect - "install linux" as a response to this?!
... or something): If you buy a car with 4 seats and only use 2 do you complain that the company welded the seat stanchions in?
Optional - check, you don't have to buy a MS OS.
Removable - check, logically and physically removable.
So I'm also going to go with a car analogy just to finish off nicely (incidentally in Soviet Russia your posts finish you off with some hot grits
So whenever I visit google.com, I can freely chose what search engine I'm searching with?
Everyone is saying Google is in the wrong here, but I can't see how. Google isn't saying Vista shouldn't include a search engine, it's saying it should be possible to replace it with a competing search engine. At the moment (if I read this right, I dunno for sure I dont have Vista) you can install Google's Desktop search, but Vistas search will continue to index thus slowing the computer down. To any non-tech-savy user this is going to look like Google's software is at fault, but the system is actually doing twice as much.
Google is right to kick up a fuss about this, coz M$ has pretty much (indirectly) stopped people using Google software by using their OS monopoly.
Ponder me this riddle:
What search would you rather use:
1.) a search designed by a company that makes money by selling you an OS, and therefore includes a search engine as a feature to help sales, or
2.) a search designed by a company that makes money by saving your search results and serving you targeted spam?
For that matter, www.live.com is providing more refined search results that Google lately, with less crap and more relevant links. I still cross-check stuff on Google sometimes, but it hasn't been my primary search for a few weeks.
It kind of scares me how Google's attitudes have been changing recently, since I love and am tightly bound to GMail, and I'm not sure how much longer I can trust it. And changing primary email addresses can be a ton of trouble, what with all of the people who can't remember where to mail me at anyway.
And for the record, you couldn't pay me to install Google Desktop Search. I'd rather have a virus.
Open up an API and the race to have the default integrated web search will be on. MS are certainly holding back for fear of legal repercussions. However if Google could replace WDS with GDS + web results, what would stop Microsoft from enhancing WDS? SO open it up, I'll be happy to have WDS include the web! Google's Adobe and Dell payoffs are giving Google an advantage, but if such an integrate GDS showed adverts, or even scanned local files and show related adverts (as Googlemail does) I can see a lot of people quickly out of GDS. More so if it starts reporting search results and keywords back to Google, though then I would hope that Vista reports abnormal malware behaviour offers to block it... Of course, there is a slim chance Google would do a good job.
Linus Thorvalds demands that MS allow installation of an alternative kernal in Windows, claiming Microsoft's current insistence on using its own kernal limits consumer choice.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
And if Microsoft were to use the strategy you suggest, how is that any different from MSFT leveraging their desktop monopoly to gain share in the Internet search space, something they've been doing very poorly at thus far? Just because Google has a dominant share doesn't make an action like that of Microsoft's legal.
Which one's MS and which one's Google...
I'm not sure Google cares that much about desktop search per se. They probably think they can do a better job of it than Microsoft, but assuming Vista provided equal access to the desktop search database, I don't thing Google would care that much.
The real point, and where Vista *is* anticompetitive is that the built-in search wants to integrate Microsoft's version of Internet search into the built-in desktop search viewer. Internet search is not a feature of the OS - or any desktop OS I know of, and there's no reason Microsoft should be able to use their desktop monopoly to make it look like their internet search is built-in while other engines are added on. In the light of past anticompetitive behavior and agreements, that's not legal.
It appears that the hooks between desktop search and an internet search engine *have* been built into Vista, and there's no good reason other than the anticompetitive one for the relevant API's to be limited to Microsoft.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
No microsoft actually stole the code. One of the authors of the original Stacker used his wife's birthday as a magic number in one place, which also oddly appeared in microsoft's implementation. After microsoft was caught they made a deal with Stacker.