Slashdot Mirror
Google Makes Case to Join Microsoft Antitrust Case
Rob writes "Computer Business Review magazine is reporting that Google has filed papers with the US
district judge overseeing Microsoft's compliance with its 2002 antitrust settlement,
outlining why it believes it has a special interest in helping
to ensure Microsoft remains in compliance. The judge has declined Google's assistance. From the article: 'Google had complained that the search engine built into Vista constituted "middleware" under the terms of the antitrust settlement and that Microsoft was therefore extending its desktop monopoly into a new market. While Microsoft insisted Google's complaint is "without merit" it did agree in late June to make a number of changes to its Vista search engine with Windows Vista Service Pack 1 to give rival desktop search software, including Google Desktop, a more level playing field.'"
funny how Microsoft can constantly damage competitors products, say their are sorry, and then take close to a year before the actual fix is pushed out. It reminds me of something I saw years ago. You know how Microsoft hates Java and all it means, well developers love it and Microsoft was refusing to make an JDBC interface to their MS SQL Server database. There were 3rd parties doing it and even an open source version IIRC, and finally Microsoft was pressured by customers to build a JDBC driver for their database. The only problem, they stated it would be released to beta in something like 8 months and release a few months later. I think it took over 12 months before it was actually released.
So remember folks, everything Microsoft does is designed to promote and protect the Windows operating system. IMO.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
I used to have respect for them. Their attitude towards MS seemed to be "bring it on!" I guess Steve Jobs is the only who is still willing to take on the giant in the market place without the government help. It does seem that those who win legal cases against MS lose to them in the market place soon after. I am not really saying that there is a causality there -- just a correlation. Even Apple took its biggest market share hit right after their we-invented-windows law suit (although Apple lost that one). Anyway, I just wanted to say, it's time for Sergei to start throwing some chair instead whining to the government.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Microsoft sucks, Google Rocks. In five years, we'll be saying Google Sucks, and someone else (new guy) rocks. The more things change.... the same.
New Music!
I never understood the whole Netscape thing. The guy that was paid by the US government to create a free browser, Mosaic, turns around and starts a company to sell a browser based on one that the US govt was giving away for free, then complains that browsers should not be given away for free.
I understood the concern about MS forcing vendors to bundle Office if they wanted a good deal on Windows and all that, but the Netscape issue always was the one that made the news. I think a lot of average people tended to side with MS because that is all they heard about.
This gesture was a really nifty way of Google telling Microsoft:
"Comply with your settlement, or we will force you to do so."
Squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that. I'm sure if no one had complained about the whole Vista search thing, the DoJ would never have taken any issue with it at all. Or, if they had, we'd certainly never know about it.
The guy that was paid by the US government to create a free browser, Mosaic, turns around and starts a company to sell a browser based on one that the US govt was giving away for free
While I'm sure some code and ideas came with Andreeson, I'm given to understand the actual codebases for Navigator and Mosaic were rather different (and indeed, if anybody's browser is based on Mosaic, you could argue it's IE, as it's a direct descendant of the Mosaic codebase under a deal between MS and U of Illinois).
then complains that browsers should not be given away for free.
I don't think that was Netscape's complaint. What they seemed to be worked up about was Microsoft *preventing* Netscape from being given away for free. In particular, in the OEM channels, and where they could, by making deals with ISPs. Basically, the automatic distribution channels.
Netscape may well have shot itself in the foot even if none of that had happened, but it certainly didn't help at all.
Tweet, tweet.
>>I guess you learnt that the hard way.
Yep. It was kind of a bummer because I thought I might get some easy money.
In reality it wasn't really that big of a deal. The program was just some project I did to teach myself C++, and I thought I would try to sell some shareware copies and maybe make some beer money. It wasn't anything special, but I was selling it real cheap and that was probably what they wanted to stop. It was a weird sensation though when the president of the company goes from blowing smoke up your ass one day to never returning your calls the next. I would periodically check the computer stores for about a year later, but I only ever saw one title from that company and it was something else entirely. They probably wouldn't have sold many copies even if they tried.
Allways talk to a lawyer, AND talk to one that knows what's going on.