DOJ To Oversee Windows 7 Development

MrKaos writes "Windows 7 is already being reviewed by U.S. government technical appointees. Under the terms of Microsoft's November 2001 Justice Department settlement, and final court judgment issued about a year later, a government-sanctioned 'Technical Committee' has been formed to oversee Windows development. The TC is responsible for ensuring that Microsoft complies with the terms of the final judgment, investigating complaints about Microsoft abuses and regularly reporting on the company's compliance."

Comments

Looking forward to this

[edwebdev]

I have been waiting for a built-in Windows National Threat Advisory widget for so long.

too far

[youngdev]

does this not bother anyone else? Why is our government so powerful that it can involve itself in development of a commercial product by a private company? Do we not realize that by endorsing this, we are inviting government to get involved in more an more areas of out lives. Why not regulating what types of products you can build as a developer? This is insane. I cannot believe that my fellow slashdotters think this is ok. Government has gone too far.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:You're kidding?

[UnknowingFool]

This reminds me of Katrina...how do you make a huge disaster even worse? Throw some incompetent federal bureaucracy into the mix.

There fixed that for you. Bureaucracy in itself isn't bad. The problem with FEMA was that it was run by idiots who, over the years, drove away all the competent people. FEMA for the most part did a good job with the 1996 Midwest floods, Nor Cal earthquake, and Sept. 11. By the time of Katrina, who was in charge of FEMA: A lawyer who had no experience in emergency management, no experience running a large organization, and may have exaggerated or falsified his resume. Also the federal government in its wisdom decided to merge the previously small and independent FEMA into the huge conglomerate that is the Department of Homeland Security while reducing its funding.

Re:I am _so_ calling this one:

[morgan_greywolf]

Pssst. DoJ had oversight of Vista, too, and it turned out just f...uhhh...oh. Nevermind. Nothing to see here, move along

Re:Not nearly far enough

[jeiler]

Maybe you shouldn't be commenting about things that you have no clue about.

Well, there goes Slashdot's whole purpose for existence.

Re:I am _so_ calling this one:

[darkmeridian]

We can hate Microsoft but as a libertarian, I find this development scary. Getting the federal government involved in the design and manufacture of a product is unwarranted and is akin to precrime. The US Government should leave Microsoft's development of Windows 7 alone. If it turns out to have anti-competitive effects, then the government can punish Microsoft for it. Everyone may say that would be too little, too late, but preemptive strikes are un-American. (And besides, we can always break MS up if it keeps pushing out monopolistic products.)

Re:I am _so_ calling this one:

[pmbasehore]

We can hate Microsoft but as a libertarian, I find this development scary. Getting the federal government involved in the design and manufacture of a product is unwarranted and is akin to precrime. The US Government should leave Microsoft's development of Windows 7 alone. If it turns out to have anti-competitive effects, then the government can punish Microsoft for it. Everyone may say that would be too little, too late, but preemptive strikes are un-American. (And besides, we can always break MS up if it keeps pushing out monopolistic products.)

As much as I would love to see a version of Windows that actually follows applicable laws before legal action is taken against it, I shudder to think of the precedent that this sets. If the government doesn't like/doesn't get enough kickbacks from a company, then all of a sudden their entire design and manufacturing process is subject to unwarranted government intervention.

As a republican, I find this sort of increased government intervention frightening.

darkmeridian has a great point, too--we can always break Microsoft up if the monopolistic policies do not stop. It would likely even be easier to separate than Ma Bell was in the 80s--Microsoft peripherals, Microsoft software, Microsoft gaming, etc etc.

Just my $0.02.

Re:I am _so_ calling this one:

[LWATCDR]

"We can hate Microsoft but as a libertarian, I find this development scary. "
That is okay I find libertarians scary.

This is part of the punishment that Microsoft received. A pretty ineffective one if you ask me but still one of them.
This isn't a precrime this is probation.

Re:I am _so_ calling this one:

[bberens]

Everyone may say that would be too little, too late, but preemptive strikes are un-American. I disagree on two counts. First, this is not a preemptive strike. This is the punishment for past wrongdoings. I would liken it to being on parole. The 'police' watch over you very carefully for a while to make sure you keep your nose clean. Secondly, it's no longer correct to suggest that preemptive strikes are un-American. That has been our standing military policy since at minimum 5 years, and arguably longer than that. It is in fact, you, who are un-American. (even if I agree with your stance).

Re:I am _so_ calling this one:

[Anonymous Coward]

As a republican, I find this sort of increased government intervention frightening. Then maybe you should stop calling yourself a republican.