Slashdot Mirror


Russia Launches Anti-trust Probe of Microsoft

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Russia's state anti-monopoly service said on Thursday it had launched a probe of Microsoft over cutbacks in supplies of its Windows XP operating system in Russia. The agency said it thought Microsoft had violated antimonopoly legislation by cutting delivery of Windows XP operating system to Russia both separately and pre-installed on personal computers, as well as in its pricing policy on the product. It said it would consider the case on July 24, 2009."

221 comments

  1. Russia launches... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I read the first two words I nearly had a heart attack, since the other launches lately have been NK testing missiles.

    1. Re:Russia launches... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 3, Funny

      When I read TFA I nearly had a heart attack, as NYCL posted something which has nothing to do with the media industry!

    2. Re:Russia launches... by cheftw · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Is it sad that you expected to hear about the potential outbreak of WW3 on /. of all things?

      --
      Always back up, never back down. ---- Think you're cool 'cos your uid is prime? Take mine, modulo the one digit integers
    3. Re:Russia launches... by sznupi · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It's not like Russia isn't the country with highest number of non-military launches in history. Heck, they had even exclusively resupplied the ISS when Shuttles were grounded...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    4. Re:Russia launches... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NYCL posted something which has nothing to do with the media

      Huh? Microsoft products are delivered via media just as much as Sony's (for example) are. Even if you were using "media" as a weird synonym for "entertainment" (or "culture") it would seem to be as much applicable to Microsoft as to the companies NYCL usually takes an interest in. In fact even if you meant to say "music industry", Microsoft would be more than tangentially involved.

    5. Re:Russia launches... by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 4, Funny

      NYCL posted something which has nothing to do with the media

      Huh? Microsoft products are delivered via media just as much as Sony's (for example) are. Even if you were using "media" as a weird synonym for "entertainment" (or "culture") it would seem to be as much applicable to Microsoft as to the companies NYCL usually takes an interest in. In fact even if you meant to say "music industry", Microsoft would be more than tangentially involved.

      Nah. My interest in this one is just a sporting one. Microsoft v. Russia? You gotta love that one.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    6. Re:Russia launches... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      In the red corner, weighing in at 190 lbs, Prime Minister, former President, and Leningrad's Own Senior Judo Champion Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin!

      In the blue corner, weighing in at 240 lbs, Steve Ballmer, CEO and Chair Thrower, looking radiant in his Polonium-laced wrestling gear!

      Two men enter the ring, only one leaves alive!

    7. Re:Russia launches... by blind+biker · · Score: 0, Redundant

      In the red corner, weighing in at 190 lbs, Prime Minister, former President, and Leningrad's Own Senior Judo Champion Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin!

      In the blue corner, weighing in at 240 lbs, Steve Ballmer, CEO and Chair Thrower, looking radiant in his Polonium-laced wrestling gear!

      Two men enter the ring, only one leaves alive!

      This is one rare occasion when an AC has a worthwhile comment :) I particularly liked the "polonium-laced wrestling gear".

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    8. Re:Russia launches... by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      I've seen NYCL post a few intercontinental ballistic missives though.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    9. Re:Russia launches... by SolusSD · · Score: 1

      "Russia launches Anti-" at that point I perked up a bit.

  2. In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    In Soviet Russia, Microsoft probes YOU!

    1. Re:In Soviet Russia... by interkin3tic · · Score: 1, Redundant

      ... I'm too late. I had hope after seeing the first post was about launches. Alas. In soviet russia, anonymous coward posts YOU first.

    2. Re:In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      epic

  3. I thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... in Russia, Microsoft would launch the probe! /Slashdot has been lying to me....

    1. Re:I thought... by B_SharpC · · Score: 0

      Monopolies are terrible. Both of those.

      --
      Score & Karma: SASA: Slashdot Approval Seekers Anonymous
  4. ...Profit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    After so many other countries are getting on the whole anti-monopoly bandwagon, why should Russia be left out of the money?

    1. Re:...Profit! by vgerdj · · Score: 1

      Ironic, the country that brought us the grand monopoly - communism, is trying to stop a monopoly. Marx and Lenin are definitely rolling over ....

    2. Re:...Profit! by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 1

      Ironic, the country that brought us the grand monopoly - communism, is trying to stop a monopoly. Marx and Lenin are definitely rolling over ....

      As are we all.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  5. Did you know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The Russian state anti-monopoly service is itself a monopoly.

    And you cant bring the Parker Brothers game into Russia for fear it might contact the anti-monopoly service, creating a huge explosion.

    1. Re:Did you know? by Elektroschock · · Score: 1

      Microsoft and its standards shysters were quite succesful with Open XML and prevented the National Operating System of Russia. Now the next opportunity to cash in for Russian officials.

    2. Re:Did you know? by jank1887 · · Score: 1

      no, not a huge explosion. just self annihilation.

    3. Re:Did you know? by selven · · Score: 1

      They should show the rest of the world how fair they are by fining themselves 900 million dollars.

  6. What about Gazprom? by an.echte.trilingue · · Score: 4, Funny

    Talk about Goliath versus Goliath. The successful monopolist versus... the slightly less successful monopolist who can rewrite its own legal system. Time to invest in popcorn.

    --
    weirdest thing I ever saw: scientology advertising on slashdot.
    1. Re:What about Gazprom? by BeardedChimp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's worse, Gazprom is state controlled and so Russia actually encourages its monopoly by helping to extort foreign companys.

      I can understand the thinking though, the relevant analogy would be if there was a car company with 90% monopoly with the other 10% not being compatible with the petrol. The car company brings out a new more expensive model while refusing to sell the old model and stopping manufacture of old parts. Nobody has a choice since the other cars won't run on their fuel and so the company can keep forcing upgrades.

    2. Re:What about Gazprom? by hosecoat · · Score: 0, Troll

      After the EU fine, all other countries can smell a new revenue stream.

    3. Re:What about Gazprom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that BadAnalogyGuy's job?

    4. Re:What about Gazprom? by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 0

      I think GM, Chrysler, and Ford should be sued by these same people for colluding to discontinue 1960s-era muscle cars. This has driven the price of such units up significantly due to continuing demand and stopped production.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    5. Re:What about Gazprom? by Patch86 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No one forces you to stop using 1960s muscle cars. If you owned one, you can continue to own it forever. You can also legally maintain and service it, and it is compatible with still-available fuels.

      Taking away XP is a little different. Whole countries rely on Windows to function. If you pulled the Windows rug out from under Russia (or anyone else) it'd be a train wreck. Without major (MAJOR) hardware upgrades, Vista isn't an option for your average East European lesser-government-agency-office. And refusing to license, support, or open-source (thus allowing self-support) XP when there is no easy alternative is essentially leaving Vista as the only option.

      If you were a national government, and you were being told "Pay billions in licensing and hardware upgrades for no reason OR ELSE" by a monopoly company, you'd be reaching for the anti-trust box too.

    6. Re:What about Gazprom? by caluml · · Score: 3, Informative

      No one forces you to stop using 1960s muscle cars. If you owned one, you can continue to own it forever. You can also legally maintain and service it, and it is compatible with still-available fuels.
      ... snip ...

      Taking away XP is a little different. Whole countries rely on Windows to function.

      How so?

      No one forces you to stop using Windows XP. If you owned XP, you can continue to own XP forever. You can also legally maintain and service it, and it is compatible with still-available software.

    7. Re:What about Gazprom? by bkpark · · Score: 1

      Yes, this smacks of the joke: "Don't steal. The government hates competition."

      Government—especially Russia!—hates monopolists because, well, it wants to be the monopoly and with monopolists around, it can't be.

    8. Re:What about Gazprom? by Patch86 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Usability of XP is a lot more than just having it.

      For one, security. Security threats march forever onward, and are kept at bay in the long run by MS patching up the various breaches. When they stop doing that, XP stops being useful to anyone who desires a secure computing environment (eg, national governments).

      For two, new licences. Large organisations are forever gradually replacing hardware, reformatting old hardware, and generally altering their computing setup gradually over time. If MS will no longer license you to install their OS, you'll be forced to replace it with something else (see GP).

      For three, compatibility. If MS is pushing an OS that has fundamental difference in the way it interacts with hardware, drivers and the like will be different. The more pressure MS puts on obsoleting XP, the less likely it is to be compatible with new hardware, software and APIs.

      None of this applies to your car. The only thing your car needs to interact with is fuel (still available 40 years on) and spares (still, you guessed it, available 40 years on). A well maintained 1960s car is exactly as useful now as it was when it was made, capable of all of the exact same things. The same can't be said of an obsoleted OS.

    9. Re:What about Gazprom? by el+americano · · Score: 1

      All your computers need are electricity. If nothing changes, they'll keep working. XP security support will continue until 2014, so that's not an issue yet either. The Russians knew how long XP was going to be supported when they bought it. That EOL date has been pushed out since then, so they already got more than they bargained for. What excuse do they have for not maintaining their computing infrastructure? If they don't want to buy Vista, they don't have to, but they shouldn't expect the alternatives to be free.

      --
      Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
    10. Re:What about Gazprom? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      No one forces you to stop using Windows XP. If you owned XP, you can continue to own XP forever.

      You can't own XP unless you're Microsoft. You can only buy a license to run it. Terms of license are in the shrink wrap, and you agree to them in order to run XP. Microsoft sets the conditions. People click past them, and generally ignore them* until they have to hit the courts. Isn't this fun?

      *Does not apply to unhappy sysadmin or responsible CIO. They tend to worry about licenses. A lot.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  7. In soviet russia... by worip · · Score: 1, Funny

    we probe you!

    --
    A picture is worth exactly 1024 words.
  8. Just plain stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From TFA: ""Analysis of the market for various operating systems shows that the transfer to the new Windows Vista operating system is occurring while demand for the previous operating system, Windows XP, continues," the service said."

    Well isn't that special. So Company X is under obligation to indefinitely support product Y as long as there is demand for it? I think not.

    1. Re:Just plain stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Support : no
      Allow to be available : I would say yes.

      IMO, when they stop selling it, it should be open season on it.

    2. Re:Just plain stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, to pirate it? Yeah, because there's not enough botnets out there. Tech's advancing. You can't expect people to continue to code 32 bit applications because there's people who can't bear to let go of their fucking precious OS, can you?

    3. Re:Just plain stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Yes, because vista made such a dent in that. Also, XP has security updates for at least 5 more years.

      2. Yes, because vista and 7 are 64-bit only.

    4. Re:Just plain stupid... by Pentium100 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, like 64bit OS will stop people from opening that attachment or downloading Antivirus2015 and running it.

      Also, people will code 32bit apps, because they are more compatible (runs on both 32bit ant 64bit systems), while 64bits is only useful if your app uses a lot of RAM or CPU. There is no point for a 64bit CD/DVD recording software, media player and browser. 64bits can be useful for games, photoshop and video editing software.

      If I understand correctly, to make a 32bit app from 64bit (or vice versa) you need to recomplie it, it's not like you need to rewrite it.

    5. Re:Just plain stupid... by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      If the company does not have a monopoly, nobody cares, it's their problem if they do not want our money anymore.

      However, Microsoft has a monopoly and a lot of companies/people depend on Windows XP, so MS has to make Windows XP available for purchase (or stop crying about piracy). It's the same if the power company, which has a monopoly, stopped supplying power to its customers stating that now everybody has to get new wiring installed, also they will change the voltage and/or frequency so that everyone has to pay for new wires and buy transformers/frequency converters conveniently sold by the same power company. They have the monopoly, get money for the electricity, can change the price of energy once a year (after an approval of the government which sets a limit on how much profit the power company can make) and have to keep supplying power.

    6. Re:Just plain stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2. Yes, because vista and 7 are 64-bit only

      Tell that to my 32-bit copies of Vista Business and Windows 7 RC1.

    7. Re:Just plain stupid... by scamper_22 · · Score: 1

      ideally...

      Having worked on a few such projects... in order to take advantage of more ram, you often cross memory limits that your previous 32bit system did not.

      I worked in memory imaging for example. When dealing with huge datasets, we converted to 64bit... and started dealing with 7 gig datasets. Suddenly, the performance starts to be a factor. You often need to revisit that.

      Not to mention much code assumed 32 bit its, especially some older networking code...

      Let's not even get into Microsoft's directory/registry structure for 32 vs 64 bit programs.

    8. Re:Just plain stupid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No point in a 64 bit media player? Try playing 1080 HD content and look at your CPU usage.

      To say that 64 bit coding isn't useful is . . . shortsighted.

    9. Re:Just plain stupid... by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      About 50% on all 4 cores. This is 1080p h264 video playing on 2x Opteron 270 (2x2GHz), which is a bit old by current standards.

      Anyway, I believe all current video cards can decode HD video, so my CPU usage would lower if I had a better card than my HD2900XT.

      64bit coding is useful for big programs (or ones that need to process huge amounts of data, like a video encoder), while a media player can be 32bits, access the video card for video decoding (audio decoding can be done on 32bit CPUs) and stay small.

      I wouldn't use a media player or CD/DVD writing program that needed >2GB RAM. Even for buffers, that's too much.

  9. Anti-monopoly? by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While Microsoft obviously engages in a lot of monopolistic practices and I strongly dislike them for this, Russia's reasoning seems rather flawed.

    While yes, it sucks that Windows XP is being EOLed for a lot of people because Vista is worse than XP for many users (IMO anyone with less RAM than the 32-bit addressing limit because if there's anything modern that sucks more than Vista, it's 64-bit XP), products getting EOLed is a fact of life. I can't see any reason why EOLing a product would be monopolistic.

    Hell, if anything, it would be just the opposite - EOLing a popular product in favor of a less popular product is going to drive people towards the competition.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    1. Re:Anti-monopoly? by wjh31 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      because you can only afford to EOL a still very popular product when you are near-monopolistic enough to be able to force people to buy the more expensive alternative.

    2. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Because the market is asking for XP but MS is in a monopoly position and they can ignore the market request. Your statement of driving people towards the competition is only valid in a competitive market. The OS market is not competitive. In reality, Linux offerings are the only true competitor since hardware and licensing limits prevent someone from buying OSX and installing it on their computer and that makes up what? 1-2%?

      If the market were competitive, MS would be forced (by market forces) to keep selling XP over Vista, or see an exodus of customers. That is not possible here, because there is a monopoly actor.

    3. Re:Anti-monopoly? by tetromino · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because Russia's Federal Anti-monopoly Service (FAS) has broad powers that go far beyond regulating monopolies. For example, FAS are also responsible for regulating advertisements, foreign investments, government purchases, etc.

      IMHO, the Service's name is a bit of a misnomer; it should have been called something like the "Federal Economic Regulatory Service".

    4. Re:Anti-monopoly? by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Because Russia's Federal Anti-monopoly Service (FAS) has broad powers that go far beyond regulating monopolies. For example, FAS are also responsible for regulating advertisements, foreign investments, government purchases, etc.

      IMHO, the Service's name is a bit of a misnomer; it should have been called something like the "Federal Economic Regulatory Service".

      I was thinking a more accurate name would be more along the lines of "Committee for State Security".

    5. Re:Anti-monopoly? by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not necessarily. If they keep selling XP, they have to keep supporting XP. If they had to do that the same for any other OS favored by a substantial number of people, they'd have 90+% of the company on support. Which would mean less new features in the new OSes, and less reason to upgrade, leaving MS with a trail of incrementally upgraded OSes, all of them needing support, and people rarely buying any of them.

      By not supporting every OS since DOS 1.0, MS had the resources to make Windows 7 attractive to some customers, despite the cost of an upgrade. Arguing that monopoly practices are to blame is a joke; there are other OSes, and it is MS's choice to risk driving people to them by EOL-ing XP.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    6. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      If they don't offer what the market wants then they'll see fewer sales. Either more people pirate XP or people stop buying completely new PCs and just upgrade their old ones one piece at a time.

      It's not like they are going to brick all current computers running XP forcing people to upgrade to Vista. Sure it may be a dick move by MS, but I don't see it as being anti-competative. A company should be able to set it's own market mix.

      I would have thought most people on /. would actually welcome this news. MS could annoy more of its' customer base and send them looking for alternatives. Either piracy or a switch to Mac or Linix is less money to MS.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    7. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Federal Economic Control and Economic Service is more appropriate.

    8. Re:Anti-monopoly? by sweatyboatman · · Score: 1

      the argument that Microsoft is not a monopoly is moot. they are a monopoly, here in the US, in Europe and in Russia.

      the question is whether they are using their monopoly position to harm a country's citizens. in this case, it's fairly clear that they are.

      Vista's only competition in the market is XP (Windows NT, ME, 98, 95, etc are no longer competitive). Many users see XP as a better choice. So the only way that Vista can beat XP is if it takes a fall.

      That is, the consumers want XP. Microsoft thinks it will make more money if those consumers buy Vista. So Microsoft kills XP, knowing that its users will eventually knuckle under and buy an inferior product.

      --
      It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
    9. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      No one is suggesting that every niche OS, or old OS be supported. What IS being suggested is that a business that is refusing to sell a software package that is the single most wanted package is clearly abusing a monopoly. Pointing to DOS 1.0 is at best a strawman argument.

    10. Re:Anti-monopoly? by jank1887 · · Score: 1

      actually, not selling the product and not selling support on the product are two very different things. They could keep selling the product, but with a notice that the product is no longer supported by live customer service. Patch / update development (if any) could be limited to what gets developed for existing, paid service contracts, which don't have to be renewed.

      Granted, they aren't forcing upgrades (since people can keep XP if they want it), they're just ending sale of an older product. If this somehow forced people to upgrade, the case would be a slam dunk. As it is, seems like a tough sell.

    11. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call shenannigans.

      Plenty of companies have EOLed certain products/variants/whatever in order to push out new product - even if in the same "series"

      XP is "old" in OS standards. If MS doesn't want to sell it, no one can make them. Thought you open source 'tards would like that....instead you're siding with the government that allows the rip-off of music artists by letting companies sell MP3s for 10 cents each...

      Riiiiight

      MS Should give Russia the finger, pull all their licenses, and sue the bejeebus out of Russia. turn it around on em. Right before the pull the licenses, send out an automatic update that will shut down the systems after 30 days and change the desktop backgrounds to bright orange with an animated GIF of Bill Gates laughing at Stalin or something.

    12. Re:Anti-monopoly? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily. If they keep selling XP, they have to keep supporting XP. If they had to do that the same for any other OS favored by a substantial number of people, they'd have 90+% of the company on support. Which would mean less broken features

      fixed that for you.

      Seriously, some of the 'new features' are just crap designed to make most people point and say "ooh , shiny". Admittedly there are a few good bits in there, but they could have put them into XP if they really wanted to. They didn', they wanted you to give them your money to replace something that worked perfectly well.

      I think this is the big deal with XP, its got to the point where it is exactly enough for most people - including me where I run XP at work. The times are long past where you always needed to upgrade, the computing marketplace has finally matured, and one of the marks of a mature market is less change. Its the way things are, Microsoft needs top get with the plan and stop desperately trying to maintain its massive revenues at our expense.

    13. Re:Anti-monopoly? by chdig · · Score: 0

      a business that is refusing to sell a software package that is the single most wanted package is clearly abusing a monopoly

      How on earth can that be considered "abusing a monopoly"? XP is desired for low-powered and low memory computers, and is still being sold for them. For modern computers, the market has shown that consumers wish for an operating system with fancy graphic effects (see OSX, and the more popular managers for KDE/Gnome), with some levels of security (which XP lacks completely), and can take advantage of the latest technologies (dx10+, better driver handling,etc).

      With Win7, the speed/memory complaints about Vista will be wiped, and Microsoft will properly kill off XP so that we can begin to move forward and escape a technology that was created alongside IE6.

      How /. users continue to wish for an OS that is now ancient while OSX and Linux have long since surpassed it in so many respects is completely beyond me.

      But back to the point, holding the world back tech-wise to 2001 by continuing to push XP would not do anything whatsoever to imply Microsoft is no longer using monopolistic practices.
      --
      XP lover = luddite

    14. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because you can only afford to EOL a still very popular product when you are near-monopolistic enough to be able to force people to buy the more expensive alternative.

      This is exactly why MS should go back to putting the year in the name. I don't think Russia would admit to using Windows '98.

      Also, I.S.R... anti-monopoly anti-trusts anti-you!

    15. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what makes me laugh is uneducated drivel you are spouting. I have been using Vista Ultimate since I downloaded the final version from MSDN a couple of months before it was released to the public. Like any MS product the hardware vendors dropped the ball and did not do the homework necessary and lots of users had printers which no longer worked. And don't bitch to me the older programs no longer worked, get an updated version of your program or do what most people do , suck it up and realize that things change, and if you want to live in the past then you'd better get ready to be using an OS that will no longer be supported. Really none of my apple IIe programs seem to work on my new MAC?

      I am running a 6 year old dell with 2 GB of ram a 128 Mb video card and have had no problems with Vista. I have yet to see a blue screen. Anyone hear ever run into the issue where XP no longer recognizes your DVD or CD burner? Do any of you know how long this issue has been around for? Since day one, guess what, it is still happening. Just had to fix it for a friend this weekend. Funny thing is I have seen the same issue on a test machine I have which is dual booting XP and Vista. Guess what XP is clueless when it comes to me DVD burner, but Vista has never had an issue. And talk about speed, try burning something in XP, then do the some thing in Vista. Vista blows XP out of the water.

      And hell who wants an OS which is security conscience out of the box, we want a wide open hackable OS, like XP.

    16. Re:Anti-monopoly? by david_thornley · · Score: 0

      You're missing the point. Let's try a car analogy.

      Suppose Honda decided to come out with a Civic replacement that was more expensive, less responsive, and with considerably worse gas mileage. What would happen is that Honda would lose sales, which would go to its competitors. The Honda Vista would not sell well, and so the people who might have bought a Civic would buy something else from Toyota or Ford or somebody. After all, they couldn't buy a Civic, didn't want a Vista, and there were alternatives. This is how things work in a market with good alternatives.

      In this case, Honda has an incentive to keep the Civic going until they can improve (and perhaps rename) the Vista. This is good for consumers. It's pressure on Honda to make sure Honda produces cars people want, and it allows consumers to buy cars they like.

      Now, if Honda was the only manufacturer that made decent sedans, people would have no choice. They couldn't buy a Civic and needed a car, so they'd buy a Vista.

      This is bad for consumers. They can delay car purchases, or perhaps buy motorcycles or SUVs, but Honda isn't that badly hurt, doesn't have that great an incentive to produce cars people like, and the purchasers can't get what they want.

      This is the difference between a non-monopoly market and a monopoly market.

      In fact, there really isn't a viable alternative to Windows for many purposes, and so by stopping XP Microsoft is effectively forcing a number of people to buy Vista, even though they don't like it. That's what the Russians are complaining about.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    17. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love how one day Slashdot is all "*nix distro X" is so awesome it's better than any Microsoft product! Microsoft Sucks!
      ...
      and the next day Slashdot is all "There are no competitors to Microsoft, of course it's a monopoly!"

      Seriously, which is it? Is linux a competitor or not? You can't have it both ways.

    18. Re:Anti-monopoly? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      I can't see any reason why EOLing a product would be monopolistic.

      Having too much share of a given market is "being monopolistic" but that isn't illegal. Using your monopoly to undermine free trade or fix prices is illegal, but not "monopolistic". Before you tell us "Russia's reasoning seems rather flawed" shouldn't you at least comprehend the basic concepts behind what Russia is talking about?

    19. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ya and 98 was more popular than XP for a good 2 to 3 years after XP was released. And people swore it was faster than XP as well.

    20. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Thaelon · · Score: 1

      Arguing that monopoly practices are to blame is a joke; there are other OSes

      How is it a joke?

      Massive amounts of customers are requesting XP, but Microsoft simply denies them and forces Vista on them.

      Most businesses simply can't decide to deny their customers what they want and instead force them to pay more for the company wants to sell instead. In a market where there isn't a monopoly, the customers simply ditch that company and go to a competitor. Any time a company gets away with this, you have a clear and evident monopoly.

      In a free market with competition companies deliver what their customers want or they go out of business rather quickly.

      Bringing up DOS 1.0 is a straw man.

      --

      Question everything

    21. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give me a break. Nobody expects Microsoft to support every prior version. This is not what is being suggested. The fact that they are able to force the discontinuation of a product that is in demand and replace it by one that is avoided at all costs is evidence of a monopoly when market share is not lost to the competition. Only an illegal monopoly could put pull that off.

    22. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Dr.Syshalt · · Score: 1

      I think Federal Economic Control and Economic Service is more appropriate.

      Even better:

      Federal Economic Control Absolutely Limitless.

    23. Re:Anti-monopoly? by dhavleak · · Score: 1

      ??

      So you're saying something along the lines of:
      1) Linux sucks (or is not a viable alternative)
      2) Mac hardware is too expensive
      So MS must continue to sell XP?

      So if:
      1) Linux remains a non-viable alternative
      2) Mac hardware continues to be too expensive
      3) No other viable competitor turns up
      MS must never obsolete/discontinue support for/stop selling any OS they release in Russia?

      How the does this work? If Linux (or FOSS in general) can't nail what the market wants, and Apple can't nail what the market wants, we should go and penalize MS for it??

    24. Re:Anti-monopoly? by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      MS has run out of specific keysets for XP, so no, they cannot sell more.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    25. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      ...instead you're siding with the government that allows the rip-off of music artists by letting companies sell MP3s for 10 cents each...

      It doesn't matter, if they were like the RIAA they wouldn't give the royalties to the music artists anyway.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    26. Re:Anti-monopoly? by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      [...] they'd have 90+% of the company on support.

      That would still leave 10% of the company available for new features. That is still a lot of people.

      Now compare MS to Apple. How many people are working in each OS's divisions? I have no numbers but I am willing to bet on Microsoft winning this hands down.

      Now compare the number of OS releases over the last say five years, and the number of really new features added over those releases. Oh and maybe you may want to look at overall performance of the product. This one I'd say is a clear win for Apple.

      And then I'm not even talking about competitor #3: Linux. That's a bit less clear because of the community, can't say how many people working on what and so and many not working on it full time... but still the innovation I have experienced here over the last five years is enormous.

      So long story short: there is no reason why it is impossible for MS to keep supporting WinXP and in the meantime come up with new OS products that are full of innovation and give great performance. Considering the number of people working in that company, and knowing that they have the money to attract and retain the best of the best, the only reason why this is not happening is management failure, plain and simple. You may think of Steve Jobs and his obsessive micro-management style what you want, but the fact is that he is doing a great job at the helm of Apple and has helped the company grow and continue to grow. And Linux with all it's distributions is doing fantastic things without any central management at all. Microsoft on the other hand doesn't know anymore what to do obviously... the failure of Vista, the flop of the Zune, the meagre success of MSN (except maybe the chat service) and the Xbox consoles, the lack of real innovation in their Office suit beyond adding more and more obscure functions... I won't buy their stock anytime soon.

    27. Re:Anti-monopoly? by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Of course they can. Turn off WGA and CD key checking, or ship it with a crack. Software was sold for many years with no "keysets".

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    28. Re:Anti-monopoly? by yoprst · · Score: 1

      Most likely the reasoning was "Hey, everyone seems to get money from MS, why not us?". The rest is a smokescreen.

    29. Re:Anti-monopoly? by el+americano · · Score: 1

      It's called lock-in, bitch. The parent explained it poorly as no good alternative. He should've said no allowed alternative or no alternative period, in most cases.

      --
      Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
  10. In Other News by whisper_jeff · · Score: 0, Troll

    In other news, Russia announced that it was running out of money and would commence looking for new ways to generate funds.

    1. Re:In Other News by harryandthehenderson · · Score: 1

      Well they'd have to find better ways because any money they'd get from Microsoft would be a negligible drop in the bucket.

    2. Re:In Other News by whisper_jeff · · Score: 1

      Ok, I confess my joke wasn't the best joke evar but, really, it was just a joke...

  11. The tables have turned by orgelspieler · · Score: 0, Redundant

    How ironic. In the US, Microsoft probes YOU!!!! I know, I know... -1 Redundant.

  12. What? by Random2 · · Score: 1

    I don't know how to take this news....it looks to me like Russia is saying that it only uses Microsoft products, so they're taking legal action to get more...

    --
    "Our goal each year should be to increase the number of goals we set for ourselves!"
  13. Obligatory... by gillbates · · Score: 0, Redundant

    In Soviet Microsoft, Russia investigates you!

    /ducks...

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    1. Re:Obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell is a /duck? And yes, I am new here.

  14. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by Ihmhi · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, Chutzpah is a word derived from hebrew. The best english equivalent is "audacity", and it comes out as this. You can translate it here and hear what it sounds like.

    (Too bad Slashdot will inevitably mess up any attempt at a foreign language. The word comes out like this: "ÑмÐÐоÑÑÑOE")

  15. This actually sounds reasonable. by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I always thought bundling useful tools with an operating system(i.e. IE) was a poor example of leveraging a monopoly to corner a market. However, discontinuing support for old products to FORCE new ones on customers, that is leveraging a monopoly in an anti-competitive manner. This is a much more reasonable case to take against Microsoft's more shady practices.

    1. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 4, Interesting

      XP is a 9 year old OS. Even auto makers are only required to support the parts for their cars for 7 years. At what point isn't it an anti-trust violation to want to get rid of an aging product? 15 years? 30?

      There isn't a single Linux vendor that supports a 9 year old version of Linux without paid support, and Apple certainly doesn't support 9 year old versions of MacOS either.

    2. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by compro01 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't see anyone wanting to require Microsoft to keep supporting it (They're going to support it with security updates until 2014 anyways). I see people wanting Microsoft to be required to keep selling it.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    3. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by Elektroschock · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When you buy a product today it should be supported 7yrs onwards

    4. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by sunderland56 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Auto makers are required to support their cars for 7 years after the last new one is sold, not from the date of introduction.

      XP was available until 2008 (if I remember correctly), which would mean that if it was a car, it would have to be supported until 2015.

    5. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by sweatyboatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1. software is very different from car parts. a better metaphor would be Coke and New Coke.

      XP may be a 9 year old OS, but to many people it's a better OS than Vista. Vista is New Coke. The Coca-Cola company tried to insist on selling New Coke exclusively, but they alienated their existing customers. They went back to the original formula because New Coke was driving away customers to Pepsi and other competitors.

      If Coke was the only kind of soda, then we'd all be drinking New Coke today. Regardless of whether it was wanted by customers.

      That's what Microsoft did with Vista. Except there's no "Pepsi" competitor to force them to market their more desirable product.

      To answer your question, Microsoft can "get rid" of their aging product when they produce a new product that people want more than XP.

      --
      It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
    6. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by Translation+Error · · Score: 1

      When there's a viable alternative that people actually want, apparently, according to Russia. The article also only mentions selling (and supplying) XP, not supporting it.

      --
      When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
    7. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by xenolion · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see that myself and I don't get why. People liked VHS videos but I don't see people and countries sueing Sony or other makers of them to keep them going when there is newer products out there. All I see these lawsuits and probes are just ways to find something to get money off a huge company and make them look good to some person that doesn't get what it takes to move business along. All companies out there will cut off a product at some point and move on.

    8. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      According to your analogy, if Ford didn't change the design of the Mustang for 10 years, but continued to sell them for those ten years, then after 3 years they could stop selling parts?
      So, even though XP was first released 9 years ago, it was still their flagship OS until November 2006. I lean toward thinking that this action by the Russian government is unreasonable, but your analogy does not work.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    9. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by Tweenk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even auto makers are only required to support the parts for their cars for 7 years.

      If more than 60% of people had the same 9 year old model, they'd have to. Even if they didn't, somebody else would because it would be profitable to sell parts. When it comes to Windows, only Microsoft has the source code and can supply fixes, so it makes sense to force them to support their product, because lots of people are still using it and nobody else can do it.

      --
      Those who would give up liberty to obtain working drivers, deserve neither liberty nor working drivers.
    10. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 1

      I always thought bundling useful tools with an operating system(i.e. IE) was a poor example of leveraging a monopoly to corner a market.

      However, discontinuing support for old products to FORCE new ones on customers, that is leveraging a monopoly in an anti-competitive manner. This is a much more reasonable case to take against Microsoft's more shady practices.

      Anti-competitive means that it hurts the competition. How will discontinuing sales of XP hurt the competition?

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    11. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by sweatyboatman · · Score: 1

      I actually wouldn't be surprised if you could still find blank VHS tapes in Walmarts and other stores. (Wikipedia is my buddy)

      Still, the VHS format died because Sony et. al. made a legitimate case that DVD was a better format. People went out and bought DVD players and rented DVD movies and found that, you know what, it was a better experience over all.

      That has not happened with Vista.

      --
      It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
    12. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by twidarkling · · Score: 1

      Yes, because after they've been forced to keep selling it, THEN people will cry out for more support. Do you honestly expect it to stop there? "Hey, we made them keep selling it, even though they didn't want to. We have new users with no idea what to do, so why not make them support those new users?"

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
    13. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by xenolion · · Score: 1

      Around here its impossible to find a blank VHS. My whole point is all of this will not matter to Microsoft they will just move on. I am one that has Vista I do hate it thats why I have moved onto the Win7 RC much better of a product then Vista. XP 64 seemed like an after thought and doesn't run well for me. Guess we will see where Russia takes all of this in then end.

    14. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I traded my 1989 Chevy in 2006. I had no problem hetting parts or service for it until the day I traded it. Try getting patches for Windows 98!

      You can get support for a 9 year old version of Linux if you pay for it, but you can't get support for a 9 year old MS OS even if you pay for it.

    15. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by Jamie's+Nightmare · · Score: 0, Troll

      Still, the VHS format died because Sony et. al. made a legitimate case that DVD was a better format.

      LOL, yes, I fondly remember the day Sony called me down to their boardroom, sat me down and explained why DVD was a better format than VHS. Seeing a demo of a DVD player running at my local retailer had nothing to do with my purchase.

      That has not happened with Vista.

      Vista's uptake has been slower because PC sales, the driving factor behind OS purchases, have slowed. Any consumer who upgraded from Windows 98/ME to Windows XP made a signifigant move, in that they were now using an OS based on the NT kernel. That was the big reason to upgrade, but few people did upgrade. Instead, most people purchased new computers with XP already installed. Based on your previous gaff (see above) it's not that you don't understand how products are marketed, you don't understand the underlying forces which drive the market itself.

      --
      "When you see a unixer brainwashed beyond saving, kick him out of the door." - Xah Lee
    16. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 1

      Excellent points. Also there's the fact that software doesn't age. It might look dated, but the 1s and 0s on a new XP CD are just as useful as the original ones. Cars fall apart with use and age. They have a limited lifetime, even if you don't use them they will eventually oxidize and fall apart. Software is good until there doesn't exist any hardware left that is capable to run it. It doesn't matter how old the OS is, what is the determining factor is the number of people still using it, which is something about 60% usage share for XP. You absolutely right that MS weren't a monopoly, then Microsoft would be in no position to cut off supply of XP or they'd be left with the 24% usage share that Vista currently enjoys because everyone else would buy an alternative OS.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    17. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by jimicus · · Score: 1

      XP is a 9 year old OS. Even auto makers are only required to support the parts for their cars for 7 years. At what point isn't it an anti-trust violation to want to get rid of an aging product? 15 years? 30?

      There isn't a single Linux vendor that supports a 9 year old version of Linux without paid support, and Apple certainly doesn't support 9 year old versions of MacOS either.

      If a company which holds 20% of the market discontinues a product which is still responsible for 80% of their sales, the company is in trouble.

      If a company which holds 94% of the market discontinues a product which is still responsible for 80% of their sales, the market is in trouble.

    18. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Excuse me, but this is Russia you are talking about. They stopped producing the Lada 2106 only three years ago and this car was in continuous production for 30 fucking years!

      They still make Lada 2104 which came out in 1984!

      And the worst thing actually is, both these cars are just facelifts and variants of the licenced Fiat 124, rolled out in 1966.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    19. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There isn't a single Linux vendor that supports a 9 year old version of Linux without paid support, and Apple certainly doesn't support 9 year old versions of MacOS either.

      Slackware 8.1 came out in 2002 and it is still supported (still gets security updates). Actually, all versions since 8.1 to latest one (12.2) are supported.

    20. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anti-competitive means that it hurts the competition.

      No it doesn't. cartels are anti-competitive, and there isn't any competition at all.

    21. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh please how much more of it they have to buy? what do they do with it anyway

    22. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Perhaps when VHS machines and tapes are not sold anymore people will sue. For now VHS machines and tapes are still fairly easy to buy as there is a demand and a free market

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    23. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They still make cars from the 60's in Russia, so I'm not sure that's a good example there ;)

    24. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      In this case it appears to be not just the support, but also the sales of new licenses, which is also being stopped. Though if MS would be forced to sell new licenses still, then the seven-year support period would never start. Oh well they could print the licenses in 2005 and sell them as "old stock" maybe.

    25. Re:This actually sounds reasonable. by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 1

      Actually, software does age. Like the human body, old software is more susceptible to infection from viruses. This makes older software far more risky to use than newer software.

  16. gimmie back my gramophone! by spyrochaete · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So in Russia it's illegal for a company to sell a 10 year old product, even though that product will be 2 versions old this year? If we could make legal demands to sell retired products I'd still be eating Ninja Turtle cereal today.

    1. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by forsey · · Score: 1

      The difference is demand and a monopoly. There is still a massive demand for XP, but Microsoft ignoring that fact. In a normal case if a company stopped selling a popular product because they wanted to sell a new version the consumer would have to the choice to rebel and go to a different company. That would motivate the company to keep selling the old product. Because MS has a monopoly, (effective) there now no competitive motivation for them to keep selling it, so they won't. In your example "Ninja Turtle cereal" doesn't have near the demand that XP does, nor did it enjoy monopoly status. You can never forget that the rules change when it comes to monopolies.

    2. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by sweatyboatman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      two versions old? that's a metric? Vista's lifespan was what, a year and a half?

      XP is a good enough operating system. In my (admittedly limited) understanding, demand for XP is actually quite a bit higher than for Vista. (Though this seems to be borne out by things like people paying $100 more for a Vista license so they can downgrade to XP.)

      Replacing a very popular product with a much less popular product is corporate suicide (imagine if Toyota discontinued the Corolla line and replaced it with a Hummer line -- Honda would be very pleased). The only way a company could get away with this is if they are in a monopoly position. And it's reasonable to consider that an abuse of that monopoly power to do so.

      After all, Microsoft's monopoly does not give them the right to foist garbage upon their users year after year.

      My office has XP machines, I know they work with all my software and I the people here are comfortable with that OS. If "Windows 7" (like Vista) doesn't offer sufficient enhancements over XP, why should I be forced to purchase an inferior (for me) product in order to get a new computer?

      --
      It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
    3. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nobody relied on solely Ninja Turtle cereal to obtain their living. One could argue that XP is a vital component for a lot of businesses and that by artificially restricting it as MS is doing, you are forcing them to incur an unnecessary cost. This is essentially saying that MS is a utility service and their actions are analogous to the phone company forcing all land line users to purchase new land lines just because they are old (and not necessarily in need of replacement). I don't necessarily view this as correct, but MS doesn't have too much sympathy from me because they're ditching an OS that people want to buy and somewhat arbitrarily forcing people to buy a new one that isn't as fast.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    4. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by twidarkling · · Score: 1

      Except it's not really their fault that there's no other OS. Because there ARE other OSs. If people are that dead-set against Vista AND Win 7, they should just abandon MS all together. Move to a *nix system. If a company wants to stop selling a popular product, it's their business. Literally. Either people will move to the new product, or if there's legitimately no option (even though there is, in this case), then in this case, they can keep using the old one. After all, isn't there technically a limit on the number of copies of an OS that can be sold, which is roughly the number of computers "in the wild." Most computers recently bought will have the ability to upgrade to work well enough for most purposes for ages to come, so they don't need a new OS anyways. Their current copy is fine. Gamers might be SOL, but they should be upgrading to Vista/Win7 anyways for the new DX versions. The market can still correct. It's not as if people's copies are going to evaporate, requiring a new one. The sale of new computers will just take a hit, is all.

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
    5. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by spyrochaete · · Score: 1

      why should I be forced to purchase an inferior (for me) product in order to get a new computer?

      You're not forced into anything. You can buy Apple or enterprise Linux or compile your own kernel. Or, heaven forbid, you could upgrade to a newer, better, backward-compatible version of what you already have, for the same price you'd pay for the old version.

      Don't build your future on a foundation with an expiration date stamped on it. Stay agile and adaptable. A clock can tick on forever if you don't attach a timebomb to it.

    6. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by spyrochaete · · Score: 1

      Poor planning is not the fault of a company whose product was so fantastic that it was foolishly adopted as a panacea. Adapt or die. It's the law of the jungle.

    7. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by chdig · · Score: 1

      why should I be forced to purchase an inferior (for me) product in order to get a new computer?

      Why should the world be held back to a 2001 era technology (say Hi IE6!), with major security issues and no advantages over Windows 7, for years to come?

      XP will be supported well towards the middle of the next decade, which should be long after your office's machines are replaced. The longer they sell this now-ancient OS, the longer everyone will be tied to 2001 era technology. Do you remember how long it took for programmers and developers to finally get past the misery of supporting IE6?

      Put yourself as an IT manager in a device company 5 years from now. You've developed drivers for the latest Windows and OSX, and now can move to writing them for lesser known systems. Will you write drivers for XP, now 15 years old, but still used by millions because of idiotic anti-trust suits, or go ahead and support linux?
      --
      XP lover = luddite

    8. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      two versions old? that's a metric? Vista's lifespan was what, a year and a half?

      It's more like two years and a half, actually (the release was on January 30, 2007).

    9. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by babblefrog · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately for Microsoft, in this particular jungle, they are not the biggest predator.

    10. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poor planning is not the fault of a company whose product was so fantastic that it was foolishly adopted as a panacea. Adapt or die. It's the law of the jungle.

      Wait, there are jungles somewhere in Russia?

    11. Re:gimmie back my gramophone! by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      One could argue that XP is a vital component for a lot of businesses and that by artificially restricting it as MS is doing, you are forcing them to incur an unnecessary cost.

      Microsoft is not accused of artificialy restricting any legally licensed copy of XP, so no, one cannot argue what you are claiming.

      Your analogy would be valid if they caused XP to stop working. They didn't tho.. they just don't want to sell new licenses.

      Even DOS 1.0 still works.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
  17. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by Zashi · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It's spelled the same way. You just have to reverse/transpose a few consonants.

    --
    Skiffy is Spiffy, but Ort is tort.
  18. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    The word comes out like this: "ÑмÐÐоÑÑÑOE"

    It translates it to Swedish?

  19. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    (Too bad Slashdot will inevitably mess up any attempt at a foreign language. The word comes out like this: "ÑмÐÐоÑÑÑOE")

    Based on the timescale of the CSS conversion, we should be looking forward to UTF8 support before 2020. Hopefully, the classic (AKA "working") comments system will be restored as default by then also.

  20. they just need to search locally by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    took me all of 10 seconds to find 'allofxpsp3.com'

    (starting download now)

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    1. Re:they just need to search locally by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 2, Funny

      Please enjoy all the virus, spy-ware, add-ware, Trojans, and key-loggers included at no extra cost.

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    2. Re:they just need to search locally by MrMr · · Score: 1

      So it's the official version you mean?

  21. Waiting for bribes by sznupi · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you're referring to EU fines...they are absolutely insignificant pocket change for EU budget; they wouldn't even make a difference to most of its individual memberstates.

    In this case the amount of money would be similarly insignificant when it comes to contribution to Russian budget. OTOH...there are certianly few individuals who could forget the whole deal for some favours. That's how things work in post-soviet countries.

    In anycase, the claims are bogus, almost everybody runs pirated software in Russia.

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:Waiting for bribes by ArhcAngel · · Score: 2, Funny

      "In any case, the claims are bogus, almost everybody on Earth runs pirated software."

      Fixed that for you ;-)

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    2. Re:Waiting for bribes by InMSWeAntitrust · · Score: 1

      [A]lmost everybody runs pirated software in Russia.

      [citation needed]

    3. Re:Waiting for bribes by moon3 · · Score: 0, Troll

      You are right, also, EU fines are not originated by some EU entity, or by EU itself, as it is perceived. Local EU firms ring the bell at EU antitrust commission and want some other firm contested, mostly some big US corporation like Microsoft. Behind every EU antitrust fine is some local firm and their law team.

    4. Re:Waiting for bribes by sznupi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hey, with vast majority of EU fines being levied on European companies, can you really blame them for thinking that ALL companies operating in EU, not only local ones, should follow rules?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    5. Re:Waiting for bribes by tritonman · · Score: 1

      [A]lmost everybody runs pirated software in Russia.

      [citation needed]

      www.google.com

    6. Re:Waiting for bribes by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      It's true. You can believe me, I'm from Russia.

    7. Re:Waiting for bribes by yoprst · · Score: 1

      Cetainly not "almost everyone". Russian authorities are really fighting piracy for the last couple of years. Of course a)it's done with their usual level of competence and eagerness b)it's most likely the result of some (cough cough MS?) companies figuring out "how thing work in post-soviet countries", not a genuine desire of Russian authorities to protect intellectual property.

  22. Thanks Europe by BasharTeg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It appears that the European efforts have triggered a new trend whereby EVERY country a multinational corporation operates in that isn't its native country can start engaging in the MoneyGrab(tm) technique. I mean why let all those euros or rubles leave the country? Why not have companies come in, sell products, and then since you can't tax the hell out of them due to the WTO and the ensuing trade wars, instead just trump up some charges over being too succcessful and "tax" them that way.

    Can someone explain to me why this isn't a WTO issue and why these kinds of taxes... I mean fines aren't regulated under the trade agreements?

    And don't tell me how they're just trying to stop the evil monopolies. I'm fine with them fining the shit out of Microsoft for bad behavior as long as they're willing to donate 100% of the proceeds to charity. It's not about the behavior, it's about the money.

    1. Re:Thanks Europe by Elektroschock · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Because antitrust is about enforcement of competition rules as to create a free competitive market. WTO is concerned about barriers to free trade and the promotion of better competition. They basically have he same objective in trade.

      It is false that Microsoft is taxed or that money was a motivation for these policies. At least on the EU side the large fines occured because Microsoft refused to comply with the moderate sanctions and played stupid. It was the first company ever which did not comply with a ruling.

      And don't forget that the US let them off the hook, just because Bush was reelected.

      In fact competition authorities don't get money or staff for the imposition of fines but rather strong lobbying and a lot of work. They would prefer to arrest offenders but criminal sanctions are not at their disposal. Deterrent fines is all they can issue and the way Microsoft communicates demonstrates that they do not show any respect.

    2. Re:Thanks Europe by apdyck · · Score: 1

      Can someone explain to me why this isn't a WTO issue and why these kinds of taxes...

      Quite simple, really. The WTO collects royalties on the use of MoneyGrab(tm).

      --
      .sig
    3. Re:Thanks Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't like the game, you are free to leave.

    4. Re:Thanks Europe by sznupi · · Score: 2, Informative

      It appears you have no idea what you're talking about.

      So...again:

      a) those money are pocket change to EU budget

      b) EU primarily fines...European companies! Do you suggest "multinationals" should be given some slack?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    5. Re:Thanks Europe by timeOday · · Score: 1

      It appears that the European efforts have triggered a new trend whereby EVERY country a multinational corporation operates in that isn't its native country can start engaging in the MoneyGrab(tm) technique.

      Is there a trend of suing all multinationals, or just a trend of everybody suing Microsoft? If the latter, maybe, possibly, it has something to do with Microsoft?

    6. Re:Thanks Europe by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      It appears that the European efforts have triggered a new trend whereby EVERY country a multinational corporation operates in that isn't its native country can start engaging in the MoneyGrab(tm) technique.

      That a company is subject to the laws of every soveriegn nation in which it operates is not a new trend. (Including cases where those national laws subject it to supranational institutions like the EU.)

      Even, for the sake of argument, assuming that the EU action was a purely corrupt shakedown, the fact that some sovereign nations systems may subject firms to corrupt shakedowns would also not be a new trend.

      So, I'm really not sure what "new trend" you are referring to.

      Can someone explain to me why this isn't a WTO issue and why these kinds of taxes...

      Well, for one thing it would only be a WTO issue if countries were erecting this as a trade barrier against foreign competitors; since the countries involved (including the US, which also conducted a lengthy antitrust probe of Microsoft and continues to impose sanctions on Microsoft as a result of that action), for the most part, engage in such probes against both foreign and domestic headquartered multinationals, it isn't, for the most part, the kind of thing the WTO is chartered to deal with.

      I mean fines aren't regulated under the trade agreements?

      For the most part, no, fines are not regulated under the trade agreements. They might be an issue if they are de facto tariffs.

    7. Re:Thanks Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Multinational companies are subject to the laws of the countries they operate in.
      Despite the hundreds of howling hillbillies here, these laws apply equally to all companies; In the case of the EU the vast majority of fines is for EU comapnies breaking the rules.
      I'm aware that in the US companies are now state-owned entities that are entirely above the law, but the rest of the world hasn't yet converted to your corporate communism.

  23. NYCL? by lbmouse · · Score: 1

    We didn't know you had interests other than fighting the RIAA?

    1. Re:NYCL? by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 2, Informative

      We didn't know you had interests other than fighting the RIAA?

      Well as you know my professional life is largely about fighting for the good guys, against the bad guys. This story comes as a welcome relief from my normal activities.

      Microsoft v. Russia?

      This is rich.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    2. Re:NYCL? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      We're corrupting him! The poor fellow...

    3. Re:NYCL? by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 2, Funny

      We're corrupting him! The poor fellow...

      Absolutely. As soon as I saw the headline -- "Russia Launches Anti-trust Probe of Microsoft" -- the first thing that came into my mind was that this was a perfect story for Slashdot.

      The only thing missing was a subhead: "Software Giant Accused of Cheating Natalie Portman".

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    4. Re:NYCL? by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 1

      I can't believe my above comment got modded "informative"; I think my moderators were trying to get their moderation rated "+5 Funny". Will someone tell them moderators don't get modded?

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    5. Re:NYCL? by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      In Microsoft vs. Russia... who would be the good guys?

  24. How about Ford model T ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should investigate Ford Motor Company for failure to deliver model T on demand from customers.

    1. Re:How about Ford model T ? by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Interesting

      WTF? That car's older than my dad, and he's in his seventies. And guess what? You can STILL get parts for one! Try getting any parts for Windows 98, that's not even 10 years old. I have older t-shirst than that.

      Now please put the chair down, Steve.

    2. Re:How about Ford model T ? by starfishsystems · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You make a really good point.

      It's quite easy for a third party to manufacture compatible parts for an automobile. There's a huge and thriving industry based on exactly that premise.

      Not so for proprietary software. Many vendors go to significant lengths, both legally and technically, to prevent this. Microsoft is a good example.

      So when Microsoft says "we will no longer support this product" it's not like there is someone else who can take over that support. It's abuse of a monopoly position that has been deliberately engineered. Not cool.

      --
      Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
    3. Re:How about Ford model T ? by docbrody · · Score: 1

      You make a really good point.

      Except the part about windows 98 being less than 10 years old...

    4. Re:How about Ford model T ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can still find old software that will run on Windows 98. Not the latest and greatest stuff, but hell, let me see you find a turbocharger and spinner rims for your Model T.

    5. Re:How about Ford model T ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's quite easy for a third party to manufacture compatible parts for an automobile. There's a huge and thriving industry based on exactly that premise. Not so for proprietary software. Many vendors go to significant lengths, both legally and technically, to prevent this. Microsoft is a good example. So when Microsoft says "we will no longer support this product" it's not like there is someone else who can take over that support. It's abuse of a monopoly position that has been deliberately engineered. Not cool.

      It's exceedingly easy for a third party to manufacture compatible software for Windows 95,98,ME,2k, or XP. There's a huge and thriving industry based on exactly that premise. Microsoft even created a standard API and provides examples for anyone wishing to do so.

      There is nothing that prevents third parties from creating software to patch, upgrade, modify, or generally update Windows XP. And indeed, some companies do just that... this is exactly what Anti-virus and Firewall products are.

      It's not a question of support for the product anyway, Microsoft will continue to support XP until 2014. They want to stop selling it, not stop supporting it (yet).

      A) there are alternatives: Linux distros, OSX, maybe resale of old XP licenses?
      B) they will support it for 5 more years
      C) even if they stopped support, there is nothing preventing third parties from filling the demand for support

  25. Russia is cracking down on piracy, Linux spreads. by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My mom works at one of the research institutes in Akademgorodok, a major research center near Novosibirsk, she along with hundreds of others have been running pirated windows/office/photoshop/matlab for as long as I can remember. This time it seems the government is serious about the crackdown on illegal software. Each lab director got a direct order to either provide every scientist with lisenses for every piece of software or install linux. Well. they all have been running Ubuntu since yesterday. So far so good.

    --
    US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
  26. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by cheftw · · Score: 0, Redundant

    The word comes out like this: "ÑмÐÐоÑÑÑOE"

    you could at least clean it up: (3/16) Ñ^4 Ð^4 O E

    --
    Always back up, never back down. ---- Think you're cool 'cos your uid is prime? Take mine, modulo the one digit integers
  27. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

    What problems are people having with the Comments Beta system? I'm running Firefox 3, NoScript + AdBlock (which slashdot.org and fsdn.com whitelisted) and I find it quite nice to have dynamically expanding messages and responses. Is this a problem on some browsers or configurations?

    --
    $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
  28. No rule of law in Russia by cryfreedomlove · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If I were MSFT, I'd be worried about the weak rule of law in Russia. It is highly likely that there is pre-determined outcome in the mind of the Russian officials running this case and any 'investigation' will be a show trial leading to that pre-determined outcome.

    I have visited Russia many times. Might makes right. It is a system that breathes on graft and corruption.

    1. Re:No rule of law in Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I have visited Russia many times. Might makes right. It is a system that breathes on graft and corruption.

      And just how is this unlike how MS operates on a day-to-day basis?

      If you're going to slam the Russians for playing the same game MS does then you need to be just as critical of MS and its policies.

    2. Re:No rule of law in Russia by dwiget001 · · Score: 1

      Or, they find an unmarked shallow grave, 20 meters from a road that leads to a hospital, 2 km away, with 3000 Vista retail boxes, all with a single bullet hole in the Windows logo,

    3. Re:No rule of law in Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike the US, where companies can change the law retroactively :-)

    4. Re:No rule of law in Russia by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 1

      >>I have visited Russia many times. Might makes right. It is a system that breathes on graft and corruption.

      Good enough then. The Microsoft crowd should feel right at home there.

      --
      Huh?
  29. There are six legitimate copies of Windows XP by Phizzle · · Score: 1

    in the entire Russian Federation. They are owned by six Microsoft consultants currently traveling in Russia.

    --
    I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
  30. Riiight... by brian0918 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Apparently in Russia, people have a right to an operating system, but no rights to life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness.

    1. Re:Riiight... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      In America we have a right to an operating system, just as we have a right to air, thanks to the folks who developed FreeBSD, Linux, etc.

      It never fails to amaze me how an inferior, paid for OS can sell any copies when there is a superior free alternative.

    2. Re:Riiight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as opposite, on USA, people don't have a right to an operating system...

    3. Re:Riiight... by shentino · · Score: 1

      Two words:

      Monopoly Power.

    4. Re:Riiight... by causality · · Score: 1

      In America we have a right to an operating system, just as we have a right to air, thanks to the folks who developed FreeBSD, Linux, etc.

      It never fails to amaze me how an inferior, paid for OS can sell any copies when there is a superior free alternative.

      Because using that free alternative means learning about how it works, at least enough to know how to effectively use it, and Americans have had at least twelve years of formal education during which they were taught that learning is boring, difficult, can only be done by rote, and must be administered by people who care about you as a human being in only the most perfunctory sense. The joy of discovery or the triumph of overcoming something that was difficult for you is completely alien to them and that's a real shame. The institutionalized schools are certainly blameworthy, though there comes a point where an individual has to decide that he won't allow himself to be deprived of important things anymore.

      To put that another way, you'd be amazed at how much flak I catch sometimes just for suggesting that a literate adult in America with no mental disabilities has no excuse for being unable to educate himself about computers when he has a 'Net connection, the needed information is unrestricted, freely available, and easily located via Google. I reject the entire notion that "impossible" is a synonym for "somewhat inconvenient" and some people really don't seem to like that very much. That's your real obstacle which explains why people don't do more for themselves, don't equip themselves, and don't decide that they want something better for themselves and are willing to invest some of their time in it. This dynamic isn't just limited to operating systems but can be found everywhere that people sell themselves short and put up with injustice and mediocrity for the sake of their precious convenience.

      The real injustice is that those of us who don't fit this description (not because we're special, but because we recognize it as a problem and try very hard not to contribute to it) have to live in nations full of people who do. We get to live with the legal, political, and social repercussions of being in a society where the vast majority of people are not interested in good decision-making and don't want the personal responsibility of being more actively involved in their own lives. That is, of course, unsustainable, which is part of why things are so chaotic right now.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    5. Re:Riiight... by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Bullshit.
      Constitution of Russian Federation, Article 17

      1. In the Russian Federation recognition and guarantees shall be provided for the rights and freedoms of man and citizen according to the universally recognized principles and norms of international law and according to the present Constitution.

      2. Fundamental human rights and freedoms are inalienable and shall be enjoyed by everyone since the day of birth.

      Article 20

      1. Everyone shall have the right to life.

      Article 22

      1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom and personal immunity.

      The "pursuit of happiness" bit is unique for the USA because it is not really defined. WTF is "pursuit of happiness"?
      The Russian Constitution defines some more rights, by the way, including these:

      Article 40

      1. Everyone shall have the right to a home. No one may be arbitrarily deprived of his or her home.

      3. Low-income people and other persons mentioned in law and in need of a home shall receive it gratis or for reasonable payment from the state, municipal and other housing stocks according to the norms fixed by law.

      Article 41

      1. Everyone shall have the right to health protection and medical aid. Medical aid in state and municipal health establishments shall be rendered to individuals gratis, at the expense of the corresponding budget, insurance contributions, and other proceeds.

      Article 42

      Everyone shall have the right to favourable environment, reliable information about its state and for a restitution of damage inflicted on his health and property by ecological transgressions.

      Article 43

      1. Everyone shall have the right to education.

      Article 44

      2. Everyone shall have the right to participate in cultural life and use cultural establishments and to an access to cultural values.

      Article 55

      1. The listing in the Constitution of the Russian Federation of the fundamental rights and freedoms shall not be interpreted as a rejection or derogation of other universally recognized human rights and freedoms.

      2. In the Russian Federation no laws shall be adopted cancelling or derogating human rights and freedoms.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    6. Re:Riiight... by selven · · Score: 1

      Technically all those rights exist in the constitution, but de facto you need to make sure you can fit the constitution on some thousand ruble bills first.

  31. Russian SOP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In keeping with the Russion government's SOP, Bill Gates will be arrested and Microsoft will become the Russian state's property.

  32. You commie! by hellfire · · Score: 2, Funny

    So in Russia it's illegal for a company to sell a 10 year old product, even though that product will be 2 versions old this year? If we could make legal demands to sell retired products I'd still be eating Ninja Turtle cereal [flickr.com] today.

    What, Fruity pebbles isn't good enough for you? What are you, a communist?

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

    1. Re:You commie! by spyrochaete · · Score: 1

      What, Fruity pebbles isn't good enough for you? What are you, a communist?

      What do you mean you won't share your property with the proletariat?? BAM!! BAM BAM!!

  33. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's pretty poor as soon as you try anything mobile.

    When it was classic comments, I could view them however I wanted. Now, I get about 12 comments per story, a further 20 abbreviated (WTF?).

    I emailed and got a nice response from Taco himself, along the lines of 'it's on the to-do pile, we're aware of it'. Circa 18 months ago. I think the new comments system is cool, just not for displaying comments. And definately not for mobile class devices.

  34. Re:Russia is cracking down on piracy, Linux spread by twidarkling · · Score: 1

    Exactly! Why are so many people bitching about "oooo, there's no alternatives! We need XP still!" If people don't wanna spend to upgrade, move to the FOSS side. It's not hard, people!

    --
    Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
  35. Microsoft vs. Russia by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 1

    This is just too beautiful.

    --
    Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  36. Bad analogy by hellfire · · Score: 4, Insightful

    XP is a 9 year old OS. Even auto makers are only required to support the parts for their cars for 7 years

    In the US and Europe, automobiles are heavily regulated to meet certain standards, and software is not. If a 9 year old car is many times safer, more reliable, more fuel efficient, much better looking, and more easily fixed than the 2 year old car coming from the factory now, and the new car is just a total dog, and if community outrage was so high that people would only want to buy the old car, and this was the only auto maker available to buy cars from then damn straight the community would be in the moral right to demand that company continue to support the old car model until the choice of a car that was as good or better came along.

    Microsoft is a convicted monopolist both in the US and Europe. If there was more competition, and Vista was a dog, people could turn to another company for better service. But they can't. They turn back to Microsoft and demand XP. They are, allegedly, trying to control the supply channel by strangling supplies of XP and hoping this will force demand to Vista, which will make Vista look better as sales go up. They have an image problem with Vista and they are using their monopoly power to try to fix it. If this was a competitive market and Linus and Mac OS had 33% each, We could just switch to one of them and Microsoft would have to compete.

    Once you are a monopoly, 99% of the business book is thrown out the window. Everything comes down to, "when you take an action as a monopolistic company, are you abusing your market dominance and reducing choice for the consumer?" A car maker to tried to do this without monopolistic power would shoot themselves in the foot for cancelling a profitable product line just because they want to sell more of another. The American automakers did just this, by trying to sell more trucks and SUVs when the future trend was towards smaller fuel efficient cars. Now GM and Chrysler are on life support, and Hyundai is making out like a bandit. Competition would have done that to Microsoft to, but there is none, so they have to follow different rules. If they don't follow those rules, any and all governments need to slap their greedy hands.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

  37. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yiddish, actually.

    A better equvialent is "nervy gall".

    Chutzpah is when you murder your parents, and then throw yourself on the mercy of the court because you're an orphan.

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
  38. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by nschubach · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I was hoping for some neat graphs from that, but Wolfram failed me: http://www41.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(3%2F16)+%C3%91^4+%C3%90^4+O+E

    --
    Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  39. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by nschubach · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I apparently failed myself. Damn you URL encoding!

    --
    Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  40. Russia serious about IP? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    There's only I've place where I've seen more IP violations that China, and that is Russia. Heck, most of the copied DVDs sold in China COME from Russia!

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    1. Re:Russia serious about IP? by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      [Quotation needed.]

      For a start, the import of CDs and DVDs into China is forbidden, the reason I've been told is censorship mainly.

      Secondly the Chinese government, particularly the higher-up parts, DO crack down on copyright infringement, believe it or not. It's just the corruption further down that prevents them to be efficient. However cargo at the borders is inspected so it's costly to import CDs and DVDs.

      Finally there is a need to be cheap and quick to the market, and shipping all the way from Russia makes it cost more and take longer.

      It is all in all not my experience with the China market that they import this kind of disks from Russia. It is more like Chinese counterfeit disks are exported to other countries, including most of Asia and even the US and Europe. Export of CDs and DVDs is also illegal by the way - because the Chinese government is very aware that most locally produced disks are infringing on copyrights.

    2. Re:Russia serious about IP? by yoprst · · Score: 1

      Times have changed.

  41. Re:Russia is cracking down on piracy, Linux spread by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Amazing how people's attitude towards Free software changes once they learn the true cost of opening pictures with Photoshop and typing memos with MS Office. I do wish people came to Linux voluntarily but after 20 years of unrestrained piracy only threat of heavy fines can make people give up what they have come to believe is rightfully theirs.

    --
    US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
  42. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by Cyberax · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Chutzpah" is better translated as "naglost'", definitely not "smelost'" ("bravery").

  43. In Soviet Russia... by kulakovich · · Score: 1

    System Operates YOU!!

    ~kulakovich

  44. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The agency said it thought Microsoft had violated antimonopoly legislation by cutting delivery of Windows XP operating system to Russia both separately and pre-installed on personal computers

    So kind of like when an icecream-shop gets shut down by an anti-icecream-law for not selling enough icecream?

    In soviet Russia Windows XP shuts...ah hell...can't figure out this one...

  45. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yiddish, actually.

    A better equvialent is "nervy gall".

    Chutzpah is when you murder your parents, and then throw yourself on the mercy of the court because you're an orphan.

    Or when you're a politician and are therefore also a lawyer so you know god damned well what the Constitution says, and you vote for unconstitutional laws anyway. After all, when some poor schlub finds himself on the wrong end of the overwhelming police power of the state and is convicted by your bad law, pays many thousands of dollars defending himself, and finally after an appeal or two during which he wonders if he will ever see his family again or if Bubba will leave him alone in jail, finally the law is struck down as unconstitutional. Yet, for some reason, the politicians who supported that law are not punished in any way. Fancy that.

    Now THAT is chutzpah!

  46. wow! by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Umm... Give us free cookies or you are a monopoly. That's rich coming from a country in which most top government officials hold positions in the monopoly energy concern of the said country. The cynicism of this move is just unbelievable. Ever since they managed to confuse the world enough to think that Georgia attacked them, they must think that the whole he-said-she-said they manufacture is enough to get their way in anything they want.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  47. Good job, Russia by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

    Microsoft has enjoyed abusing it's power and not it's on the receiving end of governments abusing their power. They deserve this.

  48. meh. someone in Russia just looking for a payoff by docbrody · · Score: 1

    Microsoft will just have to bribe some rusky official and this will all go away. Sure they will make some noise to make it all seem legit, but in the end this will get resolved in a back room with a nice fat check.

  49. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by superwiz · · Score: 0, Redundant

    mod parent up. that's definitely the most accurate translation.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  50. Re:In soviet russia... And, when they stick that by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    probe (or, probiscus) up ms' derrier (or, dirty rear), the anti-trust court can say, Ben-dova, BAYBEE... This is From Russia, with LOVE..." And, to modivy some Bond, add, "For YOUR thighs ONLY"...

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  51. No rule of morality at Msuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what about the predetermined result of installing Msuck Windoze:
    you are not secure, you will get worms. You will get viruses.
    They will f you when they can.

    At least the Russians have their own interests at heart.
    The Msuck people are just greed-heads, they don't care about
    anyone but themselves.

    Let Balmer move the whole damn company offshore.
    The bottom of the ocean is a fitting place for Msuck Windoze.

  52. Pot calling the kettle black? by Neanderthal+Ninny · · Score: 1

    A former-communist country saying that Microsoft violates anti-trust laws is very interesting.
    However, Vista sucks big time in the few installations I have and I understand why most people hate, including entire countries like Russia.

    1. Re:Pot calling the kettle black? by Erikderzweite · · Score: 1

      Well, Russia is a former socialist country, but Microsoft continues to spread socialism: there is one and only one OS, basically the same for a scientist and for a housewife. It is controlled by a single vendor (Party), is promised to deliver happiness for everyone using it and is supported by a massive amount of propaganda which claims any other ideologies inferior and is conveniently silent about its own deficiencies. Iron Curtain is in place to prevent people fleeing (vendor lock), dissidents are punished (OEM deals) and so on.

  53. A few thoughts by zogger · · Score: 1

    Vista also by most accounts I have read here takes beefier hardware. Perhaps the Russian authorities are looking out for their citizens who might not have as much cash to throw at newer/more expensive hardware as western Europeans and folks in the US, etc.

    Vista might be more difficult to pirate..perhaps..just something to consider given the rumors about what most Russians are running, which is mostly peg legged softwarez...that is all total speculation on my part though,. just what I have read, and mostly here BTW

    Then there is just the "some fatcats are looking for some cash payoffs" angle, a shakedown routine, because they know MS has some spare cash laying around

  54. Re:Russia is cracking down on piracy, Linux spread by Erikderzweite · · Score: 1

    Besides, computer literacy is IMHO very low in CIS countries because of piracy. Sure, everybody has the latest and the most expensive software available, but that's it. People don't look for alternatives especially if these are free which is perceived as low quality.
    So we have a great number of people who have XP Professional Corporate Edition, use Photoshop solely for red-eye-reduction, type notes in MS-Word but don't know how to insert a page break (these people are the loudest to bitch about OOo if they are forced to use it). Hell, I've seen scientific papers written in MS-Word with formulas written down by hand because no one knows about LaTeX!

  55. Re:Russia is cracking down on piracy, Linux spread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The last time I checked, MatLab was as expensive on Linux as Windows. Did they have to buy MatLab licenses, or did they convert to Octave or some other alternative? I imagine MS Office -> Open Office & Photoshop -> Gimp without too much grumbling, but the FOSS analogues of MatLab are acceptable only if you're using just the basics. I'm genuinely curious, not trying to insult Octave, et. al.

    - T

  56. Re:Russia is cracking down on piracy, Linux spread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Akademgorodok

    That sounds like a derogatory term for an academic.

    "Hi. I'm a software engineer" // "And I'm an academ-goro-dork"

    (No offense to anyone at Akademgorodok)

  57. For once by trickyD1ck · · Score: 0

    Let's all denounce KKKapitalism! Even the russkies get it. Just nationalize Microsoft, vote to make Windows XP the People's OS and enjoy the glorious World of Next Tuesday(TM).

  58. Microsoft vs Russia : Whoever Wins... by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 1

    Whoever Wins....We Lose.

    --
    Huh?
  59. In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Government has power over Corporations.

  60. Re:Russia is cracking down on piracy, Linux spread by Alex+Belits · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's "Academy [of Sciences] town" in Russian.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  61. zpoken like dis... by akayani · · Score: 1

    Russia -- "Das Vadanya Microsloht... Ve don't vant your DRM shite."

    MS -- "We'll be back!"

    Russia -- "Retarget da misssiles un Redmond nd release za dogs. V has vays sof yetting vhat ve vant."

    Let's face it if Windows was pirate proof Linux would be everywhere.

  62. Re:That's Pretty Funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah... Russia is actually moving towards Linux. Most schools have already switched.

  63. Why does MS still want the copyrights then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sony don't keep their VHS patents and if someone else wants to make one, it will be made.

    Now you try making your own Windows XP.

    Can't because you don't have the software.

    Can't get the software because it's copyrighted.

    MS won't let go of the copyright for WHAT reason? They aren't selling XP any more. They won't support XP without an expensive contract any more. What do they need the copyright for, then?

    And COPYRIGHT is a monopoly. A government granted one at that.

  64. Like WINE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except it isn't 100% compatible, is it. So some programs won't run.

    So it isn't a replacement for XP, is it.

    Nor is any other OS.

    Why? Because the source code is kept secret and therefore how XP works is secret and nobody else can copy it to replace it.

    Whereas my dishwasher will wash my dishes just as well as your dishwasher, even though they are from completely different manufacturers. They both take the water pipe fittings that we have in common, take the same detergent and exhaust through the same pipe fittings too. The electricity socket doesn't have to change to accommodate the new dishwasher and the new dishwasher will accept the same dishes and I do not therefore have to upgrade my dishes to a compatible dish.

    This is not the same as the OS.

    And MS STILL has the copyrights.

    WHY???

  65. So... by highfidelitychris · · Score: 1

    Who do I root for on this one?

    1. Re:So... by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 1

      Who do I root for on this one?

      That's easy.

      You root for them both to lose.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful