Slashdot Mirror
MS Wins Six month reprieve on Caldera case
Master Switch writes "Microsoft won a six month repreive from Caldera's case against them. They initially asked for 3 months, but due to scheduling conflicts, the judge gave them six. Estimated potential damages are 1.6million if Caldera should win the case "
Update: 02/19 03:19 by S : That should say 1.6 billion.
The actual damages are estimated at 1.6 billion, not million
M$ would have already settled for 1.6 million - that's pocket change to them.
Caldera was permitted to amend the list of anti-trust actions to include DOS 7/Win'95 bundling. Last I heard, popular media was under the impression that MS was winning the arguments against DOJ that Win95/IE bundling is a "feature" created by customer demand. My guess is that MS would like to see the results of their work against the DOJ and then use it to get the DOS 7/Win'95 amendment negated.
The random error message in flavors of Windows Beta has been well documented in magazines and other sources. Even if the bundling charge is not considered for determining damages, the pre-95 acts of fiction that Windows requires *MS*-DOS and is incompatible probably will total over half a billion alone. Now, if Caldera where to win such an amount, it is still debateable if it would actually help Linux or Linux community. The case is basically about MS actions against the marketablity of DR-DOS (the marketablity of Linux and MS actions against that marketablity is left for a future case). DR-DOS is a product from "Caldera Thin Clients" which is a complettely seprate company from "Caldera Systems" which handles OpenLinux. Even the name of the product has change with the split of companies. Under the united Caldera, DR-DOS was refered to as OpenDOS. Under Caldera Thin Clients the "Open" has been dropped in favor of marketing the legacy "DR." But even if they decide to invest half of the winnings in Caldera Systems, what will Caldera actually accomplish with it? Well, take a look at what they have done with their resources so far and what resources they would win:
1) As part of the law suit, they are asking to be awarded full documentation of the undocumented APIs of both present and future versions of Windows.
History: Caldera has been provided present and future API knowledge of the IPX stack Novell provides to Windows. They also had the source code to Wabi. The work of redirecting WinSock API calls to the Linux tcp/ip stack had already been accomplished by Sun Microsystems so that Windows TCP/IP programs may be able to work under WABI. Caldera, despite their resources, refused to do anything similar for redirection of IPX API calls. Hence, even if all the other Windows calls for a Windows program is properily handled by WABI, if the program requires IPX it can not work.
2) Money -- while Caldera not have the billion that the anti-trust case may generate, they still have the backing of Ray Noorda and the profits from their products including those that invested in maintenance contracts. Caldera is NOT poor.
History: Since investing in Caldera's maintenance program, I have heard nothing but excuses for not providing the quarterily CD updates. The 98Q4 update CD has elminated due to the Sept release of OpenLinux 1.3. That is understandable. But the 99Q1 update was tentatively due on Jan 1st (the beginning of Q1) and first quarter is already half over. When is Caldera actually going to honor their maintenance program contracts?! Is this the type of actions one should expect from a company that is attempting to market to "Enterprise"? Heck, Caldera has neglected things to the point that even quarterly maintenance on the web page explaining the maintenance program has gone undone (the page STILL declairs OpenLinux version 1.2 to be the latest version). Is this a matter of Caldera just not being able to afford to put out a quarterly CD after being payed $199 to do it? Or is it just that Caldera isn't a company for doing "Enterprise" work with and even a billion dollars won't change that? Btw, I have heard that members of the RedHat Update program are getting their CDs on time. Caldera... one word: "When?" Maybe the maintenance program is suspended for six months too?
i can't wait for the MS trolls (PR people) to provide us with good flamebait!!
:-)
"this what microsoft means when they use the term innovation"
The legal system moves much slower than technology, but the question is, do we just let MS go full steam ahead and do whatever they want, legal or not?
It's still relevant, because it did happen and was "illegal". Just like in the DoJ case, the current state of the market is largely irrelevant - it is was MS did back then that is being argued, not wha ti s happennin now.
I used to use DR-DOS, from v5, and I along with all our developers much preferred it over the MS or PC variety. I remember when, during the testing of Win 3.1 when it all suddenly stopped working. I rang DR, they said it should work, so I rang MS, who categorically stated that I would have to upgrade to MS-DOS. I was not impressed. Thus began my annoyance at MS business practices.
DR did fix the problem very quickly, to their credit.
The amount IS important to the lawyers involved.
I'm sure Bills lawyers are well paid.
(and to say its no longer relivant is to then allow arguments like this: "So what, I shot him dead. Hes dead. Its NO LONGER IMPORTANT to him, now is it?")
Instead of asking if it matters anymore, the question is and should be, was harm done? I don't see any posts asking if the DOJ trial matters, because the damage is done.
The point is that Microsoft designed Win95 to "break" DR-DOS. That's an unfair business practice; it forces the consumer to use a product they might not necessarily want to (Win95 could just as easily run on top of any DOS.)
I still find it hilarious that the Netscape case hinged on IE4.0 being integrated with Win98, that Microsoft argued that Win98 without IE4.0 wouldn't work...
...and yet, my Win98 box doesn't have IE on it.
Emphatically yes! Embedded systems. What do you do when you have a 386 with 1 MB (or even hardware even less powerful ?): you could do a lot of things (use an embedded RTOS, squeeze a freenix), but DR-DOS is a definite possibility. That's why it is licensed along with some PC/104 cards.
The government thinks that it's an organization that pulls in 1.3 trillion dollars a year and that MS is an organization that pulls in a few million.
If money dicatates who wins a court case, draw your own conclusions - you don't even have to consider the fact that the DOJ has overwhelming evidence. Microsoft is going down partially because they are wrong and mostly because they erroneously thought they could out maneuver Klein.
Finally, MS is going to do something to help the computer industry; they are going to get convicted.
"We're suing you for 1.6 MILLION DOLLARS!"
[pinky goes to mouth...]
"What's that Mr. Bigglesworth? Oh..."
"... 1.6 BILLION DOLLARS!"
[pinky goes to mouth again...]
>
Not can't, but won't. MS won't do this, although they could easily. Looky! Word using functions of Windows! It uses standard calls to the API (and thus DLL's in Windows) that draw Windows and fiddle with text! Remove those DLL's (that are needed whether IE or Word are installed or not) and the systemwon't work right. Oh no! Did XCOPY in DOS use standard DOS function calls at some point? Remove those standard calls and DOS won't work? Oh no! The system is crippled without XCOPY! Word and XCOPY are integrated! (For those who don't know, XCOPY is an external command that the system works fine if you delete it) Wow, even Borland once used a DOS function call? A non MS product is irrevocably required for DOS to work! If you believe the above, you deserve MS software.
they are all image and thats it!
Well, duh you were kidding. I'm just saying that it would take divine intervention for MS to get out of this. We have 3 laywers in the family and all of them think that MS is going to be squished like a bug. They won't be squished because the DOJ has them so dead to rights though, it's because the DOJ has way the fuck more resources (believe it or not) than MS for the case.
Your just mad because Microsoft(tm) has created modern computing. Bill Gates has invented 6 of the worlds best operating systems while linsux is just crappy shareware.
6? Maybe. Anyhow, I can still walk down the street without somebody throwing a pie in my face. That's worth a couple of million bucks I think.
It's highly relevant, as the various (all icky) flavors of DOS have 30 million users total. When it comes to keeping track of small lists (less than 100,000 names), nothing can touch it.
No report generator is as good as that contained in dBase/FoxPro/Paradox. Remember, QBE and SQL are both relational calculus, one is field oriented, the other tuple oriented.
There are no replacements for these database apps, and none are in sight on any OS. Tens of thousands of businesses and small nonprofits depend on DOS, day in and day out.
Yes, but I have a significantly larger penis than he does.
(I am assuming the above comment is entered in jest and mine should be taken likewise.)
Yes, it is just a program and a free one. I also thought it seemed silly until I realized what the average business will think when setting up a webserver. Before IE, they would think 'netscape makes server software, it probably works best with normal people so I'll get it" and after IE they think IIS must be best because *every* windows user should be more compatible with it.
This will be hitting the trade journals in a few hours. Microsoft has suspended shipping of 70% of the CD-ROMs in the MSDN Universal Subscription package due to the Sun Microsystems injunction. However, they are continuing to post their false and misleading press releases, e.g. "Microsoft Assures Windows Customers of No Impact from Sun Lawsuit Ruling". Shipment of MSDN Universal is not expected to resume again until April.
Currently, Microsoft is continuing to sell the package ($2,500.00), but not telling customers who buy through mail order outlets (e.g. Micro Warehouse) until they register the product.
* This case started back in 1994 or so, when DOS was still relevant. Another six months is peanuts compared to how long this has been going.
* I think one reason Novell spun-off Caldera was so that they could sue MS's ass without burning bridges.
* A new version of DOS has just been released - DOS 2000. Why run Windows 2000, when you can run DOS 2000!! http://www.software.ibm.com/os/dos/ (Somebody's buying it.)
No, you're wrong about the exclusive use. Some of the APIs that you're touting as being IE exclusive have been added to the Win32 API set and are now available for use by developers of other Windows apps. And they are being used by other apps (both by MS and other third party developers). The new HTML based help system is one example.
If your definition of "Operating System" is the API set that third party developers code to (i.e. what a developer can expect to be on the user's machine) than yes, this has been integrated. If your definition of "Operating System" is the same as "kernel" than why have a separate word for it?
Actually, this may be more relvant than you realize. As I understand it, the lawsuit includes allegations that Windows 95 (and Windows 98) is/are designed as a GUI ontop of MS-DOS 7.x, but tweaked so that Caldera's DOS can't go in its place. NT is really the only MS operating system that doesn't depend on DOS.
1.6 Million is a drop-in-the-bucket these dayz; 1.6 Billion sounds closer to the mark. Is there some verification of this? A URL?
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
Posted by QuantmJoe:
Is this still relevant? Are there that many people still using DR-DOS and Win3.1? Did this just become an issue recently or has Caldera just now decided to take action?
Joe
Brimming with queries
Posted by Alonzo The Great:
What else Can I say?
I myself run PC-DOS 7.0 under 3.11... This case IS very important to me!
Posted by QuantmJoe:
:p
I wasn't asking those questions to challenge the validity of it or anything.. I was genuinely curious. The few news bits I've read on it haven't given too much background.. mostly just "The judge ruled that there would be a 6 month blah blah etc etc"
As to the "murder someone 20 years ago" comment... I had written a reply venting some steam over the rampant use of incorrect/partly-correct analogies all over the media these days.. but Netscape crashed after "Preview" but before "Submit"
Say goodnight Data...
Joe
-----
"I am a jelly donut." - JFK
Sure. Novel lost a lot of a money, M$ gained it. Who cares if anybody uses win3.1 NOW?
See http://www.ddj.com/articles/1993/9309/9309d/9309d. htm
for an article about some of MS' tech tying.
Don't let news of MS summary judgement motions
fool you. All parts of Caldera's case are alive
and well. (Not that I'm biased)
You might want to do a little more research. One of the pillars in the case is the Win 3.1 beta. There's a little piece of code that is encrypted (to hide it's functionality) that, as the MS Exec that wanted it stated, "Put Win 3.1 on a treadmill if it didn't run on MS-DOS." (not a direct quote.) The code looks for a small unused MS-DOS specific funtion, and if not found, issues an error message about DOS versions, at which point you could expect the system to crash eventually. When they released the shipping version, they just flipped the "PerformTest" bit to 0. The code is still there.
The guy who found this is the same guy that used to praise MS, and wrote books on "undocumented" features with MS's blessing. On his web site (anyone have a link?) he tells how you can still turn on the bit in the release version while it's running, at which point you will promptly be issued the exact error message that all the beta testing people saw. The conclusion drawn is that MS used this to scare companies doing the beta testing from using DR-DOS.
Thanks :)
Well, its in the news today, in all likelyhood, due to the DOJ trail. However, Caldera has been trying to get this to trial for a number of years now. Remember, M$ has about 20Billion dollars. That buys quite a lot of lawyers and they (M$) could drag this case out for another 20 years.
The bad thing about this is they pushed it off into 2000, when we all know civilization is going to come to an end ;-)
I just hope that they don't show up in court after all the delays and say that it's now irrelevant. This thing has dragged on for so long.. On the other hand, the anti-trust trial should be over then, so Caldera should additional ammo
Arguing that Windows 9x is just a "GUI" (as if it was KDE or something), is a little silly. Windows does all of the memory and device managment on a modern computer.
DOS is only used for bootstrapping and for legacy driver support under 9x. (Wait, that's all DOS was ever used for!) It should be given away.
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Methinks that Micro$oft is just looking to push this case back in an attempt to use the time factor to dilute Caldera's case impact. This has been dragging on since 1996.
...
s/nospam\.//;
This was an issue when Digital Research owned DR-DOS. Digital Research "went away" and Novell bought much of their technology, including DR-DOS. As you know, there's no love lost between the boys in Orem and the gang in Redmond.
Novell started the legal rumblings some time ago (circa Win 3.1) when they claimed that Microsoft implemented changes to the code that specifically targeted DR-DOS and would not allow Windows to operate on top of that OS. Legal wheels grind and legal wheels churn. In the meantime, Caldera was created by Big Cheeses at Novell, ostensibly to focus on things like open software, however they also bought DR-DOS...and the pending legal action.
In fact, for quite a while, Caldera was really talking up the legal action...just short of the point of claiming the damages that they sought as an asset.
DR-DOS isn't what it used to be since the market has changed (in fact, the source code is freely available), but Caldera still perceives that Microsoft has damaged them. Maybe they have and maybe they haven't, but this is one of those cases that just cries, "Publicity!" It did when DR had it, it did when Novell had it, and it still does for Caldera. Unfortunately, as time has gone by, the stakes have gone down. The relevance of the case is still timely due to the "issues" that MS has with the DOJ, but not because of any particular demand for the software. While there are still a few people who use it, I think that it's safe to say that it's a dead horse. (apologies to the die hard DR-DOS users.)
HardCase
Oops, it was late, thanks for noting that
-Master Switch, one more element in the machine
#1-- Why does this have to benefit Linux in order to be worthwhile? I don't recall this site being a Linux site; it's a "news for nerds" site that addresses technology issues. Not everything here will be about Linux.
#2-- Just because you get an API does not mean you have legal rights to do whatever you want with them. I am not at liberty to disclose arrangements we have made with Novell regarding APIs for NetWare, but suffice it to say that we do not own these APIs nor can we do just any ol' thing with them. Novell has more to do with these things than you seem to acknowledge; it's their property, after all, not ours.
#3-- I prefer not to discuss Caldera's lawsuit in public (not that I can speak with much authority on it because it's being handled in different "Caldera" from ours), but suffice it to say this lawsuit is not frivolous, and even if Linux will not benefit from it, that does not make it a worthless lawsuit.
#4-- The maintenance program only applies to our high end products. Currently, the only high end server product we offer is OpenLinux Standard 1.2. OpenLinux 1.3 is a retail product and, for the time being, is being used as the maintenance vehicle for keeping OpenLinux Standard 1.2 up to date (none of the commercial offerings in Standard 1.2 have been updated beyond the NetWare client/admin utilities, and they are now included in OpenLinux 1.3). This is why the maintenance program still says it covers OpenLinux Standard 1.2. 1.3 customers can not purchase maintenance because maintenance is not meant for the retail product.
#5-- The Q1 maintenance CD -- OpenLinux 1.3.1 -- has been out for a short while and is in the hands of maintenance customers. If you have not received your copy, I would suggest you contact our sales department and see what the problem may be. The maintenance program is definitely not being neglected.