Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Demands Freedom to Innovate

Christopher Bibbs writes "Microsoft is trying once again to rally the troops and let Congress know that the American people want them to back off. They also have a pretty funny letter to the shareholders over here." The shareholder letter says, "Regardless of your perspective, this tool will allow you to share your views, send a letter or email to your elected officials..." There's also an invitation to "call us at 1-888-642-4097." Remember, polite comments do more good than nasty ones, regardless of your perspective. ;-)

245 comments

  1. They should be free to innovate but by Yarn · · Score: 1

    so should everyone else. In other words, they can write their software ANY way they want, who cares, as long as they dont reduce other's freedom by unethical marketing practises

    I think that's all that I need to say

    --
    -Yarn - Rio Karma: Excellent
  2. Microsoft being treated unfairly? by dylan_- · · Score: 3

    [DEEP BREATH] Ahhh...well. I think that people are being a bit harsh on Microsoft. I won't deny that I dislike their operating systems, and, to be honest, just about all their software apart from Age of Empires. :-) But there are too many folk here wanting to see Microsoft torn apart, and won't be happy till they see blood.

    Limitations on Microsoft's activities should be the same as would be applied to any company. They should not be a special case. Although they have had a few (ahem!) shady practises, their virtual monopoly isn't entirely their fault. Certainly, very few hardware companies had the balls to stand up to them, even though it's clear that if they'd banded together they could have limited MS influence. There's also the practise of companies buying MS goods to consider. There have always been alternatives to NT for instance; ones which have been proven reliable over time. If a company then chooses to switch, simply because MS says it's for the best (what do you expect them to say?!) then it's their own fault when they get caught up in the Upgrade Cycle of Death.

    One thing MS did do was make plenty software easily available to the masses. Windows (even NT) is pretty cheap compared to much of its competition. You might even argue that Linux (with GNU) is the next step in the Software for the People movement, providing affordable open software for anyone who wants it.

    I guess the point is, people do have a choice now. Linux is a viable alternative. Go a bit easier on MS.

    Phew. A post from me supporting MS. I'm away for a spot of skiing in Hell.

    dylan_-


    --

    --
    Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
    1. Re:Microsoft being treated unfairly? by Sorklin · · Score: 1
      Although they have had a few (ahem!) shady practises, their virtual monopoly isn't entirely their fault.

      That they have a monopoly is not the illegal issue of the lawsuit. The problem is when the use predatory pricing, price fixing, product tying, or other anti-competitive actions. To prove their case, the government has to prove they have a monopoly status before they can prove the case of anti-competitive actions. So I agree with you that the monopoly is not entirely their fault. But predatory practices are their fault. What one does with a monopoly once one has it is the issue here.

      Certainly, very few hardware companies had the balls to stand up to them, even though it's clear that if they'd banded together they could have limited MS influence.

      The problem with this argument is that its true -- IF all the hardware vendors had allied themselves to help limit MS's power. The problem is that any company that turned its back on such an alliance would stand to benefit greatly by reduced pricing from MS. This would allow them a competitive advantage, by being able to offer reduced prices to consumers. So in a perfect world, they would band together on principal to limit MS. But in the real one, its obvious what they did.

      There have always been alternatives to NT for instance; ones which have been proven reliable over time.

      You are absolutely correct. The problem is that you can have some competition and still be a monopoly. The fact that, in general, these alternatives have a very small market share, and in the arena of the consumer desktops, competition had been on the decline. This is changing thanks to GNU/Linux and the Open Source movement. But as to whether Linux will ever pose a serious market threat in consumer desktops really remains to be seen.

      The important thing to note is the idea that the main thrust of this lawsuit applies to the consumer desktop and not the backoffice server side of the market.

      Windows (even NT) is pretty cheap compared to much of its competition.

      What operating systems are you speaking of? If we separate workstation class operating systems from the other desktops, a quick search on buy.com reveals that NT Workstation is the most expensive (around $270). For the regular Windows 95/98 (priced around $160 -- priced as a stand alone edition. You can get better prices by buying it with hardware or upgrade copy, but for comparison purposes I chose the version that would put it on equal footing), only OS/2 is more expensive (around $175). However, I would classify OS/2 in a category with Workstation or Server because of its robustness. BeOS is around $70. GNU/Linus is $1,454 (just kidding - seeing if you are still awake). So it looks like for the Intel consumer desktop platform, NT is by far the most expensive choice around. Remember predatory pricing is one of the abuses of a monopoly structure. NT's only real competition is other microsoft products.

      People do have a choice now. They always have. That doesn't negate the fact that at the time of the trial, Microsoft has a virtual monopoly on the desktop market and was using that monopoly in anti-competitive practices.

      Sheesh. I'm done.

      Sork

    2. Re:Microsoft being treated unfairly? by RichardW · · Score: 1

      Sure, they've made some good software. And we have the freedom to buy it (or not to buy it).
      But their business ethics are less that 100% wholesome. They say they fight "hard but fair". Exactly how can you do that when you have millions, if not billions in the bank? I'm sure we all love having free browsers. But if Toyota (for example) had given small cars away free then no doubt the unions would have screamed to the US government about "dumping". How exactly does this differ from giving your internet browser away for free in order to cripple the software in opposition to you?

    3. Re:Microsoft being treated unfairly? by MassacrE · · Score: 1

      To develop that choice, even impartially (Linux is beginning to compete in server environments, but not at all yet on desktops), it took tens of thousands of developers, circling the globe, working for FREE. Probably a thousand people have worked on the linux kernel alone (probably three thousand have been subscribed to its mailing list). They have been working on the thing for EIGHT YEARS now, for no money, so that they themselves can have a choice. I fully support the freedom to innovate. The thing is Microsoft has it, nobody is taking away their freedom to innovate. But the rest of the industry does NOT have that freedom, when it comes to Microsoft.

    4. Re:Microsoft being treated unfairly? by Frodo · · Score: 1

      Well, AFAIK Age of Empires (as well as many other products) are not "Microsoft products" in plain old meaning. They just bought it or paid to someone and then stamped the corporate logo on it. I don't know if it worth mentioning that many other products (Word, SQL Server, MSIE, etc.) begun their life in Microsoft in the same way - bought from other company, which is now extinct.

      --
      -- Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
  3. Innovations? by CormacJ · · Score: 1

    Microsoft hasn't really innovated in a long time.
    DirectX was probably thier only innovation, and most of thier other innovations have been attempts to crush companies that got a jump on them.

    If they were truely into innovation they would invest more into NT on Alpha, instead of cancelling it and removing the major clustering bits out of Win 2000.

    Thier freedom to innovate, really is a freedom to lobby for less competition and reduced advances in technology.

    1. Re:Innovations? by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1

      Its a shame really, because Bill Gates WAS, despite what you may say, once innovative. He seems to have become caught in a hitlerite web of power and greed over the decades - WAKE UP AND SMELL THE FUTURE Bill, otherwise your going to lose out bigtime. Where do i want to go today? Forward.

      --
      -=>>=-
    2. Re:Innovations? by settonull · · Score: 1

      >This whole innovative spiel has always baffled me. Everyone in here is right on the button to
      >proclaim the "lack of innovation" of Microsoft while simultaneously implicitly implying others,
      >such as Linux, are chock full of innovation. This is quite an interesting claim.

      I have yet to hear anyone say or imply that anything else is "innovating" either (I don't think many people even know what that means anymore). Instead people are saying MS which _claims_ to innovate, does not. There is a very big difference.


      --
      -chris (gandalf@darkcorner.net)
    3. Re:Innovations? by MassacrE · · Score: 1

      WinG came out because the large game developer industry would not write for windows, it was too dirt slow to run any sort of game (even 2d-in-a-small-window parralax scrollers were impossible). That was a lot more innovative than DirectX (although it really was only invented to promote windows sales as far as I could ever tell)

      DirectX was started because of Apple's Quicktime APIs. Things like QuickdrawGX, QuickDraw3d, etc. were gaining the attention of developers, so Microsoft saw this as a threat and decided to include their own APIs. Notice I did not say 'develop' - they developed DirectDraw and DirectSound i believe, but Direct3D was bought completely from another company.

    4. Re:Innovations? by Kalani · · Score: 1

      DirectX was probably thier only innovation

      Actually, I remember hearing that DirectX was purchased from a company which was designing an object-oriented game programming library for cross platform use. When Microsoft got it, they componentized it (thus moving the object source to binary files) and threw in a few Windows-specific programming requirements (IDirectDraw instances must be associated with a valid HWND [to be fair, this makes sense for auto-clipping if you're not in full-screen exclusive mode.], updated interface instances must be created through CoCreateInstance which is COM-specific). Still, the goal of DirectX has been to lure game programmers away from DOS so they can finally get rid of their ancient system (IMHO, this is a Good Thing). They've also been working with SGI on a new multimedia API which is supposed to replace DirectX. Sorry to you OpenGL fans, it's supposed to be componentized too (and if there's any legacy DX code, interfaces may also support IDispatch - ie: they're scriptable). Their focus has been on componentizing all aspects of their operating system, thus (the idea goes) simpler to program, and easier to update (interface names get incremental version numbers as updates are released, so that it's simple to keep the old interfaces working and add in new features of new interfaces by changing the name of an interface type, rather than using *Ex or *ExEx functions).

      Now, whether or not this is true is a matter of perspective ... I've written OLE-enabled applications from the base level (meaning: I play with OLE interface instances and implement interfaces required by certain features of OLE). In fact, OLE may be the only innovation to come out of Microsoft (though I'd give them a bit more credit than that). From what I've been able to learn, Microsoft's COM came out of Microsoft's research department, in their archives they've got some paper published by a Microsoftie back in '88. Of course, COM/DCOM takes its fundamentals from CORBA (its interface definition language is identical), but I digress... OLE (now called ActiveX) is built on top of the COM and thus cannot be a proprietary binary standard. It's a bunch of interfaces and interface definitions (of which you as the programmer must provide implementations) that allow such things as in-place document embedding/linking, simple scriptable objects and run-time type information retrieval, event and property notification sinks for use with scriptable controls, control container requirements, error information with a simple textual description and connection to documentation with even more information (with respect to the user's currently selected language, of course), and simple stuff that doesn't get much attention ... output streams, property bags (to maintain the state of controls between loading/unloading), and the system-wide lookup table (called the "Running Object Table" or "ROT") which manages monikers for all active document objects in the system. All of these are good ideas, though Microsoft's implementation may be a bit shoddy in parts (and good luck interpreting the Microspeak in the OLE/ActiveX documentation ... it's purposefully ambiguous, almost certainly because they don't want it stolen while it's so young). I believe that the real 'innovation' (I really don't like to use buzzwords but at least it's in context) from MS has been OLE ... and it really makes sense that it would be. Microsoft has pawned off a lot of their 'big programs' to monkey-coders (more on this in a sec) ... MS Office hasn't really changed much, the interface has been beautified and the Office programmers are just gluing together the little components which come in from other areas (yes, that talking paper clip came out of an MS Research project), MS Media Player (supposedly a new focus) has been beautified and even has some ripped off code (good thing Apple kept alive) but it's also been componentized, Internet Explorer *is* an OLE control component and a component container and uses scriptable objects (as you've seen in lots of security reports).

      The next big honking program to break up and componentize is Windows itself. Windows2000 is the result of this effort, it's the result of their 'innovation' in developing a distributed component model and a large-scale model for program interoperability. Every system object now becomes an interface, every (or most every) interface exposes IDispatch, so system services are scriptable unlike ever before. This is where the monkey-coders come in, and where I believe Microsoft shows real 'innovative' genius. They bring in these monkey-coders in droves. The monkey-coders are the guys/gals who know just enough about programming to toss a few ActiveX controls on a VB form and write some simple code to invoke the services of those controls. This is exactly what corporations want. It's 'innovation' of the most effective kind ... that which equates to fast cold hard cash. The monkey-coders whip out software like their butts are on fire, the PHB's (who now manage PHMC's) don't have to shell out as much cash to get software made since just about any ape can use VB effectively, and the steadily increasing prices of MS products doesn't really hurt the corporate bottom line, as they compensate with the money saved by hiring monkey-coders.

      If your goal in developing or using Linux is to destroy Microsoft, you must do so by destroying all facets of their production. You have a friendly GUI, you have an office suite, you have nice media players and card games and clocks and database-access middleware ... but what you don't have is a system built from the ground up with monkey-coders in mind; that's what you'll be fighting come W2K.

      Thank you for your time,
      -Kalani

      --
      ___
      The ends are ape-chosen, only the means are man's. -- Aldous Huxley
    5. Re:Innovations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Microsoft hasn't really innovated in a long time. DirectX was probably thier only innovation, and most of thier other innovations have been attempts to crush companies that got a jump on them.

      If they were truely into innovation they would invest more into NT on Alpha, instead of cancelling it and removing the major clustering bits out of Win 2000."


      This whole innovative spiel has always baffled me. Everyone in here is right on the button to proclaim the "lack of innovation" of Microsoft while simultaneously implicitly implying others, such as Linux, are chock full of innovation. This is quite an interesting claim.

      Whenever I ask for examples of true innovation in the computer industry (it's a LOT harder than people think to define a TRULY original development. Free software: Been around for years. Open Source: That was some of the foundations of the industry. Etc. etc. etc. Everything has a precursor that led to it and was a "ripoff" in some sense.

      If the Linux community is at all getting any degree of responsibility, why don't you all lay off MS 1-888 numbers and just go do your OS thing that so many of you babble about so incessantly but seemingly do nothing about. No one wants to hear your religious zealotry of why Linus Torvalds ripoff of someone else's OS is the NEXT GREAT THING, and how Linus is now really awesome because it has shells that imitate Windows 98. No one wants to hear bogus claims of how bad Windows NT is just because some slackjawed Linux yokel ran it with crap video drivers and it crapped out [note: I haven't had NT crash in over 6 MONTHS. And I guarantee I do far more to push it each and every day than about 98% of the participants in this messageboard].

    6. Re:Innovations? by TummyX · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but MediaPlayer kicks QuickTime ass.

      It's fast and multithreaded....quicktime uses up 100% of my processing time playing an MPG file - and when scaling - it doesn't cope at ALL.
      MediaPlayer can scale and basically do anything I want without any frame loss...and uses less than 5% processing time.

      Come to think of it same thing with Office...StarOffice is SLOOOOOOOOOOOW. First time I installed it, the setup went fine - except at 0:00 time (when it should be finished) it threadlocked for 3 minutes before finishing...nice.
      Then the first time i ran it, it froze totally when I went "File -> Open".
      Not to mention that it took 20seconds to load - unlike the 2 seconds (and that's not exagerated) it takes Word/Excel etc to load.

      When I think about it - Microsoft products are the fastest products I've ever used. Sure, Windows isn't faster than other OSs for specific things - but generally for what I do (programming & wp) it's much faster.

  4. Suggestion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It looks like you could just as easily use their email tool to send anti-Microsoft emails to Congress as pro-MS email to Congress. Wouldn't that be ironic :)

    (assuming, of course, that someone on the other end actually reads the thing.)

  5. Re:Allow MS's competitors to innovate too! by mochaone · · Score: 1

    Word and all the other Office applications have improved so considerably that Microsloth has now created a new group to fix all the viruses created by "Office Developers" (geez, can you imagine having that for a job title) that are embedded in these wondrous applications.

    Yep, I sure love it when my application is inundated with needless "features" and is about as open as an CIA project meeting.

    I don't know about you, but I'll stick with the limiting applications like Star Office. What ever will I do without all those annoying evil macros and viruses now?

    --
    Hates people who have stupid little sigs
  6. Re:I don't get it by TummyX · · Score: 1


    Another thing is that I have heard that they have their own API into Windows. So even if you program for Windows, you are already at a disadvantage because you are given an inferior set of rules to play by. This also is wrong.

    ROFL that's the single stupidified thing I've read this weak. They write Win32, then they write InternalWin32??
    Don't think so, it's so improbably in so many ways. There are some scarcly documented API calls. Microsoft knows Windows survives because of Applications and Developers - You think Windows would survive with just MS software alone?



    Lastly, have you noticed that the evil Bill Gates just gave one billion

    I never notice him giving anything before his PR committee told him that his public popularity was one step below the devil


    You're very isolated - The Gates foundation is worth like 17billion, which means he's managed to give away 16 other billions. Infact, Gates has been giving away his money steadily - it's been increasing tho - like he's promised.

  7. Maybe Gates was tromatized... by gmezero · · Score: 1

    Say, you know, maybe Gates was tromatized so baddly by that guy who pied him in the face, that the word FIN is starting to seep into everything he does. Maybe we'll next see Microsoft rename Windows 2000 to FIN 2000. It will be just like that Simpson's episode where Homer is so mad at Moe for stealing the "Flamming Homer", that all here hears anyone say when they talk is the word "Moe, moe moe moe, moe? Moe moe moe!"

    Actually my hopes are that FIN actually stands for Final Indecisive Movement ;p

  8. Re:-- grass root -- by technotron · · Score: 1

    or for that matter ruin the economy of a small country

  9. Re:Impregnate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Impossible, since Micsosoft is screwing us all up the butt.

  10. Re:Microsoft's freedom to innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a fairy tale solution from an economic perspective. Why? Because who will decide this break up? what you are suggesting is a govt. committee that will decide what parts of software a company can make.

    Sure, today MS is powerful, so you hate it. Tomorrow another company will be (recall any anti Red Hat or Netscape posts?) It's highly theoretical to say "break it up to make the market fair".

    Yesterday IBM was bundling software and crushing competitors, today MS is, tomorrow another company will be. Yeah, have a govt. official rubberstamping everything. That will REALLY speed up the industry.

    No matter how much you hate MS, remember that dragging the govt. in can kill the industry. Just look at Canada.

  11. Microsoft already sent a check. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't mean to burt your bubble, but Microsoft has launched a massive campaign to buy Congress and special interest money. Just about every member of Congress who voted form Microsoft last year received at least $1000 directly and thousands more through Party donations. My recommendation is to vote against members of Congress who take bribes from Bill Gates.

  12. Wasting your breath by Noke · · Score: 1

    I'm sad to say that most of the readers (and moderators from what I've seen) aren't open-minded enough to look at your argument without getting all emotional and fanatical about their beloved OS. Your words on this linux fan-site aren't going to change anyones "well-thought out" views of the world of Linux and Microsoft.

  13. Does Anyone Believe this Comment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We believe consumers should decide what products they want to buy, based on quality and what best meets their needs." I guess it's time for another Microsoft Refund Day. Howard Beale

  14. BASIC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BASIC is a language, not a software product. However, Microsoft's BASIC package was very significant in the life of the PC, as it was one of the first PC products ever. Probably the first successful development environment for the PC.

  15. Re:Innovations? and why microsoft can't by CormacJ · · Score: 1

    There have been some good innovations, graphical web browsing, the GUI. More recent innovations include things like MP3 compression.

    There isn't a lot of innovation on Linux because linux is still mostly a server product, and as such has to fit in with the established protocols.

    This is partly whats microsofts "innovation" is about - they define a "new standard" to grab market share. The innovation here isn't about whats good for computing, its about whats good for shareholds and thier pockets. By innovating with closed protocols and NDA'd documentation, they attempt to force a product into the market and close out the competitors that might actually release a bug free version that works faster.

    Microsoft aren't a fast company. Thier relase calendar is 3 years. The hardware release calendar is 18 months. Microsoft are always going to be behind the wagon no matter what.

    This is what microsoft are trying to protect 1) Thier money and 2) Thier products (see #1)

    The thing that came out of the various microsoft trials wasn't that microsoft were locking the market to innovate - they were locking the market to screw a few extra bucks out of people. Note for example, we are contantly buying PC's in. When win 95 first came preinstalled, we got a nice user booklet, and cd in a case. Today we get a license leaflet, 35 floppy disk labels and a pointer telling us to make our own install kit. Microsoft are probably saving an extra 2 dollars doing this.

  16. Re:Linux is the religion by TummyX · · Score: 1

    Loook at the zealots and evangelists here - ready to burn bill gates at the stake.
    I bet they make annual pilgramiges to Transmeta everyear to worship Linus at his place of work.

  17. Freedom to innovate what...? by Moxen · · Score: 2

    No, no, you're all missing the point here. It's not the freedom to innovate in the world of software. That's too difficult; they just live by the happy maxim of "Buy or Stomp".

    It's been obvious that Gates' sphere of innovation is that of business cruelty. When have you even seen such inventive and creative ways to gut competition and smile at the mindless consumers? Their ability is so awe inspiring that, well, they are mostly untouchable.

    The whole "grassroots" effort here is a prime example of their innovation. It almost [ahem] makes you feel bad for them. Well, if you had no idea how completely evil they are.

    The really, really beautiful part of this whole thing is the "grassroots" aspect. I mean, according to their thesaurus, synonyms of "grassroots" are: waged people, proletariat, working class, workers, masses, the herd and plebs [sic]. Last time I checked, a multi-billion dollar corporation hardly constitutes as a grassroots organizer.

    If you want pure innovation, try using the MSDN help for Java. They go through great and inventive lengths to keep you from finding help on the standard class library. They just keep pushing you into the MS classes hierarchy... now that's the kind of innovation that made this country great!

    I hope they all die, all of them.

    P.S. [naive mode] Hey, I thought the MICROS~1 8.3 MS-DOS name conversions were pretty innovative. Anyone else?

  18. Re: bullcrap by TummyX · · Score: 0


    It is easier to code two sets of HTML, one for IE and one for everyone elses browser.


    Write any handwritten perfect W3C HTML or XML that will work on any browser and I bet you it will look better in IE.

    Netscape is the biggest piece of shit i've ever used.

    Everything that *manages* to work in netscape works perfectly (and 10X sometimes 100X faster) in IE. Unfortunately - this doesn't work in reverse.

  19. And I believe... by Squeeze+Truck · · Score: 1

    And I believe that freedom means my right to own slaves. I mean, this is the economy we're talkin about! Damn socialists.

    --

    "Reactionaries must be deprived of the right to voice their opinions; only the people have that right." - Mao

  20. Re:Impregnate? by Dilbert_ · · Score: 1

    No, I didn't actually write it myself, just stole it from a Dutch website that probably stole it somewhere else. There is no mention of a source there, that's why I didn't quote it (that and I'm lazy).

    --
    superblog.org: all your favourite blogs on o
  21. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought it was commonly understood that the phrase "Microsoft innovation"
    is an oxymoron.

  22. Doctrine of the Quick Buck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, to buy a company someone or several someones have to be willing to sell it. If other computer companies were willing to tough it out and try to build a business rather than going for the quick buck sell-out, maybe MS would have some more competition.

    1. Re:Doctrine of the Quick Buck by znu · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's a realistic option for any company that's publicly traded, unless they feel like a shareholder's lawsuit.

      --

      --
      This space unintentionally left unblank.
  23. Visual Tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both VB and Visual C++ are potent development environments for Windows with many innovative features. I defy anyone to demonstrate a superior development environment than Visual C++ 6.0.

    1. Re:Visual Tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is easy. Delphi 5 or 4 for that matter. Get it done faster and with less errors. If you are a language bigot and refuse to use a language with Pascal roots, use CBuilder.

    2. Re:Visual Tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple, yes now where do I begin...
      Oh, well:
      1. Borland C++Builder and Delphi:
      * Rapid developement environment.
      * Great Debugger.
      2. GVIM. I am not kidding...
      3. XEmacs. 'Nuff said.
      4. Symantech VisualCafe.
      5. VisualAge for Java.

  24. Re:Freedom to Innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Actually, there have been, in the earlier stages of the company.

    Microsoft's BASIC was one of the earliest language products for the infant PC market.

    That's the only one I can think of.

    The problem with other products that MS claims as being innovative is that it's innovative only in the very limited area of the MS universe, eg., COM+, Visual Basic, etc. This would be similar to AOL claiming its proprietary hypertext language (Rainman?) is innovative.

    I wouldn't be surprised if they'd created innovative products when MS was a small company fighting IBM and Apple. Does anyone recall?

    Also, now that they have a major research lab, they may come up with breakthroughs, simply due to the sheer number of researchers working there. Their biggest problem has been backward compatibility, which tends to stunt innovation.

  25. Re:I always get errors on comment submission! by Yarn · · Score: 1

    was it 'Error 98, you are not using MS Internet Explorer'?

    I'd be more inclined to suspect the slashdot effect combined with crappy servers than MS writing an AI that works.

    --
    -Yarn - Rio Karma: Excellent
  26. Re:Freedom to Innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well they distributed close combat 1 2 and 3, though admittedly they didnt write it, atomic did. I do enjoy a good head to head slaughter on that. Brad

  27. Re:Microsoft's freedom to innovate by JoostT · · Score: 4

    The only thing that has to be done is break Microsoft up in to parts:

    - one part that makes OS-es
    - one part that makes applications

    If there was Microsoft Office for Linux and Beos and (fill in youre favourite os) then the part that of Microsoft that makes OS-es would really have to innovate and compete on the basis of features for the OS.

    It's the combination of making an OS and the applications that makes the "monopoly".

    Joost

  28. Flag Defacement? by CormacJ · · Score: 1

    Does the FIN logo count as defacing the flag? "In 1989 when the flag-burning controversy arose, I joined with the American Legion in taking steps to react. I signed legislation outlawing flag burning or defacing the flag, but I also wanted to stop flag burning before it starts." --Bill Clinton, speech to the American Legion, 8/25/92

    1. Re:Flag Defacement? by odaiwai · · Score: 1

      Somehow I think MS will get away with their use of Old Glory with a claim that innovation is a 'great American Tradition' or some such. I can just picture billg standing proud in court defending his right to use the flag with a stirring speech while the massed microsoft minions(tm) hum "mine eyes have seen the glory and the coming of the lord" behind him.

      dave "mmm, mmm, mmmmmm, mmmmm"

    2. Re:Flag Defacement? by TummyX · · Score: 1

      Although I support Microsoft, that's the funniest thing I've read today.

  29. Re:Freedom to Innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    None that I know of and I believe that they have been sued and settled out of court with a approximately a half dozen companies. One of these companies was Apple. Anyone who thinks that MacroSloths investment in Apple was anything other than a settlement is just too naive.

    They bought DOS, they stold windows, they packaged dos and windows together to avoid competition from DOS clones and called it Win95. They change the windows API every couple of years just to break anybody elses clone attempts. Win3.12 was released with the sole purpose of breaking OS 2.1.

    They never met an open standard that they didn't try to embrace and extend. The only standard that MS and the Internet both use is Samba and getting that working has been like pulling teeth. It is easier to code two sets of HTML, one for IE and one for everyone elses browser.

    I just read that they finally released their office file format specifications. But don't expect any sort of timely release of these specifications when they release a new version of their software. Not until their new software has had plenty of time to break all other products.

  30. Innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Thanks to Microsofts innovation, we soon only have one functional web browser. And that one only runs on Win32 and MacOS.

    The last release of Netscape is soo buggy that every Windows person I talked to says they'll change to IE.

    Innovation my ass...

    -T

  31. Freedom but not for YOU! by crovira · · Score: 1

    I went, I saw and I was not conquered.

    There was no feedback button where I could have asked if *I* could innovate. Without that possibility, its just BS wrapped up in a flag.

    Microsoft is acting like a PAC (politician action committee) or worse like politicians. Well, they should suffer the fate of politicians. There are at least TWO parties in any democracy. They share in the general apathy of the populace and their fortunes are as variable as the last election.

    Also their leadership is forced to roll-over.

    Would YOU like to be King'O Redmond for a term? What Catbert-ish damage I could inflict! :-)

    -Charles-A.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  32. What are you talking about? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

    != is synonomous with "not equal to"

    ( x != y ) is most certainly an assertion. I can clearly assert that 1 != 2.

    The question comes in when you say "if".

    Only a non C-programmer would get that confused.


    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    1. Re:What are you talking about? by Lord+Kenja · · Score: 1

      No.

      In C the '!=' is a question (it's an operator. Meaning it will return someting). If it's correct it returns a 'true' value and if not it returns a 'false' value.

      THAT makes '!=' to technically a question and not (as it would be in mathematics) an assertion (where it would state in an equation that these too values is NOT the same).

      So there you have it. Hope that clears it up.

      Personally I think I would let the matematically count. Since I have little use of C operators outside of a source file ;)

  33. MS Freedom != True Freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I posted the following to the Microsoft site:

    I support a freedom to innovate, but true freedom, not freedom in the eyes of the leaders of Microsoft where freedom means freedom for them to do whatever they want to bully the market and sell more products, kill the competition, and spread FUD.

    I use Linux, Netscape, WordPerferct, Java, etc. I support those platforms for their security, stability, support, flexibility, and generally because it is fun and refreshing for a change.

    You may add me to your mailing list. You should have an option on your main page for those who don't agree totally or agree only partially, but would still like to get the info from your list.

    Please open up Microsoft, let competition blossom, and don't use your power and $$ to kill off each and everything that **might** threaten you....

  34. Sweet land of GPF by Dalavon · · Score: 1

    The flag is completly out of line. Sure I feel they can do whatever they like with it, burn it, wipe thier bum with it, make love to it, whatever. But after serving in the worlds most powerfull military (and if you doubt that just try us) I do take notice of people doing something like this to something I care about and was willing to die for....and my father was willing to die for...and his father was willing to die for. Maybe if we had kept "Don't tread on me!" they would have gotten the point. Sure it is just a symbol...but what is it a symbol for....well when you are over seas its a symbol for everything you have, your family, yourhome, your church, your friends, your ISP.

    Point? Yeah I have a point, just picture a big fella pointing a finger at you saying " I wouldn't touch that if I were you!" before you attempt to mess with the flag again.

  35. Re:The actual responses? by RichardW · · Score: 2

    We (the company where I work) use Microsoft products too. We often use the MS knowledge base. It can be good - it can also be a pain. But how is this innovation?
    I also spent an hour this morning installing all the clip art for Office 2k on someone's PC. Their wonderful "innovative" install on demand system is not all it's cut out to be.
    Sure, let them innovate. But please, don't let them continually claim their products to be much, much, more than what they are (in doing so stifling the competition), and please, let's stop this proliferation of Windows NT CDs that we get with every PC, regardless of how many licences we have. This is NOT innovation, it's dubious marketing and sales strategies. What they have innovated I will gladly give them credit for. I use MS VC++. I like it. The class viewer is useful, as are the other tools. This is innovation. The office assistant and install-on-demand may be innovation, but IMHO they are a load of cack and don't work correctly. The lawsuit by the DOJ is less to do with their programming ability than their ability to buy out / out-maneuver their rivals using dubious business practices.
    If MS had just used market capability to reach to reach their current status I would feel differently. However, on the back of their DOS licensing (which made them a lot of money) and their continual sale of software that costs a lot and doesn't do much more for the average user, I feel that it's time that their bluff was called.
    Freedom to innovate should mean just that.
    Freedom to innovate without the latest version of Outlook (beta, of course) saying that your e-postcards could contain a virus.
    Freedom to innovate without Windows (again, beta) saying that your version of DOS is incompatible and you should use MS-DOS.
    Etc.
    BTW, I'm using an MS keyboard to type this. And those are good. ;-)

  36. Free Software Violates Anti-Trust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    <SARCASM>

    The Free Software Foundation and other groups have colluded in the attempt to form an illegal monopoly based on restraint of trade. They are guilty of six violations:

    1. Collusion to fix the price of software -- at zero.

    2. Using the GPL to force software companies to give back their derivative works, just like an Intel patent license.

    3. Illegal tying, by bundling applications with operating systems (e.g. Slackware, Red Hat, S.u.s.e. all have applications included).

    4. Pressuring developers to release Free Software, or be driven out of the market by Free clones. Threatening to unleash the manpower of thousands of Internet programmers against companies that refuse to deal.

    5. Dividing the technology market with hardware manufacturers, by taking over driver authorship for those manufacturers who co-operate.

    6. Holding a monopoly over computer hobbyists, and using them to debug software. Not only does this vast, unpaid, international work force violate minimum-wage and other labor laws, but it is unfair to other developers, who aren't able to get their fair share of these hobbyists.

    As you can see, "Free" Software is a menace to business. It is one of the largest illegal trusts ever made, encompassing thousands of individuals and several companies around the world. People can't write software under its threats and coercion; they are being forced to join in. It has to be stopped, to protect the public!

    Free Software has to be broken up. The GPL needs to be split into two mutually incompatible licenses, and some software currently under it has to go each way. This is the only way to achieve fairness.

    </SARCASM>

    Turnabout is fair play...

    -- an Ayn-onymous Coward

  37. Re:Visual Studio by ajakk · · Score: 1

    Most Smalltalk environments allow you to do this. They have had this sort of functionality for years.

  38. We should give them that freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will be good for the community

    1. Re:We should give them that freedom by riggwelter · · Score: 2
      Should we? Would it really be good for the community?


      Microsoft have essentially had the freedom to 'innovate' up until now, and just look at what they've come up with - proprietory systems that redefine the word "unstable"


      In any case, what community are you refering to? The 'Open Source' community? The Linux Community? The UN*X Community? or the online/computing community as a whole?


      We should all have the freedom to innovate, it's organisations like M$ that seek to restrict that freedom by squashing opposition and their good ol' propoganda.


      I say break 'em up, or force them to make Windows Open Source (or at the very least free). The second option is attractive, I would feel less disinclined to pay 200 or whatever it is for Office if I hadn't had to pay about for Windows!


      If Microsoft really want to encourage innovation, the way to go about it is *not* to start lobbying Congress to leave them alone - it's to start developing good products in a fair way.

      --
      Listening for the sound of the coming rain...
    2. Re:We should give them that freedom by CrosseyedPainless · · Score: 1

      That was hardly "froth."

    3. Re:We should give them that freedom by MassacrE · · Score: 1

      I think we should REQUIRE them to innovate, for once. They should lose the freedom to buy and steal existing technology, and have to invent their own for once in their corporate existance.

    4. Re:We should give them that freedom by s390 · · Score: 3

      MS isn't part of "the community" of Open Source.

      In fact, they are the opposition to everything that Open Source stands for and tries to do. They don't care about quality or open standards, but just want to increase the value of their stock options! They're a parasite on computing.

      I sent M$ a polite but stiff note. However, here's what I sent all the links for my reps (in my case, Clinton, Feinstein, Boxer, and Cox), and I'd encourage everyone who replies to Microsoft to also write their Senators and Representives with similar messages. Don't let them prevail!

      "I'm using a website Microsoft put up to provide their faithful easy access to their legislators.

      However, I'm using it to oppose any attempt to let Microsoft off the hook for their criminal past of lies, outright theft, and other patently illegal practices. Resist their MS apologists!

      In my opinion, Microsoft should be tarred and feathered and run out of this country on a rail.

      Best regards,"

      As they say in Chicago, vote early and often. ;-)


    5. Re:We should give them that freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      freedom to innovate != freedom to dominate

      It's so sad that nobody who uses that shorthand'!=' seems to realize that it's a question, not an assertion.

      Only a non C-programmer would use '!=' as an assertion.

    6. Re:We should give them that freedom by jilles · · Score: 4

      Who's denying it to them anyway? They claim a right that they deny others with their strategy of crushing smaller competitors. Non of their current products has technical advantages over its competitors. Some of these products are of high quality some aren't ('innovations' in this area are welcome as far as I'm concerned).

      The things they claim are innovations are not. The two most important ones are:
      - browser integration
      - java API modifications

      The first is a very obvious and rather succesful attempt to outcompete other browsers.
      The second is violating SUN's license. In other words they stole somebodies idea and are now trying to push the real innovator (SUN) out of the market.

      For all you MS haters/lovers, I have this nice ZDNet link

      --

      Jilles
    7. Re:We should give them that freedom by BrianH · · Score: 5

      I wholeheartedly agree. Microsoft should have a freedom to innovate. But remember that freedom to innovate != freedom to dominate. I remember a time in the early and mid 80's when I actually respected Microsoft for innovating. Sure, their products may not have been completely original but they were trying to open computing to the masses...and that was still a new idea.

      The problem is that MS has gone from innovator to dominator, and they are slowly strangling the computer industry. MS essentially sees all other software companies as competition, and rather than compete, MS would rather buy or crush them. If you look closely at Microsofts history, you'll find dozens of software companies that have been bought out, and hundreds of products or ideas that have either been "borrowed" or blatantly stolen. MS doesn't compete, it destroys.

      The hipocrisy of Microsofts statement is that they want to keep their dominance of the computer industry, but the lack of competition stifles innovation. Microsoft knows this, and they want this. Innovation is Microsofts worst enemy. The Internet was a major innovation in computer communication. The OSS movement is a huge innovation in software distribution. Java was a big innovation in the war against platorm dependence. Fact is, every time another "innovation" occurs MS is forced to fight even harder to maintain it's position. MS isn't interested in innovation, this is just a desperate shot by a company that has finally realized that it's days are numbered.

      --

      There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
    8. Re:We should give them that freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks! You did more for MS with that letter than 10 pro-MS emails could. Will all other unstable American Linux fanatics please also spam your representatives with similar froth?

  39. Re:An even better answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    On the other hand I don't see all the Linux users claiming their software is particularly innovative. I see MS claiming their software is innovative, so we ask for evidence.

    In fact, why do you even single out Linux?

    The difference between the open source community and Microsoft is intentions. Who has better intentions? The ones who are soley here to make money, or the ones who are soley here to make something better?

    No, the difference here is that the way we do things is innovative, and therefore the end result is simply better. We don't focus on profit, we focus on security, privacy, CHOICE.

  40. Re:Acts of freedom by Saige · · Score: 1

    Hmm, I wonder... If you restrict someones freedom, do you still have freedom yourself?

    An attack on anyone's freedom is an attack on everyone's freedom. I think freedom gains value the more people have of it. By taking it away from anyone, you're reducing the freedom of everyone else. Too many people don't get that.

    Of course, there is a point where there is "too much" freedom, and as a result the worth of freedom goes downhill. If you give someone the freedom to kill, then you watch as plenty of people lose their freedom to live.

    The goal should be to find the point where everyone has as much invidual freedom as possible but without reaching the point where one person's freedoms start infringing on another's.
    ---

    --
    "You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
  41. Microsoft MUST Innovate! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Microsoft has never shown the slightest indication of being innovative. If they need ideas for new products, they buy, borrow, or steal them.

    The only answer is to force Microsoft to innovate. All other high tech businesses are in the position of having to innovate or die. Microsoft's whole business plan seems to be to avoid this, by achieving monopoly pricing powers which puts them above having to innovate.

    The goal of DOJ should be to force Microsoft to compete on a level playing field. With their survival at stake, maybe we would see some true innovation from Microsoft, but I doubt it.

  42. Re:A better question by Get+Behind+the+Mule · · Score: 2

    Can anyone think of any innovative product to come from Linux?

    If you're posing this question to suggest that Linux is no better than M$, then you're missing the point. Linux doesn't have a "Freedon to Innovate" site up in which they are asking you to write your Congressman, nor is anyone involved in Linux invoking the word "innovate" in some kind of PR campaign.

    There may be any number of original ideas implemented in the Linux kernel, but the whole idea of developing a Unix kernel in open source is not to create something "innovative". On the contrary, the idea is to build upon the successful concepts underlying an OS that has proven itself over the past thirty years. What you need most from a kernel is stability, and Linux provides it, by employing technologies whose reliability is well established.

    In contrast we have M$, trumpeting something about "innovation". And as others have pointed out, this is outrageous dounblethink, because M$ has never innovated any significant technology. However commercially successful some of their products may have been, they were, with no exception I know of, bought, copied or "embraced and extended".

    When M$ speaks of "innovation", what they really mean is the ability to bundle software, such as the Explorer, with their operating system, and to do so without any legal penalties. Their argument in court and in public has been that this bundling was "innovation". In truth, it was a violation of a standing consent decree and of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, specifically designed to drive Netscape out of the market. So now they have to color their illegal act as "innovation" and beg Congress and the public for sympathy.

    No one involved in Linux needs this ploy.

  43. The actual responses? by RichardW · · Score: 2

    I would like to know exactly how "overwhelming" the response has been to their campaign. I told them exactly what I thought of their "Freedom to Innovate" campaign, but had no response whatsoever. Obviously they'll wish to keep negative responses quiet, but I'd like to know how many they got compared with positive ones. I'd especially like to know how many negative responses they get after someone's tried to find an article in their knowledge base... ;-)

    1. Re:The actual responses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, late last year they did the same thing with developers and the response was so bad that they finally realized that, as a company, Microsoft had alienated most of them. The only outspoken people who responded to the call were the "Microsoft Certified" contracting firms. I have it second/third-hand that their response was seen for what it was [a** kissing].

      Of course with Win2K you have Microsoft partnering with alot of small developers and actually licensing versions of products for inclusion in the OS install. There is still the fear that if you, as a small developer, come up with something innovative Microsoft will see it and 're-innovate' it.

      Stock holders might be swayed a bit more, but could anyone afford enough stock to actually feel like they had an interest in speaking for them? Maybe some financial institutions, but no one else.

    2. Re:The actual responses? by The+Ancient+Geek · · Score: 2

      I believe them when they say they've been overwhelmed with responses--and I'm not being sarcastic. The Open Source community may view Microsoft as the incarnation of Evil, but all the programmers I know generally like Microsoft. Some of us, including me, are Microsoft fans. I think the DOJ lawsuit is a put-up job led by Microsoft opponents who got blown out of the water due to their own market problems, not Microsoft hegemony. Unless you consider charging lower prices to be hegemony.

      I find SlashDot (and UserFriendly) to be very interesting for a variety of reasons, not least of which is the a priori assumption that Microsoft is Evil. It seems, and I may not be correct, that the people who really hate Microsoft tend to be system admins. Programmers I work with generally want to work on projects with Microsoft tools, because you can do cooler stuff, and for the most part the cool new features actually work.

      So, frankly, I signed up. I'm the president of a small development house, and we've consistently found that Microsoft's development tools work, while other tools generally don't work as well.

      Funny thing? We love the Knowledge Base. I have wondered before if Microsoft is better focused on meeting the needs of developers than they are at meeting the needs of system admins. Could this be an indication?

    3. Re:The actual responses? by Sxooter · · Score: 3

      You should really read "The Microsoft File" by Wendy Goldman. You would find out that:

      They invite companies to their campus with the lure that they want to buy them and their technology. They get the company to sign "sharing" agreements where they show MS all their secrets and source code. MS then says, sorry, we aren't interested, steals the ideas and builds their own product. Most of these companies are too small to mount a legal challened in court and disappear within a year or two of their MS meeting.

      They openly forced most large computer sellers like Compaq and Dell to pay for windows for each and every computer they sold, even if the customer wanted a "blank" machine with no OS.

      They forced most large computer sellers to bundle MS Office with Windows 95, actually charging more for just widnows 95 than for windows 95 and MS office. Ever wonder why Office is the dominant suite in the market? MS gave it away long enough to establish a lead, then hopped up the price once the competition was mostly dead.

      When people were first signing up for early development kits, they had to sign forms stating they would not develop applications for other "drag and drop" interfaces with the Microsoft tools. At the time there were several alternative OLE like options, most of which were far nicer than the on in WIN32 (what a cranky, buggy interface to program).

      Microsoft got where it is today by strong arming the cometition and abusing its monopoly power, whether you can see it or not.

      If a Japanese firm acted like Microsoft, we'd have stopped them long ago, but because they are an American company, they have gotten away with this too long. Please stop them now before it's too late.

      --

      --- It is not the things we do which we regret the most, but the things which we don't do.
    4. Re:The actual responses? by jflynn · · Score: 2

      I'd like to know too, but doubt we ever will.

      This article is likely to slashdot them with negative responses. I replied, caustically but politely. I hope they get a lot of well written negative comments. It's too bad the people in Washington aren't likely to see them.

      This site is really an affront. First the "big lie" premise that the trial is about Microsoft's "freedom to innovate", as if they ever had, or ever respected anyone else's freedom. The kicker though is the caricature of the American flag -- uh, yeah, thanks for not using the Microsoft logo in the little monitor at least! Supporting Microsoft is patriotic, I'm sure, remember how Microsoft said any delay in Win98 from the bundling trial might have serious effects on the economy?

  44. Wow, look at all the M$ bashing going down... by Otto · · Score: 1

    Okay guys, I hate to say this, but...

    The issues are not all that clear cut.

    Microsoft IS being anti-competitive. No Question. However, I think that the more important issue here is freedom of software.

    ANY company should be able to develop ANY damn piece of software they want. If it undercuts another piece of software, hey, that sucks, get a net.

    I am forced to use NT4 at work, due to the fact that the system I'm programming is forced to run on it (long story). And, I hate to say this, but Internet Explorer is much, much, much better than Netscape on this platform. WAY better. It has more security problems, true. A lot of "features" turned out to be bugs in the long run. But it works better, doesn't crash nearly as often, and is one hell of a lot faster than Netscape is.

    Netscape could have beaten IE. Anti-competitive practice aside, there was a point, when IE was being integrated into the OS, that Netscape could have utterly destroyed IE forever. All they had to do was usurp the integration away from IE. IE became the windows default shell (it's not anymore, BTW.. IE5 doesn't even give you that option anymore). If Netscape had given you that option, back in Netscape 3, IE would have been toast. OEM's would have integrated the thing before anyone else had the chance.

    And let's face it. Netscape had one hell of a monopoly on the market. They had almost total market coverage. For a long time, Netscape was the ONLY browser ANYONE used. They assured this by:
    a) giving it away for free
    b) using netscape propietary extensions (CENTER anyone?)
    c) always supporting the latest HTML specs
    d) making it into an overall system. (e-mail, ftp, gopher, everything but telnet)

    Then, they made a lot of money by selling licenses to businesses, for the same free product they gave to individuals, at unreasonably huge rates. We're talking upwards of $1000 a copy here. (I know this is true, since I worked for a company that had to buy these damn things. The paperwork was immense.) And the businesses, at that time, had no other choices, since nothing else was on the market.

    Let's face it. Netscape had it, they lost it. Microsoft may have been a bit anti-competitive, but Netscape sure as hell had a monopoly. Don't nail one without the other too.

    Otto puts his flame-retardant-suit on...


    ---

    --
    - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  45. Re:They can innovate all they want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was Stacker Disk Compression that the re-versed engineered. I guess they Called it "DoubleSpace" which they really never did get the whole concept right the first time. I remember back I lost 170MB of data to this version of DOS. They (MS) had numerous DOS Upgrades trying to fix this. I guess eventually to get the bad name off of "DoubleSpace" MS comes out with "DiskDoubler". MS has giving us customers crap about innovation for years, I haven't seen many products live up to the Vaporware image they always bring to the table, that usually put's losess to competitors who have the technology now, due to many uneducated consumers who wait after seeing Ziff Davis cover on MS future products that don't even have a beta out. -The Phantom-

  46. Hey! by gmezero · · Score: 1

    Is that a computer replacing the stars? I didn't know we were now the United States of Computer?!? Man, this site screams a need for parody.

    1. Re:Hey! by odaiwai · · Score: 1

      > I didn't know that you were the United States of Stars ;)

      Why do you think all those alien superheroes live in the US?

      dave

    2. Re:Hey! by raykt · · Score: 1

      at least they didn't put the windows logo there (yet)

    3. Re:Hey! by gmezero · · Score: 1

      ...yep, one star for each superhero...

      Atleast they let us keep the one stripe for each super pet mascot!

  47. Re:Microsoft innovations and freedom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    >Let's hope they will provide us with specs.

    Hmm? hehe.heeeheheeheee.heeheeHEEHAAWWHHAWWWHAWW HAWWHAWWHAWW-*choke*gasp*erp*...heeheehee...

    eswan - a mozilla ate my cookie.

  48. Who are "The People" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "In a time when Microsoft is greatly unpopular with the people..." A bunch of Linux fanatics sending propaganda back and forth to each other over the web is not "The People". If you put Linux and Windows 98 in front of every person in America, Windows 98 would be the choice of the vast majority. These users like Plug and Play for their hardware, and like to be able to run many different types of games and productivity software. Linux appeals to broke student hackers, bored alternative media personnel, seething back-room MIS types and the opportunists hoping to make money off of cashing in on other people's work. It does not appeal to Joe and Jane Q. Public.

  49. Re:I don't get it by Godfree^ · · Score: 1

    I know someone who codes for MS.

    MS is not just one big company. They outsource a large percentage of the development to smaller companies. Only the major MS apps such as Office and Windows are written in house. Have a look on the boxes of other Microsoft products. They'll have more than one software house on it... Microsoft are becoming a PUBLISHER.

    --
    - Damnit, I'm dead Jim
  50. I don't get it by Terao · · Score: 1

    Exactly what do they mean with "Freedom to innovate"?

    It would be apropriate for movements like "Down with sofware patents" or "Free the code" but not for a "Help us keep our monopoly" movement.

    1. Re:I don't get it by Godfree^ · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's not only government monopolies that are unnoticed.

      Here in the UK, if you buy a product that has any chemical in it, chances are, it was produced by ICI. But, as ICI don't deal witht he public, nobody knows about them, and they have complete market domination (moreso than MS). People only dislike MS because they know they exist, and are jealous.

      --
      - Damnit, I'm dead Jim
    2. Re:I don't get it by EricWright · · Score: 1

      >I do not see anyone here ranting about the US Postal Service or other government institutions that have monopoly power.

      "Er, that's because they are owned by the people. If they start acting like an abusive monopoly, the public can easily get involved and fix it."

      Really? I don't remember getting to vote on increases in postal rates. The only voting I can remember is "Fat Elvis" vs. "Skinny Elvis" and other such stamp image issues, certainly not about the monetary values of these stamps.

      Chrs
      Eric

    3. Re:I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course you don't get it. You have no real clue why intellectual property and it's associated laws exist. MS has no moral rights to it's source code. Infact, it has an obligation to share that source code since it's using, or perhaps more accurately abusing, the power of government to enforce artificial scarcity. Constitutionally (US), Intellectual Property exists purely as a means to an end, not as an independent notion of property. The point is not to enrich Bill or make him rich or give him power but to encourage invention. Bill is doing anything but that. He had to be dragging kicking and screaming into the 80's round about 1995. Thus, those of us who were 'in the 80's' before '95 find these MS assertions to be a pathetic joke. If someone deserves to be in a position to abuse power today, through the success of good product in a free market, it's Jobs and Woz.

    4. Re:I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really would like the government to investigate this. I wonder how much code is actually theirs?

      Hey cool! Storm troopers digging through our computers making sure we have the right to the source code for the software we run! Neato!

      Only on Slashdot...

    5. Re:I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Now this is going to stir you up a bit, however, before reacting emotionally please think this out. First, I am not a MS fan. I have to use NT for accounting purposes but that is it. Other than that I run Linux or Solaris. The 'code' belongs to MS. Their money was used to produce it. Not yours, not mine. If they want to keep it locked in a safe on the moon, that is their right (we are talking about true freedom here). Under the logic of free the code, Coke should publish their recipe for their soda. True freedom consists of choosing your own destiny, not letting others choose it for you. Enough on philosophy. It is easy to pick on MS from a technical standpoint, however, it is a bit tiring to see the rantings of monopoly power. I do not see anyone here ranting about the US Postal Service or other government institutions that have monopoly power. Enough there. Lastly, have you noticed that the evil Bill Gates just gave one billion (yep, that's a lot of zeros) to a scholarship fund? That means some more students get to produce sights like slashdot. Stop and think before you say 'he can afford it'. After all, it is his money. Having said this, I will again tell you I am not a MS fan. I just believe in true freedom. If you do not like MS, do not use their products. I am posting this as anonymous because I know the emotional response it will draw. I would gladly give my email to anyone who would like to have a logical discussion.

    6. Re:I don't get it by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      >I do not see anyone here ranting about the US Postal Service or other government institutions that >have monopoly power.

      Er, that's because they are owned by the people. If they start acting like an abusive monopoly, the public can easily get involved and fix it. Also note, the power company WAS a monopoly. Government controlled private industry. That has been changed. This is why I don't rant about government monopoly, they get replaced when it's feasible to do so. Until then, the government is filling it's function of providing services that we can't easily provide on our own.

      Also, Bill Gates is spewing out money in an insane fashion. If were him, I'd make sure my 'foundation' could use smaller amounts of money effectively first. As it is, he's just making sure more people can use Windows. I would be surprised to see him fund something for the general good that has nothing to do with computers.

      Later
      Erik Z

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    7. Re:I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, I am not a libertarian. I may agree with some of their ideals, but I have no political affilation whatsoever. Yes, I believe in intellectual property rights. Again, should Coke give away their recipe? The idea of your personal beliefs should have nothing to do with it. Your beliefs are your beliefs and you have no right whatsoever to try to project them on anyone else. I am not trying to insult you so please do not take that in the wrong context. I agree fully with the lobbying argument. My beliefs are for extrememly limited goverment (infrastucture and defense). If our government were smaller and less invasive, we would not have lobbying groups. But, because people decided they wanted the government to cure their ills, here we are. The legal profession has taken over. Let it be said I am not 'anti' anything. That seems to be the normal response from people. I simply believe it is an indivuals responsibility in a free society to make decisions, not the collectives. If people would come to this realization, I really believe we would be better off. After all, what qualifies politicians to make such decisions? Are they all more intelligent than we are? I live in MA, so I can attest they are not at all intelligent (read Ted Kennedy, John Kerry). If you look through history, there is a very clear pattern. When the government starts to claim it is doing things for the common good, we are all screwed (Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Cambodia, China, etc, etc.) Wait a minute, I am anti-anythingthatendsinist. I enjoy being relatively free (although I wish I could decide where my tax dollars go). Again, if MS wants to lock their code in a safe they have every right to do so. We have no right to force them into releasing it or forcing them out of business. We do have the right not to buy their products. The choice is really up to us.

    8. Re:I don't get it by jsm2 · · Score: 2

      "Freedom to enjoy the monopoly profits of innovation", I think.

      You can actually construct a twisted argument for the use of the word "freedom" here if:
      a) you are a libertarian, so you believe that freedom is essentially a matter of property rights.
      b) you believe in intellectual property rights.

      Needless to say, I think it's a pretty weak argument. My personal belief is that a) is not what libertarianism should be about and that b) is downright inconsistent, but there are a lot of people (probably the mainstream of libertarianism) who would believe in a) and b).

      Of course, there are some who believe that Microsoft are just asserting their democratic rights. Like the democratic right to organise a political lobbying campaign against the decision of an independent court ... how democratic ...

      jsm

    9. Re:I don't get it by nevets · · Score: 1

      The 'code' belongs to MS. Their money was used to produce it. Not yours, not mine.

      I really would like the government to investigate this. I wonder how much code is actually theirs? One reason to keep something secret is to hide criminal activity. I'm not accusing MS of stealing code, but I would like to make sure that they are not.

      Another thing is that I have heard that they have their own API into Windows. So even if you program for Windows, you are already at a disadvantage because you are given an inferior set of rules to play by. This also is wrong.

      Lastly, have you noticed that the evil Bill Gates just gave one billion

      I never notice him giving anything before his PR committee told him that his public popularity was one step below the devil.

      If you do not like MS, do not use their products.

      This part I wish was true. But programming is my profession. I am always given tasks that I know could be done better in *nix environment but I am forced to use NT. I usually have major problems and its always "my fault", although I have done the same tasks in *nix effortlessly.



      --
      Steven Rostedt
      -- Nevermind
    10. Re:I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck with that logical discussion thing. Here's why:
      I do not see anyone here ranting about the US Postal Service or other government institutions that have monopoly power
      That's just it, they are government institutions - not companies acting in a supposedly competitive marketplace.
      have you noticed that the evil Bill Gates just gave one billion (yep, that's a lot of zeros) to a scholarship fund?
      First, this is a distraction from the issue at hand. It has nothing to do with the DOJ case. This announcement is 'conveniently' placed before this new 'rally for support' to get that warm fuzzy public sentiment going. Just like the 'kinder, gentler Bill Gates' cover of Time. I don't buy it for a second. End the DOJ investigation and it'll be business as usual for Microsoft - which means predatory pricing and software dumping.
      Second, He announced 'plans' to do so. Let me know when the check clears here's the story. Yes, he's got the money, and yes, assuming he follows through it'd be swell - although I'm not familiar with the 'Gates Millenium Scholarships'. Seems like he could've help out an existing scholarship fund...but that's his choice.
      Microsoft has a stranglehold on OEMs, and therefore on the consumer - they are also using their monopoly on the desktop to expand into other areas (in this case, browsers, the next case, office software.

  51. Re:They can innovate all they want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's the first time I awared of the MS's bad ass nature. When was your first time. CY

  52. They can innovate all they want. by Bill+Currie · · Score: 2

    However, it would propably help if they actually wanted to innovate. I remember my fealings of disgust on seeing their ripoff of speedisk (sp?) and discdoctor (sp?) (both Nortons/Symantics) in DOS 6.0. That was when I first became aware of their `innovation'. Before that, I actually thought they were innovative (being totally naive in these things at that time). It took getting a taste of real os power (Linux) to make me realise just how lousy windows was/is (dos is actually ok as something to launch real things like DJGPP). Hmm, I don't think I ever thanked DJ Delorie, I'll have to do something about that.

    --

    Bill - aka taniwha
    --
    Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak

    1. Re:They can innovate all they want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well everone seems to have locked onto the word freedom. the key word here is really "INNOVATE" this term is a Microsoft code word or double speak which ever you prefer. Just replace the word with Steal it, give it away, bankrupt the originator, fix the intentional bugs, sell it. That clears it all up they have been INNOVATING for years they just want to be able to continue unobstructed.

    2. Re:They can innovate all they want. by spectecjr · · Score: 2

      *laughs* Well... I'm glad you felt disgust at Norton / Symantec being "ripped off" in DOS 6.0 by the inclusion of "Speeddisk" AND a "DiskDoctor" clone... because those tools were actually Norton/Symantec's SpeedDisk AND DiskDoctor. They were licensed by Microsoft for inclusion in DOS 6.0 (which you can tell if you look at the COPYRIGHT on the bottom of the apps).

      Deary deary me... why not try observing instead of just looking some time?

      Simon

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    3. Re:They can innovate all they want. by Bill+Currie · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, you may be right. It's been a looong time (6 years). However, I still felt miffed, and the rest of my comment still stands.

      --

      Bill - aka taniwha
      --
      Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak

    4. Re:They can innovate all they want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correction- you feel miffed and the rest of your comment is still open for rebuttal.

    5. Re:They can innovate all they want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You left out Disk Doubler (or whatever it was called at the time, it changed names) from DOS 6.2. That one was blatently stolen from Stacker. If memory serves me, MS got sued and lost because of it.

  53. Re:Microsoft's freedom to innovate by legoandy · · Score: 1

    I think very-small-and-soft should be break down into two parts:

    part that make OS, Office, Servers,...
    part that make working software

    then somebody should burn the first part.

    Play with LEGO!

  54. shady by jimmyCarter · · Score: 1

    once again, the true muscle behind the company appears to be its marketing/propoganda divisions

    yikes.


    "The electric light is pure information"

    --

    -- jimmycarter
    1. Re:shady by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it reminds me of a cool Propagandhi song - cant remember which one though... PUNK FOREVER

      --
      -=>>=-
  55. Re:A better question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The poster was refering to the Linux community. No matter how badly you want it not to be so, "Linux" has come into common usage to mean the system, the community, *and* the kernel. Sorry, suck it up. Either communicate with the rest of the world or rock in the corner and mutter "GNU/Linux, GNU/Linux" to yourself all day.

  56. Microsoft's freedom to innovate by leereyno · · Score: 1

    Microsoft has ALWAYS had the freedom to innovate. It's really rather insulting that they would attempt to sell such baseless propaganda to us. What Microsoft really wants is the freedom to have undue influence over the software industry. The freedom to dictate to consumers what software they will use by limiting their choices. The freedom to essentially stamp out any competition or true innovation that doesn't come out of their own R&D department. I see no reason to give them this freedom. In fact I see a lot of reasons why we should line the top execs at Microsoft up in front of a firing squad.

    --
    Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
    1. Re:Microsoft's freedom to innovate by Marillion · · Score: 1
      Splitting it into two group would not automaticly make MS Office available on another platform. The Windows platform is so unique that applications written to the spec are hard to port to other platforms.

      The epitome of this is MS Access. It is so tightly bound to to Intel Windows that it isn't even available on Alpha Windows NT.

      Now, imagine you are the Harvard MBA alumnus/alumna running the MS Application Division. You are only accountable to shareholders who want a steady stream of dividends every quater. No one in that position would authorize the expenditure of remediating years of legacy code to anything with less that twenty percent market share.

      I think there should also be a third group: the tools group. If you have ever tried to port any MFC based application to any other platform, it is not pretty. The tools group needs to create a portable toolset for platforms other than Windows. This would minimize the expenditure for that MS Office executive.

      Now, how to we the Tools Division bean counter to build the tools?

      --
      This is a boring sig
    2. Re:Microsoft's freedom to innovate by robbieduncan · · Score: 2

      Killing people is obviously a bit extreme, but forcing them to be more open and placing greater controls on the companies they are allowed to buy and destroy would be good.

      Also they don't only want to have undue influence over the software market, but the hardware market as well. I'm not really talking about the devices they make, but the standards that they force on OEM's to get their coveted MS Windows stickers, and the various directives they have issued, such as instant on.

    3. Re:Microsoft's freedom to innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact I see a lot of reasons why we should line the top execs at Microsoft up in front of a firing squad.

      Please speak up. I will even buy you a bullhorn you can take with you to Comdex to say such things. Oh, I'll expect you to be wearing a GNU or Linux t-shirt at all times. Carry a sign that says Linux on it, too.

    4. Re:Microsoft's freedom to innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Similarly Linux should be broken up.

      It should be illegal to bundle the Kernel with a distribution, since the Kernel source can be downloaded from an FTP site. The userland programs should be available only at the homepages of the projects that produce them.

      RedHat should only be allowed to sell the big wad of Python scripts that is about all they contribute.

      X11 can stand alone as itself. However, only source distributions will be permitted.

      Apache will remain available, but only as a bunch of patches. It would be a good thing for 'A Patchy' http daemon to go back to it's roots.

      This could be fun!

  57. Microsoft joins up with Michael Jackson by robinjo · · Score: 2

    REDMOND, Wash. - Sept. 16, 1999. - SONY and Microsoft Corp. today announced their cooperation program to support new revolutionary media in Microsoft's new flagship product Windows 2000. The revolutionary Industry Standard OS will contain new startup sounds made by Michael Jackson.

    "We are thrilled of this possibility to have professional quality startup sounds in Windows 2000," said Microsoft's Chairman Bill Gates. The new sound files will be a special edition of soundtrack "Leave me alone", written by Michael Jackson while he was being prosecuted of child abuse. Microsoft is also planning a video starring Bill and Melinda Gates around the new startup sounds.

    Microsoft will also start a new division for teaching Windows to children. Attendees will get a free Furby and a trip to Michael's amusement park for more personal training.

  58. Re:Religion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe we will get real luck and Bill will take all his top executives on a little trip to the mother ship!

  59. Re:Freedom to Innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't they invent the wheel mouse? I always thought that was quite neat.

  60. Innovative use of the English language by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 2

    "The FIN is a non-partisan, grassroots network of citizens and businesses who have a stake in the success of Microsoft and the high-tech industry.

    Microsoft have somehow manage to 'embrace and extend' the definition of non-partisan to include people that 'have a stake in the success of microsoft'

    How can anyone have a problem with innovation like that!

    The Great Chunder Page - Alcohol Induced Fun!

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  61. But if they had it ... by Scurrilous+Knave · · Score: 1
    IF they had it, would they innovate? I'd be willing to grant Microsoft the freedom to innovate if they promised to actually use it.

    And for the record, I agree with those folks here who have noted that Microsoft actually has had freedom to innovate all along, but that as a result of their actions, their competitors have in many cases been deprived of that freedom.

    Freedom to innovate, indeed. Pah!

  62. They explain it themselves. by malkavian · · Score: 1

    The FIN is a non-partisan, grassroots network of citizens and businesses who have a stake in the success Microsoft


    For this, please read "shareholders". Non-partisan shareholders at that, apparently.
    And this leaves me wondering whether MS will now start looking to slap the patent on "Grassroots networking technology for Citizens", as it certainly looks as though they've "Embraced and Extended" the meaning ever so slightly.

    Anyway, they've thoughtfully provided a link to congress reps. How nice of them. And apprently they want to hear the views of "real consumers".

    Heh..

    Ok, Slashdot, what are you waiting for? I feel we have a nice collection of "real consumers" right here, so, please be nice to poor Microsoft, and let your congress rep. hear what you think. But PLEASE be pleasant and polite about it. The kind of message you'd let your mum read. If someone has a little more time than I have right now, maybe they'd be kind enough to provide a letter template to base the response on.

    Anyhow, that's enough from me, back to work I guess.

    Malk.

  63. Animal Farm anyone? by gnus · · Score: 1

    I don't know but this whole thing just puts Animal Farm in the front of my mind. M$ as the pigs.
    It must be me just seeing a preview of it somewhere.

    --
    I see your mouth moving, but what the hell are you saying?!?
  64. Impregnate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would happen if Microsoft started making condoms.

    *rim shot*

    Couldn't resist.

    1. Re:Impregnate? by Dilbert_ · · Score: 3

      News just in of Microsoft's latest venture

      Contraceptive99 by Microsoft

      Microsoft Corporation has taken another step toward dominating every aspect of
      American life with the introduction of Contraceptive98, a suite of applications
      designed for users who engage in sex. Microsoft has been a pioneer in
      peer-to-peer connectivity and plug and play.

      It believes these technologies will give it substantial leverage in penetrating the
      copulation enhancement market. The product addresses two important user
      concerns: the need for virus protection and the need for a firewall to ensure the
      non-propagation of human beings.

      The Contraceptive99 suite consists of three products:

      Condom99
      DeFetus 1.0 (from Sementec)
      AIDScan 2.1 (from Norton Utilities)

      A free copy of Intercourse Explorer 4.0 is bundled in the package. The suite also
      comes in two expanded versions. Contraceptive99 Professional is the Client/Server
      edition, for professionals in the sexual services sector. Contraceptive99 Small
      Business Edition is a package for startups, aimed at the housewife and gigolo
      niches.

      While Contraceptive99 does not address nontraditional copulatory channels, future
      plug-ins are planned for next year.

      OPERATION: Only one node in a peer-to-peer connection needs to install the
      package.

      At installation, the Condom99 software checks for minimum hardware. If the user
      meets the requirements, the product installs and is sufficiently scaleable to meet
      most requirements. After installation, operation commences. One caution is that the
      user must have sufficient RAM to complete the session. When the session is
      complete, a disconnect is initiated, and the user gets the message, it is now safe to
      turn off your partner.

      DRAWBACKS: Usability testers report that frequent failures were a major
      concern during beta testing. General Protection Fault was the most serious error
      encountered. Early versions had numerous bugs, but most of these have been
      eliminated. The product needs to be installed each time its used.

      CONCLUSION: Contraceptive99 is a robust product. Despite its drawbacks, it
      is reasonably good value for its $49.95 price tag, and is far superior to its
      shareware version. Hopefully, future releases (of the software, that is) will add
      missing functionality, such as Backout and Restore, uninterruptible Power Supply,
      and Onboard Camera.

      Microsoft flounder Bill Gates is optimistic about this venture, saying "Our
      contraceptive products will help users do to each other what we've been doing to
      our customers for years."

      --
      superblog.org: all your favourite blogs on o
    2. Re:Impregnate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you just write it yourself? This is solid stuff.

    3. Re:Impregnate? by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1
      Thanks for nothing! I just loaded it up and have rendered my Penis unusable...

      Apparently my equiptment was to powerful for the software. I was prompted with Buffer overflow errors galore, as well as a sore willy.

      --
      -=>>=-
  65. Re:This makes me sick too by jonr · · Score: 1

    Well, I'm sorry sir, but I have to disagree strongly. Freedom is not "free". When you move out of your parents house, you have your freedom, but all of a sudden you are on your own. Freedom brings responabilaty, for your self, at least. (hmm.. bad example) :)

    Maybe I'm just Neo-romantic utopian, freedom does not give you (you, as in anybody) rights to violate other people freedom. (sounds a bit catch22 problem)

    Jón

  66. letter writing campaign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if ms think that people writing letters to their congress representative might have some effect on how their treated, would it not make sense to organise a letter/email writing campaign to treat ms as sternly as the law allows. would anyone be interested in organising the campaign.

  67. Don't forget by Lysander+Luddite · · Score: 1

    Freedom of Choice which MS somehow seems to limit every time it takes on a competitor.

  68. Visual Cafe does it too... by selectap · · Score: 1

    ...but then again, it's only for Java. What languages does VS support this for?

  69. Converter packs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't upgrade if you don't want to. Microsoft provides free converter packs to allow you to change file formats on older files.

  70. slight change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds great, as long as you replace the word "unethical" with "illegal". Courts decide matters on questions of law, not the popular definition of ethics.

  71. Re:Freedom to Innovate by Gill+Bates · · Score: 1
    What about Flight Simulator? Did they write it or buy it?

    Bought it. At least that's what I read -- and since I saw it on the web, it must be true, right?

    Unfortunately, I don't remember where I saw it, so I don't have a link.

  72. Reality Distortion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And somehow Netscape's bugs are Microsoft's fault?

    1. Re:Reality Distortion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No, but they don't make money from Communicator, so they don't rely on it being the best. And that surely shows in the last versions.

      -T

  73. MS keyboards suck too by Mr.+Piccolo · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but even their keyboards aren't worth what they cost. I don't like that ergonomic thing.

    I wish IBM's keyboards still used mechanichal switches. Now THAT was a sign of quality!

    --
    Glückwünsche, haben Sie Slashdot ermordet, indem Sie zum korporativen Druck beugten und Subskriptionen einlei
  74. Jill Bates by Skip666Kent · · Score: 1

    Looks a LOT like Laura Croft, doesn't she?

    (cue ominous music)

    Be afraid. Be VERY afraid...

    --
    **>>BELCH
  75. Re:Freedom to Innovate by Criterion · · Score: 1

    What about Flight Simulator? Did they write it or buy it? I know I have (or had) a really old version of it for the old Atari Computer (think it was ver 1 something) and I believe it had the MS label on it back then. I need to look and see if I still have it around (at grandparents house far away) and have another look at it. I used to think that was one of the few pieces of software they actually did write. If I'm wrong I would be interested to know.

    --
    We have enough youth, how about a fountain of SMART?
  76. "overwhelming"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's what they're going to say. "In the first five minutes of our site's announcement, we got 25000 visitors..." thanks to Slashdot.

    1. Re:"overwhelming"... by Jburkholder · · Score: 2

      You can find the actual e-mail addy's through that page and send the note direct. If you do that (which I did) be sure to mention that you tried to send mail through the form and it appears to never have been sent.

      Is that a microsoft page? Its kind of hard to tell, kinda looks like its external, not really sure about that?

    2. Re:"overwhelming"... by seeken · · Score: 1

      That site has been up for a while, I think.. I filled out a form to send mail to my reps saying I didn't like Microsoft, but I was oppossed to the antitrust trial. I clicked a box saying send me a copy, but I never did. I think they review the submissions rather than send 'em. Now I'm less oppossed to the trial...

      Surfing the net and other cliches...

      --

      Surfing the net and other cliches...
      (Who Meta-Meta-Moderates the Meta-Moderators?)
    3. Re:"overwhelming"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, this happened to me too. For the sake of checking I CC my response to me and it never arrived at my mail box. Well, what elses can we expect from a company of dishonest and arrogant people. They must be filtering everything for their advantage. I don't think even for a moment that MS is genuinly interested in people's opinion.

      psamara(I am lazy to login)

  77. Yeah ! How dare they !? by sawdust · · Score: 1


    I mean, come on folks !!

    Before the DOJ case, Microsoft single handedly invented Operating Systems, Graphical User Interfaces, Word Processing and the Internet !!
    The DOJ is holding back this immensely innovative company from inventing Virtual Reality, Embedded systems and on-demand streaming media. If they don't lay off soon somebody else might think of it first !!

    music

    1. Re:Yeah ! How dare they !? by MassacrE · · Score: 1

      Dude, everyone knows Al Gore invented the internet. Microsoft invented 'Bob'.

    2. Re:Yeah ! How dare they !? by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1

      Do i detect a tone of irony in your voice?

      --
      -=>>=-
  78. Does BSOD count? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, it is a feature, isn't it?

  79. My Letter to my Representatives in Congress by pocari · · Score: 4
    It's open-source...feel free to borrow...

    Dear Senator or Representative (personalized for each recipient):

    I am writing at the invitation of Microsoft to express my opinion on their anti-trust trial.

    I most certainly expect the anti-trust laws and other regulations that apply across the economy to all industries would be applied to an industry as large and important as the software industry. As a software professional, I found Microsoft's arguments insulting--to my intelligence and to Judge Jackson's.

    Clearly, they tied their browser into the operating system to make it impossible for Netscape and others to compete. If it were not a separate component, how could they produce the identical product for the Macintosh, where they have no control over the operating system?

    Clearly, they have monopoly power over the manufacturers of Intel-based PCs. It is only because of the previous consent decree and the publicity generated by this trial that PC manufacturers have been able to start distributing new PC's with other operating systems like Linux. The government's pursuit of this trial has allowed Microsoft's customers and competitors to go after new businesses and technologies free from the threat of reprisal.

    Microsoft wants freedom to innovate. Copying a competitor's software product and using your monopoly over the operating system to ensure free distribution of the copy is not innovation. It's anti-competitive and unfair. True innovation comes about when the basic rules of fair commerce are respected and enforced. Microsoft's lack of respect for the law and its officers is an embarassment to the entire industry.

  80. MS Software (Age of Empires) by Jon+Peterson · · Score: 1

    Mmm, MS didn't write Age of Empires, they simply commissioned, published, marketed it. And yes, it is a good bit of software, as is Excel (which they did write), and FAIK, MS Flight Simulator, which a pilot friend of mine praises highly.

    MS should be punished/restrained becuase they have done wrong, not because they are bad.

    People are welcome to write very bad software, and companies are welcome to buy it. The fact that bad stuff succeeds in the marketplace and good stuff fails is not unique to either Microsoft or the software industry. It's a pity when it happens, but there's nothing inherently wrong with it.

    --
    ----- .sig: file not found
  81. Re:Popular Opinion by Simon+Tatham · · Score: 1

    Either way, since when do laws have anything to do with the majority's opinion? I didn't even realise it had to do with anyone's opinion.

    Well, the laws are made by the government which are voted in by the majority. I see that as having something to do with it; don't you?

  82. Re:Religion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only for tax reasons, though.

  83. Freedom OF innovation by Nexus7 · · Score: 1

    Aren't we all getting tired of Microsoft's plaintive cry about having the freedom TO innovate? To give MS the freedom to inovate, as they define it, is to throttle innovation's freedom. Because MS works by hiding API calls, incorrectly implementing standards, gloss bloat, they're threatening innovation.

    Free innovation!

  84. MS and attitude by settonull · · Score: 1

    Personally I am torn. I think that MS has done some great things over the years. They have also hurt a lot of companies and done a lot of things that I feel are wrong. However I have trouble having too much sympathy for the PC industry. Many people have known about these things for years, yet they continue to support MS products.

    There are other products out on the market. Give them a look. Everyone complains about how horrible MS is, and then goes and says how there is nothing else, so they have to use it. Give some of these other products a chance. If they aren't perfect work with the vendors. Heck, the earliest versions of Windows really sucked, but it has gotten better.

    While I admit Microsoft is big and ugly right now, they weren't always. And it really is hard to stay on the top. I think MS saw this fact, and did everything possible to stay on top. Personally I understand this, who wouldn't want to stay #1. However to think that you did all this for the good of the industry takes some pretty big self deluding.

    ok 'nuff ramblings,

    --
    -chris (gandalf@darkcorner.net)
  85. Re:I always get errors on comment submission! by selectap · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of the time that I was filling out some stupid form just so that I could get to a knowledge base article. There was a checkbox that basicly gave them permission to spam me if I selected it. The problem was that the form would crap out if I submitted it without the check box selected. Once I selected it, it worked. :/

  86. Re:Freedom to Innovate by slambo · · Score: 1
    -----Quote
    Can anyone think of any innovative product to come from microsoft?
    -----End Quote
    The only product that comes to mind is DOS 3.1. Until I started supporting MS products, I never realized just how much better all the other software options are (especially Open Source projects).
  87. Re:A better question by Criterion · · Score: 1

    This would be better flamebait if linux were actually a company trying to create innovative products but:

    A. its not a company, and

    2. refer to A

    --
    We have enough youth, how about a fountain of SMART?
  88. Re:Visual Tools (not) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some of us don't care for visual tools. Having used vi/emacs AND VC++, I vastly prefer vi/emacs + gcc etc. But this is opinion. You won't change mine, I won't change yours.

  89. Re:Freedom to Innovate by Godfree^ · · Score: 1

    You really don't know about DirectX, do you?

    QuickTime is a video format, DirectX is a complete multimedia API. You couldn't write a game with QuickTime...

    --
    - Damnit, I'm dead Jim
  90. MS BOB (somewhat off-topic) by tomk · · Score: 1

    That annoying P.O.S. "assistant" is based on Bob technology. That explains the extreme irritation and mental anxiety caused by even brief exposure to the f***ing thing.

    -Tom

  91. different language, different features by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Smalltalk is interpreted. C++ is compiled. What the original poster probably meant to say was that he didn't know of any other compiled language environment that allows this behavior.

  92. Re:This makes me sick too by Hobbex · · Score: 1


    Indeed it is the a cache 22 problem. If what makes people free is making other people not free, then freedom is impossible.

    There is no doubt that freedom means responsibility. Generally, trading away ones freedom for lapse of responsibility is one of those stupid things that humans just love doing (kind of like trading away your life for a pile of money).

    Look at the American suing tradition, where nothing is ever ones own fault, and no one never takes resonsibility for anything. We mat not sue each other the whole time here in Europe, but instead we are always asking the government and the collective to take responsibility (and therefore freedom) away from us. It sickens me.

    -
    /. is like a steer's horns, a point here, a point there and a lot of bull in between.

  93. Re:Visual Studio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AFAIK Sun's WorkShop for their SunPro C++ compiler has a partial in-memory compilation feature that can do just this.

    -W.W.

  94. Re:Microsoft bashing is getting old by Mononoke · · Score: 1
    If I didn't have these machines, I'd probably be forced to install some microsoft software just to justify my job... ;)

    Oh MAN! Don't give away the secret! Why do you think all those NT servers are out there? Think of the millions of nerds out of work, holding signs saying 'Will reboot servers for food.' You're gonna ruin it for everyone.

    God help us all if the real world finds out about our 'job security.'

    ^_^


    --

    --
    NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
  95. Re: Yeap - MS is ALL about marketing by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    I agree. Look at how many loosers stood in line at MIDNIGHT just to buy an OS !

    Feel free to moderate this down, it still doesn't change the fact that a bunch of wankers had nothing better to do at midnight.

  96. Re:Freedom to Innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for the info. I stand corrected.

    Does that mean that Uncle Bill's one and only contribution to society is a talking paperclip? Or did somebody else invent that, too?

  97. Acts of freedom by Bill+Currie · · Score: 1
    Ahhh, thank you very much! I've been putting a lot of thought into just what `freedom' is and how it can work. I believe this has given me an important concept, namely that for freedom to exist, it must go both ways.

    Hmm, I wonder... If you restrict someones freedom, do you still have freedom yourself?

    --

    Bill - aka taniwha
    --
    Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak

  98. Actually, yes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gates brilliance has much more to do with the fact that he has acheived "a computer on every desktop", than any particular hardware or software product. In his world, copying (stealing) good ideas from other companies is also regarded as brilliant. It's how business works. So business people have huge admiration for Gates. The fact that he is so rich in spite of shitty products just makes him that much smarter. Think about it. Anyway, MS and Co deserve a huge round of thanks for driving PC hardware into commodity status. None of the Unix vendors would ever have done that. Now Linus is going to drive the OS into commodity status. What goes around comes around.

  99. Re:Freedom to Innovate by MassacrE · · Score: 1

    Lets see, bought dos, stole windows, bundled the two because other companies were producing better clones of DOS than the real version, stole stacker technology (then I believe actually cloned it with a different algorithm after losing the lawsuit), licensed the defragger and scan disk utilities included today (the windows 98 one is totally intel's doing).

    I believe they bought the original moused wheel, and the split keyboard design, or I might count that. But no, I find nothing on this system that is innovative, except perhaps OLE (it is horribly miswritten and broken, but it was new when it came out). COM and DCOM, however, are borrowed from DCE.

    It could also be shown that whenever they came out with truely _good_ products, it was to combat something that was already released by a competitor. Direct* was to fight off Apple's Quicktime APIs. Internet Explorer got a couple of hundred engineers on the project because of Netscape. Active* was a repackaging of existing technology to compete against OpenDoc and Java I believe.

    No, the only thing I can think of that might be innovative that they developed in-house is Bob. That might have been done by someoen else first, but whoever that is sure isn't claiming it ;-)


  100. 1 $ = 1 Vote by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1

    What we all need to appreciate is that every $ we spend with particualar brands of goods is a vote for that particular corporation.

    By never purhasing microsoft products, and influincing the others around us to do the same, we, shareholders or not, truly can influence the future of microsoft.

    Remember: 1 $ = 1 Vote
    --
    -=>>=-
    1. Re:1 $ = 1 Vote by substrate · · Score: 1

      Every dollar you spend on non-Microsoft products is a vote against the corporation but its not that easy to actually do it. I haven't gone out of my way to avoid Microsoft products, I've just found that the solutions I prefer happen to not come from Microsoft. I prefer the MacOS or Linux to Windows, I prefer Frame Maker to Word, Netscape to Internet Explorer and there's nothing that I could do with Exel that I can't do easier with MatLab.

      Still I've been forced to go Microsoft on two occasions. The most recent was for a piece of hardware that proudly proclaimed it was Windows, Linux and MacOS compatible right in the advertising copy. This was true as long as you were using the hardware, upgrading it required Windows. So I was forced to run out and buy a copy of Windows 98. Returning the hardware wasn't really an option due to my particular circumstances. I don't believe in situational ethics so I didn't pirate it. I am doing my best to resolve the situation with the engineers of the product in question and they agree in principle and with management approval firmware upgrades will be coming under Linux or MacOS in the near future.

      The other is that for some unknown reason my company has decided that Microsoft Office is the standard application for document exchange. Us engineering folks almost always ignore it in favour of FrameMaker, but when we get things from Human Resources its in Word format. If it was just babbling I'd delete it and not worry about it, but its stuff like forms for performance reviews etc. Since FrameMaker doesn't like reading in Word files I'm forced to use the Microsoft product. In this case even if I used ApplixWare its a financial win for Microsoft since management will still license the same number of copies of Microsoft products.

  101. Nice New Logo by korpiq · · Score: 2

    A quick ripoff, wrong font and everything:

    http://kato.iki.fi/kato/free-monopolize .gif

    The site has limits on international traffic,
    so if you like it, post a(n US) mirror.

    --

    I think, therefore thoughts exist. Ego is just an impression.
  102. Re:Allow MS's competitors to innovate too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The company I work for has been in the past a target of veiled threats from MS... "Release product A and we might just be forced to release a free version of product B which will cost you so many millions of dollars in sales". Innovation goes both ways.

    Agreed. In the 80s/early 90s when I worked at a popular (but small) PC utility company, this was a common problem. Why make a product, if Microsoft just told you they wanted to do a junior version of the same thing and bundle it "free"? I wonder how much source code was given to them free of charge this way?

  103. Re:This is tooo good by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1

    I think he'd enjoy the kissing babies part a little too much.

    --
    -=>>=-
  104. Re:Don't you see what's happening here? by arthurs_sidekick · · Score: 1
    Bill Gates didn't put up that "Freedom to Innovate" page for us, although we're giving him a lot of free press by talking about it. (As P.T. Barnum once said, "Any publicity is good publicity -- as long as they spell my name right.") No, he put it up there for people who *will* be swayed by it, and for people in whom it *might* cast a reasonable doubt. These are voters who might be ticked off if their elected officials allow the government to take strong action against Microsoft -- and so Microsoft wins itself some safety.

    I think you're dead on in your aim here about Microsoft's goals with this 'campaign'. But they've already been caught fomenting an astroturf campaign; either they're very determined to see their strategy through to the bitter end, or they're just plain dumb. I don't think they're just plain dumb, though.

    Although Barnum seems to have been more right than would be possible in a reasonable world (e.g. some serial killers get marriage proposals --serious ones -- while they're waiting for their trials), I hardly think that posting this on /. is likely to benefit them much (I think I'll fire off a letter to the editor of the local paper just to make that point). It just pisses the likes of most of us off!

    Re: Clinton -- sure he's still in office, but do you think anybody has any respect for him? To a certain extent, Gates' reputation as a master businessman is part of the Microsoft mystique, so harm to that is harm to MS. Never admitting guilt, in the face of overwhelming evidence, was not the thing that protected Clinton. If anything, it hurt him. It was a combination of politics and the feeling that the offenses for which he was impeached were a) overblown and b) manufactured (yeah he lied, but they kept throwing the noose around his neck and kicking at his feet) that kept him from getting convicted not that there aren't parallels, too - I don't doubt that there is a "vast conspiracy" of companies out to get MS). My point being (not to start a flamewar about BC, but to point out that there's a very different context in the DOJ vs. MS than Ken Starr/the Republicans vs. Bill Clinton/the Democrats. So I don't think maintaining a straight face is going to help *this* Bill all that much. Especially since it's a single judge that will be making the decision this time, and one who doesn't appear to like being lied to. Judge Jackson is less subject to public pressure than the people in congress. Oh, and I note for the record that the public's opinion didn't seem to mean much to Congress during the slightly-more-recent-unpleasantness =)

    --
    "Oh, I hope he doesn't give us halyatchkies," said Heinrich.
  105. Re:Don't you see what's happening here? by Masem · · Score: 2

    Oh, and did anyone notice that Bill G and wife *JUST* recently, donated a billion dollars (yes, with a b) to scholarships. (The story is here). Anyone else think Bill G.'s hand was caught in the cookie jar, and he's now trying to distract as much attention before the Judge Jackson decision is made?

    --
    "Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
    "I can see my house from here!" - ST:
  106. I recall by Mawbid · · Score: 1

    Microsoft Paper Airplane Designer. It was supposed to allow you to fold a virtual sheet of paper every which way to come up with new paper airplane designs. Then you could print a sheet with fold lines and presumably logos on the wings or whatever. I never saw the program in action, and I don't think it was very successful. However, I did think it was a cool, innovative, idea.
    --

    --
    Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
    1. Re:I recall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, MS did not invent that...

      It was available from another company (name escapes me ATM - it was
      the only product they ever made.) for the C64, long after MS abandoned
      that market.

      BASIC, too, is not a MS invention.

  107. Re:A backstage look at Microsoft's PR tactics by spectecjr · · Score: 1

    Mmmmm..... yeah... well, try going to http://www.crp.org and checking out who Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers donates money to (if you don't know who they are, check out http://www.kpcb.org -- they're the venture capital firm with all the money behind Sun, AOL, etc etc), who Microsoft donates money to, and comparing and contrasting the two.

    Ignore the keiretsu behind the curtain.

    Simon

    --
    Coming soon - pyrogyra
  108. FIN - Hahahaha! by CybSirius · · Score: 3

    Has anyone noticed that "FIN" is French for "end"?

    1. Re:FIN - Hahahaha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn! :-) And *I* was hoping to get to point that out.

  109. Why should software companies be in politics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I find interesting is that MS continued to use email to fight their lawsuit, inspite of the fact that earlier email had been subpoenaed.

    As far as the actual politics goes, MS was one of the lowest donors to political campaigns in past years. In some ways, it's ironic - MS was never a major political player, unlike tobacco, the gun lobby, or alcohol, all of whom got significant concessions for their "investments". Yet MS paid for its lack of political participation by being punished for it. And now it's into politics and govt. lobbying with a ruthless vengeance.

    In fact, Microsoft's competitors were really into political leverage. Even Bob Dole was making statements for Netscape, though it's doubtful if he'd ever used a browser.

    I know a lot of people cheer for MS getting kicked, but be careful what you wish for. Tomorrow the same DOJ and senators will be after your favorite software company, and it will need to shell out its pound of flesh. Remember, they aren't after MS because of ethics or their opinion of its crappy API...

  110. Re:Freedom to Innovate by tomk · · Score: 1

    Actually, Flight Simulator was made by Simulogic, and bought by Microsoft.

    I think Microsoft might have invented FUD...

    -Tom

  111. Re:A better question by legoandy · · Score: 1

    Linux is not a company, so Linux cannot innovate anything... (maybe you should innovate something)

    But if you think about Linux community, here are some things to think about:
    Getting usefull and powerfull software into hands of poor people (students, scientists,...)
    Example: Gimp, TeX, all sort of development, utilities... Debian has more than 4000 packages FREE!!!!

  112. Re:Allow MS's competitors to innovate too! by TummyX · · Score: 1

    "The basic functionality of Word never changes?"

    WELL DUH.
    Since you'll probably never believe me, I'll lay aside the fact that Word has improved remarkably - especially for Office Developers (yes - you can extend and prorgam/script office to the limit unlike others eg. staroffice).
    But ofcourse the basic functionality of Word hasn't changed - it lets you type things.

    Those examples of "If microsoft was *****" are so stupid.
    We all know software works differently - why do you think OSS can exist in software? Earlier on, MS brought software to the masses by not charging an arm and a leg for it - but they had to protect their technologies - they couldn't just pour hotglue over it.

  113. Innovation? by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 1

    I don't think anyone here wants to deny Microsoft the "freedom to innovate" - if they'd actually use that freedom, instead of grabbing everyone else's innovations, dressing them up, and selling them at $179 a pop, Micros~1.oft might not have to pull stunts like this, non?

    --

    Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
  114. Re:Visual Studio by legoandy · · Score: 1

    Any scripting language (PERL, TCL/TK, Python....)

  115. Freedom to Not support their own browser by Sorklin · · Score: 1
    I got to say, the funniest thing about Microsoft is their unwillingness or ability to support their own web browser.

    I'm forced to use IE 3.02 at work and Microsoft.com is one of the sites that regularly won't display on this browser. Numerous javascript errors and finally a nice blank white page.

    I think the redmond definition of innovate is along the lines of "to increase complexity and fud until all product cease to function." At least that has been the operating principle they have been laboring under.

    ---------

    This space intentionally left blank

  116. Re: Wow ignorance by TummyX · · Score: 1

    You've been upgrading word _just_ to share documents with friends?
    Why not just convert the documents? Hell, Word even lets you save in old word formats.
    After using Unix applications for a few years now, I've found Microsoft Office and similar products to be more reliable stable and defintely efficient (meaning faster). As long as you run on a well setup windows....and especially if you use NT.

    Oh, and if all you need is Word2, use WordPad - it's free with windows - the native format is RTF which never changes cause new features don't need to be added - and it has more features than Word2.

  117. Isn't it Pathetic ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read their stuff on their site and I almost feel sorry for them. Well almost... M$ are starting to feel pretty insecure about life and are trying to go for the sympathy vote. This is typical of any bully... any control freak... anyone who can't hack the pace... I can hear the violins starting to tune up folks... this is the start of the end !!! Yippee...

    1. Re:Isn't it Pathetic ? by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1

      It sure is! But let us watch out- Just because microsoft may fall doesnt mean we should get complaicent. For example, lets hypothetically say that people finally decide to use an alternative operating system rather than windows. Lets say Linux. Who is to say that one of the distributors for linux will not carry on from where microsoft left. There will always be monopolisers, and as far as they go Microsoft are quite controllable - By taking them out we could cause an outbreak of sub-monopolies, pulling us in a multitude of chaotic directions. We would be worse off without microsoft.

      --
      -=>>=-
  118. Re:This makes me sick too by jonr · · Score: 2

    Many "Freedom" advocates don't get it.
    With freedom comes responsibility. They just cry "Freedom, Freedom" and just go ahead and abuse their freedom. Freedom to senslessly spam/junk mail their fellow man, freedom to tout guns all over the place, freedom to misuse capital to squash the little guy/competitor.
    Freedom does not mean that you can just do whatever you like! Freedom means that you are responsible enough to know yourself what you can or may do.
    These people make freedom just another f-word, imho. It's a sad, sad, thing. Jón

  119. they are in constant war... by xnixnix · · Score: 1

    and try to copy the true innovations. well i just ignore them till it is drier.

  120. A backstage look at Microsoft's PR tactics by CocaCola · · Score: 2

    This article details recently uncovered email evidence, which provides a rare inside look at how Microsoft uses it's PR department. Back in October when the AOL/Netscape deal came out, they immediately decided to start a PR campaign to show that the AOL deal "undermines the core of the case." Top Microsoft officials ordered PR people to orchestrated a seemingly independent and spontaneous campaign, using it's "friends in politics" (Microsoft is by far is the biggest 'contributor' to various politicians election campaigns - Microsoft-sympathetic comittee members recently even tried to nuke the DOJ antitrust division's financing - talk about interference with criminal justice), "sympathetic columnists" (paid articles?) to pointedly manipulate the public opinion. Once again.

    --
    --Coke
    1. Re:A backstage look at Microsoft's PR tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every single larger company on the planet does these tactics. It really isn't surprizing.

    2. Re:A backstage look at Microsoft's PR tactics by CocaCola · · Score: 1

      Sure, but not at this scale, and few dare to interfere with a _criminal trial_. Microsoft even tried to introduce manipulated evidence at several times. Not much left from that original 'geek Gates'.

      --
      --Coke
  121. They'll be lucky. by Colm@TCD · · Score: 1

    A recent experience made me realise that Microsoft have an uphill battle in trying to get the public to "rally 'round" them - the scene with Bill Gates in the South Park movie got a cheer! Lots of people really don't like MS, but are forced to live with their software...

    1. Re:They'll be lucky. by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1

      Thats right! Spot on Colm.

      Thats why its our, The Nerds, job to inform people of the alternatives.

      Has your net surfing nanny, your game playing cousin, or photoshop-crazy niece ever heard of Linux. Bet your bottom dollar the answer is NO!. They all use Windows 9x.

      Lets inform the Minions- We can do it. We CAN do it.

      --
      -=>>=-
  122. A better question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can anyone think of any innovative product to come from Linux?

    This isn't meant as flamebait, just a genuine question.

    1. Re:A better question by phil+reed · · Score: 1

      There's a site that discusses this very question, but the link's on my home PC and I'm at work now. Check again later.


      ...phil

      --

      ...phil
      "For a list of the ways which technology has failed to improve our quality of life, press 3."
    2. Re:A better question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linux is a kernel. Products are applications. Applications are created by people, not kernels. You'd better rephrase your question so that you do not look like a complete moron.

  123. The acronym says it all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FIN says what M$ want to do to the right to innovate. It tells the truth about M$. No innovation, they just want to finish everybody else in the world off. One company = no arguments. Worry, be very affraid.... for they may finish you.

  124. Re:Popular Opinion by Sludge · · Score: 1

    You're putting the horse before the carriage here in terms of taking things out of context. Sure, in the big picture laws are put into place because of bills from elected people being passed. However, in the context in which I was speaking, Microsoft isn't going to get a re-election before the verdict.

    Furthermore, judges are not voted in by public opinion, as this would sway their decisions, of course.

  125. Visual Studio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their "edit and continue" feature is amazing. You can add and delete code while you are debugging. I dont know of any other development environment that supports that.

  126. Microsoft bashing is getting old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't YOU guys come up with something innovative for a change? It seem that by becoming a Linux user you subject yourself to such powerful peer pressure that you're left with no room for "thinking different".

    1. Re:Microsoft bashing is getting old by CormacJ · · Score: 1

      I support Ultrix, Linux, NT, Win 95, and VMS in a large user enviroment. Out of all of these the biggest part of my time is spent tuning and keeping the NT and 95 machines running and crash free. If I didn't have these machines, I'd probably be forced to install some microsoft software just to justify my job... ;)

  127. Innovation on Microsoft's Terms by cksmith · · Score: 2

    It seems clear that Microsoft's vision of the software industry is one where Microsoft owns all the land and the other software companies are the serfs, magnitudes smaller in size, working on their niche products (all with Microsoft's operating systems, server tools and development tools) and indirectly supporting Microsoft's monopoly.

    It seems that Microsoft has to control the ENTIRE would-be commodity market, the software that everyone needs (OS's, office automation, browsers). Of course, since people want "integration", if anyone was able to take over the market on any of those things, they'd have a huge success on being successful with the other two. That's why they have to do anything they can to protect themselves.

    Microsoft is, however, willing to stay out of the small domain-specific markets (in their terms "supporting a competitive environment). In a truly competitive market, however, anyone can build and sell the commodity and they're incredibly cheap. Having to spend $100 for an upgrade on just an OS (which really should be invisible and free, just a part of the computer) every two to three years is just wrong.


  128. Here's what I sent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Representative (or Senator):

    Microsoft is running another spin campaign about innovation. I want to encourage you to fight back with the
    truth about the DOJ investigation. This is not about innovation, it's about over-agressive anti-competitive
    behavior.

    Microsoft's products are not the issue. Their insistance on forcing their buisness partners to sign contracts
    with clauses that exclude Microsoft's competitors is the issue.

    Please help to diffuse Microsoft's disinformation campaign by making sure that the DOJ states the purpose
    of their case clearly to the public, and addresses directly Microsoft's attempts to distract the public with this
    "innovation" nonsense.
  129. Re:I'm sick of your comments by Bill+Currie · · Score: 1

    They don't. Infact, one jost got moderated down for being off topic, as did onother severl weeks ago, and I wouldn't be supprised if this one did too, it certainly deserves it. Usually they stay put, even though some of them deserve to go down.

    --

    Bill - aka taniwha
    --
    Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak

  130. Microsoft and the world domination plan. by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1

    Microsoft is trying to establish this twisted form of "Democracy" to woo us into a false sense of security. This lays a perfect foundation for their world domination plans, in which we will still THINK we are having a say, even if ultimately every decision is made by our despotic leader, Gill Bates. (Gill, by the way, is Microsofts next secret weapon to lure in the Male computing community... I'll tell you about her another day)

    --
    -=>>=-
    1. Re:Microsoft and the world domination plan. by Davorama · · Score: 1
      This lays a perfect foundation for their world domination plans, in which we will still THINK we are having a say

      And this is different than the current system in what way? Sorry, I'm in a bad mood. You are obviously joking.... :)

      --

      Davo -- Free speech, free software, AND free beer.

  131. Hey! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't know that you were the United States of Stars ;)

  132. -- grass root -- by Gumpu · · Score: 3

    "The FIN is a non-partisan,grassroots network of citizens and businesses "

    Can something be grassroot and still be organized by a company with enough money to run the economy of a small country?

    1. Re:-- grass root -- by ajlitt · · Score: 1

      "The FIN is a non-partisan,grassroots network of citizens and businesses "

      s/citizens/thugs/
      s/businesses/hitmen/

  133. Parody site? by Vad+the+Inhaler · · Score: 1

    you mean it isn't a joke?

  134. This makes me sick by robinjo · · Score: 5

    Freedom, freedom, freedom. For some twisted reason the freedom-card is most often pulled by an abuser. Spammers rage about freedom of (sic)speach, fundamentals about freedom of religion, nationalists about freedom in general, US government about free world and now Microsoft about freedom to innovate.

    What's common with these all? Only they have the freedom but if you disagree with them, they go crazy and demand you to drop all your own freedom and personal choice.

    Let's have a look at Microsoft. They are rich, powerful and big. There shouldn't be any problems for them to innovate. Just use enough money and brain power and come up with new revolutionary products. It shouldn't be a problem for them to make a browser and compete fairly in the free market.

    But for Microsoft freedom is bad. Freedom to choose is bad because customers may choose the wrong product. So the competitor has to be crushed and what's a better way to do it than waving the flag of freedom?

    1. Re:This makes me sick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I've just been outed as a commie.

      No, the communists I used to know (former cadre of Bob Avakian's Revolutionary Communist Party, a splinter group known as the Revolutionary Worker's Headquarters) would never admit to being communists.

      They infiltrate and control labor unions and student groups, under names like the "Progressive Student Organization."

      You're not a commie. You're one of the dupes of that sort of group.

    2. Re:This makes me sick by dattaway · · Score: 2

      I think I've just been outed as a commie.

      If we are all commies , then Microsoft is the dictator .

      No, freely distributable software is democracy at its finest. We get to choose, change, share or charge for it and services, but we can never restrict freedom of another. Its a wonderful concept, but a threat to a dominating company that wishes to buy up all the patents and restrict our freedom and freedom to innovate. We are not communists, but there is an evil company trying to pound us into submission.

    3. Re:This makes me sick by ghost_of_gilbert · · Score: 1

      30,000 employees and what's the latest innovation all those great minds could come up with? Buy VISIO.

      Shame I couldn't moderate their letter as "flamebait" - it is asking for it in the worst possible way. Apparently any anti-M$ sentiment is unAmerican and anti-the capitalist system.

      I think I've just been outed as a commie.

  135. Freedom to Innovate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or is it Freedom to _Dominate_? Golly gee wilikers... they claim that they believe in intellectual property (as opposed to open source). All that means is that they want money, and lots of it. Remember Neil Stephenson's article (Cryptomonicon) that states that Bill Gates' sole job is to make his shareholders (and himself) money. And their use of closed source, non-free products allows them to charge premiums to keep their stock price on a steady climb. The analogy here is that they need to feed the monster they've created. The bigger it gets, the more $$ it needs. The only way it dies or slims down is if they can't keep charging gradually higher prices. That's why they want permission to continue. They don't want to have to work with anything free & open source. Out.

  136. Exercise your freedom by Brian+Kendig · · Score: 1

    I'd like to take a leading role in the "Freedom to Innovate Network." I believe that the freedom to innovate is critical for all companies, Microsoft and others.

    I believe the first step this organization should take would be to ensure that strict and severe measures are taken against Microsoft, so that Microsoft is required to innovate if it desires to keep its monopoly. I believe that predatory tactics such as buying then disbanding companies which threaten to come up with new, potentially-competitive products, and maintaining a chokehold on the industry by letting others blaze trails then underselling them, are completely contrary to any interpretation of the "Freedom to Innovate."

  137. Freedom to Innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Can anyone think of any innovative product to come from microsoft?

    This isn`t meant as flamebait, just a genuine question.

    1. Re:Freedom to Innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS certainly didn't invent the split keyboard, Apple had a very nice split keyboard out in the late 80's, which was adjustable, had a separate keypad, and a bunch of machine contorl buttons on it. It also took up most of your desk with its massive wrist rests. I don't know if Apple invented this keyboard or not, but they were sertainly the first to make a popular mass-market one. I personally love the wheeled mouse. If Microsoft didn't invent it, then they were the first major OS to include support in it. Since I started using them, I never looked back. Even my macs have wheeled mice!

    2. Re:Freedom to Innovate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no they didn't invent the mouse wheeel.. that more micrsoft properganda for you. genuis first produced the mouse wheel a year before microsoft... another example of microsoft stealing and take the credit for themselves..

    3. Re:Freedom to Innovate by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 2

      One innovative product was spotted in Microsoft HQ's toilets. Apparently Bill had produced a faeces in the shape of a small penguin, and forgot to flush. Does this novel turd represent, in some ways, Bills current worries for the future?

      --
      -=>>=-
  138. Another open source letter... by ethereal · · Score: 3

    Dear Senator or Representative (personalized for each recipient):

    I'm writing you as a consequence of a web page (http://www.microsoft.com/freedomtoinnovate/) set up by Microsoft corporation to encourage innovation in the software industry. This is a laudable goal, although I'm surprised to see it supported by Microsoft. Microsoft is not widely regarded as an innovative force in the software industry. Rather than designing, implementing, and releasing innovative products at a competitive price, Microsoft has instead chosen to consolidate its position in the industry by threatening, colluding against, and sometimes outright buying its competitors while providing substandard products in terms of security, usability, and compatibility with accepted technical standards. By doing so, they have captured 90% of the market for desktop computer software in this country, and 25-33% of the market for server software.

    If a car company acted in this manner, or perhaps the telephone company, you can bet that they would be under investigation by Federal and state anti-trust regulators. And as it turns out, Microsoft _is_ under investigation as well by the US Department of Justice (DOJ). Although it appears that Microsoft set up their "Freedom to Innovate" site in order to marshal grass-roots support for their position in the DOJ's case against them, I am using the site to send you the opposite message: please ensure freedom to innovate in the software industry for _all companies_ by supporting the DOJ case against Microsoft. Only when the software industry is free from fear of reprisals by Microsoft can true innovation occur.

    Innovation is already starting to happen - for example, many computer makers such as IBM, Dell, and Compaq have begun to offer Linux as an option on their machines as their customers have demanded. Do you think that they would have been allowed to do this by Microsoft if the trial were not occurring? In the past Microsoft has threatened computer makers with being blacklisted from selling Microsoft windows on their machines if they also sold products from Microsoft's competition, such as Netscape. Please encourage this recent trickle of innovation to become the torrent that our nation needs - support the DOJ in their efforts to get a just verdict and reasonable remedies for the harm Microsoft has done the software industry.

    Thank you for your time,

    etc., etc.

    --

    Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

  139. Re:Don't you see what's happening here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sort of like Clinton, wouldn't you say?

  140. Re:Allow MS's competitors to innovate too! by Stormin · · Score: 1

    Word! Microsoft has always seemed to operate under the "You can't beat them, so buy them." That's not innovation. That's being a bully because you have money. I bet they consider every new version off office an "Innovation." I think the best quote I read was that "In the past 10 years, Microsoft hasn't changed the word processor at all. They have changed the framework (read: OS) that the word processor exists in over and over. But the basic functionality never changes. If microsoft was the electric company, every 2 years they'd change the voltage and frequency of the power they delivered and you'd need to either replace all of your appliances or buy a voltage/frequency rectifier to keep using the ones you had.

  141. The most innovative product ever was... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You all used it. You all loved it. It changed the way we use computers. Of course I'm talking about the best example of innovation to come from MicroSoft ... MS-BOB. The only software to have a shelf life shorter than milk.

    If this is there best innovation they shouldn't be begging for freedom.

  142. This is disgusting by Brian+Stretch · · Score: 1
    Microsoft can only put out products and hope people buy. Only Big Brother has the power to force We The People to do things at the point of a gun. This open invitation for the government to regulate the software market is SUICIDE!

    Want to know the Democrats interest in all this? They saw a big, fat, rich target to EXTORT money from. They figured that Bill Gates, like nearly every other Big Business leader, would roll over and throw cash their way (roughly half of Big Business PAC $$$ goes to Democrats, give or take a little depending who they think will win in a given year). They didn't figure a registered Democrat like Bill Gates (the guy even gave money to population control groups) would fight back, and they're at least a little nervous that they've royally pissed off the richest man in the world.

    Microsoft has been blessed with largely incompetent competitors for years (Apple, pre-Jobs; Wordperfect, after Novell ran them into the ground; etc). Now they have Linux to deal with, and their usual strategy of going for market share by undercutting the competition won't work anymore. But it'll be a hollow victory if we have to rely on Big Brother to win.

    Again, read "Capitalism, the Unknown Ideal" by Ayn Rand for a good description of why government coercion over the economy is Bad.

  143. This is tooo good by Zoltar · · Score: 2

    Hehehe... just when you thnk it can't get any better. Oh boy... I just love the flag ... the appeal to the share holders to petition for the freedom of MS..oh boy... I'm surprised they don't have a midi file of God Bless America playing. Poor poor MS... you are just soooo opressed (sp)

    So what's next... are we going to see Bill Gates marching in parades and waving the flag... or maybe an ad blitz of Bill kissing babies and opening doors for little old ladies. Oh yeah..GOD BLESS AMERICA..sheesh... if MS has any freedoms taken away they will only have themselves to blame.

  144. Since when have they *NOT* had that freedom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one is stopping them from "innovating". Microsoft is very innovative. No other company has been so successful at shafting its customers and having them actually like it and want more. $180 for Win98 SE? Bull$hit! I will continue using my copy of Mandrake 6 I bought for $25 (only to support Linux) and the copy of COL2.3 that I just finished downloading last night. It may be too hard for Microsoft to comprehend, but unix style multi user systemsare easier for newbies because when they aren't running as root they won't have to worry about screwing up their system. Microsoft as far as products doesn't innovate, they just find innovative ways to legally steal other people's ideas.

  145. Let Microsoft Innovate by jjohn · · Score: 1

    Plainly, Microsoft wouldn't know innovation if the company was biten by it in a sensitive area. Microsoft is hoping to continue its business plan of the eighties. This, not linux, will finally do them in. The DOJ case is merely an interesting event, but certainly an empty one.

    Customers are Microsoft's real problem. There's a SUBSTANTIAL negative buzz about the company (remember the South Park movie?) which will be its
    death eventually.

    As the world moves to web applications, the choice of OS become less critical while the browser assumes a "desktop" like aspect. Which browser runs on more OS's? Can Microsoft take its deeply embedded browser and port it to other OS's? No.

    Remember, Microsoft sells a platform. As the platform because the web, Redmond's importance will be trivialized. Soon (five years), "windows programming" will be a marginalized skill, much like VMS programming was five years ago.

    So I say, let Microsoft embed IE into the W2K kernel. They are doing themselves in.

    Sounds too incredible to believe? Just watch, code, and wait.

  146. Re:This makes me sick too by Hobbex · · Score: 1


    No, freedom IS the right to do whatever you like. That is what it means.

    However, freedom is also the right for everybody else to do what they like. Putting a gun to somebodies head and telling them what to do is not an act of freedom, even if it happens to be what you feel like doing that morning.

    Same could be said for microsoft...

    -
    /. is like a steer's horns, a point here, a point there and a lot of bull in between.

  147. Re:I always get errors on comment submission! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's an AI. Try some keywords like "Love", "Bill", "God", "Idol", "It works", "Stable", "Pink Elephant", "White Mouse", "Nero", "I am a teapot", ...

  148. Popular Opinion by Sludge · · Score: 2

    In a time when Microsoft is greatly unpopular with the people, they are trying to get them to rally against the DOJ?

    Either way, since when do laws have anything to do with the majority's opinion? I didn't even realise it had to do with anyone's opinion. The law is the law, and if the DOJ establishes that Microsoft had (not has) a monopoly in the judges eyes, then Microsoft is going to be punished.

    However, what the ruling may be may be affected by public opinion. How much, is something that Microsoft is hoping for.

    Of course, anyone who has been hurt by Microsoft realises that they are stifling the competition's right to innovate by creating proprietary standards. Although it doesn't get posted to slashdot, there are some pro Micro-innovation sites around on the Internet. Some of them articulate MS-truth (ActiveTruth?) quite vividly.

  149. Microsoft innovations and freedom? by liki · · Score: 1

    Interesting indeed, why do they feel they are held back. I think they have still as good possibility as all others for new innovations and the even have the resources for huge research.

    Still lately M$-attitude has improved a lot. Specs for office formats etc. have been released to public, I just hope it also means that new versions would be compatible. Nowadays they also admit security flaws and are keen to provide users with patches.

    Win2k includes many huge improvements ddns, kerberos, mount points, etc. I just don't like the way they are implemented because you can't take the advance of them if you are using w2k workstations and unix servers. Could be they are really pushing w2k to replace unix on server side. Let's hope they will provide us with specs.

  150. I always get errors on comment submission! by Get+Behind+the+Mule · · Score: 1

    For the second time now, I have attempted to submit a comment at Microsoft's "Freedom to Innovate" site, to tell them exactly what I think about MS, innovation and fair competition (to summarize, it makes my blood boil when they claim to support any such thing).

    Every time I hit the button to submit my comment, I get an HTTP error as a response! Now that is truly symbolic of everything about Microsoft.

    I wonder if they some AI at the other end, which detects whether the comment was negative, and if so generates a phony error, so they can pretend they never got it.

  151. Astroturf by Paul+Johnson · · Score: 1
    This is just another M$ Astroturf campaign. They got their fingers burned trying to do it underground, so now they think that by pumping money into a "grass-roots" organisation they can get away with it.

    The US media may be computer illiterate, but this is their bread and butter. I can hear the interview now:

    Stuffed Shirt: The FIN believes that [MS pitch].

    Interviewer: But isn't the FIN entirely funded by Microsoft? Aren't you just spouting Microsoft's official line?

    Paul.

    --
    You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different.
  152. Religion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one noticing this or does Micro$oft become more and more of a religion than a company.

  153. hmmm... by Squirtle · · Score: 2

    Freedom to imitate
    Freedom to irritate
    Freedom to immolate
    Freedom to infiltrate
    Freedom to impregnate
    Freedom to indoctrinate
    Freedom to inculcate
    Freedom to incorporate
    Freedom to isolate
    Freedom to inflate
    Freedom to infuriate
    Freedom to intimidate
    Freedom to inundate

    and my fave:

    Freedom to inseminate

    Any more?

    1. Re:hmmm... by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1

      Very Innovative.

      --
      -=>>=-
  154. Don't you see what's happening here? by Brian+Kendig · · Score: 2

    Bill Gates has learned a lesson that Bill Clinton came very close to learning:

    Never, EVER, admit ANY guilt. Period. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence to your guilt, still endeavor to find ways to bring the methods and motives of your accusers into question.

    Bill Gates didn't put up that "Freedom to Innovate" page for us, although we're giving him a lot of free press by talking about it. (As P.T. Barnum once said, "Any publicity is good publicity -- as long as they spell my name right.") No, he put it up there for people who *will* be swayed by it, and for people in whom it *might* cast a reasonable doubt. These are voters who might be ticked off if their elected officials allow the government to take strong action against Microsoft -- and so Microsoft wins itself some safety.

    Here's the most interesting thing to note, however: Notice that the Microsoft "Freedom to Innovate" page says that it was last updated on September 13. Do you honestly think that Microsoft would change anything if they honestly thought they were going to win the court case? Doesn't this thing sound like an effort to "rally the troops" and prepare for some expected damage control?

  155. Re:Microsoft being treated unfairly? (Long) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Certainly, very few hardware companies had the balls to stand up to them, even though it's clear that if they'd banded together they could have limited MS influence.

    Unfortunately this is really not the case. This arguement ignores the fact that this market is highly strategic. Consider the holdout problem - if one or two firms, say Dell, holdout they stand to make a killing taking market share from the ones that abandon Microsoft. Yes, the big OEM makers would like and value OS choice and not being bullied by Microsoft. A bit of Game Theory is in order to clarify this:

    It is like the classic prisoner's dilemma 'paradox' : both crooks get off easy(ie misdermeaner) if both don't squeal - but they know the other one will squeal because that means the squealer goes free and they don't. So they both squeal on each other and both get convicted of a felony. Ex: Squeal Silent Squeal F/F O/F Silent F/O M/M Where F means felony conviction, M means misdermeaner conviction and O means off free. x/y means the outcome for the row chooser (first crook) is x and the outcome for the column chooser (second crook) is y. The Squeal/Squeal situation will happen beacuase it is the only one that is mutal best responses (Nash Equilbrium).

    Obviously the situation for the OEMs is much more complex, but the idea is there that a group of independent, rational decision makers can be 'forced' to make a 'rational' decision that is worse for everyone than some other possible outcome. Monopoly power can be bad because it can be set up 'games' like the prisoners delimma where the players screw themselves. So while there is 'choice', the 'rational' choice has been to rot in hell with Windows, at least for the big players like IBM, Compaq, Dell etc.

  156. revolutionay industry standard? by Bill+Currie · · Score: 1
    Eh? Trouble is, that's just the sort of thing that comes out of marketing departments.

    BTW, good one.

    --

    Bill - aka taniwha
    --
    Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak

  157. Re:Religion? Try Linux by Noke · · Score: 0

    If you want to see a fanatical religion, just look at the linux zealots.

  158. Airing of your wacko libertarian opinion by Nexus7 · · Score: 1

    I don't see one bit of similarity between Bill Gates' and Bill Clinton's situations. Maybe your only source of news is the American Spectator, or worse, CNN. Evidence of material harm is being presented in the DOJ case.

    You libertarians/republicans really need to find somebody other than Clinton to bash.

  159. Microsoft bashing is getting old by Bookem+Danno · · Score: 1

    What? You don't consider a free operating system with free software that doesn't crash every 5 minutes innovative?
    Look around, these are the people who innovate, not the horrendous Microsoft employees who have created a kernel so disgusting that no one at their company fully understands it, and even if they did, they can't take care of any bugs in it because most of their software actually relies on the bugs to run "properly". I'm not joking.
    Thinking differently from the perspective that Microsoft is detrimental the future of computing would be wrong.
    It's not Microsoft bashing, it's the truth - their business practices resemble those of fascism, basically they have no problem with anyone who doesn't stand in the way of their total domination of computers.
    Maybe you think that innovation means controlling the populous with a monopoly, but I happen to think that it means making good, free software that can evolve - Open Source.
    That's true innovation - that's what the future should be. No more worrying about hidden Crypto keys in your OS, or wondering why you get a blue screen everytime you leave you computer running for more than an hour. If there were a bug like that in an Open Source OS, you could just submit a bug report and it's pretty much guarunteed that it'll be fixed within the week. Sounds pretty good, especially when you compare it to Microsoft's track record.
    Win98 shipped with over 2000 known bugs - is that innovation?
    Basically, anyone who is pro-Microsoft might want to take a look at www.fascism.theman.bigbrother.evil.gov, it would be right up their alley.

    ---

  160. Complete, reliable kernel released as Open Source. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only brilliant innovation, but revolutionary as in "WORLD DOMINATION" !!!

  161. This article is a Troll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This article is a Troll. Score: -1

  162. Agreed. For Microsoft's Moral Defense: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check out THIS and read the Q&A.

    -- An Ayn-onymous Coward

  163. Allow MS's competitors to innovate too! by shri · · Score: 2

    What Microsoft forgets that it has in many ways, some ethical and some unethical killed off its competition. The company I work for has been in the past a target of veiled threats from MS... "Release product A and we might just be forced to release a free version of product B which will cost you so many millions of dollars in sales". Innovation goes both ways. This is the sad thing that Microsoft forgets all about. MS product managers are trained to assimililate and eliminate threats made to their product line.

    1. Re:Allow MS's competitors to innovate too! by punkrawk_freak · · Score: 1

      Borland are perhaps the frontrunners in doing just this, especially with their recent announcement regarding the conversion of Delphi to Linux!

      Long live Inprise. Long Live Borland. Long Live Delphi, and the few other companies who are willing to STAND UP AND FIGHT.

      (Do i sound a little straight edge punk today? I hope so.)

      --
      -=>>=-
  164. Newsflash: Microsoft threatens to innovate by Lucius+Lucanius · · Score: 5

    REDMOND (Reuters).

    In a surprise announcement today, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) threatened to create innovative products. "Our customers have said they want innovation," said a Microsoft spokesperson. "We will now make innovative products."

    According to analysts, this could send shock waves through the PC industry. "We rely on them to follow our code of honor," said a disgruntled industry leader, who preferred to remain anonymous. "We've been making the same hardware for 20 years. What will we do now?" According to an analyst, there is no skepticism in an industry used to a flood of vaporware announcements. "We have had many false alarms from Microsoft before," said the Anonymous Analyst. "However, this time they are REALLY serious."

    A key distinguishing feature this time around is a stunning move by Microsoft to create a 'Freedom to Innovate Network', known as FIN.

    Many industry observers pointed out the resemblence to a previous Microsoft initiative. "Earlier, they had formed a top secret organization called 'Freedom to Innovate Bugs', and guess how that turned out," said another insider. "Naturally, we can't dismiss this as vaporware. The coincidence is practically spooky." Especially the acronym, he added.

    Microsoft spokesmen declined to comment on backward compatibility problems with the new trend towards innovation.
    ---

    L.

  165. Different types of innovation by Grimwiz · · Score: 1

    Here is the comment I sent to Microsoft...

    I would be more supportive of Microsofts freedom to innovate if microsoft was more supportive of my freedom to stay with a stable system.
    Incompatible file formats have forced me through various upgrades to remain able to share files with my colleagues for no benefit to me (I need no more from a word processor than I had with Microsoft Word 2)
    I also disagree with innovation when it gets in the way of shipping a stable, reliable, efficient product.
    Please remember that there are two kinds of innovation, the good and the bad.

    --
    -- Don't believe everything you read, hear or think