"So you have all this incredibly nasty software sitting happily on some
(criminal enough to get the FBI's attention) hacker's computer, conveniently
within his reach."
Exactly.
They'll spend $30,000,000 of your money (if you are a U.S. citizen) on
software to exploit security flaws. Then they'll broadcast that software free
to criminals. This will teach some of the criminals how to exploit security
flaws. Then there will be more crime. Then the FBI will get more money to
fight crime. They will see this as a big success.
How many criminals smart enough to use computers will be smart enough to run
Tripwire, or some
program like it, such as the one that comes with Mandrake? At least some, is
my guess. Those criminals will know immediately that their computers have been
compromised. The criminals will then use the compromised computers to write
email saying how much they believe in law enforcement, and to send Paypal
payments to charities.
We need to protect ourselves vigorously from crime. However, creating secret
agencies who are able to commit crimes themselves is not the way to protect
ourselves.
Already there is a serious problem with people committing some destructive act
and claiming it was done by the CIA or other U.S. government secret agency.
There is no good defense against this, because people worldwide know that the
U.S. government secret agencies routinely break the law. How could it be
proven that the FBI, CIA, or NSA, or some other secret agency didn't do a
particular crime?
The U.S. FBI, CIA, and NSA are now worldwide surveillance agencies. They are
supported by Americans who are not allowed to know how much of their money is
spent on surveillance. United States citizens are not allowed to know what the
U.S. government secret agencies are doing, so they don't know if the agencies
are doing things they would now support.
The people who work for the FBI are often not smart people. They don't
realize that trust is absolutely necessary in a democracy. They have often in
the past not shown understanding of the other needs of democracy. They have
often acted like secret police. They often believe in killing or other ways of
being destructive as a way of curing some ill in society.
Now they will be attacking computers like the criminals. They will say that
they are doing it only to solve crimes, but it is socially impossible to
control this kind of thing. Once the principle is established that a secret
agency can break the law, there is in practice no limit to what some people in
that agency might feel "justified" in doing. Consider your own experience.
When has the boss had complete knowledge and complete control over the actions
of employees? Never. A company's only good policy is to hire open and honest people and to encourage honesty and genuine caring.
The FBI's influence will mean that the U.S. taxpayer's money will become a powerful force in preserving security
holes, instead of closing them. Generally, this kind of software has had holes
of its own. You may be attacked by a cracker exploiting a security hole
created by FBI software. Governments will detect FBI snooping software and
feed the FBI erroneous information.
This is all support for people who like snooping and sneaking. It is not
actually a way to reduce crime. It is for adults who like to treat the whole
world as a video game. It is for the kind of people who think of themselves as
James Bond, who like the idea of being able to kill other people legally.
The following is my opinion. I have had extensive experience in supporting
computer use by businesses, and it may be an opinion worth considering:
The Microsoft web page says that Windows 98 will only receive FULL
support until June 30, 2002. After that date support will be limited. The
limitations will have many effects that are not detailed on the web page. For
example, if severe security bugs are found, Microsoft may refuse to fix them.
This is a big issue with Microsoft products, because there have been so many
security bugs in the past, literally hundreds.
Remember, this means that the great majority of people and companies will not
be completely supported after June 2002. If they want complete support, they
will be forced to go through the difficulties and re-retraining of an upgrade.
They will also have to pay Microsoft more money.
Maybe the biggest effect of companies going to Windows XP is that they will
eventually be forced onto the planned Microsoft treadmill, in which they will
pay Microsoft money every month whether they upgrade or not, and whether
Windows XP works or not. They will also be forced onto the Microsoft
advertising and security treadmill, as Microsoft tries to pressure them
ecomonically in any way it can.
Because Microsoft has, essentially, a monopoly, it has more extensive
responsibilities. The law says this, but the law is not being enforced.
Instead, Microsoft uses its power to cause a situation in which almost every
arrangement is in some way bad for the buyer and good for Microsoft, the
seller. It is an economic dictatorship. One-sided contracts have been found to
be illegal in the past, but the courts don't understand the technical issues,
so they aren't sure that the Microsoft contracts are one-sided.
Many companies use applications that work fine under Windows 98. When Windows
98 is used with only one or a very few applications, it may crash only once or
twice a week, which depending on the applications, may be acceptable.
Companies that use Windows 98 with an accounting application, for example, may
be growing and improving rapidly, but may be happy with their accounting
methods. Such companies may not need or want to change software for a period
of 10 years or more.
If you use a computer for your own personal needs, you may buy a new computer
every 2 years. But try to put yourself in the frame of mind of a business
manager. A computer owned by a business may be used for only one purpose, like
data entry. With data entry, greater computer speed makes no difference. A
company may simply not need to change this business method; the data entry
computer is only one of many business tools.
The Microsoft web page talks about "Product Lifecycle". This is misleading. It
is as though you have used the same stapler for 15 years, but Microsoft says
you should buy a new one whenever Microsoft dictates, even though you don't
need a new one. It is as though Hoover stopped selling bags for its older vacuum cleaners, and was somehow able to prevent others from supplying bags, also.
The larger issue is that Microsoft is saying it can dictate the use of its
products after they are sold, and in an extremly prejudicial fashion. It is
doing this by imposing numerous entirely artificial limitations.
Not all computers running an un-supported operating system will need support,
of course. Also, the lack of support from Microsoft will no doubt cause the
development of an un-official support network.
Monopolies are not in themselves bad or illegal. The conditions that make the
Microsoft monopoly negative for the customer are: 1) Microsoft is often
extremely adversarial to the needs of the customer if by doing so it believes
it will make more money. Over the long term an abusive Microsoft will make less money, of
course, because the company is gaining a very negative reputation. 2) Microsoft
products are often sloppy about security. 3) Microsoft may have been
compromised by the secret agenicies of the U.S. government. Microsoft software
is sausage software; who knows what is in it?
These conditions are excellent for Linux. Unfortunately Linux is still much
more difficult to configure.
"If it is beyond the scope of the case then it is beyond the scope of the
remedy. The findings of fact and law have been affirmed by the Appeals court
and if the remedy doesn't follow those findings them Microsoft has valid
ground for yet another appeal."
The issue has moved away from a court resolution. The issue now is a
negotiated settlement. Using secret file formats to enforce monopoly is
relevant. It is relevant that Microsoft is extremely abusive in other ways,
also.
"These aren't arbitrary limits. There are valid technical reasons
(regardless of how ugly the solution was) for them being there (namely the use
of the Win16 GDI layer as the drawing engine in Win9x). These restrictions no
longer exist in WinXP so your argument here is quite a joke.
"What sort of programmer are you?"
I am a good programmer, and I realize that computers can be programmed. It was
not elegant to use the old Win16 code. However, an even more inelegant
work-around could have solved the problem.
Allowing Microsoft Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows ME to crash was a VERY
heartless act on the part of Microsoft. Many, many users bought extra memory
for their computers, not realizing that it would make no difference.
"... this is a stupid comment."
This is a problem on Slashdot. People are too quick to call someone else
stupid. Also, even if I am stupid, this is not justification for you to
act out your anger toward me. It is only justification for you to educate me.
I believe you are corrrect. There is a law of estoppel. If you deliberately
don't enforce your rights, you cannot enforce them later. There may be
something in copyright law that says that estoppel does not apply. However,
Microsoft might lose their right to enforce the contract of their license,
anyway, because of other issues.
I don't know the law in this case. Also, it would be necessary to prove that
their lack of enforcement is deliberate and widespread.
Note that is why they had the court case in which I was a witness. The
Microsoft operator gave me the legal department phone number, and I talked to
someone there with little experience, extensively. They could not ignore this.
I was VERY upset with them. There were 5 distributors in the area, and ALL of
them were selling illegal copies of DOS. I made it VERY clear I thought their
behavior was deliberate.
That may be why it is NOT possible to get the phone number of the legal
department now. When I called to make a similar complaint about Microsoft
Office 2000, they blocked me from telling my story.
"Starting next month and ending next June, the overwhelming majority of
current Windows users will find themselves operating OS versions that the
vendor --- Microsoft --- either doesn't support, or only partially supports!
" [my emphasis]
(The Langa Newsletter is an excellent free emailed newsletter that covers
matters of interest to computer users.)
I read the settlement. It is
great for Microsoft, and almost meaningless for everyone else.
The provisions don't begin until many people have been pushed into using
Windows XP (eXtra Pain), after which they will be trapped in ways that are not
part of the case. Here is a quote:
"Starting at the earlier of the release of Service Pack 1 for Windows XP or
12 months after the submission of this Final Judgment to the Court..."
Why not starting now?
Microsoft must disclose APIs, but may charge royalties. This prevents
competition from Linux.
There is nothing which prevents Microsoft from using secret Microsoft Office
file formats in an anti-competitive way.
The settlement provisions apparently do not apply if Microsoft claims that its
anti-competitive software practices provide security.
The provisions provide Microsoft significant benefits.
I've owned a computer dealership since before IBM sold personal computers. I'm
also a programmer.
Microsoft is extemely abusive and anti-competitive. -- Microsoft is
far, far more anti-competitive and abusive than the US DOJ vs. Microsoft
antitrust case discusses. If the present case in resolved in an
insufficient fashion, there will be a need for another case immediately.
Secret file formats are anti-competitive. -- A good partial resolution
of the case would be to prohibit Microsoft from using secret file formats.
Then there could be competition again.
At present there cannot be competition because the software from the dominant
company, Microsoft, produces file formats that cannot be reproduced because
they are secret. So, another company cannot make software that reliably
inter-operates.
At present, if a big customer upgrades to a new version of Microsoft Office,
and sends out files in a format incompatible with previous versions, all
people who receive the files are forced to upgrade their Microsoft software.
Companies understandably don't want to go to a good customer and ask that a
document be sent again in a former file format.
Microsoft produces software that is deliberately faulty. -- Windows 95,
Windows 98, and Windows ME all have articifial limitations which cause them to
crash even though there are plenty of hardware resources. These are called
"User Resources" and "GDI Resources". The memory for these resources is
artificially limited to 128,000 bytes in some cases and 2 megabytes in other
cases. When these resources are exhausted, the operating systems stop
functioning.
Microsoft deliberately allows piracy. -- Major competitors of
Microsoft like Corel Word Perfect and IBM Lotus WordPro have difficulty
competing because Microsoft allows enough piracy of Microsoft products that
competitors cannot sell theirs.
I called the Microsoft legal department and complained about this. The result
was that I was a witness in a case against one of the pirates. More recently I
tried to complain about this again, but it is now impossible to contact
Microsoft's legal department.
In my area Microsoft Office 2000 is available for $50.00 at dealers who sell
low-cost computers. I have verified with Microsoft that these are pirated
copies. Over a period of many years, Microsoft has not taken sufficient action
against the pirates to allow a chance for honest competitors.
Microsoft is ending support. -- Next month, December 2001, Microsoft
will stop providing support for Windows 98, apparently in an attempt to force
users to upgrade. Another good partial resolution of the DOJ-Microsoft case
would be to extend the support time for at least another 10 years. Many people
have computers that operate fine for the purpose for which they are used. For
example, an accounting department in a small company may use Windows 95, or
even the DOS operating system. These people should not be forced to upgrade.
These are only a few of the extremely anti-competitive and abusive methods
Microsoft uses, in my opinion.
From the Slashdot story posted by Hemos, (Mostly) Confirmed: New Mersenne
Prime Found
pc's [Should be PCs.]
there fifth result [their]
money has been awarded [How could this be past tense if the results
have not been confirmed?]
sofar [so far, until now]
a message send into outer space. " [two mistakes]
to totally test it out [to test it completely]
It is one of the characteristics of a young child that he or she only cares
about himself or herself. It is one of the characteristics of an adult that he
or she is considerate of others.
It is time for the Slashdot editors like Hemos to grow up and become
responsible adults. Every time they post a story with spelling, grammatical,
and typographical errors, they make every reader do more work. The errors are
especially difficult for the many Slashdot readers for whom English is not
their native language.
Someone who knows English well should edit all stories before they are posted.
I very much agree with this. Part of my definition of an operating system is that it is stable. Windows 98 is not stable. Therefore, it cannot be truly called an operating system.
I should not have to pay for junk, especially when it is deliberate junk. If Win XP is stable, then it should be a free upgrade to all those who paid for Windows 95 and 98 and ME, and suffered enormously from the shortcomings that were deliberately left there to try to get us to pay more.
N E W Y O R K, Nov. 12 _ An American Airlines jet departing from John F.
Kennedy International Airport crashed in a heavily populated section of the
New York City borough of Queens at 9:17 a.m. ET, emergency officials said, and
there was no report on the number of passengers and crew on board.
The jet, an Airbus 300, departed JFK at 9:15 a.m., officials said, when it
crashed into an area populated with many homes and businesses. The American
Airlines web site said Flight 587 was headed for Santo Domingo in the
Dominican Republic. The plane crashed near Beach 129th Street and Newport
Avenue, in the Rockaways section of Queens. There were no reports of injuries
at the scene.
Thick black smoke could be seen billowing above the crash site for miles and
several buildings were said to be on fire. Emergency crews raced to the scene.
Harriet Cohen, a Queens resident who lives near the airport and about 10
blocks from the crash site, said she was eating breakfast in her home when she
thought she heard the Concorde leaving the airport. After hearing a terrible
bang, she told her husband: "Oh my, I think it must have broken the sound
barrier." But then the house shook, Cohen said. "I looked outside, and 10
blocks from us, there was black thick smoke rising up into the sky."
Minutes after the crash, all three New York City-area airports _ Kennedy,
LaGuardia and Newark _ were closed. Airports in Washington, D.C., remained
open.
The incident comes two months after two hijacked jets rammed into the World
Trade Center in Manhattan killing about 4,500.
EW YORK -- An American Airlines Airbus A300 crashed Monday morning in the
Queens section of New York, and buildings reportedly were on fire in the
neighborhood.
The plane crashed shortly after 9 a.m. and thick, black smoke could be seen
miles away.
All metro area airports were closed following the crash, in the Rockaways
section of Queens.
The mayor canceled his morning events and headed to the scene.
One eyewitness reported debris falling from sky, and told the Fox News Channel
four homes were on fire.
Another told CNN he was 40 blocks away and saw "Just a lot of smoke. Tons and
tons of smoke. You can see emergency vehicles heading to area. Lots of people
are standing in the streets. It's very tense."
The cause of the crash was not immediately known.
The crash came two months after the attack on the World Trade Center, which
was destroyed by two Boeing 767s hijacked out of Boston's Logan Airport. One
of the planes was operated by American, the other by United.
"The former Crown Prince Dipendra was admitted to hospital late on Friday
with what appeared to be a self-inflicted gunshot wound after reportedly
slaughtering most of his family with an assault rifle as they sat around a
dinner table."
"Analysts say Gyanendra now faces a struggle to restore the role of the
monarchy as a pillar of stability in the country of 22 million people where
Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala has faced violent street protests against
his rule.
But this strikes me: Although what they have said is strongly negative, it is
almost an endorsement of Microsoft because it is not strongly negative enough.
In my experience, Microsoft is far, far worse than anyone has said.
The world does not deal with abusiveness well. People just let it continue,
and hope the abuser will stop.
Suggestion: We should have an Ask Slashdot in which everyone posts their worst
experiences with Microsoft. We could send the best posts to the justice
department. We could also use the best posts to educate people.
Here's something I would post: There are artificial resource limits in Windows
95, 98, and ME that cause Windows to crash when the limit is reached. These
are called GDI and USER resources. Some of the crashing is actually caused
by DELIBERATE design. No matter how much memory you have, Windows will
still crash if you reach these limits. One of them is 128K bytes. That's
right. 128k. Another is 2 megabytes.
Remember, even though Microsoft was found to have broken the law, the company
has been allowed to continue for years, exactly as before. The damage
Microsoft has continued to do can never be fixed.
I agree with you 100% that The Economist is a great publication. However, in my opinion, the article about Microsoft referenced in the Slashdot story is of poor quality.
The title and subtitle (below) are fine. But some parts of the article itself are weak.
___________________
Title: Extending its tentacles
As it launches an array of new products, the software giant is changing, and yet its basic instincts are staying much the same
Slashdot Mirror
QUESTION 23: What national-level intelligence assets are available to you, the warfighter?
ANSWER: Area 51 -- Maintains flying saucers and keeps alien bodies in the freezer.
Okay, how did you do that?
(If you read Slashdot enough, sooner or later you see everything.)
As the article says, the U.S. government has killed an average of 100,000 people a year for more than 30 years.
I'm against violence. However, 6,000 in one year is a lot less than 100,000 per year for 30 years.
You didn't read the article.
You can start reducing violence by being less mentally violent.
"So you have all this incredibly nasty software sitting happily on some (criminal enough to get the FBI's attention) hacker's computer, conveniently within his reach."
Exactly.
They'll spend $30,000,000 of your money (if you are a U.S. citizen) on software to exploit security flaws. Then they'll broadcast that software free to criminals. This will teach some of the criminals how to exploit security flaws. Then there will be more crime. Then the FBI will get more money to fight crime. They will see this as a big success.
The CIA used this same method in Afghanistan. They trained Arabs in terrorism. Read about that in: What should be the Response to Violence?
How many criminals smart enough to use computers will be smart enough to run Tripwire, or some program like it, such as the one that comes with Mandrake? At least some, is my guess. Those criminals will know immediately that their computers have been compromised. The criminals will then use the compromised computers to write email saying how much they believe in law enforcement, and to send Paypal payments to charities.
I'm a little more positive. I hope something can be done. But it is VERY scary.
We need to protect ourselves vigorously from crime. However, creating secret agencies who are able to commit crimes themselves is not the way to protect ourselves.
Already there is a serious problem with people committing some destructive act and claiming it was done by the CIA or other U.S. government secret agency. There is no good defense against this, because people worldwide know that the U.S. government secret agencies routinely break the law. How could it be proven that the FBI, CIA, or NSA, or some other secret agency didn't do a particular crime?
The U.S. FBI, CIA, and NSA are now worldwide surveillance agencies. They are supported by Americans who are not allowed to know how much of their money is spent on surveillance. United States citizens are not allowed to know what the U.S. government secret agencies are doing, so they don't know if the agencies are doing things they would now support.
The people who work for the FBI are often not smart people. They don't realize that trust is absolutely necessary in a democracy. They have often in the past not shown understanding of the other needs of democracy. They have often acted like secret police. They often believe in killing or other ways of being destructive as a way of curing some ill in society.
Now they will be attacking computers like the criminals. They will say that they are doing it only to solve crimes, but it is socially impossible to control this kind of thing. Once the principle is established that a secret agency can break the law, there is in practice no limit to what some people in that agency might feel "justified" in doing. Consider your own experience. When has the boss had complete knowledge and complete control over the actions of employees? Never. A company's only good policy is to hire open and honest people and to encourage honesty and genuine caring.
The FBI's influence will mean that the U.S. taxpayer's money will become a powerful force in preserving security holes, instead of closing them. Generally, this kind of software has had holes of its own. You may be attacked by a cracker exploiting a security hole created by FBI software. Governments will detect FBI snooping software and feed the FBI erroneous information.
This is all support for people who like snooping and sneaking. It is not actually a way to reduce crime. It is for adults who like to treat the whole world as a video game. It is for the kind of people who think of themselves as James Bond, who like the idea of being able to kill other people legally.
How U.S. government policy contributed to terrorism: What should be the Response to Violence?
GTK:
GTK
QT:
QT
Excellent QT Tutorial
wxWindows:
wxWindows
wxPython
Mozilla:
Mozilla
Cross-platform implementation of COM
develop your UI's in an XML dialect called XUL
Others:
FLTK
Fox Toolkit
Side-by-side comparison of GUI Toolkits:
The GUI Toolkit and Framework Page
I needed this list for my own use. Maybe it will be of interest to you.
GTK
QT
Post Comment Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
I couldn't find any 3ware controller cards. I found only this: 3Ware.
The following is my opinion. I have had extensive experience in supporting computer use by businesses, and it may be an opinion worth considering:
The Microsoft web page says that Windows 98 will only receive FULL support until June 30, 2002. After that date support will be limited. The limitations will have many effects that are not detailed on the web page. For example, if severe security bugs are found, Microsoft may refuse to fix them. This is a big issue with Microsoft products, because there have been so many security bugs in the past, literally hundreds.
Remember, this means that the great majority of people and companies will not be completely supported after June 2002. If they want complete support, they will be forced to go through the difficulties and re-retraining of an upgrade. They will also have to pay Microsoft more money.
Maybe the biggest effect of companies going to Windows XP is that they will eventually be forced onto the planned Microsoft treadmill, in which they will pay Microsoft money every month whether they upgrade or not, and whether Windows XP works or not. They will also be forced onto the Microsoft advertising and security treadmill, as Microsoft tries to pressure them ecomonically in any way it can.
Because Microsoft has, essentially, a monopoly, it has more extensive responsibilities. The law says this, but the law is not being enforced. Instead, Microsoft uses its power to cause a situation in which almost every arrangement is in some way bad for the buyer and good for Microsoft, the seller. It is an economic dictatorship. One-sided contracts have been found to be illegal in the past, but the courts don't understand the technical issues, so they aren't sure that the Microsoft contracts are one-sided.
Many companies use applications that work fine under Windows 98. When Windows 98 is used with only one or a very few applications, it may crash only once or twice a week, which depending on the applications, may be acceptable.
Companies that use Windows 98 with an accounting application, for example, may be growing and improving rapidly, but may be happy with their accounting methods. Such companies may not need or want to change software for a period of 10 years or more.
If you use a computer for your own personal needs, you may buy a new computer every 2 years. But try to put yourself in the frame of mind of a business manager. A computer owned by a business may be used for only one purpose, like data entry. With data entry, greater computer speed makes no difference. A company may simply not need to change this business method; the data entry computer is only one of many business tools.
The Microsoft web page talks about "Product Lifecycle". This is misleading. It is as though you have used the same stapler for 15 years, but Microsoft says you should buy a new one whenever Microsoft dictates, even though you don't need a new one. It is as though Hoover stopped selling bags for its older vacuum cleaners, and was somehow able to prevent others from supplying bags, also.
The larger issue is that Microsoft is saying it can dictate the use of its products after they are sold, and in an extremly prejudicial fashion. It is doing this by imposing numerous entirely artificial limitations.
Not all computers running an un-supported operating system will need support, of course. Also, the lack of support from Microsoft will no doubt cause the development of an un-official support network.
Monopolies are not in themselves bad or illegal. The conditions that make the Microsoft monopoly negative for the customer are: 1) Microsoft is often extremely adversarial to the needs of the customer if by doing so it believes it will make more money. Over the long term an abusive Microsoft will make less money, of course, because the company is gaining a very negative reputation. 2) Microsoft products are often sloppy about security. 3) Microsoft may have been compromised by the secret agenicies of the U.S. government. Microsoft software is sausage software; who knows what is in it?
These conditions are excellent for Linux. Unfortunately Linux is still much more difficult to configure.
An explanation of how the U.S. got involved in terrorism: What should be the Response to Violence?
"If it is beyond the scope of the case then it is beyond the scope of the remedy. The findings of fact and law have been affirmed by the Appeals court and if the remedy doesn't follow those findings them Microsoft has valid ground for yet another appeal."
The issue has moved away from a court resolution. The issue now is a negotiated settlement. Using secret file formats to enforce monopoly is relevant. It is relevant that Microsoft is extremely abusive in other ways, also.
"These aren't arbitrary limits. There are valid technical reasons (regardless of how ugly the solution was) for them being there (namely the use of the Win16 GDI layer as the drawing engine in Win9x). These restrictions no longer exist in WinXP so your argument here is quite a joke.
"What sort of programmer are you?"
I am a good programmer, and I realize that computers can be programmed. It was not elegant to use the old Win16 code. However, an even more inelegant work-around could have solved the problem.
Allowing Microsoft Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows ME to crash was a VERY heartless act on the part of Microsoft. Many, many users bought extra memory for their computers, not realizing that it would make no difference.
"... this is a stupid comment."
This is a problem on Slashdot. People are too quick to call someone else stupid. Also, even if I am stupid, this is not justification for you to act out your anger toward me. It is only justification for you to educate me.
An explanation of how the U.S. got involved in violence: What should be the Response to Violence?
I believe you are corrrect. There is a law of estoppel. If you deliberately don't enforce your rights, you cannot enforce them later. There may be something in copyright law that says that estoppel does not apply. However, Microsoft might lose their right to enforce the contract of their license, anyway, because of other issues.
I don't know the law in this case. Also, it would be necessary to prove that their lack of enforcement is deliberate and widespread.
Note that is why they had the court case in which I was a witness. The Microsoft operator gave me the legal department phone number, and I talked to someone there with little experience, extensively. They could not ignore this. I was VERY upset with them. There were 5 distributors in the area, and ALL of them were selling illegal copies of DOS. I made it VERY clear I thought their behavior was deliberate.
That may be why it is NOT possible to get the phone number of the legal department now. When I called to make a similar complaint about Microsoft Office 2000, they blocked me from telling my story.
An explanation of how the U.S. became the target of terrorism: What should be the Response to Violence?
If your company is not extemely abusive and anti-competitive, you have nothing to fear from the DOJ.
You are right, Windows 98 full support will stop in 7 months, not 1 month.
From the Langa Newsletter, Nov. 15, 2001:
"Starting next month and ending next June, the overwhelming majority of current Windows users will find themselves operating OS versions that the vendor --- Microsoft --- either doesn't support, or only partially supports! " [my emphasis]
(The Langa Newsletter is an excellent free emailed newsletter that covers matters of interest to computer users.)
An explanation of how the U.S. got involved in violence: What should be the Response to Violence?
I read the settlement. It is great for Microsoft, and almost meaningless for everyone else.
The provisions don't begin until many people have been pushed into using Windows XP (eXtra Pain), after which they will be trapped in ways that are not part of the case. Here is a quote:
"Starting at the earlier of the release of Service Pack 1 for Windows XP or 12 months after the submission of this Final Judgment to the Court..."
Why not starting now?
Microsoft must disclose APIs, but may charge royalties. This prevents competition from Linux.
There is nothing which prevents Microsoft from using secret Microsoft Office file formats in an anti-competitive way.
The settlement provisions apparently do not apply if Microsoft claims that its anti-competitive software practices provide security.
The provisions provide Microsoft significant benefits.
Here's my letter to the DOJ:
I've owned a computer dealership since before IBM sold personal computers. I'm also a programmer.
Microsoft is extemely abusive and anti-competitive. -- Microsoft is far, far more anti-competitive and abusive than the US DOJ vs. Microsoft antitrust case discusses. If the present case in resolved in an insufficient fashion, there will be a need for another case immediately.
Secret file formats are anti-competitive. -- A good partial resolution of the case would be to prohibit Microsoft from using secret file formats. Then there could be competition again.
At present there cannot be competition because the software from the dominant company, Microsoft, produces file formats that cannot be reproduced because they are secret. So, another company cannot make software that reliably inter-operates.
At present, if a big customer upgrades to a new version of Microsoft Office, and sends out files in a format incompatible with previous versions, all people who receive the files are forced to upgrade their Microsoft software. Companies understandably don't want to go to a good customer and ask that a document be sent again in a former file format.
Microsoft produces software that is deliberately faulty. -- Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows ME all have articifial limitations which cause them to crash even though there are plenty of hardware resources. These are called "User Resources" and "GDI Resources". The memory for these resources is artificially limited to 128,000 bytes in some cases and 2 megabytes in other cases. When these resources are exhausted, the operating systems stop functioning.
Microsoft deliberately allows piracy. -- Major competitors of Microsoft like Corel Word Perfect and IBM Lotus WordPro have difficulty competing because Microsoft allows enough piracy of Microsoft products that competitors cannot sell theirs.
I called the Microsoft legal department and complained about this. The result was that I was a witness in a case against one of the pirates. More recently I tried to complain about this again, but it is now impossible to contact Microsoft's legal department.
In my area Microsoft Office 2000 is available for $50.00 at dealers who sell low-cost computers. I have verified with Microsoft that these are pirated copies. Over a period of many years, Microsoft has not taken sufficient action against the pirates to allow a chance for honest competitors.
Microsoft is ending support. -- Next month, December 2001, Microsoft will stop providing support for Windows 98, apparently in an attempt to force users to upgrade. Another good partial resolution of the DOJ-Microsoft case would be to extend the support time for at least another 10 years. Many people have computers that operate fine for the purpose for which they are used. For example, an accounting department in a small company may use Windows 95, or even the DOS operating system. These people should not be forced to upgrade.
These are only a few of the extremely anti-competitive and abusive methods Microsoft uses, in my opinion.
Regards,
Michael Jennings
An explanation of how the U.S. got involved in violence: What should be the Response to Violence?
From the Slashdot story posted by Hemos, (Mostly) Confirmed: New Mersenne Prime Found
pc's [Should be PCs.]
there fifth result [their]
money has been awarded [How could this be past tense if the results have not been confirmed?]
sofar [so far, until now]
a message send into outer space. " [two mistakes]
to totally test it out [to test it completely]
It is one of the characteristics of a young child that he or she only cares about himself or herself. It is one of the characteristics of an adult that he or she is considerate of others.
It is time for the Slashdot editors like Hemos to grow up and become responsible adults. Every time they post a story with spelling, grammatical, and typographical errors, they make every reader do more work. The errors are especially difficult for the many Slashdot readers for whom English is not their native language.
Someone who knows English well should edit all stories before they are posted.
An explanation of how the U.S. got involved in violence: What should be the Response to Violence?
Fire Carleton Fiorino.
I very much agree with this. Part of my definition of an operating system is that it is stable. Windows 98 is not stable. Therefore, it cannot be truly called an operating system.
I should not have to pay for junk, especially when it is deliberate junk. If Win XP is stable, then it should be a free upgrade to all those who paid for Windows 95 and 98 and ME, and suffered enormously from the shortcomings that were deliberately left there to try to get us to pay more.
Microsoft is, partly, the enemy of its customers.
10:19 Eastern Standard Time, 11/12/01
Jet Crash in NYC Borough of Queens
ABC News
Plane Down Near JFK Airport
N E W Y O R K, Nov. 12 _ An American Airlines jet departing from John F. Kennedy International Airport crashed in a heavily populated section of the New York City borough of Queens at 9:17 a.m. ET, emergency officials said, and there was no report on the number of passengers and crew on board.
The jet, an Airbus 300, departed JFK at 9:15 a.m., officials said, when it crashed into an area populated with many homes and businesses. The American Airlines web site said Flight 587 was headed for Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic. The plane crashed near Beach 129th Street and Newport Avenue, in the Rockaways section of Queens. There were no reports of injuries at the scene.
Thick black smoke could be seen billowing above the crash site for miles and several buildings were said to be on fire. Emergency crews raced to the scene.
Harriet Cohen, a Queens resident who lives near the airport and about 10 blocks from the crash site, said she was eating breakfast in her home when she thought she heard the Concorde leaving the airport. After hearing a terrible bang, she told her husband: "Oh my, I think it must have broken the sound barrier." But then the house shook, Cohen said. "I looked outside, and 10 blocks from us, there was black thick smoke rising up into the sky."
Minutes after the crash, all three New York City-area airports _ Kennedy, LaGuardia and Newark _ were closed. Airports in Washington, D.C., remained open.
The incident comes two months after two hijacked jets rammed into the World Trade Center in Manhattan killing about 4,500.
An explanation of how the U.S. got involved in violence: What should be the Response to Violence?
New York Times, 7:03, 11/12/01:
November 12, 2001
Homes in Queens on Fire
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
EW YORK -- An American Airlines Airbus A300 crashed Monday morning in the Queens section of New York, and buildings reportedly were on fire in the neighborhood.
The plane crashed shortly after 9 a.m. and thick, black smoke could be seen miles away.
All metro area airports were closed following the crash, in the Rockaways section of Queens.
The mayor canceled his morning events and headed to the scene.
One eyewitness reported debris falling from sky, and told the Fox News Channel four homes were on fire.
Another told CNN he was 40 blocks away and saw "Just a lot of smoke. Tons and tons of smoke. You can see emergency vehicles heading to area. Lots of people are standing in the streets. It's very tense."
The cause of the crash was not immediately known.
The crash came two months after the attack on the World Trade Center, which was destroyed by two Boeing 767s hijacked out of Boston's Logan Airport. One of the planes was operated by American, the other by United.
An explanation of how the U.S. got into this mess: What should be the Response to Violence?
Nepal is a LONG way from Afghanistan. I guess you don't know this.
Several people saw him kill his parents.
The said that it wasn't him because they didn't want to believe it. Also, the others in the ruling family want to keep power.
The initial stories were completely accurate. Later the ruling family tried to put a spin on it.
Nepal could use our help. It is a very poor country. The ruling family was so abusive that their own son, the crown prince, killed them.
CNN: NEPAL. Report paints picture of prince's drunken rampage, June 4, 2001
Nepal's 48-hour king dies after royal massacre, June 3, 2001
"The former Crown Prince Dipendra was admitted to hospital late on Friday with what appeared to be a self-inflicted gunshot wound after reportedly slaughtering most of his family with an assault rifle as they sat around a dinner table."
Nepal's King orders massacre probe amid riots.
"Analysts say Gyanendra now faces a struggle to restore the role of the monarchy as a pillar of stability in the country of 22 million people where Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala has faced violent street protests against his rule.
What should be the Response to Violence?
I agree with Zo0ok and swb.
But this strikes me: Although what they have said is strongly negative, it is almost an endorsement of Microsoft because it is not strongly negative enough. In my experience, Microsoft is far, far worse than anyone has said.
The world does not deal with abusiveness well. People just let it continue, and hope the abuser will stop.
Suggestion: We should have an Ask Slashdot in which everyone posts their worst experiences with Microsoft. We could send the best posts to the justice department. We could also use the best posts to educate people.
Here's something I would post: There are artificial resource limits in Windows 95, 98, and ME that cause Windows to crash when the limit is reached. These are called GDI and USER resources. Some of the crashing is actually caused by DELIBERATE design. No matter how much memory you have, Windows will still crash if you reach these limits. One of them is 128K bytes. That's right. 128k. Another is 2 megabytes.
Remember, even though Microsoft was found to have broken the law, the company has been allowed to continue for years, exactly as before. The damage Microsoft has continued to do can never be fixed.
What should be the Response to Violence?
I agree with you 100% that The Economist is a great publication. However, in my opinion, the article about Microsoft referenced in the Slashdot story is of poor quality.
The title and subtitle (below) are fine. But some parts of the article itself are weak.
___________________
Title: Extending its tentacles
As it launches an array of new products, the software giant is changing, and yet its basic instincts are staying much the same