1) You are certainly entitled to your opinion on whether or not MS is a monopoly. However, MS has been convicted of abusing it's monopoly position in the Desktop PC OS market in violation of the Anti-trust laws. This conviction has been upheld on appeal, and as of yet the supreme court has refused to hear the case. These are just the facts (98.6 % sure about the SC part)
2)see above regarding your point #1, and what they where convicted for and why, and try not to let your opinion of how good or bad MS is get in the way of your research:)
3)2 of your examples in point 2 are not PC Desktop Operating Systems, and one is a network OS that MS did not have a competing product to for awhile, how much of there success against this product was due to there growing monopoly in the desktop arena no doubt helped considerably by their actions towards DR-DOS? . I also notice that you refer vaguely to other operating systems with out actually mentioning BeOS by name, was their any particular reason you did that?
4)Because the rules change for a company convicted of violating anti-trust laws. Remedies and restrictions must be put in place to restore competition to the market( PC Desktop OS market, remember?). Also, MS has already thumbed its nose at the law before. It is trying to again. Should they be allowed to completely take over one computer related market , then the internet, then the rest of the computer markets? I don't think so.
I don't see how this will help Microsoft in its fight against OSS. Just because they can market their product better than anyone else, and abuse the entire industry with their monopoly power and money, does not mean they can actually make a good product. MS WILL be destroyed or diminished if it does not stop it's abuse of it's monopoly power. And even if it does stop it's anti-competitive, illegal practices, enough people are pissed at them and there image is damaged enough to seriously hurt them and their stock price in the long run(read as: SELLL!!!). Maybe people should stop wasting their time trying to apologize for a company that has illegally sucked billions of dollars out it's industy and many others and start trying to help the Industry repair itself from MS's abuse by writing MS letters asking them to please change their ways(hehehehehehehhhehe heh he he, hohohohhhhhehehehahahhahha , ok I'm back up off the floor now), or just start supporting alternative, non-closed platforms.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Oohhhh, another MS apologist/lover that can't see past the pile of MS dung caked on the end of their nose posting on./ about how MS isn't this "big bad evil company" and we should all leave them alone. Hmmm, however should I respond... hmmmm.....
Firstly, I would be very interested in seeing the piece of legal paper that is essentially MS, speak. Next, what part of MS being a convicted monopolist, and the new set of rules for them that entails, does a seemingly MS apologist such as yourself not understand?
So your saying they should behave like all other mainstream media out there and suckle on big-bad-unethical-business' left one? Uh- yeah right how about you get back to admiring your glass collection.
So by your reasoning MS should have no trouble at all releaseing all of their code under a BSD- alike or Apache alike license? Admint it, your a whining piece of crap MS boot ^ a ^ s ^ s^licker.
Just so MS Apologists/stockholders/employees/paidorunpaid asstroturfers like your self are clear. The open source community, proprietary companies building apps to run on linux, GNU/Linux, proprietary unix etc, etc, is going to keep on rolling with or without, and preferrably right over, MS. They could not, would not,and will not, change their spots, and even if they did change in some way to improve their image it would not matter. They can't stop what is happening, it was there before them and it will be there after they are either gone or reduced to just another proprietary software vendor.
"The biggest problem with RMS is that he has said several times that not only does he think all software should be free, but you should be required by law to make your software free. There is no room in his philosophy for people to choose what type of software they want to use."
Link to a credible interview, or maytbe an article?
Very good analogy. And most business's will not go through that and are therefor in violation, and at risk. Here's a thought to ponder.
If a business' data is its life blood, and said business is locked in to proprietary software ( you know who) then..............
And how much a year do you spend maintaining your virus and filtering software? And how about when your virus and filtering software company no longer supports your version? Ohh, your not connected to the internet!! Never mind then, hehehhehehe
Corporate death penalty would take care of that. It would be the right and just thing to do. However, the world hasn't been right or just probably for a long while. Don't worry though it will get there eventually, several hundred more years of wars, WTC and OC type tragedies. Hopefully everyone gets the idea eventually that there is a lot less grey area between right and wrong than many believe.
Yup, and some people like to make money so much that they are willing to violate long standing laws against anti-competitive behavior to continue making exorbitant amounts of it.
How much would you be willing to bet that line and any others similar to it would not get quietly edited out of the final version that went up for vote?
For that useless bullet list straight out of the MS PR handbook, Mr. MS/.Cheerleader #1286. How does it really feel to be an apologist for a company tried and convicted of anti-trust violations? Are you an apologist for Enron too? Verizon? Exxon? DoJ? >|||.|.|||:)
Slashdot Mirror
1) You are certainly entitled to your opinion on whether or not MS is a monopoly. However, MS has been convicted of abusing it's monopoly position in the Desktop PC OS market in violation of the Anti-trust laws. This conviction has been upheld on appeal, and as of yet the supreme court has refused to hear the case. These are just the facts (98.6 % sure about the SC part)
:)
2)see above regarding your point #1, and what they where convicted for and why, and try not to let your opinion of how good or bad MS is get in the way of your research
3)2 of your examples in point 2 are not PC Desktop Operating Systems, and one is a network OS that MS did not have a competing product to for awhile, how much of there success against this product was due to there growing monopoly in the desktop arena no doubt helped considerably by their actions towards DR-DOS? . I also notice that you refer vaguely to other operating systems with out actually mentioning BeOS by name, was their any particular reason you did that?
4)Because the rules change for a company convicted of violating anti-trust laws. Remedies and restrictions must be put in place to restore competition to the market( PC Desktop OS market, remember?). Also, MS has already thumbed its nose at the law before. It is trying to again. Should they be allowed to completely take over one computer related market , then the internet, then the rest of the computer markets? I don't think so.
Wow.. your comment about high school is so relevant to MS bashing.. NOT!!
Darn it I need to proof read better!!!
I don't see how this will help Microsoft in its fight against OSS. Just because they can market their product better than anyone else, and abuse the entire industry with their monopoly power and money, does not mean they can actually make a good product. MS WILL be destroyed or diminished if it does not stop it's abuse of it's monopoly power. And even if it does stop it's anti-competitive, illegal practices, enough people are pissed at them and there image is damaged enough to seriously hurt them and their stock price in the long run(read as: SELLL!!!). Maybe people should stop wasting their time trying to apologize for a company that has illegally sucked billions of dollars out it's industy and many others and start trying to help the Industry repair itself from MS's abuse by writing MS letters asking them to please change their ways(hehehehehehehhhehe heh he he, hohohohhhhhehehehahahhahha , ok I'm back up off the floor now), or just start supporting alternative, non-closed platforms. [ Reply to This | Parent ]
Oohhhh, another MS apologist/lover that can't see past the pile of MS dung caked on the end of their nose posting on ./ about how MS isn't this "big bad evil company" and we should all leave them alone. Hmmm, however should I respond... hmmmm.....
Firstly, I would be very interested in seeing the piece of legal paper that is essentially MS, speak. Next, what part of MS being a convicted monopolist, and the new set of rules for them that entails, does a seemingly MS apologist such as yourself not understand?
Hmmmm, wonder what would happen if your employer started working on moving to all OOS/FS and they found out?
So your saying they should behave like all other mainstream media out there and suckle on big-bad-unethical-business' left one? Uh- yeah right how about you get back to admiring your glass collection.
I'm sure many of you have watched the movie "Jeapers Creepers"? Maybe they aren't their real fingers?
So by your reasoning MS should have no trouble at all releaseing all of their code under a BSD- alike or Apache alike license? Admint it, your a whining piece of crap MS boot ^ a ^ s ^ s^licker.
Just so MS Apologists/stockholders/employees/paidorunpaid asstroturfers like your self are clear. The open source community, proprietary companies building apps to run on linux, GNU/Linux, proprietary unix etc, etc, is going to keep on rolling with or without, and preferrably right over, MS. They could not, would not,and will not, change their spots, and even if they did change in some way to improve their image it would not matter. They can't stop what is happening, it was there before them and it will be there after they are either gone or reduced to just another proprietary software vendor.
Hmmm, collateral damage? Where have I heard that term before?
"The biggest problem with RMS is that he has said several times that not only does he think all software should be free, but you should be required by law to make your software free. There is no room in his philosophy for people to choose what type of software they want to use." Link to a credible interview, or maytbe an article?
Very good analogy. And most business's will not go through that and are therefor in violation, and at risk. Here's a thought to ponder. If a business' data is its life blood, and said business is locked in to proprietary software ( you know who) then..............
But of course the some of the prisoner's are going to say bad things about the warden!! Especially when many of them are unjustly imprisoned.
And how much a year do you spend maintaining your virus and filtering software? And how about when your virus and filtering software company no longer supports your version? Ohh, your not connected to the internet!! Never mind then, hehehhehehe
Because they have a monopoly on the PC desktop, oh and they suck too!!
Corporate death penalty would take care of that. It would be the right and just thing to do. However, the world hasn't been right or just probably for a long while. Don't worry though it will get there eventually, several hundred more years of wars, WTC and OC type tragedies. Hopefully everyone gets the idea eventually that there is a lot less grey area between right and wrong than many believe.
Yup, and some people like to make money so much that they are willing to violate long standing laws against anti-competitive behavior to continue making exorbitant amounts of it.
How much would you be willing to bet that line and any others similar to it would not get quietly edited out of the final version that went up for vote?
It specifically says you may not view the ui remotely accept as allowed by their products or by having an additional license for their product.
Yeh I wish there was then I would not have to listen to such moronic MS Weeny drivel as you are spouting.
Dell Servers still availible with RH. No I don't think your flamebait. But I do think your spouting MS PR like a redmond teapot.
Insightful?? There already is a verdict with regard to the case against MS? as for the rest of your comments, pure drivel.
For that useless bullet list straight out of the MS PR handbook, Mr. MS/.Cheerleader #1286. How does it really feel to be an apologist for a company tried and convicted of anti-trust violations? Are you an apologist for Enron too? Verizon? Exxon? DoJ? >|||.|.||| :)