I'd say there are many quality game writers - my short list would include Miyamoto Shigeru of Nintendo fame, Will Wright of Sim City, Sid Meier of Civilization et al, and Ron Gilbert of the old school LucasArts adventure games(Maniac Mansion, Monkey Island, etc) and one of the creators of the SCUMM system, to name a few.
Just because the general population doesn't know these people doesn't make them less genius.
You know, I generally enjoy/. However, every so often one of these stories comes up (it seems to be more frequently these days) that is just complete bullshit (Disclosure: I've been an MSDN subscriber for years). I don't know anyone who is complaining about SP availability. There will always be some who complain, but that's more than likely a very small minority. For those testing compatibility, the betas and RCs have been out for quite a while for the sole purpose of testing applications. I haven't worked with them personally, but a conservative guess would be 95% of functionality can be testing on the RCs.
What gets me though is that over the weekend a much more impactful event occurred: the Windows 2008 RTM. Not only that, but Windows 2008 IS available on MSDN (all English flavors at least, and most likely TechNet as well, but I don't know for sure). Windows 2008 is a much more important release than SP 1, but, alas, that gets no coverage on/.
I'm not saying that MS was not guilty of antitrust violations. I am asking though what are the merits of the new accusation? Is it the same accusation, or is it different? Frankly, the market has change SIGNIFICANTLY, for better or worse, than it was in the mid 90's. Consumers expect browsers included in the OS. Yes, OEMs should be able to include other browsers with their systems. If Microsoft were demanding they don't, this should be a violation; however, that was never referenced in any of the articles (I believe that was the case in the past).
I am doing my best to understand antitrust law as far as the EU is concerned. According to Article 82 of the Treaty Establishing the EC:
Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the common market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the common market in so far as it may affect trade between Member States.
Such abuse may, in particular, consist in:
(a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices or other unfair trading conditions;
(b) limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers;
(c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;
(d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts. Now, one can say they are being abusive, however, it's hard to argue that with competitors doing well in the EU: adoption of FireFox ranges from 20 - 40% in some member countries, according to Ars Techica. If Opera were doing as well, I would imagine that they wouldn't complain. If IE were really so abusive these days, would they have such viable competition?
So I've been told. However, they are part of the European Economic Area. That doesn't really change the fact that I was originally wrong, but it's an interesting tidbit to know.
Actually, MS bundling a browser with Windows is antitrust abuse all by itself. Their intentional breaking of standards is further abuse because it results in competing products being artificially broken through the use of MS's monopoly on desktop OS's. It further speaks to potential remedies of the problem, since simply forcing MS to not bundle IE it this point would not fix the broken Web browser market. So far as I know, only a few browsers are completely standards compliant. Yes, Opera is one of them; however, with the announcement that IE 8 should be ACID 2 compliant, that argument starts to fail. Should IE be allowed to be bundled if it passes that test? If not, then why? Because a browser should be considered an after market add on? Please! Browsers are as integral to computing now as anything else is. For instance, calc.exe has been part of the OS since Windows 3.x at least. If Casio, claimed that the calc program made it more difficult to sell calculators, I would scoff at that too. Frankly, playing card companies have more of a beef than anyone - who plays solitaire with real cards any more?
Bullshit. First, Opera is based our of Norway, which is not an EU member. Second, the EU has enforced this same law against numerous companies based in the EU. Third, the US convicted MS of bundling IE... they just didn't do anything about it because there was an election and MS contributed large amounts of money to both parties and our corrupt politicians replaced the prosecutors with people who basically let MS off with no punishment. Yep, my bad. I assumed that Norway was a member country. And yes, Microsoft did get away w/ it's case here when it's back was to the wall. That being said, if you think the EU doesn't look out for it's own, you're crazy. Google the US-EU Banana Tariff Dispute (or get a summary here.
Please educate yourself. It is a matter of companies bundling any product in one market with another product with one which they have monopoly influence. And Apple is being investigated for bundling the iTunes software and for tying the iTunes store to said software given that they may have enough influence in the portable music player market to qualify as monopoly influence. The law applies the same to everyone. However, the majority of stories coming out of the EU regarding monopoly investigations pertains to MS. Yeah, I think that iTunes is also a monopoly - the fact that they force music companies to adopt their pricing scheme is more abusive than including a web browser in an OS.
It's easy, both are tied to Windows, which is a monopoly. For example, MS has long bundled a text editor that reads the proprietary Word format with Windows. They don't include one which reads competing formats, thus giving them a competitive advantage in the word processing market. That is potentially illegal. It's not illegal to have a monopoly - it's illegal to have a monopoly and use that power to influence pricing or technology. There was no word in the article regarding pricing at all. It seems more like this is a case of going after the evil, big, bad wolf just because nobody likes him.
I don't understand this round of bruhaha... When Microsoft was/is using their market position to demand that manufacturers not bundle competing products, that's a monopolistic use of power. But that's not mentioned in the complaint at all...just a bunch of whining that "they aren't standards compliant." Yes, as a developer, it blows. But just because something blows doesn't mean it's abuse; it's just an asinine business practice. Furthermore, there are many other browsers available that work just fine with Windows, including Opera. In fact, FireFox is a great browser that is very successful on Windows.
To me, it seems that Opera is whining, and the EU is protecting a company that resides within its borders. If this was really a question of companies including software w/ their OSes, then Apple should be included as well. Hell, any Linux distro includes more software by default than Windows does. And I'm not even sure what the.NET framework or Office has to do with any of this. (Frankly, Office 2007 is so hard to use that the OSS crowd should be jumping for joy. I mean, if you have to basically learn a whole new software suite, why not learn the one that cost nothing to use?)
I got to see some of the new stuff in Windows 2008 with one of the MS sales engineers, and I have to say, I'm impressed. Here's some of the stuff they did: General:
This will be the last Windows Server that will have 32-bit installation available. With the popularity of x64 based Intel and AMD processors, and the proven reliability of WOW64, this shouldn't be a problem.
You may add/remove as many roles at a time, with a single reboot required after all the roles have been installed
You can bypass entering the product code on installation (Activation still requires the code though). Setup is no longer linear - you can pick and choose what you wish to configure. Virtualization:
Virtualization has now become a feature of the OS, rather than a separate application installation. You can enable virtualization as a server role. When this happens, a thin layer acts as the interface between the virtual hosts and the hardware (marketing term: "Hypervisor"). The parent host OS then becomes a virtual image (that can't be moved). All hosts are treated as equals.
Virtualization requires the 64-bit edition of Server 2008 installed.
Virtual machines can now have memory spaces > 4 GB and have multiple cores
Virtual machines can run any Windows and some Linux variants are now supported (most likely all will run; MS will actually field support calls for the supported Linux variants). Event Log
The event log is so much better that I can't begin to explain how much better is it. You truly have to see it. Here's some of the features:
Events displayed within each subsystems management screens. Ex: if I were to open IIS management, I would see a default screen with all the events that were generated by IIS, and none that were generated by other systems.
Events from all eventlogs (Application, Security, System, etc) can be displayed in one window
You are able to see events categorized by event severity, and grouped by time frame (ex: 1 critical event in the last hour, 3 in the last day, x in the last week).
You are able to push events to a central server from multiple server, or you can pull events from other servers to one (subscription)
You are able to execute applications or send emails when an event is fired. You set up criteria for that to happen (event ID, severity, text in body/subject, etc). Management
The Computer Management MMC console has been replaced by the Server Management console. The Server Management console is automatically populated with links to the management windows for each installed role, thus making it the de-facto configuration window.
PowerShell is a new command line interface. It is a hybrid console/scripting environment, created to aid in systems management. You can manage either the local server or remote servers from it. New Server 2008 Core Installation Option
Server core is an optional way to implement Windows 2008. It removes the GUI portion of the OS as well as a number of other features, thus reducing the attack surface of the OS.
Core is not a separate product; the Standard, Enterprise, and Datacenter editions can all be installed in Core mode
Managed with remote tools and command prompt (cmd)
5 available server roles
Included: o DNS o DHCP o File sharing o AD o WSV - windows server virtualization o Limited IIS - static content only o Task manager
Not included: o No GUI
Last time I checked the history books, the Internet was an American invention with the American government the primary financiers behind the research and development. The fact that use of the TCP/IP stack by anyone is free without royalty or restriction is amazing. I find it shocking that somehow the rest of the world is so ungrateful and hypocritical as to say they have a right or even a duty to come and take away control of what is rightfully a US possession. The US has done an excellent job administrating the small part of the Internet that it decides to manage, and leaves the rest to the public domain. Now countries like China and Iran, who censor their own citizens' use of the Internet want to regulate it for everyone else?! How is that not absurd? Furthermore, handing control of the Internet to the UN sounds like one of the worst ideas ever. The UN in its current form is ineffectual at best (and corrupt at worst).
The idea of other countries taking control of the Internet is akin to you buying the best new car on the block, and all of your neighbors deciding to take it from you just for the hell of it. I'm sorry, but rationalizing theft does not change the fact that it's still theft.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd say there are many quality game writers - my short list would include Miyamoto Shigeru of Nintendo fame, Will Wright of Sim City, Sid Meier of Civilization et al, and Ron Gilbert of the old school LucasArts adventure games(Maniac Mansion, Monkey Island, etc) and one of the creators of the SCUMM system, to name a few. Just because the general population doesn't know these people doesn't make them less genius.
You know, I generally enjoy /. However, every so often one of these stories comes up (it seems to be more frequently these days) that is just complete bullshit (Disclosure: I've been an MSDN subscriber for years). I don't know anyone who is complaining about SP availability. There will always be some who complain, but that's more than likely a very small minority. For those testing compatibility, the betas and RCs have been out for quite a while for the sole purpose of testing applications. I haven't worked with them personally, but a conservative guess would be 95% of functionality can be testing on the RCs.
What gets me though is that over the weekend a much more impactful event occurred: the Windows 2008 RTM. Not only that, but Windows 2008 IS available on MSDN (all English flavors at least, and most likely TechNet as well, but I don't know for sure). Windows 2008 is a much more important release than SP 1, but, alas, that gets no coverage on /.
If you take out Tetris, it will work fine!
So I've been told. However, they are part of the European Economic Area. That doesn't really change the fact that I was originally wrong, but it's an interesting tidbit to know.
I don't understand this round of bruhaha... When Microsoft was/is using their market position to demand that manufacturers not bundle competing products, that's a monopolistic use of power. But that's not mentioned in the complaint at all...just a bunch of whining that "they aren't standards compliant." Yes, as a developer, it blows. But just because something blows doesn't mean it's abuse; it's just an asinine business practice. Furthermore, there are many other browsers available that work just fine with Windows, including Opera. In fact, FireFox is a great browser that is very successful on Windows.
To me, it seems that Opera is whining, and the EU is protecting a company that resides within its borders. If this was really a question of companies including software w/ their OSes, then Apple should be included as well. Hell, any Linux distro includes more software by default than Windows does. And I'm not even sure what the .NET framework or Office has to do with any of this. (Frankly, Office 2007 is so hard to use that the OSS crowd should be jumping for joy. I mean, if you have to basically learn a whole new software suite, why not learn the one that cost nothing to use?)
I got to see some of the new stuff in Windows 2008 with one of the MS sales engineers, and I have to say, I'm impressed. Here's some of the stuff they did:
General:
This will be the last Windows Server that will have 32-bit installation available. With the popularity of x64 based Intel and AMD processors, and the proven reliability of WOW64, this shouldn't be a problem.
You may add/remove as many roles at a time, with a single reboot required after all the roles have been installed
You can bypass entering the product code on installation (Activation still requires the code though). Setup is no longer linear - you can pick and choose what you wish to configure.
Virtualization:
Virtualization has now become a feature of the OS, rather than a separate application installation. You can enable virtualization as a server role. When this happens, a thin layer acts as the interface between the virtual hosts and the hardware (marketing term: "Hypervisor"). The parent host OS then becomes a virtual image (that can't be moved). All hosts are treated as equals.
Virtualization requires the 64-bit edition of Server 2008 installed.
Virtual machines can now have memory spaces > 4 GB and have multiple cores
Virtual machines can run any Windows and some Linux variants are now supported (most likely all will run; MS will actually field support calls for the supported Linux variants).
Event Log
The event log is so much better that I can't begin to explain how much better is it. You truly have to see it. Here's some of the features:
Events displayed within each subsystems management screens. Ex: if I were to open IIS management, I would see a default screen with all the events that were generated by IIS, and none that were generated by other systems.
Events from all eventlogs (Application, Security, System, etc) can be displayed in one window
You are able to see events categorized by event severity, and grouped by time frame (ex: 1 critical event in the last hour, 3 in the last day, x in the last week).
You are able to push events to a central server from multiple server, or you can pull events from other servers to one (subscription)
You are able to execute applications or send emails when an event is fired. You set up criteria for that to happen (event ID, severity, text in body/subject, etc).
Management
The Computer Management MMC console has been replaced by the Server Management console. The Server Management console is automatically populated with links to the management windows for each installed role, thus making it the de-facto configuration window.
PowerShell is a new command line interface. It is a hybrid console/scripting environment, created to aid in systems management. You can manage either the local server or remote servers from it.
New Server 2008 Core Installation Option
Server core is an optional way to implement Windows 2008. It removes the GUI portion of the OS as well as a number of other features, thus reducing the attack surface of the OS.
Core is not a separate product; the Standard, Enterprise, and Datacenter editions can all be installed in Core mode
Managed with remote tools and command prompt (cmd)
5 available server roles
Included:
o DNS
o DHCP
o File sharing
o AD
o WSV - windows server virtualization
o Limited IIS - static content only
o Task manager
Not included:
o No GUI
Last time I checked the history books, the Internet was an American invention with the American government the primary financiers behind the research and development. The fact that use of the TCP/IP stack by anyone is free without royalty or restriction is amazing. I find it shocking that somehow the rest of the world is so ungrateful and hypocritical as to say they have a right or even a duty to come and take away control of what is rightfully a US possession. The US has done an excellent job administrating the small part of the Internet that it decides to manage, and leaves the rest to the public domain. Now countries like China and Iran, who censor their own citizens' use of the Internet want to regulate it for everyone else?! How is that not absurd? Furthermore, handing control of the Internet to the UN sounds like one of the worst ideas ever. The UN in its current form is ineffectual at best (and corrupt at worst).
The idea of other countries taking control of the Internet is akin to you buying the best new car on the block, and all of your neighbors deciding to take it from you just for the hell of it. I'm sorry, but rationalizing theft does not change the fact that it's still theft.