Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Senator Seeks Injuction Against WinXP

Hemos posted more than 13 years ago | from the stopping-it-at-the-starting-gate dept.

Microsoft 379

Hiro_Later writes "Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee has asked state prosecutors to seek an injunction blocking the launch of Windows XP. His reasoning? "Without 'significant changes,' new technologies might never get the opportunity to compete." Microsoft of course disagrees arguing instead that XP will bring more choices and content to consumers not less. What I find interesting is Schumer was formerly a skeptic of the government's antitrust case against Microsoft, perhaps he has seen the light. Judge for yourselves here." Update: 07/25 01:41 AM by H :So, based on the e-mail I've been getting, evidently people have forgotten that what submittors type is in italics. Like this. Notice how when I type here that is in normal type - if you've got other questions, please check out the FAQ. There's lots of fun information in there. We now return you to our regularly scheduled programming.

cancel ×

379 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Senator doesn't know what he's talking about (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#63252)

in Windows XP RC1, I get a popup when I insert a CD asking me what media player I want to use. Same thing for cameras. More choice- no more players like Musicmatch slamming me into using their player to listen to my music. Hello? Anyone smell AOL lobbying here?

Wow (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#63253)

What a thoughtful, reasoned response. Look, shithead, if you don't like what the guy's doing, >change the channel. One thing that's apparently passed by your limited point of view is the fact that most IT professionals, at one time or another, will end up in front of a screen with XP on the other side, so it's in our common interest to see things done better than they have been. Not to mention the fact that the rotten M$ business practices are endangering the industry, and thus our jobs. But you're obviously too lobotomized to notice.

Re:What in the hell? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#63254)

Yes but there was no company making themes for linux before they were introduced. Stardock makes it's living off of theme managers for windows. So when you say "who gives a shit?" it's a safe bet that Stardock does. That's just one company that stands to lose from XP's realease, I haven't tried XP and I doubt I ever will but, I am more than sure there are several other companies biting their fingernails right now over this.

You're all missing the point... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#63255)

The WinXP code is not yet ready for prime time. Microsoft wants the government to delay the release, so for once they'll have somebody else to blame for their slipped schedules!

Quick ban Mac OS X 10.1 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#63256)

It comes with DVD Authoring Software, CD buring software, mp3 making/listening software, and more!

*gasp*

Re:bah (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#63261)

Actually the check did come in. Only it was $52,000 from [now AOL] Time Warner. [opensecrets.org]

Enough whining - it's time to do something instead (4)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#63262)

As I sit here and read most of this, I am stunned at the complete lack of care or thought for the impact of what you are all suggesting. Do you not understand the implications?

So, because MSFT sold a piece of SW they will not support, everything should be released under the GPL if it's "old". Well, shoot, then every product ever released in the history of the world should be required to be released under the GPL.

Hey, even if it's not technology it should apply. Shoot, every restaurant I walk into should have the recipe, with full preparation instructions, for EVERY single dish they offer, posted right in the lobby. Coca Cola should provide complete preparation instructions so I can make my own coke products how I want them - just ingredients isn't enough.

I'm sure you have some reason to claim it's not the same, but it is. You are saying there should be no privately owned information. Fine, stop buying anything from anywhere you didn't get complete specifications, instructions, and tools from today. I'm sure you'll save a lot of money to spend on nothing.

What you fail to realize, is that MSFT is a business that spent billions of dollars on that product. I don't care if you like that or not. The kernel itself is still used today in Win2K and XP, and it is THEIR property.

The last thing I want is government that steps in at every chance to bully companies and people. As a matter of fact, I'm for a much smaller government, and sadly, we're going the opposite way. Beat MSFT by being better - don't look for someone else to solve your problems.

Linux will not beat MSFT in a consumer market because it has NO consumer strategy right now. Change that. You think innovation is a "MSFT joke"? Fine, hopefully someone who cares about innovation will push you aside and do it themselves.

People like Linus didn't whine and look for the government to shutdown MSFT before trying to make a difference. I'm saddened by the whining - I hear how MSFT whines, but it sounds the same on this end to, and it's SAD. Make a difference, don't bitch about it.

For every person here who says that the government should force this or the government should force that - go and start a company that DOES what you are saying. Don't try to alter the future by lobbying, because it has a serious impact in the future that is very scary. The reality is I could go buy Maces today - I have a Mac at home. I can run Linux. It's not like I don't HAVE choices. Yes, I understand MSFT is evil, bad bad, and they did bad things, they did this and they did that. Fine compete against them. It takes people to make a difference and innovate.

Re:Wouldn't a Boycott be more effective? (1)

davidu (18) | more than 13 years ago | (#63263)

see my post below about boycottxp.com [boycottxp.com] -davidu

Re:BoycottXP (1)

davidu (18) | more than 13 years ago | (#63264)


I've receieved a number of emails, so I'll just setup a mailing list to decide what I do...mind if I add you to the list? Your opinion and experiance would be great.

-davidu

BoycottXP (3)

davidu (18) | more than 13 years ago | (#63265)


Hi,


I have boycottxp.com [boycottxp.com] but I don't have the time to run it or set it up. If any one here is interested in helping me get it running, that'd be great.

I don't want it to be a flame site or Anti-microsoft site but rather a clear and concise set of reasons and articles on why WindowsXP is bad for consumers, developers, businesses. I have all the hosting and everything all setup. :-)

Hit me up at davidu@everydns.net [mailto] if interested.


Government intervention again (2)

ciurana (2603) | more than 13 years ago | (#63267)

The timing is too tight for this to be a coincidence.

Today we learned (here on slashdot) [slashdot.org] that AOL is opening up its instant messaging software to third parties. Then we hear Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee has asked state prosecutors to seek an injunction blocking the launch of Windows XP

The article linked from the top of the slashdot presents this comment (among others) from Microsoft: Microsoft also took aim at AOL Time Warner, saying the company has steadfastly refused to open its instant messaging systems to interoperate with other systems.

It's plausible that the AOL news were a preemptive strike since they knew that Sen. Schumer was going to make the news later in the day, perhaps at the behest of lobbyists paid for by one or more corporations based in NY state.

I don't believe that the government should have a say in how companies go about doing their business. While I don't agree with several Microsoft practices, it sickens me to think that publicly elected officials may be acting on behalf of corporations. Ayn Rand warned us about this at length (see Atlas Shrugged). I believe that Microsoft should be able to release its software as they see fit. It's up to us software developers and vendors (free software, open software, commercial, whatever) to stop their hegemony. People forget that Microsoft managed to break IBM's stronghold of computer technology by offering better products and being smarter about business than the larger company.

Think of IBM's TopView and compare it to Windows 1.0. They came out at roughly the same time. Neither one worked. IBM dropped the product. Microsoft improved the product over the years to the point where we see it today. OS/2? Good software implementation, but lousy business strategy. The current Linux revolution proves that radically different software is adopted if it (a) satisfies the user's requirements and (b) it's available. Finally, if you aren't old enough to have witnessed the fall of IBM and the rise of Microsoft (or to know what TopView was), please abstain from flaming.

It's our turn to be smarter about distributing our wares and creating better products. We don't need government intervention to win.

Cheers!

E

No! (2)

Grave (8234) | more than 13 years ago | (#63276)

For the love of God, think about what you're saying. I hate Microsoft with a passion, but stopping them from shipping a product because it might hurt innovation? How the hell do you come to THAT conclusion? Besides, the economic impact would be severe. The computer industry NEEDS WinXP to be launched in October to help fuel consumer and business buying, thus giving the tech companies a much-needed boost. If XP were blocked, the computer industry might not recover at all this year. Economy aside, blocking XP just makes absolutely no sense.

Re:Sorry (1)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 13 years ago | (#63279)

Because it's a Microsoft supported technology, hence you will see "support whatever is the competitor...regardless" (see CORBA).

Re:I have weird remedy - hear me out though. (1)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 13 years ago | (#63280)

The whole "steaming pile of it"? I don't work for Microsoft and never have, but from people who have (or are source partners) what I've heard their code is absolutely beautiful. I find it funny that those in the Linux community (which is known to have some of the nastiest source around) throw mud MS' way.

Return of the Revenge of Bride of Chucky III (2)

Detritus (11846) | more than 13 years ago | (#63285)

If Chucky Schumer is for it, I am against it.

Every time I see him speak on TV, my blood pressure goes up 40 points. He never lets inconvenient things like facts, logic or principles get in the way of a good rant.

No no no! (1)

BigZaphod (12942) | more than 13 years ago | (#63287)

I don't have much love for Microsoft, but there is no way in hell I want to see this happen. Government regulation of dangerous/unhealthy products and services is one thing. An OS?!? Come on! The market is already beginning to balance itself with the growing popularity of Linux, OS X, and all those Internet Appliances that are bound to show up (*cough*). The market WILL take care of itself one way or another. Even Microsoft can't hold everything back forever. Eventually something new will come out. Yeah, it might be hard, but the end result will be better for everyone in the long run. And there is NO need to keep Microsoft from releasing a new OS upgrade! Heck, if it sucks, less people will buy it. They may have a monopoly of sorts right now, but it isn't one that is locked tight. An OS can be changed in an afternoon. There is no need for this kind of insane action.

Re:Senator doesn't know what he's talking about (2)

Zico (14255) | more than 13 years ago | (#63289)

Well, Time-Warner was Schumer's 13th highest contributor during the 1995-2000 election cycle (he was elected in 1998 and won't be up again until 2004). So it would make sense that he agreed with Microsoft's position before, but now that Time-Warner has merged with AOL, it looks like he's been kept safely within Time-Warner's pocket.


Cheers,

Re:BoycottXP (2)

PRickard (16563) | more than 13 years ago | (#63293)

davidu typed: I have boycottxp.com but I don't have the time to run it or set it up. If any one here is interested in helping me get it running, that'd be great.

I already have more Web site than I can handle, but if you'd like some pointers, mail me. Or redirect your domain to my site, if no one else is interested...

Re:bah (2)

sharkey (16670) | more than 13 years ago | (#63294)

True. IIRC, he is one of the members of our government who takes a firm stand against the rights and freedoms of the individual, preferring instead a more imperial government. There has to be more to this sudden change of heart than altruism. What's in it for Schumer?

--

I have weird remedy - hear me out though. (5)

Soko (17987) | more than 13 years ago | (#63298)

OK, so we have more "wah wah, Microsoft's being a bully" from a prominent US citizen. Good for him, good for us, they're as guilty as sin, ad nauseium, ad infenitem.

The main problem we have here is that Microsoft keeps on "innovating" on Windows to the point of sucking money from people and businesses addicted to thier OS and main stay applications. Fair enough - let them have thier "innovations" - but only those developed over the last 5 years.

IIRC, support for NT will be pulled in 2002. So, the Government should force Micorsoft to release the source code for NT 4.0 SP6a under the GPL after the support is pulled. The whole steaming pile of it. It's 2 versions behind, so should be berift of thier "innovations" and no problem at all to GPL. If thier new products are truly innovative, they'll still sell millions of copies, right?

On the consumer side, it would allow interested parties to maintain thier current environment, the more industrious (some would say insane) to improve on what's there, others could develop competeing products *cough*SAMBA*cough* on other architectures and others still to develop really competive apps for Windows and/or other platforms under WIN32.

IMHO, no one is better able to compete with Microsoft than themselves.

Re:I almost died laughing... (3)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 13 years ago | (#63302)

> when I read the following paragraph from the article:

"Windows has always been designed as an open platform that creates new business opportunities for many third parties, including some of our toughest competitors"


It does create new business opportunities... as in "find another line of work".

--

bah (2)

Ledge (24267) | more than 13 years ago | (#63306)

Chuck Schumer is just a gas bag looking for a little press. Apparently the check from Microsoft didn't come in this month. It's amazing how he has suddenly started caring a great deal more for the public then he did during the Waco hearings.

Not Really. (2)

keepper (24317) | more than 13 years ago | (#63307)

First, and foremost, impossible. Too much underlying technology in NT that is NOT owned by Microsoft

But in case this were to happen, and microsoft was forced to give away unencumbered previous copies of their OS, it would NOT, be under the GPL.

Reference implementations, that are done so others can look and implement, are beter licensed Under a BSD-Like or Public Domain license. Why you ask?

Well, do you think most companies would use the code if it was GPL'ed and they were *forced* to have to release their enhancements to said code base?

Not likely.

Even RMS agrees with this. ( see the Orgg Vorbis commentary by RMS, in which he agress with it's BSD-Like license).


Yet another case of GPL/Linux fanatics, thinking their way is the only way.

Kinda reminds you of the way MS thinks...

Does this apply to other industries? (1)

mac123 (25118) | more than 13 years ago | (#63309)

I think that Sen. Schumer should investigate the U.S. auto industry.

I haven't been able to buy parts from Dodge to fit my Ford car.

Seriously though, XP won't prevent me from running another IM (AOL, Yahoo, Jabber), or another Media Player (Real, Winamp, Musicmatch). Or another ISP (AOL, DSL). It doesn't even make it harder to run an alternate.

So I have to download a program to run it. Big deal. Last time I checked the inventory of apps on my Linux boxen, I noticed that I downloaded virtually every usefull application AFTER I loaded the OS (hard to install them prior to the OS). It wasn't a big deal.

Re:Can anyone seriously argue... (1)

barzok (26681) | more than 13 years ago | (#63312)

Well, they could just stop selling 9x/ME and let everyone move to 2000. Same effect.

Re:Someone Has to do it. (2)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 13 years ago | (#63313)

The real question is :"When is some brave soul going to insist that the United States government cease subsidizing Microsoft through the buying of their software?"


Finally, a voice of reason. What percent of M$ sales are to goverments? How many to the very governments now embroiled in the lawsuit? I wouldn't be surprised if it is 10-15%. Dropping those sales would cure M$ pretty freakin' quick.

Then take into account the additional 10-15% when contractors aren't reimbursed for M$ software, and/or when they are required to use the native StarOffice file format (for example) when submitting gov't bids, reports, etc.

Then eliminate the French and German government sales. It'll happen sooner or later. There goes another couple of points.

While the 10-15% from the initial government backoff wouldn't do a great deal, the ripple (or multiplier, for those of you who passed macroecon) effect would be large.

Heck, I'm not even sure that they need to go this far. Mandate a certain xml dtd (I think dtd is what I'm looking for) as the preferred document type for government information exchange, and get on with it. Who gives a rat's patootie about M$ if someone can make a Jabber plug-in that will create government standard output logs of chats?

Re:Someone Has to do it. (2)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 13 years ago | (#63314)

I suppose that since you noticed, it's too late to point out? :)

Seriously though, I was thinking about that after I posted, and I remember what I read (O'Reilly book?) saying how voluminous the gov't spec for SGML was, and that it was nearly unusable.

Re:No! (4)

debrain (29228) | more than 13 years ago | (#63318)

The computer industry NEEDS WinXP to be launched in October to help fuel consumer and business buying, thus giving the tech companies a much-needed boost.
Begging your pardon, but wouldn't the same dollars that go to Windows XP be better put into available competitive products in the tech industry? I believe that money would do good to go into the tech industry, but as many wall streeter's have noticed, Microsoft isn't suffering like the rest of the tech industry, and I'm hardly inclined to believe that the money to go into the floundering tech industry is related to money going into a Win XP tax destined for a stable monopolistic party. (Am I missing something here? :) )

The most dangerous place (1)

CharlieG (34950) | more than 13 years ago | (#63334)

The most dangerous place in Washington is between Chuck Schumer and a camera. He will do anything to get some publicity. Look at his record. He's worse than Hillary

Re:Wouldn't a Boycott be more effective? (2)

HydroCarbon10 (40784) | more than 13 years ago | (#63339)

...and learn to use the new system (which still isn't as easy as Windows)

My younger sister prefers KDE2 to Windows on her p120. It does what she needs a computer to do, and does it consistently w/out locking up or melting for no reason. Windows is not easy, Windows is familiar. KDE2 is not easier or harder to use than Windows, it's just different. Don't put down a perfectly good system because you don't understand the difference between familiarity and ease of use.

As an unrelated side note...The only innovation in Windows since the 3.x series was the task bar. Until Microsoft moves to something more intuative than what's fundamentally program manager poping up when you hit the start button, Windows will not get any easier.

Re:Wouldn't a Boycott be more effective? (1)

greenrd (47933) | more than 13 years ago | (#63353)

[Clarification:] Don't get me wrong - ironically, I'm heavily in favour of ethical boycotts - being a vegan and all. But lets not lose all track of reality! Coercion from the judicial branch is often more effective at getting a corporation to stop doing something, than attempts at boycotting alone.

This is not the right remedy. (2)

jcr (53032) | more than 13 years ago | (#63356)

Such an injunction would actually give some credence to MicroSquish's standard "wah! They don't want us to INNOVATE" bullshit.

Let them go ahead and ship XP, and then break them up. They were found GUILTY of the antitrust charges, after all.

-jcr

That's not what the appellate court decided.. (2)

jcr (53032) | more than 13 years ago | (#63357)

>You have to remember Microsoft is NOT going to be broken up. The appellate court has made that decision, and it's doubtful the Supreme Court would overturn it.

The appellate court did *not* decide that MicroSquish isn't going to be broken up, they decided that Judge Jackson's ruling would be set aside, and that another judge will decide what the penalty should be. There is nothing to prohibit another judge from also deciding that a breakup is necessary.

-jcr

Re:What in the hell? (1)

Milican (58140) | more than 13 years ago | (#63360)

Yeah, I'm sure that it takes Microsoft another two years to add themes... There are alot more changes than that. Although by no means comprehensive check out the following links for more details:



You may want to look at how XP is alot more compatible with old programs than you would think. Also, you can now group multiple instances of an application together on the toolbar (I know its cosmetic). You can switch sessions from one person to another without logging out (memory hog!). There is alot more going on than the UI change.

JOhn

Current Politics (1)

thetechweenie (60363) | more than 13 years ago | (#63363)

Why is it that our voices are never heard by our politicians? I've emailed mine on many occasions, and it seems that things will never change. This isn't really something I would like to see happen. I'ld rather Microsoft was left alone, so that when Linux beats the pants off of them, they can't blame anyone. I'm ranting now, but I'm just fed up with our government. When will our respresentatives begin to represent what we want, and not what some corporation, or their personal agenda dictates...

Re:bah (3)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 13 years ago | (#63365)

Apparently [Schumer's] check from Microsoft didn't come in this month.

It might have more to do with AOL and Eastman Kodak being New York corporations.

It was one thing when California corporations (i.e. Netscape) are having their apps squeezed out by Microsoft. But when it's New York corporations that's a whole different matter. B-)

Re:This is not the right remedy. (2)

erostratus (72103) | more than 13 years ago | (#63372)

You have to remember Microsoft is NOT going to be broken up. The appellate court has made that decision, and it's doubtful the Supreme Court would overturn it. Now, if Microsoft remains a single entity, what's the best solution? Sanctions. And that's what this would be. I know you guys think antitrust laws are supposed to promote innovation, but what do you think the solution is when unethical innovation is produced? (Please remember that innovation is an ethical issue, not a technological one.) You prevent that "innovation" from taking place. No one really believes Windows XP is innovative. We all know this. I think we can all agree on 3 important points:
  • The current versions of Windows are in violation of the appellate court's decision against Microsoft and its anticompetive practices.
  • The courts do not know how to punish Microsoft for its actions.
  • The issue at present is whether Microsoft can release a major OS upgrade that violates the court's decision in the same way the current versions do.
Why should the government let Microsoft do this? They shouldn't, and that's what this senator is trying to prevent.

Re:I don't see why not (2)

barneyfoo (80862) | more than 13 years ago | (#63377)

Most open source luminaries (Torvalds, Perens, Redhat) disagree, and think that linux has more than a fighting chance on its own. That said, it wouldn't hurt to have a nice breakup (Preferably into 3 or more pieces. the 2 piece breakup is a sham, really).

Sigh... (2)

szcx (81006) | more than 13 years ago | (#63378)

So here we have a senator who is sabotaging one company on behalf of two others, but that's a good thing because you perceive the company being affected as The Great Satan(TM). Yay double standards.

When videogames are banned by Senator X and crypto is outlawed, make sure you've got this article bookmarked so you know who to blame.

Microsoft definitely needs to be taken down a notch or two, but this way? Do the ends really justify the means, or is it just this one time?

Re:I have weird remedy - hear me out though. (2)

LordNimon (85072) | more than 13 years ago | (#63380)

Nice idea, too bad it won't work. Windows NT, in all likelihood, included patented code that's licensed from 3rd parties. Like most big companies, MS has broad cross-licensing deals for patents, so even FINDING the patented code would be difficult.
--
Lord Nimon

Re:Funny. (1)

RAZOR (87477) | more than 13 years ago | (#63384)

Link is broken

Care to mirror it somewhere?

Almost enough to make you feel good about democrac (5)

sg3000 (87992) | more than 13 years ago | (#63387)

I for one am happy that Senator Schumer is seeking an injunction. When the lawsuit was originally brought up, Microsoft was allowed to ship Windows 98 with Internet Explorer an "integral part" of the OS. Of course, now that Netscape is no longer a threat, they're willing to say that PC manufacturers can now "disable" IE, as CNN reported earlier [cnn.com] . Microsoft is doing it again, but with Messenger, Windows Media Player, Photo printing services, and other technologies in XP. It's important for the government to act before Microsoft subsumes other technologies into Windows in the quest for "innovation". Steve Balmer has said before that anything can be bundled into Windows:
"Is there any limit to what you think you can put into the operating system at all?" [Steve Balmer] was asked.

"If you asked me as a matter of law, no, I don't think so," Ballmer replied after a little hemming and hawing. The only restriction he mentioned was that everything Microsoft integrates into its operating system should make good business sense and not be "frivolous."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/washtech/tech thursday/columns/dotcom/A55090-2001Jun27.html [washingtonpost.com]

And to the troll who suggested that Microsoft should be able to do anything they want: Microsoft has a monopoly. They can, on a whim, force companies [cnn.com] to pay them money, even it means laying off employees: like when they tried to raise fees earlier this year but charitably gave a 6-month stay so companies could rebudget. They illegally attacked Java, fragmented it, and now refuse to support in XP. They forced Apple, a third company, to use their web browser or they would kill a completely unrelated product. This is not a company that you want to leave alone because they promise to be good.

It's time the US got as tough on them as they would on anyone who engages on illegal behavior.


Re:I don't see why not (5)

Alpha State (89105) | more than 13 years ago | (#63391)

That said, it wouldn't hurt to have a nice breakup (Preferably into 3 or more pieces.

I think they should split off hardware, legal and marketing. We can call them MS-good, MS-bad and MS-ugly.

Re:No! (1)

colnago (91472) | more than 13 years ago | (#63393)

Also, do you really want some standalone senator, an individual, a single person having the power to tell you what you can and cannot do with your business?

If this were the foundation of a successful economy and market then the soviet experiment would have turned out to be a wonderful utopia instead of the dismal failure it is.

This is the same man who wants a "caller's bill of rights". What?! Does he have nothing more important to do than to think up ways to take my money and funnel it into more bureaucracy in order to "protect" me? I don't need his protection. I can protect myself.

Let the market decide. In the end it will anyway.

WinXP's features will squash uderdogs, like AOL (1)

tourvil (103765) | more than 13 years ago | (#63409)

The senator said he has become increasingly concerned by Microsoft's behavior amid indications XP would sideline products such as AOL Time Warner's instant messaging software and Eastman Kodak's digital photography software.

Considering that the vast majority of IM users are on AOL or AOL-owned ICQ, I don't think Windows Messanger being included in XP is a good rallying cry against the Evil Microsoft Empire. At least with Netscape, Microsoft's bundling of IE could have put Netscape out of business. I doubt AOL-Time Warner will be closing its doors because Microsoft cut into its IM user base.

FUD tactics work for Microsoft... (2)

tokengeekgrrl (105602) | more than 13 years ago | (#63414)

..so I don't see why they can't be just as effective against them.

I sent out an email a while ago to my family explaining why MS XP was bad news. I got several email replies from them thanking me, saying they'll think twice before bothering to upgrade. Then my brother emailed me and asked me to resend it so that he could forward the information on to some of his friends.

Do I think that my efforts alone will have any effect? No, of course not. But if a bunch of people get another bunch of people thinking about the issues that they can relate to on a level they understand, i.e. you may not have access to your computer applications and information you have stored on your computer if you use MS XP, and point to reputable sources that explain the issue, people will think twice. I believe that most people will act conservatively and not want to change what already works for them.

A court order may carry more weight when issued but they are also slowly determined and implemented and more often that not, too late to have any real effect. Grass-roots word-of-mouth can have a profound effect very quickly. Not saying it will or that it will have an effect overnight, just that it has the ability to do so.

Corporations can hire lawyers to keep the government or courts tied up until a product is released and then once it gains market share, the government or court order is too late; however, if consumers won't buy the product, there is nothing the corporation can do.

- tokengeekgrrl

Re:Wouldn't a Boycott be more effective? (5)

tokengeekgrrl (105602) | more than 13 years ago | (#63416)

I agree. I have already told all my family and friends to carefully consider the consequences of upgrading to XP and have sent them links to the tech articles that explain why.

I even bought my dad Neal Stephenson's In the beginning was the command line... so that he could better understand the open source vs proprietary debate.

I think if people are informed as to what they are getting into by people they know, they will not fall prey to MS's marketing machine and want to upgrade or purchase XP.

- tokengeekgrrl

Re:FUD tactics work for Microsoft... (1)

Krellan (107440) | more than 13 years ago | (#63419)

Can you please post a copy of the email you sent? I would like to send a similiar message to my family and friends as well.

Thank you!


Super eurobeat from Avex and Konami unite in your DANCE!

I almost died laughing... (5)

Mr. Sketch (111112) | more than 13 years ago | (#63424)

when I read the following paragraph from the article:

"Windows has always been designed as an open platform that creates new business opportunities for many third parties, including some of our toughest competitors," Krumholtz wrote.

I suppose that explains their open api, their open standard for COM, their open file formats, etc. And here I guess I had them figure wrong all along.

Re:Someone Has to do it. (2)

Fesh (112953) | more than 13 years ago | (#63425)

Mandate a certain xml dtd (I think dtd is what I'm looking for) as the preferred document type for government information exchange, and get on with it.

Funny you should mention that... XML is directly descended from SGML (as is HTML), which was created as just such an information exchange device for the U.S. government. I'm just amused by the full-circle aspect of your point...


--Fesh

Re:BoycottXP (3)

un4given (114183) | more than 13 years ago | (#63426)

Great! I have a Web server running IIS that I would be happy to donate...

What in the hell? (2)

talonyx (125221) | more than 13 years ago | (#63433)

XP is just Windows 2000 with themes and a few other insignificant changes, mostly cosmetic. There are a few bugfixes and more game compatibility is there, as well.

There is no reason to say anything to XP that you couldn't say to Windows 2000. Sure, it might put Stardock (of WindowBlinds fame) out of business, but who gives a shit? Linux has had themes for a long time and nobody ever said that was evil :D

This Yankee has probably just realized that there's reason behind the antitrust case and wants to seem like he's leading the crusade instead of bandwagon-jumping when it's too late.

I agree only in half. (1)

yzquxnet (133355) | more than 13 years ago | (#63436)

I only agree on half of the issue. That part being, Microsoft has used it corporate might to push around a few companies. The part I absolutely DO NOT agree with is that the government should be decideing what can and cannot be bundled with an OS. This is just plain dumb. Limiting what can be bundled with it just not just apply to MS. It could be extended to include other OS's, Mac, Linux, etc. Does the Linux community want to be told that they cannot bundle a given app because it may impead another apps growth. HELL NO. So, think about how judgments rules against Microsoft may affect others.

The real reason behind this is... (1)

PSwiss (140264) | more than 13 years ago | (#63442)

Microsoft can't meet their launch date, and this was the easiest way to buy time/press

Re:What in the hell? (2)

the gnat (153162) | more than 13 years ago | (#63451)

Yes, but most people want these features, and will be very happy with Microsoft for providing these "free of charge" with XP, letting them save money on all sorts of add-ons.

I'm a sort of 'roll-your-own' type of guy myself when it comes to Linux system administration; I'm used to battling relatively bare systems like Irix/Solaris and think that web servers, database servers, and OSes-masquerading-as-text-editors are best installed by hand (at least, I can tweak the Makefile instead of blindly typing 'rpm -i'). But I wouldn't be caught dead installing RedHat without XMMS, Netscape, GV, etc. If I had to pay extra for that shit I'd still be using Macintosh. I'm sure happy RedHat includes it, and I only wish they had an extra package for some more quality WindowMaker themes, or a license for some Digital Blasphemy backgrounds.

What's _wrong_, on the other hand, is breaking your competitors' products, forcing OEMs into nasty licensing agreements, springing audits and resultant massive fines on impoverished school districts. Somewhat less wrong, but equally anti-competitive, is supplying products to supplant your competitors by adding proprietary extensions that force greater dependence on MS products. Adding new, desirable features to the OS is not in itself a bad thing, though.

Microsoft is a genuinely nasty company but there are some valid points to be made about government regulation of "innovation", even on MS's low and uninspiring level, and the usefulness of integrated software. Prior existence of a themes company shouldn't preclude MS from building that into their OS; let Stardock compete on quality and features.

-Nat

Re:No! (3)

gilroy (155262) | more than 13 years ago | (#63454)

Blockquoth the poster:
If this were the foundation of a successful economy and market then the soviet experiment would have turned out to be a wonderful utopia instead of the dismal failure it is.
I believe this is called a "straw man" argument: The Soviet model was based on State control of the economy. The Soviet model failed. This action implies some state influence on the economy. Therefore it is the Soviet model. Therefore it is doomed to fail.

It might play well in Peoria, but it is of course complete and utter nonsense. It simply isn't true that our only choices are restricted to "Workers unite!" Sovietism and "Greasing the wheels of industry with the blood of the proletariat" capitalism.

Much of the American experiment has dealt with searching for that third way.

its not government interfering... (1)

spike666 (170947) | more than 13 years ago | (#63458)

you must remember this is not a company that is white and pure. they've been found guilty of uncompetitive practices at least twice. this is the us government saying "ok, you've broken the law, and you are ignoring the fact that you did so, and you're continuing your uncompetitive practices."

this is the government stepping in to protect our smaller companies. yes you could see it as a bad precedent of government interference, but thats what our government is suppsed to do. thats why we have a the FTC.
if you look at how microsoft in the last few years does their business, they have NO qualms about making their way the ONLY way. its only in the last 18 months that they're realizing they overstepped their bounds, what with the backlash over the win2k ClientAccessLicensing model and things like that.

microsoft needs to learn humility. squishing it into smaller parts isnt the answer. im' not sure what is, but i do like the suggestion about forcing them to release all their source code.

Re:No! (2)

krappie (172561) | more than 13 years ago | (#63463)

I hate Microsoft with a passion, but stopping them from shipping a product because it might hurt innovation? How the hell do you come to THAT conclusion?

Simple. I'll even quote the article.

"It seems the very design of Windows XP is hardwired to preference Microsoft's applications,"

When an operating system comes preset for certain applications, pretty much everyone using that OS will use those applications. Don't kid yourself, this is what happens. I'll end up on school computers that only have what the OS came with, and they tell me I'm not allowed to download anything. So anyway, when you have a product thats being used by most people, and not because of features, or price, that hurts innovation. Why should Microsoft improve their program? They've already got the market. Why should someone try to compete with a better product? They can't compete with that.

So shipping a product tied with other products surely can hurt innovation. They whole system is set up to keep competition going. Things like that basically kill it. The government is there partly to make sure it keeps going. They can step in when they need to, and if this isn't a good reason to, I don't know what is.

Re:Wouldn't a Boycott be more effective? (3)

Bluesee (173416) | more than 13 years ago | (#63469)

The boycott, involving a simple refusal to upgrade to Windows XP, would probably have a great effect on what really bothers me, and that is MS foray into .NET. I think the Senator is talking about stuff like this [microsoft.com] , Windows Media Player 8, Windows Movie Maker, and Digital Photo Support...

Here [zdnet.com] is some good "white-hat" FUD from zdnet (whom I always thought was somewhat of a lackey for MS, being descended from PC Magazine, but yay for them for speaking truth). A quote: Among the new features: an Internet firewall, an integrated media player with CD-burning and DVD-playback features, remote access tools, moviemaking and photo-editing software, wireless capabilities, broadband networking and Internet messaging.

The long list of new features potentially puts an even longer list of companies in Microsoft's crosshairs, including Adobe Systems, Apple Computer, AOL Time Warner, Corel, InterVideo, MGI, Netopia, Network Ice, RealNetworks, Roxio, Ulead, Zone Labs, Symantec and as many as 20 other companies.


Oh, and the article reminded me that XP seeks to reduce the quality of MP3's in half (how do they do that? I mean, isn't Winamp Winamp?), and that DVD's won't work with MS Media Player alone.

So, yah, boycott by not upgrading. I read somewhere that people are afraid to buy new boxen because they feel they will lose half their data and capabilities in the transition. Maybe they should be afraid to lose half their identity, their privacy, their rights, and quite possibly their mind (er, BSOD reference here) by upgrading themselves into the .NET empire.

More time for MS (2)

Amigori (177092) | more than 13 years ago | (#63473)

Let's say the states are successful in stopping/delaying the October release date of XP. Wouldn't that give MS more time to "innovate" more products into XP?

Just a thought...

ahem... (1)

superdk (184900) | more than 13 years ago | (#63484)

Microsoft disagreed. Windows XP, which is scheduled for an official launch on Oct. 25, "is designed to bring more choice and options to consumers, not fewer," company spokesman Vivek Varma said, in a statement.

this is a really strong argument i'd say. i mean, who wouldn't want more choices and options!
what choices and options you might ask? well... more.

this is about like microsoft saying "XP is a good product because we said so."

I am split (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 13 years ago | (#63495)

On one side I don't want the government stopping any os release because of possible anti-trust inplications. WHat can ms include in its os? Why should I have to pay for seperate products? What scares me even more is the possiblity of government regulation of Linux itself. For Example RedHat and Debian might have to cripple their own products because they might include software that might criple a competitor. After all, the arguement could be made that MertoX's X11 system and CDE would die because of free bundled alternatives. Redhat/debian both have XFree86 and kde which are free with their distro's. I don't have a high speed internet connection so if its all debundled then I am screwed. I don't want the government to take away my right to the communites right to innovate.

The other side is I have seen what happened to poor netscape. If netscape didn't die off I bet the internet would be a little bit different then today. The internets innovation accerlated when netscape was in control. Netscape was develoiping its own api's and way of internet centric programming. I bet ms saw this and created .net as the answer. Anyway what can and can't be included in a os? Sure I don't like the goverment involved but I am afraid of scared OEM's filling out abusive EULA's to cripple microsofts competitors.

Whats stopping microsoft for writting an EULA for a driver development kit that states "NO DEVELOPMENT UNDER VIRAL GPL LINUX OR X-11 SYSTEM"?

If this happens then linux is DEAD! No sound, no 3d graphics, NO NETWORK?

Shit, my guess is microsoft will use this and then the rent scheme will come to play after they takes over. Imagine this scenario?

You downloaded a .mpg movie file from the web and when you click on it a dialog box pops up asking you if MS passport can charge you $1.50 for using its media.net player! This kind of situation is what microsoft dreams of. After linux is crushed due to lack of drivers and no real competition in media players market, then you must click to play. When will it stop? Infact Microsoft's delaying its next windows os for next year called Windows.NET because of this hearing in the senate. What if you were charged every time you booted your computer? Or could your computer even boot without an active isp connection? No isp, no computer. Thats the windows.NET platform in all that its designed to be. Try to look at the hearing not as what comes with the os but why ms is doing this? They are doing this to kill competitors to screw you all over. Just look at the price of MS-OFFICE PRO for comparison. They almost gave it away in the mid 90's, then it goes up 3x in price, then its the same price for only one year and you must repay every year. For 3 years thats 3k, for a formal $275 product! After they takeover a market via bnulding they will then charge you every time to use it or debundle it and charge a fortune to use it seperately.

Re:No! (1)

Denial of Service (199335) | more than 13 years ago | (#63497)

I'll type this very slowly and clearly to ease the task of wrapping your head around a seemingly simple concept:

Microsoft IS the desktop if for no other reason than the fact that there are no worthy alternatives that don't require unusually expensive hardware (Mac). I don't care how you feel about Linux, it's not even in the same league for dozens of reasons that I can't be bothered to find because they've have been posted around here on literally countless occasions. If Microsoft is legally unable to release XP, the desktop market will be seriously affected negatively.

You can hate this reality all you want, but the truth is the truth. Microsoft has more than 80% of the desktop market because Windows is head and shoulders above everthing else on the x86 platform, no matter what the pro-Linux HFUD (Hypocritical FUD) that is sprayed around this place like champagne on SuperBowl Sunday attempts to 'prove'.

Oh, and before any number of you fire up the "do you work for Microsoft?" machine -- no, I don't. Have I used alternative OSs for enough time to properly compare? Yes, I have. I don't like Microsoft products any more than anyone else and wish deeply for alternatives. Luckily for me, my head is far enough outside my ass to see that none exist.

---

Here's why Schumer is correct, and M$ is wrong (1)

FeltTip (203551) | more than 13 years ago | (#63498)

M$'s argument that AOL wouldn't open up their IM is silly. They can whine and complain about that, but when they play the same game they have a problem? That's hilarious. XP is an operating system, and not an application. When M$ started making it more difficult to run competitive software on their OS, they had to know they would be getting themselves in deep trouble.

I have VERY intimate knowledge of the Kodak vs. Microsoft spat that is going on right now, and Microsoft is clearly trying to undermine the efforts of Kodak to write an application that would compete with one that is bundled with their OS.

For these reasons, and for the reason that XP is expanding the illegal Microsoft monopoly in the face of the federal ruling with XP, the release should be deemed illegal and blocked.

perhaps he has seen the light... (4)

marcop (205587) | more than 13 years ago | (#63499)

From the article...

AOL Time Warner (AOL: news, chart, profile) and Eastman Kodak (EK: news, chart, profile) are both based in New York.

Yup, he has seen the light, he has to protect home businesses. What do you think the probability that these companies lobbied this senator and convinced him to take action?

Wouldn't a Boycott be more effective? (3)

smagruder (207953) | more than 13 years ago | (#63502)

Since we've already established that XP provides no useful new features and that Microsoft is a maniacal, criminal monopolist, then perhaps we should all do the obvious??

Steve Magruder

It's not *our* job to prop up a sector. (3)

smagruder (207953) | more than 13 years ago | (#63503)

If XP were blocked, the computer industry might not recover at all this year.

It's not the duty of consumers to prop up criminal monopolies or support a business sector that isn't innovating and providing products that are actually useful. Period.

Heck, we need a break from "Upgrade-itis" anyway. :)

Steve Magruder

Yes we know. (1)

briggsb (217215) | more than 13 years ago | (#63509)

And Microsoft is suing the government [bbspot.com] in response.

Re:I agree, OS Product freeze. (1)

BrynM (217883) | more than 13 years ago | (#63510)

This is a very good point and should get modded up.

bm :)-~

Re:This is not the right remedy. (2)

Pravada (217899) | more than 13 years ago | (#63511)

Seriously. Sounds like a publicity grab to me. Say what you want about MSFT (and there are a lot of reasons not to like them), this is government interference at its worst. The whole point of US anititrust laws is to encourage innovation and competition in the market. This would stop innovation (such as it is) and not really help competition that much. I think Washington needs a reality check. But I think that much was apparent by the DMCA.

Re:Does this apply to other industries? (1)

Killer Napkin (221026) | more than 13 years ago | (#63514)

Windows Media Player has been able to play mp3s since Windows 98 was released. There are still thousands of copies of WinAmp downloaded everyday. If people aren't happy with what they're given, they'll go after something better.

In the Netscape vs. Explorer war, no one really cared about the browser one way or the other. However, Netscape always charged for their browser, so in that respect, IE was better. (Personally, I was dissatisfied by both browsers in the pre-4.0 days. Both were buggy as all hell.)

You're complaining because Microsoft is making it easier to run thier software. Would you like them to put some kind of complicated locking mechanism on the executable? What difference does it make if they're easier to run?

If Joe Blow consumer doesn't mind (and really: he doesn't), then there's not much wrong with that. Competitors will just have to come up with a creative way to deal with it. AOL is doing a pretty damn good job integrating their AIM client with their AOL program -- companiese will adapt.

I really don't have any objections to Microsoft bundling software with their OS and making it preferred. It isn't hard to download new software and make that program preferred. If the "dumb users" don't like Media Player, MSN, or IE, they'll find alternatives. They always do.

This is the only way (1)

Hobobo (231526) | more than 13 years ago | (#63519)

A intervention that delays the release of Windows XP is the only way to get Microsoft to care. Now they can just stall until XP is on the shelves, and after that the horses are out of the barn and there's no point in closing the door.

Can anyone seriously argue... (2)

MeowMeow Jones (233640) | more than 13 years ago | (#63520)

that bringing an end to the legacy 9x/ME OS isn't a good and important thing? That in and of itself is justification enough for Windows XP.

Trolls throughout history:

AOL and Kodak operations in NY (1)

BroadbandBradley (237267) | more than 13 years ago | (#63521)

seems like the golden rule to me, he who has all the gold, makes all the rules. At least MS doesn't have ALL the gold yet.
and from the article:
"It seems the very design of Windows XP is hardwired to preference Microsoft's applications," Schumer wrote in a letter to Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer. Schumer released the letter at a Capitol Hill news conference.

I didn't know that part was new with winXP, however it's good to see elected officials see it the same way I do.

Information Please... (1)

rochlin (248444) | more than 13 years ago | (#63528)

Just as a matter of courtesy to your readers... "Sen. Charles Schumer of New York..." ought to read "Sen. Charles Schumer(D) of New York" It's just nice to see those little (D)'s and (R)'s after their names to help with mental geography...

Skeptical? I would be 2 (1)

Maskirovka (255712) | more than 13 years ago | (#63535)

What I find interesting is Schumer was formerly a skeptic of the government's antitrust case against Microsoft, perhaps he has seen the light.

Looking back on Judge Jackon's comments, I wouldn't hold it against Shumer for being skeptical. Face it: the guy was either extremely biased against M$; or he was extremely biased FOR M$ and thought that he could get them off scott free. Either way, he did, at least for the for the time being. If Shumer succedes, it'll be interesting. I doubt he will though; he has too much stacked against him. Like the whitehouse, just under half the senate, a few battalions of lobbyists, etc. At any rate, I wish him luck. Sooner or later one of Microsofts enemies will take it down. mmm...something to look forward to.

Maskirovka

Not to play the Devil's advocate or anything...
...but if a corperation has the full rights of a person, don't they get to run for office at age 35?

Someone Has to do it. (1)

Rooktoven (263454) | more than 13 years ago | (#63543)

If it's Schumer so be it. More power to him. Once XP is released you can say good bye to any non MS technology running on windows. The real question is :"When is some brave soul going to insist that the United States government cease subsidizing Microsoft through the buying of their software?" Who has McCain's number?

Excellent Point. (1)

El Camino SS (264212) | more than 13 years ago | (#63546)

Considering that there are a few moments where a senator or legislator has ever been against a large corporation, IF THEY DO... BE SUSPECT. Chances are they have a friend in some other rival corporation. GOOD CALL. Very fresh perspective. I tend to agree with the post here.

WHERE DO YOU GET THAT DATA? (1)

El Camino SS (264212) | more than 13 years ago | (#63547)

I am curious, because it would be useful to find out disclosed contributions, someone please let me know the site to go to. I am news media, and that information is handy, but politics are not part of my division.

prior restraint (2)

regexp (302904) | more than 13 years ago | (#63551)

I don't know about all the legal niceties involved, but this smells to me like the type of prior restraint that is endangering programmers who crack encryption, DVD copy-protection, etc etc. Microsoft's side is the free-speech side in this case, methinks.

I agree, OS Product freeze. (5)

egommer (303441) | more than 13 years ago | (#63553)

Microsoft is guilty. Why should they be allowed to morph thier guilty product during an appeal?
It's like the justic department is saying'I know your are guilty of making a product to enhance your monopoly but it's okay to keep selling it and improving your monopoly position while we decice how punish you." HELLO! "Yes, are a mass murderer and are guilty. You may still practice and improving your murdering skills while we decide what to do with you." Am I off base here?

Re:WinXP's features will squash uderdogs, like AOL (1)

dpete4552 (310481) | more than 13 years ago | (#63554)

"could have put Netscape out of business" Paleeese! They already have. Put up a website that gets a decent amount of hits, then check out the server log. On mine there is like 1 person a week if I'm lucky that visits it that /doesn't/ use Internet Explorer.

-
AIM: dpete455
Yahoo!: dpete455
Jabber: dpete455@jabber.org

Anyone remember m$ Bob? (1)

caino59 (313096) | more than 13 years ago | (#63559)

With all the crap surrounding WinXP lately, my bet is on it being a HUGE m$ failure.

All the news as of late, all the apparant holes [tecchannel.de] popping up in the product activation, and the latest - a Senator challenging Microsoft's media player [idg.net] .

Not only that, but with respected tech sites churning out articles like this [anandtech.com] , a lot of people are bound to be turned off.

In my opinion, (yea, I know - dangerous) Microsoft tried too many tricks too soon. In the next year or so is when linux is really going to have a chance to break out and rain down upon the masses. I'm not a linux zealot, but I just see this as a real oppurtunity for the OS to really get out there and make itself known to even the most casual computer user. Especially with backing from IBM...I would IBM probably has a pretty good hate on for Bill and m$ for the whole OS/2 deal years back.

Hey, that's just my .03, flame away!

Caino

Don't touch my .sig there!

Re:I have weird remedy - hear me out though. (1)

Eryq (313869) | more than 13 years ago | (#63561)

But if MSFT's engineers released the NT source code, then MSFT's own PR department would immediately condemn it as Communist, Un-American, Viral, Cancerous Open Source code.

Then MSFT management, hearing that the ranks have been compromised by dreaded Open Source advocates, would fire the lot of them, leaving no one to work on .NET but Gates, who can only code in VB, making it slower than molasses in the Arctic.

Corporate America, hooked on all things MSFT, would use it anyway, and all of civilization would grind to a halt while we sat waiting for our automobiles and toasters and TV sets to boot up.

Or something like that.

Re:Wouldn't a Boycott be more effective? (5)

Spy Hunter (317220) | more than 13 years ago | (#63569)

. I have already told all my family and friends to carefully consider the consequences of upgrading to XP

The problem for me is, XP does include a couple of features that make it better for home use by my family than Win 98, the biggest one being stability. I'm tired of telling my mom that the computer crashed because "Windows is stupid" (which has become my default explanation for computer problems). Also, the user account features and much improved ease-of-use seem compelling for a family computer. MS really does know what people want (after spending $$$millions on usability testing), and they give it to them (with several features tacked onto the side to extend their monopoly). If I recommended that my family stick with Win98, I'd be kicking myself the next week when some program takes down the whole computer and my family is frustrated.

I like Linux as much as the next guy, but I'm not sure Linux is ready for my family to use. First of all, any software they've bought at the store in the past or will want to buy in the future won't work on it (this is a big issue that never seems to be brought up). Also, they use CompuServe (one of those locked-in for 4 yrs deals), which got swallowed up by AOL a while back and is now almost a direct clone w/ different graphics. It won't work on Linux. They'd have to sign up for and switch to a different e-mail and learn to use the new system (which still isn't as easy as Windows) and it would be a big hassle and expense (paying for 2 ISPs at once? ugh). Plus the laptop we use has a winmodem, so we'd have to go and buy some other external modem.

Those are the reasons why I (and I'm sure many others like me) am recommending a Windows XP upgrade for my family. MS may be bad, Linux may be great, but for my family, Windows is the only viable solution right now, and Windows XP is the best Windows there is.

Re:What in the hell? (5)

Spy Hunter (317220) | more than 13 years ago | (#63570)

XP is just Windows 2000 with themes and a few other insignificant changes, mostly cosmetic.

This is the attitude I hear from a lot of geeks. Unfortunately, what you are not realizing is this: Cosmetic changes in the OS are major revolutions to users! They see a "My Pictures" folder with thumbnails and stuff, and they think "Wow! I can keep digital pictures in here. Windows XP lets me manage pictures!" They don't know that they could manage pictures equally well with Win98 or any other OS. They see a button in the sidebar for "E-mail this file" and they think "Wow! I can e-mail a file to somebody! Windows XP lets me e-mail files!" Never mind that any e-mail client on the planet can send attatchments, the idea never occured to them before to send files. Soon they will be E-mailing their digital picture collections all over the Internet, saying "Look at all the neat stuff Windows XP lets me do!"

Windows XP doesn't add new capabilities - it just informs the user of the capabilities they have always had. Don't kid yourself though: to normal users, who never knew just what capabilities they had, its a revolution in technology.

Re:I almost died laughing... (1)

slcdb (317433) | more than 13 years ago | (#63571)

Who says Microsoft has to allow ANYONE to develop ANY software for Windows?

Sad to say boys, but you've all forgotten that Windows BELONGS to Microsoft and they have every right to make it as closed a platform as they'd like.

Re:This only benefits other businesses... (1)

mickeyreznor (320351) | more than 13 years ago | (#63575)

Considering Microsoft's "stellar" security record, even Sen. Schumer should be able comprehend the danger of having a backdoor capable of deactivating your OS in so many voter... err... users machines...

Ah, but you forget... the are running linux now [slashdot.org] !

Funny. (2)

mickeyreznor (320351) | more than 13 years ago | (#63576)

"is designed to bring more choice and options to consumers, not fewer,"

of course. let's hardwire our os to only run our software. see you get *more* choices. remember that less = more!

in other news, i found this commercial [dhs.org] that scares the living daylights out of me. You'll see why.

Re:This only benefits other businesses... (1)

TargetBoy (322020) | more than 13 years ago | (#63577)

Cool!

I didn't realize that the US had annexed "The Australian Capital Terrority," where they were doing that Debian project ;-)

Maybe I can get Fosters cheaper now...

This only benefits other businesses... (4)

TargetBoy (322020) | more than 13 years ago | (#63579)

This is not a direct benefit to consumers and is a protectionist action on behalf of other corporations located in NYS, like Kodak.

Perhaps someone should point out to Sen. Schumer that the consumer edition of XP will include a remote deactivation backdoor placed in the OS by Microsoft that could be used to leverage their monopoly position to force users into unnecessary upgrades at Microsoft's whim.

Considering Microsoft's "stellar" security record, even Sen. Schumer should be able comprehend the danger of having a backdoor capable of deactivating your OS in so many voter... err... users machines...

Re:I almost died laughing... (5)

TargetBoy (322020) | more than 13 years ago | (#63580)

When they say "open", they must be talking about their security...

Re:I agree, OS Product freeze. (1)

TeraCo (410407) | more than 13 years ago | (#63584)

Whereas you don't have a number at all :)

LAME

Campaign Contribution (1)

Hostile17 (415334) | more than 13 years ago | (#63586)

"Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee has asked state prosecutors to seek an injunction blocking the launch of Windows XP. His reasoning?

The bribe^H^H^H^H^Campaign Contribution check from Bill Gates must have bounced.


Hemos is feeling baaad... (2)

MangeMaBite (446237) | more than 13 years ago | (#63591)

Update: 07/25 01:41 AM by H:So, based on the e-mail I've been getting, evidently people have forgotten that what submittors type is in italics. Like this. Notice how when I type here that is in normal type - if you've got other questions, please check out the FAQ. There's lots of fun information in there. We now return you to our regularly scheduled programming.

Maybe you should all send him a email to apologize and ask him if he's feeling all right...

What is an Operating System? (1)

nohonor (450357) | more than 13 years ago | (#63593)

Not the only guy goin here.... (4)

jeffy124 (453342) | more than 13 years ago | (#63595)

The senator isn't the only one seeking injunction .... this CNet [cnet.com] article indicates that InterTrust is also seeking injunction in addition to their lawsuit against MS.

Re:What in the hell? (1)

jcast (461910) | more than 13 years ago | (#63602)

OK. First, how can you be `making themes for [OS FOO] before they were introduced'? (How do you make something that hasn't been introduced?)

Second, M$ sees a profitable market, and moves into it. That's not illegal--if you're a small enough company. If you're large, though, suddenly lots of /. kiddies jump all over you and say you should be blocked from the market. Whatever happened to equality before the law?

Third, the government's job is to protect said equality before the law, not to protect `several . . . companies biting their fingernails'.

Re:Does this apply to other industries? (1)

snilloc (470200) | more than 13 years ago | (#63623)

It's not going to be any harder to run a 3rd party app, but it will be easier to just use what's already default-installed instead, thus making it relatively harder to use the 3rd party app.

Um.... browser-war?? It wasn't harder to get Netscape, but IE was there... so many people just used it. (Of course, Netscape sort of sucks now, but we're talking about pre-4.0 browsers.)

Also, we're talking about "dumb users". Why get Winamp when Media Player works just fine? What is this "winamp" thing anyway??

Schumer's self interest (2)

snilloc (470200) | more than 13 years ago | (#63625)

In the world of academic political science, it is an assumption that each politician is looking out for his own well-being. (Also, this is not necessarily bad, but that's another discussion...)

What does Schumer get out of this?
1)"points" against the pro-business bush republicans.
2)"points" in his own state politically, especially for sticking up for Eastman Kodak. Kodak has been hurting recently, and also happens to lie in a somewhat Republican-leaning Rochester area - an area that relies a little too heavily on Kodak.

So, somewhat ironically, scores partisan points within the Democratic party for being anti-bush (anti-bush == anti-microsoft) while perhaps winning a few republicans in UpstateNY because he's sticking up for their company.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>