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!

U.S. Faults Microsoft Licensing Compliance

michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the foot-dragging dept.

Microsoft 241

An anonymous reader writes "In a written report card on how well Microsoft is complying with its 2001 antitrust deal with state and federal prosecutors, Justice Department lawyers said they might need the court to force Microsoft to act more quickly." The DOJ's court filing is online if you want to wade through it.

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

U.S. Faults Microsoft Licensing Compliance (2, Funny)

luckybob83 (530490) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367176)

"Justice Department lawyers said they might need the court to force Microsoft to act more quickly."

well that is a real shocker

LOUD SUCKING SOUND EMANATING FROM BUFFALO, NY (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367180)

DAILY REMINDER: Hillary Clinton [senate.gov] doesn't just stand by...she actively works to offshore American High-Tech [tata.com] ! Happy fuckin' Independence Day, Hillary!

Re:LOUD SUCKING SOUND EMANATING FROM BUFFALO, NY (0, Offtopic)

usotsuki (530037) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367427)

Ouch. Raw nerve.

-uso.
Presently downloading XFree86 for Win98SE

Well, what did we expect? (4, Insightful)

gotr00t (563828) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367184)

It comes as no suprise that Microsoft isn't even living up to an antitrust settlement that is this painless. From day 1, it looked as if they had no intention of following it through, and now, it seems as if the lawsuit was never filed at all.

What is a second lawsuit going to produce? Another slap on the wrist? If so, I will begin to think that the judges were... easily persuaded.

Re:Well, what did we expect? (3, Interesting)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367234)

Microsoft will drag it out as long as they can, get fined and then Bush will let them off the hook (again).

So much for competition and monopoly law.

Re:Well, what did we expect? (1)

Alien Being (18488) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367628)

+2 flamebait for dissin' a guy named George on 7/4. I like it.

Re:Well, what did we expect? (1)

SpaceLifeForm (228190) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367674)

The puppet won't be in office then.

Re:Well, what did we expect? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367710)

You never did see clinton and his unfortunate fall during a press meeting...

Now that was a puppet...LOL

Re: Well, what did we expect? (4, Funny)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367248)


> It comes as no suprise that Microsoft isn't even living up to an antitrust settlement that is this painless. From day 1, it looked as if they had no intention of following it through, and now, it seems as if the lawsuit was never filed at all.

At least they didn't laugh about the settlement this time around.

At least not in public.

Re: Well, what did we expect? (4, Funny)

56ker (566853) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367431)

I give Microsoft a C++ (a passing grade with room for improvement). The settlement was vastly watered down by their legal team anyway....

Re: Well, what did we expect? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367589)

From my experience with M$VC... I can give them a grade of G... for GPF.

RTFA (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367250)

Microsoft is mostly following through with its settlement with the federal government. They've elected to withhold TWO APIs, and they're moving the "Set Program Access and Defaults" desktop icon to a permanent location in the start menu.

Of course you would know all this if you had READ THE DOJ'S PAPER

Re:RTFA (5, Interesting)

Troed (102527) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367452)

On the other hand, on my XP laptop - even after having used "set program access and defaults" - the only way I could get bsplayer to view .avis was to each and every time select "open with". No matter the settings for filetypes - XP would _always_ launch windows media player.

I had to use "set program.." to specifically say NEVER to use windows media player to get it to work - and yet the icons are still wrong.

I'm quite sure it's not a bug - it's a Microsoft feature.

Re:Well, what did we expect? (1)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367343)

What is a second lawsuit going to produce? Another slap on the wrist? If so, I will begin to think that the judges were... easily persuaded.

You're the slow-to-anger type I guess.

Re:Well, what did we expect? (1, Insightful)

jkrise (535370) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367611)

What did I expect? Oh yeah.. well, lemme think, ahem.., here I go:

1. I expected a woman (Kollar Cotelly) would be a good judge, and would make us proud.
2. I expected MS would be fined $2 bn., ordered to open the source for public inspection.
3. I expected "Breakfast with Bill" would mean Bill comes to my place, and fixes my system with the latest Service Pack CD.
4. I expected that the judgment would be in the best interests of the world computing community, and not just a narrow American interest.
5. I expected His Billness to say "I'm sorry"
6. I expected RMS, Linus, ESR and a few others to have received meritorious awards from the Presidents of the respective countries.
7. I expected that MS would stop naming OSes after years, as if they wrote different ones every year.
8. I expected that .Net was officially declared "Dead and Buried"
9. I expected Java would be fast, flexible and open source.
10. I expected more of the Slashdotters to have seen that the whole trial was just a farce - 9 States dissenting was a stage-managed stunt, the female lawyer was not 'randomly' selected, that the evidence shown and arguments had no effect or relevance on the judgment and compliance.....and, and.. well: I expected all of these would have been obvious to all but the few astro-turfing MS apologists and shills that infest the forums over here. In short, I expected justice,dignity and fair-play from a gorilla, and I was a fool - just like most of us.

Question is: (3, Interesting)

jkrise (535370) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367186)

How many among the four parties are simply 'front' operations, supported and sponsored by Microsoft? Backup and storage are two areas where MS has done poorly on purpose, looks like they might be aiming to buy two of the 4 cos. that licensed their protocols.

What happen.. (4, Insightful)

bsharitt (580506) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367189)

What happens if Microsoft doesn't do what they settlement says? Will they face harsher penalties?

Re:What happen.. (1, Funny)

tinrobot (314936) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367213)

Yeah... harsher penalties... hee hee... HA... HA... sorry... can't stop... LAUGHING!

(chuckles)

Yes, they get fined twice as much (4, Funny)

cabalamat2 (227849) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367289)

If Microsoft continues to fail to comply, the court will double their fine.

Let's work it out: the original fine was $0, twice $0 is $0, so the new fine will be $0.

I guess American justice is the best that money can buy.

Re:What happen.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367319)

Double Secret Probation!

Here's what will happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367411)

Stop! Or I'll say "Stop" again!

Re:What happen.. (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367634)


Somebody set us up the bomb, that's what.

Great story. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367195)

michael, have some coffee before you start posting, will you?

You call this a capitalist society? (0, Flamebait)

rkz (667993) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367208)

What happened to laissez faire ideals, free market and all that.
Microsoft [microsoft.com] is argueably the most successful company evar, if the DOJ [usdoj.gov] takes action to break up Microsoft or fine them I could see this as the ideals of capitalism breaking down.

People would nolonger aspire to become as rich and successful as possible? Is being greedy a crime?
If you were Bill Gates would you open source Windows [microsoft.com] or would you buy a few more boats!

Is being greedy a crime? (4, Funny)

mikeophile (647318) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367236)

Michael Milken, Kenneth Lay, and Martha Stewart don't think so.

Re:Is being greedy a crime? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367259)

Who the fuck are they?
I'll believe it when Rupert Murdoch tells me.

Re:Is being greedy a crime? (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367419)

They also probably thought they'd be sent to Club Fed with conjugal visits instead of the pound-you-up-the-ass variety.

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367240)

That must be some great crack. May I partake?

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (5, Insightful)

LordKaT (619540) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367246)

The problem is that Microsoft, being as influential as it is, doesn't allow "free market" in certain enviornments. In a sense, they control the market. So, in a capitalist enviornment, it is more beneficial to have them broken up thus allowing for more competition.

Remeber, having a monopoly is not illegal, having a monopoly and abusing your influence, such as the case of Microsoft, is illegal. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised for the courts to find that Microsoft has "pierced the corporate shield" with all of the tactics and tricks hey use.

Then again, the republicans are in power ... ;/

--LordKaT

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (2, Informative)

Blind Linux (593315) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367368)

I'd actually say that what you're saying is in support of Free Market Venture Capitalism. To break up Microsoft, however beneficial it could be to the economy as a result of more competition, constitutes state intervention in the market and is befitting of a Command Economy, the diametric opposite to the laisser-faire, individualist ideology of capitalism.

The "abuse of influence" (the curtailing of competition through aggressive marketting tactics, hostile takeovers, and intentional incompatibilities with software made by other companies, and other tactics employed/being employed by Microsoft) is the only realistic way to maintain a monopoly; monopolies have almost never historically resulted from a product being simply superior to others in its class...

So really, while having a monopoly is "not illegal", if the means of attaining a monopoly are illegal, the end is also effectively illegal as well, no?

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (2, Informative)

Larsing (645953) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367416)

Actually, capitalism and market economy has very little to do with each other.
As a matter of fact, capitalists (those who own the means of production and reap the profit) prefer as little competition as possible...

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367249)

It wouldn't be the first time a company has been broken up. It happens.

It's OK to become rich and powerful, but you're still bound by the law.

You obviously don't understand all the reasons behind why Microsoft should be broken up.

YHBT. YHL. HAND. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367382)

You obviously don't understand YHBT. YHL. HAND.

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (4, Interesting)

sisukapalli1 (471175) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367270)

US is not a truly capitalistic country (look at social security, farm subsidies, bailing out airlines, and even bailing out obnoxious hedge funds)...

Laissez faire ideals are things that can cause depression like the 30's. Without the government regulations, we wouldn't even have had a 40 hour week standard (even though many do way more than that).

The ideals of capitalism won't break down if MSFT is broken up -- MSFT itself has become like a government of its own, stifling free market. Breaking up MSFT can only do good to consumers, just like the breaking up of AT&T and Standard Oil did...

S

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (1)

sweede (563231) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367732)

AT&T and Standard Oil are also bigger and richer than they where before the government stepped in and said 'thats enough'.

AT&T is also being slowly let back into the markets it was shut out of (local telephone market). After At&T was split up into the various companies (the 7 RBOCS, now 4?), the produced more services, lowered prices and increased technological research that helped AT&T and the other baby-bells grow into what they are today (Note that MCI was NOT a baby bell and has also just about went bankrupt)

If Microsoft was broken up into smaller, more focused companies, does anyone really see this as being a bad thing for all of the products that the company produces? It would definitly be better for the consumer, but I see this as a slow but sure demise of OS,Office,Server,Whatever Companies that have been before/during Microsoft (i.e. unix/linux, probably not sony or nintendo with the console markets). With the new baby-MS's being able to focus more on their specific goals and products, they will be able to push the envolope far faster than they can now, possibly faster than the entire Open Source community can keep up with (Again, the same thing that happened to MCI, after they broke AT&T up, they expanded at a faster rate than MCI could keep up with and now it's starting to show)

Just think of what they could have if they had a whole seperate company with hundreds or thousands of people working on Windows XP (soho,home use) or Windows 2003 server

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (1, Funny)

DataCannibal (181369) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367292)

For someone who espouses capitalism you seem to have read neither Adam Smith or the DOJ judgement and you have no idea about anti-trust laws and why they exist.
If I were you I'd shut up until you know what you are talking about...hang on...your posting on Slashdot..mumble...forget it

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367305)

"Is being greedy a crime?"

If you are refering to Anti-trust, yes it is a crime. It has been since 1890 with the Sherman Act.

"People would nolonger aspire to become as rich and successful as possible?"

Don't be rediculous. Lets look at it another way, if you company can increase it's profit margin but shooting employees that don't perform up to standard. Murder is a crime just as anti-trust laws are and it doesn't matter how rich or "sucessful' you wish to be you are not justified in acting in a socialy irresponsible way.

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (5, Insightful)

Trepalium (109107) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367311)

Anti-trust laws were originally made because the free market usually works well, there are times when it can break down and cause harm to consumers. Competition is what the free market is all about, but when a profitable monopoly is established, they tend to bleed dry any competition, either by buying them up, or bludgeoning them to death with lawsuits.

People would nolonger aspire to become as rich and successful as possible? Is being greedy a crime?

Guess what? Not everyone wants to have so much money that they could never spend it within their lifetime. I have no idea how someone could ever use 40 million dollars in their lifetime, let alone 40 billion. Personally, all I need is food, clothing, shelter, and something to do with my time that I enjoy. I don't need a fast/expensive sports car, an automated do-everything house, or my own aircraft.

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367355)

with 40 billion you could afford your own goatse.cx guy.

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (2, Funny)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367485)

I have no idea how someone could ever use 40 million dollars in their lifetime, let alone 40 billion.

I would.

I would invest heavily in genetics, cybernetics, and behaviour sciences to create...wait for it... cyborg monkey butlers!

In other words, I would use that money to make the world a better place.
With more monkeys.

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367550)

I would invest heavily in genetics, cybernetics, and behaviour sciences to create...wait for it... cyborg monkey butlers!

How is this different from political campaign contributions?

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (1)

trumaster (442689) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367493)

Money is a sure way for a lot of people to compensate for their short, umm, comings.

Re:You call this a capitalist society? (5, Interesting)

Bob9113 (14996) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367618)

You call this a capitalist society?

No, I call it a corporatist society. In corporatism, the government is charged with the maintenance of power of the major corporations.

What happened to laissez faire ideals, free market and all that.

In a laissez faire system, there is no concept of intellectual property law. Laissez faire is based on the natural laws of scarcity. Microsoft's monopoly is based on artificial scarcity established by our corporatist government through intellectual property laws.

Whether corporatism is the best course for our nation I will leave to other threads. I only intend herein to correct your misuse of the terms "capitalism" and "laissez faire."

The DOJ's court filing ... (3, Funny)

3.5 stripes (578410) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367209)

...is online if you want to wade through it

Well, I have been having problems sleeping recently.

Re:The DOJ's court filing ... (1)

Leffe (686621) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367243)

Having trouble sleeping, try these pills!

Err... I mean, the C99 is great for when you're in need of sleep.

Re:The DOJ's court filing ... (1)

3.5 stripes (578410) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367300)

Cinderella 99?

Re:The DOJ's court filing ... (1)

Leffe (686621) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367632)

100% Funny.

No, C(the programming language) version 1999. About 600 pages(at least numbered, the registers, indexes and stuff are a good 100 pages at least... or not.), a very interesting read, actually, I did not know that you could use <% and %> instead of { and }, neither did I know that you could do int a[*](I do not know what it does though, the language used in the C standard is very complicated, I think it had something to do with reserving memory or ... whatever...).
I think you have to buy it from ISO, I got mine from the warez search engine called Google.com, I'm not sure if the one I downloaded was legal or not, it seemed pretty legal, but I guess it's not as it's for sale over at ISO.

How much should we pay.. (4, Funny)

jkrise (535370) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367226)

From the ref article:
"One condition that caused particular outcry was Microsoft charging an upfront fee of $100,000 for rivals to examine the code to see whether they want to buy it. If they don't, they only get $50,000 back."

So what's the fee to take one single look at the pile of crap and say " Holy crap! This costs $100,000??"

Bride wants to marry IBM and screw Linux. Brother MS willing to pay any dowry.

your .sig (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367527)


Bride wants to marry IBM and screw Linux. Brother MS willing to pay any dowry.

Don't you mean "McBride"?

The whole settlement was a joke anyway (5, Insightful)

McAddress (673660) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367230)

If the government had really wanted to do something about Microsoft's monopoly, they would have broken it up like they did to the Bell's. Once they decided not to, it only became a question of "How much are we going to pretend to care about this?"

Their answer as seen from the settlement, and the lack of compliance is "Not very much."

Re:The whole settlement was a joke anyway (0, Flamebait)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367260)

They probably would have, but then Bush was elected and one of his cronies probably had a vested interest in Microsoft.

Re:The whole settlement was a joke anyway (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367374)

Yeah, because we all know just how much of a stellar success the Bell break-up has been. It's a good thing we took care of that monopoly!

Re:The whole settlement was a joke anyway (5, Insightful)

McAddress (673660) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367518)

Since the Bell breakup, prices on phone calls have dropped dramatically. Interstate calls used to cost $0.25 a minute (not adjusted for inflation). Now you can easily make them for less than $0.05 a minute.
More phone companies have also been able to form, allowing users more choice than ever.
Imagine where the celluar phone industry would be with only one company. Calls would cost upwards of a dollar a minute. The networks would not be so big. Cell phones would be as rare as car phones were.
The government has an interest in controlling monopolies. Microsoft has used it's monopoly on operating systems to stifle competition. Just look back to this [slashdot.org] . Microsoft commits actions like this all of the time, but the DOJ has just turned the other way.

Re:The whole settlement was a joke anyway (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367607)

We're not far off from your cell phone future, considering the cell companies have yet to make a profit - they'll have to sell to conglomerates.

Re:The whole settlement was a joke anyway (1, Offtopic)

shadowbearer (554144) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367744)

When I got my new phone a month or so ago, after moving to a different state, Qwest offered me *unlimited long distance*(in US) for 20 bucks a month.

Shocked me.

I guess they're feeling the effects of 3 cents/minute phone cards :-)

SB

No worries Microsoft (2, Funny)

Vicegrip (82853) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367231)

They just need to put in a call to their favorite guy, Ashcroft, and get him to tell the lawyers to backoff.

Re:No worries Microsoft (1)

Lysol (11150) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367388)

Expect it any day. In fact, unfortunately, when I was half way thru the article Ashcroft's face popped into my head. *shudders*

Will they? (1)

SerpentMage (13390) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367540)

I think not. The current administration has too many issues on its plate. This time, I am almost willing to bet MS will be the scapegoat.

Think about it. We need ourselves a whipping boy! Oh yeah here's one, especially since they are planning to ship good old American jobs to another country, even with 50 billion in the bank....

I think a politician will be thinking mighty hard right now!!!

Want conspiracy theories... Two days ago we hear about this India thing and how they have 50 billion in the bank. Today we hear that they are not following the law... HMMMM.....

Translation (5, Insightful)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367233)

Translation:

Microsoft's substantial contributions to George W. Bush's 2000 campaign fund were very helpful in getting him into the White House. Bush returned the favor by allowing Microsoft to escape unscathed from the big antitrust suit.

Now, Mr. Bush has begun the process of raising funds for his 2004 campaign, and it's time for Microsoft to pay up again.

Re:Translation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367265)

But isn't it interesting how Thomas Penfield Jackson was appointed by a Republican president [uscourts.gov] , while Colleen Kollar-Kotelly was appointed by a Democrat [uscourts.gov] .

Stop your whining and pathetic insults, and get your facts straight.

Re:Translation (1)

orkysoft (93727) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367304)

Republicans and Democrats? They're all in the same conspiracy together! Aliens! ;-)

Judges (5, Informative)

FuzzyDaddy (584528) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367332)

Judges, yes. Prosecutors, no. The department of justice is responsible for pressing the enforcement of the law. The judge decides between the two sides.

The judges in these cases have been impartial, but the DOJ seriously backed off when the administration changed.

Re:Judges (2)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367407)

"The department of justice is responsible for pressing the enforcement of the law. The judge decides between the two sides. The judges in these cases have been impartial..."

You really think so? I thought that Colleen Kollar-Kotelly acted the part of a paid-off lapdog rather well.

Re:Translation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367335)

Why do these comments keep get modded as insightful? MS is an equal opportunity lobbyist and campaign financier.

Re:Translation (4, Interesting)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367401)

I doubt Microsoft contributed anywhere near as much money as the religious special interest groups have, but that doesn't seem to stop the president from trying to reach out to the homosexual vote (and pissing off said special interests in the process). What makes you think that Microsoft will have more sway over the White House than Baptists seem to have?

Re:Translation (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367426)

If I remember correctly, they gave more money to the democracts than the republicans. You're just an upset liberal scum. Go kill more babies and sell the body parts for testing (ie go support the murder known as abortion).

If a baby is strong enough to survive an abortion attempt, then the doctor, or nurse, strangles it (unless the person has a moral backbone--then the put it up for adoption {illegally by the way}). Animals have better protection than humans do. Wake up from the drunken liberal lies that our society tries to shove down your throats!

Re:Translation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367463)

So, what your saying is being liberal means being anti-microsoft.

We both know where this is going; liberal cronies/ass kissers will be puckering for for the next election more then anyone else.

Re:Translation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367664)

I was sort of liberal until member of the media (CNN) began attacking black Republican's calling them trators and less then reputable. I can honestly say it was an eye opener.

Since, due to newly created *sensitivities* it often seems 80% of television programs revolve around liberal idealism effectively removing (c) and (d) from multiple choices questionaire. You'll very likely never see as many people with money in one place as you do on TV and it's very much a choke point due to un warranted influence. If you look at what some people are willing to do for a few hundred dollars the possibilities become unerving. Also, the liberal party and their supports have no qualms about punishing alternative views, or use some what sofisticated uses of psychology for their own greedy little ends. Just look at the moding on /. sometimes, rather then play an honest game and realize the truth, the powerplay game is played.

Regardless of what is said, the liberals have a terrible human rights track record, misrepresentation and deception (as anyone who worked closely with them can testify) hold higher regard then any laws or constitutionally given rights within the US.

Keep a list and follow the consequences to remind yourself and your friends when voting time comes around.

Insightful??? (5, Informative)

Pave Low (566880) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367553)

Why does this garbage always get modded up on slashdot?

If you look it up yourself, [opensecrets.org] Microsoft's contributions doesn't rank anywhere near the top compared to other donors. In fact, they contribute fairly evenly to both parties.

More mindless drivel on slashdot.

Re:Translation (1)

McAddress (673660) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367579)

Mind you, Microsoft engages in equal opportunity bribery. They donate enough money to both political parties that to them, it does not matter who wins.
Neither party can afford to lose Microsoft's support. As such, until Linus Torvalds becomes supreme king of the universe, Microsoft will always get away with little more than a slap on the wrist.

Microsoft.. Microsoft.. (3, Informative)

DaLiNKz (557579) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367235)

always in the news, never for anything good. Truth is I don't even see Microsoft as the threat it was, maybe thats because I have sort of lost any real caring about Microsoft.. good or bad. Linux is taking over the server market.. Windows does workstations fine. Maybe Microsoft should learn how to be a bit more friendly in the developmental departments with other groups then to try to attack them all..

But of course.. one day.. Welcome to Microsoft Linux 1.0 (Interactive Mode)

Re:Microsoft.. Microsoft.. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367310)

I'm just sick of the Microsoft bashing that runs on here unabated. Clearly the justice department doesn't feel MS is as big a threat as the slashdot averageuser does, and honestly I don't think it is one either. They're a business, and they'll do what businesses do to survive,

What really pisses me off is when companies like Apple use THEIR monopolistic powers to do the same as MS, but there's no legal response against them, and hundreds of slashdot fanboys actively defending them.

Same with Sun, SGI, Redhat, Mandrake and so on.

Re:Microsoft.. Microsoft.. (0)

Java no not that jav (639460) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367530)

Microsoft:Monopoly::Apple:Hardly Noticable

Re:Microsoft.. Microsoft.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367582)

uhhuh.

Microsoft monopoly

apple monopoly

just like sun, sgi, redhat and mandrake's monopoly

What pray tell do all these non MS companies have monopolies over?

Yawn (3, Insightful)

nuggz (69912) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367238)

Who cares. They will not force MS to act in a manner that fosters competition. They won't enforce a penalty on MS. It just isn't going to happen in the US.

Normal people think MS Windows and MS Office are what makes the computer industry, by that logic any action against MS would be an attack agains the industry, so they don't want to do anything.

The end is NEAR! (5, Funny)

Noryungi (70322) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367242)

Brothers and sisters, consider these facts :

  • Microsoft will be forced to comply to a DOJ judgment!
  • SCO is suing IBM and actually WITHDREW AIX LICENSE!!
  • Europe is going to accept GMOs!!!
  • And, in Peoria, Ill., John Smith [google.fr] , 20-years-old Slashdot poster and troll extraordinaire, actually got LAID!!!!


The time has come, repent all you sinners, for the shiny saucers of the sex goddess [subgenius.com] are coming to deliver us!

This, as everybody knows, has been predicted in the Holy Scriptures of J.R. "Bob" Dobbs! Convert before it is too late, heathens! ;-)

Re:The end is NEAR! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367385)

Brothers and sisters, consider these facts :

  • Microsoft will be forced to comply to a DOJ judgment!
  • SCO is suing IBM and actually WITHDREW AIX LICENSE!!
  • Europe is going to accept GMOs!!!
  • And, in Peoria, Ill., John Smith, 20-years-old Slashdot poster and troll extraordinaire, actually got LAID!!!!

That's not all, consider also:

  • The best golfer in the world is black...
  • The most popular rapper in the world is white...
  • There was a war a few months ago, and Germany didn't want to be involved.
These truly are strange days indeed...

From the no-one-is-really-surprised dept (4, Insightful)

indros13 (531405) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367254)

Honestly, you would think that with so many examples of corporate misbehavior and outright illegal activity that we'd have a Justice Department with some teeth. Instead, they waste their time covering up nude statues and hounding thousands of immigrants, most of whom have done no worse than stay past their green card expiration date.
John Ashcroft, do your fscking job!

Appeasement only buys short term security (4, Insightful)

Ridgelift (228977) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367287)

Your US government is trying to appease Microsoft. Appeasement never works. It only buys short term security. It doesn't work in diplomacy with countries, corporations or any relationship. [capmag.com] .

Though drawing parallels between brutal dictators and Bill Gates may seem harsh, the principle is the same. If people think they're safe now from Microsoft's monopolistic practices, they've bought into a false sense of security.

Reminds Me of the English Bobby Joke (4, Insightful)

Myriad (89793) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367296)

Somehow this makes me think of the joke about English police stopping criminals without being allowed to carry guns:

Bobby to criminal: Stop!! Or I'll say 'stop' again!!

Except here we have:

DOJ to MS: Comply!! Or we'll say 'comply' again!

Sad, yes. Surprising, no.

Blockwars [blockwars.com] : new features & bug fixes! All multiplayer. Go play.

Re:Reminds Me of the English Bobby Joke (5, Funny)

Larsing (645953) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367370)

Except the English police will wack you senseless with their extendable batons if you don't do what they say...

Re:Reminds Me of the English Bobby Joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367738)

"with their extendable batons"

I love it when you talk dirty.

Re:Reminds Me of the English Bobby Joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367380)

Somehow this makes me think of the joke about English police stopping criminals without being allowed to carry guns:

Bobby to criminal: Stop!! Or I'll say 'stop' again!!
You really, really can't think of a way to stop someone without shooting them? Do you look as dumb as you are?

Re:Reminds Me of the English Bobby Joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367418)

You really, really can't think of a way to stop someone without shooting them? Do you look as dumb as you are?

I guess you missed the part that said "joke".

Re:Reminds Me of the English Bobby Joke (1)

takev (214836) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367488)

It reminds me of a "Alias Smith and Johnes" sketch.

On a shooting range, there are cops of different countries: a german cop, an american asult force officer and the british bobby.

So the german cop shoots his sidearm empty on the target (resembling a human). result twelve small holes.

Then the armerican cop shoots his asult rifle empty on the target. result a many more holes.

Lastly the bobby runs toward the target and smashes his stick into the target, completely destroying it.

Re:Reminds Me of the English Bobby Joke (5, Informative)

Space cowboy (13680) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367537)

I invite you to (any time you like) get on the wrong side of a "bobby".

Their job is only to stop/catch unarmed (or at least, without ranged-weapons) criminals anyway. A policeman with one of the standard-issue batons is significantly better armed than joe crook with a knife...

Any time there is a gun-toting idiot (briefly) around, the police just call in the armed-response unit (ARU). Much better-trained snipers who don't seem to care where they hit, so long as the bad-guy gets it. Similar to SWAT teams, I suppose.

Gun crime isn't much of an issue in the UK anyway. There's a pretty-persistent rumour of a shoot-to-kill policy amongst the armed police. Perhaps that's a contributory factor :-) I think I heard of someone being shot earlier in the year around where I live (NE London). The shooter was shot dead by the police ARU. There was some criticism over the fact that he was hit by more than five bullets, which seemed overkill...

[Note that I'm not at all opposed to the bad-guy being shot. If you play the game, you play by ALL the rules...]

Simon.

Re:Reminds Me of the English Bobby Joke (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367755)

Ah, so the ARU are the SS of Britian. Now I understand, but I don't understand why you'd want to live in a police state.

OEM licensing (5, Interesting)

edxwelch (600979) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367308)

According to that report MS has been completely compliant in implementing the OEM licensing terms. So why don't we see widespread availabilty of alternative OS's from the big OEMs? There is a little discaimer at the end of that paragraph that seems to say that it hasn't been implemented yet because of the need to "train" OEM sales people, but this "training" has been going on for 2 years already.

Section III.A. prohibits Microsoft from retaliating or threatening to retaliate against an OEM because of an OEM's decision to distribute or otherwise to promote any software that competes with Microsoft Platform Software. Unlike Section III.B., which can be (and has been) implemented programmatically, compliance with Section III.A. can be achieved only through training and ongoing oversight of relevant Microsoft employees. Microsoft has conducted extensive mandatory training for its OEM Sales group personnel concerning Microsoft's obligations under the Final Judgments, with particular emphasis on Section III.A. and other OEM-related provisions. Since December 2001, Microsoft has trained its domestic OEM Sales personnel at its headquarters in Redmond, Washington, and has trained its international OEM Sales personnel at regional training sessions held in Germany, Switzerland, Mexico and Japan. Training will continue to be an ongoing process, both via live training by Microsoft lawyers and senior OEM Sales group personnel and via online training tools that Microsoft has developed for this purpose. Microsoft's licensing and antitrust lawyers work directly with OEM Division personnel to address and resolve any ongoing questions.

Re:OEM licensing (2, Insightful)

beacher (82033) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367520)

Here's your all of the OEM [internetweek.com] Training [cnn.com] that the sales force needs, courtesy of Microsoft's chief sales executive Orlando Ayala.

-B

Re:OEM licensing (4, Insightful)

quantaman (517394) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367687)

Like This [slashdot.org] ?

It takes time for the OEMs to jump on board. You need to find a good distro, negotiate with the company, test it with your machines to make sure everything works properly, train your staff so they know what to do when some customer calls with problems about it, then finally decide how to market the thing! You also need to wait to make sure that MicroSoft is actually playing nice before you risk seriously screwing yourself by ticking off the supplier of the OS for every machine you sell. Remeber the story about the scorpion and the frog? If I were an OEM I would eb damm careful before messing with M$. Still as we've just seen they are coming out, it's just a matter of how long and what kind of response HP gets from both the comsumer and M$ to see if more machines come out with linux pre-installed

Shock and awe (5, Insightful)

Realistic_Dragon (655151) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367315)

Not only is Microsoft not complying, they are in fact way in excess of the monopoly position that they were in when they started.

They have been busy leveraging their monopoly into new markets (cell phones and games consoles to name but two) and reverse-leveraging their new market share in these industries back into the PC market for greater lock in (Outlook integration that is closer than 3rd parties can obtain for example).

They have been investigating hardware lock in techniques (palladium style) and trialling them on consumers (Xbox) to prepare for the next wave of monoplising efforts. They are busy fundng other companies attacking their competators (SCO). They are proping up Bush econmic policy (share dividend at an advantageous moment) in return for special consideration (legal proglems decrease).

Lets hope to God this triggers another investigation - there is such a huge increase in their deliberatly destructive antics now that even a half blind judge would break them up.

Except that they will prbably buy him off too.

Microsoft is immune to their whiny court orders. (5, Insightful)

kaltkalt (620110) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367362)

Antitrust law is a good thing, but if it's not used quickly enough, a monopoly can get so big, rich, and powerful, that laws no longer apply to it. It can afford to buy its way out of any problems it may face. Microsoft is just such a monopoly. It should have been broken up around the time of Windows 3.1. But it was left alone for years after that, and now it can fart in the faces of the justice department and there's not a single thing they can do about it (other than whine to the press).

Re:Microsoft is immune to their whiny court orders (3, Insightful)

Daniel Phillips (238627) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367502)

Antitrust law is a good thing, but if it's not used quickly enough, a monopoly can get so big, rich, and powerful, that laws no longer apply to it. It can afford to buy its way out of any problems it may face. Microsoft is just such a monopoly. It should have been broken up around the time of Windows 3.1. But it was left alone for years after that, and now it can fart in the faces of the justice department and there's not a single thing they can do about it (other than whine to the press).

Your theory also requires that the judicial system and administration be corrupt.

Re:Microsoft is immune to their whiny court orders (3, Insightful)

kaltkalt (620110) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367726)

Not corrupt. Just powerless. It's quite possible to be full of honor and completely ineffectual at the same time. I'm not accusing anyone of being corrupt (other than MS of course). Lazy, yes. Corrupt, no.

hummmm. (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367432)

the non-compliance comes t the same time that Bush is asking for "campaign" money , but hey no connection.
And you wonder where Gates gets his ideas from. Pay us or I send ashcroft after you
Pay us or I send BSA after you

And on the 4th of July, too (5, Insightful)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367449)

A day when we celebrate victory in a civil war that began as a protest about taxation without representation.

Say, how much representation do your taxes buy you? Wouldn't it be neat if we could all choose to pay "campaign contributions" to buy laws and fat federal contracts, instead of paying taxes to whoever we decided was probably the least bad of two candidates?

I'm in agreement with George W that the only way to deal with oppressive unelected regimes is to replace them forcibly. I just think we should clean house at home before building any more aircraft carriers.

It's tempting (4, Funny)

abe ferlman (205607) | more than 11 years ago | (#6367499)

It's tempting to say "You know a company is corrupt when even Ashcroft says so."

But remember what part of the election cycle we're approaching before drawing too many conclusions here. This will all blow over before you can say "Judge Jackson was biased in favor of the truth."

moron Godless georgewellian corepirate nazis (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367719)

they just love to .confroNT each other, whilst watching J. et AL, take it in the .asp over & over.

fauxking greed/fear based frauds/felons they are.

consult with yOUR creator. vote with yOUR wallet.

more details at trustworthycomputing.com

tell 'em robbIE.

THEY ABSOLUTELY WILL NOT STOP UNTIL YOU ARE DEAD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367768)


You cannot stop them, they couldnt't stop Enron , they couldn't stop Worldcom , do you not see ? they are a machine They do not see reason or emotion they cannot be bartered with and in pursuit of that almighty symbol $ they absolutely will not stop until your buisness is dead.

Conformity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6367776)

Conformity [google.ca]
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?