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!

Microsoft Video Blunder

justin++ posted more than 15 years ago | from the again dept.

The Courts 130

An anonymous reader wrote in with this gem: "Microsoft was trying to show that a PC loaded with Windows 3.1 took longer to access the Internet than a PC loaded with Windows 98 using Internet Explorer. It turns out that the Windows 98 PC was connected to a faster modem than the Windows 3.1 PC. " I'll refrain from (further) comment on this one. Plenty of meat here. Update: 02/10 09:25 by J : Oops. More like "from the egg on my face dept." - it seems I made an honest yet huge mistake: the article says "configuring". Sorry I couldn't update when I realized this. There were some DB troubles, which seem to now have been fixed. Sincerest apologies to all.

cancel ×

130 comments

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

Microsoft Blunder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019153)

I cannot believe how many time Microsoft has tried to pull the wool over the DOJ's eyes. Surely people will realize what they're trying to pull.

why am i not surprised? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019154)

though i'm wondering if they're actually trying to get this trial invalidated by stacking the deck against themselves so fully that they have grounds for appeal.

Duplicitous Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019155)

Does duplicity on the part of Microsoft's dog and pony shows surprise anyone?

Crossing the line (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019156)

Microsoft is REALLY crossing the line this time. This really takes the cake.

Ahh those wacky benchmark comparisons... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019157)

Didn't MS get caught at one of their seminars before where they were comparing (again) IE and Netscape? Someone in the audience stood up and asked why Netscape 3.0x was being compared against IE4.0. For this he was ejected, of course.

Is it just me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019158)

or does it seem Microsoft makes up a lot of their test results?

Different modems? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019159)

um. According to the article, one modem was a 33.6 and the other was a 28.8.

Wow. Big difference there. Are Microsoft haters now reduced to this level of nitpicky-ness?

Let the judge make the decision, I have software to write. :>

Set up connection not access Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019160)

I read the story on CNet and it seems to me they were showing that it took longer to set up a connection in Win 3.1 than it did in Win98, which is true. Modem speed has no affect how long it takes to initially set up the dial-in connection.

Fair Fight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019161)

Microsoft isn't interested in a fair fight in the marketplace.
Why should they be interested in a fair fight in the courtroom?

READ the article first... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019162)

It said "Configuring a PC to connect to the internet can take four times as long with Windows 3.1 as it does with Windows 98..."

That doesn't have anything to do with the modem speed.

Doesn't make me like M$ any better, but yeah, Windows 3.1 DID take longer to configure for dialup. Has nothing to do with modem speeds, or with integrated browsers, for that matter. Idiots.

reading comprehension 101 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019163)

Microsoft was trying to show that a PC loaded with Windows 3.1 took longer to access the Internet than a PC loaded with Windows 98 using Internet Explorer.

That's not what it says, although the article's author doesn't seem to understand it either. Here's the beginning of the article. Note the first word in bold-face:

Configuring a PC to connect to the Internet can take four times as long with Windows 3.1 as it does with Window 98,

The difference between the modems is virtually irrelevant here. Obviously it will take longer to configure 3.1 than 98, because MS took the evil step of integrating IP support in Windows98, thereby depriving customers of the option to download Trumpet instead and figure it out for themselves, like in the Good Old Days.

This isn't that much of a blunder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019164)

The primary thing they were trying to point out
is that bundling a browser on a pre-installed
system makes it easier to connect to the inet.
This is true, and even if the computer hardware
were reversed, it would have shown the same thing.
The real issue in my mind is that they blocked
the ability of vendors to bundle the supperior
Netscape product, which would have allowed
consumers a choice, and still made the first
connection to the inet easier. I'm a bit
surprised that Boise didn't bring this up.

Trying to prove! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019165)

MS Windows 95 - A 32-bit extension of a 16-bit shell of an 8-bit operating system for a 4-bit processor from a 2-bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition.

M$ Bashing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019166)

I agree. It seems a lot of /. 'ers just can't stand MS. Linux and Windows -CAN- coexist. Both are good at some things, and both really suck at others. And unfortunately one of the areas where Windows blows away Linux is in the time to create a dialup account. Win98 can do this in under 5 minutes, but Linux -always- seems to take longer.

M$ Bashing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019167)

Yeah, fasifying evidence and perjury is no biggy(esp. perjury). Hey what the hell, lets go give billy boy a big high five. Those mean governmental creeps, picking on the nicest software company in the word. The nerve of some people. sheesh

M$ Bashing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019168)

Thank god, someone who actually is prepared to say it. I think all the people who slate Microsoft are just a bunch of fashion victims. Most of you are just jealous of Microsoft's success.

"Lick a rock follow fashion, drop of a conka tree"

Kick em, while they're down. Can't any of you be constructive and do something good rather than critisize people all the time.........

If this sounds harsh it's because I'm pissed and England have just lost to France.....

re: Wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019169)

wrong...

From memory (as bad as it is!)....

The two modems were different - one was 56 and one 28. This wouldnt account for the difference of several minutes, which I think was the key issue.

The issue here is not the modem speed. The issue is that they are comparing two different technologies, or rather how to setup a conection on two different technologies. This is what is completely wrong. Im surprised Boies didn't pick this up himself. I may be wrong on this, so corrent me if I am.

Its like comparing 2 cars (the new Beetle vs the old Beetle) on their 0-60mph times. of course the new one will win; its using newer technology. bad analogy, but who cares :)

Stodge in disguise

Nitt pick this.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019170)

How, in God's name AND under oath, could Microsoft compare two systems with different modem speeds for the express purposes of showing how much faster Win98 is and NOT expect someone somewhere to point this out? What possibly could have possessed Microsoft to not make the two modems IDENTICAL? If it wasn't dishonesty then it must have been stupidity. Microsoft's lack of rigor in their sworn "truthful" testing leaves one wondering how MS empolyees could actually keep a straight face when spouting these "facts".

And can someone explain why MS would want to compare Win3.1 to Win98 rather than Win95 to Win98? Someone at the DOJ should ask Microsoft on stand why this comparison is so relevant.

Yes, it's academic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019171)

The whole thing is academic if windows '98 is faster than Windows 3.1. In fact, it's academic if Windows '98 is faster than Windows '95 - all that proves is that they made the operation faster. I'm surprised the judge would allow this evidence to be presented at all - it's completely irrelevant.

Now, if you want to compare Windows '98 with the browser "integrated" versus it loaded after the OS was loaded, that MIGHT be a valid test.

JackedDot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019172)

Is it just me, or is slashdot jacked up? I have tried on multiple machines on multiple networks over the past two days and I can only go up a single 'response level' to where I am capable of reading. The rest, when you click on the responses to responses, all you get is a list of responses for that level. Is there still a problem in the code that was mentioned earlier?

--Curious(ly ignorant)

This message brought to you by the letters M & S (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019173)

Thank you Bill, for that insight.

Perhaps it hasn't occurred to you that you can build an intuitive GUI on either platform?

Win98's PPP settings affect things too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019174)

Running a PPP connection on a win98 box (ever try finding Fisher Price software for *nix?) seemed dog slow until I ran iSpeed [hms.com] on it - seem to recall hearing that MS changed the MTU parameters in 98 to better support LANs, but a the cost of PPP performance.

Geez come on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019175)

Stop trying to be 'wise' and realise that life is VERY RARELY like that. You simply CANNOT ignore people trying to destroy you.

Can Slashdot pretend to be unbiased? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019176)

Please read your stories before posting articles that are completely anti-microsoft. Out of the entire test, 22 seconds used the modem. Fact-checking please!

This is a linux page? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019177)

Hrmm, what designates slashdot as a "linux page"? Sure, there are news items about linux, but there are also items not about linux, or even computing. Where did you get the idea that slashdot is a totally-linux site?

Geez come on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019178)

Uh, this isn't a linux page. This is a page about the Microsoft trial.

Or does SlashDot==Linux in your mind?

You MS lovers are sheep (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019179)

What the hell is up with people defending MS? Apparently they are too damn stupid to see what's going on.

Their OS's suck. I spend half my night every night without sleep because our sucky NT servers go down all the time. The servers we have that run Linux or Solaris have not needed any touching for months. I have yet to see any of our NT boxes stay up for over a week. MS products suck because they push them into production before they are really ready so they can make money.

Which brings me to my next point... MS is a bunch of money grubbing assholes. They want to own everything, including you. If you have any sympathy for them, they already own you. You might as well grab your ankles right now.

Geez come on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019180)

Leave MS alone, if you hate them so much, ignore them.


And let them get away with perjury and contempt of court? Think again. Ignoring a bully, contrary to your (wussy) belief, does not make him go away; it just teaches him that he can bully with impunity.


Of course we shouldn't spend all our time bashing MS at the neglect of our own code, but we should still jump on any reasonable demonstration of MS inferiority.

Geez come on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019181)

linux? Who said anything about linux? The DoJ case is about MS denying choice for those who want Netscape

HEY! You MS readers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019182)

I know .. I know ..

We have heard about how cool it is to work for MS, about all the GREAT benefits and GREAT pay, not to mention the GREAT stock options.

An on occasion, we even hear about the GREAT products you are working on.

And how 'pointy haired bosses' are everywhere ..

but ... come on ...

Isn't this getting a little embarrassing??

even for you?

Geez come on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019183)

This is Slashdot - News for Nerds, not a Linux promotional parlour. When the world's largest software based company is up in court over DOJ charges which might bring about their ruin, it becomes news worthy of attention for all nerds.

The fact that you see the analysis of Microsoft as not being news, but a poor attempt to promote Linux, says a lot more about yourself and your own personal biasses than anything else. This stuff is interesting and deserves our attention.

Why Win3.1 and not Win95 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019184)

Okay the modems were different but what was the CPU? Come on Win3.1, why use that. Win95 is what they should have used to test if integrating IE into Win98 makes such a great differents. There are so many gotchas that could skew the results it not funny. What DOS was under 3.1, what modem drivers, was the 3.1 modem a winmodem. The poor judge, as with it as he might be, couldn't know all the possible pitfalls. The judge needs to stop these FALSE demos, it's comparing apples to tomatoes.

a real test (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019185)

A good test would be to show the speed of connecting to the internet on identical hardware.

How about a 386/33 with 8MB ram.

I wonder how quickly you could connect to the internet on that machine under win98. ;-)

This isn't that much of a blunder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019186)

No, bundling the dial-up connection support (and PPP, TCP/IP, etc.) makes it easier to connect to the internet. All this was already bundled (although they have improved it since then.)

More anti-MS FUD from the Linux losers. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019187)

Regardless of how long it takes to get a connection running, both win3.1 and win98 are faster than getting pppd running under Linux. Every one of you losers who goes screaming every time someone says even the _slightest_ thing "odd" about Linux should grow the fsck up. You FUD-wielding chumps are no better than the Microsoft marketing machine.

Re: People complaining about /. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019188)

Is it possible that MS are paying people
to flood /. with dodgy incoming news stories?
And that they then pay people to post idioitic
replies?

Different modems? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019189)

I thought the test was the time it takes to setup
a internet connection with win3.1 vs win9x. I just
set my ma up online with one of my old systems. It
took the time to read 5 diskettes (the ISP's version of netscape and a dialer) to install, and
maybe two minutes to set up the modem port addr and irq and config the dialer. Whoever was configuring that win 3.1 system was probably only
a win 98 user...

Boring (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019190)

This is so fucking boring. Every time MS farts, there is news on slashdot. Simply pathetic.

"Academic" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019191)

...and so is the fact that there is no reason for, nor has there ever been a "2400 bps WinModem".

Browser != internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019192)

Presence or absence of a browser has nothing to do with ease of connecting to the internet. MS must have been counting on the fact that people don't know the difference between the Internet and the web. They must not have realized that if you think setting up a browser is the same thing as connecting to the internet, you will also think that modem speed makes a pretty big difference.

This isn't that much of a blunder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019193)

Actually, the browser has nothing to do with it. It's the fact that starting with Win95, Microsoft included support for TCP/IP connections with the OS (though with W95a it's not part of the standard install routine). The networking client was not part of any browser code. With Win 3.1, you had to find and configure a third-party program like Trumpet Winsock, which was also not a browser. This is probably why they didn't compare Win98 with Win95. Because it would take *exactly the same amount of time to setup Win95a as it does to set up Win98 to access the Internet* (not counting browser installation).

Michael Knepher
josefk@wenet.net

reading comprehension 101 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019194)

hmm, yeah well it seems to me that they didn't change much from win95 to win98 so the addition of IE into the OS doesn't make it any faster to set up a modem. The DoJ didn't make a big deal about this because it is pretty obvious that MS wants to find anything that'll make them look good.
HEY! Win32 is faster in win98 than win3.1 with win32s also!
HEY! There's a start bar in win98! It would be really hard to add a start bar in win3.1!

You want Windows users to do what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019195)

Your average Windows user panics at the concept of "Installing" software...

We're talking Office here, the one that installs itself... PANIC... configure a printer... AHHHHH!!!

Win 98 is VERY cool for your average computer user. I am happy with MS and the fact that they have brought usability within everyones grasp, as this means more folk want computer oriented solutions, and thus I have a well paying job.

Until Linux is as easy to use as Windows, and I can sustain my quality of life as a Linux developer, SHUT UP!

This message brought to you by the letters M & S (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019196)

No, it's possible, only not when

A) no matter what you want to do in the GUI, you still need to use the command line

B) Enlightenment R15 is a pain in the ass to install and configure

C) TWM, FVWM, FVWM 95, etc. all suck

The original poster was right - there are certain applications that I would vastly prefer running Unix to running Windows (like Web servers, etc.), but personally, for my home PC, I vastly prefer WinNT4/Win2000 to any variation of Unix (and I've used Digital Unix, Minix, AIX, Solaris (x86 and Sparc), Linux, xBSD, Irix, etc.)

Even die hard linux advocates must admit - Linux is *not* a particularly friendly OS. Even though I'm quite familiar with using it, I don't like having to recompile the kernel every few bug-release updates, or tell it which sectors on my hard drive to install on. I like sticking in the Win2000 CD, saying "create a 3GB NTFS partition," and just let the installer automatically detect my DVD decoder, video card, NIC, etc. When I want to dick around with an operating system, I'll boot to Linux, but when I want to have my computer boot, without worrying about shell scripts, etc., and use my computer, I boot NT.

Oh, and before someone jumps on the BSOD bandwagon, let me say that I've been running Win2k Beta 3 RC0 for over a week now without a single mishap. I've had far more problems with beta linux kernels, and I had to compile those.

Re: You MS lovers are sheep (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019197)

A bit excessive... but a valid comment nonetheless.

Maybe your doing it wrong... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019198)

I've had NT Server up and running for weeks, running SQL Server, Exchange, and supporting 50+ users...

You UNIX folk like things complicated and arcane. The simplicity of NT confuses you.

Bigger than you imagine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 15 years ago | (#2019199)

What Boise is doing is destroying the credibility of the MS witness. If the witness has no credibity, then NOTHING that witness says matters to the judge. This is exactly what happened with the FIRST video. Boise used the multiple errors and the witness's constant backpeddaling on his answers to destroy that witness's credibility.

What is the purpose of bringing an 'expert' to court if that 'expert' can be shown not have have the most BASIC technical competence? The he isn't much of an 'expert', is he?

If he brings in a video that he claims supports his position and it can be shown that that video is flawed in some FUNDAMENTAL manner (such as not having the correct program run, I mean having another program run after the first program was run, what I meant was it was an editing error, what I actually meant was that it was only an illustration of the results we had found to be true in a lab. Would you like me to remake the video? I can do it tonight. Why were they locked out? It wasn't my idea. Here's the new video. It doesn't have the disputed test because we couldn't get a reliable connection to the Internet from the office. Yes we know we had run the original test in a lab. Yes we know that the office is not a lab. I don't know why we thought we could duplicate a lab test in an office if it could only be done under lab conditions.)

The tests MIGHT have been accurate AND the DoJ's case MIGHT have fallen apart then. BUT the defense (with all their BILLIONS of $dollar$ and the brightest people working on it) just COULDN'T get the video right. And then they couldn't explain why it was wrong.

These are the EXACT actions that would be undertaken by someone who was IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW AND ATTEMPTING TO COVER UP THEIR VIOLATIONS.

That is all Boise has to prove.

He's made his case so far.

He just has to prove that each MS witness is lieing or misrepresenting facts. It doesn't matter WHICH facts they are misrepresenting, if they are misrepresenting ANY, then ALL of their claims are suspect.

You do not want your witness to be suspect before the judge.

Did I miss something? (1)

kovacsp (113) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019220)

Did I miss something in the trial...why do we care that Windows98 is faster than Win3.1? Shouldn't they have tested Win98 and win95?

Screw Microsoft... (1)

Wakko Warner (324) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019221)

And screw all you whiners who can't handle me, or others, "bashing" them. They've been incredibly stupid these past few weeks (moreso than usual, even), and deserve all the derision that's being heaped onto them.

- A.P.
--


"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad

JackedDot? (1)

torpor (458) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019222)

OR hit "Flat Mode", that usually works for me.

Why is the DOJ so leniant on this? (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019223)

It seems to me that Microsoft is trying to decieve the DOJ in court (under oath?). Certainly these are grounds for a contempt of court charge, yet all I hear is:
"One bright eyed DOJ employee noticed the Microsoft Word and Excel icons appeared on the taskbar for the second half of the demo. The DOJ asked Microsoft to remake the video." (Presumeably so they don't forget to hide the taskbar this time).

Plus this I can connect faster to the internet with 98...and a faster modem stuff.

Clinton could have been impeached for stuff like this (well, maybe, but we certainly would have heard about it about a million times).

Set up connection not access Internet (1)

Enry (630) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019224)

It depends. If you're dialing into a 33.6k modem with a 33.6k modem, both will try to sync up at 33.6 first. If you have a 28.8 modem dialing into a 33.6, the 33.6 will try to sync at 33.6, then 31, then keep going down the line until it hits 28.8, at which point they sync up.

Guess what I run! (1)

gavinhall (33) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019225)

Posted by Alonzo The Great:

'doze 9.11 uh windoze 3.11 Yeah, I know I'm lame. If you got a better OS and want to tell me how great it is e-mail Alan Grimes at the link above... :)

I've said this before... (1)

echo (735) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019226)

... and I'll say it again.

Microsoft Internet Explorer is an Application.

A TCP/IP Stack is not...

Microsoft has the source code to Windows.

Microsoft can REMOVE Internet Explorer by rewriting Windows.

End of story.

Someone needs to inform the DOJ of these simple facts.

Unix on the other hand... (1)

C.Lee (1190) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019229)

Actually people want to play games on machines like the PlayStation rather than Windows. Otherwise why are there so much interest in emualating these machines on the PC. BTW I haven't bought a game for the PC since I bought my Playstation a couple of years ago. The system requirements for PC games these days are becoming just too absurd, and the games on the PlayStation are far more interesting, especially if you are an Anime/Manga fan.

Unix on the other hand... (1)

jafac (1449) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019230)

Someone please show Mr. Barkto the door. . .

WinModems (1)

nickm (1468) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019231)

A similar test could be performed in the opposite direction--pit a machine with decent buffered UARTs and Windows 3.1 with an external 56k modem against a Win98 box with a WinModem. Note how slowly the machine runs while "downloading the Internet" or whatever these morons call it. Make it illegal to sell WinModems.
--

They COULDN'T be that silly.. (1)

Thomas Charron (1485) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019232)

They COULDN'T be that silly.. These tests must be conducted by utter morons.. Shouldn't these tests be done by neutral, third party vendors? I mean, who's the say they didn't just speed up the friggen tape to make it appear faster?

"Joe, move the mouse REAL slowly.. We need to speed up this tape, and don't want it to look phony.."

Different modems? (1)

Thomas Charron (1485) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019233)

Yes, there is a big difference when one is judging speed.. As a matter of fact, unless they both had dedicated access to the SAME T1 line, the results can be SIMPLY screwed by someone simply ftping a large file across the LAN..

A BREAK for misleading the US Government? (1)

Thomas Charron (1485) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019234)

Lemme get this strait.. They mislead the court on 3 different occasions:

1) Using survey results that where 'ordered' to turn out the way they did..

2) Using systems that are NOT CONFIGURED as they stated to demo something..

3) They demo something on different speed modems, and suprisingly, the slower modem lost..

Does this mean that I can 'forget' to mention 30,000 of income when doing my taxes and use the 'gimme a break' as a reason?

READ THE ARTICLE (1)

Daniel (1678) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019235)

They weren't comparing thouroughput, they were comparing the time it took to configure the system. Which doesn't have *anything* to do with modem speed. (well, I guess configuring a 1980s 1200 baud modem might be difficult these days, but...)

Daniel

28.8 (1)

diakka (2281) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019236)

you know, that 28.8 "purely academic" difference could be alot difference if the modem was the old style VFC protocol, the pre-V.34 standard protocol. I had one of these modems, and it was completely unreliable. It never connected at 28.8. On the average it connected at 19.2 and it was not rare to get 14.4. Not to mention, that when these things got errors, the modem would lock up for a few seconds, until it could renegotiate the connection with the other end. Basically this "academic" difference, could have resulted in the difference shown by the video. In fact, even if there was nothing fishy about the modems themselves, they could have used telephone lines that differed significantly in quality. While the modems may have been nearly the same, the actual connection speeds could be far different, thus accounting for the big difference.
--

Geez come on... (1)

diakka (2281) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019237)

Hey genius... In case you didn't notice, this article's topic is on the MS vs DOJ case, and the video screw up. Not Linux, not FreeBSD, not BeOS. Microsoft. Natrually people are gonna express their feelings on MS. It's not as if they're offering unsolicited or off-topic comments.
Leave MS alone, if you hate them so much, ignore them.
If you hate the bashing comments on MS stories on slashdot, ignore them.
--

RE: Set up connection not access Internet (1)

Binary Boy (2407) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019238)

THANK you... I am not normally one to defend Microsoft (at best I keep my mouth shut), however in this case, while you may dispute the point of comparing Win98 to Win3.1 in terms of Internet access, they were comparing the time it takes to CONNECT to the Internet, including, presumably, the configuration of TCP stacks on each. This may actually (!!) be a valid point as difficulties in this process are what plague many users (do you remember the fucked up TCP stack in 3.1?), and making the setup faster and easier is certainly a plus.

What I dont get is the comparison: why compare technically distinct OSes when they had a perfect comparison between Win95 and Win98 (essentially the same product except for the features that are currently in question). Thats akin to an engine maker claiming its new model is faster and better in every way than its previous model, but then opting to compare it in lab tests to its 1927 model that doesnt even share a similar design.

Also, on a side note, even IF the Win98 machine was using a faster modem, and all other things were equal, it sure seems to me that with each successive generation of modem standards the handshakes take LONGER, therefore if Billy-boy had a 2400 in one box and a 56k in another, my bet is on the 2400 connecting faster.

With that said, I still hope someday thge Justice Dept. will pull their heads out of their collective bureaucratic ass and develop an actual strategy in this case... otherwise issues like this will continue to plague the trial until its dismissal.

Please dont post such obviously slanted articles (or respond to them) without thinking first.. being rabid Microsoft-haters will discredit us all in the long run... why nitpick when we have MORE than enough ammo already?

Nitt pick this.... (1)

cremat (2727) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019239)

And can someone explain why MS would want to compare Win3.1 to Win98 rather than Win95 to Win98? Someone at the DOJ should ask Microsoft on stand why this comparison is so relevant.

Yep. I was thinking the same. Why are they comparing Win98 against Win3.1 instead of Win95? It does not make any sense, unless Win98 and Win95 perform the same with and without IE. And that is obviously the reason they used Win3.1.

"most of the time was spent reading from disc" (1)

smithdog (3152) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019240)

I recall from the article that "most of the time was spent" loading the browser application from the disc. What a stupid comparison!

Geez come on... (1)

Stargazer (4144) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019241)

Slashdot itself has done nothing to make itself look bad here. Slashdot is a news site reporting the news. Moreover, it's not bashing MS's product, it's insulting their perceptions of our intelligence. If some comment-posters feel obliged to make their usual childish remarks, it's their own problem. Slashdot has done nothing here to stain its journalistic integrity (unless the summary is incorrect).

why am i not surprised? (1)

David R. Miller (4879) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019242)

I think there are always grounds for appeal, but mistakes made in your own defense are not one of them. Also, is not an appeal actually a review of the trial proceeding, its fairness and the legal logic used for the various rulings?

Perhaps a lawyer can comment on what recourse defendants have to deal with their own inept presentation of their case.

stupid law... (1)

datazone (5048) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019243)

explain to me how microsoft is allowed to do these tests. Think about this, if you were just arrested for murder, would they allow you to go to the crime scene to collect the evidence? i think not! Why are they allowing microsoft to create and perform the tests? is the DOJ so computer retarded that they can't hire a impartial third party to perform the test? much less do the tests themselves? For some reason i have a feeling that no matter what MS do, they will win this case. The DOJ has done nothing to prove their case, while MS is doing everything (and screwing it up big time) to win.

Re: Different modems? (1)

Old Man Kensey (5209) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019244)

Yet another "Anonymous Coward" wrote:

According to the article, one modem was a 33.6 and the other was a 28.8.

Wow. Big difference there. Are Microsoft haters now reduced to this level of nitpicky-ness?

Let's see. 33.6 is about 17% faster than 28.8. How about we take 17% of your income as additional tax? You wouldn't be nit-picky about it or anything would you?

17% is a big difference.

Ahh those wacky benchmark comparisons... (1)

vt (5803) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019245)

ohmygod... the wacky graph from the (every month repeating itself) microsoft ad in wired with webserver "benchmarks" comes into mind. crafty folks they are,- in _that_ business, i mean.

"Academic" (1)

ewhac (5844) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019246)

Modem Configurations for Internet Speed Comparison

  • Modem Type
    • Windows-98: External
    • Windows 3.1: Internal WinModem
  • Speed
    • Windows-98: 56K V.90
    • Windows 3.1: 2400 bps
  • Error Correction
    • Windows-98: On
    • Windows 3.1: Off
  • Connection Type
    • Windows-98: RJ-11-style jack
    • Windows 3.1: Acoustic coupler

Yeah, the differences are academic.

:-) :-) :-),
Schwab

1200 baud (1)

doog (5889) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019247)

The win3.1 machine was probably at 1200 baud and the 98 machine with a pocket rocket DSL modem... Way to fool em Bill!!

Trying to prove! (1)

tomblackwell (6196) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019249)

Why must everyone post this tired, tired, old quote whenever a reference to Windows 95 comes up? It was mildly entertaining the first time. Barely so the next few times. It has no entertainment value now. Let it die.

Make MS loose their credibility (1)

craw (6958) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019250)

There seems to be some misconception about why the DoJ would raised the issue of different modem speeds. If one has been following Boiles cross-examination of the MS witnesses, one realizes that the DoJ is systematically trying to destroy their credibility. Furthermore, the DoJ is also trying to show that MS has exhibited a pattern of evasiveness and deceit in their testimonies (written and oral). The flawed tapes and the hidden modem differences all move towards this goal. Remember, this is all cummulative in it's effect.

In contrast, MS's cross-examination of DoJ witnesses seemed to be primarily concentrated on disputing (or correcting) individual little points of contention. Furthermore, while the DoJ witnesses were from a wide-range of organizations, MS's witnesses are almost exclusively MS employees. If one destroys the credibility of the MS witnesses, you destroy the credibility of MS. This will then make life tough for MS if this gets to an Appeals Court.

The DoJ can still call two more witnesses. If too many bogus technical claims are made, I would suggest that the DoJ do their own technical demonstrations (video presentation of course). And yes, sorry MS, you are not allowed to be there when the DoJ sets up or films their demo.

Lies, Damned Lies and Microsoft Videotapes (1)

Irishman (9604) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019252)

I have to agree with this thread, why can a company like this be so blatently misleading and then just say 'Oops...I didn't really mean to say that.' If any one of us tried this, we would be forking over a bunch of money for a contempt charge, or spending an evening in the care of the state.

M$ to win the Shoot-Yourself-in-the-Foot Award. (1)

Cerebus (10185) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019253)

On a related note, visit today's stories at http://www.mercurycenter.com/business/microsoft/tr ial/ where it was reported that M$ VP Myhrvold admitted under corss-examination that the reasons behind Microsoft's restrictive agreements with ISPs to push IE was the fear that Netscape would win in side-by-side comparisons. This is in *direct* contradiction of his written testimony, where he states that IE's share increase was due to "superior product".

I hesitate to say perjury... nah, no I don't.

If I did this on trial, I'd be jailed for contemt! (1)

Dast (10275) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019254)

Yep. You would be jailed. But that is because you are not a multi-million dollar monopoly with tons of lawyers at your disposal.

Wrong. (1)

Dast (10275) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019255)

This is a linux page, don't point out MS flaws

What? Where does it say "Slashdot: Linux news for nerds?"

We are not pointing out the "flaws" of MS, but their lies. If you don't like it, ignore it. If you can't stand it, leave.

Bill Gates (1)

zrpg (10539) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019256)

Ha, the laugh of the day from our dear friend Bill. :) It's kind of sad the level of inteligence that M$ thinks we have.

Windows95 versus Windows 3.1 (1)

daviddennis (10926) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019257)

As others have pointed out, this was a usability test to find out how long it took to set up a pre-IE versus a post-IE system, not a test of the relative speeds of the two OSes.

If my memory serves, Trumpet Winsock was a horrible, horrible product that took ages to get working properly. I also recall that Windows 3.1 also had no support for modem speeds above 19.2k, and that was pretty darn shaky as it was.

But I don't have a clue what this has to do with Internet Explorer integration. 99% of the work done to set up Windows 3.1 networking was spent getting Trumpet to work; the browser always worked as soon as you could ping a remote host using a domain name.

When Windows95 was introduced, there was an option called the "Plus Pack" which included IE. If you want to see the real benefit in user convenience of having IE "integrated", you would have to compare installing W98 with installing W95 and the Plus Pack (or Netscape on CD ROM). I would argue this difference is negligible.

As far as I know, nobody even attempts to dispute that it was a Good Thing for the consumer to have TCP/IP integrated into Windows 95, even though it surely damaged the competitive positions of a number of companies marketing Windows 3.x TCP/IP, including Trumpet.

D

KDE (1)

daviddennis (10926) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019258)

I've used KDE, and I don't see how anyone could describe it as harder to use then Windows - it's a virtual Windows clone!

Now, if you were to say that the applications aren't there, I'd be forced to agree with you - but that doesn't seem to be your argument.

Incidentally, I now use Enlightenment because I can't resist the cool look. One day, one day, I promise myself, I'll do a Theme of my very own, or at least figure out how to get one of the non-default ones to work.

But I would cheerfully recommend KDE to anyone who wants a Windows-like experience.

I guess you could say I'm one of the few agnostics in the KDE vs Gnome wars. :-)

D

Big deal. (1)

mrsam (12205) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019259)

It's pretty much obvious to anyone who's actually trying to follow along that Microsoft will lose. So, I'm not surprised.

Ahh those wacky benchmark comparisons... (1)

redwraith (12532) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019260)

EJECTED? I find that a little hard to believe, most seminars I would suspect (even mickeysoft) are fairly friendly. They want you to buy their product and continue to use it, and those seminars usually ain't free.

I guess personally it would be bigger news to me that Microsoft is "ejecting" people from its conferences than Microsoft making uneven comparisons.

(Correct me if I'm wrong Sandy, but if I kill all the golfers won't they lock me up and throw away the key?)

M$ Bashing (1)

Doodhwala (13342) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019261)

This is nothing more than a case of people loving to bash MS. Hey give them a break.

JackedDot? (1)

dirty (13560) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019262)

i've been having the same problem. Just keep hitting reload, sometimes it doesn't work.

Did I miss something? (1)

dirty (13560) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019263)

Isn't that roughly like saying linux 2.2.x is faster than 1.2.x or MacOS 8.5 is faster than System 7. Or that is faster than . I would hope it's faster, win3.1 is about 5 or 6 years old, isn't it? Since the issue is integrating ie4 wouldn't a more comperable test be win95 vs win95 w/ ie4?

"Academic" (1)

Deimos_ (14332) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019264)

They put a winmodem in the 3.1 machine? First of all, I worked Tech support for a large ISP and winmodems, IDEPENDENT of the OS, took much longer to get the freeggin POS's to work in the first place. Also, I was under the impression that Win 3.1, if it doesn't have some sort of error correction or flow control, first time you try to tax the harddrive or CPU justa little bit, disconnection is the result. Winmodems are simple really crappy DA converters with no hardware flow control whatsoever, which is why if you run win (of anything) and you playing an mp3, you disconnect. Basically what I'm trying to say is what kind of a moron would use a winmodem in a test in the first place much less on a win3.1 box. Oh yeah, I forgot, he was told to make 3.1 look like it sux... sorry..

M$ Bashing (1)

WilyHacker (14378) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019265)

I'll give M$ a break when M$ gives me a break. I am sick and tired of the "This is what you really want to do" garbage. I'll tell my computer what I want to do, not vice versa.

Give Microsoft a break? (1)

feedle (14646) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019266)

I think you miss the whole point here. This is being submitted as evidence in a trial. It's not like it was part of some silly ad campaign.

Microsoft's major contention in this trial is that Windows98/MSIE are inseperable, and part of their defense is that this linkage of browser to operating system provides a superior experience than the "old way." Microsoft has, time and again, fudged the numbers in their favor, even if only slightly. Every little bit counts.

Give Microsoft a break? When Microsoft starts comparing apples to apples, we'll give them a break. Even if it was a difference between a 33.6k and a 28.8kbps modem, that's significant enough to make it an unfair (and inaccurate) comparison. Apples to apples means: same components, same conditions, only the operating system version should be changed.

How do we know that Microsoft didn't fudge things further? They could have the Win3.1 box connecting to a UNIX machine, and firing off a chat script to start PPP manually; while the Win98 box connects to a WinNT RAS server. What were the conditions of the test? Without knowing that, it's just a case of more Microsoft FUD.

If it was you being charged with a crime, and you fudged the evidence this way in your favor, you'd be sitting in jail on a contempt of court charge. Why isn't Microsoft?

Give me a break.

Unix on the other hand... (1)

romana (14716) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019267)

actually, ppp is easier to setup when using ANY gui....
whether windows or kde or afterstep!
having said that, i noted the difference between stup on afterstep (approx 2 mins less than a win setup)
and kde (5-10 mins less)
(and none of this *(^&*^&P rebooting every step of the process, either..i didnt include the reboots in the time thing, btw!)
now, i have set up so many windows dial ups for friends who just cant do it...but they all got the kde setup i showed em..
people dont want windows, they want an easy to use system, with a great gui...
sounds like linux to me..the o/s with a CHOICE (windows != choice) of guis....

Set up connection not access Internet (1)

griffjon (14945) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019268)

Yes, but with Win3.1 (same modem, different machine) I had a lot better luck at connecting consistently, because the interface and scripting was better. On the average it takes me longer to dial in with Win98 than it did with 3.1, and requires more mousing and user input (rather than one click and it dials).

I'd rather spend 3 more minutes setting it up the first time than 1 minute extra PER DAY to connect!

Also, were the machines comparable? Win3.1 doesn't recognize memory over 64megs, which, especially if we're talking about IE, could be a factor.

I agree, however, that the modem difference is small, but probably one of a plurality of factors that dragged the Win3.1 performance down.

Geez come on... (1)

Soul Brother #1 (15266) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019269)

Er...where does it say that this is a "Linux page?"

Still, I do agree that "Your operating system sucks" is a poor way to sell Linux.

Different modems? (1)

Todd Knarr (15451) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019271)

According to the report from the Seattle Times, the Win98 system was using a 56k modem while the Win3.1 system had a 33.6k one. The Win98 system could be 25% slower than the Win3.1 system and still appear faster.

http://www.seat tletimes.com/news/technology/html98/micr_021099.ht ml [seattletimes.com]

Different modems? - But why not Win95 (1)

Isochrome (16108) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019276)

The modems do seem trivial, but they also use Win 3.1 instead of Win95 sans browser. I bet even Win 95 is faster than the bloated Win 98, which would just ruin the demonstration.

It is also interesting that they didn't demonstrate connecting to the Internet on a machine on which the OEM had chosen to pre-install Netscape.

Pity poor Micro$oft, the fashion victim (1)

Kaufmann (16976) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019277)

Thank god, someone who actually is prepared to say it. I think all the people who slate Microsoft are just a bunch of fashion victims. Most of you are just jealous of Microsoft's success.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, glad you have a sense of humour.

Oh, you weren't joking. Okay. Then you're an idiot.

"Lick a rock follow fashion, drop of a conka tree"

What?

Kick em, while they're down. Who's down again?

Can't any of you be constructive and do something good rather than critisize people all the time.........

Well, in theory I can speak only for myself, but I believe that many, if not most, of /.'ers, are hackers - 'real' hackers. Now we have a tendency to be rather constructive people - as ESR said it, we'd rather build than destroy.

Some of the countless reasons why we hate Micro$oft are: * it practices evil marketing techniques; * it's not Open Source; * their code is ridiculously losing; * their employees are known to be fornicating marketroids; * their software is impossible to properly interface; * they've managed to make the overwhelming majority of computer users work on their ripped-off system, even though it's Not Good, it crashes often and it usually becomes the expert's job to fix the frustrated lusers' computers - until it crashes again.

If this sounds harsh it's because I'm pissed and England have just lost to France.....

Well, I'm too tired to make my point completely, but nonetheless I think you can have an idea. Peace, --

This isn't that much of a blunder wr (1)

strobert (79836) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019279)

Get a f**king clue! Unless web pages are used
for the config screens, then bundling a browser
makes no difference.
Remember:
internet != web

M$ Bashing (1)

twinkie (80950) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019280)

Why not?
They're big, they're powerful, they control the welfare of puny clueless ignorant users..
Why shouldn't they be as much a target in our society as our political system, our entertainment complex, or our governmental body?

They really haven't done anything for me to be appreciative of, so I don't praise them.

They tried to comandeer html and internet standards, they've tried to control the desktop graphics routine(OpenGL is still very much alive and well, thank you!), they try to sell shoddy software, bloated office packages...

Why should we give them a break? They can afford the heckling!

Twinkie

Unix on the other hand... (1)

El (94934) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019281)

People don't want servers. People wants to play the latest and coolest computer games. Conclusion: People wants Windows!

People don't want to work. People want to feel good. Conclusion: People want to smoke crack!

Geez come on... (1)

Spamman (121464) | more than 15 years ago | (#2019282)

I always noticed that when someone wants to make there 'product' look good, they just insult the other. This is a linux page, don't point out MS flaws, instead point out Linux's high points. Saying one thing is crappier than your supported angle doesn't make anything better. Leave MS alone, if you hate them so much, ignore them.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>