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!

Justice Dept. Defends Microsoft Against Google

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the friends-in-high-places dept.

Microsoft 329

Frosty Piss writes "The Seattle PI reports that Google has complained to US antitrust officials about the hard-drive searching tool built into Windows Vista, saying that it stymies Google's similar search program. The complaint, lodged late last year, was revealed Saturday by The New York Times in a story about the Bush administration's handling of Microsoft antitrust issues. The real story, though, is not the Google complaint itself, but how the Justice Department is failing to enforce the Microsoft anti-trust decree. According to the story, Thomas Barnett, the assistant U.S. attorney general in charge of antitrust issues, sent a memo last month to state attorneys general across the nation, seeking to persuade them to reject Google's complaint."

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

google is EVIL! (2, Insightful)

wwmedia (950346) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457017)

So Google is demanding that Microsoft remove Vista's desktop search feature, a feature that other OSes already ship? If other OSes can ship it then so can Microsoft. Hell, if I'd been in charge of Microsoft, I would've been bundling Windows Desktop Search with XP for years now.

Or worse yet, Google is demanding that Microsoft bundle Google's crapware?

To hell with Google. This is the same company that made a deal with Apple to have Safari's web search box locked into Google so you can't change the default or even add secondary search providers (as if that doesn't harm competing search engines on the Mac platform), and has made deals with numerous software companies to install Google toolbar and/or desktop when installing a software package, with the option to install Google's wares pre-checked (my mom has asked me multiple times why Google toolbar keeps reappearing on her computer) and they have the nerve to complain about an OS desktop search feature? (Not to mention that Google's desktop search sucks anyway.)

Oh, and those fools cited in the article are comparing this with the Netscape case? Well, last time I checked, Microsoft is still bundling IE and not Netscape, and is being allowed to do so. So if they want to make that comparison, go right ahead. OEM's can still bundle Google Desktop if they want, just as they can Netscape (Dell is already forcing Google Desktop down its users' throats).

Google has no real case here; maybe Microsoft will be forced to add Google's Desktop Search to the Set Program Access and Defaults control panel (that's what it's called on XP, I don't know what it's called in Vista); in other words, be forced to add bloat for the sake of the invincible Google (so invincible that they need to go whining to government every chance they get), but that's about it.

Re:google is EVIL! (1, Offtopic)

packeteer (566398) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457059)

I don't really know much about the politics of this issue but i know that Google desktop sucks. It isn't worth it for me regardless of who is "good" and "evil".

Even If google is evil! (4, Insightful)

3seas (184403) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457521)

So what does google have to do with MS's search engine always running?

Even if google was evil, I'd still want to be able to turn off a search engine created by a proven anti-trust violator.

Wouldn't you?

Just because people claim google is evil is no reason to dismiss an act of a part that has been proven evil.

There must be a lot of MS supporters responding to the article, for who could miss the obviousnesss of this.

The party bringing out the fact that MS's search engine is always on is itself not an evil act. Unless you work for MS.

Re:Even If google is evil! (4, Informative)

figleaf (672550) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457637)

You can easily turn it off. There are multiple ways to turn it off. Its Windows Service you can turn it off the control panel or the search options.
If you like like the command-prompt then type 'net stop "Windows Search"

Re:Even If google is evil! (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457659)

It's not a search engine it's an indexing service. What you're complaing about is libraies providing a card catalogue. Hard drives are growing in capacity faster than bus and chip performance. This is an old solution to an old problem in a not particularly new way because of new storage media capacity. It also happens to be overdue.

Re:google is EVIL! (5, Informative)

Phil246 (803464) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457065)

rtfa.
Google is asking that microsoft provide a way for the user to disable it, so that other competing desktop search programs dont battle each other for system resources and ultimately both slow the computer down.
They arent asking for it to be removed outright

Re:google is EVIL! (5, Informative)

Deviate_X (578495) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457217)

This is not true. You can disable built in indexing by unchecking indexing of the indexing locations (i.e. Outlook or the Hardrives) or by disabling the indexer in windows services list.

Re:google is EVIL! (0, Troll)

krunk4ever (856261) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457267)

I'd mod you up if I had points.

Re:google is EVIL! (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457295)

from TFA :

Google has asked the court overseeing the antitrust decree to order Microsoft to redesign Vista to enable users to turn off its built-in desktop search program so that competing programs could function better, officials said.
from the other article:

There is no simple way for PC users to turn off Windows Vista's built-in desktop search program. Google has asked the court overseeing Microsoft's antitrust compliance to require the company to let users turn off the built-in search program, the New York Times reported.
Granted there are *ways* to do it but they arent necessarily simple for clueless users

Re:google is EVIL! (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457395)

Yes, going to services under the computer management snap-in, via right click computer -> manage, and deselecting automatic startup is far too complicated. If only there was some method to host images on the internet, so one might create a kind of screenshot tutorial this whole problem might have been avoided. Alas, best to just move eveyone to Slackware. Shut up, you're a dumbass.

Re:google is EVIL! (4, Informative)

Deviate_X (578495) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457507)

There is already an API to the Service Control Manager API [live.com] for google or anyone else to use.

Re:google is EVIL! (3, Informative)

NSIM (953498) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457315)

Google is asking that microsoft provide a way for the user to disable it, so that other competing desktop search programs dont battle each other for system resources and ultimately both slow the computer down. They arent asking for it to be removed outright
If that's all Google wants, then they could have saved themselves a lot legal fees. Windows Search is a service, it can be stop, started, disabled altogether from the Services management applet, or the command line, and there would be no problem in stopping it as part of an install for Google Desktop Search.

Re:google is EVIL! (2, Insightful)

mabinogi (74033) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457075)

The problem is not that Microsoft include a search tool.
The problem is that there's no way to turn it off, and running Google desktop simultaneously therefore causes the computer to slow down enough that no one would want to install Google Desktop.

There should never be anything wrong with including something with the operating system, it's preventing competitors from competing on merit that's the problem - even the Netscape issue was never purely about the bundling of IE - as much as the overly simplistic coverage often implied that - it was about Microsoft using the threat of cutting off OEMs who installed Netscape as an alternative.

This is a fair bit weaker, as it's more of a technical issue than anything else, though it bugs me that Vista's indexer can't be turned off regardless of whether or not it affects Google Desktop.

You can find out how to turn it off (5, Funny)

Dude McDude (938516) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457147)

by doing a Google search.

What do you mean you can't turn it off? (2, Insightful)

anss123 (985305) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457261)

If you disable the indexing service it's by all means off or are you referring to the search box itself? It is not possible to remove the search box as far as I know, but if the index service is off it will only search the hard drive the old fashioned way (the Win95 way).

Re:What do you mean you can't turn it off? (1)

mabinogi (74033) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457789)

I only repeated what was said in TFA.
I have not used Vista myself.

Re:google is EVIL! (2, Informative)

frinsore (153020) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457087)

Some corrections to the parent:

1. Google doesn't care if the search tool is bundled or not, they just want MS to expose some why to turn the thing off. Having both indexing tools running at the same time hinders performance more then having just one run. Given that you can't disable Vista's most people will opt for disabling Google's. Hence anti-competitive.

2. It's similar to IE & Netscape because the end user / OEM can't remove IE from a machine and replace it with an alternative.

3. Everything else you said? Google toolbar is off topic (for what it's worth I'm sick of applications trying to install it too). Also if Google makes any headway with their talks with Microsoft Vista will actually have less bloat then before as the file indexing service can be disabled.

Re:google is EVIL! (0, Offtopic)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457165)

Google doesn't care if the search tool is bundled or not, they just want MS to expose some why to turn the thing off.

This brings to mind disk compression back in the '90s. Third party tools emerged to fill the gaps in Windows, then Microsoft filled those gaps and the suppliers of those products got a little bit upset. I know that there was an IP issue about that specific example which makes it different so maybe its a bad example.

To take an extreme position, what if google has an alternate kernel [ubuntu.com] which they think people should run. Should Microsoft be made to provide a way to turn off the normal kernel?

The IP Issue Was With Stacker (1)

NeverVotedBush (1041088) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457777)

Which Stacker claimed Microsoft just stole their code and built it into Windows. If I remember correctly, Stacker showed where code was copied directly, won the case, collected damages from Microsoft, and sold their technology to Microsoft.

Microsoft always has been evil and now Google has turned evil as well. I'm switching away from using Google as a search engine. The are doing too much data mining, profiling, etc. I switched to Linux a long time ago.

Re:google is EVIL! (1)

Dude McDude (938516) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457237)

Given that you can't disable Vista's most people will opt for disabling Google's.
Type "services" into the search bar on the start menu, hit the return key, click continue at the UAC prompt, find the service called "Windows Search", right-click>properties, change startup type to "Disabled".

Problem solved.

Re:google is EVIL! (1)

mabinogi (74033) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457803)

wait, you get a UAC prompt for merely _searching_ for a control panel item?

Re:google is EVIL! (2, Insightful)

skoaldipper (752281) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457309)

Anti competitive? What's next? Norton sues Microsoft because their AV may occasionally cause Virtual Memory error messages? Hey, let's just disassemble the OS entirely piece by piece by lawsuits, one step at a time (like Johnny Cash says), and put it all back together with 3rd party craplets.

YES! (1, Interesting)

mangu (126918) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457557)

Hey, let's just disassemble the OS entirely piece by piece

You mean, like this? [ubuntu.com] I'm all for it.


and put it all back together with 3rd party

Like this? [kubuntu.org] Sounds good, let's do it!

Re:google is EVIL! (0, Offtopic)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457473)

1. Google doesn't care if the search tool is bundled or not, they just want MS to expose some why to turn the thing off. Having both indexing tools running at the same time hinders performance more then having just one run. Given that you can't disable Vista's most people will opt for disabling Google's. Hence anti-competitive.

2. It's similar to IE & Netscape because the end user / OEM can't remove IE from a machine and replace it with an alternative.

3. Everything else you said? Google toolbar is off topic (for what it's worth I'm sick of applications trying to install it too). Also if Google makes any headway with their talks with Microsoft Vista will actually have less bloat then before as the file indexing service can be disabled.


*I* can turn off indexing in XP/Vista. Are Google more stupid than me? ... Or is Google tyring to sue their way back into business?

Yea.. oh shit, Windows has 90% market share, anything they do kills some competition! Anti-trust blah blah!

Well figure that out: anything Microsoft improves in Windows will kill some business.

You're running a site that let's people download YouTube videos? YouTube adds a simple "download" button: it kills your business. Should you sue YouTube, "hey YouTube owns majority market share on video views, dump that download button". NO, you morons. It's their right to improve their product.

It's not fair, it's just how things are. Stand up, clean the wound, rethink your stategy.

Re:google is EVIL! (1, Informative)

jx100 (453615) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457107)

Have you read this article? The complaint is about the fact that you can't even turn off the Windows Live search, causing any competitor's search software (e.g. Google's) to slow down significantly. Apparently having two things scan a HDD at the same time causes performance problems.

This is a valid complaint!

The entire problem with having MS as a monopoly is the fact that they leverage that monopoly illegally to support their software and trounce on others'. This is a fine example of how to do that, as it makes their stuff look way better than the competition when it doesn't have to.

Re:google is EVIL! (2, Informative)

TheNetAvenger (624455) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457451)

The complaint is about the fact that you can't even turn off the Windows Live search, causing any competitor's search software (e.g. Google's) to slow down significantly.

Are people really this retarded, cause I see this repeated?

Click Control Panel - Indexing - Uncheck the locations it searches.

Method two: Set the Windows Search to 'Manual' or 'Disabled'.

Both of these are EASY for the user, and something EVEN a Google Installer could do automatically for a user if the user chose to do it.

This is not Something that can't be turned off and doesn't run all the time if you don't want it to.

I can't believe people read the Google crap and are so retarded they think it is accurate or even a legitimate complaint.

Re:google is EVIL! (3, Insightful)

nanosquid (1074949) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457131)

So Google is demanding that Microsoft remove Vista's desktop search feature a feature that other OSes already ship? If other OSes can ship it then so can Microsoft.

No, they are demanding that Microsoft lets people disable it. You know, like you can do on any other operating system.

Hell, if I'd been in charge of Microsoft, I would've been bundling Windows Desktop Search with XP for years now.

In fact, I think it's perfectly reasonable to demand that no operating system "bundle" desktop search, web browsers, or other software like that and instead give users the option to pick and choose what components they like.

Re:google is EVIL! (3, Insightful)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457377)

In fact, I think it's perfectly reasonable to demand that no operating system "bundle" desktop search, web browsers, or other software like that

I don't.

I believe operating systems should have had effective file management, including searches, version control, and virtual folders more than a decade ago.

The only reason an ecosystem of third-party utilities has sprung up is because Microsoft has been so sluggish at improving their OS. Let's face it, database-like file management was available in systems like BEOS since 1995. Unfortunately, now a wealth of third-party fixes to Windows limitations has sprung up, and MS can't implement what should be basic functionality without running foul of antitrust issues.

It's their own laxity that's brought them this trap, so I have little sympathy.

Re:google is EVIL! (1)

drsmithy (35869) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457661)

In fact, I think it's perfectly reasonable to demand that no operating system "bundle" desktop search, web browsers, or other software like that and instead give users the option to pick and choose what components they like.

And what about all those people who haven't the knowledge, experience, time or interest to do so ? You know, the 99% of the market that Microsoft and Apple are selling to ?

Microsoft aren't selling you a garage full of parts and a greasy service manual, they're selling you a car. If you'd rather assemble all those parts yourself, pick one of the *multiple* operating systems out there that let you go down that path - don't make the rest of us suffer because you're so fucking anal you care whether or not you can uninstall a freaking web browser, rather than just not use it.

I remember the days of having to spend days/weeks/months assembling and tweaking a semi-working system from a plethora of just-different-enough-to-be-annoying, barely interoperable components and I have zero interest in reliving the experience, just because some 14 year old Gentoo nerd who thinks compiling everything from source is so cool, would like the rest of the world to experience his l33tness.

Re:google is EVIL! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457157)

be forced to add bloat

LOL, being able to turn off the file indexer that grinds the harddrives day in and day out is adding bloat?

Can I have some of what you're smoking?

Re:google is EVIL! (2, Insightful)

Deviate_X (578495) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457187)


Or worse yet, Google is demanding that Microsoft bundle Google's crapware? [slashdot.org]

The worst thing about google software is that they distrubute it like malware, in the sense that its hidden in other software like Adobe Reader, Java, and Firefox. If your not careful you can end up with goodle toolbars, sidebars and whatnot installed on your machine.

Re:google is EVIL! (2, Interesting)

speaker of the truth (1112181) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457209)

If other OSes can ship it then so can Microsoft.
Correction: If other OS publishers who've been convicted of abusing their monopoly can do it, then so can Microsoft.

For convicted monopolists, there are different rules then for non-convicted monopolists and everyone else. This is partly because you can't throw a monopoly into jail, and partly to keep the market fair and free (if you want a totally free market then we have to get rid of copyright laws, therefore most companies don't want a completely free market and as such rules coming into the market must exist).

So no, just because others can do it doesn't mean Microsoft should be able to do it. Microsoft made the choice to break the law and abuse its monopoly, and it was caught. Now it should suffer the consequences, which is having to work under rules that no-one else the market is followed to force.

Unfortunately this won't happen as the Bush administration is pro-Big Business and pro-monopoly abuses. This is why under the Democrats Microsoft was convicted and under the Republicans they have not been punished. The swap of power was quite unfortunately timed for software developers.

This is the same company that made a deal with Apple to have Safari's web search box locked into Google so you can't change the default or even add secondary search providers (as if that doesn't harm competing search engines on the Mac platform),
*sigh*

Its shit like this that really makes me want to leave Google. Does anyone know of any comparative services from companies that aren't as evil? I use:
* Gmail (so I'd like a web-based interface that's as rich as this)
* Google Personalized Homepage
* Google Docs

I might not switch, but I'm certainly considering it as more and more of Google's shit comes to light.

Re:google is EVIL! (3, Funny)

wwmedia (950346) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457249)

I dont know whats worse:

one one hand Microsofts monopoly on THEIR operating system!

on the other hand Google's attempts to have their spyware installed on every computer so they can collect even more data!

kinda ironic that microsofts monopoly is making SPYWARE run slow, lol

JOB ADVICE FOR SLASHDOTTERS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457483)

Job board for geeks [mcnewyork.com] !!!

Re:google is EVIL! (2, Funny)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457623)

Your post, enhanced via Slashdot vision TM

I dont know whats worse:

blah blah blah blah Microsoft blah blah blah blah blah !

blah blah blah Google blah blah blah blah blah blah !


Shoot, I'll go for the Microsoft one, it must be the worse one.

Re:google is EVIL! (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457553)

google is EVIL! [...] To hell with Google.

Dude, you were modded troll and overrated? What the hell did you expect! You just the equivalent of walking to a bunch of girls screaming "Those jeans make your ass fat!"

How could groupthink see through a slogan? It's hard, man! A slogan must be unbrekable, it's like a law. Like Moore's law. Wait, Moore's law isn't really a law too? Screw that, I chose to believe otherwise.

Microsoft is evil since Bill Gates looks like a geek. Google has color balls and funny logos on holidays, Steve Jobs talks and looks cool. While Steve Ballmer is fat and screams "developers, developers" running around as a monkey.

And since the world is ultimately very very simple to a Slashdotter, no further context to anything happening in IT is needed. Why should I think hard about whether Google is right or not in this particular case? Just recall the rules of thumb: Steve Ballmer is a loser, and Google has color balls and "do not evil" slogan.

Final judgement: Microsoft are the bad guys, Google are the good guys. Feed me the next news article, I'm hungry to try that again!

Re:google is EVIL! (3, Insightful)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457727)

"So Google is demanding that Microsoft remove Vista's desktop search feature, a feature that other OSes already ship? If other OSes can ship it then so can Microsoft. Hell, if I'd been in charge of Microsoft, I would've been bundling Windows Desktop Search with XP for years now."

Since Microsoft has an effective monopoly on operating systems for commodity hardware, they have to play under different, more restrictive, rules. If Apple locks down Safari search it affects about 10 percent of users, 50% of which use Firefox, anyway. When Microsoft introduces new features into Windows, if affects 90+% of the market.

It's also illegal for Microsoft to leverage its monopoly on desktop OSs to gain a monopoly on other existing markets (like web browsers, office suites, corporate e-mail, file and print servers, anti-virus and, yes, desktop search). And, mind you, since being judged guilty of extending their monopoly in the anti-trust lawsuit, they _have_ such restrictions in place and the DoJ _should_ be doing something about it.

While it may look obvious they should be able to extend their products at will, it should be noted that by doing so in an unrestrained way, they can harm the market in very severe ways.

Of course, if all things continue the way they do, Google's time under the microscope is coming, but that doesn't mean Microsoft can do whatever it wants.

Re:google is EVIL! (1)

ArcLinux (1042476) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457795)

Ya Dumb ass.... Google wants microsoft to enable enable the ability to _TURN_ _OFF_ the search engine. Just like any other OS. The ability to turn a specific option off. This rolls around to the same argument of not being able to uninstall or disable IE.

Re:google is EVIL! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457809)

Yes, because the standard should be decided by some 70 yearold codger evaluating arguments by other people none of whom know where of they speak, and not say Computer Structure and Organization texts, and/or the results of studies about people using computers.

The remedy for Microsofts monopoly isn't to get lawyers writing software by statute. Which is by far the fucking stupidest idea in the last couple decades. It's to void contracts, break up the company, maybe take some patents and or trademarks and put them in the public domain early. The problem with breaking up the company is an OS is properly a collection of consistant methods users would find useful.

General modern computers should render all common data formats to the user. Audio, video, text. Perform network detection, configuration, browsin across any common network flavors and services. This probably includes Doc and PDF as well; certainly read for free, maybe not write. As well as somewhat sophisticated image editing, basic video editing, and smart indexing services. In addition to more familiar self-description, device, and software management.

A lot of this is unfairly encumbered. Were I king of the world, my remedy would have been to take the doc xls specifications and trademarks, and develop the specifications like RFCs and anyone who conforms to the specifications or reaches certain benchmarks can apply and pay for an endorsement and the right to use the trademark in their software, promotion and packaging.

What is it people are supposed to have a new right to? Affordable computing, enriching us all, or software made by lawyers who can't write their own letters?

Thomas O. Barnett (5, Interesting)

Serious Callers Only (1022605) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457023)

From the article :

The official, Thomas O. Barnett, an assistant attorney general, had until 2004 been a top antitrust partner at the law firm that has represented Microsoft in several antitrust disputes. At the firm, Justice Department officials said, he never worked on Microsoft matters. Still, for more than a year after arriving at the department, he removed himself from the case because of conflict of interest issues. Ethics lawyers ultimately cleared his involvement.

Seems strange that they'd hire someone from a law firm associated with Microsoft for the Justice Dept. and then put him in a position to comment on an MS case.

Re:Thomas O. Barnett (5, Informative)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457245)

Why does it seem "strange" that Bush would appoint a Microsoft lawyer to the Justice Department that was supposed to stop Microsoft from abusing its monopoly, after the Clinton Justice Department got the court to declare Microsoft an abusive monopoly that had to be stopped? "Unjust", maybe, but how strange is it for a Justice Department that's got its chief, Attorney General Gonzales, lying to Congress every day to coverup Bush's political purges and cronyism? Not to mention all the Patriot Act travesties Bush's DoJ has committed. Haven't you heard what a zoo they're running over there?

What you might not have heard is that Jack Abramoff, the crooked lobbyist who helped build Bush's crooked Republican Congress, got his start lobbying out of Bill Gates' father's law firm, Preston Gates. It would seem strange if Microsoft weren't getting the benefit of the crooked system it's helped train and build.

Re:Thomas O. Barnett (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457479)

Isn't "crooked lobbyist" redundant?

Re:Thomas O. Barnett (5, Insightful)

andydread (758754) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457631)

How the hell is this strange. This is the Bush administration.
They put oil executives in charge of the EPA
they put antitrust defence lawyers in the Justice Dept.
They put drug company executives in charge of the FDA

I mean really now. Take a look here. http://www.iraqtimeline.com/bushcab.html [iraqtimeline.com]

And maybe someone can lookup these clowns and see what their prior industry affiliation is http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/cabinet.html [whitehouse.gov]

Re:Thomas O. Barnett's colleague (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457731)

Aspartame.

We have been here before.

Great. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457041)

F.U. Google. Here's the thing. I don't want to have to install grep or kin on my computer. I don't want to install google's desktop search. Thanks for Gmail, I even like the themes for personal search pages. Get working on a web based quicken stomper, and a better picasa for v3. But stfu about your tool bar. Stfu about your desktop search. I'm glad some people want them, awesome for google awesome for the users. From me, as a friend, cram it. Don't make me dig out a computer structure and organization text which in it's necessary and glorious vagueness describes why Microsoft is right and they are wrong here.

Grep against Google (5, Funny)

Esteanil (710082) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457081)

On another note, Google has ordered all Open Source programmers in their employ to issue weekly "patches" that include disabling grep from all linux/BSD distros.
"Grep is an evil command, and as a company that will do no evil, we must have evil commands removed." said a Google spokesman, before returning to his weekend pasttime of clubbing baby seals.

apt-get remove grep (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457271)

apt-get remove grep : Problem solved!

That's what they're complaining about. It can't be turned off/disabled to allow other competing products to do the same job.

Re:Grep against Google (1)

alx5000 (896642) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457393)

Yeah... except we're talking about updatedb running constantly on the background, instead of grep.

Re:Grep against Google (1)

figleaf (672550) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457467)

Google will next complain about Vista's Photo Viewer application
Then the calculator application
Then Wordpad ....

Re:Grep against Google (2, Informative)

hachete (473378) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457511)

no.

1. The indexer runs in the background continuously

2. No API to turn it off.

Why is slashdot full of MS trolls today? I notice they're avoiding the question of why the US govt is now part of MS's out-reach program.

Re:Grep against Google (4, Informative)

figleaf (672550) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457533)

1. The indexer only runs when no other applications are using system resources.

2. Its a Windows Service you can easily turn it off.

Why is slashdot full of trolls today?

Just goes to show what I always say... (5, Funny)

F34nor (321515) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457169)

Its cheeper to buy a congressman than to fix your business model.

Re:Just goes to show what I always say... (1)

gtall (79522) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457233)

Errr...you do understand the justice department is not under the legistlative, right? M$ bought a piece of the executive branch, the buyouts of the legistlative branch come under a completely different slush fund.

Gerry

Euphamism (1, Redundant)

JamesRose (1062530) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457175)

Google saying we want it for the search to be able to be disabled is b/s. I hate it when programs do this to my files, I install VLC because it plays everything, but I only want to use it for my files that wmp can't play, I skip through the installation like anyone else and before I know it all my files are opening in the wrong bloody application and i have to go and change all my settings in a menu in a menu in a menu, which most users would not find.

The same thing will blatantly happen here, google will install this crap, you click through the install like usual and your windows search is gone. I DONT WANT YOU DECIDING TO STOP OTHER PROGRAMS RUNNING ON MY MACHINE. Software companies never understand this, they just walk into your system and shut down competing system like they have sort of right, bullshit. Windows doesn't let desktop search shut down, and good for them, its not like they are disabling other search engines, they just make sure you always have their software waiting for you. Google is getting more evil by the day and I'll have no part of it. The only way I would support this, is if you can disable the search engine in the control panel, not let programs disable, let YOU PHYSICALLY GO THERE AND CHOOSE TO DISABLE IT IF YOU ARE BOTHERED.

Google will keep pushing untill it gets the reputation of microsoft, will do a little good and people will embrace them because we want to like them, well I'm not gonna use any of their desktop/search bar/downloadable software at all.

Re:Euphamism (2, Informative)

Dogers (446369) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457215)

You don't need to go through the file associations menu to change what apps open what.

Right click a file of the type you want to change, choose Open With and make sure you tick Always Open Files of This Type With.. option

Programs will always steal the file types, because they play them and you specifically chose to download and install it, therefore you want it to work.

Simpler way would be to stop clicking blindly through an installation, that's a good way to get crap on your system you don't want or need.. ;)

sounds like linux would be right for you (1)

biscon (942763) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457219)

You should really give linux a try mate. Programs won't pull that shit on you. Another benefit is that you get rid of all the "control centers", oh why must every piece of windows software install its own huge and bloated "center/agent" running in the tray?.

on the other hand, you're one of those chaps who can't standing reading more than 2 lines of text on the screen, perhaps you
wouldn't like linux.

Re:sounds like linux would be right for you (1)

JamesRose (1062530) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457239)

I do run linux as a secondary boot (ubuntu) but unfortunately, there are certain things I need windows for, like when other people want to use my computer, some of the people I know are technophobes, and would never make the switch if not because of the differences, because of being scared of the change. Having said that, I do kinda like windows for its sleek interface (on face value) and who doesn't want to play solitare for hours ;).

In other words, While I have to have this operating system around (and I've ended up using it quite a bit) I'm gonna bitch about it)

sounds like you're talking out of your ass (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457255)

oh why must every piece of windows software install its own huge and bloated "center/agent" running in the tray?.
They don't. Stop talking shit sir/madam.

Re:Euphamism (2, Insightful)

victorhooi (830021) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457223)

Err, I'm sorry to say this, but you Sir, are an a*sehat...

Google is asking for a way to disable the Windows Indexer, which currently can't be disabled. And having *two* indexers running at the same time introduces a

And guess what, if somebody is actually installing Google Desktop, gee, gosh...maybe it's cause they want to actually try Google Desktop, rather than run it and the Windows Indexer at the same time. It's called making life easier for your users - you run the Google Desktop installer, and gosh, it installs it for you and turns off the in-built Windows Indexer. You un-install Google Desktop, and it turns the Windows Indexer back on. Not that hard, mate, really...(and yes, gee golly gosh, you can script something like that in an uninstaller).

Seriously, what is it with Google bashing lately, anyway? Everybody's making it sound like Google is seeding some kind of spyware that disables Windows Search (which, not that relevant, but I actually dislike it. I don't like Google Desktop either, or Spotlight...still haven't found the perfect search, and Beagle is a hog...lol), no, they're letting users who choose to install Google Desktop disable it so it doesn't slow your computer to a crawl.

Victor

PS: And for the record, it's spelt *euphemism*.

Re:Euphamism (1)

JamesRose (1062530) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457269)

I'm not gonna assume thatm if I end up with google search bar (why would i want this with a search bar box in my FF anyway?) while installing completely unrelated software, that google is going to do the honourable thing and not suspend it by default.

As a second thought, have you considered the other programs that may leap on the ability to disable it? It wouldn't be exclusive to google.

A*rsehat

Ps: I'm a bad speller ;)

Re:Euphamism (2, Funny)

Negatyfus (602326) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457459)

Uhm, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but in true Slashdot fashion, you've totally misunderstood what the article is about. I would like to add that I came to this conclusion without actually reading the article myself, of course.

Re:Euphamism (1)

JamesRose (1062530) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457669)

Yes, I read the story, but if you are saying that in reply to a comment three/four below the level of a direct responce, the likely hood is the conversation has progressed. I hate to be the one to tell you this, but in true slashdot fashion, you've totally misunderstood what conversation is about.

Re:Euphamism (1)

Negatyfus (602326) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457739)

No, I know what it's about. Star Wars in Latin, right?

Re:Euphamism (1)

JamesRose (1062530) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457747)

Oh great, now the rest of the world needs to come up with a new code to confuse you. :P

Yeah, but at least he doesn't have supergulibility (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457321)

I guess this must be a fake then [imageshack.us]

As any idiot can plainly see from this image, Google is completely full of shit. If only windows provided someway to handle this manually or automatically. I wonder if I were a super intelligent monkey with an electronic hat, would I be able to change the startup option from automatic to disable, or manual. No. It's entirely too difficult, even for a supermonkey.

Re:Euphamism (1)

balthan (130165) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457797)

And having *two* indexers running at the same time introduces a
 
...bug that deletes words from Slahdot posts?

Excellent Point...Re:Euphamism (0)

JagsLive (1106379) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457371)

you make excellent point. I totally agree. Its about time to DUMP Google.

Re:Euphamism (1)

oogoliegoogolie (635356) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457429)

M$, once again, forces you to use their application and limits your choice by hiding any method of disabling it, yet you're complaining about Google not liking this?? MS knows that most users just don't care about computer politics and use what is given to them. MS Messenger is a good example-until v8 it was crap-you couldn't even send offline messages-yet it's been the most popular for years. Why? Because it's bundled with the OS.

skip through the installation like anyone else and before I know it all my files are opening in the wrong bloody application
If you don't bother to look at what the install is doing, then it's your fault when crap gets installed. Really, how much effort does it take to pay attention to the details of an install wizard, especially today, when almost everything wants you to install "Happy Toolbar" or change your home page. Yes, it is annoying when companies do this, and I wish they didn't but they do and wont stop. I and many others learned my lesson not to trust the installer waay back in the late 90's when installing Real Audio (was it v3 or v4?)

BTW, the other day I installed Windows Live Messenger, and during the install if you don't pay attention and uncheck some options, M$ will change IE's home page, make Windows Live Search your default search, install the MS toolbar.

Re:Euphamism (1)

paganizer (566360) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457509)

I can't really think of when the last time I defended microsoft, but.. all you have to do is open the services CP and disable indexing. whats so hard about that?
I am, of course, basing this post on non-vista operating systems; if you use vista, you deserve whatever happens to you. "it came with my computer" is no better an excuse than "I was just following orders".

Re:Euphamism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457679)

MS Messenger is a good example-until v8 it was crap-you couldn't even send offline messages
I agree that Microsoft has a history of releasing crappy software, but that really isn't a good example. Reason: Sending offline messages is not so much a software feature as it is a service feature (it requires offline storage).

Re:Euphamism (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457481)

Arrgghh!! If only I had a nickel for every Microsoft Astroturfer and Sockpuppet on this thread, I could buy my own f*&^king Justice Department!

mod Down (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457185)

Google should buy some politicians (1, Troll)

hachete (473378) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457227)

Did anyone actually *read* the NY times article? *rolls eyes* this truly is a dazzlingly brilliant strategy for Microsoft. Legal problems with Big Gov? Insert your own people into the process ... then everything comes up smelling of roses!!!

Rule of the people by the people for the people? This is more like rule of the people by big govt for big govt.

So? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457235)

All this shows it that Microsoft paid more for their politicians than Google did.

Re:So? (2, Funny)

JamesRose (1062530) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457373)

Shouldn't've used froogle.

Re:So? (2, Insightful)

mh1997 (1065630) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457665)

All this shows it that Microsoft paid more for their politicians than Google did.

Actually, all this shows is that Microsoft should have paid for their politicians a couple years ago, then there would have been no anti-trust case at all.

If the government really believed that Microsoft was a monopoly and doing evil, then why, when dealing with the government, do all documents have to be in Microsoft Office format? The US Government is large enough that if it switched to any other software, Microsoft's domination of the market would be severely cut.

Instead of fixing the "problem" without a lawsuit or legislation, politicians punished Microsoft for committing the greatest sin in politics - not paying off congress to the level that congress thought was required.

Nothing less from Zonk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457299)

A most misleading summary if there ever was one. Perhaps a button should be added to the site called "flog Zonk" that people can click when the summary is misleading. Then everytime enough people click it, Zonk gets flogged IRL in front of webcam for all slashdot to watch. Perhaps that'll make him learn. I actually kind of doubt it, but at least it will be entertaining.

fsck em both (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457325)

the current powers that be in washington just proved microsoft is a government enforced oligarchy...

google's desktop seems to be a piece of crap spyware according to popular opinion but i will never know since i do not use ms windows...

I'm a pretty paranoid guy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457339)

..paranoid schizophrenic to be exact.

I was OK with Ballmer and McCain. I weathered the wiretapping and video
face recognitions. I had a glass of tea over the IRAQ war conspiracies.

If you mix Microsoft with the Bush administration I will commit MYSELF.

Time to Dump Google... (1)

JagsLive (1106379) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457341)

Friends,

google is getting evil by day & night and its about Time to Dump google...

Re:Time to Dump Google... (1)

figleaf (672550) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457439)

This puts Real and Google in the same bucket.
Both have Real player and Google Desktop are crap programs and the companies are using the legal system to promote their applications.

Re:Time to Dump Google... (1)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457613)

Of course Google is evil. They're publicly traded.

Something Important is missing here.... (2)

3seas (184403) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457369)

... like CONSUMER CHOICE!

Consumers/buyers are the ones with the loudest voice, they are the ones the politicians are really supposed to listen to, but if the information that allows the consumer to check it out for themselves and express their choice and concerns, is kept confidential and away from the consumer then there is one question to ask: Why?

What is it that Microsofts search engine is looking for that it is always running and why is the initial political response backing this?

Sidebar:
IS there some connection to spying on the public, which in this case would be the public even outside of the US?
If it is then I suspect, due to the easy to hypothisize of the 6 billion or so people in the world, it is some fraction of 1 percent that are in positions of warmongering and in general causing problems that otherwise do not exist. If it is for spying then that a lot of funding that could be better spent fixing real problems and removing the excuses of these major wrong doers.
End of sidebar:

Back to the MS search engine. Why is it always on?

Re:Something Important is missing here.... (2, Informative)

JamesRose (1062530) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457495)

It indexes your files, firstly, to do correctly, and without slowinng you r computer alot that takes a long time, secondly while you are using your computer you are modifying files, when you modify them, they need re-indexing. If really necessary ctrl+alt+del, find the process, shut it down, its no vital, but that's not a permanent solution.

Re:Something Important is missing here.... (1)

3seas (184403) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457701)

Yes it is much faster to send an existing index of files info over the net than to send on the fly generated directory listings. Likewise it is less obvious too, if sending to a party that is not authorized.

Indexing and search are?

A) The same

B) Different

c) both A & B

It's not a bug, its a feature.... it's not a search, its an indexing. Trust us, we are the MSNSA.

Deadlock (1)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457431)

The US government would rather one US company had a monopoly over the desktop than have a foreign company have more market share.

Even though Apple and Google are both also US companies that would thrive with a less powerful Microsoft.

A lot easier for the security services if the major player is a US company. Easier to get tools to bypass encryption etc..

Netscape, Part Duce (0, Troll)

Jerry (6400) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457433)

An oh, so familiar strategy -- bundle a product similar to your competitor's, or, roll it into the kernel and then claim it can't be removed without damaging the kernel.

I think this establishment of a Government-Microsoft cabal is the last straw. Bush has definitely replaced Carter was the worst President of the modern era, if not in the history of the US.

Re:Netscape, Part Duce (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457491)

Bush has definitely replaced Carter was the worst President of the modern era, if not in the history of the US.

Allow me to quote Ralphie Wiggum here:

"That's unpossible!"

Carter was such a terrible president that the only way he could be surpassed as the worst president would be if some future president were to cause the complete destruction of the space time continuum. And maybe not even then.

Re:Netscape, Part Duce (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457497)

what about nixon?

These guys are really corrupt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457441)

There is going to be a non-confidence vote for AG Gonzales tomorrow.

WASHINGTON, June 8 (UPI) -- Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., Friday announced a date has been set for a no-confidence vote in the Senate on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Schumer said the vote would be held Monday, The Hill reported Friday.

"If all senators who have actually lost confidence in Attorney General Gonzales voted their conscience, this vote would be unanimous," said Schumer.

However, The Hill reported, Schumer said he expects President George W. Bush to pressure Republican senators to vote against the measure.

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/06/08/s enate_sets_gonzales_noconfidence_vote/4212/ [upi.com]

The final straw was the firing of nine US attorneys. They all seem to have been fired because they pissed off the Republicans. They were either investigating criminal wrongdoing by Republican politicians or they refused to bring (in their opinion unwarrented) action against Democrats. Although the President has the right to hire and fire the attorneys, it is corrupt for the government to interfere in ongoing investigations.

I don't know whats more disturbing (2, Insightful)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457499)

Google lying to push their desktop search with its close to the bone privacy policies or the way that most people so far have just taken whatever Google say about their major competitor as being fact. I know this is Slashdot but I would expect a supposedly clued up technical audience to be aware of how easy it is to disable windows search in Vista. Whats next? Will Google want Yahoo messenger disabled as well because it's a bit of a resource hog and that might impact on Google desktop search performance?

Re:I don't know whats more disturbing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19457689)

I would expect a supposedly clued up technical audience to be aware of how easy it is to disable windows search in Vista

Say how for informative mod and gratefulness of all Vista's users. ;)

hmm (3, Insightful)

um... Lucas (13147) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457523)

Without having read the article (sorry, i haven't had coffee yet), i have to say, I'm with Microsoft on this one. I can definetly see the anti-competitiveness of grafting a web browser or media player into the operating system, BUT for google to complain that the operating system includes a means of searching for files on the computer it's running on... that seems a bit babyish. Am I missing something? Should i read the original article?

Re:hmm (3, Interesting)

keithjr (1091829) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457657)

You're not missing much. This is the argument that MS would use if this case were to ever come to fruition. It's the same way they dodged the Netscape suit: claim that the product being complained about is actually an integral part of the functionality of an operating system in today's computing model.

This worked with Netscape thanks to the sharp rise in internet use by the common user when IE started coming bundled with Windows. At that point, a web browser was indeed an intergral part of the OS and thus not criminal for the OS provider to provide one. This is the line of reasoning that can be leavied against Google: search functions are now necessary for day-to-day use.

But then again, it will never come to that, thanks to Microsoft's clever investments in government.

Re:hmm (1)

elchuppa (602031) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457807)

The article states that Google is not complaining that MS is bundling desktop search. They are complaining that it's difficult to turn off and therefore installing another desktop search utility severely affects computer performance due to double indexing.

Lesser of two evils...? (2, Insightful)

jihadist (1088389) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457581)

Wait, which is the lesser of two evils here? Google are privacy-destroying voyeurs, and Microsoft are omnivore IP hogs. I'd like to find the lesser of two evils. Except, when I look into it, all they're doing is advancing market share so their shareholders are happy and everyone from the CEO to the janitor goes home richer. So are the people behind Microsoft and Google the evil? Or is it the system?

Why can't we admit that capitalism and good design are oppositional forces, and that we the people through our greed defeat ourselves?

Why are they not complaining about OSX? (2, Interesting)

QunaLop (861366) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457629)

I know they don't provide an indexer for osx, but the indexer in osx was conceived after ms's vista (longhorn i suppose)'s i think google is way off base to begin with, and not saying anything about osx really cuts the legs out of the argument imho.

Rethink the "A.G.'s were Fired by GWB" Story (1, Insightful)

mpapet (761907) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457667)

Because this story is a good example of why the current administration is under such political heat for the often repeated and horribly mislabled "firing of Attorneys General."

It had only a little to do with the fact that the Administration couldn't come up with a consistent story. It had nothing to do with firings.

The current administration uses the office of the Attorney General as another way to pay back campaign contributors and intentionally alter the course of close district elections where Republicans aren't the clear leader. They also altered the rules such that over 400 people from the administration can communicate with the Justice Department regarding their work. (Versus the four that were allowed to do the same thing in the previous administration)

While there is still good reason to dislike Microsoft, the last appearance of any sense of Rule of Law as gone quietly into history. There is no power balancing provided by the Attorney General. The fox is now guarding the hen house. Microsoft is mere plankton compared to what the big fish have done to this country in about 20 years.

Still, it's not like it's a new idea (1)

MrZaius (321037) | more than 7 years ago | (#19457745)

The other two increasingly mainstream OSes both implement this. Mac OS X and current versions of both GNOME and KDE versions of Ubuntu ship with desktop search-like applications. In purely practical terms, it seems unreasonable to suggest that Microsoft can't do the same just because a third party happens to be selling similar software for their OS. That said, I'm not familiar with the language of the antitrust ruling, and I am a bit alarmed by the partiality shown by the Department of Justice.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?