MS may be fined 2.5m Euros Daily

[Timber Loftis]

I have never liked Apples. And, back in the day, Apple was the most non-innovative POS company one could imagine. It took a kick in the rear from MS and others to get it going at all. As for all the problems with MS, I switched to Mozilla and a good firewall, and now no problems at all. It's IE, not MS generally, that is the problem.

Anywho....

"We've shipped a new version of Windows, we've paid a historic fine, and we've provided unprecedented access to Microsoft technology to promote interoperability with other industry players," Mr Smith added. "In total, we have now responded to more than 100 requests from the Commission."

Here's the problem with the EU. I'm not an MS fan, but I sympathize with anyone who has to deal with the red-tape-loving bureaucracy of the EU. Unless you happen to be Airbus, they are forever a PITA to deal with.

[ 12-28-2005, 10:04 AM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Melcheor]

As soon as another OS comes along that is as easy to use as windows and is compatible with everything windows is, i will be the first to convert. Microsoft's dominance ensures that this will never happen. Is this unfair, or is it an inevitable consequence of such big business? Should the EU hence impose fines? IMHO, yes. Microsoft is too dominant, and that is not good for competitors or consumers. It is only good for Microsoft. Microsoft should be forcibly crippled/split up, for the general good. Until it is though, I'll be using the best and most convenient product I can. Alternatives are too much of a pain in the arse for me to take the moral high ground.

[LennonCook]

Originally posted by Melcheor: [QB] As soon as another OS comes along that is as easy to use as windows and is compatible with everything windows is, i will be the first to convert.

This is already doable. See: various Linux distros, primarily Ubuntu GNU/Linux, and GoboLinux. Some people also recommend Mandriva and SuSE, and occasionally Fedora Core. I like the look of Gobo over most of the others (I've only used Ubuntu from this list, and now use Linux From Scratch), because it doesn't try to hide the filesystem from you or dumb things down to the level that a slightly advanced user can't function. Also, you might like the various non-linux Unixen, such as FreeBSD. The "compatible with everything Windows is" is a little hard, since MS refuses to publish alot of these details (and backward engineering attempts have to emulate the bugs aswell), but you can achieve the same tasks on *nix as you can on Windows - just not with the same programs.

Should the EU hence impose fines? IMHO, yes. Microsoft is too dominant, and that is not good for competitors or consumers.

The problem isn't so much that MS is too dominant, as that MS behaves anticompetitively. For example, they make it as hard and expensive as possible for people to switch away from their products. That they are so dominant is a result primarily of this (and that, 10 years ago, their product was better marketed than the competition). Don't mix up cause and effect: if Microsoft weren't anti-competitive, the Unixen would be much better know, and more widely used. /This/ is why the EU should fine them, and this is why the EU is fining them. And this is why MS is complaining, and trying not to comply with the order ('shifting the goalposts'? Umm, no, more like 'enforcing an order').

It is only good for Microsoft. Microsoft should be forcibly crippled/split up, for the general good. Until it is though, I'll be using the best and most convenient product I can.

That's something bug-ridden, full of holes big enough to drive trucks through, and crash-happy? You speak like someone who hasn't ever looked at the competition with a non-critical eye. I recommend you do it sometime - games are about the only problem area, these days (not because games don't exist on Unix, but because most Windows games hook into Microsoft-proprietry APIs).. and games could easily become less of a problem with the Playstation 3, which is apparently going to run Linux and use various open technologies, which will mean it's games should be trivially portable to a desktop machine.

Alternatives are too much of a pain in the arse for me to take the moral high ground.

Alternatives are a pain only if you choose to make them so.


Timber: Apple might have been non-innovative (and, indeed, still is - basically all of their products can be traced back to the Free Software communities at some level), but MS hasn't ever been any better. MS copied the GUI from Apple, who copied it from others. And it *is* MS general who is the problem - Outlook and Outlook Express have as many holes as IE (*and* lack features compared to the competition - neither of them can thread emails, and nor do they set the headers that allow it), and Windows is such a monolithic system that it's impossible to avoid the problem apps (IE *is* Windows Explorer, and it provides your task bar and start menu). Switch to the competition, you don't even need a 'good firewall' - you may need to filter inbound traffic, but never outbound. A firewall like the Windows XP one would be ample, and alot of people use routers instead. This also stops any virus attempts clean in the tracks (not that they'd have much luck, anyway). Have you ever tried to deal with the Windows registry? And don't get me started on the memory management... the competition is, in general, Better.

[Morgeruat]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: I have never liked Apples. And, back in the day, Apple was the most non-innovative POS company one could imagine. It took a kick in the rear from MS and others to get it going at all. As for all the problems with MS, I switched to Mozilla and a good firewall, and now no problems at all. It's IE, not MS generally, that is the problem. Anywho.... quote: "We've shipped a new version of Windows, we've paid a historic fine, and we've provided unprecedented access to Microsoft technology to promote interoperability with other industry players," Mr Smith added. "In total, we have now responded to more than 100 requests from the Commission."

Here's the problem with the EU. I'm not an MS fan, but I sympathize with anyone who has to deal with the red-tape-loving bureaucracy of the EU. Unless you happen to be Airbus, they are forever a PITA to deal with. [/QUOTE]It is worth noting that Microsoft has been trying to do what it does in the US, the bare minimum to meet the requirements from the EU's judgement, less than the minimums if it thinks it can get away with it, so while it may have opened it's source more than ever before, it's a vague milestone, if I wrote a program and showed you 3 lines of code, I could still quite truthfully tell you I've shown you more of the code than I showed anyone else in the world and made it available to you, it doesn't mean what you've seen is at all usefull, or that it meets the requirements of the judgement against Microsoft.

[Timber Loftis]

I don't know how you can make a company open its source code to begin with. I bet they don't make coca-cola divulge its secret formula.

[Larry_OHF]

Or KFC's secret blend of 11 herbs and spices

[ 01-04-2006, 12:33 PM: Message edited by: Larry_OHF ]

[shamrock_uk]

But slightly different - the code they're being asked to divulge is simply that which would allow other programmes to interact effectively with it.

They're not being asked to divulge the code behind the unique features that windows offers (and we could ask if there are any such features that need protected by a 'secret formula') simply the code whose obscurity allows anti-competitive behaviour to continue by making competing products appear broken if they fail to interact correctly with Windows.

Also worth bearing in mind that "unprecedented access" doesn't necessarily equate to 'enough access'.

[ 01-04-2006, 02:17 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]