Microsoft's antitrust activities to be monitored for another two years

Sure, most of the Microsoft antitrust action is going down in Europe nowadays, but Uncle Sam's lingering judgment against Redmond is still kicking around -- Judge Colleen Kollar Kotelly (remember her?) just issued a ruling extending the consent decree against Microsoft for another two years. The judge said that the company has been extremely cooperative with the government thus far, but that "the extreme and unforeseen delay" in acquiring technical documentation from Bill and the boys requires that monitoring continue. That pretty much leaves things at the status quo, although we're not exactly holding our breath for anything to change once the consent judgment actually does expire.

[Todd @ Jan 30th 2008 2:49PM]

Entry: Microsoft [noun]
Synonym: Anti-trust

See also: http://imdb.com/title/tt0218817/

[stephenbratz2 @ Jan 30th 2008 4:18PM]

Entry: Linux [noun]

A computer operating system used by very few people. It is characterized by self-righteous users who complain about the user interface of competing computer operating systems, but then copy that same operating system down to the pixel. The users have a sense of entitlement, demanding that people use their operating system because of the business practices of others, when really it is their own fault for not offering software that people want, in a way people want - prepackaged and easy to find, with the features they want. When real work needs to be done, or for entertainment purposes (such as games), the Linux user will temporarily use a competing operating system; usually acquired illegally. The Linux community will overlook this illegal behavior, but then complain at the slightest violation of the GNU Public License, or GPL. The Linux user is also very hypocritical, making arguments against competing operating systems when they themselves have the same issues. One example is the proliferation of different versions, or “distros” of Linux which number in the 100s, while the latest version of the competing operating system only has five. The Linux user will often proclaim that their operating system is one of the easiest to use, and if the user has problems they can easily find help on the web. However, when such user tries to find help to perform the most simple of tasks, they are frequently shouted down with derision such as “n00b”, and “you do not deserve to use Linux.” The Linux user is also quick to point out that software is generated by the “vast community” of users, but, in reality, only a small percentage of the small number of Linux users contribute. Finally, the Linux operating system is free, but this has not been an incentive for people to use their software, even though other free software packages such as the “Firefox” project have proven that free can entice users to switch with some successful results. The Linux user will complain about Anti-Trust issues when the Linux operating system does not achieve wider acceptance, but ignore these successes with other free, open source software.

Synonym: Whiny little boy.

See also: http://imdb.com/title/tt0217630/

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 30th 2008 4:57PM]

@stephenbratz2:
Let me understand this. You:

...falsify your post by putting that Linux is a direct copy of the competition (of which one of it's competitors is built from) when it's clearly not (it has more customization and features in fact..) and I could argue that Linux doesn't have a GUI... but XWindows/X11/Xfce/et al. handle that. Also, since when is choice and preference bad? As far as I can tell, there are really only a few distinct variations of Linux (BSD/Redhat/Suse..) and most of the distros you group together are based on these. Are you going to complain about themes for Windows as well because they change the look and feel?

...continue to complain about Linux not having software and accredit it to Linux and not the third party shops writing the software?

...then continue to complain about Linux's lack of games, written by third party developers using competitor PROPRIETARY and unavailable APIs that cannot legally be used in Linux because Microsoft will not allow it

...you still continue the banter with another claim that says "it's free, but nobody's buying" which correlates with your second point of lack of third party software packages

If I sum all that up:
You're mad at Linux, because Microsoft created closed APIs that cannot be used on Linux of which applications are written upon, by other software companies that haven't created software that you want on Linux. How is this Linux's fault?

[Teetdogs @ Jan 30th 2008 5:09PM]

@anidr

I think you just proved his point. Also it was meant to be humorus, man you linux fanboys need to learn to laugh a little bit.

[thethirdmoose @ Jan 30th 2008 5:47PM]

Stephenbratz obviously doesn't know what real work is... real work is making operating systems like Windows :)

[stephenbratz2 @ Jan 30th 2008 5:53PM]

@Andir3.0

What a way to twist my words. I am not mad at Linux. If it works well for you, great! More power to you. Vista works well for me, better than XP did, and so that is the one I use. I have even played with OSX on my GF's Mac Book, and while it does not do everything I want, it is respectable. Each OS has their own API, and programs written to that API cannot be run on an OS that does not support it. Just as Apple programs cannot be run on Windows, Windows programs cannot be run on Linux, and Linux apps cannot be run on Apple - ignoring kluge translation libraries, which have been writen by many manufacturers (including Microsoft, which wrote libraries at one time to allow Windows apps to be run on Apple). The same happens with many platforms - the main logic behind a 360 game can be ported to PS3 or Wii, but there is a significant amount of rewrite necessary to port to one game platform to another. So why is it not Sony's fault that a game written for PS2 (the platform that had the majority of consoles sold last gen) does not magically run on an XBOX 1?

I tried a Linux distro about 3-4 years ago (I think it was Red Hat) just to see what it was like. After booting it looked just like a copy of Windows. When I tried to find drivers for it and install those drivers but without luck, I went to some Linux forum (sorry, it was too long ago to remember which) and I was called a n00b, and not a "you are a n00b, so you will need extra help", but in the context I gave above. Rather than accepting the fact that maybe the Linux community is at fault for not having a larger installed base, for writing software that people want in the way that people want (it may not satisfy all the people, but it hits the majority) it is blame everybody else - just like society today (I was rear-ended while sitting at a red light last week. The police in the car that was sitting in the lane next to me and saw it happen agreed it was the other guy's fault, but the other guy is fighting the insurance company that it was my fault - for sitting at a stop light). Has Microsoft done some shady things in the past? The court says so, so I cannot disagree. The judge has said that Microsoft has been cooperative but because of "unforseen delay", unforseen because they are trying to put up roadblocks? No, because she said they are cooperative. And with the information that Microsoft has released, and under licensing terms that has satisfied the courts, Linux still cannot increase their marketshare. How is that Microsoft's fault?

[Skullfighter @ Jan 30th 2008 6:54PM]

I bet Ryan Block practically had an orgasm when he found out Microsoft still can't put goodies into Windows for fear of legal action.

[Randavance @ Jan 30th 2008 7:59PM]

@stephenbratz2:

firstly,

"Windows programs cannot be run on Linux"

It's just funny hearing this after a round of command and conquer I legally bought for windows and run on linux.

That's a bit of a cold jab at the Linux and open source community. It seems like you've had problems in the past with some of us, congratulations, you found some assholes on the internet, have a cookie.

Just don't generalize, the people of the community who bitch and whine about windows are usually the ones who have just started with Linux and are trying to make it something it's not. From an end user perspective it's really not all that much better than Windows. But for those of us willing to push the limits, it opens a world of possibilities that make us laugh at the idea of using Windows or or the Mac OS. Unlimited customization, portability, and a complete avoidance of proprietary formats and the "embrace, extend, extinguish" strategy are my personal favorites. It's a freedom that you will never even begin to feel unless you really dive head first for at least a good year or two. Many of us are backing off on this whole lets hate Microsoft bit (see link 1), even with still fresh wounds left by the company (see link 2).

Do I think you should give up Windows and change to Linux? Probably not, by all means, I prefer it being more underground and a small percentage, I'd take one computer obsessed teenager with lots of free time and a desire to contribute over 100 newbies expecting it to "just work" any day.

As for us getting pissed about GPL violation, it's a matter of someones hard work that they donated to a cause they believed in being misused for someone else's profit, and we usually have to speak up because we usually don't have the monetary power to fight it in the courts.

So lets keep Engadget to what it's known for, flaming wars between Mac and PC fanboys, and not between open source and proprietary.

[Randavance @ Jan 30th 2008 8:12PM]

link 1:
http://www.vnu.co.uk/vnunet/news/2196258/linux-foundation-calls-respect

link 2:
http://www.daniweb.com/blogs/entry1465.html

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 30th 2008 8:59PM]

For my responses, read the next BIG wall of text I posted here. I am not going to re-post and spam up here.

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 30th 2008 9:01PM]

@Teetdogs: I don't find it funny at all. Your talking about a company abusing the market in a BAD way and you just shrug it off as "business." Boy, they have you right where they want you.

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 30th 2008 9:40PM]

and for the record, because it's false information: the judge did not say they were working well, a spokesman from Microsoft did.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The court's ruling "should not be viewed as a sanction against Microsoft," U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly wrote. She said she based her decision on delays by Microsoft in filing technical documents related to the licensing of its software.

"We will continue to comply fully with the consent decree," Brad Smith, Microsoft's general counsel, said in an e-mail. "We are gratified that the court recognized our extensive efforts to work cooperatively with the large number of government agencies involved."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But since your looking for a govt agency that is "working well with MS"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Bush administration did not join the states' request. The Justice Department said Microsoft had complied with the settlement, and the decree should be allowed to expire.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We all know the Bush administration's track record for smart decisions.

[Kamal @ Jan 30th 2008 3:02PM]

Maybe the judge is still ticked of at MS for her kids downloading spyware on her laptop and screwing it up. :)

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 30th 2008 4:39PM]

It's upsetting. All Microsoft is doing is "playing" the system. The longer they can delay the judge, the more they can continue business as usual.

[SIC TR4NSIT @ Jan 30th 2008 7:12PM]

Andir3.0... No offense, but did Bill Gates personally rape or kill a member of your immediate family? From your posts, I get the feeling that you seriously, truly, from the bottom of your gut hate Microsoft and everything that it has ever had anything to do with.

May God have mercy on your tortured soul...

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 30th 2008 8:59PM]

No, but... and hear me out... Bill Gates personally signed off and lead the company on one of the most restrictive licenses in the world because he wanted total control over the software you and I bought (or thought we bought.) You don't own your copy of Windows. You know that, right? You only buy the hardware, and you rent Windows for as long as that computer lasts. (In the terms of the new licenses, for as long as your hardware doesn't change too much. WTF!) The only way around this is to buy a retail box of Windows, which still only allows you to install legally on one machine... ever, with the same hardware restrictions today. If you buy a new computer, guess what. You agreed to buy a new copy of Windows. Forgive the car analogy, but it's like GM saying that you can't take the V8 out of your Oldsmobile and squeeze it inside your new Chevy or you can be taken to court, fined heavily and yes, your baby could die because you now have no money to feed it.

The only distinguishing difference between these two things is that one is a solid material and the other is a digital copy. Many, many man hours went into making these engines. For Bill to print off a copy of Windows and sell it to you and me, it's a 10-15 cent deal. Ok... granted, you have research and production time. Do you truly believe that they spent so much time (billions of dollars worth?) on Windows that it justifies a $150-400+ price tag? Hardly. While it may not sound like a lot for an operating system, it's price gouging (and a monopolistic tactic.) You know why Macs cost so much? They have to hire more developers to create a system to compete. That money has to come from somewhere, and if nobody is buying the hardware (because they are locked into software with no exit strategy) then they have to raise the price of the OS to help cover the costs. Now, they have higher costs and it's a deterrent factor to moving to MacOS because Microsoft still sells it's products to the OEMs for pennies. The customers CANNOT just drop all their software and switch tomorrow because Microsoft has abused it's power and locked everyone into Windows through this and through proprietary software means. Disallowing anyone (again, through tricky licenses) the ability to "measure" their files. They are way overcharging for a retail license of Windows. Now, you say, buy OEM! Here is another instance of a monopolistic tactic. Restrictive pricing brackets and distribution. Bill Gates and Co. had the balls to come into the conference room and say, "I'll offer you this OS for $1 (whatever) per copy as long as you do not sell any other OS." Yes. It happened. What is that you say? Illegal.

How would you feel if the RIAA comes in and says you don't own that music CD you bought today. Your only allowed to play it in Ford vehicles, and once you play it, you cannot remove it and put it in another vehicle. You bought it for that car. Does that sound fair?

If someone breaks into your car and steals something, do you hate that person with a passion? Why? They violated the law and your personal space. Personal space can be digital as well you know. You get attached to your desktop I assume? You know where everything is, where you put your icons, how the menus are laid out, you like the colors you chose (I hope)... you become attached in a weird sort of way. You think everything is great, until you upgrade your motherboard. (Another bad analogy incoming.) Now, let's say you redo your basement. Well now... the housing company you "bought" your house from gets a message from your furnace: It thinks you moved it into another house! How dare! Deactivate now! Your house is now gimped (no heat!) unless you can prove to the bank that you didn't actually move your heater.

Do I think electronic media should be judged and treated just like physical media? Yes. If I buy an operating system, I should be able to install it and listen to it on any machine in my house. I should be able to take it apart and see how it works. I bought the damn thing, it's mine now. Bill Gates and company should have to compete to keep me interested in coming back for new and more, not competing with me to force me into upgrade paths. (IE: GM, shutting down your car because you changed out the back seat or you bought a new trunk.)

Sure, ok... Someone should just take these Microsoft APIs and move them to Linux/Mac? Illegal. Microsoft pushed hard for that one. Reverse engineering software is illegal. Your not allowed to think about it. All those programs that were written for windows that you use? Sure, you can try to run them on Linux, but you can't use any Microsoft files to do it. Wine gets around this because they aren't using MS files. They are creating them from scratch through a loophole that basically doesn't prohibit creating your own method for running those apps. It's not an emulator, and it's like trying to build a car in your backyard from bare steel rods that will use parts form ___ motor company without fail. This takes time. Meanwhile, people do not understand the process that has to be followed and they critisize Linux for not working the way Windows does. So, that's Linux's fault?

[TheAxMan @ Jan 30th 2008 5:06PM]

@Andir3.0:

I dunno man -- between the EU and the US DOJ it seems like the west doesn't believe in free markets anymore.

At least the US DOJ is relatively reasonable compared to the EU. The EU just has it in for MS at any cost..

[Randavance @ Jan 30th 2008 8:22PM]

I don't know if you've been paying attention to the USA economy, but the whole "free market" thing is looking less and less appealing each day.

http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/jan2008/pi20080130_276797.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_investing

http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/2008/01/27/

But then again, it might also be the president standing as captain of the ship telling everyone that we're all ok, as the water creeps up his ankles. Boy it would be nice if he had an credibility left...

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 30th 2008 9:15PM]

The economy is such a state because we have no financial, personal and political freedom. People's hands are tied because they might say something wrong. Nobody wants to get their feelings hurt (even though they need it.)

Companies rule the govt. Ask anyone. Ask anyone on a lobby committee. Decisions are made in Govt. that don't hurt business. That's why this whole ordeal with Microsoft is taking so long. I'm sure there's a Microsoft employee in every Judge, Congressman, and Senator's office begging them to judge one way or another in the next ballot. It used to be different. The Govt was at one time "For the People" and Senators were not legally bought. Today however, it's a different story. In order for the free economy to work, people need choice, and competition. In order to enforce this, you need a govt who is not afraid to step in and smack down a company violating the law as Microsoft has so blatantly done. No, they are too afraid that businesses might have to buy more software or manpower to switch to something else (you know... put more money into the economy? Pay programmers?) Since our govt let Microsoft get as big as they are with as much control over the PC market as they have it's going to hurt even worse now than it would have to stop it early. (As the EU is trying to do... before they get tied into a computer strategy with no clean way out.) I call it smart business to think about what your going to do if you have to switch from Windows tomorrow. What would happen if Microsoft closed it's doors tomorrow? (fat chance, but think about it..) Is your company ready?

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 30th 2008 9:48PM]

Also, for the record: Everyone that thinks I'm voting myself up somehow... I'm not. I'm sorry if that doesn't play into your conspiracy theory.

I do however thank those people with common sense that understand and support my posts with a positive vote!! You guys/gals are a welcome sight. I thought for a while that I was the only one that had any sense of what the hell is going on behind our backs. Please though, sign in. It's fairly anonymous. Speak your mind. Support alternatives. Laying idle is the worst thing you could be doing.

Also, get out there and vote in real life! Find out which of the candidates are the best match, get to the primaries and vote. Find out who they want to put on their cabinet as well, I think you'll be surprised at some of the people you think are the right choice. Spending a few days (maybe a week or more if you want) every 4 years is not really that much to ask.

[orielsydiaz @ Jan 30th 2008 10:49PM]

Right on bro.

Get out there and figure out who stands for what you believe in and vote for that person.

Don't be ingnorant and vote for some one just "because". Find out what that person stands for and if its a match do your duty.

Hey Andir I hear what your saying about MS but I don't know what I would do without this thing we call Windows man. What are the pros and cons of Linux (just the major stuff).

[Andir3.0 @ Jan 31st 2008 7:00AM]

Linux is just like any other OS, except that instead of waiting for Microsoft to patch things, you have the potential for one of the users to patch it. Of course, if Linux had the user base and all the programmers that currently work under windows, you'd see much more enhancement and little tweaks that everyone complains about all the time being fixed. And of course, your code submissions are open for everyone to see. Someone else could notice something you missed or further enhance your submission.

Which leads me to a con. It's still pretty early in Linux's life. It doesn't have all the little kinks worked out, but it's getting there.

For the time being, Linux is fast. I don't know if this is going to change or not, but you have some pretty dedicated and talented developers that optimize the hell out of their code base.

It can be small and agile or "desktopified." With Linux, you can run it on a phone, car PC, server, or desktop and you don't have different binary files. (IE: No Windows Mobile vs. Windows Desktop... just copy your program over and run it if you have the disk space and memory.)

Linux is about choice. Someone complained that there are over 100 distributions out there, and I agree to a point, but you have to understand that the underlying kernel is the same. If a program were written with this in mind, you can easily create packages for every one of those distributions with a simple command.

And of course, it's open source. So if a programmer is unexpectedly removed, someone could easily continue where they left off.

Some will say that open source is looking for a vulnerability, but I think it actually helps to dissuade this kind of thing because you put your chips on the table, and people can decide if one of those chips are bad before you commit your code. With Microsoft and other closed shops, all the stale/green potato chips get shipped without the customer even knowing, or having a chance to know. When they open the bag of chips to consume it, they have a blindfold on and your gonna eat the chips, good or bad, and you won't know when it's going to happen. This leads to blind confidence and things like "Patch Tuesday" to fix everything the programmer missed when they were being pushed to release their new library or program.

Of course, there's always the enhancement angle. In the Linux world, things like Beryl/Compiz (3D desktop cubes and effects) come out when they are ready, and are usually very quickly implemented in all the various distributions. And of course, they are optional. Things like this happen all the time. There's no waiting for Microsoft/Apple to release their next big operating system or patch to enjoy this new addition. The same would apply to gaming and entertainment. Codecs and Libraries would be available to use and wouldn't be restricted (like DirectX10 is to Vista...) If one of the talented programmers over at Crytek, Valve, or iD found a better, or faster way to do something in the kernel or video path, they could submit it and everyone could benefit from it.

Linux is about progression, not about a complete rewrite every 5-10 years, but it does this by being modular. You can switch out a part of the kernel and have a system that looks and feels brand new if you wanted while still working with your previous applications. Don't like Gnome? KDE, Xfce, and other desktop environments are out there. And yes, I've run KDevelop (written for KDE) in Gnome, a completely different desktop environment. This is not the only example.

Sorry I didn't have any more cons, but I guess I could include lack of third party applications to which I complained about in my text wall.

[Mike @ Jan 30th 2008 10:39PM]

oh, another boring microsoft news. engadget are such m$ fanboys.