OSDN | Our Network | Newsletters | Advertise | Shop     X 
Welcome to Slashdot News Technology Television GNU is Not Unix Patents
 faq
 code
 awards
 journals
 subscribe
 older stuff
 rob's page
 preferences
 submit story
 advertising
 supporters
 past polls
 topics
 about
 bugs
 jobs
 hof

Sections
apache
Jul 23

apple
Aug 3
(1 recent)

articles
Aug 5
(27 recent)

askslashdot
Aug 5
(11 recent)

books
Aug 2

bsd
Aug 3
(1 recent)

developers
Aug 5
(4 recent)

features
Jul 18

interviews
Aug 5
(1 recent)

radio
Jun 29

science
Aug 4
(6 recent)

yro
Aug 5
(5 recent)

MS to Implement Some DoJ Settlement Terms Preemptively
MicrosoftPosted by timothy on Monday August 05, @11:27AM
from the you-can't-fire-me-i-quit dept.
lysurgon writes: "The New York Times (free registration, blah blah blah) is reporting that Microsoft will today announce it is taking some steps in implementing parts of the original DoJ settlement, a settlement which is still under review and not yet official. It's seen as a tactic to influence Judge Kollar-Kotelly's deliberation on the more stringent restrictions asked for by nine states attorneys general. Looks like MS wants to get off making some cosmetic changes (no surprise there), but given their rather stormy relationship with the judge, it could backfire. The other interesting thing is that at this stage, without an official ruling, no matter what they do or why they say they're doing it it's legally voluntary." Update: 08/05 17:00 GMT by T: HeUnique adds a link to another story on ZDnet which tosses in a few numbers while remaining fairly vague on what exactly will be released and under what terms.

 

 
Slashdot Login
Nickname:

Password:

[ Create a new account ]

Related Links
· lysurgon
· implementing parts of the original DoJ settlement
· stormy relationship
· T
· another story on ZDnet
· More on Microsoft
· Also by timothy

<  Pop-Up Ads Begin To Face Serious Opposition | Talk To a European Patent Examiner  >
MS to Implement Some DoJ Settlement Terms Preemptively | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 312 comments | Search Discussion
Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2 (Slashdot Overload: CommentLimit 50)
Good and Bad... (Score:5, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 05, @11:32AM (#4012161)
I'm not optimistic about the whole settlement, but is it possible MS is changing? Seriously, is it possible MS is taking a different approach and is softening? Given the huge amount of attention on security by the government and the public, is MS actually changing? Not that anyone at /. would for definitively, but what is really happening with the latest move?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Hmm (Score:1)
by LordYUK on Monday August 05, @11:32AM (#4012170)
(User #552359 Info | http://www.threemoons.net/)
so what? what exactly are they going to do? the article is extremely light on details.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Hmm by Steve Franklin (Score:1) Monday August 05, @11:51AM
  • Re:Hmm by 1g$man (Score:2) Monday August 05, @12:07PM
  • 385 bits of code by EmbeddedJanitor (Score:1) Monday August 05, @03:44PM
  • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
Sure They will Change a few Icons (Score:3, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 05, @11:34AM (#4012176)
The whole MS monoploy lawsuit has come down to removing a few icons from the desktop. Like that is going to create a great deal of problems for MS? The States that oppose the settlement are right. Nothing but an OS, no browser or media player. If you want that then MS must sell it on the open market. MS isn't going away and the lawsuit must force a more level playing field.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Good (Score:1)
by SpatchMonkey on Monday August 05, @11:34AM (#4012177)
(User #300000 Info | Last Journal: Tuesday July 16, @02:40PM)
It's about time they got round to doing something about it. Hopefully they will open up their source code to Windows 98 so we don't need to use WINE any more!
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Good by mustangsal (Score:1) Monday August 05, @11:41AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
Sure, right. (Score:5, Funny)
by Valiss on Monday August 05, @11:34AM (#4012180)
(User #463641 Info)
Microsoft is about as clear on details as this Monty Python quote on politics:

"I think that all good, right thinking people in this country are sick and tired of being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being sick and tired. I'm certainly not, and I'm sick and tired of being told that I am."
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Implement, huh? (Score:1)
by fobbman on Monday August 05, @11:34AM (#4012182)
(User #131816 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
Let's get this outta the way now: Implement, and EXTEND.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
Can't trust Microsoft (Score:1, Interesting)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 05, @11:34AM (#4012183)
Red Herring. Boy crying wolf.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
alternately... (Score:3, Informative)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 05, @11:35AM (#4012190)
Here's an article from CNET, with an interesting quote from a Jupiter analyst.

http://news.com.com/2100-1001-948328.html?tag=fd_t op
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Dangerous move (Score:4, Interesting)
by Saurentine (saurentine@excite.com) on Monday August 05, @11:36AM (#4012199)
(User #9540 Info)
Given that Microsoft has in the past stated that all of the DOJ's proposed remedies were unacceptable to them, isn't this a dangerous move to suddenly implement these previously unacceptable remedies voluntarily?

What is to make supporting multiple versions of Windows unacceptable in the future, given that these remedies were once unacceptable in the past?

Is there something I'm missing, or could their legal department really be that incompetent?

I hope that *finally*, their arrogance and insane, childish brinksmanship through this whole process comes back and bites them in the ass.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Its a calming method (Score:4, Insightful)
by brejc8 on Monday August 05, @11:38AM (#4012213)
(User #223089 Info | http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~brejc8/ | Last Journal: Wednesday July 31, @12:30PM)
I think this is an admission of a loss by M$.
They know the DoJ demands are not going to hurt them but they might hurt their shares.
So placing an outline stating that M$ is happy to do somethings that it thinks it will be expected to do will soften the blow by the final decision.
When the decision comes they can tell their share holders "We were goning to do that anyway".
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:Loss? by brejc8 (Score:2) Monday August 05, @12:14PM
    • Re:Loss? by justsomebody (Score:2) Monday August 05, @12:30PM
      • Re:Loss? by justsomebody (Score:2) Monday August 05, @12:32PM
        • Re:Loss? by jafac (Score:2) Monday August 05, @03:34PM
  • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
now THAT's interesting.... (Score:3, Funny)
by jeffy124 on Monday August 05, @11:43AM (#4012248)
(User #453342 Info | http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Friday August 02, @06:19PM)
load up the page of comments and see an ad of Microsoft Visual Studio .NET.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
win 2k SP3 (Score:3, Informative)
by Alien54 on Monday August 05, @11:44AM (#4012251)
(User #180860 Info | http://radiofreenation.net/)
It looks to me that some of the things implement in the SP3, that Personal Settings icon, is precisely that sort of Windows dressing trying to preempt the Judges decision.

Not that I hope this tactics works.

Personally, I hope it backfires

[shrug]

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • Re:win 2k SP3 by spagma (Score:1) Monday August 05, @12:34PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
Influence.. (Score:5, Informative)
by donutello on Monday August 05, @11:46AM (#4012265)
(User #88309 Info)
It's seen as a tactic to influence Judge Kollar-Kotelly's deliberation

Rather, one of the terms of the settlement with the DoJ was that the terms of the consent decree would be implemented immediately (in the next release) without waiting for the settlement to be approved.

IIRC, Microsoft would have been in violation of the settlement if it hadn't done this by now.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Too vague to be of any value (Score:2, Insightful)
by A Cheese Danish (jessiegurtland AT mindspring DOT com) on Monday August 05, @11:46AM (#4012267)
(User #576077 Info | http://ood.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Friday July 26, @10:08AM)

From the article:

The company's proposed settlement with the Justice Department would give computer makers more flexibility to add icons and menu entries of their choosing to Microsoft's Windows operating system.

It would also prevent Microsoft from entering into certain restrictive and discriminatory pricing agreements, require the company to make some disclosures about its software code and restrict the company from retaliating against competitors.

So basically, it's saying that they are just changing the paperwork of their contracts with computer manufacturers (which is no work on their part) and releasing bits of code out to the public (also no actual work being done). But we're not saying which of these we're doing, how much of these non-mentioned goals we will accomplish, or exactly when we can expect these non-mentioned amounts of non-mentioned goals to be completed (or at least expected to be completed).

I will be anxious to hear what is produced from the phone call happening later today, but right now, there is too little information to assume too much.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Link to article on free site (Score:3, Informative)
by duckygator on Monday August 05, @11:47AM (#4012271)
(User #171704 Info)
The article can also be found on Netscape's news site here [com.com].
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Is Microsoft getting away with anything? (Score:1)
by Whatthehellever on Monday August 05, @11:49AM (#4012282)
(User #93572 Info)
With this Slashdot story:


More MS EULA Fun
  [ Microsoft ]Posted by timothy on 09:28 AM August 4th, 2002
  from the if-a-eula-falls-in-the-forest dept.
  gray code writes: "The Register is reporting that Microsoft has placed an interesting wrinkle in the EULA of WinXP SP1 and Win2k SP3 that asks for the same remote admin rights as the Windows Media Player patch that raised such an uproar. I think I'll be leaving my Win2k box at SP2, thank you very much." Update: 08/04 15:05 GMT by T: Helix150 writes that a separate EULA for W2K's SP3 "contains this nasty bit: 'You may not disclose the results of any benchmark test of the .NET Framework component of the OS Components to any third party without Microsoft's prior written approval.' Hmmm..."


This is great. MS is putting restrictions on free speech. The ACLU would love to hear about this.

Dosen't any contract that contains an illegal request nullify the entire contract making M$ EULAs void?

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
M$ Releases Windows Code (Score:2, Informative)
by potuncle on Monday August 05, @11:49AM (#4012283)
(User #583651 Info)
see this story: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=5 78&e=2&cid=578&u=/nm/20020805/ts_nm/microsoft_code _dc_13
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
Whatever it takes... (Score:2, Insightful)
by lynx_user_abroad on Monday August 05, @11:49AM (#4012289)
(User #323975 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
They really don't have an option. Assuming an unbiased judge, if they force the judge to make a judgement, any judgement would be more expensive that just about anything they could offer for an out-of-court settlement. If there is a judgement, it must be one "in the public interest".

On the other hand, if there is a consent decree, there's no restriction on what the terms of such a consent decree must be.

What bothers me is that the consent decree route is supposed to be an incentive for a defendent to avoid the cost and time of a trial. It hardly makes sense for them to consent at this point, unless they know it's the only way to avoid a harsh judgement.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Pretty bold assumption (Score:2)
by sphealey on Monday August 05, @11:49AM (#4012290)
(User #2855 Info)
Microsoft must be making the assumption (very bold IMHO) that it can control/win the appeals process up through the Supreme Court. Which would further indicate that this has been signaled to them by the parties involved.

Therefore, the purpose of this move would be to antagonize the current judge into doing something which would call her decision into question, as Judge Jackson's was after the trial.

Very very confident if you ask me.

sPh

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re:Pretty bold assumption (Score:5, Insightful)
    by danheskett ((dan) (at) (heskettnet.com)) on Monday August 05, @12:58PM (#4012779)
    (User #178529 Info | http://www.danheskett.com/)
    Microsoft has prevailed numerous times, and in numerous higher-venues, with very stakes, in the appeals court.

    People have this misconception that MS lost this trial with the Fed's. This is incorrect.

    MS won the trial. The DOJ/States wanted a breakup. That was the big stick they were trying to beat MS with. Jackson delivered this victory. However, the appeals court viciously, savagely, and without doubt struck down the premise of a breakup. The essentially laughed it out of court.

    This means effectively MS won, because the only penalty that could really hurt MS was taken off the table.

    There is no possible ruling that the judge could pass down that is (a) sustainable in court and (b) able to harm Microsoft.

    MS won this trial.
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
Microsoft's legal defense (Score:3, Funny)
by Guppy06 on Monday August 05, @11:54AM (#4012342)
(User #410832 Info | Last Journal: Friday May 17, @06:05PM)
Please don't throw me into that briar patch, your honor!
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Too little info so far (Score:1)
by A Cheese Danish (jessiegurtland AT mindspring DOT com) on Monday August 05, @11:55AM (#4012344)
(User #576077 Info | http://ood.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Friday July 26, @10:08AM)

From the article:

The company's proposed settlement with the Justice Department would give computer makers more flexibility to add icons and menu entries of their choosing to Microsoft's Windows operating system.

It would also prevent Microsoft from entering into certain restrictive and discriminatory pricing agreements, require the company to make some disclosures about its software code and restrict the company from retaliating against competitors.

Now, from what I gather from this, it means that M$ would release the computer manufacturers from their agreement on how the desktop is arranged and set up (not really any work on M$'s behalf, just changing legal wording) and releasing bits of code to the public (also no actual work).

But so far, we don't which of these goals M$ plans to implement, nor do we know how much of non-mentioned goals would be accomplished, nor do we know when non-mentioned portion of non-mentioned goals would be completed (or at least attempted to be completed).

I think this will become an interesting topic once the statement from M$ comes out answering all these questions, but for now, there is just too little information to make an informed opinion.

Of course, if you want to just "knee-jerk" M$ and how bad they're gonna be, I'll lose no sleep.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
The unthinkable *may* happen, sort of, maybe. (Score:2, Informative)
by wuHoncho on Monday August 05, @11:55AM (#4012348)
(User #587718 Info)
They must have just made the conference call before I wrote this. Logged onto yahoo and saw "Microsoft to reveal Windows source code" and immediately cleaned up the half-chewed chicken melt pieces that fell out of my mouth and onto my lap. anyway, here's the link (sorry, I'm very rusty with HTML)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=5 80&e=3&cid=580&u=/nm/20020805/bs_nm/microsoft_code _dc_13

It's still unclear as to what parts of windows will be "revealed" and under what terms or even to whom. IMHO it looks like play-the-good-guy-and-smile-real-big-for-the-camer a legal manuevering.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
CNET LINK (Score:2, Informative)
by benjamindees (bendees@ c o x.net) on Monday August 05, @11:58AM (#4012372)
(User #441808 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
for those who don't want to register at NYT:
here's a link at CNET [com.com]
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
This is MSFT strategy 101 folks (Score:2, Insightful)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 05, @12:06PM (#4012417)
I think MSFT is doing this on purpose. Much like they force standards by pushing them into the market through the power of their channel (if everyone is using them, they're standards right?), I think they are complying with the weaker restrictions to A) make themselves look friendly, B) to make it look like the case is over, and C) to make the states that are clinging on to stronger sanctions look like bullies. My guess is that it'll work and the pressure for more restrictions will be dropped by the end of the year.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Too Little, Too Late (Score:5, Insightful)
by Stephen VanDahm on Monday August 05, @12:08PM (#4012428)
(User #88206 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
I don't want to troll, but I for one have lost hope that anything good will come out of the Microsoft trial. Their stranglehold on the Desktop market is pretty invincible, in my view. The penalties proposed by the States are too little, too late.

If they release a stripped-down version of Windows without a web browser, what good will it do? Microsoft already owns something like 95% of that market, and its only competitor, Mozilla, isn't so much better than IE that anyone will switch back. I suppose that they haven't won the "Media-Format War," for lack of a better term, so maybe a version of Windows without WMP might help. But I don't think it'll make that much difference.

The real reason that the Microsoft monopoly is invincible is that there are no competitors. Linux on the desktop isn't working out too well. BeOS is out of business, and while there are Open-Source BeOS clones, they aren't ready yet. OS X is frickin' sweet but it doesn't run on i386 hardware. None of these options, even if viable, would allow users to run their old Windows programs.

The best case situation is that Microsoft behaves a little better towards the folks they've already beaten. Nothing in the proposed penalties (that I've heard about, anyway) will keep Microsoft from crushing competition in the server/Enterprise area, or from implementing their Palladium project.

In my view, an effective set of penalties that solves current and future problems would contain the following:
  • Full Disclosure of their APIs. There should be a mandatory waiting period between the release of a modified API and the release of MS software that implements that API (so that competitors have time to implement them too). Proprietary HTML extensions count as an API for this purpose.
  • Ensure that Palladium is a fully open system. It should be compatible with Linux and other Open Source projects both at the technical level and at the legal level. In other words, GPLed software should run on Palladium-enabled hardware without violating the GPL.
  • Ensure that .NET runs on UNIX. Even the graphical applications.
  • Anyone should be able to write software that understands Microsoft file formats.
  • Windows network protocols should be well documented in such a way that other companies can write software that interfaces with Windows clients (like SAMBA) and Windows servers (like Ximian Connector).
These are the penalties that the states should be demanding. These are the penalties that will allow for the creation of competitive alternatives to Windows. Until this happens, we're fucked.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
What does this actually mean? (Score:2)
by dzym on Monday August 05, @12:08PM (#4012429)
(User #544085 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
It just means that Microsoft will start making the url links to the Windows and MFC API documentation on MSDN [microsoft.com] BOLD. :)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
hmmmmm (Score:1)
by richarst1414 on Monday August 05, @12:16PM (#4012475)
(User #584975 Info)
So i guess there finially revealing the code for paintbrush I allways wanted to know how that was written????
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
hmm MS wokring for Prosecutors Offce (Score:1)
by linuxislandsucks on Monday August 05, @12:16PM (#4012480)
(User #461335 Info | http://www.diaries.com/ShareMe/ | Last Journal: Wednesday July 10, @10:10AM)
This might be a miss step by MS..this only adds to the 9 opposing States arguement in demostrating that MS has the technical know how and the motives to change and accept a stiffer judgement..

It does this in two ways.

Remember MS's arguement has always been that any change wil drastically affect them economically..has not happen yet even with the first change to accept the terms..(the first change was to eliminate exclusive delaing contracts back 2 years ago)

Two, it indidcates that Ms wil only deal with the actual terms they agreed to not what nay Judge can hand down...basically thumbing their noses at the court again but in a more polite manner..still will not wokr!

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
Has anyone noticed -- (Score:2, Interesting)
by nkhorman on Monday August 05, @12:20PM (#4012499)
(User #598532 Info)
that with SP3 you can now remove Internet Exporer, Outlook Express, and Windows Media Player using the windows component wizard in add/remove programs... Has anyone tried removing Internet Explorer yet, and how does it affect the system?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
M$ to Reveal Windows Source Code! (Score:2, Informative)
by nherc on Monday August 05, @12:21PM (#4012507)
(User #530930 Info | http://www.oddzdog.com/)
Yahoo! is reporting [yahoo.com] M$ will reveal over 300 "pieces" of Windows source code as a part of the settlement.

SHWEET!

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Is Linux Really a Threat? (Score:1)
by grEchelonSurge on Monday August 05, @12:21PM (#4012510)
(User #579509 Info)
On the topic of Microsoft and Antitrust,

Is Linux really a threat to Microsoft in a antitrust sort of way? Since there's no corporation behind it, if Microsoft wanted to, say, force manufacturers to include hardware that would break Linux, then they're not infringing on another company's right to access a free market. After all, antitrust laws were not brought about to be _fair_, they were brought about to prevent a single company from controlling an entire market and hurting the economy. But the loss of Linux wouldn't immediately hurt the economy (despite the fact that, as we all know, if Linux were to die, and IIS to take over, life on this planet would end).

So does Linux count as competition to M$, in a Free Market sense?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
385 bits of computer code (Score:2, Funny)
by cyber_rigger on Monday August 05, @12:40PM (#4012659)
(User #527103 Info)
This Reuters Market News article [yahoo.com] says "Microsoft said it plans to disclose 385 bits of computer code and internal operating rules, previously kept secret, that outside software developers can use to write programs to run on Windows."

I calculate this (385 bits) to be about 48.125 bytes. I'm not impressed. :^)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
385 bits of code :-) (Score:1)
by daved321 on Monday August 05, @12:47PM (#4012710)
(User #229528 Info)
from yahoo article at: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=5 78&e=2&cid=578&u=/nm/20020805/ts_nm/microsoft_code _dc_16

"Microsoft said it plans to disclose 385 bits of computer code and internal operating rules, previously kept secret, that outside software developers can use to write programs to run on Windows."

385 bits huh.... couldn't even let us have the rest of the 49th byte.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Parts of Windows to be revealed (Score:4, Funny)
by Animats (slashdot-replies@downside.com) on Monday August 05, @12:56PM (#4012771)
(User #122034 Info | http://www.animats.com)
Here's the list:
  • The OS/2 emulation subsystem.
  • The POSIX emulation subsystem.
  • The OpenGL emulation subsystem.
  • The 16-bit emulation subsystem and all 16-bit code.
  • The TCP/IP stack.
  • NetBIOS.
  • The screen savers.
  • MFC
  • The MSVC library.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
It's like the NCAA (Score:1)
by ianscot on Monday August 05, @01:02PM (#4012810)
(User #591483 Info)
Often a collegiate sports program that's in the deep end with the NCAA will do something like this: impose their own restrictions on the program in question, in order to shortcut what they suspect might be even harsher punishments from the NCAA.

Want a good example of how an administration that's in bed with big business will compromise the public good? Gee, this settlement must be tough enough if the company enacts parts of it willingly, as a negotiating ploy in order to get the rest of it through.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
In related news... (Score:4, Flamebait)
by Alsee on Monday August 05, @01:20PM (#4012931)
(User #515537 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
A convicted child molester awaiting final sentencing has voluntarily stopped giving cherry flavor lollypops to children. He continues to insist that prison time and losing his job as school teacher are unacceptable.

He further argues that it would be inappropriate for the sentence to place any restriction on his freedom to use candybars to lure children. While he admits he has used candybars in this manner, the district attorney got his conviction based on solely on cases where he used cherry lollypops. Candybar evidence was never presented in court due to budgetary constraints the complexity of the numerous brands and flavors of candybars involved.

-
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
So Microsoft Reveals Code... (Score:1)
by protein folder (blah@blah.blah) on Monday August 05, @01:21PM (#4012941)
(User #228881 Info)
Now if they could only get Word to Reveal Codes I might not actually hate it.

WordPerfect 5.2 forever!

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Timeline (Score:2)
by telstar on Monday August 05, @01:22PM (#4012951)
(User #236404 Info)
I know the courts pretty much follow the Id Software philosophy of "When it's done" ... but is there any rough timeline of when a decision is expected in the trial being decided by Judge Kollar-Kotelly?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
The Exact source that MS will be releasing (Score:2)
by Tazzy531 on Monday August 05, @01:23PM (#4012970)
(User #456079 Info | http://www.johnia.com)
In the ZDNet Article, they said "Microsoft said it plans to disclose 385 bits of computer code and internal operating rules, previously kept secret, that outside software developers can use to write programs to run on Windows."

This is exactly what they will be releasing (from an inside source)
the secret code to Microsoft Windows XP is......
MS actually lied...they only released 384 bits (48 Bytes). The last bit is just null
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Undocumented APIs (Score:3, Interesting)
by Florian Weimer (fw@deneb.enyo.de) on Monday August 05, @01:30PM (#4013024)
(User #88405 Info | http://www.enyo.de/fw/)
Didn't the FTC examine those APIs in the early 90s, and didn't Microsoft claim that there wasn't any reason for them to use undocumented APIs in their applications, or something like that? Internal APIs are hard to avoid, and you can get into deep trouble if someone relies on them (because you cannot change them after that). If Microsoft was using these APIs for applications (and not system components), then they knew that they made two fundamental errors: they violated the previous FTC agreement, and good software engineering practices.

Both errors are hardly surprising, though.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
MSFT press release (Score:1)
by diakonos on Monday August 05, @01:46PM (#4013159)
(User #13183 Info | http://www.bigfoot.com/~ndye)
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/legal/aug02/08- 05settlementmilestones.asp

(until they move it...)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
385 bits!?! (Score:1)
by John Percival on Monday August 05, @01:55PM (#4013216)
(User #198124 Info | http://www.vbulletin.com/)
Microsoft said it plans to disclose 385 bits of computer code and internal operating rules

That would be approximately 48 bytes . . . is this really front page news? ;-)
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Erring on the side of reasonableness? (Score:1)
by aeoo on Monday August 05, @02:30PM (#4013459)
(User #568706 Info)

From this link [com.com]:

Microsoft said the steps are based on several principles, including "erring on the side of reasonableness" and "listening to feedback and acting on it."

Does anyone else think it's funny that Microsoft likes to err on the side of reasonableness?

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Thanks for the chuckle (Score:1)
by Snork Asaurus on Monday August 05, @02:55PM (#4013627)
(User #595692 Info)
It's seen as a tactic to influence Judge Kollar-Kotelly's deliberation on the more stringent restrictions asked for by nine states attorneys general

No! Really? They wouldn't try to do that, would they?

One of the problems with such a protracted legal process is that it allows the guilty to apply influence after the case has been made, the facts determined and guilt found. The whole process is contemptable. If I get a speeding ticket, I can't get a reduced penalty by going to court and saying "look, I'm not speeding now".

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Strictly a PR move (Score:1)
by nortcele on Monday August 05, @02:59PM (#4013652)
(User #186941 Info | http://slashdot.org/)
As has been reported, companies are not updating their Windows and Office programs as Microsoft had hoped (and was counting on for revenue). Part of the reason for this is Microsoft's declining image in the areas of security and compatibility. The masses really are beginning to view Microsoft with the same attitude IBM was looked at in 1985... Disdain.

So Microsoft has this to combat as well as the impending DOJ outcome. They are trying to hit two birds with one stone. If they let Balmer do the throwing, it will likely just break a window.

If anyone believes this is something out of the goodness of Microsoft's heart... I've got a copy of Windows to sell you.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Outlook and Exchange (Score:2)
by IGnatius T Foobar on Monday August 05, @03:00PM (#4013662)
(User #4328 Info | http://uncensored.citadel.org/)
What I'd really like to see opened up is either the MAPI extensions used for calendaring/scheduling, or the Exchange wire protocol used to do the same. If either were opened up, we'd be able to extend groupware servers like Citadel [citadel.org] to handle Outlook calendaring/scheduling with the same capabilities as an Exchange server.

Let's go, Bill: put your money where your mouth is. Is your software good enough to stand on its own merits instead of being propped up by platform lock-in?
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Arguments against making software open are Bogus (Score:1)
by greenhide on Monday August 05, @03:01PM (#4013668)
(User #597777 Info)
From the AP Wire news story:

> It [Microsoft] said that [opening the OS software completely]
> would allow them [competitors] to "clone" Windows,
> prompting Microsoft to stop investing in research and
> development on the operating system.

Hmmm... that hasn't happened with the Apple's open source Darwin software.

If anything, the introduction of Mac OS X and its Darwin OS has led Apple to invest more time and energy into its research and development, partially because they can draw from the Open Source community.

Of course, I have a hard time imagining that the open source community would flock to Windows' aid if it became open source. There's still enough enmity against Microsoft that I think most self-respecting open source developers wouldn't touch the Windows OS with a ten foot pole.
[ Reply to This | Parent ]
Microsoft and Philip Morris (Score:1)
by brre on Monday August 05, @03:02PM (#4013677)
(User #596949 Info)
The tobacco industry does this sort of thing at lot: offers "voluntary" efforts. Almost invariably, we later discover that the industry knew the things it was offering would have no effect on how it does business. Since it's usually better informed on what does and doesn't matter to its business, it's very good at offering things that look good at the time, but are later found out to be worth little, yet which displace or stall real measures that would have been effective.

Example: the broadcast ban, generally thought of as a big concession by the tobacco industry, was in fact a deal to get the anti-smoking ads off the air. Smoking, which had been falling, flattened out, as both sets of ads left the airwaves. This displaced a generation of effective anti-smoking ads. Example: warning labels on packs: the industry negotiated soft "may be a risk" language for the warnings and then got 30 years of teflon in court. This displaced real warnings (e.g. visible in ads, use of graphics, warnings about addictive product, list of additives and emitted substances, etc.)

Many more examples could be cited. The history is long and ugly and it leaves one fact uncontested: whenever the tobacco industry offers to make a deal, whatever concessions it's offering, it already knows would have little effect on its business. It then holds up these concessions as real reform and a sign of its good faith. Politicians usually fall neatly into line, shouting that this is real change and big progress. The industry smiles quietly and sails ahead, signing up another generation of 14 year olds (median age).

Veteran tobacco industry watchers call this "give an inch, gain a decade".

A longer-winded summary would be, figure out what looks good and really doesn't matter, make a big thing of offering that, and see who goes for it.

Any similarity between Philip Morris and Microsoft is entirely up to the reader.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
385 bits?! (Score:1)
by jdreed1024 on Monday August 05, @03:43PM (#4013965)
(User #443938 Info)
From the ZDNet article:
"Microsoft said it plans to disclose 385 bits of computer code ..."

That's it?! They really think disclosing ~48 bytes of code will get them out of hot water with the justice department? I think not...

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
Slashdot needs to introduce a new acronym (Score:1)
by Jelloman on Monday August 05, @04:16PM (#4014175)
(User #69747 Info)

  NYT(FRBBB)
   
...since they use those eight words in a row about once a day, on average.

[ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 21 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • (1) | 2 (Slashdot Overload: CommentLimit 50)
    		  Success is relative: It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. -- T.S. Eliot, "The Family Reunion"
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2002 OSDN.
    [ home | awards | contribute story | older articles | OSDN | advertise | self serve ad system | about | terms of service | privacy | faq ]