Microsoft has revealed the altered terms for access to Windows protocols that form part of its antitrust settlement
Microsoft on Friday outlined new terms under which other companies can gain access to Windows protocols; an important element in its antitrust settlement with the federal government.
Last week, Microsoft said it would alter the terms to make it cheaper and easier for software developers to license protocols that allow other products to work with Windows. Following the concessions, Microsoft received approval from US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly that it was in compliance with the terms of its landmark settlement. Under that deal, Microsoft is supposed to license such code on "reasonable and non-discriminatory" terms.
So far, EMC, Network Appliance, VeriSign and Starbak Communication have licensed the protocols, but other companies have complained that Microsoft's terms have been unreasonable. Massachusetts regulators had also argued that more court intervention was needed.
News source: ZDnet News
Microsoft on Friday outlined new terms under which other companies can gain access to Windows protocols; an important element in its antitrust settlement with the federal government.
Last week, Microsoft said it would alter the terms to make it cheaper and easier for software developers to license protocols that allow other products to work with Windows. Following the concessions, Microsoft received approval from US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly that it was in compliance with the terms of its landmark settlement. Under that deal, Microsoft is supposed to license such code on "reasonable and non-discriminatory" terms.
So far, EMC, Network Appliance, VeriSign and Starbak Communication have licensed the protocols, but other companies have complained that Microsoft's terms have been unreasonable. Massachusetts regulators had also argued that more court intervention was needed.
News source: ZDnet News
UNDEAD CHANGES
Within the Tomb of Relics maximum stock for the Rod of Necromancy has been reduced from 2 to 1.
HUMAN CHANGES
Aerial Shackles damage has been increased from 20 points per second to 30 per second.
The gold cost for a Dragonhawk Rider has been reduced from 235/40 to 200/30.
Arcane Towers now deal Piercing damage, and have had their range increased from 700 to 800.
Animal War Training upgrade cost has been reduced from 150/250 to 125/175.
Long Rifles Upgrade now requires a Keep instead of a Workshop.
NIGHT ELF CHANGES
Spirits of Vengeance (which are summoned by the Avatar of Vengeance) have had their damage increased from 14-18 to 17-21.
ORC CHANGES
You no longer need a Fortress as a prerequisite to build Batriders.
Wind Rider hit points have been reduced from 600 to 570.
Burrow armor has been increased from 2 to 5 and damage has been reduced from 1d8+33 to 1d5+22
CLASSIC CHANGES
Anti-air creeps have been added to each Mercenary Camp in the map (4)Tranquil Paths (Reign of Chaos).
Wyvern hit points have been reduced from 600 to 570.
Halls of the Dead and Black Citadel attack cooldown have been reduced from 2.0 to 1.5.
The multiplayer custom map desync that occurs between Reign of Chaos and Frozen Throne players has been fixed.
NOTES:
Replays are incompatible between major game revisions (1.11 replays cannot be viewed with the 1.12 version of Warcraft III). Custom save games will not load from version 1.11.
how is it unreasonable? they created a protocol, no one said they had to even license it in the first place
Now if you're talking about getting the "Made for Windows" (or whatever it's called) logo on your software package, then yeah you'd have to pay Microsoft to test the application in question. Some of the Windows protocols have also been available to a select few companies/developers, though that's entirely different than having to pay Microsoft to develop for Windows.
Also protocol licensing is an entirely different matter than OEM deals with hardware vendors.
By definition, Microsoft is not a monopoly. It is foolish to claim otherwise. Consumers are free to use other operating systems like Macintosh OS, and that other one...unix I think it's called...
If program developers don't want to pay the fees then they should develop software for other platforms. Whatever happened to Adam Smith's theory of economics? If allowed to freely choose (and we are) consumers will dictate what is in demand by the purchases they make. Windows is the leading operating system because enough consumers freely chose to purchase it. Microsoft should be permitted to set its own policies and license/developer fees. Obviously, the lower the fees, the more programs consumers will have to choose from for Windows. That, in turn, makes Windows a more valued and demanded oeprating system. Conversely, if fees are too high there will be too few programs for Windows and consumers will be unsatisfied with the operating system.
It should be up to Microsoft to determine the fee which provides a good balance.
If companeis have "had enough" then they are certainly free to dis-continue their partnership with Microsoft and develop for other consumers and other platforms. No one in Microsoft's hsitory has ever forced a company or consumer to purchase, use, or license any Microsoft product.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.