misecia Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 "If the Unsettling States have their way, Microsoft will either have to withdraw Windows or put out versions of the product that probably won't work, Bill Gates testified at the antitrust trial yesterday. Furthermore, if I Microsoft employee had an idea, they'd be in contempt of court if they didn't immediately pass it on to the major PC companies. Oh yes, and Microsoft would disintegrate." - Bill Gates on trial http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/24974.html he has to joking right :p okay i'm not all that anti-microsoft but this is just taking the p*ss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevember Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 Why. If an employee has an idea why should they tell all there competitors? My opinion is Microsoft? was one of the few companies that got it right in this ever changing world why shoulded they reap the rewards? I do feel they should have IE as a separate download to shut them up, almost everyone would install windows then download IE almost immediatly. Microsoft did break the law by using there Windows monopoly to create another monopoly in internet browsers so they should take it out and give people a choice they will still win. But it would give the better browsers a fighting chance. But whats my opinio:D:D All trademarks mentioned in this post are the property of their respective owners. Just in case Microsft are wathing me and if you think they aren't then your nievei> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superbeast Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 Unfortunatly, he's not joking. Under the proposed restrictions by the dissenting States, Windows would have to be redesgined from the ground floor to work as an OS. Microsoft has no one but themselves to blame for tying IE and other apps so tightly into the core OS. While Microsoft may not disenigrate, it would lose an incredible amount of power and resources because of this, basically crippling the company to a shadow of its former self. The two main concerns, I think are Microsofts roadmap for an even more tightly integrated internet experience and overall investor reaction. To rip apart Windows is one thing, but to throw away billions in development at the same time would be near fatal. And then their stock would drop drop drop...losing billions for Bill & friends, not to mention removing important capital needed for a Microsoft recovery. Of course, what the DOJ wants is a joke. I like Windows, but restraining Microsoft, within reason, is a very necessary action at this point in the game. The DOJ wants Microsoft to take a 5 minute time out for not playing fair...insanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timan Veteran Posted April 23, 2002 Veteran Share Posted April 23, 2002 yak yak yak we all know ms is gonna be here forever. *not like apple can do anything :roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven P. Administrators Posted April 23, 2002 Administrators Share Posted April 23, 2002 Its all b u l l s h i t whats linux without the 1000's of apps that ship with the release, Linux distros are generally 4 CD's because the apps that come with it.. To say that Windows must strip itself bare of core components to other Microsoft products is idiocy. If I was Bill Gates I would pull Windows just to prove the point. but his obligation to his shareholders and employees plus the millions of people that use MS products is most obviously what he is fighting for. Look at the larger picture people... Microsoft took a market and won. Now people are ****ed with that. EDIT: Tired when I posted this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiNZ Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 If all the features a nd apps are unbundled from Windows as the DOJ and States and their bakers AOL/Netscape , Real , IBM etc etc are seeking then Windows will cost $US120.00. The other apps that the aforementioned would have you use would remain free to download for how long ? about 30 seconds after the final rulings . Thus add to the $120 above all those apps you now have to buy seperately , EG Netscape ( yes they will charge for that coz you really want it only nasty MS is stopping you ) Real Media , etc etc etc The cost to achieve what Windows currently gives you has grown to beyond $US1000.00. But of course this has all been done for you the consumer so you are better off. Hmmmmm I wonder how ? but hey the DOJ knows best what we want . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiNZ Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 Damm my spelling and typing is bad , Oh well thats what happens when you'r up all night building a PC for a friend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven P. Administrators Posted April 23, 2002 Administrators Share Posted April 23, 2002 Originally posted by KiwiNZ If all the features a nd apps are unbundled from Windows as the DOJ and States and their bakers AOL/Netscape , Real , IBM etc etc are seeking then Windows will cost $US120.00. The other apps that the aforementioned would have you use would remain free to download for how long ? about 30 seconds after the final rulings . Thus add to the $120 above all those apps you now have to buy seperately , EG Netscape ( yes they will charge for that coz you really want it only nasty MS is stopping you ) Real Media , etc etc etc The cost to achieve what Windows currently gives you has grown to beyond $US1000.00. But of course this has all been done for you the consumer so you are better off. Hmmmmm I wonder how ? but hey the DOJ knows best what we want . I hear ya mate.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underscorebios Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 Well in times like these where "connectivity" and "Mobility" are keywords for the future they should stop looking at IE as a web browser and think of it as just another feature of the OS, and the more integrated it is into the core OS the better services it will be able to provide IMHO. Now picture this: windows without IE, a Defragmenter, card games (i know many ppl would freak out on this one), the new cd burning services, a media player etc etc etc, if you get the picture this wouldn't be what I for one whant, if i'd have a say it'd be bring MORE functionality into the system not REMOVE it ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timan Veteran Posted April 23, 2002 Veteran Share Posted April 23, 2002 i'll be damned if i use an os with aol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underscorebios Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 Originally posted by Timan i'll be damned if i use an os with aol LOL, but think of it this way, at least they "aren't" a monopoly :ponder: or are they??!! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonHi Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 microsoft has not comitted any crime they have competed well and been the best how can that be illegal in america Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonHi Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 wise words there kiwinz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vraa Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 i'm pretty sure even linux users would agree with us that destroying windows would destroy all competition and too many n00biez would come into the linux world and down technology goes so therefore if the DOJ gets their way we shall in the next ten years go back in time 40000 years and restart life as we know it.. can u detect the sarcasm there in the last part? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eth3l Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 Firstly - The states should be grateful that MS stepped up to offer a product which would make computing easier for the masses. The nature of computing requires that users are using the same OS. This holds especially true in the business environment. As an example, the only reason Apple is still alive is because Bill Gates backed Apple and developed Office for Apple. Now the Graphic designers and MMX artists can use Apples and communicate with their business assciates easily. Secondly- As for IE - I think it sucks, but is a natural development of the OS. Think about how drastic a change WIn3.1 - Win95 was? This, IMHO, was because of the ease at which Win95 allows one to browse folders, by using the explorer. Now add a little code and you can browse internet files the same way. In VERY simplified terms, browsing web pages is a visual way to browse files on another computer. Thus, using a file browser from your computer to view these files make logistical sense, practical sense and Darwinian sense. Third- The business aspect of this is key. MS is not being called into question because of the products they develop, but rather how they brought these products to market. They gave IE away, placed it in the OS. this makes sense, as detailed above. Companies which could not do that got ****ed. Problem was, none of them made a comparable browser. earlier incarnations of IE sucked, and the masses used Netscape, or AOL/IE. When IE began to appear usable and reasonable the masses over. Personally I think netscape used to rock, now its a whole bunch of fulff. I use Opera. Conclude In total I think the states are just trying to cause a **** for MS. A program called 98lite www.98lite.net has existed for years. This app allows you to separate the browser from the OS. I am shocked that the state have not yet used this as a way to show that it is possible. I am also shocked that MS has not used this. A good solution would be for MS to offer 2 versions of the OS. Win+IE, and WIN-IE - let the consumer decide. Regardless, the OS has evolved with the internet, like it should, and it is highly unlikely that the states will win this. Until someone finds a better way to market a better OS for the masses MS deserves to be on top. Note that I said MASSES - this excludes coders, graphic designers, MMX artists, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xpablo Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 This whole MS anti trust issue just proves you can't be too successful in America . I can hardly wait to see the day AOL/Time-Warner face an anti-trust suit by the DOJ for being a monopoly on the Internet and TV Stations and print media. :p It's just too bad small "Ma & Pa" Internet providers don't have the $$$ to pay off congressmen.. etc.. to launch an anti -trust against AOL. And that major ISP's dont see AOL as a threat to even bother thinking about a lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StOnD Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 I absolutely HATE AOL/Time Warner and what they do. They are the polluters of the internet and our computers. If any company should be facing antitrust suits it's AOL. Netscape used to be a decent browser but now it just sucks, it's way over bloated and AOL have only made it worse. I don't much like Opera either. I have been using IE for years and will continue to use it for years to come. There is no other browser I would rather have included with windows. I don't like what AOL have done with Winamp either... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortensen Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 If I was Bill Gates I would pull Windows just to prove the point. but his obligation to his shareholders and employees plus the millions of people that use MS products is most obviously what he is fighting for. Exactly... and in the licence it does actually say you don't OWN Windows. So technically he could withdraw all licences and most businesses would have to stop working and get to finding alternatives and then paying 100,000's or millions to retrain staff. But Bill Gates actually wants to be known for all the good things, not for screwing up what must be nearly the whole world that now uses Windows (obviously some use Linux and alternatives, but MOST desktops are Windows). It is funny though what he could 'technically' do. With that much money I wouldn't care. Past 1 billion and you could piddle money up the wall, buy whole cities and then demolish them, buy the water companies and then only pump milk through them, buy 30 million sheep and then release them in New York, buy an airline and makes all the planes fly upside down, buy the Hollywood hill and then replace it with whatever text you want, clone fifty copies of yourself and then start killing each other, clone fifties copies of yourself make a film entirely starring yourself.... oh, you could have a LOT of fun. Why have more than 1 billion? Dunno, perhaps he is saving up for a small country (like the UK, :p). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 I agree with Neobond and KiwiNZ. I hate that Microsoft is in trouble for being sucessfull. I guess that Google will be next since it would qualify as extinguising competition. But the DOJ would never get AOL/Time Warner. They just would not do it, but they would take other sucessfull companies to court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timan Veteran Posted April 23, 2002 Veteran Share Posted April 23, 2002 ah the us government is just scared little ...... fill hte blanks ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hurting101 Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 Damnit... why can't they live MS alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timan Veteran Posted April 23, 2002 Veteran Share Posted April 23, 2002 i know right, how come apple doesn't get in trouble for not having aol in its os? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E3L Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 MICROSOFT FOREVER!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syscrash2k Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 You know what? if they take out ie, how the hell are we supposed to download anything else at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Pablo Posted April 23, 2002 Share Posted April 23, 2002 At 30 years of age, my computing history is pretty much driven by Microsoft (except for the Commodore years) and we've watched DOS give way to 3.x to 95 to 2000 to XP - and with the exception of WinME it's getting better all the time. So what's wrong there for the consumer? In this time we've also watched the command line give way to the GUI, the GUI with File Manager give way to Windows Explorer and now on to the Internet Explorer integration. From navigating a drive, to navigating drives, to networks to the Internet. This all seems like natural progression to me. Whilst many would question these being Microsoft innovations, it's certainly appeared that way to me - after all, I don't use University systems, Xerox Parc laboratory systems or overpriced designer Macs. Finally Internet Explorer - I love it being there on every Windows box. No hunting for the browser, there it is as always. It would certainly be a worse experience if I had to pay ?40 every few months for an up to date browser....certainly if it was an AOL adware bloated Netscape. Then we get to the issue of monopoly - Microsoft have a monopoly on desktop Operating Systems...do they? I wasn't aware! I can get many, many operating systems to run on my PC - hell Linux and *BSD to name just two are available for free, nada, gratis! The history of "monopoly" also suggests something like the oil barons of old who bought up all the oil wells and strangled supply...but this isn't a suitable comparison. It's not like Windows grows out of the ground deep under the Microsoft campus where the evil employees extract the CDs using drills and pumps, simply packaging the CDs and shiping them to OEMs...It is a Microsoft creation which did not exist without Microsoft, so of course they have a monopoly. It's the same as Boeing having a monopoly on Jumbo jets! However no matter how much I like MS products, there is the issue that Microsoft are a shareholder company, and as such have a duty to their shareholders to make as much money as possible. This is after all, modern capitalism in action - the market decides, and for the past twenty odd years or so the market seems to be deciding that Microsoft are doing alright. Without doubt Microsoft are going to fight tooth and claw against anyone who want's a piece of the market. Perhaps, just perhaps someone needs to reign in Microsoft when it assasinates companies - whilst Netscape had certainly lost direction, Microsoft played a big part in turning the darling of the Internet into an also ran AOL subsidiary. I would prefer the US government leave Microsoft and Windows intact (the thought of AOL Windows alone is enough to convince me of that!) - however, unless the competition builds a better mousetrap Microsoft are going to keep on growing and kicking sh*t out of anyone who stands in their way...until they self destruct that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts