Recommended Posts

Microsoft Corp. (MSFT.O: Quote, Profile, Research) has agreed to modify its new Vista operating system in response to complaints that its desktop search function puts Google Inc. (GOOG.O: Quote, Profile, Research) and other potential competitors at a disadvantage, a source familiar with the case told Reuters on Tuesday.

The U.S. Justice Department and Microsoft are expected to provide details of the proposed changes in a joint report filed in federal court later on Tuesday, the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The source provided no details on what changes Microsoft had agreed to make.

A spokesman for Microsoft had no immediate comment.

Source

Source 2

Edited by wd40
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/568360-microsoft-to-alter-vista/
Share on other sites

as much as i not a fan of vista, this is stupid. they put features that people want (especially when they see things in other OS's) and when they do it, they are forced to make them crappier... make sense anyone?

Why does it have to be made crappier? All they need to do is release some API's and have a menu where you can choose what engine runs, as you would with a web browser. If people want Vistas then you'd see no difference but instead you could use googles. If dont right it should be transparent.

They could stuff it up, but it can be made to work too.

They better not change Vista to make it worst on purpose, just because google is crying. For those who bought Vista, we paid at the very least $100. We deserve the quality that we paid for. If google wins this, I will never use them again, and I will be waiting for my $250 check in the mail.

Why in the hell would free software even expect to compete with expensive software?

Exactly! This is nothing but pure bs! :(

Someone is gona come in here and scream "antitrust thats why!"... which I think is BS also... if one company is forced to do it one way, and then another company comes and does it the way the one that was forced to orignally they should be required to follow the same ruleing...

I guess I should add that

IF,

in Google's Vista Desktop Search, the service agreement included the phrases...

(or something similar but posessing the EXACT same meaning):

"... desktop searches performed by the Google Vista Desktop Search Engine will only include Internet search results for the query string entered if you explicitly allow it by checking the box below the text box you have entered the query string in to"

and

"... absolutely none of your desktop search queries will be sent to Google for any reason without your explicit permission...."

and

"... permission to search google.com and return the results of a query are granted on a query-by-query basis, meaning that allowing the Internet query to occur one time does not give Google Vista Desktop Search permission to query the Internet every time you perform a desktop search...."

and

"... you have the option to change from Google Vista Desktop Search back to the system default search engine, or any other desktop search engine, without the requirement of justifying it to or by forcing logging in to Google's servers...."

and

"... Google Vista Desktop Search will neither record nor archive any history of any search nor will it retain any information relevant to the search such as the query string, and personally identifiable information such as user-name, computer name, ISP or I.P. address of the computer performing the query nor shall any results returned on said queries be retained on any of Google's servers for any length of time. Each search is a one-time event and will not be traceable to the originating computer or user. We belive in anonymity on the Internet and we appreciate your desire to search the web anonymously and respect your rights to do so. To this end, we will offer you this service without accountability on your part. We realize that we are providing this service for free and if we should present or offer unto you information which has been deemed illegal in your area, it is our fault for not restricting information appropriately and will assume any consequence from our action of offering that information to you and assume full liability for our actions...."

I might consider it allowable.

Edited by tao muon
Someone is gona come in here and scream "antitrust thats why!"... which I think is BS also... if one company is forced to do it one way, and then another company comes and does it the way the one that was forced to orignally they should be required to follow the same ruleing...

http://www.albion.com/microsoft/

This means they should force it on OSX also...why do people always F*** w/ MS?

I agree.

For whatever extent you feel Microsoft has a monopoly on the personal computer market, Apple and Linux have a monopoly on their respective portions.

So, if one has to do it, all have to do it. Otherwise it's not fair. It's affirmative action in cyberspace.

I agree.

For whatever extent you feel Microsoft has a monopoly on the personal computer market, Apple and Linux have a monopoly on their respective portions.

So, if one has to do it, all have to do it. Otherwise it's not fair. It's affirmative action in cyberspace.

While I agree with what your saying that if one company has to do it so should all, I do strongly disagree with your assertion that both Apple and Linux are monopolies, especially Linux. I mean monopolies of what? Linux in particullar uses the same hardware platform* as Windows so it certainly cannot be considered a monopoly. Even in networking and internet related applications Windows Server still ranks quite high in usage (I've read some claiming above Linux even but that seems to vary). Linux also isnt one company, its many many distros by many companies and all are free to fork the code if they want.

* I know Apple does too more or less.

I certainly wouldnt call Linux a monopoly. Hell I wouldnt even call MS a monopoly in todays landscape although if your going to use raw market percentage and ignore the fact the other 2 do have strong support then I guess you can still call it as such. I'll gratiously disagree and say there 3 main players, but thats my oppinion.

What all of you are missing about OS X is that before Spotlight, there were no "instant search" applications AFAIK, and even now I think Google is the only one, and I think it's a beta. On Windows, there's a lot of search options, and there were before Vista came out.

And if they're talking about web search options ("desktop search" is a very vague term, it could mean search the desktop, or search on your desktop), then Apple already has done so with Sherlock. So... they don't have a problem.

If this update comes in, I am staying with Vista RTM :angry: Google SCREW YOU. DUMB ****ERS. DIE GOOGLE DIE.

.

.

.

calms down :p

What all of you are missing about OS X is that before Spotlight, there were no "instant search" applications AFAIK, and even now I think Google is the only one, and I think it's a beta. On Windows, there's a lot of search options, and there were before Vista came out.

Windows Desktop Search shipped 6 months before Spotlight shipped. And Longhorn search was shown at least 2 years before Apple said anything about it.

Windows Desktop Search shipped 6 months before Spotlight shipped. And Longhorn search was shown at least 2 years before Apple said anything about it.

I meant there weren't any instant desktop search applications for OS X. I know Microsoft actually had the idea first and Apple just managed to release it earlier.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!