Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

A Post-Microsoft World

Posted by JonKatz on Tue Apr 04, 2000 10:01 AM
from the does-this-mean-anything-new? dept.
For those of you who've spent years battling and cursing the rapacious, insatiable Microsoft, there had to be a belated satisfaction in seeing a judge brand Bill Gates a monopolistic law-breaker. For everybody else, it's hard to see what, if anything, will change as a result of this surreal conflict between 18th-century laws and institutions and 21st-century economic realities. Truth is, we already live in a post-Microsoft World. (Read more.)

"Good morning, and welcome to the post-Microsoft world." Words many of you have been waiting to hear for years. Yesterday's court ruling didn't end the Microsoft Age, just focused attention on the fact that it's over.

The response to the ruling yesterday, in fact, defined hype. Almost all the significance was symbolic. The findings changed little in the short term, and probably even less in the long run. The most significant and blessed fallout from yesterday may be the loss not of Microsoft, but of a host of those annoying dot.coms flushed out by a NASDAQ mourning a world without Omnipotent Bill. Truth is, we are already living in a post-Microsoft world, and nobody really much cares.

Until the mid-90s, Microsoft was the technological Godhead. Everyone involved with computing or the network hated, used, exploited or feared it. That's no longer true.

The Microsoft Age began to unravel when programmers all over the earth connected and demonstrated that they could create a viable, ethical alternative operating system, sharing freely what was costing everybody else billions. It was accelerated by Bill Gates' profound and distinctly non-visionary arrogance. Anybody who has ever watched TV would have known to settle a long time ago, but Gates must have been reading his own press, thumbing his nose at the one mega-corporation on earth bigger than his.

Had the government intervened a decade ago, when it would really have mattered, yesterday's court ruling might have been as ground-breaking as the pundits and analysts were claiming last night. Who knows what kind of smothered, suppressed and acquired innovation might have been unleashed had Microsoft been reigned in at the height of its abuse and power?

As it was, the decision felt profoundly anti-climactic. It's hard to think of a single major thing on the Net that will change. Bill Gates, it was clear, had given up on this judge, first patronizing, then brazenly lying to him, finally going for the end run, perhaps in the hope that a Republican would shortly take up residence in the White House.

In a few years, after the platoons of lawyers have been as enriched as Microsoft's middle managers, it's possible that computer users will have three or four operating systems to choose from -- if there even are traditional operating systems, sold and downloaded in traditional ways, which seems less likely by the week. But even if there are, it isn't clear that any "remedies," once they are finally contested and sorted out in the courts, will have much meaning. Gates is still trying to come to grips with a political system that is slicker than he is. How odd to see him all over the evening newscasts, practicing his own annoying what-me-worry? spin, proclaiming his company the world's greatest, cheapest and most benevolent technological empowering force.

It seemed pooped and lame. Bill Gates' company hasn't dominated any of the significant technological movements and evolutions of the late 90s: open source, nano-technology, AI, genetic research, hand-held and wireless computing, supercomputers.

For those who've spent years battling and fussing over this rapacious, insatiable company, there was belated satisfaction in seeing a federal judge confirm what a lot of people already knew: Billl Gates is a monopolistic, predatory lawbreaker.

But apart from terrifying high-tech investors for a day or two, it's difficult to discern a single significant outcome from yesterday's decision, a single reality likely to change for people who use computers, the Net or the Web. The pundits couldn't even agree whether Microsoft would be more of a menace broken up or left alone. And the hysteria about lawsuits was laughable. Microsoft has a big enough legal budget to tie up class-action lawsuits for years, and its insurance company is already putting aside billions to start drawing interest for the inevitable day when the settlements must be paid.

Yesterday brought the odd spectacle of 21st-century economic problem confronted by a century-old law (the Sherman Anti-Trust Act) being deployed by a 225-year-old institution (the federal judiciary) and analyzed by an ancient information structure (the news media). All this was also being trumpeted endlessly by a federal bureaucracy eager to appear to curb the unchecked power of run-amok corporations, when it's far from clear it will ultimately even be able to curb one.

Perhaps the post-Microsoft world began between when Linus Torvald began his software experiment and Judge Jackson's eerily retro ruling yesterday. Why eerie? Because it pitted a string of l9th-century laws and institutions against a 21st-century economic system. And the antiquarians really thought they had won.

When all is said and done, many of the people reading, working on and joining this site had a hell of a lot more to do with this than those Justice Department pols falling all over one another yesterday to get their pusses in front of the TV cameras, trying to convince the world that they were out there fighting for the little guy.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
A Post-Microsoft World | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 389 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
  • Re:Yup (But then again ... ) by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:07AM
  • monopoly power by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:09AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:23AM
  • Delusional!!!! by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:24AM
  • Desktop OS a commodity? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:25AM
  • Good by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:28AM
  • Re:Desktop OS a commodity? by Joseph Vigneau (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:19AM
  • point of view by mAIsE (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:04AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by Phaid (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:47AM
  • Post Microsoft World? by Geoff (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:11AM
  • Re:point of view by PHroD (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:09AM
  • Re:What to do about Microsoft by pb (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:38AM
  • Re:Post? by pb (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:42AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by Phil-14 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:51AM
  • "Eighteenth" century laws? Come on. by Phil-14 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:29AM
  • Re:Post-Micro$oft maybe... by flea (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @08:11AM
  • Just a little bit of history repeating by flanman (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:15AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by homebrewer (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:45AM
  • Re:Sorry, Jon by CWCarlson (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @11:20AM
  • Re:Katz is right! by thenerd (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:27AM
  • Welcome to the first-post Microsoft age. by thenerd (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:25AM
  • What about my DOS? by VAXGeek (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:10AM
  • "everything" in computer is not related to MS by Frédéric (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:02AM
  • What this means... by Odinson (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:03AM
  • if you don't like it, get involved (A16) by cthonious (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:40AM
  • Actually Post-Linux as Well... by TheSync (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:03AM
  • Re:Karma Whore by unitron (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:52AM
  • Re:Tears For Fears in the background by unitron (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:57AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by unitron (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:24AM
  • Judge Jackson for President! by unitron (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:43AM
  • Re:point of view by bonehead (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:08AM
  • Re:all this linux hype by bonehead (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:00AM
  • Re:Effectively, Micro$oft will not be punished... by bonehead (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:09AM
  • Re:What to do about Microsoft by bonehead (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:34AM
  • Re:point of view by bonehead (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:40AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by bonehead (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:27AM
  • Re:What to do about Microsoft by bonehead (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:52AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by bonehead (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @05:07AM
  • Re:point of view by bonehead (Score:1) Thursday April 06 2000, @11:57AM
  • Re:Sherman Anti-Trust is from the 20th Century by TimeHorse (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:23AM
  • Sherman Anti-Trust is from the 20th Century by TimeHorse (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:41AM
  • Re:Sherman Anti-Trust is from the 20th Century by bbcat (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:57AM
  • I dont... by Bob McCown (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:59AM
  • She ain't sung yet, unfortunately by whitroth (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:39AM
  • Re:Yup+ by ch-chuck (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:19AM
  • Wafting another airball with Jon "salaeri" Katz by tomwhore (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:44AM
  • Leave M$ on the x86 & ONLY on the x86. by crovira (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:47AM
  • Re:Yup+ by mitheral (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:12AM
  • Re:Desktop OS a commodity? by mitheral (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:32AM
  • Re:Judge Jackson for President! by Spud Zeppelin (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:21AM
  • Stop the Insanity! by Spud Zeppelin (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:58AM
  • Re:point of view - Yours is dumb. by vawlk (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:06AM
  • Re:Karma Whore by Camelot (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:46AM
  • Brilliant Move by Bill Gates by Hasdi Hashim (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:29AM
  • Katz the panderer by AshleyB (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:44AM
  • Re:point of view by Gilmoure (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:17AM
  • Everyone wants to play Monopoly... by NutZac (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:15AM
  • No surprises, no expectations. by Badgerman (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:19AM
  • Re:Yup+ by Dr. Charles Forbin (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @02:07PM
  • Re:Yup+ by Dr. Charles Forbin (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:56AM
  • Bull*hit by Pepe Rodriguez (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:55AM
  • Age Of Empires was not made by Microsoft by Aos (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:36AM
  • Re:Open the PROTOCOLS and FORMATS, API's by ConceptJunkie (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:09AM
  • Old laws vs. New companies misses the point by gmhowell (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:07AM
  • Re:What about my DOS? by SEWilco (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:26AM
  • Bright Shiny Future? by Tyriphobe (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:51AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by bprotas (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:34AM
  • Re:The Ruling Only Limits Linux by phee (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:02AM
  • Re:The Ruling Only Limits Linux by phee (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:43AM
  • Re:point of view by UranusHertz (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @11:20AM
  • Re:We Won??? by mberkow (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @05:23AM
  • Re:We Won??? by mberkow (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:34AM
  • Re:point of view by kveldulv-- (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:01PM
  • Re:Yup by ThePlague (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:54AM
  • Re:Yup by ThePlague (Score:1) Thursday April 06 2000, @03:17AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by Wah (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:04AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by JoeyJoJo (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:14AM
  • Re:What to do about Microsoft by spectecjr (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:16AM
  • Re:What to do about Microsoft by spectecjr (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:31AM
  • Open the PROTOCOLS and FORMATS, API's by The Cisco Kid (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:40AM
  • Media Coverage by john187 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:27AM
  • Re:Yup by RangerElf (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:56AM
  • Microsoft's Lawyers by I R A Aggie (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:26AM
  • Don't break out the champagne yet by cornjones (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:49AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by SpinyNorman (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:56AM
  • Re:Effectively, Micro$oft will not be punished... by MrCreosote (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:00PM
  • Re:point of view by Halster (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:45PM
  • Nanotechnology!? by CharlieG (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:04AM
  • Open source = Feed the children by sddefrag (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:14AM
  • Re:The denial that comes with psychotic jealousy by sddefrag (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:23AM
  • Re:Installing by sddefrag (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:31AM
  • Re:18c vs 21c and laws by sddefrag (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:37AM
  • Re:Open your eyes by sddefrag (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @05:23AM
  • Re:On the other hand... by sddefrag (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @05:36AM
  • Open your eyes by sddefrag (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:53AM
  • Expect the other shoe to drop. by Greg@RageNet (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:58AM
  • On the other hand... by Coleco (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:28PM
  • Re:point of view by B.B.Wolf (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @02:19PM
  • Re:Not yet. by Ateran (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:25PM
  • Re:point of view by wqbang (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @03:44AM
  • cheap hardware + linux alone will kill microsoft by hopeless case (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:46AM
  • OK so where were you BACK THEN by badzilla (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:45PM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by ronfar (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:26AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by ronfar (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @10:38AM
  • Re:pov - Linux overtaking MSFT + Extra Comment by subrat (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:56PM
  • Also OT: Centuries are wrong s/b 19th & 20th by Cy Guy (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:32AM
  • Get the net! by Philageros (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:46AM
  • Well, maybe..... by Djin (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:51AM
  • Re:18th Century Laws? by Djin (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @11:34AM
  • Rumors of MS's demise.... by Hnice (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:37AM
  • Microsofts attitude to tumble by MantiX (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @04:10PM
  • Re:point of view by Jerad (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @04:40PM
  • Baby Bills and Standards by Brecker (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @02:41PM
  • Now we can predict the future? Didn't see that... by emarkp (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @01:36PM
  • Not Quite by matthead (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @01:13AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by iceT (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:59AM
  • So Katz is the greater crusader? by satanic bunny (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:26AM
  • OS installs are a pain by gabedude (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:01AM
  • Re:BG ruleda criminal. So, when does he go to jail by viking099 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:56PM
  • Re:Everyone wants to play Monopoly... by KGBear (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:07AM
  • Re:Post? by KGBear (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:17AM
  • Re:Up until the same 19th cntr logic fries Linus.. by KGBear (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:59AM
  • No reason for rejoicing by _Logic_ (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:41PM
  • Re:No reason for rejoicing by _Logic_ (Score:1) Thursday April 06 2000, @02:32AM
  • Re:Not yet. by dimator (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:04AM
  • Re:Choice is good? by Peaker (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:25AM
  • Katz is right! by shaunj (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:48AM
  • Vilification by Kvort (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:15AM
  • Re:point of view by itascon (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:54PM
  • One word: Mandrake by DebtAngel (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:49AM
  • Linux freaks by CaptainPhong (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:16AM
  • 18c vs 21c and laws by PB8 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:26AM
  • Re:Come-on-Katz? by Borealis (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:32AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by supabeast! (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:39AM
  • Re:Desktop OS a commodity? by xxyyxxzz (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:04AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by xxyyxxzz (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:04AM
  • Re:What to do about Microsoft by Mononoke (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:30AM
  • Re:Yup (But then again ... ) by Mononoke (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:44AM
  • Re:What to do about Microsoft by Mononoke (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:27AM
  • Mac piracy rumors. by Mononoke (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:31PM
  • RH won't become evil empire... by god_of_the_machine (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:16AM
  • Re:point of view by KDan (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:56PM
  • Re:point of view by lunatik17 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @01:39PM
  • Re:point of view by lunatik17 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:17AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by lunatik17 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:35AM
  • Re:Come-on-Katz? by s.a.m (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:28AM
  • Yeesh... by TopShelf (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:02AM
  • Re:Am I the only Pro Microsoft person here? by briancarnell (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:55AM
  • What's to stop MS from getting a clue? by Milkman Dan (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:08PM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by debaere (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:54AM
  • how many of you.... by TheReverand (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:09AM
  • I really don't think most people get it... by TBedsaul (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:43AM
  • Re:What to do about Microsoft by Rantage (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:08AM
  • Re:What to do about Microsoft by Rantage (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:35AM
  • Re:point of view by Jonathan the Nerd (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:13AM
  • Just my points. by mazur (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:37AM
  • Microsoft's Impact by Municipa (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:51AM
  • Re:Monopoly != evil! by daevt (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:38AM
  • The wonderful world of Squall.... by cprincipe (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:56AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by DuctTape (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:48AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by superkorn (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:43PM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by superkorn (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:53PM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by superkorn (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:00PM
  • We knew it all along. by teiresias (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @01:30PM
  • you don't get it, dude by Deadbolt (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:03AM
  • Re:Open your eyes by Serveert (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @04:32PM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by RickHunter (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:39AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by RickHunter (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @10:16AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by RickHunter (Score:1) Friday April 07 2000, @10:27AM
  • Re:Everyone wants to play Monopoly... by wltack (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:33AM
  • That nutty Katz by Nyarly (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:39AM
  • The real paradigm-shift news by bockman (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:59AM
  • Think Microsoft - Think Media by kwashiorkor (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:32AM
  • Anti-Microsoft is anti-capitalist, not pro by epgandalf (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:52AM
  • Re:Anti-Microsoft is anti-capitalist, not pro by Dracos (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:54AM
  • A bit late ... by hoss10 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:20AM
  • Crash Bang Boom by waldeaux (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:32AM
  • Re:What to do about Microsoft by Rand Race (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:14AM
  • Advantages of one operating system by NearlyHeadless (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:53AM
  • Proposal: JonKatz Icon by swordgeek (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:52AM
  • Re:Not yet. by ThatWeasel (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @11:26AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by rm-r (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:28AM
  • Re:What about my DOS? by rm-r (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:32AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by rm-r (Score:1) Thursday April 06 2000, @08:28AM
  • 18th Century Laws? by adenied (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:46AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by SirGeek (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:59AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by Mark A. Storer (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:26AM
  • You forgot some things... by mj (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:31PM
  • Re:point of view by Zordak (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:59AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by Capt. DrunkenBum (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:30AM
  • Re:Come-on-Katz?(now Idealist?) by lordmage (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:14AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by hypergeek (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @02:05PM
  • Yeah Right! by gsparmar (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:15PM
  • Not Yet by Kailden (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:31AM
  • Re:Everyone wants to play Monopoly... by bjrubble (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @03:48PM
  • Free the Mac!!! by bjrubble (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:48PM
  • Re:Post-Micro$oft maybe... by kupolu (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:28PM
  • Monopoly != evil! by Hang0ver (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:30AM
  • Re:We Won??? by chrischow (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:29AM
  • Re:Advantages of one operating system by yzquxnet (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:42AM
  • Re:Yup+ by styrotech (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:00PM
  • I just want them to fix it when... by Dethboy (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:38AM
  • Re:point of view by Lupei (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:49PM
  • In response to... by skatedork (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:41AM
  • Hmmm. yellow by FreshView (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @11:35AM
  • Post Microsoft by notcarlos (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @11:54AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by fleener (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:17AM
  • Re:Am I the only sane person left? by fleener (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:31AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by nomadic (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:13AM
  • Re:Age Of Empires was not made by Microsoft by nomadic (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:40AM
  • Post-Microsoft? by sokoban (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:14AM
  • Re:BG ruleda criminal. So, when does he go to jail by HLynes (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:02AM
  • Mind you... by AgentRavyn (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:28AM
  • Open Source Operating Systems & Average PC Users by Ogre332 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:08PM
  • Re:point of view by syzygysm (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:30AM
  • Long Term Effects? by stuckpixel (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:50AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by absurd (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:59AM
  • Re:The Ruling Only Limits Linux by kel-tor (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:11AM
  • Settlement by bobs666 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @11:48AM
  • What a bunch of crap, Jon! :-( by Poligraf (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @01:33PM
  • Re:point of view by SuperCujo (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:44PM
  • It's nothing new... by way2slo (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:03AM
  • Re:point of view by Klync (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:51AM
  • Phillip Morris by Spoing (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:09AM
  • Re:point of view by tomcatkev (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:45PM
  • Re:On the other hand... by tomcatkev (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:49PM
  • Short on MSFT, Long on SUNW, ORCL by tomcatkev (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:09PM
  • What's wrong with old laws to stop new monopolies? by Modab (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:32AM
  • Re:Like this would ever happen . . . by New Luser (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:09PM
  • Re:business is business by New Luser (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:50PM
  • Re:Vilification by New Luser (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:28PM
  • Re:Sorry, Jon by New Luser (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:45PM
  • "Symbolic" != unimportant by gilroy (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @11:21AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by shadowstrider (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:15AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by shadowstrider (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @11:12PM
  • hmmm by kryptonian (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @11:56PM
  • Re:Yup+ by john_many_jars (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:21AM
  • Re:Yup+ by john_many_jars (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:53AM
  • Re:Yup+ by john_many_jars (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:35AM
  • Nano-technology by Knunov (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:24AM
  • Copyright Laws by jg253 (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:36AM
  • Re:point of view - We're all being foolish! by DavittJPotter (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:46PM
  • But what of it man? by drachenstern (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:30AM
  • Re:True, very true by Venyce (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:39AM
  • Elitism? by Venyce (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @04:37PM
  • Re:OS? What's an OS? by Venyce (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:12AM
  • A Post-Katz World by powderkeg (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:33AM
  • Re:point of view, and they're influence... by GeZ117 (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @01:00AM
  • Majority of Who? by quelar (Score:1) Thursday April 06 2000, @05:25AM
  • Re:Anti-Microsoft is anti-capitalist, not pro by lonine (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:44PM
  • Does Katz believe in freedom by lonine (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:06PM
  • monopoly w/ guns vs. the monopoly w/o the gun by lonine (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:52PM
  • micro$oft by SirRobin (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @04:11PM
  • Re:Effectively, Micro$oft will not be punished... by hurqalya (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @03:28PM
  • Re:Yup by LordOfTheHunt (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:27AM
  • True True by BlackHelmetMan (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:50AM
  • Re:cheap hardware + linux alone will kill microsof by BlackHelmetMan (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:02AM
  • Apple by BlackHelmetMan (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:45AM
  • Good point. by trzeciak (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:25AM
  • 1800's == 19th century, !=18th century by sethgecko (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:54AM
  • capitalism? by kalinh (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:41PM
  • Ethical.... ? by kullman (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:10AM
  • Re:That nutty Katz by Phil Winninghoff (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:04AM
  • Re:point of view by sorceress (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:20AM
  • Re:Am I the only sane person left? by MarkoMuscovich (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:51AM
  • And I Missed It?!? by B-B (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:56AM
  • I differ. by cwilper (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:24AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by telecsan (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:49AM
  • Re:Yup+ by Feynman (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:24AM
  • Be afraid! Be very afraid! by gundeman (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @12:53AM
  • Re:What's wrong with old laws to stop new monopoli by Goldcard (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:37AM
  • Like this would ever happen . . . by Goldcard (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:12AM
  • Re:This whole thing makes me sick . . . by Goldcard (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @02:08AM
  • Re:Like this would ever happen . . . by Goldcard (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @02:11AM
  • Re:Like this would ever happen . . . by Goldcard (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @02:22AM
  • This whole thing makes me sick . . . by Goldcard (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:16AM
  • Re:On the other hand... by Goldcard (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @02:45AM
  • Re:Microsoft = Adaptive by Goldcard (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @02:48AM
  • Re:My response to Micro$oft by Goldcard (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @02:54AM
  • Re:So, its a post-Microsoft world, is it? by Goldcard (Score:1) Wednesday April 05 2000, @03:04AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by Pondering (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:39AM
  • Post-Microsoft as a state of mind? by Alakaboo (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @02:26PM
  • Re:point of view by sharkface (Score:1) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:16PM
  • Re:circular reasoning by cybrntk (Score:1) Friday April 07 2000, @10:08AM
  • Jon... by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:11AM
  • BG ruleda criminal. So, when does he go to jail? by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:37AM
  • Re:This whole thing makes me sick . . . by Alex Belits (Score:2) Wednesday April 05 2000, @01:30AM
  • Re:Like this would ever happen . . . by Alex Belits (Score:2) Wednesday April 05 2000, @01:34AM
  • Re:Microsoft = Adaptive by Alex Belits (Score:2) Wednesday April 05 2000, @02:04AM
  • Re:On the other hand... by Alex Belits (Score:2) Wednesday April 05 2000, @02:17AM
  • Re:On the other hand... by Alex Belits (Score:2) Wednesday April 05 2000, @06:37AM
  • StarOffice by Alex Belits (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:24PM
  • MySQL by Alex Belits (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:57PM
  • Re:You forgot some things... by Alex Belits (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:02PM
  • Re:We Won??? by Alex Belits (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:48PM
  • Hi, MS troll by Alex Belits (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:49PM
  • Re:Just a little bit of history repeating by Alex Belits (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:38PM
  • Re:Crash Bang Boom by Alex Belits (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:58PM
  • Re:Ah, But M'soft Still Matters (Unfortunately) by Alex Belits (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @11:07PM
  • Re:Advantages of one operating system by Alex Belits (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @11:20PM
  • Re:So, its a post-Microsoft world, is it? by Alex Belits (Score:2) Wednesday April 05 2000, @12:19AM
  • Re:My response to Micro$oft by Alex Belits (Score:2) Wednesday April 05 2000, @12:56AM
  • Re:Poke-soft... by Chris Johnson (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:31AM
  • Overly-simplistic by Tony (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @01:45PM
  • Get your centuries straight by Brian Knotts (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:03PM
  • Re:Effectively, Micro$oft will not be punished... by Danse (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @02:08PM
  • Re:Not yet. by jd (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:15AM
  • The King is Dead! Long live the King! by law (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:36AM
  • Microsoft is the Hydra by unitron (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:22AM
  • Karma Whore by waldoj (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:16AM
  • Timing of the decision b4 Antitrust meet by ch-chuck (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:19AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by finkployd (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:21AM
  • A Post-Katz Slashdot by Lord Kano (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:36AM
  • I think you misinterpret "open source". by jetson123 (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @08:40AM
  • proposed remedy: specifications and liability by jetson123 (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:11AM
  • My response to Micro$oft by Soko (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:25AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by King Babar (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:21AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by King Babar (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:40AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by King Babar (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @12:10PM
  • Yup by Dr. Charles Forbin (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:05AM
  • Re:Post? by Ralph Wiggam (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:12AM
  • X-box/WinCE/Sidewinder/Actimates/WebTV... by SuperKendall (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:47AM
  • Savage Henry Matisse, you're still wrong. by Frac (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:30AM
  • Re:Come-on-Katz? by Nodatadj (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:40AM
  • We Won??? by mberkow (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:14AM
  • Well Said by NavySpy (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:22AM
  • Re:Choice is good? by PinkPanther (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:48AM
  • What It All Really Means by WillAffleck (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:18AM
  • Post-Microsoft? I didn't hear about the merger by georgeha (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:21AM
  • Re:Be careful of what you ask for, you might get i by weave (Score:2) Wednesday April 05 2000, @04:43AM
  • Dominated what, exactly? by Steve G Swine (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:25AM
  • Re:Outdated thinking by ronfar (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:56AM
  • JK's odd sense of timing by imac.usr (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:47AM
  • not yet by burgatron (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:27AM
  • What really will change.... by nellardo (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:53AM
  • Re:point of view - Yours is dumb. by jaybill (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:09AM
  • Re:True, very true by riggwelter (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:47AM
  • I do not think you mean what you think you mean. by Speare (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @01:10PM
  • A Post-JonKatz World by LocalYokel (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:46AM
  • Frac, it is a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by Savage Henry Matisse (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:50AM
  • swashbuckling styles of argument . . . by Savage Henry Matisse (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:48AM
  • Microsoft = Adaptive by mlimburg (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @03:55PM
  • And now the backlash begins... by waldeaux (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:30AM
  • Not quite post by Kagato (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:29AM
  • Effectively, Micro$oft will not be punished... by Scriven (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:55AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by 348 (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:16AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by 348 (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:22AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by 348 (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:29AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by 348 (Score:2) Wednesday April 05 2000, @02:30AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by 348 (Score:2) Wednesday April 05 2000, @02:41AM
  • Re:Katz, it's a SOFTWARE COMPANY. by 348 (Score:2) Thursday April 06 2000, @02:27AM
  • Re:Not yet. by perelgut (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:04AM
  • Post-Micro$oft maybe... by koh (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:14AM
  • MS good for the Linux Community by dancingmad (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @09:08AM
  • Poke-soft... by Megane (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:10AM
  • More Unworkable Solutions by Anomalous Canard (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:34AM
  • Re:Sorry Guys. by fleener (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:15AM
  • Change can be funny.. by steelwraith (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:35AM
  • Sorry, Jon by Slad (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:48AM
  • Re:OS? What's an OS? by tesserae (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @10:44AM
  • Re:point of view by mfinke (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:55AM
  • Am I the only Pro Microsoft person here? by imagineer_bob (Score:2) Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:40AM
  • by Zachary Kessin (1372) <zkessin@kessin.com> on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:25AM (#1152700) Homepage Journal
    Does not make it wrong. There are many laws around the world far older than the Sherman Anti Trust act that I would not do without.

    If you read some of the laws in the Torah, esp some of the ones about things like debt that most people don't pay much attention to and really think about them you will realize that many issue of the question "How do we treat our fellow people" have not changed in 4000 years or more.

    The Cure of the ills of Democracy is more Democracy.

  • Jon... (Score:3)

    by Signal 11 (7608) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:35AM (#1152701)
    Jon, I understand where you're going with this, but please don't comment on technical issues if you don't understand them.

    It is not a post-microsoft era. Reasons to follow:

    • Microsoft still has a monopoly on Operating Systems. If you want to release an app, you release it for MS platforms first unless it's a very specialized application (like CAD).
    • Microsoft has more capital than the GNP of many small countries.. combined.
    • Who the hell thinks MS won't just move to Canada when the ruling actually comes down? It's not like AT&T where their infrastructure is tied to location.. they can market and sell Windows just as well from across the border.
    • Microsoft still has lots of influence in, say, the IETF.. or a dozen other trade organizations. What Microsoft says is still influential, anti-trust or not.
    • If you want to play games, you use MS products. Yes, linux has a few games out there.. no, if you're serious you won't run them under linux. Netrek is one thing.. Red Alert is quite another.
    • Microsoft has features in it's OS which cannot interoperate with any other product. Duh. Try using server replication with linux.

    In short, Microsoft isn't dead.. and even if they were broken up, categorically every single major brokerage has stated such a move would have a direct benefit on the stock-holders and bill gates would get richer. One need look no farther than the "post-AT&T" era to see how much your rates have increased... DESPITE free internet telephony tech being available.

    I rest my case, your honor.

  • by ch-chuck (9622) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:37AM (#1152702) Homepage
    Of course we're talking about the software behemouth, but here's my take: once upon a time computer processing was limited to a corp/scholastic priesthood, then microprocessors embodied a 60ish "power to the people" type mentality, down w/ corporate domination, and suddenly hw hackers could, with some effort, own their own computer. Then commercial companies jumped in and you could buy a 'personal computer' to do with as you wish for the price of a good used car. Then, I think a turning point was reached in the early 90's when win3x for some reason make 'GPF's common on too many business desktops, and suddenly people HAD TO BE WinTel COMPUTER LITERATE to succeed or be hired. I.e., when it turned from "gee, I can own my own computer!" to "You mean I have to learn how to operate this damn thing just to get an office job??".
  • by gentry (17384) <slash@monk[ ]rg.uk ['i.o' in gap]> on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:30AM (#1152703) Homepage
    While Mr. Katz view is put very eloquently put, it is extremely blinkered. The Post-Microsoft Age came with Linux? No it didn't. The majority of companies and individuals still use and purchase Microsoft products everyday. A huge proportion of web servers are still running NT and IIS and new major site running this technology come along everyday. Though it embitters me to say so, Microsoft will be the major OS player for a long time yet to come.
  • Re:Choice is good? (Score:3)

    by Pope (17780) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:24AM (#1152704) Homepage
    Choice can be good, but again it depends on a lot of other factors:
    You mention the ol' days of the home computer explosion. A lot of games were ported to as many different platforms as possible, if the company was willing to do so. I think it was either Hard Hat Mack or Miner2049er that was available on everything from the Vic20 (mine!) to the Atari 400 + 800, and 2600 game console, not to mention Apple ][, Colecovision, etc.
    At which point the effort ($) put in by the developers returned a nice profit. Granted, not all those ports came out at the same time, but the first versions proved popular enough that they made more copies available.

    Many games in the past were ported to multiple platforms: these days, I'm lucky if ANY games make it over to the Mac.

    Pope
  • Re:Sorry Guys. (Score:3)

    by King Babar (19862) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:05AM (#1152705) Homepage
    Even if Judge Jackson passes down the harshest ruling possible, Microsoft still has its software running on a huge percentage of the world's computers.

    I keep reading stuff like this, and Yet Do I Marvel. I guess it's human nature to assume that most of the (important) computers in the world are like the one on your desk. Also, that the computer on your desk is particularly important. I'll submit to you that this just isn't true.

    Most of the important computers in the world are either things like embedded controllers, or very, very large information systems that do important things, like run the phone system, send bills, or write checks. In other words, all the systems that people were getting freaked out about when Y2K rolled around.

    Microsoft's real market share of crucial computing is just not very big. I hate to break it to people out there, but the computing that most of us do on our desktop machines is just not very important in the big scheme of things. I mean, how could it be? Sending memos back and forth doesn't really accomplish much. A spreadsheet may seem important, but very few of them reach or endorse conclusions that were either unknown or unreachable by other means.

    What personal computers are really about, more than anything, is keeping people entertained. Microsoft is not a technology company, but an entertainment outfit. The Web was not a threat to Microsoft because somebody would write a java word processor or something that would eat into MS Office revenues per se. The Web was a threat because people found it more entertaining than existing MS product offerings.

    Look carefully at Microsoft's investments outside of operating systems and applications. You've got a TV network (MSNBC), an alleged content provider (MSN), freemail (hotmail), a bunch of stuff like Encarta, kid's toys, now a gaming box... In other words, entertainment. What you don't see is serious vertical market software, or infrastructure stuff.

    Interestingly, Microsoft has tried to enter one other non-entertainment area: money and financial software. That, of course, makes sense because the real money is, well, where the money is. But everybody knows that, so the competition there is both fierce and skilled; for PC-based entertainment (like MS Word), it just hasn't been.

    They may have to take a step back in their development, but they'll find ways around any injunctions, just as the baby bells have.

    Funny thing about that, however: the phone company break-up really did lead to huge improvements in the variety, cost, and even quality of service. And the resulting baby bells and their competitors have grown at a rate much faster than Ma Bell ever did. And investors have done incredibly well. Yes, there are some problems here and there, but the anti-trust ruling in this case clearly did us all a lot of good. If the MS case ends up half as well, we should all be thrilled.

  • by weave (48069) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:44AM (#1152706) Journal
    First of all, the entire Katz "article" should be moderated down as a Troll.

    Before I begin my rant, look at my user history. I'm a big Linux supporter. I'm also a realist. With any change comes benefits and disadvantages.

    In the mid 80s, when it came to PC hardware, IBM was the world leader. What they did, the world followed. When they introduced the 3.5" floppy in 1987, other manufacturers scrambled over themselves to include one in their "clones." 3.5" floppies were not new. HP 150s had them for a few years. But no one could break the 5.25" "standard."

    Now that IBM is no longer dominant in the field, the hardware end has not progressed as smoothly. For example, we are still stuck with 3.5" floppies and plus we also now have a plethora of high-capacity "super disks, zips, clicks, etc..."

    A fragmented OS world will cause additional support headaches, make no mistake about it. It will not be an easy transition.

    Don't misinterpret what I am saying. Microsoft killed the browser market by leveraging their OS installed base to push it through. For those that remember, Microsoft was one of the last major players to discover the Internet and leaped to get into it (they even used Spyglass Mosaic to churn out IE in a hurry). They need to be bitch slapped, but if they dropped dead tomorrow, the industry would take a long time to settle.

    Now is the best time for open source and standards movements to make a move. If it doesn't happen now and another closed-proprietary OS takes over, we will have lost our best chance...

    Just don't go dancing in the streets yet. The loss of Microsoft dominance will hurt everyone in one way or another.

  • OS? What's an OS? (Score:3)

    by Junks Jerzey (54586) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @07:16AM (#1152707)
    Let's suppose that all of a sudden Microsoft and all copies of Windows 95/98/2000/NT vanished. The result would be a complete mess. Likely, it would cause a run on Macintoshes, but I can't see it causing a run on Linux. The oft cited mantra of the Linux world is that the user should be able to make choices. The choice of which Window manager to run. The choice of which text editor to use. The choice of which distribution to get. These choices only matter to people who fixate on Linux as an operating system. Realistically, people think like this:

    I'm a writer. I want to use a comfortable word processor.

    My son is four. I want to get him some educational software that will help him learn to read.

    I want to be able to browse the web and send email with pictures to my friends.

    Obsession with particulars of hardware and software isn't part of this at all. These people aren't stupid; they have their lives and want a tool to help them get things done. Right now, Linux isn't a tool as much as it is a kit that you can spend weekends and evenings with until you've eventually built a ship in a bottle that you are happy with. Windows and Word and Outlook and Excel have gotten to the point where they *are* just tools. When I put on my geek hat, I dislike Bill Gates greatly. When I put on my other hats, I'm glad that I can fire up Word and be done with it.

  • True, very true (Score:3)

    by riggwelter (84180) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:27AM (#1152708) Homepage Journal
    JK's hit several nails full square on their heads with this piece, the plain fact of the matter is that to describe the [insert description of time here] before yesterday's ruling as the Microsoft Era is to give them kudos and credit they simply do not deserve.

    To suggest we are leaving The Microsoft Era is to suggest that Microsoft have in some way impacted our lives up until now. Frankly, apart from giving us something to fight against, they haven't.

    If I think back over the past decade or so, [technological] things that have impacted my life significantly have been mobile phones & mobile computing [of the Epoc variety], UN*X/GNU/Linux/Open Source, DVD, MP3.

    If we are leaving a technological era, it is probably the Closed Source Era. Not just Microsoft, but producers of CS across the board. We are not however entering the Open Source era, we've been there for a very long time (eras can overlap can't they?), merely coming to a stage where it is going to predominate in the software market. Nor are we going to see the end of closed source software, there is a place for it (surely not I hear you cry, and if you knew who I work for, you'd shout it even louder), but frankly, there are some systems that have to be kept closed, even secretive by their nature. Imagine is a government, any government, opened the source for their [insert intellgence system of your choice] software, they'd be screwed yeah? That's my point.

    If we're leaving a financial era, it's the one of having a single behemoth in the software market. If the decision is taken to break-up Microsoft, chances are that it will be broken into three companies: Operating Systems, Internet and Applications. Welcome to the wonderful world of having three Microsofts in the market place, who, by the very nature of the split, will not be competing with each other. Observe as their collective stock value outstrips anything any dotCom speculator considers feasible, but also be aware of the fact that the public now knows the truth, so notice how much less power they have than if Bill hd decided to split the company in such a way voluntarily, say, five years ago. Be thankful therefore that this case has happened, because if they had split the company down previously, you can bet this case would never have been brought, and the practices would have continued unchecked.

    Yes, the government has done it as a show and nothing more, but although the reason may not be 'pure', the result is most certainly a Good Thing [TM]

    --
  • by meckardt (113120) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:21AM (#1152709) Homepage

    While lots of us are cheering the results of yesterday's court ruling, it almost seems to me that it is like the case of a bunch of kids who finally realize they can beat up the school yard bully when they gang up on him.

    Microsoft is no longer a dominating factor in the new online community. Its still a factor, but it isn't the only one. There are going to be lots of other things that will concern me more. Things like the the DMCA [slashdot.org].


    Gonzo
  • by 348 (124012) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:29AM (#1152710) Homepage
    In the decision, Jackson said Thecompany "mounted a deliberate assault on entrepreneurial efforts" that could have introduced technologies that competed with Microsoft's own technologies, and "placed an oppressive thumb on the scale of competitive fortune, thereby effectively guaranteeing its continued dominance in the relevant market."

    Sounds like a profitable business plan to me. Isn't this what most businesses try to do in one form or another?

  • A story... (Score:3)

    by WhiskeyJack (126722) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:50AM (#1152711)

    Once upon a time, a long time ago, when the stars were young and the world was new, dragons roamed the earth and men feared them. And it came to be that one dragon did come to dominate the land and roam freely upon it, pillaging and burning as it went, yet those that never saw the beast's depredations called it admirable and came to worship it.

    But there were those who saw the damage it wreaked, and the shear evil of the beast, and they banded together to try and destroy it. And slowly they were able to build strongholds against the monster, and on occasion inflict small cuts and scrapes and other indignities upon it, but they could only weaken it little and never slay it, and its depredations continued. And then a giant came down from the north and began battling the dragon, and the battle lasted long and was fought hard, and those banded against it gathered around to witness the terrible struggle.

    And then, at last, the giant pinned the dragon, lashing and gnashing its teeth, to the ground and a cheer resounded amongst the gathered throng.

    And that's when Jon Katz lept atop a nearby barrel and started to write the dragon's epitaph and loudly proclaim its death....

    "But...", said the crowd.

    "It's dead!" proclaimed Katz jubilantly.

    "Um..." the crowd answered, pointing toward the beast as it trashed in the giant's precarious grip.

    "Dead as a doornail! Dead as a tree stump! Dead!" crowed Katz.

    "Er..." the crowd attempted to interject.

    "It is _sooooooo_ dead....." Katz attempted to continue, interrupted by a loud *THWAP* as the lashing dragon's tail pulped the poor deluded man with an errant flick.

    The crowd shrugged. "We _tried_ to tell you!"

    The End

    In short, Katz, rumours of Microsoft's demise are greatly exagerated, and you are quite premature in writing the company's epitaph. It still holds a monopoly on the desktop market, and there still isn't a clear path to breaking that monopoly. It has been struck a heavy blow by Judge Jackson's ruling, and the class-action lawsuit hounds are gathering to take their respective chunks of flesh, but the fight is far from over and only time will tell if Microsoft's dominance of the market will be more than temporarily staggered by this ruling. I regrettably can't write them off just yet.

    -- WhiskeyJack

  • really..? (Score:3)

    by Joe E Sunshine (161364) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:33AM (#1152712)
    when you say that we already live in a post-m$ world, are you referring to the /. community or to humanity as a whole?

    If the latter, I hate to disappoint you, but my grandma still don't know what Linux is, and she probably wouldn't care should someone explain to her either. And then, the same goes for about 10 zillion other grandmas, big stupid companies, tiny stupid companies and practically all other computer illiterates.

    Conclusion: what you're talking about is far far away, as always.

  • Re:point of view (Score:3)

    by LordOfTheHunt (166353) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:19AM (#1152713) Homepage
    Microsoft's point of view appeared to be one of incomprehension.

    They seemed incapable of believing in a reality where someone would not want one of their products. It was incomprehensible to them. Somewhere around 1990 they started believing their own hype and removed themselves from the reality of the marketplace the rest of the world operates in.

    It'll take 20 years to settle all of the appeals and other lawsuits this one will generate. By then, Microsoft will either be but a bit player in the overall game or they'll have begun to innovate and contribute the the overall improvement of the computing world.

    My bet is that they'll be a bit player, but hey, I"ve been wrong before.

  • Post? (Score:4)

    by thenerd (3254) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:15AM (#1152714) Homepage
    I was discussing this with a friend last night. If they are forced to open their source, with a license that is not crippling, then that means the likes of us get to have a go. We can make Windows do what we want.

    So, like it or not, if MS open their source code, then Windows could become even more powerful. Think - their installed base, thousands working on their source code. The MCSE's could have to learn how to hack Windows itself. It could be that what is good for the goose is good for the gander, and Windows would become even more prevalent. Some would say this mattered, some would say it doesn't. There is the chance that it would actually get better. We can hope...

    Was this headline made by the Katzbot? It is priceless. All I want now is the columbine slant on the whole thing. Remember, kids - everything is an 'age'!

    thenerd.
  • Re:Post? (Score:4)

    by ConceptJunkie (24823) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @06:11AM (#1152715) Homepage Journal
    You know, I've heard this argument quite a bit and I think it is completely wrong.

    In the Microsoft world, you have thousands and thousands of barely-competent software vendors writing code for Windows. They test their code (in theory) on Microsoft Windows (and many of them _still_ ignore supporting NT).

    If Microsoft's code is opened (and I think you'll see Ice Capades in the Iron city of Dis before that ever happens), suddenly you've got lots of spin-off versions of Windows... and guess what... a lot of this marginal software (including most of Microsoft's own products) will stop working.

    Look at it from the 3rd party's point of view, it's already too much trouble to support Windows 98 and Windows NT for many of them... and their stuff barely works in many instances as it is.

    What happens when suddenly there's RedHat Windows and AOL Windows and GNUWindows and Corel Windows... and suddenly every software vendor starts getting hundred of calls because their software crashes under Fred's-Windows-and-Video-Strip-Poker.

    Don't support it? Fine. Then no one buys anything but Microsoft and then you're in the same places as you are now.

    It's a wonderful thought, but Windows is so big and bloated and depends on it's own maddening complexity to work that no one could ever duplicate it.

    Remember TASM's "quirks" mode to support the bugs in the MASM assembler for compatibility? Well, just think what you'd have to maintain compatibility with the _whole_ operating system.

  • by Frac (27516) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:17AM (#1152716)
    It seemed pooped and lame. Bill Gates' company hasn't dominated any of the significant technological movements and evolutions of the late 90s: open source, nano-technology, AI, genetic research, hand-held and wireless computing, supercomputers.

    Your fallacy seems to assume that Bill Gates is trying to build an empire of everything technological. However, Microsoft has remained to be a primarily software company ever since its inception, and I don't see why a software company needs to dominate nano-technology, supercomputers, or genetic research to be rake in cash from an operating system used in most personal computers in the world.

    Actually, why on earth would a software company want to dominate in any of those mentioned fields?

    Let me go sell my amazon stocks now, since I don't think they'll plan on doing anything nanotech with their books and DVDs anytime in the near future.

  • Come-on-Katz? (Score:4)

    by Pengo (28814) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:09AM (#1152717) Journal

    Yeah I agree,
    What would be here without the threat of Microsoft? BUT.. I have heard many times that the greatest technological inventions come about because of war. I am not sure how true that is or not, but you go to RedHat and see the "Anti-Microsoft" die die die energy... Hasn't that fueled the community a bit? I would bet yes.

    I don't hate Microsoft, they remind me what I don't want and make me appreciate what I have. I hope that the megapower doesn't get broken down.. Maybe it will keep the commuity-a-burnin for a few more years! :)

    $.02

  • Re:Come-on-Katz? (Score:4)

    by nevets (39138) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:52AM (#1152718) Homepage Journal
    Yes, I agree that having a Giant Evil to wake up against every morning is motivational, and even Linus Torvalds said that he started on Linux because he didn't care for the operating systems he had available to him. But he said that about Minix too.

    What about good old competition. Yeah, it's great to team up and fight the "Bad Guy". But I like it better when we are all on the same playing field and are trying to take that "Bad Guy" spot. As long as there are strict standards to follow, I believe it is healthy. What I mean of strict standards is that you must publish and follow all of your APIs. If you write a file that becomes a standard (as is MS Word) it too must be under a standard and published format that other tools may use.

    I enjoyed it back when we had DOS and you can chose from Word, Word Perfect, Write, and Excel Lotus 1,2,3 and other applications. Let the apps fight for features, not file formats.

    What I'm trying to say, is that the motivation will still be there. It doesn't just go away. Its the same argument that I give when I push for Open Source and Free Software. The response back is "why should I write something if I can't 'monopolize' on it". The answer is easy. You need to eat. You still come out with features, and support. Free Software does not prevent you from charging for products. I still buy Red Hat and I have a mirror of it. May sound silly, but I like the support.

    Companies and people alike will still fight hard to be innovative(TM) and productive, with or without the "Bad Guy".

    Steven Rostedt
  • by 348 (124012) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:24AM (#1152719) Homepage
    Interesting piece. However frankly I don't agree that there will be a Post Microsoft period. As one sided as this site is with regards to Microsoft, I think it would be foolish to believe that "The wicked witch is dead". Microsoft does have a customer base, and will continue to diversify making the public at large more and more dependent on their products. From smart houses and game consoles to news television and insurance, Microsoft has it's paws in everything. As well they should. Microsoft, for all Slashdot readers flames and finger pointing on the evil empire continually forget one important thing. Microsoft is in business to make money for their shareholders, they have always been in business for this reason and will continue to keep profit margins and revenue stream well ahead of culture driven policy and for that matter the justice department.

    They will have the courts tied up for years with appeals and why Open Source advocates are rejoicing that the wicked witch is dead, Bill and Balmer and the gang are focusing on making more money with newer products and slick marketing. Unfortunately money is power and although the DOJ won this round but overall I don't believe it will really hurt Microsoft at all.

  • Sorry Guys. (Score:4)

    by tcd004 (134130) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:09AM (#1152720) Homepage
    Not that I'm happy about it, but I think we're a long way from a post-microsoft world. Even if Judge Jackson passes down the harshest ruling possible, Microsft still has it's software running on a huge percentage of the world's computers. They may have to take a step back in their development, but they'll find ways around any injunctions, just as the baby bells have.

    tcd004
    LostBrain [lostbrain.com]

  • Re:point of view (Score:4)

    by maniack (146532) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:35AM (#1152721)
    This is stupid. Just because most people who read slashdot are in their own little linux world doesn't mean that the rest of the world doesn't use Windows. Linux has barely made a dent in Microsoft's power, and MS continues to grow in the handheld/non-PC world. Linux, or any other OS, will never overtake MS until it's as easy to use as Windows. The majority of computer users do not have the expertise to even install linux, much less maintain it.
  • Outdated thinking (Score:5)

    by Phaid (938) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:20AM (#1152722) Homepage
    You're right, Jon, we already live in a post-microsoft world. But not in the way you seem to think.

    On the one hand, the breakup of Microsoft is largely irrelevant. Microsoft's success in the world of operating systems has peaked. Windows 2000 is the beginning of the end ; its mediocre performance and its failure to establish a strong presence in the server market means that MS will never own the enterprise. And its challengers on the desktop are winning as well ; Microsoft is in retreat on all fronts. And because Microsoft is now a well-established company with stable stock value, a successful career at Microsoft no longer means retiring as a millionaire at age 30. They can't attract the talent they need to keep going. The justice department may well accelerate their decline, but they aren't the cause of it.

    On the other hand, you talk of choices between operating systems, etc, etc, and how the world will be all wonderful and happy now that the great beast Microsoft has been slain. Guess again. There's a new sheriff in town, and this time it's got the law on its side and the courts in its pocket. And its name is... the Entertainment Industry. Yes, Microsoft dumbed down computing for the masses and in doing so they reduced the quality of the experience. But they didn't have the millions of dollars of lobbying power that the MPAA, RIAA, and other consortiums of faceless companies have to force their wares down our throats. While Microsoft may have bundled apps in order to kill their competition, the entertainment industry simply gets laws passed to kill theirs.

    So we can all jump for joy and celebrate the fact that we can run any operating system we want on our machines. But we're really just kicking the dying giant, while the real enemy creeps up on us from all sides.
  • by jht (5006) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:31AM (#1152723) Homepage Journal
    I wrote this letter this morning, and submitted it to a couple of newspapers up here in Boston. I don't think that Microsoft needs to be broken up into bits, and if they don't see the benefits of opening their source, I don't think we should be forcing it on them - eventually the marketplace probably will. But they still are dominant, and they use that in an unfair fashion. The letter below is just me taking a whack at how to level the playing field enough to let everyone else back in the game - if we did this and companies still failed to get any traction against Microsoft it'd be their own danged fault. We're not in a post-Microsoft era yet, nor are we likely to be no matter what the outcome of the suit. There's just too much MS out there, and there's really no reason to get rid of it all for most people. Punishments I'd like to see would be on the order of a flogging for every BSOD-causing bug.

    Well, the hammer has fallen on Microsoft in an utter anticlimax. On the one hand, Microsoft has used their size, wealth, and clout to squeeze as much competition as possible out of their path, but on the other hand they have built genuinely useful products (flaws and all), and are a key part of the high-tech economy. How do we solve the issues at hand and reconcile these two divergent views of Microsoft? I'd like to put forth my proposal for a remedy here.


    First of all, Microsoft should not be broken up. That would simply create a host of smaller companies which would dominate in smaller market segments. Nor should they be fined - that would just enrich the government further and not even put a dent into Microsoft's cash flow.

    My solution, however, would deal with this in a more effective fashion.

    First, Microsoft would be required to provide full applications support for all competitive platforms (anything with approximately 3% of the total market or more). This would include Macintosh and Linux. Microsoft offers partial support for Macintosh today, with a version of Office that lacks web development or database support. They would be required to move the missing pieces of Office as well. Additionally, they would be required to port to Linux and any OS that met those criteria, with full feature parity and simultaneous releases for all platforms. This would ensure continued support for Microsoft's competition, and give users the freedom to use any platform they wanted. It also would probably increase Microsoft's overall application sales.

    Second, require Microsoft to open up all the core API's (programming interfaces) of Windows and Office, and to publicly publish all file formats to their applications. Microsoft would have to publish the information before they, themselves could take advantage of it. This will put developers of applications and add-ins on equal footing with Microsoft without favoring anyone.

    Third, allow Microsoft to embed Internet functionality in the operating system (but with the same openness requirement as above). Make Internet Explorer a separate program, though. Move it to the applications group at Microsoft. The same with Windows Media Player (which is trying today to kill off RealNetworks' Real Player and Apple's QuickTime).

    Fourth, appoint a judge to oversee this with the authority to intervene at any time, rather than making them wait until a suit is filed. During the three years this case has run, Microsoft succeeded in killing off Netscape, and that was a good deal of the reason the suit was brought in the first place. Don't let it happen again.

    If implemented, this would have the effect of giving Microsoft's competition a fair playing field with which they could then succeed or fail on even terms. It will also give Microsoft an opportunity to remain dominant - but force them to play fair in order to do so.

    - -Josh Turiel
  • by johnalex (147270) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:34AM (#1152724) Homepage
    We may like to think this ruling comes "too little, too late," that the computing world has already outgrown M'soft. Perhaps we have. However, many of us tend to forget that a world exists outside the academic and geek realms: the world of business. In that world, Microsoft still matters.

    Go into almost any business nowadays and poll people on their OS's and applications. You'll find Microsoft still controls much of the business world. Macintosh and Linux are far behind. In fact, few businessmen even know about Linux.

    I may be returning to the financial industry in a few months; I find out today. I'll be entering a pure Microsoft shop. My first order of business will be turning my personal machine into a dual-boot Linux-WinNT setup. I can do that because I know the alternative exists, and I have the expertise to make the alternative work. I've already told the DP manager I plan to implement a firewall and mail server using Linux. He has no Linux experience. All his PC experience concerns Microsoft OS's and applications. In this industry, he's not alone. Even worse, the DP vendors themselves have adopted wholesale Microsoft back-office and front-office applications - running on Microsoft OS's, of course.

    Multiply this company by the multitudes of companies in other industries, and you'll see we're a long way from breaking the shackles of Redmond. And let's not even consider Aunt Minnie at home.

    We have a long way to go before Microsoft truly doesn't matter. Hopefully, we'll arrive before this mess finally finishes at the Supreme Court. Then, we'll relish the triumph of knowing the marketplace settled the issue - helped along by the Slashdotters, of course. :-)

  • Not yet. (Score:5)

    by 3247 (161794) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:23AM (#1152725) Homepage

    No, we're not living in a post-Microsoft world yet:

    Microsoft products still dominate the personal computing and standard software market:

    • The vast majority of desktop computers still run Windows.
    • Most software written, especially games, is only available for Windows.
    • The most frequent data formats used to exchange documents are thos of MS Office.
    • Schools still teach the use of Microsoft products.
    • ...

    Even if Microsoft is split up in Baby Bills, this won't automatically change MS Office's market share.
    Even if the courts rule Microsoft's marketing methods illegal, this does not mean people will stop to buy Microsoft products.
    Even if there are other operating systems that you can buy your PC with, you still need software for it.

    At the moment, people buy Windows and Office because everyone else uses it too. And vendors write software and hardware drivers because everyone has it.
    This won't change that soon only because Microsoft is punished in any way.

    What we need are standardized APIs, data formats, etc. that are not tied to a certain software product. As long as eg Windows' API or Office's data formats remains proprietary, nothing will change from today's situation:

    • If someone sends you a Word document, it's your problem if FooOffice can't read it. Use MS Office.
    • If a game "designed for Windoze" does not run on Wine, that's your problem. Run Windows.
    • If there are no drivers for your operating systen, bad luck. Use Windows.

    Well, let's see what the punishment for Microsoft will be...

  • by Jerome2003 (168602) on Tuesday April 04 2000, @05:31AM (#1152726) Homepage
    I don't know about everyone else, but is becoming very frustrating to pick up the paper and see all of the doomsday articles about Microsoft. First of all, I am a long time Mac loyalist. I grew up throwing darts at pictures of Windows logos and Bill Gates. It made me upset that Microsoft had stomped out Apple from even competing in their level. It inspired me to use that frustration to learn how to program and one day create the tools and technologies that would level the playing field and make the power that Microsoft wields nevermore. This was true for people across the industry. Netscape, Sun, and even alternative OSes like BeOS and Linux fueled their drive on the fact that one day their technologies, their abstraction from the Windows world, would allow consumers to one day be free. This would not have been true if there was not an entity like Microsoft to fight against.

    Humans love a fight. It is proven that the most patriotic times in this country and the most productive are when we are at a state of war. Many outlets of the computer industry were fueled in energy and enthusiasm to fight against the software behemouth Microsoft. Would Apple have dumped their entire code base, replacing it with the multi-processing, protected memory, BSD pumping Mach Kernel if Microsoft didn't threaten to the world that NT would be the replacement for UNIX and all other Oses? Would Linus and the elite group of hackers that gravitated to Linux have come home every night after a long day of work to work on the Linux kernel and its surrounding technologies if they weren't fueled by the lack of choices for a decent PC based server and development environment? Would the programmers from Apple and SGI have gotten together to break the status quo and put the speed, media power, and 64-bit database file system into the BeOS if they didn't think the media enthusiasts of the world needed something other than the dominating Windows OS? Would Netscape have open sourced their browser and tried to redesign it from the ground up when they saw they were loosing their ground to the powerful Internet Explorer? I think not. I contend that the alternative operating systems, cross platform applications, and the power driving today's businesses online would not have been if we didn't have the company that everyone loves to hate, Microsoft.

    Programmers rallied around the little Microsoft of yesteryear because they were fighting against the giant IBM, breaking the status quo of the mainframe world into the PC world today. Because of this, we are living the benefits of a PC (or Mac) on every desktop. Now programmers are rallying around alternative OSes and Internet technologies that make cross-platform, networked applications a reality. They are trying to break the status quo of Windows everywhere. Think of what benefits this energetic generation of programmers will create! And thank Microsoft for fueling the flames in their hearts that help them to continue fighting towards freedom!
(1) | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6