Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft

Dan Gillmor on WinXP 327

A reader writes:There's a new column from Dan Gillmor on SiliconValley.com about Windows XP. The column calls for an injunction stopping the shipping of WinXP. Dan's got a well thought out list of reasons why and how it would work."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dan Gillmor on WinXP

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 03, 2001 @11:10AM (#2111248)
    Some of us actually LIKE using it. Don't get me wrong, I can think of a half dozen better OS's than Windows, technically speaking. But as I am FORCED to use Windows for work during the day, Windows XP is -- bar none -- the best Windows OS. I've been using XP since beta 2, now at RC2. It's crashed perhaps 3 times, and I use it non-stop during the day. I rarely have to reboot it.

    Posting anonymously so that I don't feel the WRATH. (Just pretend you see the +2 Karma points.)
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 03, 2001 @11:09AM (#2111323)
    I am sure American consumers will vote with their wallets as they always have done.

    The greatest trick the Devil ever did was to convince everyone he didn't even exist. The greatest scam the corporations have pulled off was to convince the consumers that they could actually effect the rise or fall of a major company by "voting with their wallets".

    The sad truth is that a) the better product doesn't necessarily win the competition and b) when a company grows big enough it doesn't need to pander its clients anymore and can dictate all the terms it wants instead (the largest companies can tell governments what to do!).

  • by Gingko ( 195226 ) on Friday August 03, 2001 @11:24AM (#2113077)
    I don't want to come across as one of the "everything /. posts about MS is biased" crowd, so I won't comment on the decision to post this. However, some of the points in the article made me laugh.

    Microsoft has added ''code-signing'' measures -- verification, supposedly, that downloads will be safe -- that could scare customers away from using software that competes with Microsoft's offerings.

    How do you spell FUD? This is just silly. Microsoft have added code-signing (which I thought had been around a while) - which they could use to scare people away? How? I suppose they could do something by only allowing MS code to get signed or something, but that's pretty damn unlikely. The idea is that you can be certain where the code has come from, and then it is up to you to decide whether you trust it. Microsoft add *no* commentary on whether they think you should trust it or not, and to assume they will do is just paranoia.

    Microsoft removed the Java environment from XP, thereby breaking thousands of Web sites that use Java. XP customers will face endless downloads to replace the functionality they'd come to expect.

    While I'd rather the JVM was still in XP (but I hadn't noticed it was gone, will check that tonight when I get home), I don't feel any anger towards Microsoft for removing it. They have a competing platform, in .NET. Their attempts to do something with Java, rightly or wrongly, resulted in them getting their wrists slapped. No-one at MS that I've talked to really cares that much about Java. So why should they include it?

    Microsoft is bundling all kinds of services into XP in ways that block competition, from photography software to video/audio playback. If customers want to use other vendors' products they'll have to jump through Microsoft-designed hoops

    Slightly more questionable this. But I do like having ZIP folders natively as part of Explorer. But I've never had any problems with replacing functionality with the alternatives. I am an *informed* user. It is my business as a user to remain informed, and to make the choices that are right for me.

    I could go on, and the article makes points about the OEM market that do sound pretty worrying to me. But all this article does is regurgitate some of the common fears and rumours surrounding XP, without *any* real and substantial justification of this strange injunction idea. I agree with authentication of XP, since you can control what is being posted, and I don't think piracy is good. I haven't had to use my Passport once, and I've been using XP since Beta 1 (as in never - have never even typed in the password).

    I guess I just don't understand why people are making such a noise about fairly minor complaints. My cynical side is telling me that it's indicative of a jealousy of success, but I don't think that's always the case.

    Henry
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 03, 2001 @11:24AM (#2113206)
    You're wrong.

    MS can still ship Java. They can still use Java.

    They just can't take Java, make changes to it so that it's incompatable with real Java, and continue to call it Java.
  • you are :) (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 4n0nym0u$ C0w4rd ( 471100 ) on Friday August 03, 2001 @11:12AM (#2115651)
    Sun simply told Microsoft that Java would NOT be "embraced and extended", that their Java tools had to be compatible with the standards Sun set. Microsoft got pissy about not being able to make an MS Java that was only compatible with windows (forcing companies to block out other OSs or code more because most internet users are windows Users) and decided to come up with C# to kill Java. Suprised that all the Java programmers did not instantly flock to C# (after all it IS made by MS) they decided to take all Java support out of XP and force a large download for users that want Java. MS hopes this move will for webpage designers to use MS langauges rather than Java, thus accomplishign the same objective they had before....stop other OS users from using the web effectively.
  • by Diego_27182818 ( 174390 ) on Friday August 03, 2001 @11:11AM (#2126365)
    ..but personally, I could never support a court injunction preventing a company from shipping their product. Isn't this a little like Dmitri being arrested for the "innovation" that he did? I think that the day that we allow the government to keep a perfectly safe product from shipping is the day that we have finally undermined all our principles of capitalism and the free market.

    The only problem with that is that in the findings of fact, it was found that Microsoft had abused their monopoly position. While it is not illegal to be a monopoly. It is illegal to abuse that power. The time that it takes for a court case to go from findings, to sentance, through all the appeals is just too long. If Microsoft is allowed to continue business as normal until the appeal process is over, any punishment given will be worthless. The punishment will fit the situation as it exists now, and will not be appropriate for the new sitution.
  • by KingAdrock ( 115014 ) on Friday August 03, 2001 @10:58AM (#2141914) Journal
    Microsoft removed the Java environment from XP, thereby breaking thousands of Web sites that use Java. XP customers will face endless downloads to replace the functionality they'd come to expect.

    I may be wrong, (Trust me it wouldn't be the first time) but isn't the removal of Java from XP stem from a court settlement between Sun and Microsoft. I don't think the settlement explicetly made Microsoft remove it from the operating system, but instead didn't allow Microsoft to develop a Java compiler or products anymore. Why should they be expected in include the VM if they don't have any control over it.

    It will still be available for download. So while it may temporarily render sites using Java useless -- they aren't broken forever.
  • The product that succeeds in the marketplace is by definition the best product.

    Bullshit.

    Take a look at the Billboard Hot 100. Would you seriously argue that this represents the best music available? Or even the best music being made today?

    Do you think that best-selling books, or highest-rated TV shows, represent the best work in these media? You beleive that "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" is the best television show airing in the USA today, and that the lastest Danielle Steel and Jackie Collins efforts are amoung the best works of the written word?

    Quality and popularity are completely independent variables.

    Microsoft got where they are by riding IBM's coat-tails, by clever business tricks, and industrial strength marketing. They've managed to make the quality of their product almost as irrelevant as the quality of a pair of Nike's is to a well-branded teenager.

  • by LocalYokel ( 85558 ) on Friday August 03, 2001 @12:44PM (#2158518) Homepage Journal
    For the most part, I'm an M$ whore. I actually paid money to be in the XP preview program, and I must say this $10 appraising fee was well spent -- there's no way I could spend even $100 for an "upgrade" to this piece of crap.

    The minor enhancements they made to the shell as it currently works are nice, but I could do without the more dramatic changes.
  • by Satai ( 111172 ) on Friday August 03, 2001 @01:07PM (#2158629)
    Take a look at the Billboard Hot 100. Would you seriously argue that this represents the best music available? Or even the best music being made today?

    I agree completely - but at the same time, the distinction being drawn is between being the best product and being the best music. Quality and success are independent, yes, but the quality of a product - as a product - is measured in its success.
  • by Ryosen ( 234440 ) on Friday August 03, 2001 @01:52PM (#2158847)
    So, now MS is being put into a position where it will have to beat a possible injunction by pushing XP out the door even faster. Never mind all of the anti-competitive reasons, my bigger concern is the open access to the raw TCP/IP stack, as discussed by Robert Cringely [pbs.org].

    Now, not only are these machines going to have an easily compromised stack, they are going to be even more buggy and vulnerable. The US most likely would not act fast enough to prevent this.

    IMHO, anti-competitive reasons will not prevent the release of XP. However, preventing its release on the grounds that it is of danger to the consumer sounds a lot more feasible.
  • by Lethyos ( 408045 ) on Friday August 03, 2001 @01:53PM (#2158853) Journal
    Preventing the release of WindowsXP will not help to "turn the tides" against Microsoft. I think the majority of Windows users, frustrated over Microsoft's poor quality or not, will find contempt for an injunction against XP's release. I think that it would be best to let Microsoft push the envelope as far as they can in this case until the consumers get absolutely fed up on their own accord. Don't tell them they're fed up. People will reject MS trash when they want to and in due time.
  • the last election (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 03, 2001 @01:55PM (#2158863)
    Do you really think that Microsoft didn't learn anything from the last election? You can win by delaying in the courts until the deadline is past. In this case they are setting their own deadline.

    Anonymous and Cowardly and proud of it.

  • by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Friday August 03, 2001 @02:09PM (#2158963) Homepage
    ...but personally, I could never support a court injunction preventing a company from shipping their product. Isn't this a little like Dmitri being arrested for the "innovation" that he did? I think that the day that we allow the government to keep a perfectly safe product from shipping is the day that we have finally undermined all our principles of capitalism and the free market.

    Woah. HOLD ON A DAMNED MINUTE!!

    Fact: Microsoft has been found criminally GUILTY. Fact: Microsoft is attempting to release a product that Propogates the crime for which they were found guilty.

    These facts go WAY BEYOND the idealistic free market motivations. They have been found guilty and before sentence can be passed, they are continuing and even going beyond in those practices.

    Let's say, for example, a bank robber got caught, was tried and found guilty but was still out on bail before sentencing. While out, he commits another bank robbery. Most people would jump all over this story saying that he has no respect for the law or court systems, that he was out of control and beyond rehabilitiation. In short, they'd be crying out for "life without parole."

    Microsoft is continuing "business as usual" in spite of the fact that their product structure has been found criminal in nature. Corporations are looked at in many ways as a pegal person entity...except in criminal cases? The justice system cannot put a corporation in jail but there are other remedies. There is nothing inappropriate about seeking an injunction against FURTHER criminal acts except that it seems somewhat redundant!!

    What if I were selling illegal copies of MS software, was caught, tried and found guilty? Then while out on bail awaiting sentencing, I sold MORE illegal Microsoft CDs to cover my legal costs? That would be "business as usual" right? Who do these court people think they are!?!? Interfering with my right to do business like that?! The nerve of them!!

    Hello? Have I brought my point home yet? They were found criminally guilty and they persist in doing it by releasing yet ANOTHER operating system with the browser illegally tied with the operating system. They ought to be slapped with an injunction and then with contempt of court to boot!!

    Some of these people are freaking insane!!
  • by pjrc ( 134994 ) <paul@pjrc.com> on Friday August 03, 2001 @02:48PM (#2159249) Homepage Journal
    ...but personally, I could never support an injunction against company dumping toxic waste into rivers and streams. Isn't this just like not giving those tree huggers the time of day in the mainstream media? The day we let uncle sam get in the way of ordinary chemical production is the day we've thrown out all our principles of capitalism and the free market.

    Meddling in ordinary business practives, while it might give some satisfaction to some poor folks who have to drink tap water, but it won't really solve anything, and it certainly sets a dangerous precedent. Personally, I don't see what they're complaining about. I buy premium bottled water, and I've seen nothing in the polution infested public water utility that'd make we want to stop. We've got lots of great clean bottled water brands at every store, so why's everyone so scared over a few chemicals?

    and yes, I know it was a troll, but I just couldn't resist....

  • by subsolar2 ( 147428 ) on Friday August 03, 2001 @05:22PM (#2160085)
    I may be wrong, (Trust me it wouldn't be the first time) but isn't the removal of Java from XP stem from a court settlement between Sun and Microsoft. I don't think the settlement explicetly made Microsoft remove it from the operating system, but instead didn't allow Microsoft to develop a Java compiler or products anymore. Why should they be expected in include the VM if they don't have any control over it.
    I believe the terms were that the java products could not contain any Microsoft specific extenstions. Making them comply with SUN's java specifications, and being Microsoft they went back shiping an older version of their JVM that only supports JDK 1.0.4 if I remember correctly. Of course my own recollections my be totally fubar also!

    - subsolar

Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.

Working...