Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Analysts Split Over Vista Launch Date 165

Posted by Zonk
from the sooner-or-later dept.
An anonymous reader writes "A ZDNet report details comments by analysts on the upcoming release of Microsoft's newest operating system. Vista is currently scheduled to be released to businesses next month, and to consumers in January of next year. Not everyone on the sidelines agrees that the company will make that deadline, though. Reservations seem mostly to center around legal and political issues, rather than any concrete technical problems." From the article: " A delay for Vista now would be convenient for Microsoft, Gartner analyst David Mitchell-Smith argued, because 'when people start complaining about the delay, Microsoft can reasonably say 'don't blame us' and point the finger at the EC.' ... Mitchell-Smith also noted that Microsoft wants to avoid further litigation, as it is already facing legal action by Symantec and Adobe Systems."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Analysts Split Over Vista Launch Date

Comments Filter:
  • by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohn@@@gmail...com> on Saturday October 07, 2006 @04:49PM (#16350513) Journal
    Disclaimer: I am drunk.

    So the analysts are split, eh? And that's news? So if the analysts go one way or the analysts go the other, it's news. And now, we've witnessed that if the analysts don't agree, it's news. Come to think of it, it'd be pretty damn hard for analysts to do something that isn't news.

    Well, I've got the next headline: "Analysts Think About Vista & Retire to the Bathroom to Lay Some Cable." I mean, is there anything the analysts can do that won't make the news? And it causes me great amusement when we get reports from IDC or sponsored "analysts" that are in favor of those who sponsor them.

    You know, I should become an analyst. I hear they get all the girls--unlike the bassists.
  • Oh, get real (Score:5, Insightful)

    by overshoot (39700) on Saturday October 07, 2006 @04:50PM (#16350519)
    It's on rails. Whatever MS has when the date comes, goes.
  • the punch line is
    "It's the bottom of the ninth, the score is tied and the basses are loaded."
    (note some versions have this as 2 men out also)

    if MS shoves this out the door they will get tagged for the bugs
    if MS waits then they have contracts that expire so either they will need to extend them or "lawyers are standing by"

    Gomers playing with thermite in the bilge of this ship will he find the sparklers?????
  • Vista (Score:4, Insightful)

    by TheRecklessWanderer (929556) on Saturday October 07, 2006 @05:05PM (#16350611) Journal
    Vista is nice. It certainly (IMHO) not worth an upgrade, and I'm not buying a new PC. I don't see any benefits. I see it breaking my music, or making it harder for me to play it. I see it making things less easy to configure (at the low level). It does look cool, but so what. There is no way my office is upgrading to Vista (Luckily, I make that choice). All these analysts saying this and that and the other about Vista. Why don't they do something useful instead of shooting off a bunch of useless positions.
    • by tomhudson (43916)

      All these analysts saying this and that and the other about Vista. Why don't they do something useful instead of shooting off a bunch of useless positions.

      That's the job of analysts - to "retire to the toilet and lay some cable".

      • Those who can, do ...
      • Those who can't ... become analyssts ...
      • Those who can't analyse ... trust analysts.

        It even explains the plethora of bagholders for SCO.

    • In a sane world, it would be astounding that anyone would hire these "analyst" groups. But this is far from a sane world.

      "Analysts" as a group are some of the most useless people around. They're not technically adept enough to properly examine the technical market and they're not market-savvy enough to make accurate predictions about it.

      In short, everything I've seen suggests that they don't know anything and they don't do anything of any real importance. Based on the quality of their "keen insi

    • by canuck57 (662392)

      Vista is nice. It certainly (IMHO) not worth an upgrade, and I'm not buying a new PC. I don't see any benefits. I see it breaking my music, or making it harder for me to play it.

      Shhhhhhhhush.... don't let the cat out of the bag. All those non-Vista compliant machines are going down in price and make good Linux systems for cheap!

    • by oddfox (685475)

      How is it breaking your music?

      • by b0s0z0ku (752509)
        How is it breaking your music?


        DRM?


        -b.

        • by oddfox (685475)

          When DRM is mandatory, let me know. You can encode WMA/MP3/WAV with WMP11 at various quality levels and with or without copy protection, and if I remember correctly copy protection is disabled by default. As for video, or if you're talking about Media Foundation in general, it's not something that's forced upon you by anyone but the content providers. Bitch at them if you want to bitch to anyone, and stop giving them money.

          • by jZnat (793348) *
            I agree. Although Vista will have far too much **AA-inspired DRM added, it isn't exactly mandatory to use with your own content, so I wouldn't be too worried yet. The day DRM becomes mandatory is the day Microsoft shoots itself in the foot with a rocket launcher (the one from Halo 2, and they're not host either).
          • by bit01 (644603)

            When DRM is mandatory, let me know.

            Ever heard of the boiled frog [google.com]? M$ is a master at it.

            ---

            Open source software is everything that closed source software is. Plus the source is available.

            • by oddfox (685475)

              When and if Microsoft ever decides to make DRM mandatory in their products, there will be a great migration to other software solutions that don't cram it down their user's throats. Furthermore, I'd see plenty of legal trouble for them if they were to do so and prevent people who want to make copies that they can use freely for their own enjoyment on whatever system they happen to have for playback.

              Besides, you're obviously an OSS supporter, and considering how Linux as a desktop is easily viable (More ga

              • by bit01 (644603)

                When and if Microsoft ever decides to make DRM mandatory in their products, there will be a great migration to other software solutions that don't cram it down their user's throats.

                Like XBox you mean?

                There never will be "one day" when they make DRM mandatory. They'll just keep on gradually turning up the heat, as they are doing now with things like WGA and TC, until the net value to the consumer is marginally better than zero with M$'s profit maximized. That's the whole point of the boiled frog anecdo

                • by oddfox (685475)

                  Like XBox what? You mean the console that's still lagging behind the big players in the market? Do you know how easy it is to mod an XBox, as well, to make it an excellent media center machine? A friend of mine did just that and it's a great piece of hardware for that purpose? So it can't rip burned CDs by default, that's the only thing I can think of that you'd be pointing out. Arguing DRM by pointing at the XBox is pretty lame, and for the record, I do support the idea that they can say whatever the hell

                  • by bit01 (644603)

                    Pointing out the example of an XBox as a closed platform where M$ acts as a gatekeeper for every piece of software running on it (for the majority of the population and like other consoles) is not lame.

                    And to say WGA and TC is not DRM (Digital Rights/Restrictions Management) is just silly.

                    ---

                    Unregulated DRM = Total Customer Control = Ultimate Customer Lockin = Death of the free market.

                    • by oddfox (685475)

                      Yes, it is lame, and no, it's not silly. I just woke up and havn't had a chance to get some food or coffee into me but here goes anyway, I'll try to plow through another post.

                      It is lame to point out the XBox because the XBox is a custom piece of hardware that Microsoft has a vested interest in keeping closed up for a multitude of purposes, not the least of which being internet multiplay over the XBox Live network. Furthermore, I already pointed out that if you want to mod your XBox, you can easily do so,

                    • by bit01 (644603)

                      All your XBox arguments apply equally to the PC in the medium to long term. That's why M$ is boiling the frog.

                      Like most businesses they want more control. Unlike most businesses they are in a strong position to get it.

                      ---

                      Unregulated DRM = Total Customer Control = Ultimate Customer Lockin = Death of the free market.

                    • by oddfox (685475)

                      No, they don't. The PC is, has always been, and always will be a general purpose utility that can be constructed by anyone who wishes to do so. The XBox and other entertainment consoles are not. Microsoft is in no more a position to eliminate fair use rights than any other company with as much influence in fields related to this subject matter. I can think of no better way to drive users to the competition than to force DRM on it's users. Until they do so, you're talking out of your ass with your "boiling t

    • Re:Vista (Score:5, Insightful)

      by slackmaster2000 (820067) on Saturday October 07, 2006 @07:31PM (#16351433)
      I also make software decisions for my organization, and like you, I will not be upgrading any machines to Windows Vista.

      However, I realize that we are bound to Windows for the long term. Previous plans to switch to competitive (preferably OSS) software have always concluded that the initial bump is too high and too wide to overcome without dedicating considerable resources throughout the company. We wouldn't see a positive return for a long time, although eventually there will be a (relatively speaking) small one. In other words, the hassle is a tangent that is not in line with the goals of the company, and the payoff is minor enough that the effort is not considered to be worthwhile. Inevitable poor analogy: I have to mow a large lawn with a crappy little lawn mower. My time is valuable to me, and a new lawn mower would save time and over the long term pay off. However, a nice lawnmower is so immediately expensive that I really don't want to afford it now, and can't afford the effort of saving for it. The end goal is that the lawn look nice, which will occur whether it takes me an hour with a nice mower or four hours with a crappy mower. Thus I'll just continue mowing the lawn with my crappy lawn mower and not worry about it.

      Ok, so I've taken the long road to get to my point: you're in a Windows shop, as am I. Neither of us will be upgrading to Vista, but it is inevitable that we will begin running Vista on new machines. It is inevitable that we will eventually have a majority of our machines running Vista. I don't know about you, but I've been installing the release candidates to get an idea of what I'll be seeing in the future. (and trying to optomistic about the obvious flaws in these beta releases..."what do you mean you can't find a driver for my CDROM drive? It's a CDROM drive, just fucking read it!")

      It's also interesting to me to think back on my initial impressions of past MS operating systems. The only one that I actually *liked* and *upgraded to* was Windows 2000. A Windows OS that was hardware, software, and support friendly in terms of business use. When I first experienced Windows XP I hated it. I hated it for years. However, now I would much rather support our majority of XP machines than our minority of Win2K machines. Is XP a better operating system? Well, now that I've gotten over the realization that it isn't the best thing since sliced bread, I can say "yeah, it's a bit better."

      Nowadays I don't pay much attention to hype and analyst bullshit, other than for personal amusement. I look at the features that I'll eventually be supporting and try to plan on how they'll affect me both negatively and positively.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Javaman59 (524434)
        I don't make these decisions for my company, but I've made them a few times for home.

        Previous plans to switch to competitive (preferably OSS) software have always concluded that the initial bump is too high and too wide to overcome without dedicating considerable resources throughout the company.

        Each time I've considered Linux for home use, I've decided that right now not only is Linux not worth the trouble of switching, but that Windows actually does the job that I want of it better. The only looking

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by jawtheshark (198669) *

          I agree. Window's 2000 was actually likeable, but WinXP, despite some ugliness, is a bit better. I miss the XP "Start" menu when I use 2000

          There are exactly *two* features that are useful in WinXP that aren't in Win2000. That's fast user switching and remote desktop. The Luna theme is not part of it. I have never met a single IT person that hasn't switched it off and many user I talked to was delighted to find out that you could actually switch it off. As for the two advantages of WinXP: the fast

      • However, I realize that we are bound to Windows for the long term. Previous plans to switch to competitive (preferably OSS) software have always concluded that the initial bump is too high and too wide to overcome without dedicating considerable resources throughout the company. We wouldn't see a positive return for a long time, although eventually there will be a (relatively speaking) small one....[snip]...

        Ok, so I've taken the long road to get to my point: you're in a Windows shop, as am I. Neither of u

  • by Teun (17872) on Saturday October 07, 2006 @05:08PM (#16350625) Homepage
    Microsoft is "probably getting a bit tired" of the European Union's stance, suggested Mitchell-Smith. "It's not unreasonable to think so."

    And Europe is getting a bit tired of Microsoft's attitude.
    These guys in Redmond know damn well what is required to get a smooth introduction of their software in Europe, and unlike at home it can't be bought in a court or congress.

    Of course Europe has it's own shortcomings, for one they should have demanded a noticeable price difference between XP and XP-N, surely the development of MS Media Player was not for free.
    For another Europe should have insisted on more interoperability like full access to the specs of NTFS.

    Just to name a few issues with the de-facto monopoly.

    • by linuxci (3530)

      And Europe is getting a bit tired of Microsoft's attitude.
      These guys in Redmond know damn well what is required to get a smooth introduction of their software in Europe, and unlike at home it can't be bought in a court or congress.

      I don't know about that. The EU have shown recently that they're willing to bend over for the US government, look at the recent story about EU handing over airline passenger data to the US (they have been doing it for a while but the EU courts decided it was illegal so they renego

    • The EC is nothing but a bunch of idiots. The removal of the media player from Windows was a joke -- and note that WMP ~is~ a free download from Microsoft's website. The new regulations -- demanding that Microsoft decrease the security in Windows so that security companies have something more to secure -- is just as much of a joke. The US anti-trust case was more effective than anything the European Commission has done, and that is not saying much.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Saddam bought off damn near the whole continent. Ever notice how the French abandoned enforcing the no-fly zones when the UN started up the "Oil-for-Food" program? The very program that funnelled billions of dollars of bribes all over the world?

      People in the EU aren't any different from the rest of humanity - the operate in their own best interests. They just don't feel like selling out to Microsoft at this time, because they think it's not in their best interests to do so.
    • by rtechie (244489)
      And Europe is getting a bit tired of Microsoft's attitude.

      This isn't about the EU vigorously defending the rights of European citizens. It's about European software companies (and goverments) being pissed off that lots of euros are flowing into Microsoft's coffers, an AMERICAN company. But they can't just stick on tarrifs like they normally do. Why? Because the tarrifs are designed to encourage local competitors. It's very difficult for local competitors to get traction against MS due to very significant co
  • by linuxci (3530) on Saturday October 07, 2006 @05:09PM (#16350631)
    Another delay won't matter one bit, it's been delayed enough already that I'm sure any computer manufacturers already have contingency plans made in case the release is not ready. Also as businesses are generally slow adopters (many still run Win2k) not many will be waiting for that release (I don't understand why they're releasing to corporates first and then consumers, it's eather ready or it's not).

    As is the case with many of you, I'm not going to be queueing outside in the rain waiting for the first store with vista in to open (well I'd be crazy to I use OS X and Linux at home and Linux and Windows at work and I'm not going to pay to upgrade a work machine!), all the interesting features from the product were cut so it looses whatever geek appeal an MS product can ever have so now it's probably best that they make sure they deliver the most polished product they can possibly do.

    Things have changed a lot since the XP launch days, now Mac OS X is a very mature product and as Macs are Intel now some people may buy a Mac so that they can hedge their bets and run either Vista or OSX depending on what they prefer, a rushed and unpolished Vista would really make the Mac shine. Also there's a lot more user focus on the Linux desktop such as ubuntu, not to mention Live CD's which are a great way for people to try out Linux with no risk - although live CD's are not new, I remember a Slackware CD from 1996 that you could run from, but these days they're a whole lot more user friendly with decent hardware detection.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Teun (17872)
      Another delay won't matter one bit, it's been delayed enough already that I'm sure any computer manufacturers already have contingency plans made in case the release is not ready.

      You can say that again!
      Have you also noticed the number of new (not just top of the line) computers being offered with standard 2 Gb of memory? That's surely not because of the applications that the average person is running.
      All that memory was ordered months ago expecting it to be mated with Vista around now.

    • by pipingguy (566974) *
      I fully expect Vista to break existing customized AutoCAD installations, but that's OK these days as engineering is now all about pushing buttons and making stuff look good with 3D models and perfect laser prints. You know you're in trouble when management defers to CAD support and tells you to design what the software is capable of simulating.
  • by Blahbooboo3 (874492) on Saturday October 07, 2006 @05:22PM (#16350717)
    As usual, with any Vista announcement come the big proclamations saying "Oh, I am not upgrading to vista." Ya ya, whatever....

    People said the SAME thing about XP here as well. 5 years later I bet almost all of you windows folks are running XP at this point. Eventually, you will want to buy a new computer and just like XP did, it will come with Vista. Yes, of course people will claim they are going to OS X but I'll believe it when I see the Mac % of worldwide market go above 5%.

    Basically everyone will switch one way or another to Vista whether to play some game or some other Vista only application. Microsoft knows & understands this having seen this in all of its Windows releases. That's why they are basically just doing whatever they want...as we all will eventually be assimilated :)

    BTW, I am a closet Mac fanboy :)
    • 5 years later I bet almost all of you windows folks are running XP at this point

      Emphasis added. That's the point. 5 years from now ? Who knows. But thing is, as with XP (and FYI very many people, companies, etc. don't even use XP yet) there will probably not be an enormous rush to switch in the beginning. Especially since it will require many people to buy new computers (since most of them don't build their systems and many just usually buy new PCs instead of changing components).
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by TheRaven64 (641858)
      People said the SAME thing about XP here as well.

      I did. I was on Win2K when XP came out. Now I have two laptops, one with FreeBSD and another with OS X.

      If I were a game developer, I wouldn't consider using DirectX 10 for a while. At launch, the Vista market share will be tiny; smaller than the Mac market share. It might even be the opportunity for OpenGL to gain some mass-market traction again; a game written using OpenGL can take advantage of all the latest GPU features (some via extensions only

    • I don't really think so, because, to me, Vista seems to be the next WinME.
    • I bet almost all of you windows folks are running XP at this point.

      And what do you know, five years later and (almost) at the next version release, and here I am still on 2k. More importantly, every single desktop where I work is still on 2k.

      Could be different with Vista though. The problem with XP was that it is not different from Windows 2000 in any substantial way, just uglier and a little less stable. Vista looks like it actually might offer something new.

      Or maybe it's just because even 5 ye
      • Vista looks like it actually might offer something new.

        Doesn't Vista have a slightly tweaked XP kernel and the same filesystem?

        Do you remember that the idea of using a kernel based on server2003 with improvements was ditched? So what do we get that is new other than a different shade of GUI and newer versions of the optional extras?

        • by baadger (764884)
          No, the Vista kernel is built upon the 2003 Server kernel as a foundation just like Windows XP x64 Edition was. There are loads and loads of enhancements and tweaks.

          It's such a shame that the aweful userland/UI decisions (horrible default colour scheme, nasty default fonts, users still running as pseudo-admin's, DEP *still* disabled by default even if implemented by the CPU) are going to be the things that define Vista in most peoples eyes.
    • The computer industry needs a windows lauch. A new windows releases forces people to upgrade their software. They also tend to buy new PCs. Semiconductor stocks are doing rather poorly right now. If intel or amd start moving units, it will definetely have an impact on the stock market. While I'm a fan of open source software, I also realize that Microsoft and Apple do stimulate the economy.

      I've attempted to test several betas of vista and have been unable to install any of them on any of my PCs for lac
    • I "upgraded" one system from NT4 workstation to XP "pro" - the consequence was the shared files on the receptionists machine couldn't be seen by enough people at the same time in a small office with less than ten people. Face it guys - it's a home computer operating system and they want us to shell out for Server2003 or wait for Longhorn server for the basic functionality that used to be in the workstation version.
    • People said the SAME thing about XP here as well. 5 years later I bet almost all of you windows folks are running XP at this point. Eventually, you will want to buy a new computer and just like XP did, it will come with Vista.

      Sorry, no dice, we won't even be looking at Vista till at least 2010

      I work in a shop where the boss did a 2 year lease with Dell that is up in March of 07 (yes all XP boxes). Well, the powers that be have decied that a three year lease is the way to go.

      So once again Dell, once ag

    • It's different this time.

      I *cared* about XP. Even ran the betas for development for a while. My users did too - I was fielding questions about it before the official release, and pointing out bugs.

      With vista I've got a machine with it on but I never go near it except for essential testing (rarely) and nobody has asked me about compatibility yet (I know one of our programs doesn't work on RC1 because of a nasty bug in IShellFolder that stops it.. presumably fixed in RC2 - not tried yet).

      This is completely
    • I did, because of "product activation". Later, increasingly intrusive anti-piracy measures in XP reinforced that stance. Otherwise, I might switch to XP.
      Instead, my private machines still run Windows 2000. With the occasional attempt to run Linux. So far, the games are the showstoppers - few available for Linux, and WINE is not perfect yet. But I guess eventually there will be a version that handles the most important ones ;-)

  • by Tim C (15259) on Saturday October 07, 2006 @05:24PM (#16350729)
    Who cares? Seriously, what is this obssession with Vista's launch date? I don't believe that the majority of people here are eagerly awaiting it, so they can rush out, buy it and install it, so why are we hanging on every single piece of non-news concerning it?

    It'll launch when it launches. You'll get it (or not) when you get it. Until then, why the fascination? Anyone would think it was the Second Coming that we were waiting for...
    • Traditionally, everytime Microsoft pushed a new OS out the door, it gets a windfall of cash.

      There are People/Companies on the sidelines waiting for a new OS before they buy a new PC simply so get stuck with an old and thus now "obsolete" OS. Also, as the new OS ups the requirements to run, it will push new PCs on its own.

      This is also why MS has been getting companies into yearly contracts for software, to get away from this cycle and go into a more steady subscription based cycle.

      As you noticed, this story
    • by iminplaya (723125)
      Seriously, what is this obssession with Vista's launch date?

      It's called hype. If the product isn't constantly pushed into our faces, we will forget about it, giving the alternatives more mind share. All this hype is to keep us focused on the "prize". With all the delays since its announcement(how many years has it been now?), how many continuous days has the product NOT been on the front pages of slashdot, a "Source for technology related news with a heavy slant towards Linux and Open Source issues.", accor
    • Most of the business MS cares about are corporations that don't "rush out and buy", but plan the expenditure many months in advance. Many organisations would have budgeted IT expenditure on Vista. For many, finalcial year == calendar year. That means people want to be able to spend their money before the end of the year to keep their budgets clean.

      So, regardless of the state of Vista, something is very likely going to get shipped before the end of the year, even if it gets followed in a few months with a se

  • REASONABLY? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 07, 2006 @05:47PM (#16350855)
    Microsoft can reasonably say 'don't blame us' and point the finger at the EC.

    Complete crap. The commission's position is that Microsoft must obey the law. That means no anti-competitive conduct. Microsoft want some presciptive agreement that they can work around instead.

    It's like someone being told it's illegal to murder someone and then coming back time after time saying "well, suppose I shoot her?", "well suppose I hit her with an icepick, is that okay?", "I just want you to give me an exact list of the things I mustn't do so I can stay within the law. Food supplements are okay, right, suppose I just put some 'supplements' in her food, can you say that's okay?", "just tell me every way I mustn't kill her so I'm in the clear for anything else". Nobody is stupid enough to fall for this. It's insultingly absurd.

    There is nothing remotely reasonable about Mcirosoft's behaviour on this. Instead of obeying the law they want to "negotiate" with the legal process. Seriously; they use that word themselves. Then they say they show "goodwill" by complying with parts of what they are legally REQUIRED to do. Seriously, who the fuck do they think they are?

    Apologies for the tone but their conduct in this really gets to me. And no, I'm not a generic Microsoft basher, I use a lot of their software but it's about time for someone to teach them that laws apply to them too. Hopefully the EC can do that.
    • by Jugalator (259273)
      I agree, I actually misread that piece and thought the summary said *can't* reasonably point finger and it made much more sense to me! Because doing that would also give a focus on their legal issues with Vista, which never does anything good for a company. Especially when the party having issues is an organization represented by group of over a dozen countries. Then even their stock owners start to notice the company is having quite some trouble.
      • by TheZorch (925979)
        I agree also. For some reason Microsoft seems to think its somehow above the law or that the laws aren't supposed to apply to them. Oh but they swiftly employ those same laws to defend them if somebody pirates their software. They have a double standard at that company and this is their biggest problem.
        • by shaitand (626655)
          "For some reason Microsoft seems to think its somehow above the law or that the laws aren't supposed to apply to them."

          Microsoft looks at the laws just like they look at a contract. If they have gained a greater profit than the total of the fines and penalties levied against them, then breaking the law is just good business.

          The problem is that governments are unwilling to bankrupt companies as punishment for offenses like anti-competitive behavior. The penalties for anti-competitive actions should equal the
    • Is Microsoft one of the few in this or are there many US companies that take the barbaric attitude of asking governments how much they have to pay to break the law? In Australia we imported a failed US telecommunications CEO to run our mostly state owned telephone company and he is certainly taking this attitude.
    • Complete crap. The commission's position is that Microsoft must obey the law. That means no anti-competitive conduct.

      "Anti-competitive conduct" is not as easy to recognize as you seem to believe. Your analogy to murder is "insultingly absurd", to use your own phrase. Anti-competitive practices, especially in this case, are not so clear-cut.

      The EU regulatory commission is being amazingly pig-headed in this case. The commission doesn't want to be seen as "holding up the release of Vista" because they'

      • by bit01 (644603)

        Anti-competitive practices, especially in this case, are not so clear-cut.

        Nonsense. It's called bundling to an unacceptable level. Cross-subsidizing to get into new markets. Something they've been doing for decades.

        M$ knows full well what the problem is, in fact better than the commission, it's just that they refuse to accept it. As usual they are gaming the legal system to increase their profits. As you know full well, software, like pornography, is an amorphous entity that the law does not precisely

        • by kylef (196302)

          Nonsense. It's called bundling to an unacceptable level. Cross-subsidizing to get into new markets. Something they've been doing for decades.

          This is where I completely disagree with your position. Under most legal standards, to be guilty of anti-competitive "bundling", the "bundled" product must be a clearly distinct product which is not functionally relevant to the market-dominant one.

          To use a real-world example, if my company had a near-monopoly on freezers and I tried to bundle a chair with my fre

          • by bit01 (644603)

            This is where I completely disagree with your position. Under most legal standards, to be guilty of anti-competitive "bundling", the "bundled" product must be a clearly distinct product which is not functionally relevant to the market-dominant one.

            That's the issue. Software is amorphous. All software could be considered part of the OS.

            You have to draw a line in the sand somewhere if you don't want a monopoly supplier of all software and for better or worse the EU have decided that media players and se

  • by texaport (600120)
    1 . Purchase XP-home next Sunday 15 Oct from a local retailer with thirty day return policy.

    2 . Wait for Microsoft to make a retroactive Vista upgrade announcment in mid-November.

    3a. Return software should Microsoft not do the obvious.
    3b. Get at least $150 credit toward Vista

    4 . Unload XP-Home to someone for $20 loss.

  • by The Living Fractal (162153) <banantarr AT hotmail DOT com> on Saturday October 07, 2006 @06:01PM (#16350929) Homepage
    " A delay for Vista now would be convenient for Microsoft, Gartner analyst David Mitchell-Smith argued, because 'when people start complaining about the delay, Microsoft can reasonably say 'don't blame us' and point the finger at the EC.' ... Mitchell-Smith also noted that Microsoft wants to avoid further litigation, as it is already facing legal action by Symantec and Adobe Systems."

    I really don't see how a delay is good for Microsoft, no matter who's fault it is. I mean, OK so I follow this guy's logic and Microsoft says to me 'don't blame us, blame the EC'. Of course then I go to the EC and according to them the blame is squarely on Microsoft for being at fault in the first place. So it just leads back to Microsoft anyway, which I hardly imagine could be 'convenient' for them.

    Sort of like if I committed a crime and, to explain why I haven't gotten out of jail yet, I said 'don't blame me! blame the government for putting me here!'. Yeah, because it had nothing at all to do with the fact that I started it?

    TLF
    • by Aladrin (926209)
      Not only that, but how many people still fall for that 'It's his fault!' fingerpointing bullshit? And how many of the few that are left would actually believe Microsoft if they tried it?

      Not enough to make a difference, and definitely not enough to counter all the people pissed off about the delay and fingerpointing.

      No, delays are not convenient for companies no matter what.
  • With such high quality products like Microsoft Project - they should've known their critical path...
    Plus, you always have to consider your "Legal and Contractual Feasibility" /me wishes he wasn't in a Sys. Analysis & Design class...
  • by nurb432 (527695) on Saturday October 07, 2006 @06:51PM (#16351255) Homepage Journal
    Cool, perhaps there is a use for attornies afterall..
  • A lawyer friend of mine filed suit against a major utility company. In order to proceed, the judge required a million dollar bond, that he or his clients did not have at the time (him being new to practicing law, and the clients being poor people alleging harm by the utility.)

    Considering the dollar amount MS could attach to an injuction delaying Vista, anyone seeking to block Vista shipping may have to put up an eleventy billion dollar bond... Or show harm that no amount of monetary penalty could replace.
    • anyone seeking to block Vista shipping may have to put up an eleventy billion dollar bond


      Get real. This isn't something started by J.Q. Shark P.A., as a nuisance lawsuit. This is the EU. They make their own laws and havethe right to enforce them. In theory thay could require MS to post an 11-trillion euro bond before selling Vista. That said, why am I posting here? I care diddly-squat about MS's next pseudo-O/S. May the Edsel be with it....
  • The EU fracas has been going on for years. They've known it has been going on, they've known what they had to do to avoid continuing fines and other trouble. They have no excuse for Vista, especially as they've gone even further to exclude third party products.

    The very first thing you see in Vista are links to Windows Live and Windows Live Onecare. This is obviously going to suffocate sales for other security products, as well as forcing other products to use a security model that is preferential to OneCa

One picture is worth 128K words.

Working...