New Documents Shed Light on Microsoft's Tactics 614
Tigen writes "As the NY Times reports, even as MS prepares to face penalties from the European Union, testimony during the second week of trial in the consumer class-action lawsuit in Minnesota has revealed some embarrassing internal documents from Microsoft which were not disclosed in the 1997 federal antitrust lawsuit. Items include a 1990 letter from Bill Gates to Andy Grove, and Microsoft's illegal tactics against the Go Corporation, a Silicon Valley startup."
Article (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Article (Score:4, Insightful)
As if this doesn't make it obvious what M$ was doing! They were only in the game to keep somebody else from innovating new technology. As soon as a potential competitor closed down, they stopped attempting to "provide a better solution for the customer." What a bunch of hooey!
Re:Article (Score:5, Interesting)
As if this doesn't make it obvious what M$ was doing! They were only in the game to keep somebody else from innovating new technology. As soon as a potential competitor closed down, they stopped attempting to "provide a better solution for the customer." Dude I think you got your history all wrong. When Apple announced the Newton in 1992, everyone wanted to jump onto the same boat. Several companies rushed development of similar devices, including Microsoft, Go, and several others.
When the Newton was released in 1993, and proved to be a fiasco, many companies put their projects on hold or sold them off. That's why Go was sold, and that's why MS stopped development.
The humiliating failure of the Apple Newton put mobile computers on hold for a few years, until Palm revitalized the once dead market.
Re:Article (Score:5, Informative)
This is business, one is supposed to honour one's commitments.
They then went on a firesale buying spree of companies doing pen computing:
- Aha Software's InkWriter once available for Windows and Penpoint? It's Microsoft Journal
- some website markup tool company and a couple of other things.
and most recently Creaturehouse Expression, and despite a promise that it'd be avialable again in November of _2003_ it can't be had for love nor money now.
William
This is business (Score:5, Interesting)
Business: Microsoft was supposed to build their own competing product, follow all legal and ethical guidelines, and fairly compete with Go. Hopefully if they both have good business plans and a good product, they both make a profit. The good natured rivalry between the two causes each to put for their best effort to make their product better. Their customers have a choice of who to give their money to, and high quality products from which to choose from. Everyone benefits.
Highway-robbery: Microsoft violated a non-disclosure agreement (a contract). They took Go's technology and used it to compete with Go. They used their monopoly and bullying tactics to try to frighten investors away from Go. Regardless of the fate of the Newton, this was breach of contract, and potentially a violation of antitrust laws (IANAL). In short, Microsoft's actions were unethical, and possibly illegal.
Btw, Apple canceled the Newton in order to streamline their product line so they could concentrate on OS X (and staying afloat). The Newton still has users today.
"At this moment, it has control of systems all over the world.
And...we can't do a damn thing to stop it."
Miyasaka, "Godzilla 2000 Millennium" (Japanese version)
Re:Article (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Article (Score:5, Funny)
Whenever you append "&partner=google" to the end of a NYTimes URL, you're in sans registration.
Well, whenever you append "&partner=[Anything]" you are in ...
Try http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/24/technology/24sof t.html?ex=1080709200&en=81be83eda9c09dad&ei=5062&p artner=AlQaida [nytimes.com]
HAHAHA (Score:4, Funny)
if($partner) $access = 1;
switch($partner){
case 'google':
$access = 1;
break;
case 'slashdot':
$access = 1;
break;
default:
$access = 0;
break;
}
Re:Article (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Article (Score:5, Interesting)
Well I wish Slashdot would append that to the links by default. They link to the god damn NY Times so much that they might as well use a partner link. Thankfully kind people like yourself usually post a link within a few comments as long as the moderators don't come along and delete your posts.
Re:Article (Score:5, Insightful)
Well I wish Slashdot would append [&partner=] to the links by default.
When YOU abuse their lax partner system, the NYT isn't going to waste their time. When a company, OSDN, or its officers abuse their lax partner system, it is (1) a potential legal liability on the part of OSDN, and (2) going to make NYT change their whole system, probably for the worse.
Re:Article (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Article (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Article (Score:5, Funny)
But what if San wants to use his registration when we already are? Then what will he do?!
Re:Article (Score:4, Funny)
I'm being a good PATRIOT, see? See?
Re:Article (Score:5, Insightful)
What's this? (Score:4, Funny)
OK it's so, let the "Exchange server ate my email" excuse begin!
Re:What's this? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:What's this? (Score:5, Funny)
Recently overheard somewhere at One Microsoft Way:
What's this: "New Documents Shed Light on Microsoft's Tactics" ?!
I thought I told you guys to SHRED those documents, nod SHED them!
The Microsoft Damage. (Score:4, Insightful)
There are a lot of 'high order' dreams in the computing science. The CS holy grail of pocket, portable computing is only now coming to fruition (thank you Palm), but has been on the cards since at least the 60's as a design reference/specification. Go could've given us this in the late 1980's, early 90's. Microsofts' machinations, however, prevented that from happening.
I understand now, why the Palm founders adopted their 'found and leave' strategy for PalmOS. In the light of Go, Inc's demise it makes sense to light 4 or 5 small fires that the enemy can't put -all- out, rather than making a very large target, like Go and Motorola did
I stopped using Microsoft products in 1998. They'll not get one penny of $ from this consumer, and not one item of code from this programmer. I tell all my Microsoft-using friends to fuck off with their self-made problems, too, and get real operating systems, from real software companies
slashbot (Score:3, Insightful)
Please explain how pocket, portable computing would have been possible even ten years ago. The hardware was the limiting factor. Microsoft had nothing to do with it - the state of the semiconductor industry did. We didn't have CPUs that worked withotu sucking *lots* of juice. NMOS CPUs were very power hungry.
Today we have calculators [hp.com] with 75 MHz processors, powered off AAA batteries. Would that have been possible 10 years ago? perhaps, but the price would have been insane.
Companies
Re:slashbot (Score:5, Insightful)
You seem to have forgoten what Wintel is...
OS writers are very much in a co-dependant relationship with the chip makers... the direction that the OS writers take their software and the direction the chip makers take their chips have to be in sync because one will not work without the other.
Thus, research into chip design was up until recently funneled towards keeping up with the Moore's Law pace of faster and faster clock speeds. Research into creating a chip that could run on low power just wasn't done because there wasn't much of a market for it.
In order to justify writing an OS for a handheld, you need to know what chip you're going to be running on. In order to build a chip geared for handheld use, you need to be sure somebody's actually going to make handhelds.... it's a classic catch 22, and Microsoft appears to have blocked the Go-Motorola partnership that would have made those advances a decade or so before they actually happened.
Re:slashbot (Score:4, Insightful)
Go-Motorola partnership? The article talks about an investment reduction from Intel. Given that Intel and Motorola are competitors, maybe Intel just didn't want to indirectly fund their own competitor?
Re:slashbot (Score:5, Informative)
What about the Newton [oldschool.net], circa 1993?
Re:slashbot (Score:4, Interesting)
Linkie [oldcomputers.net].
Re:slashbot (Score:5, Informative)
While Americans might think that Palm (or Apple/Newton) invented pocket computing, I suggest you take a look at Psion [computer-ease.com]. This company made several successful pocket computers more than ten years ago. They released the Psio series 3 [dolphinmaritime.com] in 1991. In the later models they managed to include word-processors, spread-sheets, graphical software, games, web browsers, in a tiny ROM. The computers were truly innovative.
Sadly, they recently decided to get rid of their innovative technology (Symbian) and focus on WinCE devices instead. No more innovation from Psion. From the leading edge to a me-too M$ slave.
Psion Lives on in Symbian (Score:5, Informative)
I own a SonyEricsson P800 UIQ based Mobile Phone. Based on the Symbian 7.0 platform, you can still see the Psion/Epoc influence underneath.
The result, a sold stable computing platform, which arguebly crashes FAR less than equivelent MS Smartphones. (this is from personal experience amongst me and my collegues)
A MultiTasking/Multithreading operating system that is easy enough to use (MAC/Palm style), yet DOES allow you access the filesystem (C drive, ddrive, etc), and other system details via freely downloadable software shoudl you wish to tinker.
Its Handwritign recognition is exemplar, and far better and more "user friendly" than Palm's old Graffiti system which was very good for what it was.
I use it as an Ogg player (who needs an MP3 player, its sound quality is excellent), a PDA (it synchs with Outlook contacts/mail/tasks/diary/notes, and has dynamic contact spaces (it dynamically adds new fields even when they are not provided in the main set of fields, try that with palm its its infuriating 5 max fields for numbers/fax/email/web and one address field)
For those not wishing to submit to Outlook, it also has excellent vCard and SyncML support. You can back up the contacts by selecting "send all" and pointign the Infrared or bluetooth at any computer (Win/Mac/Linux) and selecting send. it will create a standard vCard file with all contact details stored in it. and to send it back to the phone, just send the single file. Even outlook on the PC cannot handle a vCard with numerous contacts so simply and elegantly, heaven help Mobile Outlook users!
it is simply the best PDA i have ever had, and does follow to some extent Jerry Kaplan's original vision...
Oh and i forgot to mention, its a damn good phone too!
Re:Psion Lives on in Symbian (Score:4, Funny)
Except with the words "handwriting" and "exemplary" :-)
Re:slashbot (Score:5, Informative)
As the ARM was shipping in hardware in those days, a full set of support hardware and software was available, Digital was licensing the technology in order to develop the StrongARM (1995/6 for the 200Mhz version IIRC - got a Palm on my desk that's powered by one of those). ARM didn't have quite the same profile in embedded systems markets in those days, but they were well aware of the potential of their CPU: the ARM6 was the first CPU they specifically designed for embedded applications.
So no, the hardware was *NOT* the limiting factor. The main limiting factor was the will to make the devices, especially as the (ARM6 powered) Newton was not exactly setting the world on fire.
See Here [greenend.org.uk] for example, discussing the ARM6 core - in 1991!
I bet that calculator is powered by an ARM7/8. A direct descendant of a processor available in quantity 10 years ago, not that much faster, and it wasn't the only one around.
Re:slashbot (Score:5, Informative)
This device was pocket sized, heavy but not as bad as the Jornada 620/720 and used two "AA" batteries with a watch battery for backup.
History of Psion here
http://3lib.ukonline.co.uk/historyofpsion.h
Re:slashbot (Score:5, Interesting)
Palmtop history [palmtoppaper.com]
I now own a Sony Clie TG50 but I must say its PIM features are still not quite as good as that old HP (BTW: I still have it and it *still* works for about two weeks on a pair of AA batteries).
Of course doing e-mail and browsing with it was a real pain but I remember plugging it in in a Tokyo phonebooth to mail home with Compuserve.
I got a 10MB PCMCIA flashcard (not compact!) for it that cost me $500.
Also I remember beta-testing a hotsync type of application for a company called Palm software. I've always wondered if they took that hotsync technology and went on to make the Palm devices...
Regards,
Xenna
Re:slashbot (Score:5, Interesting)
I'll tell you how it was possible. I used to own one. [computercloset.org] The Dauphin DTR-1. It wasn't exactly a pocket computer but it was a very small tablet with a pen-based version of Windows, which even included a nifty handwriting recognition system *gasp*. This was in ~1994, and I got it out of a discount catalog, so it must have been at least a year old at the time. I held it in my hands and got a lot of use out of it, so I'd say it was perfectly possible to have portable computing 10 years ago. Guess what, the software back then didn't need nearly as much power as it does now. Full size desktop computers at the time ran fine with a 486SX/33 and 4MB of RAM.
I really miss that old computer. Had a 486SLC and a 40MB hard drive. Not much but it ran Windows 3.1 just fine. That thing was so cool. Everyone who saw it loved it. And I've always wondered why I've never seen anything like it in the intervening years. Well, this article about Microsoft and Go pretty much explains it. After Go Corp. collapsed, Microsoft dropped the whole PenWindows and portable computing project. I can only imagine what neat things we could have seen if Microsoft hadn't interfered as usual.
Slashdot FUD, my ass. This is real damage to market innovation caused by a real monopoly. Put that in yer pipe and smoke it.
Re:slashbot (Score:5, Insightful)
Please explain how YET ANOTHER example of MS using dubious business practices to stiffle competition is not hurting progress.
You alledge that it is not to blame MS for not being able to use AAA batteries 10 years ago, and you are right.
That is however not the issue.
The -issue- is how MS is illegaly extending its monopoly into other markets, and how this IS NOT promoting innovation, if only simply because if your new innovation gets eyeballed by MS, you basically lost.
remember drdos?
remember netscape?
remember stack?
remember Citrix?
remember real? Oh well Ill ask that one in two years.
So why start in the first place? THATS what software devolpers are thinking, and I alledge that this is the reason for the lack of innovation in the past 15 years.
I alledge this is another reason for the dotcom bubble burst. I alledge this is the reason for the general dubious image ICT now has world wide.
And I -know- it has cost many Office Automation specialists lots of lost happiness.
"/Dread"
Re:slashbot (Score:3, Insightful)
remember netscape?
remember stack?
remember Citrix?
remember real?
Citrix is doing fine. MS adding Terminal Server into Windows doesn't remove the market for what Metaframe does.
In the era of DRDOS, I was using an Apple IIe, but I suspect its failure had more to do with it not offering any clear advantage over MSDOS.
Netscape killed themselves by not adding anything significant to their browser for years after they first released Communicator. Communicator was better than IE3, but not IE4, and
Re:slashbot (Score:3, Informative)
20 years ago, the Tandy corp had a number of portables on the market. First notable ones are the Tandy 100/200/300. These are slightly larger then a handheld, full sized keyboards, and the model 100
Re:slashbot (Score:3, Informative)
Low-power 8-bit Cmos processors have been available since the 1970's. I sold software for the RCA-1802 in 1979, and had been playing with it for some years before that.
The 1802 may not be nearly as
Re:slashbot (Score:5, Insightful)
An odd statement to make given that the main article is about proof of anti-competitive and illegal activities of Microsoft, not to mention their recent European fines for similar activities.
What exactly does Microsoft have to do wrong before you'll consider "Microsoft bashing" reasonable. Perhaps if they clubbed some baby seals?
Your a knee jerk slashbot (Score:3, Interesting)
The Whole point of Go was to create the software and hardware together remember that IBM and Intel where involved. Microsoft persuaded Intel to reduce its contribution to the project which they did which killed the hardware side resulting in the failure of the software side. Once this happened neither IBM nor Intel would have wanted to work w
Great Friend... (Score:4, Insightful)
Surely there's a way you can express your displeasure with MS products to your friends with a little more tact?
Re:Great Friend... (Score:5, Funny)
I suppose I COULD give them outright bogus advice... "Try deleting some of your registry keys. Too many of those can cause problems like that." But then, that wouldn't be very nice would it? On the other hand, once their system was totally toast maybe they'd be more inclined to give a true manly operating system a try.
"Dat girly-man operating system should be a ting of de past" - Ahnuld
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the clearest demonstrator that Microsoft has held back innovation is PowerPoint. Because it is virtually installed as default on all business machines, everyone uses it. Microsoft has had little motivation to update it, so it still functions like a piece of software from ten years ago. But ask any graphic designer about it and they will free out about how impossibly sh*t it is for creating presentations, especially bearing in mind the amazing graphics computers are capable of these days. And yet where is the strong competition for PowerPoint? There isn't one, because it is impossible to compete with the kind of product bundling Microsoft can get away with.
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:5, Informative)
All that, and it even imports and exports PowerPoint documents, so you don't have to start from scratch.
Yes, it only runs on Macs. But if you give presentations a lot, it's nearly worth getting yourself a Powerbook just for Keynote!
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:3, Interesting)
although powerpoint isn't the perfect tool for my job, it meets my needs
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:4, Insightful)
For those of you who are too young to remember, Microsoft's marketing people destroyed the market for GeoWindows (a far better GUI), DRDOS, WordPerfect Suite, OS/2 and many other far superior packages by either buying them or forcing them out of business with whatever tactics they chose to use. My gut feeling is that threats were part of that equation but alas, I have no proof other than what people inside a couple of companies have told me.
There are resources on the 'net for a list of companies that Gates has purchase or "acquired" over the last 20 years and if you look at it closely, it's scary. I can't find the link, maybe someone else can.
Yes, I hate Microsoft and everything it stands for. For the past 15+ years I've watched them devour everyone around them save a few early pioneers. If IBM hadn't failed so miserably at marketing OS/2 I think we'd be using that instead. But I have to use Windows for my job, much as I hate to. I can't even use a Mac because the software I have to use won't run on it. Virtual PC used to be an option but M$ bought that too. Linux isn't ready yet. It's close, but not quite there. I actually prefer that but again, not enough software.
So until there are lots more packages that run on a web server that are easy to use, fast and reliable (and don't forget inexpensive) we're stuck.
Bill Gates has accomplished something no one else ever has, and most likely never will again. He controls (or is close to controlling) most of the world's technology from computers to broadband to automotive to cel phones and is only getting bigger and stronger. Until our government does something to stop Microsoft from some of its illegal activities and other companies are able to stand up to them with legitimate, cost effective programs and hardware it will continue. As long as Washington is run by corporations, that will not happen.
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's very interesting that as a consequence of Microsoft's domination of the market, people give you very weird looks when you tell them you don't use windows. Then they calm down, an idea hits them, and they ask, "Oh, so you use Mac, then?" The weird look, however, wrests itself upward from its grave where the pallbearers were finally resting with (they thought) the satisfaction of a job well done, and climbs back on to the poor user's face when you're forced to disillusion them.
Using something other than windows is almost a stigma in some circles (circles the average slashdotter has little contact with, and avoids as much as possible), and it's the fact that most people only know and (ha!) understand how to use one OS that leads to this sorry state of affairs. A consuming fear of new ideas leads to stagnation, not innovation, and this fear is exactly what the Microsoft monopoly has led us into.
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:3, Funny)
Yes. I had to suffer my sister lecuring me about how clever Microsoft was to "invent" Windows and the web (Internet Explorer == web), and she rolled her eyes in disbelief when I tried to explain to her that they didn't actually invent them.
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:5, Insightful)
Same here. Only now I find people don't argue with me so much. While Intel has done a credible job of advancing the hardware, they probably would have done more had they not relied on the nod-nod-wink-wink relationship with Microsoft.
The true agent of change is the hardware, and now software technology moving off-shore. Sadly, the cost of overcoming the Microsoft bottleneck will be America's loss of dominance in computing. Emerging economies have no desire to pay top dollar for a mediocre operating system, and with fabrication of hardware all going on elsewhere the PC is becoming close to a disposable device which means the OS needs to be that way too.
History will lay a large part of the blame at Bill Gate's feet. Having squandered our technology lead for his own personal gains and ego is a distinction he well deserves.
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:3, Funny)
And flying cars. Don't forget the flying cars.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:5, Insightful)
My point, such as it was, is this: The oblivious and the clueless are capable of causing (or being used to cause, same effect) great damage to the 'Net as a whole. Almost invariably, those people are using a Microsoft Windows product as the base of their computing experience.
In the US, just about everyone has a car. Even our poor people do. They are ubiquitous. That ubiquity has led to subsidies which lower the cost of vehicles, fuels, roads, and the like. And yet, we _still_ demand that people be licensed because if they get onto the public infrastructure without some basic skills they can cause enormous harm.
Granted, getting your box pwn3d because you think someone you've never heard of sent you a calculator attached to a message consisting of random nouns doesn't quite rank up there with driving an 88 Buick through a preschool playground, but it has a cost. The burden on the infrastructure thanks to Windows machine is estimated to be billions of dollars. Identity-theft stories frequently involve vulnerabilities in IE or IIS.
All I want is to see some basic skills. If you're the kind of person who clicks attachments from strangers then goddammit, you do not belong on the Internet with the rest of us. And yes, that extends even to your parents, who I am sure are delightful people and don't actually do that sort of thing because you know what you're about and they'd certainly listen to you.
If a company invented a circular saw that was so "intuitive" that no one read the user's manual, indeed no manual came with the saw, there'd be a lot of injury. And no one would applaud that company for bringing circular saws to the masses, or for leading to a price drop across the board on power tools.
Now I'm going to conclude with an admission that I've been awake for about 52 hours so if my initial message or this one are more incoherent than usual, it's not alcohol's fault.
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:3, Interesting)
Nope. The difference between a 30MHz Arm used 12 years ago and a 75Mhz Arm used today is nearly nothing. Software is and will be the limiting factor. And it is not just software - it is the OS.
At the time general purpose OSes that do power management did not exist. The reason we see devices now is the appearance of general purpose OSes which:
Have power management and can make the portable really work
Have a well k
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:5, Interesting)
What would a pocket pc look like in the early 90's ?
Perhaps like this: Psion PDAs from 1986-1999 [filesaveas.com]
Or like this: Apple Newton H1000 from 1993 [compuseum.de]
Or like this: HP 95LX from 1991 [i-m.de]
How effective would it be ?
About as effective as today's PDAs, minus the audio/video stuff, and some glitz. Oh, and less space. But all the apps, calendar, calculator, memos, spreadsheets, and syncing. Sometimes Internet functionality to boot.
IMHO, it must have been limited on processor power and hardware more than the software.
IMNSHO, this is a typical statement of some self-proclaimed "geek" who has written, maybe, a web application in the early 00s. If you didn't use computers ten years ago, don't babble away about how ineffective they were back then. Mmmmmkay?
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:The Microsoft Damage. (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyway, I think this unity argument is just propoganda that we've heard for years coming to rest as truth. Really, before Windows, there were a multitude of DOS variants, operating as the launcher for programs written directly to the metal, for the most part. MS owned this one from early on with IBM, but DR-DOS might've had a chance. These were all effectively neutral as far as the program went.
Then we had the window managers which appeared on top of DOS. There were several, including the fledgling Windows, but I don't remember them, because my Model I had died, and I didn't own a non-DOS computer for several years after that. Anyway, MS didn't own that part for a long time, and programs were still pretty much DOS.
But no matter what, it wouldn't have stayed that way. Toolkits other than MS versions would have appeared. We could have seen DOS cores with competing window managers and toolkits, and things would look pretty much like they do now on Linux.
And, just like now, computer manufacturers would be integrating these components looking for consistent appearance and behavior, leading to standardized APIs, most likely.
So, I don't think that MS brought unity to the computer industry, because I think that it was an inevitable result of market pressure. MS was simply in the right place at the right time (because of their contracts with OEMs) and used the right (aggressive) business tactics to own the whole thing.
We can argue whether this is all true or not, and certainly whether the result under MS is better or worse than what I've laid out, but I do believe that, if MS had not taken the desktop, someone (probably several someones) would've done it in MS's place, and we'd have unity in the form of standard APIs.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
$1.5 billion..... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:$1.5 billion..... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:$1.5 billion..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:$1.5 billion..... (Score:5, Insightful)
If the fine were the only issue microsoft would have paid it and said "sorry we wont do it again" before going off and doing it again.
The main issue in the EU case and the reason Microsoft is going to appeal it is control.
Making Microsoft remove media player (and who knows maybe others will happen later).
Making them provide *complete* specs such that other software companies can make totally compatible products.
Those are the real issues. Efforts to control microsofts future not make them pay for wrong-doings in the past.
The best thing that could come out of the EU case is the interoperability thing. Imagine if you could choose your html renderer and it slots itself into place so perfectly that anywher IE was used before your choice of renederer gets used now.
How about an NTFS implementation for Linux with complete read/write compatibility.
How about open office reading/writing all of Office's document formats perfectly.
That is what microsoft is scared of.
Re:$1.5 billion..... (Score:4, Insightful)
It should be pointed that the complete disclosure clause under dicussion by the EU Commission is of client-server application formats and APIs. That is, it only applies to stopping Microsoft leveraging control of the desktop into control of the server market. So neither of your examples would actually be covered by this penalty, but some other very useful things (SMB stuff, all the IE-only hacks which bad html authors constantly abuse, asp; this is not an exhaustive list) will be covered.
~cHris$1.5 bn+ ... has been paid, it's just the start (Score:3, Interesting)
In both the US Fed. and EC cases the fine/penalty/remedy is not really the big economic point.
Once a company has a gulty verdict against it in a federal anti-trust case the door is open for all kinds of civil cases.
Realistically, materially punitive federal judgements would hardly fly even in the EC, let alone the US (where an amazing majority of people actually like the app
But... (Score:4, Interesting)
Back then in June 1990 (as the date of the letter), Microsoft wasn't a monopoly yet, right? So, the anti-trust trial cannot use this as an evidence against them....
I would say that this may lead to anti-competitive lawsuit... (btw, is such lawsuit allowable in the USA?) And of course, as usual, IANAL...
Re:But... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:But... (Score:5, Informative)
Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
Re:microsoft abuses power (Score:5, Informative)
Legally Microsoft is a Monopoly. Microsoft was shown in court to control nearly 100% of it's market. Obviously a single person running a different OS does not alter the fact that Microsoft has monopoloy power. Even 5% of people using non-Microsoft not enough to signifigantly diminish that monopoly power.
Monopoly is not defined as absolute 100% perfection. It is (roughly) defined as an overwhelming dominance and control of the relevant market.
Microsoft was further shown to have (1) illegally abused that monopoly power to maintain their monopoly, and (2) to have illegally abused that monopoly power in an attempt to extend their monopoly into other markets (and thus exterminating competitors and competition in those markets).
Examples from the court case include Microsoft abusing it's Monopoly power to force all major computer sellers to sign contracts forbiding them from selling dual-boot machines. Computer sellers could have included Window/Linux dual boot option at essentially zero additional cost (or Windows/OS2 dual boot at merely the cost of an OS2 licence). The public would have greatly benefited from a completely FREE additional Linux system on their machine, and from the option for a low-cost OS2 (or other) second boot option. Illegally maintaing a Monopoly.
Micrsoft further worded that contract such that the seller had to pay Microsoft for EVERY machine they sold. If they offered a system without an OS, or with Linux, or with OS2, they STILL had to pay Microsoft for that machine. That has the twin effects of increasing the cost to the consumer to buy a Linux or OS2 machine, and it allows Microsoft to effectly collect a tax on its competitors products. Illegally maintaining a monopoly.
Microsoft also illegally leveraged it's OS monopoly in an attempt to create a new monopoly for itself in the web browser market. InternetExplorer has obtained a somewhat overwhelming dominance, but that doesn't matter. Even if InternetExplorer failed and had merely 1% of the market, the tactics they used in the attempt were themselves illegal. Illegally attempting to abuse a monopoly to create a monopoly in another market.
-
Re:But... (Score:3, Informative)
If only GO Penpoint software was open-sourced... (Score:5, Interesting)
If GO Penpoint software was open-sourced 14 years ago... as an attempt to counter Windows H agression...
I wonder what would the landscape of mobile computing be like today?
Microsoft Crimes (Score:5, Insightful)
If this is not anti-competitive, then what is?
Microsoft violated a signed secrecy agreement with Go and showed that Microsoft possessed technical documents from Go that it should not have had access to.
Industrial Espionage.
Microsoft violated nondisclosure agreements with Go, and then used that information to build PenWindows, a competitor to Go's PenPoint operating system.
GO has loyalty rights for PenWindows. GO should sue PenWindows licensee's individually. This is what Microsoft is trying to do to Linux users through SCO. GO has more legal grounds to stand on that SCO.
Shortly after the letter was written, Intel reduced its planned investment in Go from $10 million to $2 million
Intel was held to ransom, and they paid it.
The advice read in part that the focus should be shifted from "killing the competitor" to "providing a better solution to the customer's problems."
So they did believe in Killing Competition. A tiger never changes its stripes.
I think some of these allegations could ammount to criminal offences. I do hope Mr. Gates does a time in a cell with No Windows
Moderate this comment
Negative: Offtopic [mithuro.com] Flamebait [mithuro.com] Troll [mithuro.com] Redundant [mithuro.com]
Positive: Insightful [mithuro.com] Interesting [mithuro.com] Informative [mithuro.com] Funny [mithuro.com]
MS word.doc (Score:3, Funny)
A simple solution (Score:5, Funny)
-
Re:A simple solution (Score:4, Funny)
text/funny
Re:A simple solution (Score:3, Funny)
But then someone might video it! Of course if they switched the lights off then you could still video it with an IR camera.
So I really think that Microsoft executives should conduct their business in mime, with the lights off, wrapped in tin foil.
Go (Score:5, Interesting)
I read the book "The Power of Penpoint"
by Robert Carr, Dan Shafer but never had one of their computers myself (they are pretty rare in Europe). I nearly bought one on ebay recently though.
Some images: http://www.ojisan.com/penpoint/index.shtml [ojisan.com]
Microsoft might stolen IP (Score:3, Insightful)
Every time Microsoft goes on about piracy hurting them damaging innovation etc they should be reminded of this that they are IP thieves themselves and if SCO can ask for $1million from
Re:Microsoft might stolen IP (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, the argument can be made that it was dumb to allow anyone to bring a video camera into that presentation, but still-- this is complete and total thievery, perpetrated by Microsoft. I got angry just reading about it, more than a decade after the fact. Go had some neat stuff back in 1989-- I can only imagine how technological advances between then and how would have improved their product, had Microsoft allowed the company to exist.
In this day and age, I don't see how any company with a promising new product doesn't take great pains to hide the thing's existence from Microsoft to keep from getting ripped off. After all these years it's clear they had and still have absolutely no shame about it.
~Philly
Not relevant... (Score:5, Funny)
A Microsoft spokeswoman said that many of these newly disclosed documents were not relevant to the trial, which focuses on Microsoft pricing actions.
Oh, of course, sorry. Yes, these documents aren't relevant for the current trial, so we should just ignore them completely and pretend they don't exist.
"These are not the documents you are looking for..."
Jedidiah.
GO (Score:4, Informative)
Lets wait for groklaw shall we? (Score:5, Insightful)
IF it is true then it just goes once again to show how fucking rotten the legal system is. Tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth eh? So will these be grounds for a new case? Wasn't Martha Stewart found guilty of lying to an officer instead of insider dealing? Can they get MS on withholding evidence? Perhaps even going after people who can be jailed? I personally don't believe for a second that this could be accidental (IF of course it is real)
Some posts seem to mention that attempting to create or abuse a monopoly is a felony. Doesn't this mean that MS is a criminal? So how exactly is it still allowed to do business as usual? Companies seem to want all the perks of being treated a real people but none of the bad stuff like oh say being punished for committing crimes.
Oh well at least we can snigger at all the microsoft apologist trying to wriggle out of this one. This must be one of their worst weeks. Embarrising papers, being fined and if you look at groklaw yet more hypocrasy by claiming that the EU has no right to tell it how to behave while MS itself is asking the EU to tell Lindows how to behave.
I almost pity the MS fans. Almost.
Microsoft - Still as anti-competitive as ever... (Score:5, Interesting)
Many companies would desire to maintain a monopoly. The problem here is that after so many years of knowing that Microsoft has this attitude, nobody has done anything effective to stop it.
People can complain about the EU being anti-American in its anti-trust case, but personally I feel that the US should have imposed far more restrictions on Microsoft than it has thus far. Microsoft continually gets away with anti-competitive practices, everybody knows this - although some Microsoft apologists vehemently deny/excuse it.
"Consumers were harmed by being deprived of choice. The greatest harm out of the Go story was the suppression of innovation and new technology by Microsoft."
The extent of consumer harm can't really be known. People seem to be relatively happy with Windows. Then again, people just accepted that computers needed regular rebooting after running Windows 95, it just goes to show how most people just accept things without question. I guess we'll never know how far things could have progressed if it wasn't for Microsoft preventing competition by abusing its position.
Consumers are harmed, so are competing businesses.
Look how things are flying now because Microsoft has a bit of competition from Linux/Open Source. Of course, Microsoft can say, "Hey, we're doing this because we love you all, not because we're scared of Linux", but why does Microsoft care now when it obviously didn't give a damn for years (judging by the poor quality of Windows up until now)? If there's no competition then you work at your own pace, and as long as it appears that there's progress, people seem to be satisfied.
Link to Trial Exhibits (Score:3, Informative)
A desensitized public? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A desensitized public? (Score:5, Insightful)
I would argue that you overestimate the majority, and underestimate the minority. I think most sheeple still do look up to Bush, and simply assume that America MUST be right to do what it's doing, because well, we're America. (Look at all the US flag stickers on all the cars around you...) But I think those of the public who are still thinking, reading, researching and really paying attention are hurt WAY more than any numbness could negate.
I do, however, agree about the role models. I have no doubt that there is a Benjamin Franklin, a Jimmy Hendrix, and a Marie Curie among us, but the climate is very inhospitable to them right now. It's impossible to rise to any sort of power or recognition unless the government tells the media conglomerates to LET you (for whatever reasons they have). Real radical thinkers and revolutionaries are in hibernation, and all we have to look up to are basketball rapists and Vin freaking Diesel.
I think I feel my breakfast coming back up...
Thanks, Microsoft (Score:4, Funny)
During a few months you couldn't open a computer magazine without Go Corp being hyped in every article.
Every article during that time had Go Corp hyped in every paragraph.
I got so fed up of reading about Go Corp in every paragraph in every article in every computer magazine that I cancelled a few subscriptions.
Then good enough access to the internet came along, and I didn't need those subscriptions anymore, and Go Corp was but a vague memory.
Can we stop bringing up daemons from the past, and leave Go Corp for once and for all behind us ?
The big fakers (Score:4, Interesting)
Two years later, Marlin Eller, a former Microsoft programmer who was part of the PenWindows project, wrote in "Barbarians Led by Bill Gates" (Owl Books) that the intent of the PenWindows project had been primarily to undermine Go.
In the same book he describes how they put together a presentation for their PenWindows for a computer fair (Comdex?) to show that they could do the same stuff as Go. When in fact they had absolutely nothing. It was all smoke and mirrors.
I always remember that story when watching another cool Longhorn presentation. And I wish others would too, especially journalists ...
The set back pen computing for a decade... (Score:4, Interesting)
Holy shit these were 486SX and 468DX touchscreen systems where the screen flipped over on top of the keyboard making the laptop a thick tablet computer.
Running OS/2 Warp 4 with full pen functionality enabled, these systems are absolutely amazing. I never use the keyboard, even from a DOS window as the handwriting recognition is pretty darn good all across the OS (even with Win-OS/2 aps, etc...).
How History Repeats Itself (Score:5, Insightful)
A decision was made, but a lot of people believe that decision was just so much tepid crap. Courts have been overturned in the past; perhaps if enough new evidence comes to light, the case can be reopened.
Yes, it does serve a purpose. It serves to dig up more facts and evidence should someone in the judiciary ever get wise and reevaluate that case.
Even if the trial never reopens, the Court of Public Opinion is always open. The more people learn what kinds of jiggery-pokery Microsoft has been up to, the more likely Microsoft will gets its just desserts sooner or later, and the less likely anyone else will ever pull such stunts again.
Honestly. I'm trying to figure out your attitude. "Microsoft did it, they got away with it, and that's good enough for me!" Are you always this doggedly complacent?
Need something burned down in a big hurry? Then come on down to the Flamebait Market, for all your pyromaniac needs!
Re:ENOUGH WITH THE ANTI MICROSOFT FUD (Score:3, Insightful)
One man's flamebait is another man's insightfu.
Re:Andy Grove intimidation? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2004-0
Re:Andy Grove intimidation? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Andy Grove intimidation? (Score:4, Insightful)
I have (personally) NOT seen proof of Andy Grove keeping IBM employees in a cellar, and I would damn well like some evidence of it if I'm expected to take that seriously.
Re:Andy Grove intimidation? (Score:4, Informative)
It would be one thing if these were prisoners of war being held until the war ended, as per the Geneva Convention, but this is an ongoing 'war against terror' (except Iraq, the terrorists followed us there) basically giving Bush the ability to hold these people indefinitely. Besides 'Mission Accomplished' has already been declared in Iraq and there are plenty of Iraqis in the camps.
Now, it would be one thing if there was any accuracy at all in the determination that the detained people are terrorists or terrorist supporting individuals. And noone is asking to 'open the floodgates' and let em all run free and noone would be complaining if all of these people were dangerous. But we've already seen plenty of cases where people were improperly detained and without any representation at all bad things happen to good people... 88 of them so far and counting.
Re:good morning slashdot!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps if companys where less like Microsoft and Enron Etc. and the senior managers actually punished when do act like that then you wouldn't see so many go down in flames.
Re:PenWindows? (Score:3, Interesting)
Was it renamed Windows CE in a later life?
Or was it just another MS experiment?
From the article:
In late 1993, Go was sold to AT&T where it was ultimately merged into the company's portable computer subsidiary. In 1994 the phone company shut down the effort in portable computing. Three months later Microsoft canceled its PenWindows project.
In 1996, Mr. Kaplan wrote a book, "Start-Up: A Silicon Valley Adve
Re:PenWindows? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Sounds like a Movie Script (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Media BS (Score:5, Insightful)
And how do you sell your soul to a book? That just has some mightily amusing implications depending on one's literary choices...
Re:Funny, they needn't have bothered. (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a loose quote (I don't remember it exactly) from Marlin Eller's book referenced at the end of the article: "This wasn't about 'grow the market,' it was about 'block that kick.' Go Corp spent $(millions) creating their product, we spent $4 million shooting them down. They'll never sell their shit again." That's not the exact quote, but it's pretty close. I remember it so clearly because I was completely shocked to read such a thing.
IIRC, this was said in response to Eller expressing his opinion that Pen Windows was a failure because it didn't take off, and the person who spoke the words above explained that Pen Windows was a success because all it was supposed to do was cock-block Go Corp from building a presence in the market.
~Philly
Re:Newsflash! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sigh. The whole point here is that they destroyed innovation by wielding their influence as a major player in the industry to starve potentially competitive emerging technologies of support by threatening companies (like Intel in this case) that were otherwise inclined to support it.
You can't "destroy innovation with subpar crap." You can certainly flood the market with crap, but that has relatively little effect on someone else's ability to create something better. Market dominance can certainly make it more difficult for someone to overtake you, but it's not impossible.
The point many of us make is that Microsoft has, in fact, done relatively little to "advance us." (Exactly what has it done, by the way?) Instead, it has abused its relationships with other companies to obfuscate and intimidate, stifling emerging technologies until they (MSFT) can move into the space. Every time it is successful at this, it gains even more power to throw around the next time.
Take a closer look at Go. They chose to build a new platform in part because they judged that they could create a more effective pen-based experience by starting from scratch around a new design center. Rather than tolerate an emerging new platform, Microsoft intimidated potential partners and, according to the emerging evidence, made and violated agreements with Go to take their ideas for Pen Windows. Now, years later, people will point to pen computing as one of the many things Microsoft supposedly did "to advance us."
Microsoft created nothing here; they just bullied and destroyed.
Was moderating, but had to set all back to Normal. (Score:4, Interesting)
Why did I stop moderating? Why did I do that?
Because I *simply* had to respond to this.
If I had to bet on it, I would wager that 90% of the devoted Microsoft bashers that infest Slashdot are either devout liberals or aspiring socialists.
Not this particular M$ basher.
Actually, I'm mostly a Libertarian. I am a fiscal conservative but a social liberal. I wish to see as little government meddling in free enterprise as possible, because it almost always backfires. As an example, I'm quite convinced that the government Corporate Average Fuel Economy regulations which killed the full-size station wagon are, in fact, the very reason why we now have full-size station wagons built on even thirstier (CAFE-exempt) 4x4 pickup truck chassis choking our streets.
But I make an exception for Microsoft. Without government intervention, there'd be nothing to stop monopolistic behaviors. Linux is an aberration unique to computers: if one car company had more than 97% of the market and was abusing its monopoly, there wouldn't be open-source cars because the product is not intangible and easily duplicated. Normally, the free market will work things out on its own. But Microsoft lucked its way into a position of power initially, and has ruthlessly used that power to squash anything which could become a threat.
Micrsoft, it seems, has become a symbol for "corporate greed", "bullying", etc, etc and bashing it serves as a substitute for bashing capitalism - the real target of their enmity.
Microsoft is a symbol for corporate greed and bullying. If they're not, I can't imagine what they'd have to do to get that name. Maybe Bill and Paul would be abducting competitors' children in a non-descript white van.
As for capitalism, yeah, it sucks. Some people starve while others get rich. But it's also a lot better than anything else anyone has come up with. I do hate capitalism. But I hate socialism and communism even more.
Indeed, bashing capitalism is considerably less "fashionable" than bashing MS (or Wal-Mart, or any other large and successful company), so why not use MS as a proxy?
I love Wal*Mart. Usually, after I've been shopping there, I compare prices with their competition (key point, that) and determine that I've saved a couple of bucks with each shopping trip. Case in point: was going to buy a small level, checked out Home Depot. Found a level that I liked for $19.95, which seemed a little steep. Went to Wal*Mart, found exactly the same make and model of level for $4.99. I do not begrudge Wal*Mart their success, because unlike Microsoft, it seems they've actually done something to achieve it. The very first thing Wal*Mart has done is somehow create a discount department store that I'm not embarrassed to go into. The next thing is almost always having what you want in stock, and usually at the same price or a little better than the competition.
So, all you MS bashers out there, why not just admit that you are, at the very least, liberal Democrats and voting for Bush would be as inimical to your creed as using Windows?
A vote for Bush is evil, pure and simple.
Al Gore was no better. His liberal fiscal policies would have punished me for my financial success rather than enticing me to expand my business and hire more employees. His pro-union stance drives up the cost of labor artificially to a point where a person who makes brake pistons all day gets $25/hr while a McDonalds employee whose job requires far more intelligence and skill gets minimum wage. But, on the other hand, at least Gore was intelligent and secure enough with his masculinity to know that gay people aren't going to hurt him.
Furthermore, why not just say that capitali