Microsoft Would Settle For The Children 780
The news from MSNBC
is that Microsoft wants to, er, settle for the children. Take that
whichever way you want. They propose to settle civil anti-trust cases (not the DoJ suit) with a $1.1 billion (retail value) spanking (they
have $36 billion in the bank), consisting of free computer goodies to our nation's poorest schools (the first hit's free, kids). I'm sure Microsoft will upgrade those old computers to keep them current, in perpetuity, for free, out of the kindness of their hearts, but in an apparent oversight that was left out of the news report. Of that $1.1 billion, $0.9 billion will be software presumably valued at whatever Microsoft wants to charge (see "monopoly"). For hardware and (laughable) training/support costs, Microsoft will be docked three weeks' worth of interest on their cashpile; they will seek matching funds for the remainder, I am not making this up. Some lawyers opposed this but "concluded that Microsoft's monopoly already is so pervasive that students would have to learn to use these products anyway in the workplace." Update: 11/20 21:22 GMT by M : Heh. Red Hat offers an alternative to Microsoft's settlement proposal - you provide hardware, we'll provide software.
article w/o MS influence... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:article w/o MS influence... (Score:5, Insightful)
No it's not, because for microsoft that's not a donation at all. Once they've written the software, each particular copy only costs them the price of a CDR - a mass-produced one at that, probably $0.50. By making more copies of windows to give away, they essentially print money: money in the form of a tax-writeoff. Each copy of MS-Windows donated to a charity gets MS a $300 tax writeoff (charitable donation, baby!) for a 50-cent disk, and serves to expand the Microsoft platform dominance.
Giving away windows is win-win-win for Microsoft. Just be aware: using their pricing for copies of windows distributed as part of the settlement inflates the actual value of that settlement by a factor of about 500, and helps to perpetuate their monopoly.
Nice title. (Score:4, Insightful)
You're very right, Jamie. The double-meaning in the title *is* hilarious.
Re:Nice title. (Score:5, Interesting)
The government(s) should actually settle on this case, and let MSFT donate $1.1 billion to the school systems of software. But demand that it be their competitor's software (preferrably linux and other commercially-available Open-Source software). For example, let MSFT donate approx 10,000-20,000 boxed sets of either RedHat, Mandrake, Suse, etc, to the existing PC's in the schools. This will put significant cash flow in the high-tech industry, help further their competitors, and actually punish MSFT.
10,000 copies of linux could be divided as one official copy to each school or school district. they can then make legal copies within the schools. This can actually be more useful and efficient than you'd realize. If each school had one computer running linux, teachers and school computer folks can begin to assess how to run windows software under WINE, and other educational linux software. eventuallly this would save the school a bundle as they realize how to migrate their systems.
Of course there would be lots of details as to how the $1.1 billion would be distributed amongst MSFT's competitors. But there is NO WAY MSFT should be "punished" by allowing them to extend their monopoly further.
Re:Nice title. (Score:2)
Alternatives to MS stuff would be good, though... and not just linux! How about Sun servers, Cisco routers, Macintosh and SGI graphics stations?
There's plenty of "tools of the trade" equipment that isn't Microsoft that is still widely used in certain fields. Why not give kids the advantage of growing up with this other equipment? If any of this is going to high schools, this kind of equipment would be *far* more useful than, for example, a word processor; anyone can write essays on paper, but can you do raytraced pictures on paper if you're thinking about pursuing a career in computer graphics?
Besides, tethering schools to Microsoft might bring about a lot more of those "incidents" we've been seeing lately where MS charges some governmental organization large sums because they have lost track of a couple of site licenses.
Let me get this straight.... (Score:4, Redundant)
Re:Let me get this straight.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Let me get this straight.... (Score:2, Funny)
- X goes to primary school, sees computer (Windows, thanks to Microsoft's generosity)
- X goes to high school, learns a bit more (Windows, thanks to court settlement)
- X goes to college, only sees one operating system around (Windows, thanks to some astute bulk licensing policy and a not very bright college administrator)
Now, a question:
Assuming that X has not become a geek (quite probable, given the cruel environment he has been subject to
Re:Let me get this straight.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Let me get this straight.... (Score:4, Insightful)
So our average computer shopper doesn't research that end of it. Should they... of course. But, if they don't understand that they should be researching HW/SW/OS, then they won't. I imagine some investigate SW to some degree (Antivirus, maybe an office suite), but I highly doubt any would even think of the OS.
So who is going to educate (en masse) the public. We certainly can't expect MS to do it. Who would expect any business to educate its customers into researching alternatives? Us, the Free SW crowd? Sure, we would, but how? That's the real question. How do we show the general public that there are other options out there. That they don't have to just accept whatever the big retailer installs on their machine.
Re:Let me get this straight.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh that's interesting, basically none..
Thus, Windows is doing everything that the majority of users need, and thus is doing a good job. Just because use tech savvy people (who, BY THE WAY have different needs/wants from our software, and we are also in the vast minority) want more out of our operating systems and don't necessarily like what Microsoft gives us, doesn't mean that for the vast majority of the people it doesn't work perfectly fine for them...
Just food for thought.
Re:Let me get this straight.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh that's interesting, basically none..
Thus, Windows is doing everything that the majority of users need...
Except that it could be argued that Microsoft (and the software industry in general) have changed the average user's mindset to believe that this is as good as computers get, and getting any better stability, inherent virus resistance and security and so forth isn't really possible.
Problem is sneaky terminology (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Let me get this straight.... (Score:5, Interesting)
They broke the law. In a court of law they were found guilty. It never stops being their fault - they did it.
Can you really not understand why people are upset by the proposal that punishes a company that has been found guilty of breaking the laws of the United States with behavior reminiscent of the crime?
I'm not opposed to the idea of helping these schools, but these are separate issues. Fine let's decide to give the schools the settlement. Give them 1.7 billion in cash and let them maintain their buildings, pay teachers more (i.e. let them decide what they need).
What else are they going to throw in free downloads of windows media player?
Re:Let me get this straight.... (Score:5, Informative)
1. It is legal for MS to be a monopoly.
2. It is illegal for MS to abuse their monopoly power.
#1 is the result of consumer decisions; that's why it's legal. #2 is the result of MS decisions. So, to answer your question, it stops at the point when Microsoft stops illegally abusing their perfectly legal monopoly status.
Simple ... when ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you not been reading the case? at least one of the points at issue is that M$ has been forcing hardware vewndors who sell its product to not carry competing products (ie. if you want to make a PC with Windows on it you can't sell PCs with Linux or Be, or etc on it).
The result - I couldn't buy a laptop with Linux, or even a blank one to put Linux on myself - now because of the DoJ suit things have changed (a little). That's called "leveraging a monopoly" it's illegal
So long as a customer goes to buy a PC at a brand leader like Dell, or Compaq, or Gateway and they don't have a choice of a non-M$ OS, or of one without an OS (at a lower price of course) then we don't have a choice.
PS: you want to buy all the old copies of Windows I was forced to buy with my last few computers? oh wait I'm not allowed to sell them - I was forced to pay for them, declined to accept the license but seemingly am still bound by conditions in the license I didn't accept that bar me from selling it
Re:Simple ... when ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Basically the original comment stated that "At what point does this top being Microsoft's fault and start being the fault of the millions of users? If people didn't buy the software or use the software, a monopoly would not exist! ". This evidence proves that consumers had no choice before 1998.
Actually users do not buy the Operating System. YOUR OEM DOES. Infact the EULA is not written for consumers but for oems. This is why the BSA only goes after businesses and oem's and not individuals. Individuals never agree to the EULA unless they are doing a manual install. Mainly coroporate clients. Infact it is a monopoly if you strangle competitors by controlling the distribution. This is precisely what MS did. Rockafeller started his whole monopoly by buying out train companies. With distribution under control he took over the whole market by charging sky high rates for competitors oil so his was always cheaper and standard oil would get a profit wether a consumer bought oil from him or someone else. This is really not that different then Microsoft's deals with the OEM's.
Looks like microsoft wins again (Score:2, Interesting)
Let me get this straight (Score:2, Redundant)
Microsoft learns from Joe Chemo (Score:2, Insightful)
yeah, right! (Score:2)
If they really wanted to show us how sorry they are, they would put Macs in the schools.
Re:yeah, right! (Score:2)
Personally, my experience with Macs in schools has NEVER been tainted with Office or Explorer. I attend a University that is home to over 30,000 students, in which Macs are the preferred and dominant species of computers. NONE of them use Explorer or Office. My school has purchased volume licenses of Corel WordPerfect Office and they use Netscape 4.78 or above for browsing.
So are you trying to tell me that the proposed "punishment" is actually WORSE for microsoft?
if only (Score:2)
Re:if only (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's my take on why most people in government support Microsoft. First, whatever the morality of their practices, they are arguably the most successful business in history. They pay lots of salaries and benefits and have created much wealth.
Also, many people remember how scary it was in the 80's when the Japanese were kicking our asses in every way (with the Koreans and other Asian nations not far behind). MS, along with Intel, Oracle, Sun, etc. have brought the world technology leadership solidly back to the US. Many politicians want to keep it that way.
Don't get me wrong, I'm badly disappointed with this proposed settlement and the one for the still-pending DOJ case. That's why I only use Linux on my computers (except for a lingering Win98 partition at home to play a couple of Windows only games).
You know what? Thank God for all MS's security holes. If Windows/IE/IIS/Passport were all actually secure, then they would completely take over everything, no question about it. Then we'd all truly have our entire computing experience controlled by Redmond.
I'm getting depressed, I'm going to shut up now.....
An acceptable punishment (Score:2, Insightful)
Wow. (Score:2)
The rest of the punishment goes like this... (Score:2, Redundant)
Note to Red Hat, Sun, et al: (Score:2)
Re:Note to Red Hat, Sun, et al: (Score:2)
Perhaps I was too brief, but I meant that Red Hat, Sun, etc. should step in and offer to load their software on the hardware M$ is buying. Of course the schools are free to replace Windoze with Linux or *BSD or even DR-DOS if they wish, but like the majority of PC owners they won't, they'll stick with what came loaded on the box. If you want to break that cycle, you'll have to do it actively, not passively.
I doubt my local school district is one of the 14,000 poorest, but if it is I'll be right there in M$'s face offering to upgrade at least some of those PCs to Open Software. It would be nice if I had Red Hat and Sun (or whoever) backing me up.
What the hell? (Score:2)
- A.P.
Taxes (Score:3, Interesting)
A real penalty would be 1.1 Billion in hardware. If you let them include the software, credit it for it's actual value (7 cents per CD).
SD
Re:Taxes (Score:3, Informative)
That's...but...I mean...THEY CAN'T JUST...aww crap (Score:2)
And this was a plaintiff's attorney who came up with this? Oh yeah, the lawyer was only looking at dollar signs. And who wants to bet the attorney's fees will be based on a percentage of the $1.1 billion MS is claiming this will "cost" them?
Bzzzzt! Thanks for playing (Score:2)
While at the same time charging $40-$50 more for Windows (according to their own internal documents) than the market should have supported. So let's do the math:
Windows = $49
Netscape = $25
Windows + monopoly + Internet Explorer = $99
Canecel terms and we have Internet Exporer = $50. If the things they give away are subsidised by an illegally leveraged monopoly, the real cost of the things "given away" is actually the cost overcharged by virture of that monopoly.
Holy crap (Score:3, Insightful)
This is kind of backwards if you want your next generation to be tech-saavy. Windows ABSTRACTS computers, removing the need (for most people) to actually know how a computer (and software) operates. In this respect, the world will be FORCED to at least have a small understanding of the technology
At any rate, it's insane. Would we let Coke donate lots of Coke to kids as a settlement (knowing that they'll
What strikes me the most is the acceptance that Windows will be the dominant platform for the next 80 years. Fortunately, this will not be true. Very few companies even stay in business that long.
Re:Holy crap (Score:4, Insightful)
Probably not for awhile. But on the flipside, hardware would probable be more understandable to humans if we attempted to minimize the abstraction between hardware/software; causing hardware developers to think about the interface to their componants, both physical and virtual, and how to make them intuative and simple enough for a wider range of users (Ie, no jumper pins, SCSI-like device IDS instead of IRQ/DMAs/etc). Abstraction simply alleviates the engineer of social responsibility, although I understand that in current times, the engineer is thought to have no place in being involved in determining the social relevance of the product.
Drugs and software (Score:4, Offtopic)
Drug Dealers:
-Refer to their clients as "users"
-"The first one's free!"
-Have important South-East Asian connections (to help move the stuff)
-Strange jargon: "Stick," "Rock,", "Dime bag,"
-Realize that there's tons of cash in the 14- to 25-year-old market.
-Job is assisted by the industry's producing
newer, more potent mixes.
-Often seen in the company of pushers,pimps and hustlers.
-Their product causes unhealthy addictions.
-Do your job well, and you can sleep with sexy movie stars who depend on you.
Programmers:
-Refer to their clients as "users"
-"Download a free trial version!"
-Have important South-East Asian connections (to help debug code)
-Strange jargon:"SCSI," "RTFM", "Java," "ISDN".
-Realize that there's tons of cash in the 14- to 25-year-old market.
-Job is assisted by the industry's producing newer, faster, more potent machines.
-Often seen in the company of salesman,
marketing people and venture capitalists.
-DOOM. Marathon. SimCity. Command&Conquor. 'Nuff said
-Damn! Damn! DAMN!!!
Re:Drugs and software (Score:2)
Microsoft the victor? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Microsoft the victor? (Score:3, Insightful)
The fact is that Real People aren't idealistic about software. The computer is analogous to a car in almost every way. Car enthusiasts have the edge in knowledge, but everybody has to use one (unless you live in a large urban area with good public transportation, but I digress) and most people just want to get in and turn the key and start moving.
Windows does that. Nothing else on a PC does that for the average Real Person. So stop it with this idealistic shit and fight MS on its own terms.
It worked for Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
I imagine MS is looking to do the same thing here. It will be a good thing for MS, a good thing for the schools, what the hell right? Wrong. I am really disapointed that they would try and do this a means to reach settlement, makes the whole thing rather hollow. If they had done this just because they felt like it I'd probably support them in it, now they just look slimy.
Errr, more slimy.
Re:It worked for Apple (Score:2, Insightful)
Perpetuating the Monopoly (Score:5, Insightful)
And using poorer schools... that's good. These schools would have previously been a good "target market" for OSS... can't beat the price. Now MS gets three victories for the price of none... they get the plaintiffs off of their backs, they get the PR boost that always comes with helping poor children, and they get a win against OSS. And what does it cost them? A "virtual" $1.1 billion. They're giving software to people that probably wouldn't have bought it in the first place, and they're giving away a product based on its RETAIL value; it costs MS very little to give this software away. The realized cost to MS will probably be less than $100 million. Much less.
Another Seattlement, if you ask me. I think I'm going to give up and be a rice farmer now... until Microsoft (TM) Wheat pushes me out of the staple foods market.
Re:Perpetuating the Monopoly (Score:2, Insightful)
The point is that Microsoft has committed a crime and needs to be punished, not rewarded...
Re:Perpetuating the Monopoly (Score:5, Insightful)
What an incredible double-standard there is here at Slashdot whenever the subject of Microsoft comes up.
If Redhat were to donate $1 billion in free software to all the poorest schools in America, they'd be hailed as saviors of the poor, and nominated for sainthood. But when Microsoft does it, it's just another evil conspiracy.
Double standards are not always a bad thing...
Would you rather Dr. Smith (the friendly and talented neurosurgeon), or Dr. Lecter (the friendly and talented cannibal) perform your brain surgery for free? Even a so called act of 'philanthropy' can be underhanded (look at Gates' recent donations, and how they nicely cancel out most of his taxes owed (link forgotten, do a google search)).
It IS ok to hate one thing and like another based on their historical performances...
New Love Letter virus (Score:2)
Hi! I am sending you this CD-ROM as part of an antitrust settlement...
But seriously--if Microsoft is to be punished, shouldn't Microsoft be forced to give all the poor children a PC with Linux on it? If Bill Gates was forced to do 100,000 RHL 6.x installs w/o kickstart, I bet he would never ever ever ever again stifle competition or build a vertical monopoly.
The proposed settlement is equivalent to giving a burglar keys to every house in the neighborhood, or giving a gun and rubber gloves to a murderer. The principle of punishment is to deter the perpetrator should the desire to commit crime arise again.
Uhh...no (Score:3, Interesting)
However, even ignoring that, the key computation lay in asking how much each consumer would collect even if the most generous award were handed down. It turns out that the total payout would be less than $10/consumer before legal costs, and negative afterwards. The court isn't willing to go forward with a class-action lawsuit that will harm the plaitiffs even if they win.
This is a solution that makes everybody with a legitimate stake in the outcome win. Consumers benefit by getting something, the lawyers benefit by getting their costs covered, and Microsoft benefits by not having to go through another trial. The only losers are the third parties that make money off the continued controversy. I don't have a lot of sympathy for Larry Ellison or Scott McNealy, though -- do you?
Re:Uhh...no (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Uhh...no (Score:3, Insightful)
As a consumer who has presumably been harmed, what exactly does this settlement do for me? How has MS been 'punished' for its actions, or alternatively how is it deterred from doing it again?
Re:Uhh...no (Score:5, Insightful)
You're joking, right?
How about Outlook's Virus of the Week? How about IIS's Vulnerability of the Week? How about ten years of blue screens? How about twenty years of a crappy filesystem that corrupts itself at the first opportunity? (And don't give me any bullshit about FAT being robust. If it were robust, why is SystemAgent set by default to paper over its fragility?) How about a fundamentally b0rk3d system design that the merest child could tell you was a disaster from the start? How about twenty five years of lying to the public (you would call it "marketing" and "PR") about how "innovative" Microsoft is, when in fact they've been strip-mining the industry for other people's ideas, filing off the serial numbers, and presenting them as their own? Good gravy, not even Bill's BASIC was original, being a port from a BASIC interpreter at Harvard (such activity would be considered criminal today by Bill's own set of "ethics").
You're right, but only in a sense that a dissembling lawyer would agree with. It is difficult to measure the harm to consumers, but that does not mean it didn't happen or merit correction.
Except that Microsoft was found guilty of criminal anti-trust violations. They do not get to win. Not by a longshot.
Schwab
What a great idea! (Score:3, Funny)
Where was this Michael Hausfeld fellow when we needed him?
-Erik
Poorest schools and Open Source (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe I'm being cynical, but Microsoft providing the software for these institutions for free would be a very good move on their part to slow down the adoption of alternative operating systems and office suites. It's here, in schools that cannot afford the MS pricing anymore, that the erosion of MS monopoly will begin, and Microsoft has proposed a very effective counter measure to it. They slow down Linux and OSS adoption, and get DOJ off their backs. Both with one strike.
Then again, maybe they're just doing it for the goodness of their hearts...
M$ the company that we love to hate (Score:2)
The article reported by MSNBC is focusing on small part of the whole settlement and just like any bad report taken out of context, if the report is focused on one element, it tend to paint a picture that this *is* all what the subject is all about where it isn't.
The Microsoft Mentality (Score:4, Insightful)
The only way any kind of settlement with Microsoft will accomplish anything is if the people who make up Microsoft's leadership actually alter their behavior.
This latest proposal shows that Microsoft is fundamentally incapable of changing its core DNA to suit a new paradigm. While all public businesses are driven by valuation, Microsoft doesn't realize that when a corporation reaches a certain size and power in the marketplace, it carries additional responsibilities.
Microsoft prides itself on providing boundless upward value to stockholders, but it seems to have a huge mental block when it comes to assessing its role in the larger culture.
Re:The Microsoft Mentality (Score:2)
The goal of a settlement is generally NOT to alter behavior. That's why it's called a SETTLEment. You settle for something of agreed-upon value (cash or other terms) and then get on with life. Think of insurance settlements, divorce settlements, etc. If you don't think any settlement for cash and equivalents is fair in this case, then you probably wanted to see senior management at Microsoft thrown in prison. Jailing the richest people in the country simply isn't The American Way(tm).
Get A Life (Score:2, Interesting)
Really, who gives a shit! I mean, why not just say:
"Wow, that's really a nice thing to do for kids who would otherwise probably not get a chance to use a computer."
and go on about your business? I have really come full circle in this whole anti-Microsoft thing. I liked and used MS products, then abandoned them in favor of their *nix counterparts. Lately, though, I've come to realize what a load of crap most of the *nix software is.
The fact is, the Internet, and computer software in general are not some magical thing that doesn't have to follow the rules like the rest of the world. Companies like Microsoft are in this business to make money, and frankly Bill Gates does an extremely good job at making money. His company makes a product that people want, and he has every right to promote it and try to get people to buy it. Just like any other product.
People, you need to realize that just because a company actually wants you to *pay* for something, that doesnt' automatically make it illegal. I mean, why should they be a company if they can't make any money?
Getting back on topic, I think it's great that Microsoft is doing this, as it will give a chance to kids who wouldn't otherwise have one.
Quick Linus, do something bad (Score:4, Funny)
Let me get this straight... (Score:4, Insightful)
-MS gets to increase it's market share(by displacing Macs in schools)
-Does not need to change it's monopolistic practices
-Gets a $1.1 billion tax writeoff(They will try to write that off)
Wow, sounds like a great deal....for Microsoft and states idiotic enough to sign this(Kickbacks anyone?)
-Henry
Can they switch? (Score:2)
"Value" of 0.9 billion. Cost of goods to MS. . . (Score:3, Interesting)
Ain't the software business grand?
Can I pay MY legal fines by donating Red Hat
KFG
In Other News... (Score:5, Funny)
Today, Phillip Morris, manufacturer of cigarette products, agreed to settle all pending lawsuits that allege that they (PM) sold cigarettes to underage smokers.
The generous $1.9B settlement provides for Phillip Morris to provide, free of charge, a lifetime of tobacco products to every Junior and Middle school in America. The settlement would consist of $1.1B worth of prepared tobacco products, and $800M worth of reconditioned ashtrays and smoke detectors.
Phillip Morris attorney Hugh Smokem commented that "This is an equitable settlement which answers our critics charges that we sell tobacco products to minors. Clearly, no tobacco will be sold here."
30
Re:In Other News... (Score:3, Funny)
not a punishment (Score:3, Insightful)
$1.1 billion worth of software does not cost Microsoft anything. It's essentially free for Microsoft to crank out more software since the R&D has already been paid for. That reduces this so-called "settlement" to just a Microsoft marketing campaign.
Best solution: they must contribute $billion or so of cold, hard, cash to a fund for school technology improvement. Then independent technical experts and educators can suggest uses for the money that don't necessarily benefit Microsoft. This settlement is a total victory for Microsoft - I'd hate to see what happens when they actually win a case...
Who's doing the math? (Score:2, Interesting)
Is today April 1? (Score:2)
*notes it is not April 1*
You gotta be shitting me.
Brilliant MS strategy. (Score:2)
I'm so disgusted by this prospect I can hardly hold back the bial.
How can Americans take this abuse? It's rediculous. This isn't a remedy to Microsoft's monopoly, it's a ploy to give the remain state's lawyers a way to exit this case while leaving MS with almost no pain. What's it really costing MS to print up some more software and give it away? Nothing. In fact it grows their business.
This whole case has stunk badly since the new administration took over and there's little hope that it will start smelling like a rose now.
News Flash! (Score:2)
Redmond, Washington's Microsoft corporation today signed a deal as a part of their antitrust suit settlement for a record $1.5 billion worth of Macintosh hardware and software from Apple Computer. This purchase is supposed to go to schools, where the majority of WORKING systems are already Macintosh computers anyway. When asked about the deal, Microsoft's iconic despot Willy Gates replied "I go way back with Apple, so I figured I would throw them a bone. This is just a slap on the wrist anyway, so why not give some of this to charity?" No word on whether or not Gates was referring to the schools, or Microsoft's sometime partner Apple computer as the charity. Apple Computer's iCEO, Steve Jobs, was unavailable for comment, but is rumored to be in satisfactory condition and recovering from the shock of seeing the Purchase Order in a Bay Area hospital.
- Freed
Exxon Analogy (Score:2)
What's wrong with you people? (Score:2)
Re:What's wrong with you people? (Score:4, Insightful)
Hmm, when I was in high school they made a big deal about beingup to date with the latest software used in industry. I remember clearly writing all my reports in WordPerfect 5.1 for Dos, just like industry. Didn't help me any though, by the time I got out of college MsWord was the standard (word95 I think). Not that it matters, the company I work for uses FrameMaker when we need formated text, and otherwise emacs, or vi depending on your religion.
I also remember watching the transisition from Word*Star, but I was a kid so that was on the sidelines.
With that history it seems to me that computers change too quick for it to matter what you learn on in high school, it will be obsolete before long anyway.
The Scarlet Letter (Score:2)
It doesn't matter anyway. (Score:2)
I object...*minor rant* (Score:2, Insightful)
This is an archetypical pro-business civil settlement. MS appears to be minorly rebuked, yet comes away with a PR and marketing triumph. On one hand, you have *seriously* needy public schools getting new and arguably functional hardware and software. That is, overall, a really good thing (N.B. I see nothing addressing issues of integration, support or training and am thus inclined to think that much of this, if it comes to pass, will be largely un-under-utilized..but that is another matter). Any settlement that touches addressing these shortcomings is at least worth considering...
However, as was pointed out elsewhere, MS is sitting on about $36BB cash and what is largely being "offered" here is in the form of software and hardware ($900MMish based on MS valuations) and here is the rub. That $900MM has an actual cost of somewhere in the neighborhood of $50MM (I have nothing to base this number on and I wager it will be lower than than...), that is to say that the actual cost to MS is de minimus.
In exchange for this minor offering to the legal gods (or demons), MS will *gain* a really substantial marketing coup...market penetration in a very young, eager and hungry market group..school children. (aside: I am sorry, I have this great image of RJ Reynolds handing out cigarettes at schools to settle one of the marketing class actions they have faced...) This is truly a win-win for MS...very little actual cost and a huge marketing upside.
The entire idea behind class actions and/or punitive damages is the idea of *punishing* a corporation for wrongdoing at the corporate level. It is always a matter of ratios. As a percentage of income/wealth, a $100 speeding ticket *hurts* the recipient to a certain extent...as it should. Here, we are faced with a situation where MS will receive the equivalent of a $1 fine *and* win Man of the Year.
If they are to be "punished" for corporate wrongdoing (rather well documented, at this point), then do so...make it meaningful and make it *hurt*. Otherwise, it is simply a cost of doing business and a cost that they have long demonstrated that they will willingly bear.
best,
/rootrot
--
Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, most do.
- Bertrand Russell
Are you editors given free anti-ms training? (Score:3, Troll)
$900m in software + 200,000 reconditioned computers + $90m in teacher training + $38m in technical support + $250m for the foundation + $160 to teach kids how to work with computers, guys, basic math.
900 + 90 + 38 + 250 + (est $40m for the computers) + 160 = $1478m
I watch all of the people here who complain without even reading the articles, and believing word-for-word what the editors post in the headlines and it makes me sick. You are a jouralist outlet that serves half a million pages a day, and you should be a lot more responsible than that.
Let me also call this fact into light:
The settlement proposal came from one of the lead plaintiffs' lawyers in the case
Oh interesting, so it was the prosecution's idea to do this...
and also:
Estimates of the value of the settlement ranged from $1.1 billion to as much as $1.7 billion, one source said. "It's going to get money to the people that need it the most," this source said.
And as I counted, the $1.7B is a lot closer to the value than the $1.1B, and this is also not counting the costs of actually figuring all of this stuff out for MS. And don't think that for each copy of windows handed out they don't have any costs either, they're not free once you consider everything into account (you add up all costs of developing and divide by the number of products made)... It's not going to cost them $900mil, but it will cost $400mil or so...
I just get tired of people who hate Microsoft and blindly believe everything that they're told (partially because they want to believe), and yet are being completely hypocritical. We're in a capitialistic society ladies and gentlemen... In this society man exploits man... If you were in their shoes, can you honestly say that you wouldn't do things any differently?
---
Having said all of that, yeah, they're being overly monopolistic, and yes, this is a rediculously small punishment for what they've been caught doing. I mean, not that $1.5B is a small chunk of change, that is a large chunk of money for any corporation, but they're not really being restricted hardcore from repeating the same "mistakes"/"crimes" in the future. And as anyone knows, the companies that survive don't do so because they're magnanimous, they just learn how to hide their mistakes better the next time.
But then again, with the court's track record lately, could you honestly have expected anything different? (sigh)... Justice will have to be postponed for yet another day.
Re:Are you editors given free anti-ms training? (Score:3, Insightful)
Better idea.. (Score:5, Insightful)
A Linux & BSD user's thoughts on what's being (Score:3, Flamebait)
Most of the people posting against the settlement know not what they say.
Long version:
Most of you seem to have this knee jerk reaction to anything with M-I-C-R-O-S-O-F-T printed anywhere within. I think MS has a monopoly. Wow, what a revelation. Whooda thunk MS would ever be accused of such a thing?
Here's some info that I'd like some of you to consider before you flame me mercilessly and kill my karma:
1) MS didn't sprinkle pixie dust on PC users and magically become a monopoly. You and I MADE them a monopoly. And don't give me bunk about "the OS that people saw growing up was Windows, so that was the only OS in the universe". Whatever. When I was in school, we had teletype terminals and IBM DOS machines. There was no MS monopoly back then. I'm in my mid 30's so it's not like I'm talking about the dark ages of computing.
2) If you put Windows machines in schools, Apple will piss and moan about it. If you put Apple machines in schools, MS and everyone else will piss and moan about it. If you put Linux in schools, BSD folks will piss and moan about it. Face it, there is no OS on the planet that can go into schools that will get a 100% endorsement even within the free/open-source software world. Period.
3) Let's see what's more benefitial: average PC users receive a check for the $20 determined to be the "damage" we sustained as a result of MS's monopolistic actions, or kids in poor neighborhoods/schools get access to training, hardware, and computer related education that they would not be given access to otherwise. Hmmm... Let's see... (If you have to honestly think about it, you need to work on being more human and less greedy.)
4) I don't give half of a rat's ass if students learn to do word processing on Word instead of Abiword. I started off with DOS, then I moved to Windows, then I moved to Linux, and now I'm working with BSD and UNIX. I started off the same way these kids will start off, and despite all of that I'm not a Windows user. Gee, could it be possible that I had -- *GASP* -- freedom of choice? Reading comments posted here, you'd think that if MS puts Windows in classrooms that the people in those classes will nevereverEVER touch anything other than Windows. Get real, folks.
5) Windows is -- on the whole -- easier to use than Linux, *BSD, or UNIX. I say that as someone using these latter OSes daily and the former OS almost never. I don't let my preferences cloud the issue or induce prejudice against Windows, though. I don't care if you're more familiar with the latter OSes. Windows is easier to deal with for newbies than any of them. And until developers start putting the end-user experience in front of developer coolness (take a hint, free/open-source developers), this will continue to be a true statement.
5) Windows experience is more marketable right now than Linux/BSD/UNIX experience, and will continue to be that way for quite some time as far as I can tell. Unless companies completely ditch Windows and start over with a new OS (which will not happen, no matter how many op-ed pieces you read saying the opposite), it's going to be a long, long, LONG time before Linux/BSD/UNIX experience makes you more marketable on a global scale than Windows experience. And with the web services wave just about ready to rise, the OS people use will become less important than the browser it's running, so people will have less incentive to go through the IS/deployment/training nightmare associated with a company-wide OS switch.
Flame away...
Re:Here's a flame for you. (Score:3, Informative)
1) "Using" a computer is not the same as developing on a computer. Here lies the fallacy that is dragging down Linux and other open-source OSes: end users don't care about APIs, cool developer tools, and open source code. They care about *using* computers. When I said that developers needed to put end-users in front of developer coolness, this is the *exact* thing that I was talking about. If you're an open source developer, you need to stop thinking like a developer and start thinking like an end user. Computers are tools, and when they're made accessible to the masses they can unleash all kinds of wonderful stuff; make them cryptic w/ GUIs that encapsulate 100% of the functionality, refer folks to source code and APIs to learn how to make things happen, and send them to newsgroups and mail lists where they'll be flamed for not reading the comment the developer put in header file X before asking questions, and you'll lose a potentially valuable user base. Let's face it: free/open-source developers more often than not write apps for other free/open-source developers. Your comments illustrate this nicely.
2) There's more to computer-oriented careers than software development. More people use computers than develop for them. Again, you're illustrating how developer-centric this realm is. I'm saying you need to step out of this before making a real difference for these OSes.
3) "Dumbed-down" user interfaces are necessary for the average human. You and I may be able to configure DNS using a command line and vi, or even a slightly dumbed down UI like webmin, but the average IT guy won't. Yes, intelligently weeding out the complex stuff and leaving that to command line folks or another GUI under an "Advanced" button makes sense. I would welcome more dumbed down GUIs on Linux/BSD/whatever. It would make my life easier (less questions to repeatedly answer).
4) You completely missed my point about web services and browsers. If an IT group is faced with a decision to either swap out an OS so that some different software can be run or just keep an OS around (like Windows) that will work just fine with a web services application, there is absolutely, positively NO reason to go through the IT headache of changing OSes on hundreds of computers company-wide. What you're saying is that if the browser on Windows and the browser on Linux works fine, then there's no reason not to switch to Linux. Huh?... Have you ever deployed anything across an entire company before? Leave-it-alone is the best policy when it comes to situations like this.
5) I don't know exactly where you're seeing these "reams of documentation", but after using Linux for 10 years I still am amazed at how poorly documented it is. The mass-market books available in bookstores are good for pressing flowers, but most of them aren't worth much more. And if you're talking about the ancient man page collections and HOWTOs/FAQs, they're in sad shape as well. And even when these things are "complete", they're so cryptic that without prior experience you'll have a lovely time trying to figure out what the hell you're supposed to do to get effect X out of utility Y. In other words, the documentation sucks.
Try again.
So let me get this straight... (Score:3, Funny)
And Apple (or other software vendors) can compete with this how? And this avoids further penetration of the educational software market exactly how? This prevents them from pushing other software vendors out of markets how? This avoids cyclical dependencies on their software precisely how?
I want some of what the state AG's are smoking.
Now, putting on my reality cap, I understand that to have to tell your voting public that you turned down the opportunity to have a one billion dollar infusion of software and computers into the poorest schools simply because you thought it would be wrong to let a company get away with something, and that overall, the people who are making money with the company will still make a lot of money with it after you "win", is something akin to political suicide. But it is still laughable.
But then it could be just me.
Redhat Proposed this Settlement (Score:5, Interesting)
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/011120/202744_1.html [yahoo.com]
200,000 computers -- what a coincidence. (Score:4, Informative)
This Microsoft page [microsoft.com] suggests there are at least 40,000 computers on the main Microsoft campus (search for the first "40,000" on the page). Since they want employees to use their latest and greatest version of Windows, Microsoft needs to replace computers frequently. Old boxes are just too slow. Replace each of 40K computers once a year for 5 years -- how many old boxes do you need to dispose of?
200,000
What a coincidence.
A picture is worth a thousand words... (Score:3, Funny)
Notice the poor innocent youth to his right...
Article on CNN (Score:3, Informative)
http://money.cnn.com/2001/11/20/technology/micr
My letter to NPR (Score:4, Insightful)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 18:12:38 -0500
From: "Clark C . Evans"
To: atc@npr.org
Subject: Incorrect Statement about Microsoft Settlement
You mentioned the Microsoft settlement on your
program this afternoon. And I'm afraid I heared
two mis-representations:
1. This program will cost Microsoft 1.1 Billion.
FACT: This program will cost Microsoft $300 Million.
The CD-ROMs and paper that the licenses
for their "$800 million" of Microsoft
software won't cost Microsoft more than
a few thousand dollars.
Further, since these schools are too
poor to buy the software, you can't
argue that it is a loss in revenue.
FACT: Having Children learn to use Microsoft
software, instead of open soruce
alternatives (such as open office
and linux) increases the value of their
software; since more people are familar
with it (the value of software is
proportional to the user base). It's
hard to buy new recruits.... costly
actually.
Having thousands of children learn how
to use Microsoft software "for free" is
hugely valueable to Microsoft. This is
worth more than $300 million alone...
2. This money may be used to buy non-Microsoft software.
FACT: The software licenses "retail value
$800 million" are for Microsoft
software.
Perhaps some of the $300 million can
be used to buy non-Microsoft software,
but I doubt it.
I'd like to mention that RedHat has an alternative [1]
if Microsoft *really* wants to spend 1.1 Billion.
1. Microsoft just buys the hardware instead.
2. Open Source software is used (for free).
I'm afraid that Microsoft's play is just a mechanism
to extend their monopoly. It doesn't help anyone
but Microsoft.
Could you please air a correction?
Best,
Clark Evans
[1] http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/011120/202744_1.html
Too little, too late (Score:3, Insightful)
Red Hat's whole deal is free software, so why didn't they help out poor school districts a couple of years ago? Does anyone really think stunts like this are going to be enough to stop RHAT's downward spiral into dotcom obscurity?
Re:Sigh.. (Score:2)
that's interesting, because jamie said that Of that $1.1 billion, $0.9 billion will be software presumably valued at whatever Microsoft wants to charge . so i would say that nearly all the money is directed back to Microsoft.
but i guess whether or not that is a good cause is up for debate.
-sam
Re:Sigh.. (Score:2)
i agree, schools getting free computers and software is a good thing. but what i do not understand is how this is supposed to punish Microsoft or deter them from doing it all again. it is like distracting a small child (the US government) with something shiny (money for schools) while you take the rest of their toys away. okay, so it's nothing like that. but anyway...
-sam
Re:Sigh.. (Score:2)
well considering this is not the DOJ case, instead this is a class action case for those who were overcharged for windows licenses, who is president becomes much less of an issue. it is being prosecuted by lawyers, not the government.
what IS interesting is that this settlement separates the attorney's fees from the amount of the settlement - microsoft pays money on top of the settlement fee to a tune of whatever amount the judge decides the attorneys should be paid.
my vote? the judge accepts the settlement, prescribes normal attorney's fees, and another couple billion in 'miscellaneous court costs'.
-sam
You have completely missed the point (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, this (i) helps Microsoft strengthen their Monopoly, (ii) costs Microsoft little more than $200 million, and (iii) probably harms children.
Uh, try again. (Score:2)
Sorry. This presupposes that the children will benefit from being inundated with MS software. In the long run, they won't. Neither does the rest of the world: that's what this case is about. Your statements sound reasonable, until you realize that they presuppose what they're trying to show. That doesn't work.
Re:Sigh.. (Score:2)
No, according to the article, they wouldn't be getting better computers, they'd be getting reconditioned(!) computers and MS software.
Oh dear, I guess I'm "Microsoft bashing" now. And when I say that it was grey and cloudy here this morning, I guess I'm "weather bashing". I'm such a meanie.
I'm sure this is an offer direct from Billy's heart, and the fact that it amounts to a slap on the wrist and would be a grab for more early mindshare and -- thanks to XP/IE defaults -- would enable MS to collect info on a lucrative market segment is purely accidental.
Re:Sigh.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullshit. These kids need better computers in their classrooms the way staving Afghanis need shiny new Air Jordans.
These kids need school buildings that aren't falling down, schools that are free of violence, teachers who are competent and well-paid, and textbooks that are up to date. Computers in the classroom (other than in progamming and clerical classes, of course) is a fad that will ultimately have as much revolutionary impact as educational filmstrips. (Beep.)
This is a loss for everyone except Microsoft. In any sane nation, their corporate charter would have been revoked long ago, their corporate HQ razed and the ground salted, and Gates would have spent a week in the pillory, being pelted with rotten tomatoes and old DOS manuals.
Re:Sigh.. (Score:4, Insightful)
This is eerily like big tobacco settling their suits by providing free cartons for distribution in schools. Locking in another generation of lusers.
The size of the MS monopoly is starting to generate a gravity-like field which distorts perception of reality in its presence. Even ostensibly unbiased media coverage of MS seems boggled as to how to speak about them. I can't imagine any other entity in any other industry even suggesting such a thing. And now MS is dictating security policy on Capital Hill. Its like GM setting emmissions standards. Thankfully, the Fates look askance at such hubris.
And lately I do too. Until a few months ago I liked to imagine that I understood peoples fear of the unknown, their reliance on the familiar; I took a gentle, only slightly patronizing tone with Windows users. Now I regard them all as moral beggars. If you run Windows you are wrong, and should be shunned from polite society.
Look at it this way (Score:3, Informative)
Anti-Microsoft-Class-Action-Settlement-Rant (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft gives away some of it's software to schools that could not have afforded it anyway (so they are really not losing potential revenues).
The real kicker of this settlement is that it sounds like Microsoft will get to value the software at its reatail value and not at the actual marginal cost to Microsoft
Microsoft loses almost no money from giving away the software, except the cost of distributing the cd's. So they get to write-off $1.1 billion in profits, value the give-away at $1.1 billion, but their actual costs are only pennies per installation. So if they value windows XP at $200 but the actual costs of distribution and media on that one istallation are (let's be generous) $5, you can see that this $1.1 billion settlement really costs them only $25 million dollars (taking the $200:$5 ratio of stated-value:actual-cost used earlier).
Now since this $1.1 billion dollars is subtracted from their income, and assuming Microsoft pays about 15% corporate taxes, we can see that they get a $165 million write-off for about $25 million dollars. In other words, Microsoft ends up $140 million dollars richer from this deal.
Now there is $128 million in training and support they are promising (again, real cost to Microsoft is probably less) but even that leaves them with a profit. There are vague promises of setting up a foundation with up to $250 million, but that is not a firm number.
Also they will be trying to obtain matching funds from other charities, to leverage this operation.
And when you get down to brass tacks, this deal benefits Microsoft in a very important way. This gives them an excuse to train millions of schoolkids on how to use their stupid software so that when these kids eventually look for jobs their employers will have to buy software from Microsoft because that is what their employees have been trained on.
Also Microsoft gets good P.R. for "helping disadvantaged kids" (ha!) and don't have to spend millions more staying in court and risking a truly costly jury award.
In summary, Microsoft gets to escape any future civil liability, while instituting a training program that makes their software more valuable at virtually no cost, or even a cash gain for themselves. And all the lawyers will get fat fees.
Sounds like a great deal for Microsoft. Now what would be really good is if Microsoft had to spend $1.1 billion dollars deploying other companies software in disadvantaged schools. Wouldn't it be great to know that the Linux or FreeBSD or Oracle, etc., etc., installation at your local school being paid for by Linux?
Re:Sigh.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes it is.
Microsoft also would be responsible for making available 200,000 reconditioned computers and laptop computers during that period, $90 million in teacher training and $38 million in technical support.
Makes me wonder though who is lining up to get this contract for 200,000 'reconditioned' computers? I've always wondered what happens to the leased machines like the ones our company gets. We have a 3rd-party leasing company that gets the boxes from Dell which we lease for 18 months. We ghost the drives and put them on people's desks. When they go off lease, we wipe the drives and the leasing company takes them away.
My first guess would be that MS is going to source these from multiple leasing companies that operate in the areas where these 14,000 schools are?
Re:So why is this so bad? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:So why is this so bad? (Score:2)
I'm really only half joking.
Re:So why is this so bad? (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyway. Of course an overriding goal is to increase the company's bottom line. However, traditionally, companies have also followed the constraints of the particular nation's laws. If not follow them to the letter, than at least to not directly oppose them.
Re:ok slashdot (Score:2)
those are just a start. and okay, so number 3 was not noble at all... can't blame me for trying, right?
-sam