RSSJudge Criticizes MS Settlement Progress
By Ed Oswald | Published October 27, 2005, 2:30 PM
At a court hearing to discuss Microsoft's progress in meeting the sanctions imposed in a 2002 antitrust settlement, a U.S. District Judge reprimanded the company over its recent music software flap. Microsoft was also scolded for not moving fast enough in opening its Windows internals to third parties.
Last week, the government disclosed that Microsoft had considered forcing its partners to stop bundling rival music software with their portable players. The plan was apparently proposed in a draft of marketing strategies, but was dropped after a manufacturer complained.
"This shouldn't be happening," Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly was reported as saying in the courtroom, suggesting that in order for this to happen, something must have not been going right with the compliance process. She also demanded an explanation as to why the proposal was written in the first place.
Kotelly in the past has generally had words of praise for Microsoft's work to comply with the settlement, which made Wednesday's comments all the more striking. However, no indication was made that she would take action against the company for the mistake.
Also, Kotelly said that Microsoft needed to begin to move faster to comply with a portion of the settlement that requires the company to make its technical documentation more accurate. The move would help competitors make their software work better on Windows, lawyers for the government claim.
Microsoft told the judge that it "underestimated the difficulty and the time" of the project, however Kotelly said that was "not a good excuse" for the lack of progress on the settlement requirement.
I hope I am never unlucky enough to develop a series of products and services so usable, so sought after, and so successful that every move I make to further my hard-earned fortune is then criticized, attacked, & legislated to death! What a horrible price to pay for revolutionizing computing, the net, and even the world.
Then again, if it would make me "Bill Gates"-rich... on second thought: Why not?
I've not heard the like of all the MS bashing to be found online since I was in high school, when the "cosmetically-challenged" gals used to sit & brood over anyone more attactive, (rather than consider working on their own dismal personalities, or considering a jog, or maybe an extra face wash or two).
MS rules because people have chosen and continue to choose their products and services over the few others who have attempted to compete, and they exercise more business savvy than anyone else. Don't like it? Go Mac or Linux, and enjoy all that compatibility. :D
Score: 0
|What MS bashing? How is posting factual information MS bashing?
Score: 0
|It's called anti trust.....T. Roosevelt Started it over 100 year ago..myabe you should have worried less about the cosmetically challenged and paid more attention in US History
Score: 0
|Microsoft is breaking the law with their MONOPOLY on the market. And they are dragging their feet to abide by the LAW. The Judge has already ruled against them, so how anyone can defend Microsoft over this, is beyond me.
Perhaps the Judge needs to throw Mr. Gates into jail again, until he fixes his software. None of us in society would be able to get away with breaking a Judges ruling, so why should Microsoft.
Score: 0
|It is thier market you f**. When the b**** judge throws him in jail who is going to release vista for the government to run all of its software on.
This is one situation where a monopoly is exactly what we need to bring a single standard in software, media and entertainment in general. Otherwise, we will have 1000's of codeccs and other software AND hardware all of which is uncompatible with each other. But hey, then at least you can choose a different color, right idiot.
Score: 0
|So much anger, and little else apparently.
Score: 0
|I believe he pointed out WHY there was a monopoly in the first place. They developed something that, while perhaps not truly original, was in the end "better" marketed, better deployed, and better to use than the competition. When the rest of the world figures out how to make a product that is "better" rather than "best", then they, too, will see Microsoft's success.
I am a firm believer in the idea that to be "the best" is not good enough. It is too arrogant to say that something is the best and, therefore, has no room for improvement. To be better implies that you are above the rest and still have room for improvement.
Score: 0
|Wasn't it FRANKLIN Roosevelt? Heh maybe I do need to read history more if not...
Score: 0
|"What MS bashing? How is posting factual information MS bashing?"
The manner in which it was done. Let me give an example. There's a certain movie star (call her 'Liza') that has married 12 or 13 times now, and cannot seem to settle for the same husband. Now where I come from, we call that a slutt, but that would be bashing her to call her that. Factual information does not discount claims of "false advertising" or "slander" in legal matters, nor would it in this case. Still this is beside the point (see below). What MS bashing? Let's look at one of your own comments:
"How is it unfair that they are being punished for breaking the law?
I think it's perfectly fair that they give back some of what they screwed their competition out of illegally.
They got off EASY, and that's what's unfair.
It's unfair to every one of us consumers."
Since I'm a consumer and it is fair to me, that would make this "non-fact" anyway, no? "I think" implies opinion, does it not? Did Microsoft literally "screw" the competition? Sorry, that's bashing. I've bashed MS bashers before too, I admit it, but there has been some MS bashing in here (as well as people bashing anti-MS people), as rustik_one suggested. Making generalized statements about a persons or company's character is bashing, as well as name-calling (yep, that means you seaweedopm).
Score: 0
|People are so hopelesly sue-happy with Microsoft. I would be willing to bet the guy they purchased DOS from has even tried to sue them for 'damages' at some point along the road.
Score: 0
|And you would win that bet!
http://en.wikipedia.org/...attle_Computer_Products
Score: 0
|ok, so the poor guy that created DOS got a total of $75,000. I kinda think he got shafted on that deal.
Score: 0
|If he was foolish enough to sign the deal on it, it is his own loss... would you sign a job contract with unacceptable terms, conditions, and compensation? I didn't think so.
Score: 0
|Could you imagine being in his shoes? I bet he has been kicking himself in the rear since. LOL
Score: 0
|I dont think its fair on microsofts part that they have to give away secrets about windows so COMPETITORS can make their software better than theirs
Score: 0
|Life's not fair.
Edit:
How is it unfair that they are being punished for breaking the law?
I think it's perfectly fair that they give back some of what they screwed their competition out of illegally.
They got off EASY, and that's what's unfair.
It's unfair to every one of us consumers.
Score: 0
|Better? Having documented APIs doesn't mean they have an advantage over Microsoft. Microsoft wrote the operating system! The court is just trying to level the playing field, so third parties have equal access.
Score: 0
|It's Microsoft's operating system. They can do what they like with it.
Score: 0
|No, they can't.
If you don't like it, then lobby the government to change the law that they were convicted of violating.
Good luck with that.
Score: 0
|This isn't about public APIs. MS probably has more and better documented public APIs than anyone else. Granted, there are still a lot of APIs undocumented but their definately the minority. This is about giving people deeper access to the internals of Windows, down to the source level.
Score: 0
|Like they hurt you so much. Windows has always been the same and you could uninstall or install anything you wanted and nothing forced itself on you, nothing that you couldn't turn off anyway.
It's all moot these days, there are just alot of haters.
Score: 0
|Since you know so much about the laws they broke, what was it again? Skips my mind.
Score: 0
|MS was tried and convicted for multiple violations of the Sherman Anti-trust Act in April of 2000.
Quote:
"...the Court concludes that Microsoft maintained its monopoly power by anticompetitive means and attempted to monopolize the Web browser market, both in violation of § 2. Microsoft also violated § 1 of the Sherman Act by unlawfully tying its Web browser to its operating system..."
That quote is direct from US DOJ, and can be found here:
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f4400/4469.htm
Documented fact. Got it now?
Score: 0
|I posted it yesterday, I'm sure you read it. This post to me is just because you can't accept the facts.
Score: 0
|"No, they can't."
They DID, didn't they? So much for the law--really though, MS is not as evil as some would have them to be. Have you looked at what Intel has been accused of recently? Know why Micron no longer sells PC's? Or the main reason Compaq had to merge with HP to survive? All unproven accusations, of course, but frankly none of this mess has gone through the legal system yet so for all we know this could all be reversed.
And HERE, folks, is where one of the main problems lies in our modern American society--nothing is ever in stone anymore, rules and laws are rewritten and overruled so often I COULD just break a law I disagree with, hire really good lawyers and appeal to the Supreme Court, and bribe the judges to overturn a law that has existed for two and a half centuries-- if I were rich and powerful enough. Of course the First Amendment could then be interpreted by Judges to say that murder is a form of speech and thus protected. I'm way of subject now, but the more of this nonsense I see where one judge's "interpretation" of the law is different from others, so he decides to be God and rule differently to make a name for himself. I must shut up now.
Score: 0
|Unfortunately, you are on the money with your comment. They DID, and fortunately in this case even though they had already put the breaks on it the Judge was all over it for happening in the first place.
Score: 0
|Tell me how to uninstall Internet Explorer, DirectX, or Media Player.
Thanks.
Score: 0
|Deleted, wrong ruling (doh)
Score: 0
|Section 2 was completely upheld. They only remanded the punishment.
Score: 0
|Wow, you replied before I could even check myself. Guess I should wait until BEFORE I post to verify things...
Score: 0
|Weird. :-)
Score: 0
|I don't see why they can't. If I write an OS, I can block who I want from it. Of course, that would be anti-profit, as who would use an os that I block people from? :P
Score: 0
|There is this thing called rule of law. You should research it sometime. :-D
Score: 0
|Yep. I'd like to know that as well. I once had to remove Internet Explorer - or as I prefer to call it, Internet Exploitee - from an MS Windows box, and the blessed thing wouldn't boot after that.
It's an official virus vector. I can guarantee you - or anyone else for that matter - that at least 50% of the viruses and other malware you get on an MS Windows box are there courtesy of Microsoft's "innovating" an insecure user interface level - the browser - into the MW Win9x and WinNT kernels. It's like that Far Side cartoon where "Listen to music" and "Make the wings drop off" are options on an airliner's passenger seat, and one passenger gets it wrong. :-)
Score: 0
|If you don't like it, then lobby the government to change the law that they were convicted of violating well thank you for that comment .at least a few of you are not asleep at the wheel
Score: 0
|He said that you could at least turn it off. And you can turn it all off if you have half a brain.
You are trying to take pieces of a pie apart and ask why it's still not a whole pie.
As far as security, if gayzilla or any of those other generic browsers had as many users as IE then there would be more haters creating malicious code to comprimise security. Piss off kook and go play on linux with your bobo office software.
Score: 0
|The government created laws because of situations like oil where the consumer is screwed when prices are raised. Tell me, if MS released software that was more expensive yet, as always, helped be more productive doesn't that even itself out?
You end up making and saving more money, so pay them more.
There needs to be standards in software. Microsoft is in the position to regulate and create these standards. Just like you go to a gas station and the g** d*** pumps are the same. You dont say "hey there is a monopoly on the pumps", no, you just pump that s*** and leave.
Score: 0
|No, he said you could uninstall it. Learn to read.
Score: 0
|There is a monopoly on the pumps? Which company owns 90+% of the oil market?
Oh right, you don't have a valid argument.
Score: 0
|OK, granted, I'll accept that you want to disable/uninstall IE or Media Player... if you have a better product, use it. DirectX, on the other hand, powers much of the grahics engine in Windows, so why on Earth would you want to?
I was satisfied that IE and MP can be disabled rather than uninstall it and *risk* breaking functionality of the OS. Besides, I can still use them if I see fit this way, and well, it's not like anyone is seriously hurting by losing 100MB of disk space these days.
Score: 0
|I don't disagree, nor do I want to uninstall them however it should be an option.
Score: 0
|My only response : break up MIcrosoft into baby Microsofts. It Worked with ATT. Think about it we might have a baby Europe Microsoft, a baby China Microsoft etc.
LOL. I love the idea..
Score: 0
|LOL.
Like they did with ATT? So you want a new, second MS to grow into another behemoth and then rejoin the original MS Behemoth? Cuz that's how it worked with ATT, man.
Score: 0
|OS company, Applications company, and Internet services company
That would not FIX the problem, but in my opinion it would pave the road towards resolution.
Score: 0
|Just presonal opinion here, but I don't think that'd actually ^help^ other comapnaies.
I think it would help MS, and I think they've needed to do this for quite some time as they seem to have been losing focus as of late, but I doubt it would help others get a foot in the OS, or Office door in terms of any *real* market share.
*shrug*
Hehe.. What I'd realle love to see, my biggest MS fantasy, what would drive me absolutely friggin nuts with giddyness would be to see MS pull off an Apple/Intel-type switch-hit. Mainly because I just cannot see them being able to even attempt such a thing given their size, but it would definately be a fun ride.
Nah....it'll never happen. ;)
Score: 0
|"Just presonal opinion here, but I don't think that'd actually other comapnaies."
Not criticizing you...I genuinely want to know what you intended to say here.
Score: 0
|Wouldn't we all?
Grrr....
Fixed.
Score: 0
|Ya!! Right.. and Comcast should not be have blocked OLN from being on Dish network.. We have antitrust problems all over the entertainment world. Every company wants more control and money!! And all they have to do is buy a few congressmen to have control.
Score: 0
|"buying a few congressmen" Isnt that the American way? The Almighty dollar
Score: 0
|"This shouldn't be happening,"
No kidding? LOL
Score: 0
|