i appreciate european efforts all the coutries should join in the race and kill microsoft.there must be a general body and standards to build an operating system.but now with microsoft nobody can be able to create an os because of hardware support.if this continues microsoft will threaten even the goverment of the country.as it is ruling the computer world.as of now microsoft software development is the world development.if microsoft does not support blue tooth blue tooth will ruin.if a printer is introduced without microsoft he cant able to sell it.

american site filled with american ppl. u never grow out of ur superiority complex and disregard of millions of non-americans in this world.

No government should be able to tell a for-profit software company to hand over their source-code. Period.

It has nothing to do with international relations or a "superiority complex."

> No government should be able to tell a for-profit
> software company to hand over their source-code. Period.

Both US and EU governments can and in fact are obliged under their anti-trust laws to protect consumers from a convicted monopoly abuser.

Microsoft is a convicted monopoly abuser both in US and EU. The difference is that EU is actually trying to do something about it.

EU is planning for the next world war - that's all. They want no dependency on American technology. Only God knows how many security holes the NSA has listed for WinXP in their little (humangeous?) black book to allow them total control over the world's citizens.

Basically what I'm saying is the EU has already decided their goal is open source OS (+OOffice naturally) for their subjects - within 10 years.

The news that will "shock" the world (and make us Americans jump on our hind legs) is yet to come - that Windows Vista will not be allowed to be sold in the EU "due to lack of compliance with EU anti-monopoly requirements" as they'll say.

Then again, MS might do the right thing and fully-comply with whatever they're requested, with strategic assistance from the NSA (who will be contacting them shortly).

After all, this is, bottom line, clearly a national security issue.

Let them declair war it will do us all a favor! We all want war on the EU just do not want to declair it! LET THEM PLEASE! SO THEY CAN LOOSE SOONER!

You guys do know that in MS there is never a shortage of Toilet paper right? I mean these guys get to read all these BS lawsuits and threats, and when they are done reading they wipe and drain em down the toilet =)

**** Off you bas****s when you can't just distinguish the diffrence between API and being open source shut it up !
Microsoft has so extensible and powerfull plus low level APIs that is 1000000000 times better than being Open Source at least from a developer's view like me !
EU should go and find another way to prepare its budget or there's a better way so much better to shut it!
Poor Microsoft that has to deal with you dumbs let it be free bas****s and do its best. If you wanna improve Computer's world and speed up its evolution progress force Microsoft or Intel to release thier new technology's faster!
Force MS to release its WinFS faster or force it to improve its UI in Vista! not to fight with MS just with what is not your bussines and profession !
Force Intel to release its triple core CPU and beyond 9999999999999999 core CPUs with 1THz frequecy per Core it's the perfect way not these actions man!
Think a little more about what you're doing !

Wow...holiday blues, eh?

kia_akhalghi, you have just no idea of how MS is totally uncapable of getting winFS to work. and unaware of the basic laws of physics and economy that prevent intel (or any other chip company) to produce what you're asking for

I guess you missed the video of their live demo of WinFS that they posted on MSDN months ago...

The EU is on crack.

What a bunch of retards.

Ok. I'm convinced. The sky *must* be falling.

Well said. =p

Anti-competition and Monopoly laws are in place to, among other good things, protect the worlds consumers from becoming owned by corporations (other than government). There should be more strict enforcement of these kinds of laws imo

So MS should open up their source code to the public?? What kind of retarted demand is that.

Is MS a monopoly by any measure? Have they been found guilty of anti-competition? If so, who cares how retarded the demand is, they are on the wrong side of the law. Judging and sentencing is justified.

" Is MS a monopoly by any measure?"

A monopoly would mean you have no choice...do you have a choice in using windows or not? Some guy in europe tells you they're a monopoly and suddenly it must be true? Men can breast feed...must be true to you now too right?

"Have they been found guilty of anti-competition?"

Every single company out there has some anti-competitive practices...what is microsofts exactly? Giving you a free version of media player and internet explorer is anticompetitive?

"If so, who cares how retarded the demand is"

Two wrongs don't make a right...if you punch me in the stomach I don't have the right to shoot you in the head. If your company can't compete against mine doesn't mean I have to give you all my companies secrets.

Giving out source code unwillingly to the entire world is not justified by any means. It's copyrighted code, MS owns it, and nobody should have a right to it. Giving out the code will just spawn a bunch of windows clones, yea that will be good for the market.

"I don't have the right to shoot you in the head"

You do if you live in Florida, and you can prove that by punching you in the stomach he was trying to kill you.

LOL ;-)

It's true! I used to live in Sunny fla! :)

MS is claiming intellectual property for their software? On top of not wanting to disclose the code they've really written, they just don't want to show how much was stolen and plagiated from the open source community. Is that supposed to stay unpunnished and legal?

MS is claiming intellectual property for their software? On top of not wanting to disclose the code they've really written, they just don't want to show how much was stolen and plagiated from the open source community.

> Giving you a free version of media player and internet explorer is anticompetitive?

it goes much further than this. MS deliberatly introduce "errors" when using standards (network protocols, hardware usage, etc) to force software developpers and (more important) hardware manufacturers to comply to MS's errors in order to get the "made for windows" label, and therefor have the slightest chance to sell their prodcuts and therefore survive.

users have no other choice than wait for hackers (NOT crackers) to waste precious time trying to reverse engineer hardware they have legally purchased and should be allowed to use they way the like on the system they like. binary codecs fall in the same category.

ah MS delibertly introduces errors and somehow forces computers to not be usable unless they're hacked...I see.

Stop reading consiperacy theory books, and say that again when you get out of HS.

Uhhh....what company that makes a profit off their software doesn't claim intellectual property? What company discloses it's code (open source excluded)?? Ohhh but MS should be different because....oh just because their MS and you seem to have no clue what you are talking about.

> What company discloses it's code (open source excluded)?

Words of a true moron.

Any company disclosing it's source code would be called "open source" company.

Microsoft is a convicted monopoly abuser both in US and EU.

i really think a lot of people here are either crazy (if you support the EU wanting MS to open up their code) or dont understand the issue (think EU just wants MS to open code to competitors for their own irrational reasons). really the only reason the EU is stirring up this mess is because MS implements WMP and IE into windows and DOESNT GIVE THE USER THE OPTION NOT TO INSTALL THEM DURING WINDOWS INSTALL!!! this means by default WMP and IE are chosen for media files and web browsing. this is unfair to competitors because they already have the lower hand in the equation. the EU is right in asking MS to deal with this issue, but opening the code to WMP and IE for competitors is NOT A SOLLUTION! the proper way to deal with this is to fine MS if they dont comply in ASKING THE USER during a windows installation if he/she wants to install WMP and IE or not. that way the user HAS A CHOICE before ever even having WMP or IE on their computer in the first place. THEN the user can decide afterwards to go solely with a 3rd party media player and browser OR to use MS's programs. this is the ONLY problem being dealt with by the EU and the US. so rant all you want about the open source demand. I agree that's insane! but understand at least how they got mad at MS in the first place, and then just point and laugh at the idiots for taking the whole conflict out of proportion and making insane demands.

Well, for one M$ already took WMP out of windows in Europe. I think Windows in Europe has been stripped down majiorly in europe, pretty much all it has is IE. But you gotta think Strotman, Are the Europeans so freakin' stupid that they think that the HAVE to use WMP and IE? here on my work computer, I have IE, WMP, Wordpad, blah blah blah, You know what? I use, Firefox, Winamp, and Microsoft word! Why? because I'm smart enough to know I have a choice. I mean, Microsoft offers those components with windows to make the consumers life easier. I know some people who LOVE IE and WMP, and would use nothing else, so this means they would have to go and download them, rather than them already conviently installed on their computer. But I DO understand the point at hand, but making their software open source is not the answer. I still think M$ needs to just not sell their software in europe since they have such a huge issue. I mean, read the posts here, most of the eurpean people that post on BN said they hate Microsoft, So why even bother sellingt he product there? Let them use Linux and Firefox and all the other free open source stuff, then they'll realise that it all SUX

And another thing, if Internet Explorer didn't come preloaded with windows, how the hell is the consumer gonna browse the internet to download Firefox? or Opera? or netscape?? LOL!

European Customer: "ohh, I decline to install IE, I'll just download firefox instead" *an hour goes by, XP is loaded and done* "ok let me go download firefox!"

Windows XP: "Hey idiot, you can't browse the web cuz you don't have a browser!!!!"

European Customer: "eh...oops..."

"Well, for one M$ already took WMP out of windows in Europe"

LOL...and from what I hear the WMPless version of windows is pretty unpopular in EU...yea, the EU is doing what's in the "best interest of the public"...yea, sure you are.

lol no kidding

obviously. It keeps on crashing for no reason. And I know this for I live in Europe.

As for the IE and WMP, it cannot even be uninstalled for this exact reason. Windows DOES NOT WORK without these components, which compromise greatly the users private life and security.

"Windows DOES NOT WORK without these components, which compromise greatly the users private life and security."

If that's what the user thinks, then they should use a different OS. That's what we in the U.S. call a free market...

Oh you live in Europe...no wonder your opinions are so biased and skewed...I hope your not a representative of what the educational system in Europe is like...although that would explain alot of EU's thinking.

And you apparently live in America, which explains *your* bias.

Everyone here is biased just by the very nature of what is going on. Pulling the "bias" card doesn't go very far.

My bias of what? I have no bias...if MS was in Europe and the US Gov't decided to force them to show the world their source code...I would be just as pissed at our gov't as I am at the EU.

Forget boycotting sony, Boycott the European commission!! This is BS! Why are they gonna take a companies profit away from them??? Hell with Europe! Hell with the french! Don't sell M$ Products in Europe! Let them suffer! "NO WINDOWS FOR YOU!"

I am just trying to imagine how any of this works, the EU is not based in America but think they make demands like this and push around an American company? Not a pride thing, just how is that even work?

Microsoft programmed that operating system, it's theirs. Just like if I wrote a program and released it and if it became really popular I would not give out the code because that is just stupid.

That and I bet you that they really don't know the diff. between programming API's and real source code. I be will to go so far and say nobody on that entire EU pannel has ever written their own HELLO WORLD program.

The EU can shove off with the FCC, RIAA, and MPAA.

"the EU is not based in America but think they make demands like this and push around an American company?"
That's not right. In each European country Microsoft is an own company, e.g. Microsoft Germany GmbH etc. So they ARE able to do this because the law says Microsoft is an European company and sells it poducts in the EU.

I don't think that is what anyone is saying here at all. I think that the EU is making demands upon a company without regard.

Obviously, MS is there due to demand by the public for its products. MS complies and builds a factory there to sell. Now, only to have the EU decide on what that product will do and what MS must do to make others easier to destroy that product. MS already allows 3rd party programs on to their system. It is the source code they are after, not applications. If you don't want media player 10, then don't download it. At the same time, if photostory 10 requires it, it means you don't get photostory either. But you do have the choice to download or install any other program and use it.

The EU keeps changing their minds and demands and has even gone as far as to state they have not read the new documentation given by MS. What are they after then?

MS has made many changes to their operating system since the beginning and still others want more. They are not a monopoly, you still have choices. It is not MS's fault you don't like the choices, but that is what you get.

Take it or leave it. I wish they could pull out of Europe, but that would even be more silly than the demands placed upon them. They are willing to make concessions, but the EU is not budging. I see that they are after something else.

"They are not a monopoly"

Where is the evidence to support that statement?

3 different governments in 3 different parts of the world disagree.

What makes you right and them wrong?

Me and you agree on this point, fewt. MS is definately a monopoly. That's probably the ONLY thing me and you agree about though :)

I doubt it's the only thing. It's probably the only thing you'd admit to though. :-P haha

Seriously, in my opinion they are doing a great job in every area except interoperability. I think the EU is asking too much to demand source code, however I'm not so sure that they are asking for source code.

"Smith complained in a statement that the Commission demand that internal workings of the Windows operating system be documented and licenced to rival server makers "can open the door to the production of clones of parts of the Windows."

"The Commission confuses disclosure of the source code with disclosure of the internals and insists that it will fine the company if it fails to address this," he said.

He added that the Commission had assured an EU court last year that its decision did aim to force Microsoft to disclose the internal working of the Windows."

- http://today.reuters.com...CROSOFT-EU-REACTION.xml

I think it's perfectly acceptable to force them to a point where it's easy for their competition to be able to interoperate seamlessly. Microsoft is right that source code isn't required, however the commission is probably also right that Microsoft hasn't done enough to comply.

I can still buy a pc today and not have an OS installed on it. I then can purchase one and install it as I wish. Where is the Monopoly in that? I can even purchase many software titles or download them free from the Internet and install them at will. But with other OS's, I have to search for specific software and hope to find a tech that will service it if I have trouble.

In stores, you can see machines side by side with Mac and Windows, but those of Windows are being bought more often then Mac. The reason for this is due to the fact that if you installed a Linux OS onto an EMachine or HP, it would sit on the shelve for months, maybe years and not be purchased by anyone. Is this Microsoft's fault? NO! It is what the customer wants, and for this Best Buy would be silly in purchasing more than one machine with such configuration as not to go broke.

No one else is developing Operating Systems that are being bought. Though it works to the advantage of MS that such is happening, it is not by them pushing them off the shelves.

Even to this day, Linux does not have a OS that is suitable for the common user. This is not the fault of Microsoft, but of Linux. Same for Mac. Mac is more expensive and when they sit side by side on the shelve and you are told that you have to learn something new, people shrill and move to the OS they are familiar with. In time this will slowly change as more and more options are offered, but again, not the fault of MS.

I could care less what the EU or Korea and such complain about. If they are so dead against MS being a monopoly, then why even let them into their country in the first place. What tactics are being used there? Each could block MS anytime they want, but they will not do that because of the demand for their products.(And the money they get from them) Talk about calling the kettle black.

If MS was going to PC Manufacturers and forcing them to place Windows onto their machines and not allowing any other OS to be installed or any other peice of software, then you would be right in assuming they are a monopoly.

I don't know you from the next guy, but just because it is in print, does not make it so. Think for yourself. It is easy to see why some think that they are monopoly, but it is only due to the small base of OS's offered, not by their design.(Though every company does have a dark side, and not to say that some things they have done were illegal)

These are all your opinions, which don't change the facts. :-)

The problem is that the EU is too much involved in things mormally the companies are deciding on their own. An example: if two companies want a fusion, they have to ask the EU if it is OK.

Microsoft should tell them to shove it

lol, thats badass

.. and the EU could then make MS products illegal, to massively support open source software. The whole US would soon be wiped off the "computer" face of the earth because you retarded idiots would still be using an inadequate OS. Since most of Asia is much in favor of Linux and UNIXes, it wouldn't take long before US could not export one single piece of hard or software and become the laughing stock of the planet.

please, no PLEASE! do so. Ruin what's left of your economy, exagerated national pride and political bulls*** ; rot where you're sitting on your fat asses and leave the world in peace. We'll all be better off after that, we don't need and don't want your help. in other words, f*** off.

Someone hit a nerve?

Personally, I don't think the EU has any right to do this sort of thing. I think if they want to make an organizational body to deal with software companies and such, then do so, but till then, stay out of it. MS should pull products from the U.K until they stop this kind of crap.

"MS should pull products from the U.K until they stop this kind of crap."

Why are you picking on the UK?

News flash, dumba**, the EU consists of more than just the UK. It's actually made up of 25 European countries with more to join later.

"Why are you picking on the UK?

News flash, dumba**, the EU consists of more than just the UK. It's actually made up of 25 European countries with more to join later."

OK, oh smart one, the UK and the rest of the 24 (and soon to be more) other anal retentive dumba**, can't make an important decision to save their own countries a** countries that make up this wonderful and useful organization.
And I chose the U.K because they generally seem to have the 'oomph' in voice, especially with this case, when it comes to any kind of meeting over the matter.
They couldn't get 'control' of the net so now they're making American companies miserable. First MS, I then predict Dell, Gateway, anything on the map. You'll see.

As I said before, if they need to, then put together an organization to oversee software policies etc. Make that their job. Lately they've been just so....I dunno, like mosquitos.

And for the record, MS wouldn't lose any real money from pulling out because people would simply buy the product online somehow, companies would still buy server products, etc. Local Tech. Outlets would like import U.S versions anyway.
It'd be slightly more difficult and a tad more expensive, yes, but hey, you reap what you sow right? And it's not like they wouldn't deserve it. They're just never satisfied, and at this point it seems like they're more interested in extorting money from MS in any way they can than doing the community any good whatsoever.
It's really comparative to the RIAA, where nowadays they seem more interested in sueing first, correcting the problem later.

"OK, oh smart one, the UK and the rest of the 24 (and soon to be more) other anal retentive dumba**, can't make an important decision to save their own countries a** countries that make up this wonderful and useful organization."

I'm sorry, there are so many grammatical mistakes in that I don't actually understand what you're trying to say. It just doesn't make sense.

"And I chose the U.K because they generally seem to have the 'oomph' in voice, especially with this case, when it comes to any kind of meeting over the matter.
They couldn't get 'control' of the net so now they're making American companies miserable. First MS, I then predict Dell, Gateway, anything on the map. You'll see."

The UK doesn't want control of the net it's just we see it a bit unfair that the US should control it. Secondly, the decision in this matter wasn't made by the UK it was made by the EU Commission. At the end of the day ordinary people didn't have any say in this so let's not go and start picking on the UK, thank you.

MS is being monopolistic and anti-competitive, or so the EU Commission says, other companies are not being punished by fines but as soon as they do become like MS then I'm sure they will be fined to until then it's just MS. However as much as I disagree with EU Commission's decision I don't think they're out to get American companies.

"And for the record, MS wouldn't lose any real money from pulling out because people would simply buy the product online somehow, companies would still buy server products, etc. Local Tech. Outlets would like import U.S versions anyway."

Very educated indeed. I think you may find that MS would lose A LOT if they pulled out of Europe.

Thanks for reading, do have a Happy Xmas.

Is it just me or is the EU very much like the RIAA, except they "represent" a group of countries instead of record companies.

It's just you. :-)

EU government can be real pain in the back, but in this case they are on the right side.

Microsoft is a convicted monopoly abuser both in US and EU. The difference is that EU is actually trying to do something about it.

precisely

Well if Microsoft wants to sell their product in other countries, and make millions in profit from it, then they have no choice but to follow the laws of that country. I don't think its going to kill Microsoft to give in to these demands.

Microsoft is so used to bullying everyone else around, its about time they get the same dished back at them.

I love Linux, I am a fanboy to a limited extent, but this seems a bit asinine. Microsoft included the thing that's like "Set Program Defaults and... ???" program to set the default program and toggle visibility of the program. Come on, folks... what are we doing with an ultimate blessing of "free will?" This capability says that we have the choice to not use that program!

In the EXTREME worst-case scenario, if this were to succed, then they could go after Linux distributions (Red Hat, Novell, Mandriva, etc.) under anti-competition laws for bundling and setting to default OpenOffice.org, Firefox, Gaim, etc.

they have no right to tell microsoft they have to open their source to COMPETITORS! this is ridiculous, outrageous and just plain stupid. if you don't like media player, DON'T USE IT! microsoft doesn't have to bow to anyone, especially not a foreign power! we have laws protecting intellectual property! who do they think they are trying to break those laws. they have totally lost their minds, this is just another ploy by them to get money. THEY are the ones that should be fined daily for this. i'm with MS on this one.

"microsoft doesn't have to bow to anyone, especially not a foreign power!"

Last time I checked Microsoft Ltd was registered here in the United Kingdom. That makes Microsoft Ltd a British firm. It may be a subsidiary of Microsoft Corp. which is in US but Microsoft Ltd is based in the UK and therefore has to abide by our laws and regulations so YES it DOES have to bow to 'foreign power'.

I'm from Europe, and I just want to add to the many other comments here showing the disappointment at the EU's ruling. Like many others, I would like to see MS just pull from the market. Then the EU will realize they have been amazingly silly, and the world can go back to normal.

I dislike the EU a great, great deal. The rulings they have against MS are ridiculous, in my opinion. MS bundles WMP with Windows, and they did it because people wanted their OS to come with more than just a bare OS. They wanted to be able to play media without having to worry about downloading other stuff. It was more relevent when people had slower connections, but for those who don't know what they're doing with PCs, I see a benefit.

What with Vista? If MS have some kind of AntiSpyware built in, are the EU going to ask them to remove that too because that's anti-competitive? And why is it just about all PCs you buy have a 30 day trial of Symantec NAV installed with them. So I get my OS already messed up because of software someone else is enforcing on my computer?

I digress. Basically, I'd rather have MS bundling whatever they want with Windows. And I'd rather have MS doing what they want with their APIs, and their source code. I don't see why it all needs to be opened up. People have been creating applications for years that run fine on windows, and do lots of.. well, whatever. So obviously there's plenty of documentation out there.

Maybe the EU are just strapped for cash and fancy hitting the biggest target. They make me sick.

"What with Vista?"
I'm not sure, but I think I've read somewhere that Microsoft will bring out Windows Vista E, a special version for Europe. There's no WMP, no Anti-Spyware within.

This is rediculous! How the hell does the European Union think they have the authority to tell MS to open its internal source code!

USE THE DAMN APIs!!!!!

How do they think that this will improve the market?

I guess they are doing this for reason, or not. I dont really care since its not in my hands, but as for Microsoft. I feel no pity. **** happens when you are running a monopoly, which not everyone likes.

I'm from the UK and think the EU is totally out of order. The judging panel probably don't know anything about Source Codes and APIs.

Why should MS open up its code to its competitors, its their IP, nobody elses!

What about Apple - are the EU going to persue them. I doubt it!

I admire Microsoft for that they have done to the computer and the Internet, I wouldn't say i'm a total fan of them, but their products make the world go around!

"but their products make the world go around!"

Exactly, and not everyone is so comfortable being in that position. Problem is, Microsoft got upper hand on the OS market and competition seems to be non-existing... that cant be good.

> but their products make the world go around!

that must be why over half of web servers run apache, and less than a quarter run IIS

One way MS could get round the removal of Media player is to bundle other media players and give the user the option on install

I personally think that M$ should be made to strip out all apps and just make it basic like Windows 95 was back in the day. Then he/her could install the apps. Rather than it being forced apron us like it was from win98 onwards

by including other media players you mean including competitors' software? how would you like it if you made a piece of sofware but was told you need to include your arch enemy's stuff on it too? probably won't think that's appropriate right? also, what would determine what "other" media players go on it? all of them? that'll be like 100+ of them. Deciding what to include should be the responsibility of the company/person installing the software, so all MS should do is to allow you to uninstall the stuff you dont want.
windows 95 back in the day had at least IE installed by default. I doubt most ppl would be able to go online and install other stuff without a default browser.

No it didn't, IE came on the IE cd in the box with Windows 95 and it was only with Windows 95B. At that time IE was still an off the shelf product that cost approx $40.

As for not being able to go online, most ISPs bundled their dialer software with a web browser making it pretty easy to get online.

ok. i'll give you the 95 not bundled with IE (it was so long ago that i can't remember :D)

but for ISPs bundling their software with a browser..you can apply the same logic for the ISP's software as well that was used for MS. does the ISP software have to come with all possible browsers? or can they just choose one of their own choice? it's all the same result. whoever(company) makes the package has their own free will to include what's in it. if you dont like it, then it's your own freedom to switch to another one.

No, Windows95 came in diffrent versions.

95A, 95B, and 95C.

Version A came out on 13 floppies and did not have IE to save space on the floppies. Any CD version of the OS had IE with it. 95C even had a diffrent boot logo that said IE was bundled with it.

Nothing is forced. If you don't like it, don't use it. Are you using any peice of software now that you don't like? I bet not, because you know how to turn off that feature. It isn't hard or rocket science. It has been this way since Win98. Even if you don't know how, there are many Internet sites out there to help you do it.

As soon as MS does this, the commission is going to demand something else, and will continue to do so.

There are only 3 major players in the world of OS programs. Of these, MS has the largest customer base. Only because of their products, not because of their monopolistic tactics. It is primarily because they have listened to the wants of the customers and have incorporated them into their OS. Even giving alternative ways in which to configure their products so 3rd party vendors can be used. Many of these hacking into the system configurations for their own profit and mucking up the mix.

This is not to say that MS is perfect, but only a product of what the customer base has asked for and conducting business like all other companies in the field. Do we forget about IBM, INTEL, Mac, and Zerox?

How about the EU going after MS on XB0x360 or Sony Playstation for not allowing other games to be played on them?

"not because of their monopolistic tactics."

Incorrect. The US, Korea, and the EU have all ruled them a monopoly, and that they gained their monopoly illegally.

Your opinion may be that they didn't get their due to their monopoly however the facts show that they did.

95A came as both a CD and a floppy set as did 95B. I believe that the original release of 95 (pre A) came only on floppy. 95C only came on CD.

I recall the company I worked for at the time purchased 95B on floppy by mistake and we had ~38 floppies to install with, yeah that didn't happen (sent them all back un-opened).

Nice to see the EU doing something right for a change. Also nice that so far they don't show any signs of doing what the US DOJ did - finding Microsoft guilty of something, then rewarding them for it instead of punishing them.

So many of you didn't seem to read this article. They are merely asking for certain protocols and data types to be documented so that products can be created that interoperate with Windows, or replace certain components of Windows. The source code they are requesting, if any, is merely to demonstrate how the protocols and/or formats are used so that the documentation can be validated. They aren't saying, "give us all your source code". They aren't 'killing' Microsoft or stealing their IP.

A free market must have restraints placed upon it to ensure a competitive market-place exists.

Particularly scary is if Microsoft's patents on various protocols, data types, and file formats were enforcable. Then software developers couldn't achieve interoperability with Microsoft's software without paying licensing fees.

Governments should do what is necessary to make sure free markets function in the interest of the consumer. If it weren't for the U.S. government breaking up various monopolies over the years (i.e. at&t/bell), then we'd all be paying much higher phone bills.

Many markets are forced to allow for competition to interoperate.

This ultra-capitalist position many of you are taking doesn't work any better than an ultra-communist position. In the end, some reasonable combination of capitalism and socialism is the best for THE PEOPLE.

It is amusing to hear you argue against your own good. I wonder if some of you aren't being paid to post such things.

"A free market must have restraints placed upon it to ensure a competitive market-place exists."

Restraining a "free market"? Doesn't sound so free to me. Why don't we just force every industry to have competitors that control at most 50% of the market? Oh, that's right, because it's socialism!

It sounds great on paper--in reality it simply doesn't work. Really...how have you, or any other consumer benifited from the lawsuits against MS?

Remember MS owns the desktop market. HURTING THEM HURTS THE MARKET. This does not benifit consumers one bit.

"This ultra-capitalist position many of you are taking doesn't work any better than an ultra-communist position. In the end, some reasonable combination of capitalism and socialism is the best for THE PEOPLE."

This is sadley the belief of many Americans, especially liberals, today. Equal benifits, prices, etc., only causes less profit, because people lose their will to work, and the people who do work get the same as the lazy ba$tards. This already happens with "government" housing in my opinion. Let me give an example.

Three major hurricanes this season: Katrina, Rita, and Wilma. I live in Port Arthur, Texas, which was right in the middle of Rita. Still I find that every store etc. still wants to give to Katrina victims. Don't get me wrong--Katrina was bad, worse than Rita--but nobody seems to understand that just because we had an IQ above our waistline and actually decided to evacuate doesn't mean we weren't affected.

Still today I see nothing but ads for the poor Katrina victims and such. Listen, I DON'T WANT YOUR MONEY, don't misunderstand. I'm pointing out that because *MANY* (not all) Katrina victims were a buncha b****in a$$holes our government and our people are spending an unprecedented amount of money on them. Money doesn't grow out of people's a$$...Wilma and Rita victims got the short end of the stick. FEMA can't afford to do anything, insurance companies are millions of dollars in debt, yet we spent all of the money on the precious Katrina victims. AND MOST OF THE MONEY WILL BE GOING TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T EVEN MAKE THEIR OWN MONEY, because they think their government owns them. Wakeup people! Government BY THE PEOPLE, for the people. WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT!

Okay I got a little off topic...my point was blurred too...but to me we need less government, not more.

I suspected you were from texas. (joke) :-P

I agree the katrina thing is pretty pathetic, especially the begging on TV for someone to give people hand outs when they should have evacuated. In my opinion they shouldn't rebuild New Orleans at all, because it's just going to happen all over again but I digress.

I've been through 4 hurricanes in the last 2 years, so I don't feel sorry for them for knowing a cat 5 hurricane was coming and them staying in a city that's 10 feet below sea level. It just doesn't get any dumber than that.

You can't have a free market without controls, that's not capitalism it's ANARCHY. There is nothing liberal about putting controls on a free market, without them every company could become the next enron or worldcom. It's not about the control, it's about making sure companies act responsibily.

thank you

> It is amusing to hear you argue against your own good. I wonder if some of you aren't being paid to post such things.

hehe, me too

I agree with you on this one :) , although now that they are stuck in this situation i would rather them collect donations than use american taxes purely.

government needs to control minimum wage, saftey issues, minimum working age, monopolies, max hours aloud to work, price fixing i mean think of a world without these things. Youd still be working for your 10 cents at the factory. Government regulations on the economy and cooperations are necessary altough we must maintain a strict limit on this not to let the government control the economy and control it to how they want it. There is a big difference between regulation and control

I don't understand the EU: they want to keep the competition. Competition exists when the consumer can decide between VARIOUS products. But if they want MS to open their codes or sources, other companies can copy it. So the EU is stepping back in time... That's European bureaucracy...

here's a thought to EU:
why not just make every software open source, or force every company to open every source code up, so everyone can improve on it. Theoretically it will work great right? since everyone would benefit from it.
Wow, that sounds just like Communism, works great in theory, but sucks in real life.
LOL

Exactly my point! Misrepresentation by one individuals agenda, blatant ideology of a communistic society! Sound likes EU has degressed itself into a futuristic dictatorship as depicted in the bible!

I'm from Europe (Germany) and please don't think that the European people agree with the EU commission! The Germans think the EU makes too many and too complicated laws like the Competition rights law. Why the hell does the EU commission want MS to delete WMP from WinXP? We have no problems with it... And if you don't like WMP, go and download another one...
Sometimes it seems to me that this commissioner Neele Kroes has a "personal anger" against MS so she wants MS to pay for... nothing that breaks an EU law!

Why is it that your people are misrepresented? And their opinions are beat down by one mans agenda?

The EU often misrepresents the people. What do you thínk why the French and the Dutch voted against the European Constitution?

Reminds me of BIG BROTHER, some high authority way up there that no one relates to or knows about, that just does what they want. This will lead to either a complete Big Brother like society or a revolution to where the EU is overthrown.Which is highly unlikely to have a revolution from internal sources in this day an age, because you can so easily prevent this from your own people with modern technology. So for this to happen their would have to be an Iraqi like revolution, with support of an outside nation like the US. (LET THE US DECLARE WAR ON THE EU AND FREE THEM FROM THEIR DICTATORSHIP!) J/k but this is an statement many americans wish would happen

I think you're exaggerating a bit now. You should think about the fact the EU is the biggest economy zone in the world!
Maybe you go to http://europa.eu.int/com...mpetition/index_en.html

I know i was exagerating quite a bit! But i do believe that the arrival of the EU in europe is the onset of either of those too outcomes, Big Brother Society, or an outside revolution=war. Which are both far from close to happening, and could very likely be the next WW3 but this has nothing to do with this and should be ignored lol!

you may not agree but if you think of the two outcomes of misrepresentation of people it has always been a revolution. In this day and age their is that posiblity of BB although.

America is not George Bush. There is a diffrence.

I am not a fan of Microsoft ways but I must say that they made a good product, and it is their IP; so it shouldn't be forced on them to open their source and I see no evil that MS does here if they can make a product that really sells and others can't keep up with

Fewt so i hear you tell everyone to stop argueing , stop because you do not know the reasons, stop because you just don't know! Well all i hear you say is well they have been found guilty so there you go! Its like you are going into an arguement with blindless support for a side, knowing nothing about the facts of the arguement! Just because something is ruled does not mean it should have ever been ruled! So im going to pull a EU and say we cant talk to FEWT until he changes his name to not include an F! Until he does so he is required to pay 2 million a day! (but you know since everyone else with an F is on our side then this does not apply to them)

So, since you can't argue the facts you have to resort to personal attacks.

I guess that means I win.

;-)

No not a personal attack just a pure and simple exampe to what has been done by reversing the side to a point of view that you might understand

You haven't reversed anything.

Tell you what, form a country followed by a government, write a law based on whatever logic you were trying to portray, then exhaust all legal means to prove your law and maybe you'll have a point. Till then you are babbling. ;-)

Actualy the case in fact is that the side you are supporting has made a ruling against the side I am supporting. I made an example of the side i am supporting making a ruling against you. Theirfore I gave an example in which the party being ruled against turned in order to reverse the arguement.

Have you no imagination or must everything be virtual for you to comprehend it?

Do you not understand that the courts upheld it?

I don't "support" EITHER side. However the facts show that the EU found them guilty and the court system upheld it.

Sorry, sucks to be "your side".

Get over it.

That is my point! We do not agree with what the courts have upheld! So if in fact we believe MS should no simply say "SHOVE IT"

Go for it, I'd love to see the result of that honestly.

This is really based on what you believe to be more important. Power of the government, or power of the consumer(people). If in fact the consumer makes a ruling and decides they are wrong then they will punish MS by not buying from them. Which is how i believe things should be done in comparision to Government stepping in on behalf of the consumer as if we are so ignorant that we cannot make decisions on what we want or what is right. And is MS did say "Shove it" yse they would loose their hold on EU, but two things would happen rampant

file sharing of windows, or smuggling in of windows. And with the advances in technology one of those two will eventualy be stopped. Leaving only on the illegal smuggling in of windows. So MS still gets windows into EU. Also with the rise of China, India, and other markets MS will soon have other domains to dominate to compensate for loses made in EU.

Dude, don't argue with Fewt, he is like straight troll. What kind of person declairs that "I WIN!" in online arguments?

It was funny, get over yourself.

send me your bank account number. I'll give you 2 bucks so you can get yourself a brand new brain better than what serves this purpose now

obviously fewt declairs "i win" because he did not me

they say their SUSE is so great, why not use it...

In order to be EU compliant Windows has to become open source? They are not called bureaucrats for nothing!

Did you read the article?

Maybe if we tell the RIAA the EU is trading music they will sue them. Or maybe the EU and the RIAA are one and the same.

there is an RIAA equivalent here in Europe called IFPI. on top of this many countries have their own organism to take care of music copyright problems (like the Suisa in Switzerlerand for instance).

Before saying anything stupid read the article and make sure you understand it ; read the international news and just learn the least of what is going on.

Since when is Microsoft (or any other software company) obligated to make source code public domain so that third parties can use it? "Show us your code or we'll fine you." Sounds to me like "Tell me your trade secrets or I'll blackmail you."

yeh seems the EU got a bit trigger happy, but yeah. couldn't they at least open source win 3.311? and continue as its apparent it's out classed entirely

If they can decide whom to release source codes whenever they want to, what's going to happen to this world?

Nothing.

That is so wrong.

Elaborate.

My god, a funny thought.

If Microsoft is originated from a country of EU.

Will Americans sue them? I don't think so!! :D

think just half before you say something so tragically dumb.

Americans are known and laughed at worldwide for their eagerness in suing people for ridiculous reasons.

remind me.. who was that woman who once put a cat in cat in her microwave, because it wasn't specified in the manual? there are hundreds of examples like this one. I feel sorry for you guys. Really

Your anti-U.S. tirades aren't staying on topic very well. If you're looking for a political forum, I suggest you go elsewhere. We're supposed to be addressing the issue at hand.

it really is like MS says..there's a huge difference between source code and API. Source codes are trade secrets, so asking them to open it up is a lot similar to asking the CIA to open up their list of secret agents to whoever wants it.

The EU just want our American dollars, what else? Jeeeeee

Nah mate, I'd much rather stick to my British Pound.

Alright, American programmers make programs that work well with windows without having access to the source code. Are European Programmers really so ignorant that they can't get the same results.

I really don't see what the big deal with WMP was either. If those people are so dumb that they don't know how to go download an alternative.....well they don't deserve a computer.

Being a programmer has nothing to do with anything in this case.

1. Man creates laws.
2. Company violates laws.
3. Company is found in violation of those laws.
*4. Company is punished for violating the law.*

yeah..i dont see the big deal with WMP either.
So punish them for bundling a pretty good media player with their OS? Then they should have sued the pants off Apple for bundling quicktime (I doubt many ppl would say quicktime is better than WMP) with their OS too then.

The EU created a law requiring that all network protocols, even for closed source operating systems must be open?

That's the only "violation" that would justify this punishment.

If it's a monopoly thing, network protocols have nothing to do with it, and the EU needs to perhaps pour any fines from MS into an open OS platform and quit ordering MS to do things they have no reasonable reason to do.

Ya don't punish a monopolist by requiring them to give up their IP. You either break them up, or force them to fund alternatives.

"But last December, the European Court of First Instance rejected an appeal to suspend all of the antitrust sanctions, saying Microsoft faced a daily fine if it did not comply by December 15, 2005. Since then, a Monitoring Trustee has been tracking the"

Being a programmer has everything to do with it troll, there are API's and there is code and if you don't know what you are talking about you are just gonna piss people off. (Sound Familiar?)

Microsoft has not violated any law, especially by not deciding to share the code that pays all the bills. They don't have to share anything with you, so get over it.

"Are European Programmers really so ignorant that they can't get the same results."

Oh well, great, let's just insult all the European programmers by implying that they're all ignorant and incompetent and American programmers are sooooo much better. Has this really got anything to do with European programmers? I mean come on, what the hell did you eat this morning that has made you so dumb?
I live in the UK, I hate the EU and what it's doing, but why on earth do you have to go and begin comparing programmers?

"If those people are so dumb that they don't know how to go download an alternative.....well they don't deserve a computer. "

YOU'RE DUMB! MORON! Like that insult? Didn't think so. Think about what you just said, if you still don't see the problem, come here ask and I'll be more than happy to explain.
Ask yourself this, do you think we had much say in this? Me, who doesn't like the EU or their stupid decision against MS?

"Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated."

Maybe you should edit these, huh?

Microsoft has been found guilty in *3* different parts of the world. Get over it.

You're right. I have to agree with you on this one.

From what I've been reading of everyone's comments, I get the impression that everyone thinks Microsoft should get the hell out of there and make the EU fend for itself. But we all know they won't do that. They have a market niche there, and they'd much rather pay the 2 million euros a day than pull out of a market. That's how MS functions. A few million, even billion euros wouldn't hurt Microsoft. As long as people buy Windows, they could care less.

Figure: Suppose Microsoft pulls out. That only leaves two possible solutions for our European friends. One: They have to import copies of Windows, which would probably not go over too well with the EU. Second: Piracy runs rampant across the EU, and Microsoft loses anyways.

I'm not against Microsoft. I'm not a diehard fan of them, either. I'm split.

Yeah, but they still would not care. Just so long as none of those solutions involve something other than Windows :)

have you guys heard of the third solution baring many names such as open source, linux, unix..? I really don't believe pirate copies of MS products would run around for long.

I think Microsoft should just stop selling their products in Europe! Microsoft should NOT have to make windows Open source. it's their software, they have a copyright to it. Why should they have to make it open source? and why the hell do the damn eurpeans keep complainging? Us Americans don't complain one bit. We don't care if WMP is on XP, if we don't wanna use it, fine we DL winamp or somthing.

"I think Microsoft should just stop selling their products in Europe!"

Yeah that's wonderful, but there's just one problem with that. Microsoft would lose a major market and a crap load of money with it more than if it were to pay the stupid fine.
Think before you post.

You're not the only one saying it, there are loads of people on here saying that, which I think is stupid thing to say.

I do agree on your copyright point but I do NOT agree with this:

"and why the hell do the damn eurpeans keep complainging?"

I am insulted by that, thank you very much. I'm a 'damn' European, as you put it, and I don't complain. Get your facts right, it's the EU Commission, a room fool of twats, that decide on this not the individual Europeans. No no, damn YOU, maniakmx3, stupid moron (notice how I insulted YOU not your entire nation).

This is the problem when you put a non-IT judges on a case like this. The judges probably know nothing more than turn on their computer and browse the internet. Did they know what they are talking about?

If I am MS, I will just pull it off the market. And layoff everyone in the Europe. Make their already high unemployment rate higer. Let them burn in hell.

So let me get this straight. Since no one can come up with an OS to challenge Microsoft, lets just make them show us the code so ppl can make their own?

Doesnt that sound rather ridiculous?

WTF is going on? Microsoft should not comply to these demands, they are ridiculous!!

Microsoft APIs are more than enough for developers to build solutions. I would know, i am a programmer.

Furthermore, how come they arent going after Apple to open up the OSX?

If you dont like Windows, MAKE YOUR OWN, or go and use *nix or OSX.

Damn straight.

This is complete and utter BS unless they demand the same of all other software companies operating within the EU.

I thought the EU was more grown up than this....a tad more mature. It appears they have some work to do on that yet.

Amen!

Yeah, great, you're forgetting that many contributors to competing operating systems (such as freeware Linux distros) do actually come from Europe, be it England, Germany, Spain, etc, etc.

And since more and more programming in general is being outsourced to other countries, the likes of India, maybe I should say MAKE YOUR OWN software to the US in general. (To be honest, outsourcing to poorer countries is good, IMO).

Someone needs to tell the EU to shove it.

Hey, EU...

Shove it.

There, how's that?

Take this Union and SHOVE IT! Now someone needs to teach them about Capitalism.

Amen!

Someone needs to teach you people about a president who can spell and knows good grammar.

I'm sorry. What does that have to do with the topic?

Perfect.

And telling the Union, effectively Europe (which I and millions of others are part of), to go shove it has something to do with the topic?

"And telling the Union, effectively Europe (which I and millions of others are part of), to go shove it has something to do with the topic?"

Since the article was about the EU's bullish threats against MS?

...very much so.

It's not like I hate all of Europe or anything. I just don't agree with this action, which is why I say they should shove it.

Sorry if you couldn't see the connection. Maybe I should spell out the obvious stuff from now on.

and on the name of an arbitrary god and a corrupted church, he went and declared war on the world, torturing and killing for $$$

you make me sick

the point is, your whole "superior race" as you seem to believe is widely uneducated and so ignorant and spiteful of what goes outside its boarders, it's pathetic.

umm...

????

What the hell?

Who said anything about a superior race?

I don't believe the EU should have the power to say Microsoft should hand over their source code. What does that have to do with racism?

I'm not trying to pick a fight with all of Europe here. I just don't agree with this action by the EU. Hence, my statement.

P.S. It's "borders"

But I guess I'm "uneducated"

I can see the connection perfectly well. It's you who isn't quite getting what I'm saying.
You say you don't hate all of Europe but telling the EU to shove it is telling the 25 countries that make up the EU to shove it. I.e. that's basically telling ME to shove it since I live in a EU member country.

The EU as most people on here obviously don't know represent 25 European countries. Telling the EU to shove it is like telling those 25 countries to shove it. Perhaps directing that remark towards the EU Commission would have been more appropriate since then you would be telling the EU Commission (some top level leader people in Brussels not the entire 25 countries and their residents) to shove it.

Before throwing around insults and stuff people should try and direct them at certain groups or individuals, not entire nations or groups of nations. You don't see me telling the US to shove it do you? No. If I was unhappy with the US Congress I would tell the US Congress to shove it, not the US.

Now that I've spelt it out for you as clearly as I can I hope it has become obvious enough for you to realise what I'm saying and hopefully agree with me on some level.

Apparently I need to explain more:

By "IT" I meant the threat against MS.

I would have said, "Someone should tell the EU to shove their threat," but that just doesn't have the same ring.

I guess I should have clarified by saying the EU Commission, but considering the context, I thought that was already obvious. Sorry for my oversight.

I think we've been agreeing all along, but neither of us knew it.

Wincement, my concern arose when GoodThings2Life said, and I quote, "Take this Union and SHOVE IT! Now someone needs to teach them about Capitalism."
To me saying "take this union and shove it" sounds like he's telling the Union (European) to shove it.
This is further hammered home by PC_Tool who makes it even clearer by saying, and I quote again, "Hey EU... Shove it."
To me that also sounds like the EU is being told to go shove it. In both cases, I think you will agree, that that is exactly what those two intended to say and that's what I'm not happy with.

Happy Xmas, over and out.

im not so sure eu court knows what they are doing.

first the talk about stripping media player from windows. =dont improve antyhing.

Second i dont think anyone has the right to enforce microsoft to do anything.

Not when it comes to the above

knowing how bad eu court are in other areas people in eu should not just read everything thats being said as good.

They have had ample time to comply, fine them.

Ample time to comply with an unjustified ruling. Name one other software company in the EU that is required by law to open their software?

No, I'm rarely with MS, but I am with them on this one. The EU is just gold-digging on this one. They seem to think chipping away at MS will gain them noteriety or something.

They should really focus on something a tad more constructive, though less profitable, like defending fair-use.

Name another software company in the EU that's been found guilty. ;-)

There is no law in Europe that states you are required to provide source code for an entire operating system if it is used on more than 95% of all computers.

By law people have the right to make and sell completely closed source software to the general public in any country. This includes operating systems. Therefore, Microsoft is not breaking any law. The EU just thinks they can make a law that specifically states "Microsoft must make Windows XP open source software" that no one else has to follow.

Oh?

"In March 2004, the EU ordered that Microsoft give competitors access to certain Windows networking protocols, which "would allow non-Microsoft work group servers to achieve full interoperability with Windows PCs and servers"

Wrong answer.

"In March 2004, the EU ordered that Microsoft give competitors access to certain Windows networking protocols, which "would allow non-Microsoft work group servers to achieve full interoperability with Windows PCs and servers"

I understand the ruling...but it's absolutely ridiculous. If MS wants proprietary networking protocols in the OS, so be it.

I still fail to see how then EU has any right to tell MS how to write their code when it does not explicitly break anything.

If it went out on a network and disabled all other protocols, then yeah, I'd agree, but this is nothing close to that.

They aren't telling them how to write code in this instance. They are telling them to open the source to specific network components so competetors can write code to interoperate.

It's not like it's going to hurt them, in fact the entire industry WILL benefit from it, especially anyone that makes a living working with multiple platforms.

Opening up network protocols is one thing but there is no reason to require the entire OS be open sourced. The EU can't just make up a law that says "If you happen to own a company called Microsoft that makes operating systems this means you have to open source your entire OS just because your company has a name we don't like."

Is it legal for the EU to target Apple specifically and require Mac OS X Intel Edition to run on any computer with an Intel processor?

No one demanded they open the whole OS. If they did, it probably wouldn't have stood up in court.

It wouldn't have been a fair punishment either.

The problem is once Microsoft complies with one demand from the EU such as opening up the network protocols, the EU makes a brand new demand for Microsoft to open source something else in Windows. How much of Windows does Microsoft have to open source to make the EU happy?

Yes, that could be a problem and if it does happen (Microsoft is indicating that it's happening now, but I don't really see it.) hopefully the court system will intervene. That is what it's there for. ;-)

Well done, fewt. You have very succinctly stated the core issue:

"They are telling them to open the source to specific network components so competetors can write code to interoperate."

Competitors would only need MS source for the Network Layer so that they can then demand further source code to move up the integrally linked OSI (Open Source Interoperability) network layers to the Application Layer -- which MS APIs already accomplish for them. They are given that ability by the APIs without need for the source. The obvious purpose then is to dismantle Windows. Allow me to elaborate:

Layer 7: Application Layer (e.g. HTTP, FTP, etc.)
Layer 6: Presentation Layer (aka Syntax Layer)
Layer 5: Session Layer
Layer 4: Transport Layer
Layer 3: Network Layer
Layer 2: Data Link Layer
Layer 1: Physical Layer

The goal is to gradually chip away at Microsoft IP rights by demanding successively more source to move up the OSI on a redundant parallel path to the APIs so that in the end Windows source would be completely open and Microsoft would no longer have a unique marketable product.

Other MS products? The non-networking aspects of Windows? All are just as easy to attack once the case is manufactured for "Disclose your Source Code." As an example: With HTTP being just one of the protocals on the Application Layer, you would later "Of Course" need the source for Internet Explorer; just as you will have 'needed' it for Windows. Since Office supports FTP (as well as a host of other Application Layer protocals such as POP3, HTTP, SMTP and so on) it will be a natural progression to demand the source for Office as well.

And so Windows Search falls as well as the Help and Support center and installation and virus detection and update abilities. And finally Windows Explorer. The sky's the limit.

I cannot support such a seige.

Imagine the Linux-like near anarchy of the phrase "Flavors of Windows." In that scenario, you create what you hate: a monopoly. How? OSX would then become the only commercially viable and accepted OS that is not fragmented by the uncertainty, rivalries and other difficulties of "flavors". Competition will have been eliminated for the Apple OS, another fine OS that will have been artificially set up for attack as well.

Naturally, Apple source code would then come under attack.

I have heard that the EU has a hard time getting the funding they need/want. So I guess they figure a nice non-Euopean company would be a good source of revenue with fines. I think the US should step in and do something. Just my 2 cents.

I am European and I dislike Microsoft with a passion. Daily fines are not sufficient. The complete break-up of MIcrosoft into baby- MIcrosofts is the only solution . They have become too powerful.They should be downsized.

"They have become too powerful.They should be downsized."

I don't understand. You're saying they must be broken up for the mere fact that they have been successful? Why punish a company for succeeding?

(P.S. I'm not whining) =p

I think it has more to do with the methods used to gain that success, but...?

You don’t like them because they’re successful? Is that it!? Microsoft owes no one their source code. They created it and they own it. It’s as simple as that! It’s that myopic worldview that you and so many others are afflicted with that compel you to call them a monopoly, when really they are SUCCESSFUL!! Get over it!

Do you have a good reason you "dislike Microsoft with a passion."? If you dislike them so much don't use any of their products. Why would you spilt up the company. What would that accomplish except costing the company more in administrative costs. As an end-user how would you benefit? I think the EU should focus on bigger issues like the keeping terrorists out of Euro and not worry about if inferior European software developers aren't getting enough of the pie and what music player is on everyone’s PC.

That and I hate to burst the bubble but Microsoft already split into three brances that work with each other. Still Micosoft, just in more pieces all over Redmond now.

> I think the EU should focus on bigger issues like the keeping terrorists out of Euro

but don't have as big as problem with it as you do. and RTFA, it's NOT about WMP but openeing protocols you fool.

on top of it, if terrorism is so much of a problem, it is because your the deep moron that serves as your president can't make out the obious difference between hussein and ben laden, between switzerland and sweden, and so on. so get lost.

Its rare I hear any pro-Microsoft comments. I am a fan of Microsoft, but I do not think that the EU court is asking that much.

The best thing for consumers is what everyone should be concerned about, IMHO.

And the best thing for consumers would be the ability to introduce competition by making publicly documented whatever standards Microsoft uses in any of its software, from protocols to data structures.

Of course, software patents would seek to further undermine competition and innovation in the industry, but this is another topic.

Kudos to the EU for not backing down.

The best thing for consumers is if EU would FÜck off. Microsoft owns the Desktop market. Deal with it. Hurting them hurts the desktop market. Plain and simple.

MS would have to be squashed utterly and completely for ANY competition to step in and frankly, nobody is ready for that. EU should build their own OS. Killing Microsoft will cripple the Global Economy. Even Apple would go under unless they had some serious re-structuring and reorganizing should MS die.

If MS is really so evil and controlling I have faith that consumers will ultimately decide.

I am very much in the minority with what I'm about to say, I know quite a few heads will turn, but frankly I don't believe government, Feds, or anybody should get involved with any monopoly bias. A business should be a business, and just because MS is better than you doesn't mean they have to have different laws. That's just plain discrimination. Sherman Act is BS to the core. If MS *has* to comply, so should every other company in the EU. It is anti-American of the EU. Buncha bias two-faced hypocrites who can't stand that Microsoft "appears" so anti-Christ and that they aren't based in Europe. Destroy Americans, more power to Europe...a twisted demonic version of the "trickle down" theory of Economics.

"If MS *has* to comply, so should every other company in the EU. Buncha bias two-faced hypocrites."

You hit the nail on the head with that.

As far as the Sharman act being BS though, I am going to have to politely disagree with you. And I'll reserve my reasons for that tin the interest of avoiding a political flame-war.

Like I said...a very minority opinion on my part...but I could be wrong. Heck I haven't read the whole thing myself it may justify itself so I guess I shouldn't say anything. I'll read it sometime if I'm free and revise my comments if need be.

The problem with anti-trust laws is that they often don't distinguish between natural and artificial monopolies. It's not difficult to see that having a monopoly on oil, water, or anything where someone can't create an alternative is nothing like what Microsoft has.

The reason the government should do something about the former is that it's the government's laws on property that have created the situation where a small group can control most natural resources--something for which no one is responsible for creating.

Point taken. If that is what is meant by the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, that makes sense. Still--now that I think about it, why is AMD sueing Intel anyway? Yeah Intel is ethically wrong in their workings, but to me this is something that consumers have ultimate control over. Boycott Intel. Boycott Microsoft if you want to as well, but IMO MS has done nothing deserving this BS from the EU.

Unfortunately, free markets can not be left without government restrictions. Monopolies must be dealt with, else situations arise where competition is effectively impossible. Why does it hurt Microsoft so much to allow competition? Revealing protocol and data structure formats doesn't 'kill' Microsoft. Even forcing them to make source code available doesn't hurt them that much.

I don't know where you guys are coming from, but I suspect you are all Republicans ;).

"Unfortunately, free markets can not be left without government restrictions."

They certainly could for the first hundred and twenty or so years of our nation (see comments below before flaming)...Republican? Nope. Don't agree with half of em, though I will admit that if you had to put a label on me it would be ultra-conservative.

"protocol and data structure formats doesn't 'kill' Microsoft."

Really? Who says? Do you know any of this information? BTW, I understand that we must place restrictions on companies. All I'm saying is that if company A is larger/ smaller/ cuter/ smarter/ dumber/ more assertive/ more whatever than company B, why should laws or rules be in place for company A while company B doesn't have to abide by them? EU should demand that every software vendor in the world with software in the EU has to give them all of their source code and such, otherwise it's discrimination. They're looking awfully anti-American if you ask me.

Daily fine??? MS should just pull it's product.

Here's what we think of your commission.. run your PC's on something else. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

This is almost like me buying a TV dinner and fining the producer daily for not removing the crappy brownie.

And lose half their market in the meantime?

No.

They just won't pay it, it'll make it's way to tye UN or some such and sit until forgotten.

It's meaningless crap. What's the EU gonna do if they don't pay? Fine them more? Order every retailer in the EU to stop selling MS products?

Yeah...that'll happen.

Don't be surprised. They could quickly make it illegal to sell Windows in the EU.

Imagine the shareholder reaction as well, I imagine no one with VP status or higher would retain their jobs.

We are such close allys with the EU that anyone they asked for would be turned over immediately, our ties with them are far more valuable than any company.

:-)

I think you underestimate the EU's dependance on MS software, but...

Still, I think it will just go away. MS will not pay and the EU will drop it.

I dunno, I suspect Microsoft will continue to sit on it and the EU will start down the path towards putting Balmer and company in jail.

Nevah Gonnah Happen.

But it should be an entertaining show if that's the route they decide to take.

I'll be sure and make some popcorn.

I'll bring the lounge chairs. heh

Well the EU will not ban Microsoft, that is almost as stupid as that Iran leader banning Western music. You cannot enforce a law like that, would be like telling people you will be beaten and fined 5 million euro's everytime you whack off, you just cannot enforce law like that.

Put Steve in jail? Are they going to come over here in EU boat and take him away? Hahahaha.

"You cannot enforce a law like that"

Really?

They seem to have done well making Microsoft remove WMP.

"Daily fine??? MS should just pull it's product."

Yes, clever cloggs, you obviously thought that one through. Ask yourself this, how much do you think they will lose if they pull their operating system from the European market (where they have a monopoly, clearly) compared to this fine?

"Here's what we think of your commission.. run your PC's on something else. If you don't like it, don't buy it."

Here's what I think of you... you're an idiot.
EU Commission's decision is very bad, IMO, but what has that got to do with the average Joe Bloggs (or John Doe) user who LIKES the operating system and WANTS to use it but it's some boneheads in Brussels sitting in their big leather chairs that call themselves the EU Commission that mess everything up with dumb decisions.
I'm sure many Europeans, particularly those who live in the EU, would disagree with the decision made by a few blockheads at the top of the pile. So stop blanket insulting the average European citizen who owns a Windows based PC.

If Microsoft were smart, they'd simply stop cooperating with the EU and let consumers and businesses pressure them into doing what's sensible. Why isn't this commission making the same "open" demand for Apple hardware and the iPod?

this is one excellent idea. I'll suggest this whenever I get the chance. the iPod is a really nice product and I'd love to be able to use it with my linux box

Lame filter just kicked into high gear.

I'd say MS should just tell 'em to go to hell, but they'd lose half their market.

This is BS so long as *any* software compnay in the EU operates without being 'Open'. There should be no legal way the government could force this issue.

It's their OS. You don't like it? There's always MacOS and *nix.

Stupid gits.

Either way, MS won't pay and it'll get forgotten. What are they going to do, kick MS out? Yeah....riiiight.

"I'd say MS should just tell 'em to go to hell, but they'd lose half their market."

True enough. Why should some ignorant boneheads (EU) dictate to MS how to run their business!? They may lose half the market, but somehow I doubt it would even be that bad. Time will tell, depending on MS' next step.

Why should some arrogant company dictate to a government how to run their country? If they want to do business in the EU then they have to play by the rules.

If they pulled out they wouldn't just lose half the market, their stock would crumble and suddenly Microsoft would be looking for quite a few employees including a CEO, board of directors, and a chief software architect not to mention the amount of layoffs they would have to impose in order to keep their heads above water.

That I would bet on.

Couldn't agree with you more.

But when the rules apply *only* to Microsoft??

No, unless the EU enforces the same policy with Apple, this is BS.

The rule only applies to Microsoft in this case because they were found guilty. If it was any other company I'd expect them to comply too. ;-)

The European Commission is not a government or a country. However, many governments and countries contribute to it and are bound by its decisions.

The EU Commission has put Microsoft in an impossible position. The easy option is to comply, but in doing so it would put chunks of its most valuable asset in the hands of Joe Public. Being big and powerful does not mean the rules have to change. I may not like Microsoft but I don't think we gain anything by bringing it down.

Incidentally, Microsoft does not have to pull out of Europe. It only has to threaten to. Nobody in their right mind would force them to actually do it.

Quickest way to see it's stock tumble is to threaten to pull out of the EU.

They can't and they won't.

"That I would bet on."

And you would lose. First off, don't downplay Gates' official title. He may be the Chief Software Architect, but he still owns the majority of shares within MS, so NO ONE would oust him. Furthermore, being the majority shareholder, he would prevent any of his stalwarts from being canned as well. Yes, a number of employees would be let go...from the EU. Aww, what a shame.

Second, with MS currently focusing on such burgeoning markets such as India, market share can only GROW. The EU's dependence on Windows is so far-reaching that they'd beg for MS's business. All MS has to do is threaten to pull out of the market and the EU's tune will change.

You seem to be basing your opinion more on anti-American sentiment than anti-corporation sentiment. Regardless of what you think of MS, they have a RIGHT to protect something they have created. If you invented something everyone needs to use, and you have patents in place to protect yourself and you charge for licenses to use certain aspects of your product, would you NOT be upset if some a$$hole government waltzed in for no reason and told you to strip useful parts of your product and allow your current and future competitors unfettered access to your product's internal workings, thereby effectively crippling your ability to do business and allow others to profit from your invention, cutting you out and bankrupting you? Get over yourself. The EU has the best intentions, but their execution is flawed. MS will not pay, it will go to arbitration, and it will die a quick, unimportant death.

"You seem to be basing your opinion more on anti-American sentiment than anti-corporation sentiment."

Nothing I have said is "anti American" or "anti corporation". It's not even "anti Microsoft".

They were found guilty, I'm sorry you can hate it all you want but if you rape someone and you are found guilty you get punished. Doesn't matter one bit if you don't like it, actually that's one of the points of the punishment.

Actually it couldn't get more pro American than that. ;-)

I'm not going to argue because it won't do any good. Fact is, the fine won't do any good. When you figure that them not paying for a year will cost them $867-million USD and the cost of opening their software to competitors is potentially billions...they'll take the hit and prevent theft of their product.

And I wouldn't liken this to rape. Rape is malice-driven crime. All MS really did was create and promote their own form of media and made it so that only Windows-based PCs could fully communicate with Windows-based networks...damn. If WMP played RM files natively...then I can see MS "raping" the competition. But no, they created their own file-type...which just so happens to be better than Real's. And not for nothing, but most companies I know of don't have IT departments that allow multiple OS PCs communicate on their networks anyway. That's why MS gives out volume licenses to their customers...so they can have PCs that can communicate on their network. It would be an IT nightmare if you had 10 different flavors of Linux, several Unix environments, Macs, and Windows PCs all trying to communicate...you'd need multiple levels of IT support...and a successful company will NOT invest that kind of money into just making sure they can access the network.

"I'm not going to argue because it won't do any good."

Then stop arguing.

You don't have the details of what MS did so you can't say "all they did". According to the EU they were found in violation of the law, and they are being punished.

That's how it works, sorry if you don't agree.

"It would be an IT nightmare if you had 10 different flavors of Linux, several Unix environments, Macs, and Windows PCs all trying to communicate."

The only nightmare is all of these products attempting to communicate with Windows. They all interoperate just fine otherwise. Linux, HP-UX, Solaris, and MacOS all work seamlessly together. The only interoperability issues arise when you mix Windows into it.

Then apply punishment.

Requiring that they do something like open windows is absolutely ridiculous.

Fines are great. Making them make changes to a program is fine.

Forcing them to open their software? That's not a punishment, it's a death-sentance.

See, they aren't asking for the "Windows source code". They are expecting Microsoft to release the source code to "certain Windows networking protocols" including SMB.

That's no death sentence.

1. Someone explain to me how Microsoft is getting sued and not Apple? How is the EU not forcing Apple to open up iTunes?

2. Laws are not absolute, despite your rather simplistic following of them. Laws, for all the good they are created to do, are created by men which are highly imperfect and prone to mistake.

3. Even good laws are subject to abuse and misinterpretation by usually intelligent people. There is a very good reason why we have appeals court.

4. Laws need to be based on logic and in context. Following anything as an absolute is a mistake and nothing is absolutely correct even most of the time.

5. You keep saying "but it's the law, they broke the law, the law has them" as if laws are immutable. If they were it would still be illegal to remove the tags from your mattress. Laws don't only get created, they also get removed and changed though sadly our people have become too stupid to function without a tomb of safety guidelines, laws and amendments. Not to mention how dishonest people are (such as trying to sneak in a drilling amendment on the end of a defense bill. I mean really, grow a pair and try to push it through by itself, not be some parasitic amendment).

6. When a law stops serving it's original intended purpose it needs to be amended, changed or completely removed. Again, if we never looked at the logic or reasoning behind laws we would still be stuck going 15mph.

7. To think anyone in the upper echelon of Microsoft would end up in jail for any amount of time is *highly* naive. It's hard enough to put known murderers, rapists and embezzlers into prison.

The EU is obviously out of it's league on this one and after reading the ruling and the notes it's apparent that a lot of this is the EU wanting to seem tough yet fair, wanting to keep their "one constitution, one currency, many nations" vibe. The EU also has no choice but to try and appear strong on this because once they made the blunder of going down this path they can't back down. It won't reflect well for them if the entire EU is defeated by an American company.

Personally I think MS should comply by stripping out any propriety networking protocols and put in a text-based, open, non-secure protocol. Be careful what you wish for EU.

To be honest we do not need the EU. Their are plenty markets out there we can profit on to compensate for the losses in Europe.

Hey, nothing like changing your comment.

You may not need the EU, but until you understand how economies work a little better I'd withhold judgement on not needing them.

1. Did you read the article? No one is asking for source code to WMP. They are asking for the source code to specific network protocols.

2. "But last December, the European Court of First Instance rejected an appeal to suspend all of the antitrust sanctions, saying Microsoft faced a daily fine if it did not comply by December 15, 2005."
Become a citizen of the EU and lobby to change the law if you don't like it.

3. I absolutely agree, however see #2

4. I absolutely agree, however try breaking the law and see just how black and white it is for you. Go ahead, let me know how it turns out.

5. See 2,3,4

6. See #2

7. Your opinion, I respect that. Mine however differs. ;-)

That's an interesting point of view, because here in Europe many people have been arguing for years that Europe does not need America.

Of course America needs Europe, just as Europe needs America. Europe may not be quite as big as America but it is home to some of the largest economies on the planet. We are trading partners and rivals. Unfortunately, this is not about who needs whom. It is not even about right and wrong. It is about the money.

"Did you read the article? No one is asking for source code to WMP. They are asking for the source code to specific network protocols."

Yes...that matters because? It is still Microsoft...Apple needs to open its old AppleTalk protocol too, and reveal how much MS is giving them to keep a foot in the market. http://www.wired.com/wir...e/12.06/start.html?pg=2

I could pull up some more articles about more recent "donations" but you're not worth that much effort.

"But last December, the European Court of First Instance rejected an appeal to suspend all of the antitrust sanctions, saying Microsoft faced a daily fine if it did not comply by December 15, 2005."

Yup, and MS will get out of it. If EU gets mad...we'll see the wonderful show. Don't forget those lawn chairs, Fewt.

Why? Who tries to interoperate with appletalk? You know that Appletalk pretty much went away with OSX right and it's not enabled by default anymore so people don't use it right? You are making a *VERY* weak argument here.

Then there are more personal attacks, wonderful. Bet you feel like a man now! Wouldn't expect anything less from you though with your typical "Fewt must hate Microsoft because he posted the facts again" mentality.

I don't think they are going to get out of it, but we'll see.

Nothing I have said is "anti American" or "anti corporation". It's not even "anti Microsoft".

Denial is a powerfull thing.

Fewt, I can say now you have never worked in any IT related field with your above statement. Seriously dude, you just have no idea. And I am being nice about this.

"Fewt must hate Microsoft because he posted the facts again"

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Well seeing how you complain with everyone else whenever Microsoft releases a security update or a patch for IE it would be very smart NOT to release code on that platform.

Think about it Fewt...

Windows is closed source, and they have security problems like crazy. People are always trying to reverse engineer their code and fine holes, flaws, etc. make the platform even worse for security because now you have poorly programmed 3rd party "mods" for Windows networking that open up new holes and problems that have nothing to do with Microsoft.

Do you think those companies would respond as fast as Microsoft does to problems with the Windows Update site?

More attacks huh? Why don't you post something with substance like everyone else?

Yep, sure buddy.

Glad you liked it, figured you would since you obviously fall into the same catagory.

Really?

Find a comment where I have complained.

I've given nothing but kudos to them in recent years for their security initiative.

Your post is an outright lie.

My point was more about the donations than appletalk--I never meant to imply that revealing Appletalk protocol would be any sort of strain for Apple--but why now anyway?

Geez, I mean--nevermind. Why am I wasting my time with you anyway? I should take people's advice and leave you alone with your "facts". Have a good life, as miserable as it must be.

"Find a comment where I have complained."

com·plain (km-pln)
intr.v. com·plained, com·plain·ing, com·plains

1. To express feelings of pain, dissatisfaction, or resentment.

2. To make a formal accusation or bring a formal charge

These fit that definition:

1. "Why should some arrogant company dictate to a government how to run their country?"

2. "The only nightmare is all of these products attempting to communicate with Windows."

3. "Linux, HP-UX, Solaris, and MacOS all work seamlessly together. The only interoperability issues arise when you mix Windows into it."

You complained. Complaining is not always a bad thing, but you definately have complained throughout this entire thread. Complaining that we cannot understand your supernatural intelligence about law and monopoly, mostly. :)

"I've given nothing but kudos to them in recent years for their security initiative."

Heh, *YOUR* post is an outright lie this time around...

If you didn't mean to imply .. appletalk .. why did you use it then?

LOL My life couldn't possibly get any better than it is today, so thanks. ;-)

No, it isn't.

He said I complain about security updates.

"Well seeing how you complain with everyone else whenever Microsoft releases a security update or a patch for IE it would be very smart NOT to release code on that platform."

Find one instance since they began their security initiative where I have complained.

Didn't you just say something the other day in regards to how I had praised them for something?

'nuff said

"Didn't you just say something the other day in regards to how I had praised them for something?"

Yes. You have complained though:

http://www.betanews.com/article/1023415483

"How many people are still gullible enough to trust MS when security is concerned? I mean come on, face it MS you have a decent OS, but you couldn't figure out how to lock your back door if it came with "coke can" instructions. "

" have yet to see anything real out of their security initiative. I will gladly change my tune when I see real hard results, but not until then. ;-) "

http://beta.info/article...06256787?all_comments=1

"They must have found all the bugs.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

;-) " (sense some sarcasm there)

http://beta.info/article...06320128?all_comments=1

" " I do not think it is Microsoft's fault that it is "less secure" than other browsers." [fewt quoting netwiz562's comment]

Right, it's the customers fault and not faulty equipment.

I guess Firestone's problems were customers faults too, as were the Chamois blankets, and the Aprilaire electronic air cleaners.

Wait, software is perfect and isn't bound by the laws real products are.

My bad. "

I'll get some more when I have more time to waste...

"How many people are still gullible enough to trust MS when security is concerned? I mean come on, face it MS you have a decent OS, but you couldn't figure out how to lock your back door if it came with "coke can" instructions. "

- This complaint is from *June 6, 2002*, didn't that initiative start right around then? Sorry you can't use it.

Again: "Find one instance since they began their security initiative where I have complained."

Worst case, I'll give you that one from *three years ago*. Find another.

"I will gladly change my tune when I see real hard results, but not until then. ;-)"

- That's not a complaint it's a statement. If you look further you will find that I honored that statement.

"They must have found all the bugs."

- That is clearly a joke. LOL

" I do not think it is Microsoft's fault that it is "less secure" than other browsers."

Right, it's the customers fault and not faulty equipment."

- This has been a valid complaint. It's not about them releasing patches however, it's about them not releasing *ENOUGH* patches.

Keep looking. ;-)

I love your selective posting skills, but you aren't quoting your entire posts on these...I'm done with you though. Really. Well come on and get the last word. It's what your best at right?

Edit: You get the last word, I'm outa here...

I'm quoting the relevant parts, yes. Why waste comment space with the rest when it's not valid?

What do you feel I've missed? I'll be more than happy to clarify.

Edit: Of course you are, until the next time you decide to blast me without merit. ;-)

"Linux, HP-UX, Solaris, and MacOS all work seamlessly together. The only interoperability issues arise when you mix Windows into it."

Up until I read that statement, I considered you as someone very educated about this debate who I happened to disagree with on a few small points.

Now, however, you've lost quite a bit of credibility in my mind...

How? I didn't say it was impossible, only that there are issues.

You can't say that there aren't. You have tools like SFU that bolt on top of Active Directory and provide single sign on for Windows and Unix, as well as provide SMB to NFS for Unix communication however NFS and NIS (provided by SFU) are EXTREMELY insecure, and no one in their right mind uses them.

One example of many.

There's always LDAP, however Windows doesn't talk native kerberos, or contain the proper fields in the AD schema for Unix so in order to integrate them properly and maintain the integrity of your network you have to maintain two seperate directories. There are work arounds such as installing SFU simply to extend your schema to allow for the necessary fields, but then you still need to use a product like Vintela.

"As with Active Directory, UNIX and Linux systems typically include their own implementations of both Kerberos and LDAP. Although these implementations can interoperate with Active Directory, they are typically done without considering the way that Microsoft has integrated the two standards in Active Directory."

...

"Vintela Authentication Services (VAS) implements Kerberos and LDAP functionality on UNIX and Linux systems, and can fully integrate with Active Directory."

http://www.microsoft.com...eDirectory/default.aspx

Again, issues. Most aren't show stoppers, but they tend to make life painful.

Then you have Samba which spawned winbind. All reverse engineered to work with Windows. None of them were built using documentation provided by Microsoft so they all have issues. They are great products, don't get me wrong however until Microsoft lets competition hook into their protocols well stuff is just not gonna work right 100% of the time.

If I'm wrong, feel free to educate me on the subject. I've been working with these platforms for years and have yet to find a viable solution that wasn't a patchy kludgy hack, or require more software on top of the software to force them to work together.

HP-UX - Solaris - Linux integrate wonderfully, with minimal fuss. MacOS (I don't have any direct experience, I speak of MacOS based on conversations with others) supposedly is just as easy to integrate with them.

Open to comments, maybe I've overlooked something somewhere. Entirely possible.

Oh, is it because I ignored the 10 different linux comment?

No one is going to run 10 different distributions in an enterprise, I ignored it because it was stupid and irrelavant.

I just couldn't agree more

Lets see (assuming you are agreeing with Maxwolf)

"It would be an IT nightmare if you had 10 different flavors of Linux, several Unix environments, Macs, and Windows PCs all trying to communicate."

10 different flavors of Linux. First, no one is going to do this. In an enterprise you have three options #1: RedHat, #2: SUSE, #3 See 1 or 2.

Even if you do have 10 different flavors, they all talk ldap, they all use SSH, and even if their OS configuration files are stored in a different file on each of the 10 flavors you'll be writing scripts to account for things like that on Solaris and HP-UX *ANYWAY* so what's a couple more flavors? Your COTS products would run unchanged provided they are all LSB so what's your point?

It would be difficult for a day afterwards it would be cake.

Again, as I said in the first paragraph no one is going to have 10 flavors on their network. If you've ever used more than one Linux distribution you'd know that they are more alike than not.

I could handle it, maybe because I know more than one Linux like I know more than one Unix (*AND* I know Windows).

:-P

> Well seeing how you complain with everyone else whenever Microsoft releases a security update or a patch for IE it would be very smart NOT to release code on that platform.

what the hell are you on about?

> Windows is closed source, and they have security problems like crazy. People are always trying to reverse engineer their code and fine holes, flaws, etc. make the platform even worse for security because now you have poorly programmed 3rd party "mods" for Windows networking that open up new holes and problems that have nothing to do with Microsoft.

there are hundreds of holes in window because of the crappy way that it was built, modified, adapted. open-source software doesn't suffer a tenth of these problems. it's just a little harder to install.. linux is user-friendly, it's just picky of who its friends are ;-) lol

> Do you think those companies would respond as fast as Microsoft does to problems with the Windows Update site?

M$ is damn slow at solving issues. When a fail was discovered in SSH, it took the open-source community 3 days to fix it. It took a whole week for others to manage to exploit the fault, even with FULL documentation on the software. can M$ say anything like that about their products?

just to piss you off (and I hope you read this post bourgeoisdude), fewd just knocked you off. he won't have the last word, too..

du nord-ouest, au sud-est, sans toucher la Corse. et tu casses. et tu casses..

pas de violences, c'est les vacances (c'est noël aussi)

muahaha, get some french culture because this one was just SO appropriate :-D