Microsoft releases Vista Source to Competitors

[Arwin]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6058512.stm

Seems they are *slowly* caving in to EU and Competitor demands. I think particularly McAfee's action helped ...

Earlier this month, security firm McAfee took out a full-page advert in the Financial Times to alert readers to its worries about the way Microsoft was handling the release of its new operating system.

Of course, there is also the pressure from the EU, who's shown its willing to hold its foot down:

All eyes are on Microsoft in the run-up to the January release of Vista, including the European Union which is checking there are no issues of monopoly abuse with the new operating system.

EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes has already had major run-ins with Microsoft over Vista. She has called for changes to the European edition of the operating system to better open it up to rival software providers.

Microsoft has enjoyed a somewhat rocky relationship with the EU since it was fined 497m euros ($629m; £335m) for anti-competitive behaviour in 2004, and was further hit with a 280m-euro penalty earlier this year for failing to meet demands that it share technical information with rivals.

I think that the E.U. is in a good position for negotiating, as they could probably delay Vista's release into Europe if they wanted to.

 

[Rangers]

microsoft could pull an Apple and threaten to hissyfit out of the EU market?

I dont understand this issue but I'm not sure it's good. I've heard microsoft's concerns about opening up the Kernel are valid. I dont think we should all be wishing for more viruses..

Does Apple open up the OSX kernel?
________
Medical marijuana delivery 95448

 

[DemoCoder]

Yes, OS X's kernel has been available in the Darwin project for years (since 1999).

 

[Frank]

microsoft could pull an Apple and threaten to hissyfit out of the EU market?

I dont understand this issue but I'm not sure it's good. I've heard microsoft's concerns about opening up the Kernel are valid. I dont think we should all be wishing for more viruses..

Does Apple open up the OSX kernel?

Is Microsoft used to writing the laws? Is that why they are so rich?

Who cares about Vista? I say, good riddance to them.

 

[Arwin]

Microsoft lost the appeal for the-open-up-the-code-and-allow-competitors-to-windows-media-player-to-have-a-fighting-chance suit in the EU, and will have to pay up the half billion dollar fine as well as comply to the other rulings. Here's a BBC analysis of the impact:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6998490.stm

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

I dont understand why the EU is attack MS so hard. I can understand about the part that MS musnt stop competitors from making software on their OS but I dont understand about the IE/MP part. The whole point about a OS is to give to customer a system as complete as possible right? Like the customer cares what he uses to play his media, if they really want something else they'd just download it. And most people dont even want something else that IE/MP. I installed firefox at my neighbours house because the kids kept screwing up the pc with all those toolbar downloads but even after removing all the IE shortcuts now they just use MSN to start IE, they just dont want something else.

Now a option to fully remove IE or MP would be great, but I dont really see why ms should incluse other people's software. If you buy a Ford they dont give you to option for a other brand engine/seats/whatever either because you might like those better.

 

[Davros]

Microsoft releases Vista Source to Competitors

was it written in cobol ?

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

I thought it was written in Java.

Microsoft releases Vista Source to Competitors

was it written in cobol ?

 

[Rainbow Man]

The whole point about a OS is to give to customer a system as complete as possible right?

No not really.

The OS's job is to provide basic services; memoy allocation and file I/O and graphics rendering and network shunting and whatnot.

applications should then do the actual work.

The idea that an OS should come with everything + kitchen sink built-in is rather new. Most likely started when MS decided to corner the market by bundling IE into windows with win98. Then along came media player and now there's all kinds of stuff in there with the security centeretc.

Like the customer cares what he uses to play his media, if they really want something else they'd just download it.

You see, that's exactly what MS wants people to think. To noot think for themselves and just use the bundled MS stuff instead.


But the thing is - and this is a big one - all the bundled MS stuff act as builtin advertising for MS's other apps.

You surf with Microsoft Internet Explorer and you enjoy your audio and video with Microsoft Media Player and you search for yours and other peoples' stuff with Microsoft Windows Live Search and so on. All of it bundled into vista and set as default.

So if youuse nothing but microsoft stuff all day long not only are you NOT spending anything on MS's competitors' products - thus starving them of sales and money - ou're also more likely to buy other MS stuff as well since that's whaty you're used to using.

And most people dont even want something else that IE/MP.

Most people haven't ever tried any alternatives. Either because they're misinformed and simply don't know there is anything else or they simply can't be arsed.

MS has the huge advantage of being market leader and defacto standard in most areas of the software market. Except image manipulation where photoshop reigns and others that are too small/niche for MS to bother trying to grab hold of as well.

Literally millions of companies have use for office apps but rather few in comparison need say CAD software for exmaple. So MS isn't gong to blow billions on research and development to take over that. But web searching is a huge business and MS resents google for being the most successful at it.

So hence the all "Live" hullabaloo. They even renamed their MSN chatter and is trying to do the same with hotmail even though it's such a well-established brand.

Peace.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

No not really.

The OS's job is to provide basic services; memoy allocation and file I/O and graphics rendering and network shunting and whatnot.

applications should then do the actual work.

But a OS isnt cheap and I doubt your average joe is willing to accept a OS that cant play his mp3's or go online out of the box. That was alright when pc's wernt for everybody but nowdays you just cant do that anymore. Its like ford selling you a chassis, engine and 4 wheels and let you figure out the rest so you can pick whatever you like.

You see, that's exactly what MS wants people to think. To noot think for themselves and just use the bundled MS stuff instead.

Do you really think the average user wants to figure out what he wants to use? the average user wont know whats good and what is not, he just wants something that works.

So if youuse nothing but microsoft stuff all day long not only are you NOT spending anything on MS's competitors' products - thus starving them of sales and money - ou're also more likely to buy other MS stuff as well since that's whaty you're used to using.

Than again MS made it right? why shouldnt MS be allow to advertise their own software? thats what every single company in the world does right? advertise their own products over other products.

Most people haven't ever tried any alternatives. Either because they're misinformed and simply don't know there is anything else or they simply can't be arsed.

The latter is probably the case with most people. Like I said I tried people to let them use Firefox to avoid screwing up their pc but they just refuse to do it, even after I fixed their pc for the 3rd time.

The point is that if people think something works for them they dont feel to need for something different and I dont see why you should ''force'' them to use something different. The only to get them to use something different is to install it as default but I think its redicoulus to force MS to install competitors software as default.

MS has the huge advantage of being market leader and defacto standard in most areas of the software market. Except image manipulation where photoshop reigns and others that are too small/niche for MS to bother trying to grab hold of as well.

So what? If MS office is the standard than that probably is what the market wants otherwise system admins wouldnt use it right? And to some extent that might even be good as you can be fairly sure that others can open your files. Now imagen having like 3 evenly populair office apps, that could get nice when they are all using their own formats trying to increase their marketshare by that.

Im not saying its good MS is market leader in so many places but I dont think MS is to blame for that because at the end of the day it are the system admins who chose the software to be used.

 

[Skrying]

I DARE YOU to name a OS that has ANY real market share that does not include: A Internet browser, a media player, a IM client, basic word processor, or any other basic applications you need. Microsoft simply provides their own programs for these instead of the case with Linux they include generally a open source release, or Apple just includes their own programs as well. Why hasn't the EU jumped all over the shit of Apple for including their programs with OSX? Why MUST my new Mac Book come with OSX? Why can't I use OSX on another computer not made by Apple? EU vs Microsoft is bullshit, pure bullshit. It's attacking the guy on top because his competitors can't get anywhere on their own.

 

[Zengar]

The problem is not Microsoft providing tools like browser and media player with their OS. The problem is that this tools are connected to base OS in such a deap way that no third-party developer can compete (by using undocumented features, for example). Basically, Microsoft is forcing the user to use their tools, because it may be difficult just to install a competitor's tool! For example, why do I need two browsers? Moreover, I want browser to be a standalone application and not part of the OS, if I install Firefox, I want to uninstall the IE. But this is only possible if we mess with the installation medium via nLite or similar. I can imagine custom Windows distribution, just like there are custom linux distributions, with Windows core and OpenOffice/Firefox as tools.

 

[Rainbow Man]

I DARE YOU to name a OS that has ANY real market share that does not include:

..Because MS has already set prescident here.

If you don't include all this shit you can't compete at all anymore.

Quite sipmle really. :smile:

Why hasn't the EU jumped all over the shit of Apple for including their programs with OSX?

Probably has something to do with:
A - market share.
B - deep integration/use of hidden APIs.
C - anticompetitive behavior.
D - all of the above.

EU vs Microsoft is bullshit, pure bullshit.

Is that just your personal opnion/knee-jerk reaction or have you actually studied the trial/read witness statements/the judgement etc?

Peace.

 

[Skrying]

Market share is the sole reason Microsoft is decided as a target. If you want to say they're doing something wrong then go after everyone who is committing the same "crime." Picking your targets simply on market share only allows competitors who are doing the same thing to be screwed over later. That is giving others an unfair advantage. It's like a athlete dominating a sport and then the referee's going "You must now play with one arm tied behind your back and your left leg removed." If the EU wants to force MS into that situation then it must do the same for ALL of its competitors as well. It won't though, and therefore my problem with it. EU vs Microsoft is pure unfair bullshit, it is an attempt to help the little guys, it is controlling the market, it is a crime in itself.

 

[Frank]

That's why they depreciated WinHelp with Vista: They claim there has been no development on it for some time, so it doesn't meet their standards any more. Therefore they replaced it with a stub that says that it isn't supported anymore.

Then again, they still support the 16-bit variant, and they offer a highly-modified version for download, with many restrictions, that makes it often useless. The Windows XP program still works (except for searching) if you kill and replace the Vista stuff, but they warn everyone that doing so is highly illegal and not allowed whatsoever.

For the same money and effort, they could have changed it to meet their current standards. But that isn't the policy, it seems.


And on what grounds do they claim it being illegal? Only on the grounds that they have the most money to hire lawyers?


Btw, there are applications that can read all kinds of Windows help, and display it all in the same way. Visually, winhlp32.exe can display things just like the most recent help engine.

 

[Davros]

im writing my own o/s where do i get the windows source code from

 

[standing ovation]

I thought it was written in Java.

COBOL. JAVA. That's way too easy.

What could be more obscure than the truth -- Mac OS X source code?

 

[Mintmaster]

..Because MS has already set prescident here.

If you don't include all this shit you can't compete at all anymore.

Quite sipmle really. :smile:

So who determines what an OS is allowed to include?

I'd say internet browsing is as fundamental as file browsing nowadays. My dad, for example, uses Internet Explorer far, far more than Windows Explorer (in fact, he barely knows how to use the latter). That Microsoft saw the importance of the internet years ago when the it wasn't as prevalent doesn't mean they're overstepping the bounds of what an OS encapsulates. With most PC's coming with a sound card since the Windows 95 days, why shouldn't MS include a media player?

Zengar has a point about what's wrong with MS practices. Your argument, OTOH, is really nothing but hot air. Even with his argument, though, he's drawing an arbitrary line. Should people be able to uninstall windows explorer also? Install a third party file system? Even a word processor could be deemed essential to the basic function of a computer (especially before the internet started dominating the usage of a PC), but MS let people compete there. There's no objective way to say what should come with or be removable from an operating system.

I don't know what the extent of undocumented features is, but from what I've seen in the Windows SDK documentation, I can't imagine that it really impedes competition that much.

 

[aaaaa00]

That's why they depreciated WinHelp with Vista: They claim there has been no development on it for some time, so it doesn't meet their standards any more. Therefore they replaced it with a stub that says that it isn't supported anymore.

WinHelp32 is way scary. You can embed macros in a .hlp file and they do not run in any sort of sandbox at all, which is one of the reasons it's deprecated.

 

[Rainbow Man]

That Microsoft saw the importance of the internet years ago when the it wasn't as prevalent doesn't mean they're overstepping the bounds of what an OS encapsulates.

I don't think they saw the importance of the internet as much as they saw the need and opportunity to squeeze out a competitor from the market.

Which they incidentally succeeded with and proceeded to not develop their visionary piece of software one iota for what, half a decade? (Not until firefox started to make some minor waves, when they borrowed a couple modern features from the competition - MS in a nutshell - and made a couple cosmetic changes to IE's appearance.)


Fact is MS didn't foresee the revolutionary emergence of the internet back in 1996-ish while developing Win98. I don't think anyone really did see or understand back then what's happening right now with the way new social and commercial interactions are growing across the globe.

To purport MS had some kind of special insight here when they claimed they'd integrated IE so deeply into Win98 that it could not be taken out (a boldfaced lie) is nothing short pf prepostrous.

Your argument, OTOH, is really nothing but hot air.

Oh really?

In what way exactly?


Peace.