INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Smoking gun?  (Read 2366 times)

JimH

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 7604
  • Miller drives a tall-masted tractor on the ocean
Smoking gun?
« on: May 02, 2002, 03:30:44 pm »

This is a little esoteric, but worth a careful read, if you are following the Microsoft trial (as any software person might well do):

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=581&ncid=738&e=1&u=/nm/20020502/tc_nm/microsoft_dc_273

My favorite parts:

A states' attorney presented the e-mail while questioning a Microsoft executive who denied in written testimony that the company had used the Windows operating system monopoly to thwart RealNetworks' media players.

.....

In a series of e-mails a month later, Gates and other top Microsoft executives fretted because the company's WebTV subsidiary was negotiating a deal to upgrade the media streaming software they licensed from RealNetworks.

WebTV offers consumers Internet access through a television set-top box. Gates and other Microsoft executives said the service should not use Real's software without also offering Windows Media Player.

"Do you want us to win against Real? If you do, then we must have the whole company pull together consistently," Microsoft executive Jim Allchin wrote to Gates and others.
Logged
Jim Hillegass
JRiver Media Center / Media Jukebox

Callithumpian

  • Regular Member
  • Galactic Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
  • Subvert the Dominant Paradigm
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #1 on: May 02, 2002, 07:21:44 pm »

There are only two types of sensible people in the world:
Those who hate MS more than Real and those who hate Real more than MS.
Regular fluctuation between the two states is no more than the sign of an active mind.
Logged

lclontz

  • Regular Member
  • Recent member
  • *
  • Posts: 41
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2002, 07:54:11 pm »

Er... what's the smoking gun? That Microsoft wanted to increase marketshare of Windows Media Player? *Gasp*

This antitrust thing is a pile of dung. The fact that all of us are on this board is a testament to the fact that the government needs to bark up a different tree. Media Jukebox is a great product, and it does what I want, so I paid for it. If I didn't like Media Jukebox, I could use MusicMatch, RealJukebox, WinAmp or, yes, Windows Media Player. There's an abundance of choice and people seem to be smart enough to pick what they want to use.
Logged

Stebajo

  • Regular Member
  • World Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
  • Every move you'll make I'll be here with you
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #3 on: May 02, 2002, 08:21:10 pm »

Well said!

Listening 'Moby - 18 - At Least We Tried' on MJB
Logged

JimH

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 7604
  • Miller drives a tall-masted tractor on the ocean
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #4 on: May 03, 2002, 05:04:38 am »

MS makes an OS.  We make applications.  They make applications.  Real makes applications.  Anyone who makes applications needs details and cooperation from the maker of the OS.

In the above, who gets good detail?

MS?  Yes.
Real?  Maybe
JRiver?  Never

There is an inherent conflict of interest in this.

Let me point out that the courts, after hearing extensively from all concerned, have decided that:

1.  Microsoft does have a monopoly on the OS.
2.  Microsoft has abused this monopoly.

All that is being argued now is the remedy.
Logged
Jim Hillegass
JRiver Media Center / Media Jukebox

Severian

  • Regular Member
  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 83
  • Data Stylist
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2002, 05:38:58 am »

What do you mean by 'good detail', just to be clear?
Logged
Severian

Frobenius

  • Guest
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #6 on: May 03, 2002, 05:58:24 am »

Microsoft isn't stupid (most of the time).  They realized that when all apps start being browser based the OS starts becoming a comodity.  They had to kill Netscape and Java to protect the cash cow: Windows.

I suspect MS sees Macromedia Flash in the same light.  If the current trend towards more and more Flash based web sites continues then FrontPage, IE, and (to a lesser extent) Windows become irrelevant (as long as your browser has a flash plugin you're good to go).  I wouldn't be one bit surprized if MS tried to buy Macromedia or came out with a competing product to Flash in the near future.

P.S. How many Microsofties use MJ?

P.P.S. The plan to sabotage DR-DOS is my favorite MS anti competitive story...
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_159000/159742.stm
Logged

JimH

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 7604
  • Miller drives a tall-masted tractor on the ocean
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2002, 06:15:10 am »

Severian,
Example of detail -- In the last year, we discovered a problem with Microsoft networking.  There were three options for how we called their functions.  There were MS acknowledged bugs in all three, but no fix available.  It was a show-stopper for us.  So we rewrote a LOT of code from scratch.

If we had been a MS division writing an application that depended on this working, what do you think would have happened?

Another example -- When Windows Media added encryption for licensing purposes, we signed and sent the application to be included in the club of companies who were trusted.  A LONG time passed, many emails and calls to MS.  Nothing happened until I wrote a letter saying my next stop was a call to their attorney.  Within a few days, we had the SDK.

What would have happened if we had been a division of MS?

If you work for Microsoft and you are reading this, I'm sorry.  Lots of great people and great code at Microsoft, but there is a blatant conflict of interest, and an overt policy of giving MS app's preferred treatment.  Even that would be fine if we didn't have to write for windows to make a living in software.
Logged
Jim Hillegass
JRiver Media Center / Media Jukebox

lclontz

  • Regular Member
  • Recent member
  • *
  • Posts: 41
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #8 on: May 03, 2002, 07:25:27 am »

I can certainly understand your frustrations, Jim -- I'm sure working around ill-documented OS bugs is a real PITA, especially when the application hooks into as many different areas as MJ.

However, it seems to me that if MS really had so much insider knowledge about the OS, they'd be able to make vastly better applications than Real or especially a small company like J River. That's not the case, though. MJ kicks the pooky out of WMP. Photoshop was much better than Photodraw. Netscape used to be better than IE until AOL decided they wanted to turn it into a media property instead of a browser (and then ceased development on the app for a couple years). Real is just an awful company whose products really give me the willies. Glad I can play my Real media in MJ.

Besides, if MS DIDN'T make WMP, the Windows-included media player application would fall to the highest bidder, who would probably be Real anyway. It's not like the best technology would win out for inclusion in the OS... the richest company would.

I've always believed that good apps are made by smart, clever programmers, not by APIs. I hate Windows Media Player (and I'm typically kind of a "Microsoft" kind of guy) because it doesn't work like I want it to. The organization is weird, the menus are Byzantine and the interface confuses me. I don't care if it's hooks into the OS are 10x more efficient than MJ's (which I find hard to believe); it's the way the app works that I care about.

Put another way, you could be Mac developers trying to compete against iTunes... now *that's* a dead market.

I've bought three upgrades to MJ and have never regretted it. The most recent beta of 8 looks fabulous and you guys are really to be commended. I know dealing with MS can be frustrating, but as long as you guys have great ideas (and you do) and listen to your customers (and you do) and have great word of mouth and reviews (which you do) you can't help but succeed. You've had me as a customer for a couple years now and my evangelism has sold at least two other copies that I know of.

Hats off, you guys. Next Page
Logged

Frobenius

  • Guest
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #9 on: May 03, 2002, 08:47:59 am »

I think you're missing the point.  It's not the amount of pain involved in working around bugs.  It's that MJ has to do it at all (whereas MS internal apps would never have to).

Also, I think IE had already won the browser war by the time AOL bought Netscape.

One of the things that really makes my blood boil is the constant rhetoric from Redmond about how innovative MS is.  Virtually every product or technology MS has ever brought to market has been either, a) a rip off of another product (e.g. from Apple), b) bought from another company (e.g. FrontPage), or c) stolen (e.g. Windows NT == Digital's VMS).

The silver lining to Microsofts preditory and anti-competitive techniques is the unifying and consolidation of the PC market.  What would it be like if the OS market was split nearly evenly amongst Windows, MacOS, OS/2, AmigaDOS, ...?  Trying to bring an app to market and gain market share would probably be considerably harder.
Logged

lclontz

  • Regular Member
  • Recent member
  • *
  • Posts: 41
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #10 on: May 03, 2002, 09:53:14 am »

I don't buy the conspiracy. If MS apps were benefitted so greatly by "not having to work around the bugs" (which I think is a false assumption -- every OS has quirks that an application developer has to work around), then MS apps should always have some unbreakable edge over other apps. In fact, MS apps are usually competent, but rarely Earth-shattering in their innovation. That's why products like Media Jukebox exist at all -- MS doesn't provide all things to all people.

//Virtually every product or technology MS has ever brought to market has been either, a) a rip off of another product (e.g. from Apple), b) bought from another company (e.g. FrontPage), or c) stolen (e.g. Windows NT == Digital's VMS).//

I think that's a little short-sighted. Front Page was bought by MS some six years ago or more -- it's a radically different program now than it was then. And how much do you think Digital's VMS has in common with Windows XP? As for Apple, they do some interesting things to be sure, but OS X "steals" as much from Windows and Linux as it innovates. (And if you want a buggy, ill-documented OS to develop for/around, try OS X.) Besides, Apple bought Final Cut Pro and no one seems to fault them for it. They deliver a lot of things people want; that's why they're successful.

Netscape dug it's own grave. It had a significant market advantage when both browsers launched at the 4.0 stage and then... nothing. No new versions appeared for almost four years! Is it any surprise that they lost marketshare? How many of us still use MJ 4.0? Next Page

It's easy to see everything as a conspiracy, but remember Occam's Razor.
Logged

Harry The Hipster

  • Guest
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #11 on: May 03, 2002, 10:57:52 am »

"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate

             -William of Ockham

Don't over-complicate things - the simplest answer is usually the right one.

             - Harry of Hipster
Logged

Frobenius

  • Guest
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #12 on: May 03, 2002, 12:02:02 pm »

Having once worked for a hardware company who had their own OS and Apps departments I can assure you this: features are added sooner and bugs are fixed faster (in general) due to internal relationships fostered over time and the overarching company goal to bring the best possible products to market.

It's not a conspiracy, it's standard operating procedure.  At big companies, bugs reported by customers go through a convoluted screening and triage process that's often several layers deep.  Inside the company developers are free to pester developers mano-a-mano.  Things happen much faster.

Agreed, Microsoft is capable of taking a product and incrementally improving it (usually to the point where feature bloat starts to overwhelm the interface).  But in terms of invention and innovation?  Sorry, with very few exceptions they always fall short.  Put another way: Microsoft is very productive, but almost never creative.
Logged

Harry The Hipster

  • Guest
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #13 on: May 03, 2002, 01:11:07 pm »

I understand the argument, but aren't we focusing on an ancillary point?

Let's unbundle the issues:

- "Microsoft is being punished for competing, and that's the American way". Agree with the second part of the proposition. Disagree with the first part. More important, both the much-reviled Thomas Penfield Jackson and the Circuit Court disagreed with it, too. Its been a basic tenet of anti-trust law for almost 100 years that certain practices are illegal, even if they are motivated by an otherwise-laudable desire to establish primacy in the market. The issue in MS 1 was whether MS had forced unwanted/unnecessary applications on consumers - essentially like a tying agreement where you can't buy Product A unless you buy Product B. The US disproved the MS defense - that these applications and the OS were mutually interdependent and couldn't be unbundled. MS was 'punished', if that's the word, for dirty dealing and then lying about it. That's what the incriminating emails were all about.

And that's what the State AGs are pushing in MS 2 - the same approach of piggybacking other unrelated applications on top of Windows, and justifying it by claiming they're joined at the head, like Siamese Twins.

"MS chills competition by denying service, support and data to other companies with competing programs." Maybe - I just don't know enough about what actually happens inside companies like MS to say anything intelligent. Perhaps the truth lies somewhere between JimH and iclontz. If you're not a blood brother, or an important customer, you'll cool your heels for a while.

Is that nice? No, but there are lots of things that happen in the real world that are un-nicer. Doesn't shock my conscience, absent clear and convincing evidence that it is established corporate policy to deny access to specific customers based on a desire to drive them from the market. And even that - 'refusal to deal' - isn't necessarily the basis for a legal action, though it might be cumulative evidence that MS committed some other foul deeds.

"MS apps are generally pretty so-so, and that's proof that MS isn't using data access as an offensive weapon, because if it knew how to de-bug programs, it would do a better job itself." Hope I quoted that accurately.

Give it some reverse English. If as suggested MS isn't terribly creative, and can't match products being put out by entrepreneurial program developers, maybe the refusal/inability to provide support establishes an attempt to level the playing field by refusin assistance to programs that are inherently superior. So, where does this take us? Refusing to deal by itself isn't nice (see above) but it isn't illegal either. However, if it is part of a concerted effort to create unavoidable obstacles for competitors, say by programming in material that impedes the operation of Brand X but not the MS equivalent, that may be another story. Don't know if anyone has claimed that, so this is mere speculation. I mention it only to underscore that certain behavior in and of itself may not be illegal absent special circumstances, but under those other circumstances may well be.

I don't see the anti-trust proceedings as an attack on the free enterprise system, and I'm a believer in the great value of American enterprise. Remember, anti-trust theory wasn't formulated by Lyndon Johnson or JFK; its not reflective of any particular set of political values. Teddy Roosevelt was profoundly committed to the free enterprise system, and yet he was a first mover in the anti-trust area, precisely because he saw that certain practices stifled creativity. This has continued down through administrations as different as Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Carter and Reagan. People aren't supposed to be punished for being over-competitive; they're punished for turning competition into a one-sided knife-fight in a dark alley, and unfairly impeding the ability of other entrepreneurs to enrich the market for consumers.

With all of that, I do share the concern that the remedy may be destructive, particularly as applied by non-experts to an industry that moves on very unusal principles. We'll have to watch that closely.

HTH
Logged

lclontz

  • Regular Member
  • Recent member
  • *
  • Posts: 41
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #14 on: May 03, 2002, 01:13:52 pm »

//Microsoft is very productive, but almost never creative.//

Totally agree with you there. I think that's a very fair statement and very well put. Microsoft is like McDonalds -- popular and widely consumed (and derided), but usually good enough for most people.
Logged

Severian

  • Regular Member
  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 83
  • Data Stylist
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #15 on: May 03, 2002, 08:36:04 pm »

JimH,
Sorry I didn't get back to you after asking for clarification--was trying to ship a product, you know how that is (and then took the dev team out to Spider-ManNext Page).

Anyway, by this time others have clearly taken the point and kicked it around somewhat. I feel your pain too, of course, having had similar problems; on the other hand I think, as the others have, that it's pretty much standard data for any company to prioritize the internals over the externals; it's just the nature of bureaucracy. I mean to be neither a detractor nor a defender of them. On the one hand, they've certainly done their share of awfulness, and on the other at times I think we moan about the problems we have with them because the relative smoothness with which the rest of operations get conducted throws it into sharp relief.

Just last week I burned about a solid 30|PLS| hours of billable time on 'problems' with their dev products that wouldn't have been that if better support and clearer documentation were had. But at the same time I remember the late 80's and early 90's, when this business was just for geeks and you couldn't even play a fricking game without carefully choosing your hardware and software while simultaneously closing yourself off from a lot of other options. I'm a big fan of the idea that out of chaos and competition comes the best ideas and products, but past experience seems to indicate that what you get instead in the software/hardware business is a kind of digital tribalism and a perpetual war among entrenched camps. So at times I'm grateful that there is a big giant out there for the little guys like me to trail behind. It makes my lifestyle possible, and I'd venture to say that it probably makes yours too.

--Severian
Logged
Severian

swilburn

  • Guest
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #16 on: May 03, 2002, 09:35:34 pm »

Just to give you something else to think about, guess what your federal government was doing while they had Microsoft on the carpet.  Dumping WordPerfect Suite and making MS Office useage mandatory.  And this has been pretty much government-wide.  I should know, I work there.

Sam Wilburn
Logged

Frobenius

  • Guest
RE:Smoking gun?
« Reply #17 on: May 07, 2002, 11:20:04 am »

Getting back to the original topic...

More choice quotes from MS employees:

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/05/07/1751234&mode=thread&tid=109
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up