Topic: Judge orders Microsoft to show source to states (Read 2903 times)

JimH · « **on:** February 16, 2002, 07:01:29 am »

This is a breakthrough.

Microsoft Corp. will have to supply the computer code for its Windows program to a group of states seeking stiffer antitrust sanctions against the software giant, a federal judge ruled Friday.

Nine state attorneys general had argued that they needed to see the Windows source code in order to verify Microsoft's claim it could not offer a simpler version of the Windows personal computer operating system, stripped of features like the Internet Explorer browser.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/industry/02/16/microsoft.code.reut/index.html

KingSparta · « **Reply #1 on:** February 16, 2002, 08:15:17 am »

>>This is a breakthrough.
For who

What happens one day when they say hey, Jim your Jukebox blows away all of the others

"You need to provide source code to everyone so real and MusicMatch we can make there’s just as good"

I think this is opening a can of worms, once you set precedence then they can go after others.

My feeling is if Netscape wants it so bad they can create there own operating system.

So now, MS is now working on a 64-bit operating system that they spend millions on developing, only to give it away to someone to leak it to a vender.

Does not sound good to me if I was a software company no matter what side of the window I was standing on.

JimH · « **Reply #2 on:** February 16, 2002, 08:32:00 am »

The reason it's important is that it will probably disprove MS's claim that they can't separate the browser and media player and other software from the OS.

And the reason that's important is that if they are forced to do so and offer a stripped down version of the OS, it allows companies like Real Networks, Winzip, Nero, Opera, JRiver, and many others to compete for this business with OEM's.

We've made software for 20 years now, and it has become harder each year to find a niche that MS wasn't interested in. Offering a stripped down version of Windows should change this.

A long list of companies dwindled or died because Microsoft either added their functionality to Windows or made MS technology a "standard". WordPerfect and Lotus, for example.

Without competition, MS will own more and more of your life.

KingSparta · « **Reply #3 on:** February 16, 2002, 09:10:21 am »

JimH

I can understand that.

I would like it stripped also, maybe this is the only way of doing it, do not know.

It just seems it may be counter productive possibly allowing the government to get into your business in the future.

You support too many sound files, you cannot have one package to both video and sound files. So they will be telling you to give your source code to [former member] and KingSparta all documented since they need a shot at creating a music program that competes with yours (sure, ok).

and what am i to do when they tell me i need to give them all my VB code? I will go broke fighting them off trying to save all my freeware code.

Sounds like liberal \ communism, both I cannot stand.

If they can keep the source code from falling into someone’s hands (sun, AOL, netscape etc…) and do there decoding or what ever maybe.

We all know they built it so it could not be stripped.

And if they give the code up, how long will it take to find out it cannot be stripped 2 – 4 years. After that, MS will have something completely new. And another 60|PLS| million bucks of the US Tax payers down the drain.

I think it would be more productive for companies to put research and programming into Linux if they hate MS so much and take the market share away from MS.

I do see your point however

I just do not like the putting the source code out there for all to see part.

Gatobrit · « **Reply #4 on:** February 16, 2002, 09:22:35 am »

JimH,
OK. I agree with some of your points and disagree with others.

Unbundling software like the browser, media players, firewalls etc. from Windows is a useful step to increase competition in the marketplace. I believe it would also increase the performance and stability of the O/S.

In most of these cases, the MS versions are 'OK'. Not as good as you would or could purchase but probably in a lot of cases good enough for most people so that they do not go looking for something else that will probably cost $24.95. (That said, I've licensed MJ since version 6 and wouldn't consider using anything else so please don't see this as a sock as J River.)

However, Lotus and Word Perfect had the lions share of the market with their respective #1 products - 1-2-3 and WP. They decided to sit on their laurels and watch MS bring Windows 2.0 to the market, then 3.0 and then 3.1 and then the Windows GUI versions of Word, Excel and PowerPoint. Then Windows 3.1, 95. The the bundling of office apps into MS Office etc. etc.

Over 10/12 years of development and at no point during that time did either Lotus or Word Perfect come out with a product that competed with MS in terms of ease of use etc. or built significantly on their huge customer base. Maybe their products were "better" than the MS ones but if the product is more complicated to use (or appears more complicated) than a competitor then it's a short distance to find out who will win.

If you need another example - Visicalc (the first PC 'killer app' was eventually killed by Lotus 1-2-3 because Lotus developed their product while Visicalc 'fiddled' and counted $'s. I won't even discuss Macintosh.

zevele1 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 16, 2002, 10:28:07 am »

I do not want to have an opinion.Just this:all the time i had a phone 56kps connection,internet explorer was remove from my Windows98.So you can run Windows and not to have internet explorer.I had-for the fun- a try to a software who removes mediaplayer,moviesmaker and systeme restore.WindowsMe was working fine .Seams they theory dont stand

Deathrider · « **Reply #6 on:** February 16, 2002, 11:17:22 am »

Bottom line is that now the market will open up for competative software that will truly be compatible with windows. Think in terms of cars, What if the only replacement parts or service could be had from a dealer, they would be able mark the price up to a point that the value of the vehicle is less than the value of one years service. Everyone has to agree that the cost of a Windows OS costs more than it cost the developer to produce when you take into account the volume of sales. In the near future we should see more choices in OS's. giving the user more choices for their needs and at a fair price. I like windows for the most part but believe it to be far to expensive for what you get in the end with the needs for updates and service packs. we should start to see in the future more stable OS platforms becasue the selling point will be the stability and security right out of the box and not the current status of this is all there is and if you dont like it go with nothing. This will not be the downfall for Bill Gates( and I have a great deal of respect for the guy) or his company, it will only put him in a possition of choosing to produce quality product or making less money and I think this is very fair. The consumer has been stuck with one choice for years and personaly linux is not an option since very little software products sapport it, but an OS standard needs to be created so that any program will work on any OS and then that would be competative marketing for the consumer....

Robert Long

Jaguu · « **Reply #7 on:** February 16, 2002, 11:27:03 am »

JimH,

from the user's perspective I would like to buy one single package, load it on a computer and have all the tools at my disposition that I need for work - as it basically was in the good, old Unix days. You hardly needed anything else, everything you ever really needed came in one single bundle.

The reason I bought Media Jukebox last summer was simply that I was not fully satisfied with Windows Media Player (specifically the music organization part of it) and looked for something better until I found your product which I still like a lot, although MJ8 Beta gives you headaches from time to time. So you can always make better tools than Microsoft does.

For some reasons I do not really understand, Microsoft very often badly fails to deliver some tools I would really like to have right away on my computer. (When you buy a car, you also want to get it in one piece ready for use, and not as a kit to assemble). Music might be something special, but other things like writing to cd's, compressing, backups, firewalls and many other small utilities I would like to have right away on my desktop ready for use.

I now work for a large international corporation as a project leader responsible for migrating some 20'000 PC's and about 1000 servers to Windows 2000. The company has to migrate and package something like 3000 different applications for their business needs so that they can be distributed automatically. Management would probably be most happy if Microsoft would be able to integrate even more in their operating system so they could skip all this non-productive kind of work. (By the way Application packaging has been outsourced and there are quite a number of companies specialized on that!)

Something else: It's the first time in my life that I work for a company that has a large dependency on Microsoft products. You can't imagine how this makes life simpler, just to know that 20'000 people use Outlook and Office 2000 and you can send them the most complex Excel or Powerpoint files and with a single click they just open them and do not complain about not having the right application installed as it often happens in mixed environments.

I don't think large corporations really want anything other than that and they are probably not the supporters of these antitrust sanctions (maybe with the exception of Sun and Oracle...)

Jaguu

KingSparta · « **Reply #8 on:** February 16, 2002, 11:33:44 am »

>>OS standard needs to be created so that any program will work on any OS and then that would be competative
that will not happen

>>Think in terms of cars, What if the only replacement parts or service could be had from a dealer
can't you use something other than internet explorer, media player now? don't see how your car statement fits, unless you want to run over the box windows comes it with it.

>>Bottom line is that now the market will open up
I don't see it happening, Mr. Bill will fight to the bone to keep the code

I just don't see microsoft being the HQ for the Devil (it might be his summer home however)

gerrysan · « **Reply #9 on:** February 16, 2002, 05:32:14 pm »

Here is my question. ??
What is source code?? That is If one writes a Prog in what ever language VB, Basic, C, C|PLS|, C|PLS||PLS|, (does assembler count).
to me source code is a higher level language one to be compiled. Please inform me.
Cheers Smiler

JimH · « **Reply #10 on:** February 16, 2002, 05:39:12 pm »

Source code is what [former member] dreams of.

gerrysan · « **Reply #11 on:** February 16, 2002, 05:50:39 pm »

Ahh you mean JimH that which makes it easy

KingSparta · « **Reply #12 on:** February 17, 2002, 02:02:50 am »

Source Code:

Source "KingSparta"
Source Code Makes The World Go Around And The Sun Come Up In the Morning, Without Source Code And A Cup Of Coffee (Beer After 10am) Life Is Just Not The Same.

source 2

Human-readable program statements written in a high-level
or assembly language, as opposed to object code, which is
derived from the source code and designed to be machine-readable.

source 3
(Or "source", or rarely "source language")
The form in which a computer program is written by the programmer.
Source code is written in some formal programming language which can
be compiled automatically into object code or machine code or executed
by an interpreter.

source 4

Program instructions in their original form. The word source
differentiates code from various other forms that it can have
for example, object code and executable code).

Initially, a programmer writes a program in a particular
programming language. This form of the program is called the
source program, or more generically, source code. To execute
the program, however, the programmer must translate it into
machine language, the language that the computer understands.
The first step of this translation process is usually performed
by a utility called a compiler. The compiler translates the source
code into a form called object code. Sometimes the object code is
the same as machine code; sometimes it needs to be translated into
machine language by a utility called an assembler.

Source code is the only format that is readable by humans. When
you purchase programs, you usually receive them in their
machine-language format. This means that you can execute them
directly, but you cannot read or modify them. Some software
manufacturers provide source code, but this is useful only
if you are an experienced programmer.

gateley · « **Reply #13 on:** February 17, 2002, 02:49:44 pm »

Microsoft often uses the technique of adopting a standard or custom, and making proprietary extensions to it so that only Microsoft's implementation works well. It then relies on its huge customer base to put competitors out of the picture (your product doesn't work with 98% of the sites). Don't take my word for it, search for the Halloween papers. You've heard of the halloween papers, right? (Scary that you haven't).

This particular example (browser embedded in the OS) is the same technique. Browsers like NetScape and Opera cannot compete because of the proprietary hooks in IIS/Java/Javascript whatever.

The judges decision is a blow against this type of commercial warfare. It may be wrong in many senses, but it'll help the little guys like Opera.

When I have problems with Opera, I post on a mailing list, and get responses from real people at Opera. When was the last time you did that with Microsoft?

j

Callithumpian · « **Reply #14 on:** February 17, 2002, 06:19:57 pm »

When Opera has a user base in the hundred of millions we'll see where their personal service is.
The aim of business is to crush the opposition - to outcompete.
I just find it so ironic.

Our magnificent capitalist system encourages competition in which, for the most part, deceipt, double dealing, false representation, back stabbing, hidden agendas and all manner of ethically dubious jiggery-pokery are either condoned, blind-eyed or dealt a token feather-smite.

Then, when someone (like mild mannered Bill) perfects the mongrel dog bastardry that is the unstated ideal of good business practice, you all cry foul like a big bunch of babies. Utter hypocrisy.

The potential for economic juggernauts to go malthusian berserko, (like, I agree, MicroSoft, Exxon, Union Carbide, Nestle...ad infinatum/nauseum) and run roughshod over basic human values (like fair play) is in-built. That potential is the very cornerstone of a system in which this year's profit must, at any cost, exceed last year's by 10%, or heads will roll.
Fair play, good manners, common decency - these things do not generate shareholder dividends.
Don't be offended, it's not personal, it's just business.

KingSparta · « **Reply #15 on:** February 18, 2002, 01:09:17 am »

what is Opera

JimH · « **Reply #16 on:** February 18, 2002, 04:11:48 am »

A good browser.

www.opera.com

KingSparta · « **Reply #17 on:** February 18, 2002, 06:30:36 am »

Jim I was kidding...

gateley · « **Reply #18 on:** February 18, 2002, 06:47:56 am »

On that happy note, shall we proclaim that the fat lady has sung and end this thread?

j

KingSparta · « **Reply #19 on:** February 18, 2002, 06:52:24 am »

I Am Playing With It Now...

Not Really If I See An Advantage Yet

MHorton · « **Reply #20 on:** February 18, 2002, 06:58:19 am »

>>>>>>>>>>on that happy note, shall we proclaim that the fat lady has sung and end this thread?

>>>>>>>>>>>I Am Playing With It Now...
Not Really If I See An Advantage Yet

what--to opera or ending the thread?

never saw any advantage to opera

was it Twain that said "opera is music for people that don't like music"?

could be applied to the browser too, I guess

KingSparta · « **Reply #21 on:** February 18, 2002, 07:03:05 am »

>>what--to opera or ending the thread?
Opera Browser...

I timed the page load times, I got about the same.

I guess i will need to use if for sometime to see if there is an advantage in one over the other.

zevele1 · « **Reply #22 on:** February 18, 2002, 07:42:03 am »

callithumpion
You are 200% right.Only this:this kind of behaviour when try to be imposed to anyone worlwide gives a day in september
King
Opera.If you print a lot,in a very fast and easy way ,you can set a print without colors,pictures and so on.In one click in fact
With the same click you can use it as a Lynx browser,if you need pages to read.If you have a fast connection,you are right,speed is the same than others.But for someone with a 56kps connection,Opera is much much faster than the others.The faster browser rigth now is Mozilla.
But still in beta

MHorton · « **Reply #23 on:** February 18, 2002, 07:42:08 am »

personally, I'd be interested in knowing why people choose to use Netscape or Opera rather than IE, and how that choice affects their use of MJ and this forum (I've heard that there are some problems here if you don't use IE, and I wonder why that would be the case if JRiver is in support of Microsoft's browser competitors.).

Michael

JimH · « **Reply #24 on:** February 18, 2002, 07:51:59 am »

We don't recommend any browser. If you want to use Opera or IE, it's all the same to us. The subject of browsers came up as an example of MS crushing competition by "adopting" standards and then taking them off into MSWorld. Java is another example.

Don't feel that you have to defend MS. In lots of ways, I like MS software. I just don't like a world that has only one software company. And I don't like a company being able to buy influence in Congress, in the White House, or in Best Buy (they own 5%).

zevele1 · « **Reply #25 on:** February 18, 2002, 08:07:43 am »

There is no problem using any browser with MediaJukebox.I spoke once of a small problem with Netscape 6.2.But nothing to do with MediaJukox.It is part of the war aol/windows
JimH
You are right,Windows is not that bad.But,if you want to be "in"you have to say that Windows is crap.And i do think it is not crap.At least if we do not speak about all the security problems.The behavior is crap,the product is not

MHorton · « **Reply #26 on:** February 18, 2002, 08:19:27 am »

oops, wrong "voice"

not defensive, but curious

vague memory of comments here to the effect of "have to use IE to the thing to work"

maybe it was just for purchases or something

but what is that necessary?

i've never used anything but IE, but i'm not married to it either

would try switching, but seems like so many sites that i use are refined for IE

my primary Q is: other than security concerns and the ever-so-hip Microsoft bashing, why would one want to switch. are the other choices more functional?

not a sarcastic or rhetorical Q

KingSparta · « **Reply #27 on:** February 18, 2002, 08:26:34 am »

zevele1

i did see the andvantage with Print, thanks...

trying to find Auto complete right now....

also i did find an option to translate

JIMH This Morning In Another Thread

HimH: gracias para las palabras de un viejo
Translated: thanks for the words of an old one.

it would be nice if there was a spellcheck, maybe i missed it but i did see a dictionary

zevele1 · « **Reply #28 on:** February 18, 2002, 08:30:37 am »

As i said on an other post,i did "a week with IE my default browser".First time in my life i used it.If security and "critical updates" are not a problem to you,Ie is a very good browser.With many nice things,like the fact that it is the one that gives you the larger screan with tollbars still easy to use.But if you have a look at the security and privacy options in Netscape6.2 and IE6,it is "i know my computer"against "mister average"
I have very little to say against IE for surf,and i am a hardcore Netscape head

MHorton · « **Reply #29 on:** February 18, 2002, 08:33:53 am »

[former member]

I enjoy pondering your posts (NOT SARCASTIC)

keeps my mind occupied through the drudgery of daily chores

my "a-list" of fav authors: Peter De Vries, Dylan Thomas, Mark Twain, Jonathan Swift, Oscar Wilde, Edward Abbey

but

keep in mind

if you're ever furstrated that no one has profound responses to your posts

Housemartins - We're Not Deep (1986)

zevele1 · « **Reply #30 on:** February 18, 2002, 08:39:51 am »

MHorton
If you want to give a try at Netscape,do not download it from Netscape.Go to sillydog.org,you can download "a slim version" without the aol junk.But better to wait until the next realease.6.2 is still a beta ,even if an almost perfect one.As soon as Mozilla 1 is ready,the new Netscape will be avaible.And this one will beat ie6 with no mercy

MHorton · « **Reply #31 on:** February 18, 2002, 08:51:47 am »

zevele1

thanks, along with mpc, I'm gonna give it a whirl. I'll wait for 6.2, but please clarfiy: Mozilla 1--is that an in-beta upgrade to Netscape 6.2, or is it a product by a different company?

zevele1 · « **Reply #32 on:** February 18, 2002, 08:55:31 am »

there is not autocomplete in Opera,you get just the user name case fill.They say they do not want to put this option,because there is security issues with such a fonction.But,it is just a big pain in the a...to have to fill yourself.An other big problem:there is not WindowsMediaplayer pluging

zevele1 · « **Reply #33 on:** February 18, 2002, 08:55:35 am »

there is not autocomplete in Opera,you get just the user name case fill.They say they do not want to put this option,because there is security issues with such a fonction.But,it is just a big pain in the a...to have to fill yourself.An other big problem:there is not WindowsMediaplayer pluging

MHorton · « **Reply #34 on:** February 18, 2002, 09:01:35 am »

zevele1

apparently, there is not autocomplete in Opera,you get just the user name case fill.They say they do not want to put this option,because there is security issues with such a fonction.But,it is just a big pain in the a...to have to fill yourself.An other big problem:there is not WindowsMediaplayer pluging

One should always be a little improbable -- Oscar Wilde

Michael

zevele1 · « **Reply #35 on:** February 18, 2002, 09:08:31 am »

MHorton
for make short.Netscape is based on Mozilla.Mozilla is an open source with a lot of pre-Aol
Netscape people.there is a Mozilla browser on his way beta09,8 today.1 will be the final release.Netscape will use this for the next Netscape and put all his fu... sh... on it.It will be Netscape6.3[i think].If there not Windows issues against Netscape as it is today,this browser will be the best on the market
icq100
Opera is slow when he has to load all the junk of a "typical IE standarts page"Not everyone is good at dealing with mongoloides

MHorton · « **Reply #36 on:** February 18, 2002, 09:43:01 am »

zevele1

thanks--that makes it clear

Michael

zevele1 · « **Reply #37 on:** February 18, 2002, 10:01:12 am »

MHorton
Did you see that you put Oscar Wilde on the post with the word a..on it ?

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: Judge orders Microsoft to show source to states (Read 2903 times)

zevele1

Deathrider

gerrysan

gerrysan

gateley

gateley

KingSparta

MHorton

KingSparta

zevele1

MHorton

zevele1

MHorton

zevele1

MHorton

zevele1

MHorton

zevele1

zevele1

MHorton

zevele1

MHorton

zevele1