Microsoft’s path for the future
p2p news / p2pnet: If one looks at Microsoft as a person, is it a greedy, unprincipled and manipulative bully with few scruples, or is it basically a good guy at heart, willing to accept other points of view once it’s seen the error of its ways?
European regulators recently hit Microsoft with another $357 million fine for anti-trust violations in addition to the 497 million-euro (about $627,850,823) fine already levied by competition commissioner Mario Monti .
Microsoft says it’ll appeal and meanwhile, after arguments that teams of dedicated Microsoft thinkers have been working overtime to come up with answers, company general counsel Brad Smith now says the company does, in fact, have principles based on the, “sometimes difficult and painful lessons Microsoft has learned in bringing Windows into compliance with antitrust laws,” according to the Seattle Times.
"As creators of an operating system used so widely around the world, we recognize that we have a special responsibility both to advance innovation and to help preserve competition in the information-technology industry," he’s quoted as saying, going on that Bill and the Boyz are committed to building and selling Windows so:
- Non-Microsoft programs can be run in place of the operating system’s features;
- Software developers can build products that compete directly with Microsoft’s;
- Customers can easily exchange and use data across different systems.
Smith doesn’t explain why the company hasn’t been following these guidelines all along, but he does say eight of a dozen "competitive principles" governing Windows Vista and all future versions of its desktop operating-system software, “stem from Microsoft’s obligations under a 2001 settlement in the landmark antitrust suit filed by the states and the U.S. Department of Justice,” says the story, continuing, “Microsoft has said it intends to remain in compliance with that settlement, portions of which expire in 2007. In May, other provisions were extended until 2009.”
But, "These [principles] are no more than public-relations commitments," says Albert Foer, president of the American Antitrust Institute in the story. "They carry no teeth. They are not meant to be in place of the antitrust laws. … Rather, they state in a general way pretty much what the antitrust laws would require."
And, "In the end, Microsoft tipped its hand toward greater openness, and that, of course, should be welcomed," said Ken Wasch, president of the Software and Information Industry Association, which opposed Microsoft in its US case and quoted by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
Wasch also said Microsoft should lower the price of Windows for PC makers who install non-Microsoft programs on top of Windows before shipment.
"That would leave room in the pricing for computer makers to strike deals for competing programs – such as alternative media software – making the overall price the same as if they had stuck with a Microsoft program," the story has him stating, adding, "But was there anything that customers or developers can cheer about? I don’t think so."
Also See:
$357 million fine – Microsoft fined another $357M, July 12, 2006
Seattle Times – Microsoft opening up Windows a lot wider, July 20, 2006
Seattle Post-Intelligencer – Microsoft adopts guidelines for abiding by antitrust rules, July 20, 2006
p2pnet newsfeeds for your site.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss
Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
July 20th, 2006 at 8:25 pm
IMHO The Vista OS in combination with TPMs (trusted platform modules) will have the effect of locking out the majority of small software developers and content provides, particularly in (but not limited to) the areas of HD media content and playback. Kind of like the DMCA killing fair use for all things digital that include ANY form of DRM. That was not the stated goal, but fair use is dead where DRM is used none the less.