What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
65 Comments
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -7/+47MS is a disgusting company, it is wonderful that more people are switching to Linux everyday.
- generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+42I truly wonder why MS truly goes to court with such solid evidence. Comes is really a gold-mine for more recent predatory behavior on MS's part, for all the people who said MS reformed after the 1998 antitrust trial.
"In late 2000, for instance, Microsoft executive Joachim Kempin described his plan of retaliation and coercion to shut down competition from Linux: "I am thinking of hitting the OEM harder than in the past with anti- Linux actions" and will "further try to restrict source code deliveries where possible and be less gracious when interpreting agreements - again without being obvious about it," continuing "this will be a delicate dance."
Judge Kollar-Kotelly didn't let that Kempin memo in at the 2002 remedy hearings btw, because she said it would be 'prejudicial' to MS. Truly unbelievable, considering MS forced Dell to stop selling Linux on the desktop in 2000. That's seven years of forced high prices and low innovation for Windows.
"Microsoft’s Predatory Response to GNU/Linux
142. GNU/Linux is an "open source" operating system that runs on Intel-compatible PCs. Microsoft has targeted the competing operating system by pressuring Intel, as well as various major OEMs such as Dell and Compaq, to boycott Linux. In late 2000, for instance, Microsoft executive Joachim Kempin described his plan of retaliation and coercion to shut down competition from Linux: "I am thinking of hitting the OEM harder than in the past with anti- Linux actions" and will "further try to restrict source code deliveries where possible and be less gracious when interpreting agreements - again without being obvious about it," continuing "this will be a delicate dance."
143. LindowsOS (now known as Linspire), which is developed and marketed by Lindows.com, Inc., is an Intel-compatible PC operating system based on Linux and which competes directly with Microsoft on the. PC desktop. On information and belief, Microsoft interfered with Lindows.com, Inc.’s ability to distribute its product through the OEM channel. Microsoft also initiated a lawsuit against Lindows.com, Inc. that adversely affected Lindows.com, Inc.’s ability to exist, obtain; funding and conduct business.
Microsoft’s Anticompetltive Agreements With OEMs To Foreclose Competition
144. Microsoft Chairman and former CEO, Bill Gates, reportedly summarized the effects of the DOJ’s 1995 consent decree--which banned "per processor" licenses, among other exclusionary licensing termsmas "nothing." Microsoft was able to devise other restrictive OEM agreements to foreclose competition in th¢Õ
145. A "per system" license was the practical equivalent of the "per processor" license. Under the "per system" license, the OEM had to pay royalties to Microsoft for every computer of a particular "model" or "system" that it shipped--again, as with the "per processor" contracts, regardless of whether the PC contained Microsoft’s operating system. Microsoft defined "system" and "model" so broadly in its contracts that virtually all of an OEM’s production was subject to Microsoft’s "double tax" if the OEM wanted to give the consumer a choice of operating systems. Microsoft did not agree to give up its "per system" licenses in the 1995 consent decree, even though the Department of Justice warned the federal district court that "per system licenses, if not properly fencet in, could be used by Microsoft to accomplish anticompetitive ends similar to ’per processor’ licenses"--and in fact were.
146. Another way that Microsoft found to circumvent the federal court’s 1995 injunction forbidding its use of "minimum commitment/per processor" licenses was what Microsoft calls its "Market Development Agreements" ("MDAs"). Microsoft contrived the MDA as a device to evade the Court’s decree prohibiting Microsoft from requiring OEMs to adhere to "minimum commitments." As Steve Ballmer (Microsoft’s current CEO) acknowledged: "We have always given better prices to customers who work with us to make the market. Those used to take the form of commits [i.e., minimum commitments] which we do not do anymore as a result of the [federal court’s] decree but we still believe in rewarding people who help us create demand. Hence the iMDA." Under the MDAs, Microsoft granted large discriminatory price concessions to those OEMs that would agree to market and promote Microsofl’s Windows to the exclusion of any rival operating system. These discounts were calibrated so as to force the OEM to sell most of its computers with a Microsoft operating system in order to obtain the lowest price.
147. Because the OEM market is so competitive and profit margins are so thin, every OEM had to get the lowest price it could :from Microsoft in order to survive. In March 2002, a Gateway marketing executive (Anthony Fama) testified before Judge Kollar-Kotelly in State of New York et al. v. Microsoft, Case No. 98-1233 (CKK), about how Microsoft used its MDA program in order to force OEMs to market Microsot’s operating system exclusively: "Given the substantial nature of these discounts, participation in the MDA, as a practical matter, is not optional. In other words, not receiving :these discounts would put Gateway at a substantial competitive disadvantage, and Gateway has communicated that self-evident proposition to Microsoft." Microsoft also used its MDAs to lock OEMs in and competitors out by offering a discriminatory price to the OEM in a later year provided (a) the OEM reached Microsoft’s imposed goal of Windows sales over competitive sales in the prior year and (b) renewed its exclusionary contract with Microsoft for ,the later year. This placed the OEM on a perpetual treadmill, eliminating competition indefinitely. Microsoft continued these exclusionary terms at least past April 2002.
148. One method for encouraging competition in the operating systems market would have been the sale by OEMs of "naked machines" (i.e., computers that are sold without a predetermined suite of software forced upon the consumer). "Naked machines" would allow consumers to choose their computer’s software configuration from an array of competitive software products, either for preinstallation by the OEM or installation by the end user. Microsoft sought and obtained the agreement of the OEMs to refrain from selling "naked machines." Instead, OEMs universally agree to "bundle" Microsoft applications and operating systems with their computer hardware, effectively depriving consumers of any competitive choices. These restrictive agreements exited before 2000 but, in 2000, Microsoft ratcheted the restriction up so that OEMs are forced to forfeit all discounts otherwise earned if they ship any "naked machines" to consumers. This heightened restriction, which (on information and belief) continues to the present, prohibits PC users and PC retailers from buying and installing lower priced or better quality operating systems of their choice." - tribaal, on 10/11/2007, -2/+40I don't like PDF links, but it's a pretty interesting read. And you had the decency to warn people, too. Dugg.
- Dankoozy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+30The dirty evil robbing bastards
- spiderworm, on 10/11/2007, -4/+22I for one will be glad to see our old Microsoft overlords gone.
- spiderworm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10I don't think anyone wants to watch a video of Waterrat reading about Microsoft on Youtube.
- soopafly, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10A lot of people prefer Windows because it's the only thing they know
- generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8More info about the email Kollar-Kotelly didn't allow: http://www.mailutilities.com/news/archive/121/1924.html
"Microsoft judge won’t allow e-mail
THE AUGUST 2000 e-mail from then Microsoft Vice President Joachim Kempin to other top level officials, including Chairman Bill Gates, said that chipmaker Intel was lobbying other computer makers “who are not (Microsoft) friendly in the first place and ... encouraging them to go to Linux.” Linux is a free operating system that competes with Microsoft Windows. (MSNBC is a joint venture between Microsoft and NBC.)" - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10 Yeah,the more I read about them the more I feel like puking through my nose!
- jeremymccurdy, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10I just set up a dual boot system with Ubuntu and Vista, and I have to say that I can see why Microsoft would try and crush Linux, pure fear.
A little side note: I still like Vista, but Linux is an equal, with Ubuntu a free equal. - mvent2, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7You don't have to use the command line anymore...
Plus, I would rather have an operating system that innovates than one from a company who tries to destroy their competitors because it is inferior. - geehossiphats, on 10/11/2007, -10/+15Of course they did! How else is Microslut supposed to make money? Compete fairly? HA!! They'd go belly-up if they did that.
- jeremymccurdy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Nothing like a big can of spam in the morning....
Hey buddy, piss off. - mvent2, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5But MS doesn't strive to do better. They copy Apple and Linux and use predatory practices to try to keep them from becoming a threat. Because of that the standards of PC's have been lowered to far below where they should be. PC's have a reputation for being crash- and virus-prone. A glorified Alt-tab which shuffles windows is supposed to be so glamorous that it is worthy of a $400 upgrade, despite OSX and Linux having far superior eye-candy and requiring far less hardware requirements. This is all because of the Windows monopoly.
I will be so glad when MS loses its position, then PCs will advance faster than what they are. - generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7They imposed a barrier to entry for 'naked pcs'.
They forced OEMs to sell only Windows by paying them to do so. They got around *TWO* consent decrees that disallowed this (95 and 2002).
They forced Dell and Intel to stop helping Linux.
See this Dell timeline for how MS stopped GNU/Linux being sold at various times:
http://www.ideastorm.com/article/show/66081
Feb 1992 Linux runs fine (except for swapping) on a Dell 235D (25Mhz 386).
Mar 1992 Dell employees help vote for the creation of comp.os.linux
Aug 1992 Dell employees active on the Linux-Activists mailing lists.
Oct 1994 Dell employees help thier customers run Linux on Notebooks with a footnote that"In this isolated instance these are indeed the opinions of my employer"
Jun 1995 Dell tests Linux on Notebooks and notes to potential customers "OS/2 Warp is supported. Linux isn't officially supported but unofficially, it works fine. I've been using these machines for over a year... I'm on the notebook design team at Dell.".
Mar 1998 Ralph Nader sends a letter to Michael Dell requesting pre-installed Linux "after learning that Dell and other OEMs were reluctant to offer a Linux client PC on the grounds that it would harm the OEM's relationship with Microsoft."
Feb 2000 CNN reports "Red Hat Linux 6.1 is now available on the Dell Inspiron 7500.... The Linux-enabled laptops will cost no more than their Windows 98 counterparts, according to a spokesperson for Dell....With the availability of Linux on its laptops, Dell is leading the pack in the deployment of Linux, ...I think Dell has set themselves as the innovator here,...With their basic business model, they don't have to build 10,000 Linux machines and then worry about getting orders."
Apr 2000 Michael Dell says "I think Linux on the desktop has a fair shot over the next couple of years"
Jun 2000 Michael Dell responds to "if I log on to your Web site and order a laptop running Linux, will you ship it to me", Dell: "Absolutely. Not only can you order a laptop, but you can order at least one configuration of every single product we sell, and we would encourage you to. We are one of the leading providers of Linux-based systems, and I believe that's a rapidly growing part of the market."
Aug 2000 Michael Dell says "Dell is now the No. 2 provider of Linux-based systems worldwide and the first major manufacturer to offer Linux across its full product line"
Aug 2000 Michael Dell says "configurations of all Dell products are now designed, tested and certified for Linux. Our factories can now customize each system -- from PCs to servers -- with Linux. "
Mar 2002 Media reports that Microsoft killed Dell Linux.
Jul 2002 Dell's support channels still provide excellent support on pre-installed Linux Dell Notebooks.
Jan 2003 Michael Dell says "We continue to offer Linux on the desktop and there is nothing else to say,"
Sep 2004 Near impossible to buy a Dell Linux desktop (they apparently stopped pre-installing though the website suggested they did).
Sep 2005 Dell introduced a notebook with pre-installed Linux for the French market.
Jan 2007 Dell introduced a notebook with pre-installed Linux in China.
Mar 2007 Dell writes "Dell has heard you and we will expand our Linux support beyond our existing servers and Precision workstation line. Our first step in this effort is offering Linux pre-installed on select desktop and notebook systems. We will provide an update in the coming weeks that includes detailed information on which systems we will offer, our testing and certification efforts, and the Linux distribution(s) that will be available. The countdown begins today."
OEMs testimony during the 2002 remedies phase of US v Microsoft:
"Anthony Fama, Gateway's group counsel, said in testimony submitted by nine states and the District of Columbia that the Redmond, Wash.-based software maker can still use Windows licensing agreements and other contractual provisions to extract concessions from PC makers.
Fama, who also appeared in court Monday and will likely take the stand again Tuesday, was critical of the proposed settlement because, he asserted, it effectively gives Microsoft too much wiggle room. "
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-868505.html - spiderworm, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Nothing jumped out at me as particularly new, but previous lawsuits have resulted in no market correction, so hopefully the outcome of this one will have a little more teeth.
- idonthack, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4That poor server
- generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5MS settled with Lindows for 20 million dollars. Who knows what the settlement terms are, but some people thing Linspire sold out to MS at that point.
- generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6I did an OCR of the Petition if you hate PDF, which you can find here:
http://pastebin.ca/613395 - generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Comes v Microsoft is already over sadly. Microsoft settled it. They've settled almost all the states' antitrust cases now, I think only Massachusetts is still progressing.
The bad PR from the plaintiff's exhibits got to Microsoft (as it should) and they had to pay ~180 million in actual money, not the coupons for MS software as they usually do. - stalefries, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4You should put that on Youtube.
- generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Wanted to add that the iowaconsumercase website that these exhibits are from disappeared after MS settled the case. MS's settlements are always confidential, they want the evidence gone. See Caldera Inc v Microsoft.
If you want to know more, check out http://groklaw.net in the Archives (Search for Missouri and Comes) and the MS Litigation page. - DigitalDaiquiri, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3You most likely either already run, or interact with Linux on a daily basis. It might be in your cell phone, or rather in the form of your Tivo, or maybe you just run into it when displaying pages on the internet. The point is that to operate Linux you need not be any more advanced of a user than if you were to run Windows instead. My 48 year old father, and my 16 year old sister run Ubuntu on their respective computers just fine, without any maintenance from me. Before you are so quick to dismiss something and judge it outright, you should probably at least give it a try first, in order to make any kind of a well founded and logical statement about it. After all, you my friend are the one who is coming of as being ignorant.
- dr3d, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Sorry, this reads to me like a litany of all past complaints against MS. Is there anything NEW in this lawsuit, or is it just a rehash ??
- srg13, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3That should be about 2015, right?
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5And now Linspire has partnered with Windows...
How the worm has turned!
"143. LindowsOS (now known as Linspire), which is developed and marketed by Lindows.com, Inc., is an Intel-compatible PC operating system based on Linux and which competes directly with Microsoft on the. PC desktop. On information and belief, Microsoft interfered with Lindows.com, Inc.’s ability to distribute its product through the OEM channel. Microsoft also initiated a lawsuit against Lindows.com." - generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3oops...make that Mississippi. Not MA. http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,133230-c,microsoftantitrustcase/article.html
"Microsoft estimates the cost of Iowa settlement, as well as settlements reached with Arkansas and Wisconsin in March, plus an outstanding case in Mississippi, could cost the company between $1.7 billion and $1.9 billion, according to an April 26 filing with the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission." - myfanwy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3what is so bad about MS is illegal tactics and practices, designed to unfairly crush the competition. these are summed up as monopolistic activities and are highly undesirable in any field
the end does not justify the means. who's to say where we would be if things had been allowed to run their natural course?
and don't focus on platform compatibility - that's a small issue. what's more important is data compatilbity. i.e. being able to access word processing/spreadsheet/CAD/graphics formats on multiple different systems.
and the part about the command-line is bollocks. most linux users will need it no more than they would on windows - generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Yes, the anti-competitive actions against OEMs selling Linux is new and the information about their strategy for .NET is new. Most of the past lawsuits only focused on Netscape, Java, Dr DOS, etc.
It shows how they ignored the 2002 Consent Decree. - aazn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I can NOT agree more. My thoughts written better than I could probably express them.
- generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Last post here, sorry for the duplicate replies :)
Comes has newer information on the .NET strategy. It states that MS, like it used DOS monopoly to get into the Windows monopoly, will use .NET to get into a services monopoly. It states the Microsoft attacks on Opera and alternative browsers through MSN.com (which only has traffic because of the Windows monopoly..which created hte IE monopoly...which defaults to MSN...)
Mono on GNU/Linux has some interest here, esp. with the Novell covenant not to sue for customers. Makes you go "hmm". Mono is dual licensed as GPL/LGPL as well as MIT, which doesn't protect against embrace, extend, and extinguish.
"Microsoft’s anti-competitive attacks upon Java, coupled with its limitation of a primary distribution vehicle, Netseape Navigator, effectively eliminated the Java threat to the applications barrier.
205. Microsoft continues to engage in various anticompetitive acts designed to further eliminate competition in the operating systems market. For instance, Microsoft refuses to distribute any implementation of the Java runtime on its Windows XP operating system. Unless OEMs separately install a JVM, the first time that a consumer running Windows XP encounters a
web page requiring a JVM, Windows XP generates a notice that in order to display the web page correctly, the user must download and install the Microsoft Windows-compatible Java runtime environment. If the consumer then selects the download option, the user has automatically been directed to a Microsoft web site from which the Microsoft Windows-compatible Java runtime environment is downloaded and installed.
206. Having illegally debilitated the vendor-independent Navigator/Java middleware platforms that threatened its PC operating system monopoly, Microsoft is now exploiting its illegal monopolies to leverage market share for its own middleware platform, one that, in sharp contrast to the Navigator/Java middleware platforms, is Microsoft specific. Microsoft refers to its new Microsoft-specific middleware platform as the .NET fi-amework. When the potential of the Navigator and Java platforms to capitalize on the Interact paradigm became apparent, Microsoft was neither poised nor well-suited to provide a competitive alternative to those
70
platforms. Now that it has illegally crushed the threat poised by the Navigator and Java middleware platforms, and thereby bought itself years of time to clone much of the functionality of the Java platform, Microsof~ has touted the belated introduction of its new .NET middleware
platform as its most important initiative, one that will fundamentally transform its own business and the Internet in general. Just as it developed the Windows platform on top of MS-DOS in order to encourage developers to write to the new platform, Microsoft now will provide the .NET Framework as a middleware layer on top of Windows, and encourage developers to increasingly write their applications to this new platform, gradually obsolescing the Windows platform and transferring MicrosofVs monopoly from the PC operating system to the middleware layer. Microsoft hopes to use its ill-gotten .NET market share to leverage market share in the increasingly important realm of server-based computing, a realm that currently poses the greatest threat to Microsoft’s desktop hegemony. By infusing .NET with Microsoft-specific interfaces and protocols shared by the Microsoft servers facilitating dynamic web services, Microsoft threatens to control, and render Microsoft-specific, the market for dynamic web services and other server-based computing. Microsoft also hopes to leverage its .NET market power to increase its market share in the adjacent market of embedded devices. " - afx1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2nice way to get blocked idiot
- Comanche, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Microsoft drives the coperate world, end users are only the iceing the the real cake.
- generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3When the market value is 3rd and you only rely on anti-competitive tricks...it would be better to break up to stimulate innovation.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6Microsoft should be ashamed of themselves.
- generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Fred, Microsoft hammered IBM for promoting OS/2. At the time, OS/2 was way ahead of the DOS + Windows 95/98/ME "operating environment" that had BSODs galore. OS/2 would have been able to run Win16 apps and would be MUCH more stable than ...consider that a lot of bank machines run OS/2 (although now MS is moving in on that too. Makes you wonder why.)
They forced them to either pay higher prices for Windows licenses because everyone 'needed' to sell the Windows monopoly products, or stop promoting OS/2; IBM stopped. But in doing so that killed off OS/2 and IBM took it out of the consumer space. Same with BeOS, MS's contracts prevailed, google it or look it up in the Findings of Fact.
MS killed DRI as well, in several ways. First with CP/M (Gates bought QDOS which had copyright infringment, settled with DRI and IBM to sell both, IBM proceeded to make CP/M cost more), then with DR.DOS. DR. DOS was superior to MS-DOS and had compatiblity with MS-DOS. MS made Windows incompatible with DR. DOS and added error messages. The world would have been a much better place if DRI and GEM ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_Environment_Manager ) had taken hold instead, or if there was actual competition between GEM and WIndows.
Ancient history...but still. - init100, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The reason Microsoft is now increasing their anti-piracy measures is because they now think that people are sufficiently locked into their platform that they won't switch, regardless of what Microsoft does to them. Microsoft believes that people will just bend over and take it in the a**.
- init100, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"you should probably at least give it a try first, in order to make any kind of a well founded and logical statement about it."
And a 15 minutes try won't cut it, he'd have to use it longer than that to really get a feel for the system. Otherwise, you'd get silly arguments like:
* "This doesn't look like Windows, thus it's crap."
* "This system has a crappy and illogical filesystem. I mean, where are my drive letters, and where are 'Documents and Settings'? It's crap."
* "This system is crap, I downloaded a plain .exe, and it won't run."
* "There are no famous games, and no Microsoft Office, it's crap." - generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"Computer software would be a broken mess without an OS that most people use, and without familiar file types and controls. "
Sure, but that's what standards are for. UNIX had them, and now with GNU/Linux and the GPL, it forces everything to be compatible since you can't embrace and extend. There's freedesktop.org too. Standards would win out in the free market, since no one would want to be isolated. Therefore, *Microsoft's* place in the food chain is an aberration.
Otherwise, if MS still wants to be on top no matter what (they've talked about a 'natural monopoly'), they have to be regulated by the government so customers aren't harmed like they are now with lock-in and high prices. After MS gained a monopoly in the 90s, prices reversed the trend from downwards to going upwards. Talk about ill-gotten gains. - aazn, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5It's United States v. Microsoft all over again, except this time the public won't let Microsoft get away with stalling.
While I'll be overjoyed to see Microsoft predatory techniques and Microsoft anti-competition moves go away, I'm worried about the Microsoft Gaming Devision. What will happen to the Xbox 360 or Xbox Live once Microsoft goes down the *****?
Microsoft has had a long history of mistrust and conspiracy. It tied crucial references of Internet Explorer to it's operating system, making it nigh-impossible to remove. Microsoft also claims that GNU/Linux violates over 100 of it's patents, but refuses to name them in case developers work around. It is obvious Microsoft wants to stay on top, but it's also disturbing the lengths they will go to stay on top. Extortion, Borderline-blackmail, persuasion and deceptive marketing, deception, lying, forcing it's bug-ridden products on hapless consumers.
But who is the real victim here? End users. Developers try to push out great products but the buggy Windows platform creates a hostile environment where the greatest innovations go unnoticed because they are for alternatives. Software developers aim for maximum penetration, aka Windows, but create a larger and larger application base for Windows which it does not deserve.
I'll be glad when GNU/Linux overthrows Windows. - generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1""Computer software would be a broken mess without an OS that most people use, and without familiar file types and controls. ""
I forgot another point. This is called the applications barrier to entry.
Microsoft destroyed all companies that threatened to remove that barrier, like Netscape and they polluted Java (which promised write once, compile on *all* platforms-- one look and feel). - r3zonance, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"It is obvious Microsoft wants to stay on top, but it's also disturbing the lengths they will go to stay on top."
The Xbox 360 is proof enough alone that Microsoft is willing to lose an absolute ton of money hand over fist with an unreliable, shody product that will eventually put the better console manufacturers against the wall, just because MS has deeper pockets.
Microsoft would just keep driving the Xbox 360 until they are the only player left in the market. I hate that about ANY company. Good job some countries actually make selling "loss-leaders" illegal, to stop just this kind of practice. - myfanwy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3a lot of people prefer windows because it's the only way they can get the job done. try finding a decent steel-detailing or 3D CAD package for Linux. No, I said decent. Like, comparable with AutoCAD and Vector Works.
- Cherubim, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3People are waking up the fact that Microsoft doesn't give a ***** about producing quality software.
- Comanche, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I like how people instantly say this is the end of microsoft. When your market value is 3rd in the US, you dont just shut down, even the government wouldnt be stupid to ruin the company.
- init100, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"Dell is now not offering but recommending GNU/Linux in the form of Ubuntu to end-users."
I'd use "offers" rather than "recommends". Dell still recommends Windows: "Dell recommends Windows Vista™ Home Premium.", but can supply you with Linux if you stubbornly insist on it. - init100, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I agree that the US government will probably not put any significant harm to Microsoft. I'm hoping for the rest of the world to do so instead. The US government won't want to harm Microsoft because they are a very important exporter that brings large amounts of money into the United States. Other countries may not have an interest to let Microsoft keep its current position for eternity.
- init100, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1They won't be, if it gives them more money.
- generalloy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2No, they only shipped Linux with FreeDOS. As Comes Petition says, they could not ship Linux on all machines (like Dell was going to do in 2000) because Microsoft pays them MDAs (Marketing Development Agreements) to only ship Microsoft systems. It is not a rehash, it is new anti-competitive behavior that Microsoft is perpetrating, that is not prohibited by any of the government settlements.
And all the documents from Comes are verified. They have to be since a judge accepted them. I'd like to see evidence you have of fraud. They were also widely reported in the news media.
BTW, this is why Judge Sporkin and Judge Jackson all said Microsoft needed either extreme regulation or to be broken up, since normal regulation would cost too much and MS would find a way around it, like they found a way around their 1995 settlement. - 4t0mik, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1There has been fraud on digg before claiming to be from the Comes V Microsoft case. One pretended to be a memo from Bill Gates himself about the ACPI intergration into Windows. It was purely fraud and proved to be. You might not have experience in buying Dell or just paroting what you hear here however Dell has for the last 8 years provided the media to Linux and FreeDOS not because they "couldn't" install it but because of the configuration challenges that users would cry about. How big to make the swap and user partitions etc. Dell did for a while install Linux Red Hat on many servers however their users complained that the "default" paritions are not good enough for them. So they let the users install it. Simple really.
-
Show 51 - 68 of 68 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is