Judge presses for more from Microsoft
Updated 10:55 a.m., with more details
The judge presiding over Microsoft's antitrust case said Tuesday that the company must release details on how different parts of Windows work together, according to a Dow Jones Newswires report.
The comments, by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, came as part of a regular status conference to discuss Microsoft's compliance with its antitrust consent decree. A difference of opinion had arisen over whether the technical details were required in addition to the licensing of actual communications protocols. Microsoft said it would continue to offer the so-called "overview documents" but had maintained that it was not required to do so under the consent decree, while the plaintiffs in the case had argued the documents were required.
According to Dow Jones, Kollar-Kotelly said the technical documents are "integral to interoperability" when it comes to creating Windows programs. According to the wire report, Microsoft officials told Kollar-Kotelly that they can have a draft version of the requested documentation by March and a final version by the end of next June.
It's an interesting issue, particularly as Microsoft works to more closely tie its desktop programs to online services. In addition to efforts on the application side, Microsoft has also dabbled in linking various parts of the operating system to online services.
Windows Vista, for example, was shipped in November 2006 with a built-in Windows Mail e-mail program and Windows Photo Gallery, a tool for viewing and organizing photos. Since then, though, Microsoft has released downloadable programs that essentially replace those operating system components. Windows Live Photo Gallery and Windows Live Mail are more tightly integrated with Microsoft's online photo, blogging, and e-mail services.
The company is expected to take this another step further with Windows 7, the new version of Windows that Microsoft is aiming to ship late next year.
There was also discussion at the hearing over whether Microsoft was losing ground in providing documentation. Microsoft acknowledges that the number of outstanding issues has risen, but said it is to be expected as the company makes more documentation available to more testers.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
A march 2007 survey from Macenstein said 90% of online downloaded music was through iTunes... how is that not a monopoly? In addition 84% of the $ spent on MP3 players was on iPods? that's not a monopoly?
The only real reason why they haven't been held to the same level is becuase they don't have as deep a pockets. So since you got started on how Apple isn't trying to be anti-competitive... why is it against their license to install their OS on non-Apple OEM hardware?
let's just say Apple got big, would that practice still be "good" or let's use google's term "not evil"... come on.. .when I have to burn my music to a CD because of their practices in itunes preventing me from using it on another player...
Lastly, its not about whether MS is a monopoly, fine they are and we all know it, its about holding everyone to the same standard!
An example of monopolising is when Microsoft fail to publish certain documentation regarding the operating system which all software developers have access to, so everyone is on a level playing field when making software to run on the platform. One particular example was IE taking advantage of certain methods within Windows that weren't published so other developers could use when writing their own browser, such as Firefox. This essentially gave IE an unfair advantage, aka a monopoly.
And if you think just because a particular product or service has 90%+ market share it automatically makes them some sort of monopoly, you are dead wrong.
Give me one example how Apple has monopolised the digital music market? They haven't. And the fact that certain music purchased from the iTunes store is DRM'ed has absolutely nothing to do with it. It doesn't give Apple an unfair advantage over anyone else, such as Microsoft. Microsoft can build an mp3 player and software just the same as Apple can. The difference is, can they do it as well?
You also suggest that Apple not licensing their OS is some how a monopoly as well? Please explain.
You have other alternatives, the fact people aren't using them doesn't make them not-exist.
For the record, I never said Apple isn't trying to be anti-competitive. If you can quote me saying that, I will eat my keyboard. So try to stay on topic. We were talking iTunes and iPod. Now you are bringing up the Mac computer. Wow, you are all over the place on this. I will try to keep up with your attention deficit disorder though. Apple is competitive. They are competing. They are doing quite well too. Other people ARE free to compete. We are still talking about the Mac computer right now Mr. ADD? What makes you think Apple should have to allow their OS to be installed on non-Apple OEM hardware? I am very interested in your reasoning. Just because MS licensed their OS? That means Apple should have to? They make their OS to work perfectly with their hardware. It does not matter to me or to Apple if you don't like it. Because you have a CHOICE. Buy an OS that is generic to run on thousands of possible configurations by any vendor. Or buy an OS that is tailor made to run on specific hardware. If Apple licensed their OS to non-Apple OEM hardware manufacturers, it would be like Vista. We all know how great that is!
Apple's iTunes & iPod does not make it unfair for any willing competitors in the market. Sure iTunes has a massive market share, but it's because right now they're doing it better then anyone else. Sony, Microsoft, amongst everyone else, are all on the same playing field as Apple, they just don't have the product to match.
If anything, Apple's iTunes & iPod has only done wonders for the market as a whole. Whether you own an iPod or not, we all get to enjoy the digital music market Apple has helped explode, while many competitors working hard to come up with the next best thing trying desperately to win your piece of the cake.
I buy windows because I want to, not because of the market share. If I wanted a Mac or a Linux laptop, I'd surely get one. Leave the programming to the programmers.
- by kalinga007 June 25, 2008 7:53 AM PDT
- Remember, this is a CONVICTED monopolist. We are talking about the slap on the wrist of a punishment here, and then the DoJ negotiating even that! How would you feel if your house was burgled and the judge told the convict the punishment is that he should not do it again, and allow his activities to be monitored, and the convict argues he should not be monitored when he's planning the next burglary or when executing it?
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by Commander_Spock June 25, 2008 10:02 AM PDT
- Simple solutions: Change all your "LOCKS" to "Burglar Proof OS/2 (and/or Linux) ones!
- Like this
-
(38 Comments)