Read more on Cloud Computing
July 19, 2006 12:40 PM PDT
Microsoft vows to play fair
- Related Stories
-
EU knocks Microsoft with $357 million fine
July 12, 2006 -
Feds add two years to Microsoft antitrust deal
May 12, 2006 -
Google has its eye on Vista search
May 10, 2006 -
Court rules for Microsoft in antitrust case
April 18, 2006 -
Microsoft tells judge it's antitrust-compliant
November 30, 2005
The voluntary principles will come into play after major parts of a U.S. government decree related to the landmark U.S. antitrust case against the software maker expire next year, said Brad Smith, general counsel at Microsoft. They focus on the freedoms that users, manufacturers and developers can expect in Windows Vista and its successors.
"In the broadest sense, I am here to pledge Microsoft's continued commitment to vigorous competition and vital innovation in the software marketplace--and to explain how this commitment is guiding our development of the next-generation Windows operating system, Windows Vista," Smith said in a speech at a luncheon here hosted by the New America Foundation, a public policy think tank that counts Google CEO Eric Schmidt as a board member.
Under the principles, users and manufacturers will be free to change any default settings, to install any software and to remove key Windows features as they please, Smith said. Developers will enjoy access to a broader range of application programming interfaces, or APIs, and anyone will be able to license Microsoft's communications protocol or patents, within certain parameters.
The announcement comes just a week after the European regulators slapped the company with a $357.3 million fine for noncompliance with a 2004 antitrust ruling. In addition, several U.S. antitrust-related provisions imposed on Microsoft by a federal court run out in November 2007. The company agreed with federal and state prosecutors in May to extend certain parts of the judgment related to licensing of its communications protocols until 2009.
News.com Poll
The principles unveiled on Wednesday aren't meant to substitute for antitrust law, nor are they as comprehensive as some might like, Smith acknowledged. "We do not pretend these principles answer all questions for all time or even for now," he said.
But they reflect the fact that Microsoft has learned a lot in the nine years since the U.S. government launched its antitrust probe in earnest, Smith said. Chief among those lessons, he said, is the recognition that Microsoft has "a special responsibility both to advance innovation and to help preserve competition in the information technology ecosystem."
That means, for instance, that if a PC manufacturer wants to ship machines with a competing search engine enabled, that's just fine with Microsoft, Smith said. That statement appeared to be an almost direct rebuttal to concerns raised by Google earlier this year about a search box planned for Internet Explorer 7 in Windows Vista.
"Users can reset settings and choose whatever they want as things go forward," Smith added.
Microsoft has written itself 12 tenets to promote competition associated with its operating system. Here are the main areas:
Choice for computer manufacturers and customers
1. Installation of any software
2. Easy access for software makers
3. Defaults for non-Microsoft programs
4. Exclusive promotion of non-Microsoft programs
5. Business terms (no retaliation against PC makers that support non-Microsoft software)
Opportunities for developers
6. Disclosure of APIs
7. Freedom of choice in Internet services
8. Open Internet access in Windows
9. No exclusivity in middleware contracts
Interoperability for users
10. Availability of communications protocols
11. Availability of Microsoft patents
12. Support for industry standards
Source: Microsoft
Such flexibility should also allow the "phenomenal success" of others, such as Apple Computer's iTunes software on the Windows platform, to continue, he said.
The principles also include a nod to the hot-button issue of Net neutrality, or the idea that network operators must not be permitted to make deals offering higher priority to Web content and service providers that pay for the privilege.
On Net neutrality, Smith promised that Microsoft would "design and license Windows so that it does not block access to any lawful Web site or impose any fee for reaching any non-Microsoft Web site or using and non-Microsoft Web service."
He did not, however, claim that the principles are entirely comprehensive. No mention was made, for instance, of privacy and security because "we didn't think those issues belonged as part of competition issues," Smith said. He added that Microsoft devotes the largest chunk of its research and development spending to security.
The principles drew applause on Wednesday from two Democrats in Congress. Rep. Ed Towns of New York said the document gave him confidence that America's software industry will continue to see a resurgence in activity. Rep. Jay Inslee, who represents a district in Microsoft's home state of Washington, said the principles "reaffirm Microsoft's commitment not only to compliance with government regulations, but also to technological innovation and consumer choice."
Directions on Microsoft analyst Matt Rosoff said he suspected that the timing of the announcement was tied at least in part to the European Commission's action against Microsoft.
"More generally, Microsoft wants to avoid any more expenses related to lawsuits--these fines and settlements have cut more than $6 billion from the company's bottom line in the last few years," he said in an e-mail interview. "And I think with organic growth slowing in some of its businesses, Microsoft is more acutely aware of these expenses than ever before."
See more CNET content tagged:
Brad Smith, antitrust, principle, API, software company
62 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment (Log in or register)
computer, my right to set it up as I see fit. How nice of them.
I assume that's as long as I allow WGD (Winblows Genuine
Disadvantage) to report my computer's setup and software back
to Redmond. Twice a month, in case my legal version suddenly
becomes illegal. Or in case M$ wants to deny me access to my
own machine.
You know, with Linux on my home machine these "rights" to set
up my own computer are never in question.
Ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha! Heh heh heh. Ahhhhh.
Now you tell one.
I wonder, how much more open the Windows platform can become?
Sorry, but after MS has showed for so long how they intend to act, I don'e believe a word of this. I don't believe they are willing or even capable of self-regulating. They say they are willing to license protocols and patents "within certain parameters", which are surely intended to make it akward, difficult, or impossible to include in alternative platforms.
Sorry, Brad, but I don't trust you.
So far they have made more than $5 payments. If they had used the money they could have made better products!!
MS has had no commitment, thus contiuning nothing is meaningless.
They have yet to developed anything resembling innovation, much 'vital innovation'.
What a joke.
Pundits will argue that Microsoft could have saved itself decades of lawsuits, antitrust actions, and billions of dollars in settlements if these principles were adopted 20 years ago. They may be right about that, but put in the same position they probably would have made the same decisons that Microsoft execs did years ago. Others will sneer that this is just a PR move and there is no real substance here. I disagree. Microsoft has changed dramatically. Microsoft is already living these principles today, and has committed to honoring them in the future.
I wrote a blog about this today <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2006/07/microsofts_12_p.html" target="_newWindow">http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2006/07/microsofts_12_p.html</a>
slower and slower in releasing their third rate copycat operating
systems. You remind me of someone whose wife has been
caught cheating numerous times, who forgives the past and
then swears to everyone she has changed for the better.
If Microsoft had adhered to these new principles of theirs 20
years ago, they would not have become the near-monopoly they
still are. They might not even be in business any more.
Have a nice day!
but only by THEIR rules..!!
your head..!!
- Media Player
- Internet Explorer
- Instant Messenger
- .NET
- Movie Maker
...and a variety of other items that I consider a waste of my hard drive space without some obfuscated process. If I could install Windows like I can install GNU/Linux I would actually consider using it more. I want the ability to pick and choose everything that is installed on my system.
For the record I have 4 GNU/Linux machines, 2 Macs, and 1 Windows machine.
developing Vista, then I don't thing you will be getting your
money's worth
Maybe the Euro-nutbaskets and the Feds are working from the unfortunate truism that "No one ever lost money underestimating the general public" (E.L. Menken, American).
The charge seems to be lead by the fanatic fringe of Linux Desktop geeks. Yes, Linux is a good server product but its' desktop products - and I have tried ALL of them - suck when compared to MS Office. Their saving grace, of course, is that they are for free.
Another example of you get what you pay for.
Bottom line, the Euro-trash decision was bought and paid for by a consortium of OSS money making companies, IBM, Real Software (now a global double-dipper), and other companies who sensed that they could stab at Microsofts bottom line by pocketing a few bureaucrats - and they succeeded.
Take their argument to it's logical conclusion and MS opens their OS to every company who claims to have a compatible product. Bye bye OS security. Just like FireFox and their endless list of extensions, some of which are known and notorious spyware generators.
Mozilla's response to inclusion of these spyware companies in their list of software suppliers said, "We are aware of this problem.", thanks and goodbye.
Goodbye is right. FireFox in all its' versions, is now gonzo from my system. It was hard enough to get their extension junk off my system without risking yet more by trying any others.
As an informed user, I have also tried most competing OS's while they were still alive. I have avoided Linux because I see no benefit to me in it - a steep learning curve and the lackadaisical attitude towards security of the entire Linux group of products.
It takes an entirely 'new' version of FireFox to alleviate a few security problems? And new versions take MONTHS to appear? Thanks but no thanks.
1. M$ Office is NOT the desktop, it is an application.
2. Windows, Gnome, KDE - These are desktops. That many mistakenly think "windows" is an OS is due to your type of thinking born out of inept cluelesness and lack of understanding.
3. The eu is driven by its own need for money, thats why the large fine. Open Source had nothing to do with it.
4. As to the FF extensions, just who installed them on you system?
5. Be more careful next time you go porn happy and warez hunting and you wont get loaded up with malware.
6. How long between updates? Look at the gaps in IE updates. How long does it take M$ to come out with a new browser. Heck, my three year old kid hit puberty while I waited.
7. Please continue to stay away from Linux as it obvious to me it is way over your intelligence threshold.
8. If Linux's learning curve is over your head no wonder any OS you try is beyond you ability to fathom.
They are still decades behind though.
The negotiate because their unethical business practices force them to.