Perhaps the next time Brad Smith heads to Brussels, it will be for a vacation.
After years of wrangling with Microsoft, the European Commission announced an accord with the software giant Wednesday on several fronts that seems poised to put an end to its antitrust concerns with Redmond.
Brad Smith
(Credit: Microsoft)In the wake of the announcement, I spoke to Smith, Microsoft's general counsel, about the decision, what it means for the future of Windows, and whether the company sees its spot on the antitrust hot seat now being taken up by other companies, including Google.
Here's an edited transcript of our conversation:
Q: Is this really it as far as Europe is concerned?
Smith: This is definitely a major milestone for Microsoft. Today's announcement reflects a broad set of agreements that really address a wide array of issues. At the same time, we obviously need to keep our eye on the ball. Antitrust issues will continue to be important for us, just as they are going to continue to be important for a number of other leaders in our industry. We're going to have to do an excellent job implementing these agreement. We are going to have to do an excellent job addressing any new issues that arise in the future. Having said all that, I also think it is fair to say, as Commissioner [Neelie] Kroes did when she spoke in Brussels, this does represent the closing of one chapter and gives us the opportunity to open a new chapter. We're definitely enthused about that opportunity and we're committed to ensuring the next chapter is a positive and constructive one.
One of the things that Steve Ballmer talks a lot about in terms of antitrust issues is getting legal clarity on what one can and can't do. Do you feel like you now have that understanding with the EU?
Smith: I think this gives us a great deal more clarity. I think it gives the industry as a whole more clarity. It's perhaps most helpful in the area of interoperability because it really implements a new framework. It applies to a broad array of Microsoft products--Windows, Windows Server, Exchange, SharePoint--and for all of these products it has certain principles that we have to adhere to. It addresses the way we implement file formats.
At the same time, no advance on any single day can ever answer all questions for all companies for all time.
Essentially the EU has said through its very objections that you can't put a media player in Windows and you can't put a browser in Windows. What do you feel Microsoft can include in future versions?
Smith: There are two things to think about. First is what gets included in Windows, and second, what's the right way to address something that is included.
Our basic approach is to include in Windows, software that has APIs (application programming interfaces) that will be beneficial for other applications to call on and use. The browser is definitely an example of that. It's quite probably even more important in that role today than it was, say, when the browser issues first arose in the 1990s. The media player plays a similar role in terms of some broad APIs that are used by a wide variety of other applications.
There are other things that we have put in Windows in the past that don't necessarily involve the same role. A good example of that is Windows Live Messenger. We had Windows Messenger in Windows XP. It's not in Windows Vista or Windows 7 We're trying to make thoughtful decisions about what is included.
Then the second question that arises is how do things get included. How do we document APIs that our browser is using so that other browsers can use them as well? That's part of the U.S. consent decree.
How do we ensure that [computer makers] have flexibility to offer competing choices? How do we ensure that consumers are aware of competing choices and can use them if they wish. That latter part is an area where different governments have chosen different approaches at different times. The U.S. Department of Justice chose one approach in its consent decree. The Korean Fair Trade Commission chose a second approach. The European Commission in the media player case in 2004 chose a third approach. Today's announcement on the browser reflects the European Commission choosing a fourth approach.
Some people have the opinion that as a result of these different antitrust issues, Microsoft really finds itself with one hand tied behind its back as it competes in the battles of today. Do you believe Microsoft in the current antitrust environment competes on an even footing with some of the other Internet giants?
Smith: I do believe it is very important for all technology leaders in our industry to follow the same laws and obey the same rules. The rules don't necessarily apply in the same way when a company has a small market share as it does when a company has a large market share. But there are a number of companies that have large market shares for very important products. We've taken a number of steps to get into line with new legal rules in this field. The law has evolved and we've needed to evolve to address these new obligations.
We do believe our competitors need to play by the same rules. They've often been at the forefront of asking regulators to evolve the law in new directions. Now that the regulators have done so, we believe they need to pay attention as well.
Do you anticipate a period of time over the next few years where Microsoft is more likely to be the subject of antitrust inquiries or the company on the other side of the table for a change?
Smith: I think that we have addressed a very wide array of issues. Perhaps, in part because we were the first company to have to go through these inquiries, at least since the dawn of the PC era. We've probably had to go farther and sooner than other companies have had to do. We're now in an era where a different company seems to be in the headlines for competition law issues, if not every day, at least every month.
I think that what we are going to see in the next decade is this field of law being applied to a wide number of technology leaders that have high market share. We're going to see that, not only in Washington and Brussels, but we're likely to see that in more countries around the world simply because the global economy has evolved.
Have you expressed concerns specifically to Europe or Washington, D.C., about some of Google's behaviors?
Smith: We were very transparent last year when Google entered into its agreement with Yahoo. We felt that that was an illegal agreement that Google had entered into for the sole purpose of preventing Microsoft from becoming a more successful competitor, together with Yahoo, in the search space.
It was only when the Department of Justice informed the parties that it was on the verge of filing suit that Google decided to drop that agreement. We have not been shy about raising concerns when we have them.
It was only a couple hours after you guys settled with Brussels that we heard from D.C. with regards to Intel. When you initially heard that the FTC was filing suit against Intel, did you have feelings of empathy toward what their lawyers are going through, or what were your initial reactions?
Smith: I obviously know from a lot of firsthand experience the challenges that arise when a company needs to address these kinds of issues. Our road was a long one and it had its share of difficult moments. Antitrust issues are never easy for company to address.
This isn't a case where Microsoft has taken a public stance or even voiced to the regulators a position, is it?
Smith: We have not taken any public or nonpublic positions on the issues.
Are you guys looking to reach an agreement with Plurk? You guys said that you used code you shouldn't have? I'm curious if you are trying to negotiate some sort of settlement with them?
Smith: I wouldn't want to say anything that goes beyond the public statement we put out.
It does seem when I look at any particular issue with regards to the Internet, Microsoft tends to have a much more cautious approach. It seems like it is tough to compete when others are bundling more than you.
Smith: I think our goal is to be thoughtful but also fast-moving. As we look at the Internet today, it is increasingly a regulated space. That wasn't the case a decade ago. I think a thoughtful company needs to really think through how its products and services are going to comply with the regulations that are going to be enforced or likely to be applied in many different countries around the world. At the same time, one cannot let that get in the way of moving forward quickly. I think it's striking that balance that is really quite important. One needs to move fast. One shouldn't move faster than speed of thought and yet one shouldn't be so thoughtful that one simply analyzes problems and fails to solve them.
Do you think Microsoft has erred a little too much on side of caution in recent years?
Smith: I don't know that we've erred too much on the side of caution, but I do think it's extremely important we move quickly. This is a very dynamic space it is certain to remain a very dynamic space. Customers are interested in deploying new products and services, whether it is on the client, on the server, or on the cloud. The real key is to develop the capability to be both thoughtful and fast moving.
Google CEO Eric Schmidt is the latest Silicon Valley CEO to draw ire after suggesting that folks seeking privacy might not want to look to the Internet to find it.
"I think judgment matters," Schmidt said, appearing on CNBC (see video below). "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines--including Google--do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities."
In some senses, Schmidt was merely stating the truth about the U.S. law as it currently stands. However his "maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place" comments, in particular, seem to have raised the hackles of privacy advocates and others.
Among the most interesting reactions was a posting on a Mozilla veteran's personal Web page suggesting that users might want to switch to Bing because of its better privacy policy.
"That was Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, telling you exactly what he thinks about your privacy," Mozilla Director of Community Development Asa Dotzler said on his personal blog, referring to the CNBC comments. "There is no ambiguity, no 'out of context' here. Watch the video."
From there, Dotzler shows how one can easily switch Firefox's search engine from Google to Bing, adding, "Yes, Bing does have a better privacy policy than Google."
To be fair, that Patriot Act and other laws apply just as much to Microsoft as it does to Google. Still, I think Dotzler's posting raises some interesting issues. Plus, it's particularly noteworthy that a Mozilla worker is willing to raise the issue given how the lion's share of Mozilla's revenue comes from the Google traffic generated from Mozilla's search bar.
The difference, in my opinion, isn't that Microsoft is somehow subject to different laws than Google, or even that it would behave differently in the face of a government challenge (both companies kowtow in China, for example). Rather, the two companies seem to have a different approach toward privacy issues.
Google's attitude tends to focus on the great benefits that open information can, and often does have. Plus, of course, its stance is an outgrowth of the fact that Google has built its business around gaining revenue by doing the best job of organizing that information.
That shows up in all kinds of ways. Mozilla Developer Relations Director Christopher Blizzard noted in a Twitter posting that sites users visit in Chrome get sent to Google.
"Everyone knows that every site you visit and all address bar searches in Chrome go to Google, right?" Blizzard wrote. (I sent an e-mail to Mozilla seeking its corporate take on things, but did not immediately get a response.)
Microsoft's approach, meanwhile, stems no less from its economic interest, but its zeal is tempered by years of heavy regulation and consumer backlash.
These differences in attitudes, and shifting tides in the center of power in the tech industry, I expect to be major issues in the coming years as regulators and consumers decide where to place their attention.
That said, Schmidt is hardly the first to point out that the idea of privacy on the Internet might be outmoded. "You already have zero privacy. Get over it," former Sun CEO Scott McNealy famously intoned, drawing many of the same criticisms.
Obviously, privacy advocates argue that protections must extend to the Internet. In a blog posting, security expert Bruce Schneier makes a passionate argument, although I think it is interesting that he digs up an essay from 2006 to make his reply.
"Privacy protects us from abuses by those in power, even if we're doing nothing wrong at the time of surveillance," Schneier wrote. "We do nothing wrong when we make love or go to the bathroom. We are not deliberately hiding anything when we seek out private places for reflection or conversation. We keep private journals, sing in the privacy of the shower, and write letters to secret lovers and then burn them. Privacy is a basic human need."
So what do you think? Is privacy a basic human need, or a quaint, outdated notion, or is it, paradoxically, both of those things?
Navteq announced a partnership Monday under which it will supply 3D map data for Microsoft's newly expanded mapping online services.
Last week, Microsoft took its first steps building 3D imagery into Bing Maps with data from about 100 cities to start with in the Streetside feature that gives a driver's-eye view of the world. But slogging down innumerable streets the world over is an arduous process--Google has been doing it for years with Street View and still has a ways to go to add its first data, not to mention the challenge of keeping views up to date.
... Read more
SAN FRANCISCO--Although Microsoft would rather everyone ran out and bought a Windows Mobile phone, the software maker is aware of reality. And, since it wants people to use Bing on their phones, it knows it needs to have software that works on other devices.
"Everyone understands the popularity and the pervasiveness of the platform," said Microsoft principal group program manager David Raissipour, following a Bing event Wednesday. "We are actively working on it."
Raissipour confirmed Microsoft is working on a mobile Bing application that will combine a number of features--more than just mapping and search. However, he declined to say what all of those features are or when the software will be ready.
I probed as to whether some of the cool mapping technology Microsoft showed on Wednesday might make it onto phones. Raissipour said such mapping requires a rich platform, but could potentially be done without Silverlight, if necessary. So, what about the iPhone?
"It's certainly possible," Raissipour said. "That's a rich platform."
Microsoft already has native mobile applications for many Windows Mobile phones, BlackBerry devices, and a number of Verizon feature phones. The company is also exploring what it might be able to do on Android, particularly on non-Google branded Android devices. In the meantime, the company has its mobile m.bing.com Web site.
I also had a chance to catch up with overall search engineering chief Satya Nadella to ask some overall Bing questions.
In particular, I wanted to see just how many people are actively choosing to go to Bing.com, as opposed to just searching via MSN or a browser tool bar. With Bing's predecessor, Live Search, very few people actually went to the Live.com page.
"It's still a small percentage," Nadella said, but noted that it has succeeded in getting a fan base, which was a key early goal of the product.
When it comes to the data that Microsoft is including at the top of some search results, in general, Nadella said Microsoft is not paying for the content, nor are companies paying to get their information included.
The benefit to Microsoft is that it displays more useful results while content providers get a link high up in the results page. "It's kind of like SEO [Search Engine Optimization] for structured data," Nadella said. As for those new mapping abilities, I encourage you to check them out for yourself and read . In addition, though, here's a video I did with Microsoft's Blaise Aguera y Arcas, where he walks through the new features.
SINGAPORE--In a year, most enterprises will have the choice to "get rid" of Microsoft Office if they so choose, suggests Dave Girouard, president of Google's enterprise division.
Girouard said in an interview here with ZDNet Asia that he expects Google's online suite of applications, Google Docs, to reach a "point of capability" next year that it will serve the "vast majority's needs."
He acknowledged that Docs is currently "much less mature" than Google Mail or Calendar. "We know it. We wouldn't ask people to get rid of Microsoft Office and use Google Docs because it is not mature yet," he said.
But this is expected to change in about a year, after the company's introduces another "30 to 50" updates.
Read more of "Google: Firms can 'get rid' of Office in a year" at ZDNet Asia.
Microsoft said Monday that it's cutting by a third the subscription prices for the hosted versions of Exchange, Sharepoint, and Office Communications Server.
The software maker plans to cut the monthly per-user cost of licensing all three products from $15 to $10, while the cost of licensing individual products is also dropping by as much as 50 percent. The move comes as Microsoft faces continued pressure from rivals, including Google.
Capossela
(Credit: Microsoft)Last week, the city of Los Angeles voted to go ahead with a deal to shift many employees to Google Apps from Microsoft Office.
In an interview, Microsoft Vice President Chris Capossela said the move has less to do with competitive pressure than that "it's the price that customers are really excited to buy our suite at."
,p> "We're pretty excited about the price and not so much focused on free services or the price Google or others might charge," Capossela said.In addition to the price drop, Microsoft is also touting several new customers and announced its plan to bring the year-old Microsoft Online services to more than a dozen new countries.
The company is announcing its commercial launch in Singapore, as well as trials in Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Czech Republic, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Israel, Malaysia, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Poland, Romania, and Taiwan. Microsoft also expects to have commercial availability in India later this year.
Among the new customers are McDonalds, Aon, Lions Gate Entertainment, and Rexel Group. They join existing customers, such as Blockbuster, Coca-Cola and Autodesk as those paying Microsoft to run hosted versions of its products. Microsoft formally launched Microsoft Online at a San Francisco event a year ago.
Next week, Microsoft will also formally launch Exchange 2010 at its TechEd Berlin developer event. Microsoft said last month that it had finalized the product. Traditionally, Microsoft has developed products first as a server and only later, if at all, customized them to run in hosted form.
Exchange 2010, though, was designed first as an online service and then crafted into a product that businesses can run on their own servers.
Programmers have mostly overcome a crucial hurdle to releasing a beta version of Chrome for the Mac, printing support, but several Windows 7 features won't make the cut for the present 4.x version of Chrome.
The Mac printing support is now added, according to the Google browser's issue-tracking system, though there are "minor remaining issues" and the new features aren't yet distributed with the software.
Google has cited Mac printing support as one holding back a Mac version of the browser. Mac support is important for the company's ambitions to spread the browser and its fast-Web philosophy to mainstream users. The Linux version, while less mainstream now, also is important since it's the foundation of Google's Chrome OS project to build a browser-based operating system for Netbooks.
But on the Windows side of the shop, a number of planned features to support Windows 7 were pushed back to the next version Chrome on Wednesday. That includes support for showing thumbnails of open tabs on the task bar, showing "jump lists" for quick actions such as links recently or frequently visited pages, pinning thumbnails to the task bar, and overlaying a download progress status bar on the Chrome icon.
The present beta and stable releases that Google issued Monday, Chrome version 3.0.195.27 (download for Windows only), are members of the 3.x family. The developer preview is in the 4.x family (download for Windows or Mac OS X). The Windows 7 features had been slated for the 4.x series, but now are planned for version 5, according to the issue-tracking system.
The change doesn't indicate the features have retreated into the distant future, though; Chrome version numbers change relatively rapidly, as evidenced by the move to version 4 in just over a year.
Also pushed back to the 5.x series is built-in support for discovering when Web pages have RSS feeds, one of Chrome's most-requested features. Its absence is ameliorated by a Chrome sample extension for RSS, though.
Extensions remain a work in progress. New ones are arriving steadily, and existing extensions such as Lastpass for filling in passwords and forms and AdSweep for blocking ads is progressing. But Google recently switched interfaces, dropping the use of a toolstrip across the bottom of the browser with pop-up "moles" in favor of browser actions, small icons along the top of the browser.
Microsoft's top lawyer said that a tentative agreement with Brussels announced earlier Wednesday could potentially allow the software maker to move out of the regulatory crosshairs, perhaps paving the way for regulators to shift their attention elsewhere.
"It's important for us to get closure in Europe on issues that have obviously been controversial for over a decade," General Counsel Brad Smith said in an interview. "Today's decision takes us an important step closer to doing that."
Smith
(Credit: Microsoft)Microsoft initially took a much different approach to the European Commission's assertion that the inclusion of a browser in Windows violated antitrust law. The company had initially proposed just stripping out the browser from Windows 7 entirely, leaving users the prospect of trying to get a browser on their own. The software maker eventually backed down after indications that that approach was unlikely to fly.
While not final, Microsoft's moves would appear to resolve all of its outstanding regulatory issues with the Commission and were greeted warmly by regulators on Wednesday.
Although most of the early attention focused on the agreement around a browser "ballot screen," Microsoft also announced on Wednesday an agreement around product interoperability. Under that deal, a 10-year commitment by Microsoft, the software maker agrees to publish communication protocols and adopt certain standards as part of Windows, Windows Server, Office and other high market share products. Companies could also purchase for 5,000 euros a warranty that would subject Microsoft to court oversight and monetary penalties if it doesn't live up to its commitments.
Smith said that the approach Microsoft took with regard to interoperability was designed to adopt methods that Nellie Kroes, commissioner for competition, had outlined in a speech last year for how companies with high market share products should behave.
"I actually think this in effect implements the model that the Commission has been advocating," Smith said. Moreover, he said it is a model that other software companies should pay attention to, he said, noting that there are lots of companies that have high market share. He noted that Google has 78 percent of the paid search market and IBM has 100 percent of the mainframe market, while Adobe also has dominant positions in certain areas, such as Photoshop.
"It is important we believe to create a level legal and regulatory playing field," Smith said. "Everyone that has a high market share needs to respect the same set of rules. I think a number of these rules are likely to be applicable to other companies and other products."
Settling now with Brussels also could help Microsoft in its effort to win approval for its search deal with Yahoo, Smith said.
"This certainly isn't going to hurt when it comes to the Yahoo-Microsoft agreement," he said. "It's not necessarily going to make a huge difference. We didn't feel a particular step was needed to help it along."
Microsoft is in the process of trying to ascertain whether the deal needs approval from Brussels or from individual European antitrust authorities. It also needs approval from U.S. regulators, who have asked for more information on the deal.
Microsoft on Thursday lashed out against Google Chrome Frame--an Internet Explorer plug-in that supplants IE's rendering engine with Google's.
The software maker, in a statement, said users are better off moving to a later version of Internet Explorer if they want the latest technology as opposed to using Chrome Frame.
Google plans to use Chrome Frame to, among other things, allow people to run Google Wave from within Internet Explorer.
(Credit: Google)"With Internet Explorer 8, we made significant advancements and updates to make the browser safer for our customers," Microsoft said. "Given the security issues with plug-ins in general and Google Chrome in particular, Google Chrome Frame running as a plug-in has doubled the attach area for malware and malicious scripts. This is not a risk we would recommend our friends and families take."
However, some took Microsoft to task for criticizing plug-ins, noting that Redmond itself has more than a few.
"Microsoft scared of security of plug-ins. Uninstall Silverlight now," Mozilla's Dion Almaer wrote in a Twitter posting.
Google announced Chrome Frame on Tuesday, saying it can be used with Internet Explorer 6, IE7, or IE8 to use Chrome to render Web pages and execute their JavaScript programs. To work, users have to install the plug-in and Web developers must insert a line of code onto their Web sites that engages Chrome Frame when a person visits the site.
Update, 12:35 p.m. PT: I had a chance to chat with Amy Barzdukas, general manager for IE.
In addition to reiterating the security risks associated with running what she called "a browser within a browser," Barzdukas said that using Chrome Frame also interferes with the private-browsing and clear-browser-history features within Internet Explorer 8.
"That is not made clear," Barzdukas said. "That is a trade-off that customers would really want to make with eyes wide open."
Barzdukas also rejected the notion that it offers a good option for those still using Internet Explorer 6.
"If you are a user of IE6, you should get off IE6, not install another add-on," she said. "It just compounds your problem."
Update 3:20 p.m. PT: Google offered up a statement on its own, explaining its thinking behind Chrome Frame.
"Google Chrome Frame is an open source plug-in that is currently in an early developer release and was designed with security in mind from the beginning," Google said. "While we encourage users to use a more modern and standards compliant browser such as Firefox, Safari, Opera or Google Chrome rather than a plug-in, for those who don't, Google Chrome Frame is designed to provide better performance, strong security features, and more choice to both developers and users, across all versions of Internet Explorer."
Although it does increase the surface area, Google notes it brings some security features of its own, particularly for those running IE6. "Accessing sites using Google Chrome Frame brings Google Chrome's security features to Internet Explorer users, providing strong phishing and malware protection (absent in IE6), robust sandboxing technology, and defenses from emerging online threats that are available in days rather than months," Google said.
Microsoft's new Bing search service is the fastest-growing U.S. search engine among the top 10, according to a Nielsen report released Monday.
The total amount of searches on Bing rang in at 1.1 billion for the month of August, a leap of 22.1 percent over July, winning Microsoft a 10.7 percent share of the search engine market.
Google remained in the top spot with a commanding 64.6 percent share, accounting for 7 billion searches in August, a gain of 2.6 percent over July. Yahoo saw its search results drop 4.2 percent for the month to 1.7 billion, earning it 16 percent of the market.
(Credit:
Nielsen)
Other players in the top 10 included AOL Search in fourth place with 333 million searches and Ask.com Search in fifth with 186 million searches.
Similar studies have also seen a boost in Microsoft's search business. An August report from ComScore discovered that Microsoft's share of the global search engine market lept 41 percent from July 2008 to July 2009. Bing was introduced in May, taking the place of Microsoft's Live Search.
Earlier this week, Microsoft showed off a "visual search" feature for Bing that returns thumbnail images for at least some search results. Microsoft reportedly will be debuting a Bing 2.0 sometime soon sporting a variety of new features.
