On The Insider: Gwyneth Paltrow Goes Country
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 24 of 54:
Next »
« Previous
Please read what I wrote before disagreeing.
I'd said, concerning the media portion of the penalty:
First is the media playing capabilities. It's not the player; Microsoft has to keep supporting the third party applications written for XP as is. Monti could get anything he wanted concerning the player.

You wrote:
They were not onlu required to un bundle the media player.

The media player isn't bundled. It's one use of the media capabilities that are part of the operating system. Other media players could easily be installed on Windows. Microsoft offered to assist that process in the settlement discussions.
Monti wants a version of Windows, call it the "Monti", without media capabilities, as Microsoft reads his order. That's a point of product design.


About the server portion of the penalties, I wrote:
Second [point on which Microsoft feels it can't compromise] is the server IP Microsoft considers trade secrets, the reason for people to buy Microsoft servers.

You commented:
They were ordered to provide greater access to their server api's so the competition would not be forced to play the game with one hand tied behind their backs.

Let's suppose there are server API's that should be available to everyone. Let's suppose further that in addition to the API's there are what Microsoft calls "communications protocols" that are unique to its server software and provide a reason for people to buy.
Microsoft's argument is that no one has any right to the protocols and that Monti wants to make that information available to competitors, with no indication of when any improvements to those protocols can stop being made available.
If Microsoft has described the situation correctly, then its complaints appear valid to me.

There's room for discussion of whether Microsoft is correct in its description of the situation, and what Microsoft may fairly be ordered to give up. But let's start from a clear understanding of the issue, please.
Posted by: Anton Philidor   Posted on: 07/03/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Sorry suckers knew they were too guilty!  Jeff Spicoli | 07/02/04
Oh, come on, you could do a lot better here...  quietLee | 07/02/04
was yer basic trolling..  Jeff Spicoli | 07/02/04
LOL  quietLee | 07/02/04
bah... the money is meaningless  ryusen | 07/02/04
nope  V Sanders | 07/04/04
I hope this doesn't effect Secure Computing  Mike Cox | 07/02/04
affect, mike, affect (nt)  eLurker | 07/02/04
Good for you Mike. (NT)  P. Douglas | 07/02/04
if you switch to toast and deli sandwiches ...  oldskool | 07/02/04
8.0  WhoIsDaMan | 07/02/04
An unsecure 7.0  AbsolutelyNot | 07/02/04
pathetic...  DarbyOhara | 07/06/04
I've said all along  rapson | 07/02/04
A settlement, yes...  Anton Philidor | 07/02/04
One thing  Jeff Spicoli | 07/02/04
The law must be specific and the penalty appropriate  Anton Philidor | 07/02/04
has the law ever been this way though  V Sanders | 07/04/04
Even felons have some rights returned  Anton Philidor | 07/04/04
True, but  Linux User 147560 | 07/04/04
Product design  Rick_K | 07/03/04
Control of product design  Anton Philidor | 07/03/04
companies should retain control over the design of their products  NemesisNL | 07/03/04
Please read what I wrote before disagreeing.  Anton Philidor | 07/03/04
MS should not have paid  Enterprise Analyst | 07/02/04
You just don't get it  mabricen | 07/02/04
rose with new name  Rembrandt Pussyhorse | 07/02/04
Could be  AbsolutelyNot | 07/02/04
MS Broke the Law  Stephen Wheeler | 07/02/04
Hit Gates with such a fine already, that will change MS's behaviour!  oldskool | 07/02/04
Well, hold on there...  quietLee | 07/02/04
Stop smoking crack  Bill_gates_Is_SATAN | 07/02/04
Glad to see you obliged  Expatriate US Geek | 07/02/04
Why bother?  Rick_K | 07/03/04
Correction to you  AbsolutelyNot | 07/02/04
$600M To Fund Further Fight Against MS Scams  claytonmuhler | 07/02/04
They better not spend it at all!  amicus_curious | 07/02/04
ummm  eLurker | 07/02/04
Yep  quietLee | 07/02/04
OOOOO, THAT HADDA HURT!!  Eggs Ackley_z | 07/02/04
I got that right here!  amicus_curious | 07/02/04
recent payouts are dipping into almost 10% of the reserve ...  oldskool | 07/02/04
pocket change  V Sanders | 07/04/04
Not really true  Linux User 147560 | 07/04/04
Makes sense  John L. Ries | 07/02/04
Even better than that  amicus_curious | 07/02/04
Pitiful EU  FilledOut | 07/02/04
EU  Enterprise Analyst | 07/02/04
An American living under the repressive jackboot of the EU tyranny  Expatriate US Geek | 07/02/04
Wrong again!  Linux User 147560 | 07/03/04
And you have lived in the EU for how long?  mlindl | 07/04/04
If you read my post above yours  Linux User 147560 | 07/04/04
A drop in the bucket....  Stewart Cannon | 07/02/04
Microsoft didn't pay the fine yet...  SBArbeit | 07/06/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here