For those who have Windows XP on your system....not sure if you've read this before....
http://www.siliconvalley.com/docs/opinion/dgillmor/dg080301.htm
Now that a federal appeals court has reaffirmed its unanimous decision
that Microsoft abused its monopoly and stifled innovation -- and now
that it's clear that Microsoft has no intention of modifying its
behavior -- it's time for a difficult but necessary step.
The Justice Department and states must quickly seek an injunction
blocking the upcoming release of Microsoft's new Windows XP operating
system, at least as it's currently designed.
This sounds like an extreme move, and in a way it is. But it's vital.
The alternative is further abuse by a company that keeps
demonstrating, in word and deed, utter contempt for the law and fair
competition.
Eight federal judges, many appointed by conservative Republican
presidents, all agree that the company is a lawbreaker and that there
must be remedies to prevent further lawbreaking. Those remedies will
take some time to craft. But in the meantime, Microsoft is trying to
use Windows XP to extend its monopoly power into other areas of
personal-computer software -- and far beyond.
Consider what the company's actions since the original appeals court
ruling June 28:
Microsoft pretended to allow more competition on the desktop by
saying that PC makers could remove the Internet Explorer icon from the
desktop, although not the software code underneath. That's not much of
a concession now, when the Microsoft browser is totally integrated
into the operating system and has an overwhelming market share.
With transcendent hypocrisy, Microsoft complained about the damage
to consumer choice when America Online said it would pay Compaq
Computerfor rights to be the exclusive online service on the desktop
of Compaq PCs. Shortly thereafter, Microsoft re-asserted its
requirement that PC makers give its Microsoft Network at least equal
billing with any other online services.
Microsoft removed the Java environment from XP, thereby breaking
thousands of Web sites that use Java to add features -- such as stock
tickers and other little ``applets.'' Windows XP users who visit those
sites will have to download a huge Java software file to restore the
functionality they've come to expect.
Microsoft will force XP users to sign up for its Passport
authentication system if they want to use key XP features. This is a
dagger aimed at all kinds of other businesses, and despite Microsoft's
claims to the contrary, it represents a potentially massive threat to
customers' security and privacy. Microsoft says it will keep data
private, but it has a horrendous security record -- and a spotty
history of keeping promises.
Microsoft is bundling new products into XP in ways that block
competition, from photography software and instant messaging to video
and audio playback. If customers want to use other vendors' products,
they'll have to jump through Microsoft-designed hoops to set them up.
Microsoft is correctly betting that many people are too afraid of
their PCs to go through the hassle.
Microsoft has added ``code-signing'' measures -- verification,
supposedly, that downloads will be safe -- that could scare computer
users away from using software that competes with Microsoft's
offerings.
Windows XP imposes harsh controls on users to prevent unauthorized
copying of the software. If you reinstall the OS after upgrading your
hardware in ways that Microsoft considers questionable, you'll need
Microsoft's permission.
Microsoft did bow to public pressure in removing -- only from Windows
XP, but not from Office XP, which is now shipping -- the invasive
Smart Tags feature that gave it the ability to mark up and put its own
advertising on other people's Web pages. I predict it will take less
than a year before customers are encouraged, with punitive results if
they don't comply, to accept them in a ``Windows update'' session.
On one level, an injunction against Windows XP is a regrettable idea,
because the new system does offer some genuine improvements. It
finally brings a crash-resistant environment to everyday folks. And
the user interface is better in several ways.
And the damage to the PC makers, who are counting on this release to
restore consumer desire for their products, would be real, if
temporary. But the manufacturers' craven complicity in maintaining the
Windows monopoly suggests they're only getting what they deserve.
Windows XP isn't just an upgrade of the operating system. It's the
linchpin of Microsoft's scarily plausible strategy to control the
Internet just as it now controls desktop computing -- and to put
itself at the center of all manner of future commerce and
communications. It's wrong to allow this unrepentant monopolist to
ignore the law and keep on its predatory path.
A company that had any respect for the law or fair competition would
have taken to heart the appeals court's unanimous June ruling. Such a
company would have realized by now that it couldn't insist on business
as usual, or at least that business as usual had been found to be a
criminal act.
Instead, immediately after the appeals court's June ruling,
Microsoft's top two executives insisted that the court's judgment
would have no impact on XP or other future products and that the
company hadn't done anything wrong in the first place.
Even as it spouts platitudes about wanting to settle the case,
Microsoft will surely pursue its best legal strategy -- stalling for
time. It understands that justice delayed in this situation is truly
justice denied.
The antitrust cops are the only people with sufficient clout to make a
difference at this stage. Do they understand that it may be too late
to remedy much of anything once Windows XP is on 100 million computers
and Microsoft has another $10 billion in its checking account?
Do they have the spine to do the right thing?
Let's hope so.
http://www.siliconvalley.com/docs/opinion/dgillmor/dg080301.htm
Now that a federal appeals court has reaffirmed its unanimous decision
that Microsoft abused its monopoly and stifled innovation -- and now
that it's clear that Microsoft has no intention of modifying its
behavior -- it's time for a difficult but necessary step.
The Justice Department and states must quickly seek an injunction
blocking the upcoming release of Microsoft's new Windows XP operating
system, at least as it's currently designed.
This sounds like an extreme move, and in a way it is. But it's vital.
The alternative is further abuse by a company that keeps
demonstrating, in word and deed, utter contempt for the law and fair
competition.
Eight federal judges, many appointed by conservative Republican
presidents, all agree that the company is a lawbreaker and that there
must be remedies to prevent further lawbreaking. Those remedies will
take some time to craft. But in the meantime, Microsoft is trying to
use Windows XP to extend its monopoly power into other areas of
personal-computer software -- and far beyond.
Consider what the company's actions since the original appeals court
ruling June 28:
Microsoft pretended to allow more competition on the desktop by
saying that PC makers could remove the Internet Explorer icon from the
desktop, although not the software code underneath. That's not much of
a concession now, when the Microsoft browser is totally integrated
into the operating system and has an overwhelming market share.
With transcendent hypocrisy, Microsoft complained about the damage
to consumer choice when America Online said it would pay Compaq
Computerfor rights to be the exclusive online service on the desktop
of Compaq PCs. Shortly thereafter, Microsoft re-asserted its
requirement that PC makers give its Microsoft Network at least equal
billing with any other online services.
Microsoft removed the Java environment from XP, thereby breaking
thousands of Web sites that use Java to add features -- such as stock
tickers and other little ``applets.'' Windows XP users who visit those
sites will have to download a huge Java software file to restore the
functionality they've come to expect.
Microsoft will force XP users to sign up for its Passport
authentication system if they want to use key XP features. This is a
dagger aimed at all kinds of other businesses, and despite Microsoft's
claims to the contrary, it represents a potentially massive threat to
customers' security and privacy. Microsoft says it will keep data
private, but it has a horrendous security record -- and a spotty
history of keeping promises.
Microsoft is bundling new products into XP in ways that block
competition, from photography software and instant messaging to video
and audio playback. If customers want to use other vendors' products,
they'll have to jump through Microsoft-designed hoops to set them up.
Microsoft is correctly betting that many people are too afraid of
their PCs to go through the hassle.
Microsoft has added ``code-signing'' measures -- verification,
supposedly, that downloads will be safe -- that could scare computer
users away from using software that competes with Microsoft's
offerings.
Windows XP imposes harsh controls on users to prevent unauthorized
copying of the software. If you reinstall the OS after upgrading your
hardware in ways that Microsoft considers questionable, you'll need
Microsoft's permission.
Microsoft did bow to public pressure in removing -- only from Windows
XP, but not from Office XP, which is now shipping -- the invasive
Smart Tags feature that gave it the ability to mark up and put its own
advertising on other people's Web pages. I predict it will take less
than a year before customers are encouraged, with punitive results if
they don't comply, to accept them in a ``Windows update'' session.
On one level, an injunction against Windows XP is a regrettable idea,
because the new system does offer some genuine improvements. It
finally brings a crash-resistant environment to everyday folks. And
the user interface is better in several ways.
And the damage to the PC makers, who are counting on this release to
restore consumer desire for their products, would be real, if
temporary. But the manufacturers' craven complicity in maintaining the
Windows monopoly suggests they're only getting what they deserve.
Windows XP isn't just an upgrade of the operating system. It's the
linchpin of Microsoft's scarily plausible strategy to control the
Internet just as it now controls desktop computing -- and to put
itself at the center of all manner of future commerce and
communications. It's wrong to allow this unrepentant monopolist to
ignore the law and keep on its predatory path.
A company that had any respect for the law or fair competition would
have taken to heart the appeals court's unanimous June ruling. Such a
company would have realized by now that it couldn't insist on business
as usual, or at least that business as usual had been found to be a
criminal act.
Instead, immediately after the appeals court's June ruling,
Microsoft's top two executives insisted that the court's judgment
would have no impact on XP or other future products and that the
company hadn't done anything wrong in the first place.
Even as it spouts platitudes about wanting to settle the case,
Microsoft will surely pursue its best legal strategy -- stalling for
time. It understands that justice delayed in this situation is truly
justice denied.
The antitrust cops are the only people with sufficient clout to make a
difference at this stage. Do they understand that it may be too late
to remedy much of anything once Windows XP is on 100 million computers
and Microsoft has another $10 billion in its checking account?
Do they have the spine to do the right thing?
Let's hope so.
Facebook
Twitter