Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Government Operating Systems Software United States Windows News

Windows 7 Eyed For Antitrust Violations 290

Posted by Zonk
from the keep-it-on-the-up-and-up dept.
Preedit writes "The committee that oversees Microsoft's compliance with the 2002 antitrust settlement now has its hands on Windows 7. The Technical Committee is checking to see if the software meets the settlement's terms. Among other things, it's looking at whether Windows 7 favors Microsoft apps over third party programs, according to InformationWeek. The story also notes that Vista SP1 includes a number of changes that were added to satisfy the committee. For instance, it eliminates several browser overrides where Vista ignored users' default preferences and automatically launched Explorer. Windows 7 is due sometime around 2010."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows 7 Eyed For Antitrust Violations

Comments Filter:
  • Lost causes (Score:4, Interesting)

    by pembo13 (770295) on Monday March 10, 2008 @02:14PM (#22704962) Homepage
    Microsoft Outlook needs (and loads) MS Word. MS Visual Studio requires MS Office for some of the data aware components to work at all. Windows Media player often "reactivates" all on its lonesome
  • by roadkill_cr (1155149) on Monday March 10, 2008 @02:24PM (#22705160)
    "it's looking at whether Windows 7 favors Microsoft apps over third party programs"

    Doesn't Apple very heavily lean towards Apple software?

    (This isn't starting flaming, this is a legitimate question - what separates Apple from Microsoft in these regards?)
  • Forcing IE (Score:5, Interesting)

    by diodeus (96408) on Monday March 10, 2008 @02:24PM (#22705172) Journal
    "For instance, it eliminates several browser overrides where Vista ignored users' default preferences and automatically launched Explorer."

    Yup, just try clicking on a link in a Messenger conversation with or without Vista. You get IE, like it or not.
  • Re:Lost causes (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gstoddart (321705) on Monday March 10, 2008 @02:25PM (#22705174) Homepage

    Microsoft Outlook needs (and loads) MS Word. MS Visual Studio requires MS Office for some of the data aware components to work at all. Windows Media player often "reactivates" all on its lonesome

    And, a surprising amount of the time after an update My Firefox and Thunderbird clients have to tell me that they're no longer the default applications and do I want to re-enable them.

    For some reason, I find that rather annoying. It was my setting yesterday, just because you patched a vulnerability on Outlook, why have you made it the default application?

    I believe my iTunes has occasionally had to re-assert itself as the default player for audio files on my PC.

    Cheers
  • Re:Who cares (Score:5, Interesting)

    by QuantumRiff (120817) on Monday March 10, 2008 @02:31PM (#22705298)
    You MUST run iTunes
    Hmm.. My ipod I sync with Amarok (on ubuntu). Sure I can't download podcasts and stuff from the itunes store, but it will play any supported media on my player (mp3's).

    My Fiancee has a laptop running windows 2000. Her brand new ipod nano requires version 7.4 of itunes, which won't run on windows 2000. She is doing fine using Winamp!.

    Your logic is completely backwards. If i want DRM'd content from the apple store, I must use itunes, and an ipod. If I don't want to access that content, I don't! Just like if I want DRM'd content from Microsoft for a zune.

    If I want to purchase MP3's legally online, I go to amazon.com, purchase the .mp3 file, and load it onto the player of my choice (including ipods)
  • Re:this is total BS (Score:3, Interesting)

    by psychodelicacy (1170611) <psychodelicacy@gmail.com> on Monday March 10, 2008 @02:46PM (#22705558) Homepage
    I sort of agree with you, except that t seems to me that most places you buy computers sell them with Microsoft software pre-installed. (Unless they're selling Macs, obv.) So a) the average computer user thinks that Windows is the best option (otherwise why would computer manufacturers always ship with it), b) the average computer user gets used to using Windows, and c) the average computer user pays extra for their system because they think they need Windows with it.

    If computers were sold without an OS, and the customer given the choice of buying Windows or having a Linux distro on a free CD, especially if they were buying from one of these places that'll come to your house and set it all up for you, I think Linux would be doing much better. And the consumers would get a better deal.
  • Re:Who cares (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 10, 2008 @03:02PM (#22705874)
    >> If Microsoft had solid competition, there would be no problem.

    Wrong, at the time they had to play by the same rules. MS might have now to obey to a stricter ruleset because they have been convicted.. before that they had to obey the same rules of every other OS provider.

    This leads us to a problem as old as DosShell and DoubleSpace integrated in MS-DOS if not older:
      1) See an OS missing a key feature
      2) Provide an utility which provides that feature
      3) Profit!
      4) Watch a similar utility being integrated in the OS
      5) Bankrupt

    At the same time IE was integrated in the OS, most OS already came with a browser in default inst. If you believe the difference was in the "bundled utility" vs "OS component" thing, Konqueror became a key part of KDE before conviction came.

    I'm not defending M$ practices here, but I just want to note that things are much more grayish than the black vs white you (and many others) want everyone to believe.

  • Re:this is total BS (Score:3, Interesting)

    by psychodelicacy (1170611) <psychodelicacy@gmail.com> on Monday March 10, 2008 @03:07PM (#22705942) Homepage
    I guess the difference is that McDonalds and Coca Cola's products haven't become almost-essential tools for a wide variety of people. I'd have trouble getting a job if I didn't know how to use a computer, and so would a vast number of other people. Knowing the difference between a Big Mac and a Bacon Cheeseburger is less likely to be a feature of my CV. Using a computer is a priority for people, so Microsoft not only has a massive share of the market, it also has a relatively captive audience. Because most computers come with Windows pre-installed, and because Windows is so well-known, that is what most people will use in their workplaces. This encourages them to use Windows at home, too. In contrast, the fact that there's a Coke vending machine in your office doesn't mean that you won't drink Pepsi at home - the choice of drink has no impact on your work efficiency and employability.

    I don't know whether there's an answer to this. Different OSs will always work differently, and most people will learn to use the one that they will encounter more frequently. Getting employers to shift to Linux will never be easy, and until they do, employees will favour Windows as the OS to learn. Microsoft is lucky that, despite the fact that it now faces controls, it managed to manoeuvre itself into a position where people will choose Windows regardless of the fact that there are other free and more efficient options. Isn't legislating against Microsoft now like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 10, 2008 @03:32PM (#22706366)
    The Lost Cause is what way can MSFT go now that Vista has poluted everything.
    Vista is the same as Intel's Itanium.
    Itanium (aka P7) was supposed to replaced the 686 architecture and essentially be the "786". Intel was fortunate. When it because obvious that Paul Thomas and Albert Yu (IIRC. it has been a while) had fucked Itanium up hard, they could just ignore it and let another team (Oregon) move on to a proper 786, and leave iA64 as an alternative architecture.

    However, MSFT has all its eggs in one basket. Since "merging" DOS-based Win9x and WinNT into WinXP, they have only one horse to ride. And with Vista that horse has become lame and diseased. WinNT wasn't the BEST horse but it worked more than not; certainly more than Win9x. However, BVista is fucked and everyone and their Mom knows it. But, once they released Vista to the market place they are stuck with it. And they are stuck with it for all time.

    So, they have to start Windows 7 with the Fucked Up Vista code base, and don't have the luxury of starting with the relatively clean WinXP code base. All the mistakes they made in Vista, we are all going to have to live with for at least a decade if not two.
  • Re:Lost causes (Score:4, Interesting)

    by zachdms (265636) on Monday March 10, 2008 @05:53PM (#22708660) Homepage
    I'll stick my neck out here.


    I wrote most of that code. There's no mechanism by which it could reactivate. Hit me up at zachdms at hotmail dotty com and I'll walk through whatever you think you're seeing.


    Most third party players have tended to be a little lackadaisical when it comes to file association implementations. This is one of the big reasons why the new (easy) Vista file association interfaces (Set Default Programs) are so great. Ask your favorite application to support it if they don't already. I've supplied the basics to a number of third party vendors (WinAMP, VLC, MPC-via-CCCP) to get them up and running on this.

  • Re:Who cares (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Kattspya (994189) on Tuesday March 11, 2008 @10:48AM (#22716264)
    Locking out develepors defeats the whole purpose of an operating system. One fixed bug is not locking out develeopers not when it's a piece of software that microsoft gives away for free.

    If you had numbers supporting you i.e. that the operating system was just an insignificant part of Microsofts buissness or any rational reason why Microsoft would want to piss its market shares away. Some sort of evidence at all would be nice.

FORTRAN is a good example of a language which is easier to parse using ad hoc techniques. -- D. Gries [What's good about it? Ed.]

Working...