| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Why MS 'Ruling' Is Dangerous | |
|
||
| Time: 10:35 EST/15:35 GMT | News Source: Wired | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Has Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly helped set the stage for a computing disaster of unprecedented magnitude? She's not the only culprit involved, but her ruling affirming the Justice Department antitrust deal with Microsoft may have devastating results that we'll all come to regret. Regardless of the judge, anyone who seriously thought Bill Gates would ultimately get more than a slap on the hand probably also believes in the tooth fairy and trickle-down economics. But let's set aside the core money issues of the case and think about a different aspect of Microsoft's overwhelming dominance of the PC world -- the potential for a computing-related Armageddon buried within the proprietary code of Microsoft software. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 343 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:02:17 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/11/2002 11:37:19 AM |
|
Just FYI, Mr. Wired "Journalist" Man, Judge Kollar-Kotelly did indeed offer a ruling. No need for the quotation marks. This post was edited by BobSmith on Monday, November 11, 2002 at 11:42. |
| #2 By 20 (24.243.41.64) at 11/11/2002 11:40:51 AM |
|
Man, the liberals are coming out of the woodwork on this one, aren't they? Man, if you'd read Wired, you'd probably think that any corporation that is allowed to do business without close government intervention is a "disaster of unprecedented magnitude" waiting to happen.
No Wired, it's not. This whole case was a big pile of trumped-up BS by the liberal Clinton Administration to attack big business to rally his liberal base. Kollar-Kotelly just stood on the side of justice and American values and agreed that the government persecution of big business is not in the interests of the consumer. In fact, most of today's recession can be attributed to the case first being filed on Microsoft. That's when the technology bubble started to burst. If anything, the TRIAL ITSELF has done so much irreparable harm to the entire US economy that it can't be compared to any minor, if any, damage done my Microsoft. While Microsoft's business style may or may not have cost consumers a couple million over the period of 20 years, the Clinton Inquisition has cost the American public trillions of dollars. If the DOJ should be going after anyone, it should be Clinton and Janet El Reno. |
| #3 By 2960 (156.80.64.132) at 11/11/2002 11:45:41 AM |
|
"In fact, most of today's recession can be attributed to the case first being filed on Microsoft. That's when the technology bubble started to burst. "
Oh, paleeease :) In this _were_ true, then it just solidifies the point that Microsoft is TOO powerful of a monopolist and is dangerous to the world economy. TL |
| #4 By 7797 (63.76.44.252) at 11/11/2002 11:46:50 AM |
|
daz:
"In fact, most of today's recession can be attributed to the case first being filed on Microsoft." Thats not a fact. Its your twisted interpretation of reality and nothing more. The same goes for the rest of your post(s). |
| #5 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/11/2002 11:50:14 AM |
|
"Yet the Microsoft decree ensures that the vast majority of us will continue to use Windows for our important applications, with the critical portions of the system still closed to outside scrutiny."
Oh, so the ruling forces users to use Windows? Um, no. The vast majority of us will continue to use Windows for our important applications because we choose to. The reason I choose to use Windows is that I feel it is the best platform available. That's my choice. Yep, there is choice in the software industry. What's else is wrong with this article? Well, it seems to lack a point. One on side the author says the government is hiding Windows info from the public. On the other side governments are going open source. Funny, these seem to be two opposing ideas to me. Users are forced to accept upgrades? Um, no. Users are given the opportunity to automatically update, to be notified of updates (then go download and install manually), or be notified (then install, because there was a background download), or not use auto updating at all. I'm running the latest bits of Windows XP and Windows 2000 Server and I've yet to have a single update occur that I didn't specifically authorize. I guess that means that the consipiracy theorist are full of it. "Security through obsucrity". Huh? Where'd that come from? The non disclosure of Windows source code is not a security through obsurity technique, it is an intellectual property theft prevention technique. Duh! |
| #6 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/11/2002 11:52:07 AM |
| tgnb, you are employing some great logic yourself. If daz's posts are so full of non facts, then it should be rather easy for you to dispute them. Funny, I haven't seen you do that. I've seen you offer your opinion just as daz has. Perhaps you are the one with a reality perception problem. |
| #7 By 7797 (63.76.44.252) at 11/11/2002 11:58:40 AM |
| BobSmith : you are truly a moron and there is no helping you |
| #8 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/11/2002 12:02:16 PM |
| Hmm, it seems to me that name calling, while extremely immature, is also a Terms of Use violation. It seems that you don't have too much respect for for those that own and operate this site. |
| #9 By 7797 (63.76.44.252) at 11/11/2002 12:09:52 PM |
| BobSmith: I am not calling you a moron, it is a fact |
| #10 By 7797 (63.76.44.252) at 11/11/2002 12:20:56 PM |
|
mhfm:
"Is this how the liberals argue, call evertybody who disagrees with them moron" Is this how morons argue, call everybody who disagrees with them a liberal? Join the moron club This post was edited by tgnb on Monday, November 11, 2002 at 12:21. |
| #11 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/11/2002 12:39:10 PM |
|
Huh? When did the recession start? Sometime in 2000, right? If anything it was Judge Jackson's rulings that was the trigger, not the filing of the suit in 1998. Anyway...
I don't think it is accurate to say that the anti trust case "caused" the recession. I'd say that Jackson's ruling was the straw the broke the camel's back. With or without a case, the Nasdaq of early 2000, was heading for disaster. It would have popped sooner or later. There have been several contributing factors to the current economy. Major bankruptcies or "near misses" have certainly helped in the hurting. Enron, WorldCom, Global Crossings, Adelphia, Qwest, and Tyco to name just a few have had their impact. The faltering airline industry, which was made worse after September 11th, has added more than 100,000 to the jobless count. The ripple effects from that alone are huge. Oh, let's not forget the auto industry with its set of bad business practices. All of those issues just mentioned would have occurred whether Republicans or Democrats were in power. They are the result of greed and foolishness. Wow all of this and I didn't even mention the insane notions of "good business" that the .com folks were perpetuating - get customers at any cost. Profit doesn't matter. Microsoft isn't the only player in the economy. The certainly are a huge player, but they are by no means the only player. |
| #12 By 7797 (63.76.44.252) at 11/11/2002 12:47:55 PM |
|
BobSmith:
Wow, I actually agree with your last post. |
| #13 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/11/2002 12:54:09 PM |
| Lol. So does that make you a moron since you have now agreed with a moron? Or does that mean that I'm not a moron? |
| #14 By 7797 (63.76.44.252) at 11/11/2002 1:03:35 PM |
|
BobSmith: Neither. Even morons make correct statements sometimes.
flawed logic: agreeing with something a moron has said does not necessarily make one a moron This post was edited by tgnb on Monday, November 11, 2002 at 13:04. |
| #15 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/11/2002 1:07:01 PM |
| I didn't make a claim one way or the other. I just asked a few questions. |
| #16 By 7797 (63.76.44.252) at 11/11/2002 1:27:59 PM |
|
BobSmith:
"I didn't make a claim one way or the other. I just asked a few questions." This is what i call "moonwalk behaviour". Trying to back out employing irrelevant technicalities. |
| #17 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/11/2002 1:30:37 PM |
| You aren't worth talking to. |
| #18 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 11/11/2002 2:04:11 PM |
|
daz: "Man, the liberals are coming out of the woodwork on this one, aren't they?"
I find it curious how everything you disagree with is a liberal conspiracy out to get you. "Man, if you'd read Wired, you'd probably think that any corporation that is allowed to do business without close government intervention is a "disaster of unprecedented magnitude" waiting to happen. Actually you'd get that impression reading the Wall Street Journal, what with all this discussion of accounting oversite, SEC and so forth. "No Wired, it's not. This whole case was a big pile of trumped-up BS by the liberal Clinton Administration to attack big business to rally his liberal base." Yep, that pretty much explains the involvement of Orrin Hatch, Robert Bork and Kenneth Starr, etc. etc. etc.. Those god damned liberals just out to get the man! "Kollar-Kotelly just stood on the side of justice and American values and agreed that the government persecution of big business is not in the interests of the consumer." Wow, what incredible spin. Kollar-Kotelly sided with what was written in the law. She made no statement about government persecution of business, instead she focused on what the Justice Department had presented in their case, agreed with those findings and tried to set forth a remedy that corresponded with the points of law addressed. The legal system worked because she made it a point to preclude hereself from bias. "In fact, most of today's recession can be attributed to the case first being filed on Microsoft." In fact, no, it cannot. "That's when the technology bubble started to burst." Actually no, it did not. The case was ended in fall 1999 when the Findings of Fact was issued. After that point the NASDAQ more than doubled in value, the DOW went up another 20-25% or so. The bubble started to come down in March of 2000... The Conclusions of Law was not issued until June of that year. While I do believe the lack of a recovery in the tech market is due in part to the uncertainty surrounding the Microsoft trial, there are many other factors here as well impacting other markets. You may have noticed, but there was also a signifigant nose dive in the markets that occured after 9/11, which I think you'll be hard pressed to blame the liberals for, but I'm sure you will find a way to do so given your pattern of behavior. "If anything, the TRIAL ITSELF has done so much irreparable harm to the entire US economy that it can't be compared to any minor, if any, damage done my Microsoft. While Microsoft's business style may or may not have cost consumers a couple million over the period of 20 years, the Clinton Inquisition has cost the American public trillions of dollars. If the DOJ should be going after anyone, it should be Clinton and Janet El Reno. " I think we can all agree on one thing. It's time you got over losing the 1992 election. |
| #19 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 11/11/2002 2:47:46 PM |
|
Yawn. talking politics is a waste of time on this site. No one ever gives an inch (myself included)... so whats the point.
sodablue - "The bubble started to come down in March of 2000... The Conclusions of Law was not issued until June of that year." BUT, early in 2000... the overwhelming feeling was that the judgement was going to be against Microsoft. SO, the actual day of The Conclusions of Law wasn't as important. It was the dread associated with the inevitable conclusion... that popped the bubble. |
| #20 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 11/11/2002 3:39:15 PM |
|
mooresa56 - "BUT, early in 2000... the overwhelming feeling was that the judgement was going to be against Microsoft. SO, the actual day of The Conclusions of Law wasn't as important. It was the dread associated with the inevitable conclusion... that popped the bubble. "
The bubble was going to pop... that much is a given. Most of what the bubble involved was reinventing the mail-order catalog industry. It was stupid, and it was stupid for people to fall for the idea and throw money into those stocks. I was saying it was stupid as early as 1995, and I could probably say now that I told you so, but I'll be honest... I had my doubts too. 1999 was a huge year for the tech industry. I was involved in y2k preparations, and we spent a boatload. We got rid of obsolete hardware, obsolete systems and so forth. In 2000, when we woke up and everything worked... The end result... Everybody got laid off. Business didn't want to spend on technology that year, because they'd blown their budgets the year prior. At my company we just sat back and waited. This year we've began spending money again, although it's somewhat cautiously. So into 2000 there was nobody driving to spend money on upgrades to software or technology.... and all the downstream companies started getting impacted. Dell, Cisco, Sun, Microsoft, everybody. The consulting companies went belly up. The Systems Integrators went belly up. The Internet bubble was coincidental, although I think hype surrounded it because of the focus on technology spending in the latter half. That is, they went hand in hand. The bubble burst at the same time the tech market downsized. Because of this happening concurrently the two aggravated each other making the overall effect substantially worse. This post was edited by sodablue on Monday, November 11, 2002 at 15:39. |
| #21 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/11/2002 4:19:05 PM |
| That may be true, blue, but you know that it was Clinton's fault that 2000 was the year that came after 1999. :-) |
| #22 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 11/11/2002 4:29:29 PM |
|
BobSmith - Yes, I know... Clinton is also at fault for Monday coming after Sunday.
Thankfully Bush is responsible for Rainbows and Puppies! :-) |
| #23 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/11/2002 4:42:59 PM |
| Rainbows and Puppies? Is there a joke I'm missing? |
| #24 By 2332 (65.221.182.3) at 11/11/2002 5:03:27 PM |
|
#3 - Daz, I think you're hatred of "liberals" has blinded you to some obvious facts.
"This whole case was a big pile of trumped-up BS by the liberal Clinton Administration to attack big business to rally his liberal base." Actually, it was Microsoft's competition, not Clinton, who trumped up a case that had almost no merit to begin with. |
| #25 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 11/11/2002 5:12:56 PM |
|
RMD -
and it was the Clinton Administration that listened to msft's competitors with far-to-open ears... LUSTING at the idea of crucifying BIG BUSINESS. This post was edited by mooresa56 on Monday, November 11, 2002 at 17:13. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 343 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:02:17 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
