| 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 |
 |
States Show Microsoft Judge a Variation of Windows | |
|
||
| Time: 14:05 EST/19:05 GMT | News Source: Reuters | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Nine states seeking stiff antitrust sanctions against Microsoft Corp showed the judge on Wednesday a commercial version of the Windows operating system that already has removable features -- similar to one of their key demands. Microsoft has said requiring a version of Windows that can be customized by computer makers and rival software companies would fragment the operating system, cripple Microsoft, harm consumers and hurt the entire computer industry. Bill Gates, Microsoft co-founder and chairman, who took the witness stand for a third day, was pressed by a lawyer for the states to say whether the Windows XP "embedded" program demonstrated that a similar home program could be built. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 162 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:20:58 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 531 (66.188.86.105) at 4/24/2002 2:54:29 PM |
|
I've always assumed that the "not technically possible" is referring to modifying the existing Windows code-base to be totally modular, as opposed to re-writing Windows to be modular.
It seems to me that what MS is saying is that "it would be an ungodly huge pain in the ass for us to modify Windows to be modular... we'd have to re-write the whole thing, and take the existing product off store shelves while we do it, all because of the whiney cry-babies who don't know how to make a good product. Oh, did I say that out loud?" |
| #2 By 1295 (216.84.210.100) at 4/24/2002 3:44:42 PM |
|
If anybody plans on commenting on what MS says they sould read Bill Gates' testimony. It spells out exactly why the WON'T do it. Basically they would have to take it off the shelves because the Nine States remedy would make so MS would make no money at all while building the new operating systems.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/trial/mswitness/2002/billgates/billgates.asp This isn't a guy trying to weasle his way out of the remedies... his comments in the huge paper are actually pretty level headed and straight forward. |
| #3 By 1295 (216.84.210.100) at 4/24/2002 3:54:15 PM |
|
If you want a decent piece of reading from his testimony just start at paragraph 181. He starts talking about the remedies one by one.
Its good stuff :) The best part starts at paragraph 231. This post was edited by Mr.Humpty on Wednesday, April 24, 2002 at 15:55. |
| #4 By 61 (65.32.169.133) at 4/24/2002 4:05:15 PM |
|
#6, none the less, those aren't API's. Things like IE, WMP, Windows Messenger, etc... all are API's that will have many apps break.
And btw, the security structure is still there in Home, just that it won't allow Home to do things like joining a domain. There simply are not any applications that are built around these things. |
| #5 By 2332 (129.21.145.80) at 4/24/2002 4:25:22 PM |
|
Can you guys imagine the carnage if Micrsoft were forced to remove IE from Windows?
One of the biggest reasons for IE's success is the fact that it can be used as a component inside other applications. I would venture to guess that 50% of all applications use some kind of IE functionality. Those applications would instantly break if Microsoft was forced to remove IE from Windows. Impossible? Nope. Insane? Yup. |
| #6 By 1989 (32.102.75.240) at 4/24/2002 4:42:12 PM |
|
People mention XP Embedded. Which modules would be included for the home or business user??? When you think about it, very few modules would NOT be included. From what I have seen, not too many people run a large number of apps on an embedded system. Usually it is specialized to run just a few. This post was edited by Lord British on Wednesday, April 24, 2002 at 16:43. |
| #7 By 5444 (208.180.245.59) at 4/24/2002 10:21:37 PM |
|
#5,
Have you played with Embedded at all?? The issues even a to lower then you can imagine. I could classify the Font handleing system in Windows as an application. Or actually any Com componet in windows for that matter. So If I make a moduliar system. who controls what goes in?? the Look and feel of the system. Could and OEM in theory replace the Look and Feel of windows with Netscapes xpcom. And only allowing programs written for xpcom to run?? While I can accept that windows can be moduliar. If I write a HTML renderer as a Com componet and use that both in IE and within the system. That is considered a violation. By using that same logic ninty percent of the UI is in violation of that rule. Who makes the decisions in those cases?? Will MS be allowed to decide which form of the font handler is used. How about a HTML renderer, xml handler, Buttons, run the gambit of the whole GUI based OS. What happens with a embedded module that is missing from the OS that an OEM decides to use, that a developer finds useful for there application. Do they roll there own. I seriously doubt it. Most developers that have apps already made will, have the modules they need on the install disk. But in the long run this will drive up the cost of development. Because I seriously doubt that MS will sell the added bits any cheaper than they do now. so on a per cost development, the consumer will be paying more for each module. Why. because you will be paying for it in each piece of software you buy. A modular system will be inconsistant on what is available to the developer. So either they cut features to meet the new Lower level version of windows. or they buy the modules from MS and install it. Now that cost is passed onto the consumer, Of course you have look at it in the big picuture. If the feature was in the OS already, it cost the developer less money so the cost of the package is cheaper. You also pay for the module once, (when you bought the OS) intead of every time you buy a piece of software. Not to mention Updates and the like. Who would be responsible for issueing the updates of the different modules. MS or the Vendors. Would MS be only responsible for the Modules that are installed on the consumers machine by the OEM and the Developers issue updates from their install?? And what is a Modern day OS suppose to have in it and what isn't it suppose to have in it. Should it handle every file format?? or should that be a plug in depending on what software is loaded on the system. What happens if a Vendor finds that COM and COM+ are contrary to their plans. There are other packages out there. Corba, ORBIT, and several others. how moduliar should windows be. So yes I agree that it is impossible to say the least. there are tons of different technologies that are not compatable. ms HTML renderer compared to Netscapes version or Opera, or any of about 40 others that exist. which would you rather have rendering the HTML in the OS, and XML for that matter as the transistion to that technology is in effect. food for thought. El. |
| #8 By 4209 (163.192.21.2) at 4/25/2002 10:43:26 AM |
| I don't know about you guys, but I have one major application on my network that needs IE to run. It also runs out of IIS on the server side. The reason being because it is easier to program using software or apps that already are part of the OS. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 162 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:20:58 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
