|
|
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
©1997/2004, Active Network. All
Rights Reserved.
Layout & Design by
Designer Dream. Content
written by the Active Network team. Please click
here for full terms of
use and restrictions or read our
Privacy Statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time:
12:52 EST/17:52 GMT | News Source:
CNET |
Posted By: Robert Stein |
Microsoft this summer will institute some changes to Windows XP as part of a settlement agreement meant to benefit consumers and increase competition. But some state trustbusters and Microsoft's chief rivals aren't convinced that those changes go far enough. The software maker says it plans to start testing Windows XP Service Pack 1 as early as next month, with a final release slated for late summer. The update will introduce support for Mira wireless devices and the Freestyle digital media interface.
More importantly, the update will let consumers and PC makers remove access to about a half-dozen of Microsoft's so-called middleware technologies integrated into Windows XP.
The capability was mandated by Microsoft's settlement with the U.S. Justice Department and nine of 18 states that brought an antitrust suit against the software colossus.
In theory, this change means programs from AOL Time Warner, RealNetworks and other companies could get prominent placement in Windows XP over similar Microsoft technologies, creating more consumer choice and increasing competition.
|
|
#26 By
2459 (66.25.124.8)
at
4/6/2002 1:19:37 PM
|
Sodajerk: "... a company that provides a platform for other markets, some of which the company itself is in and some of which they want to get in... There is no such company that is suh an octopus as Microsoft."
---------------------
I think Apple and Sun are examples of the above.
Apple provides a platform, OS X and the Mac hardware. Apple also produces software that is targeted at the same markets as existing third-party Mac software. Apple has gotten into new markets (Newton(old), iPod) and want to get into others (servers, professional video editing).
Sun provides a platform, Solaris, Java, hardware. They produce software for their platform and others where similar software exists (server software, dev tools). They want to get into new markets (StarOffice, cell phones, PDAs, National ID cards, and wherever MS goes).
The Sun example is a little crude, but I didn't have as much as I initially thought to go on. I mean, what the hell do they do these days besides promote Java, sell expensive hardware, bash other companies, and follow/sue MS ? :-)
--------------------
Sodajerk: "Shared things can stay. It's a simple principle that I think should stand as a technology tying standard. Anything that can be shared should reside as a distinct "module." And yes, it means you'll keep that stuff installed."
---------------
In some cases the executable, itself, is a shared component. Depending upon the functional implementation of an application, it may directly call an exe of an included program. If the exe is not found, the app may break (most likely nothing big in this case, but expected functionality is lost). However, in most cases where WMP or IE, etc., are concerned, most, if not all major functionality is contained in dlls that are provided for developers to take advantage of the available functionality. The exe simply exposes the functionality in a Microsoft inplementation. In most cases the exe can be removed, but what real benefit is obtained when the average exe size is 500 KB?
I still think it comes down to the fact that MS creates a product like other companies. It sells because people derive value from it. Product design and definition should remain only with Microsoft as it should with anyone elses property. If they screw up too much, they will suffer through lower sales. Years ago, people thought IBM and Intel couldn't have any competition.
I look at Microsoft's market expansion as being comparable to Asian companies. Companies like Sony and Mitsubishi are in everything from cars, to banking, to electronics, and many submarkets of those markets, yet this is accepted. Other American companies also do this, yet the perception only changes when MS does the same thing.
|
#27 By
3339 (64.175.40.60)
at
4/6/2002 7:40:55 PM
|
RMD, that was a joke about the Xbox, but whatever... Personally, I think it's rather remarkable how they chiseled their way into a 3 way competition. I do think over the next couple of years all three will be doing just fine with worldwide numbers putting XBox towards the back (And being close to Nintend #s is still far behind Sony). And if Microsoft doesn't significantly transform the market in two/three years, the XBox would be a subsidized division of Microsoft... (Maybe that's wishful thinking, but I can't wait for those Microsoft movies!) Anyway, my actual point was: if you don't think there is a point where pricing becomes predatory and that certain companies have the resources to do so and that this doesn't become a crime at some point, well, that's your view of America's economy and laws--I was just putting out a hypothetical.
Enforcer, yes, other platform alternatives have survived... Apple, Sun, Linux... But have these gotten to the point where they are monopolies? And if they did, would you want them to be treated as monopolies?
As for the technology, I'm saying that the company that is supposedly a year or two or three away from delivering the fastest, greatest, easiest crossplatform language, framework, etc..., the ideal object oriented, web oriented, flexible, network aware (and secure) OS and file system, and delivers the finest, most wonderful and popular programs and services--which now with their new technology they should theoretically should be able to bring to any platform (Mac, Solaris, BSD, Linux, etc...)--I don't see why they can't separate an .exe and its .dll functions from a universal API .dll.
|
#28 By
3339 (64.175.40.60)
at
4/6/2002 7:57:33 PM
|
By the way, that was sarcasm. And I don't really have a problem with entering new or competitor's markets or creating new ones, I think ever has its limits though... These days seem especially interesting: Microsoft (what will the XBox 2 have inside?) (and sorta Apple) moving toward GPU development against, and both playing off, ATI and Nvidia, all the chip manufacturers diversifying into new markets; Apple fighting the media industry (mp3, portable and burnable music, mpeg-4)/Microsoft courting the media industry (locks, DRM, Corona); Apple stealing the pro video market to produce a new class of video professional/prosumer; games; services; phone/PDAs; on and on...
|
#29 By
2332 (129.21.145.80)
at
4/6/2002 10:37:41 PM
|
I would comment further on all of this... but I've had a bottle of Rancho Sabaco '99, so I think whatever I would type wouldn't make much sense.
Damn good wine... highly recommended. ;-)
|
#30 By
2332 (129.21.145.80)
at
4/7/2002 4:54:49 PM
|
#65 - Using your "undertanding" of anti trust law... imagine this scenario.
I start a company and I invent something really cool. It's so cool, in fact, I'm the only one who knows how to make it. It quickly becomes a staple of American life, and I quickly become a billionaire.
My company is doing great, so I decide to start adding features to my invention. Alas... since I'm a monopoly, I can't improve my product because... um... hrm... well, because I'm a monopoly.
So, how does your understanding deal with this situation? Is it only when the monopoly is only a sem-monopoly... in other words, when it really isn't a monopoly? Is it only when there is at least some competition? What are the qualifiers?
Again, this is a great example of why it's bad to mix government and business... *unless* you're going 100% socialist.
|
|
|
|
|