| 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 |
 |
Microsoft Judge Wants Compromise | |
|
||
| Time: 09:10 EST/14:10 GMT | News Source: Associated Press | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
The federal judge hearing the Microsoft antitrust case ( news - web sites) wants lawyers for Microsoft and nine states to focus on modifying competing penalty proposals rather than argue about their differences. "Prioritize the various provisions in your own remedy proposal, indicating which provisions are integral to the proposal's effectiveness and which are less significant," U.S. District Judge Kollar-Kotelly told both sides in an order Tuesday. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 305 Last | Next |
The time now is
12:02:30 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 2459 (24.206.97.178) at 6/19/2002 11:07:13 AM |
| Didn't Bill Gates basically do this with his written testomony? It was pretty thourough, and covered the shortcomings of the States' proposal in extreme detail. |
| #2 By 20 (24.243.51.87) at 6/19/2002 11:51:08 AM |
|
Let's see if we can guess the items for the Stats and their priorities?
(item, priority 1-10, 10 = highest)) "No freedom for Microsoft at all for any reason", 10 "Whatever is worst for consumers and raises prices", 10 "Whatever benefits MS's competitors", 10 "Whatever is completely ludicrous and has no bearing in reality", 9 "Whatever benefits consumers", -1 |
| #3 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 6/19/2002 1:56:53 PM |
|
As I recall sodajerk and the anti-MS crowd were pretty insistent last month that the states were going to win their case and get everything they asked for.
We'll see if how close reality is to that dream. :) |
| #4 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/19/2002 2:04:58 PM |
| I never said they'd get everything they asked for, but that's never stopped you from lying. Let me speak for myself, soda. |
| #5 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/19/2002 2:05:14 PM |
|
Time to kick the server! This post was edited by sodajerk on Wednesday, June 19, 2002 at 16:02. |
| #6 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/19/2002 2:05:30 PM |
|
..and kick it twice for good measure! This post was edited by sodajerk on Wednesday, June 19, 2002 at 16:02. |
| #7 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/19/2002 2:23:59 PM |
| I never said they'd get everything they asked for, but that's never stopped you from lying. Let me speak for myself, soda. |
| #8 By 61 (65.32.168.97) at 6/19/2002 2:55:52 PM |
|
Realist: These days, WHATEVER Microsoft does with Windows is said to be illegal.
How do you define what is illegal, and what is making Windows to have the same features as other OS's (media player, instant messaging, movie editing, i-net browsing, etc...) so it CAN compete in the marketplace? Whenever Microsoft adds features to Windows, people scream monopoly, and how Microsoft is leveraging it in order to gain a foothold in other markets, but other OS's have the same features (often much more advanced versions, because if MS added the advanced form in, they would be in even more trouble than just adding basic features). Everyone says that Microsoft charges too much money, however, Microsoft is often the cheaper alternative to other products (namely in their server products). Just for your reference, it is EVERY companies goal to make money and to grow. In order to make more money and to get bigger, these companies have to please the consumers, because without the consumers, no one is buying their products/services, and therefore the company can not survive as it is not generating revenue. Microsoft is no different then any other company other then the fact that Microsoft is bigger and has more money than most of it's competitors (not all, though). Basically, since Microsoft is the big-dog, and everyone ALWAYS routes for the under-dog, Microsoft can never win, whatever they do is wrong/illegal. This is what most inteligent people would call plain stupidity and is just flat out wrong. Get a life. This post was edited by CPUGuy on Wednesday, June 19, 2002 at 15:48. |
| #9 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 6/19/2002 4:33:27 PM |
|
I smell a weasel, sodajerk is backing down from his claim the states would win the case outright.
Interesting... CPUGuy - Right on! |
| #10 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/19/2002 4:56:26 PM |
|
No, soda, see you are too wrapped up in MS's crap to understand that they already lost. What I said was the settlement would be rejected and some of the state's proposals would have to be accepted, and that it would be ridiculous to believe that any judge would say the settlement is adequate.
Did I argue with you over and over agin about certain remedies that I, myself, don't agree with? Sure, but I argued because I wholly believe in the merits of claims of illegal behavior. Your a complete idiot if you think I ever said that the states' proposal would be accepted in full or that it should be. (It's easy enough for me to know this because my own opinion diverged from the states' position as soon as they put together a PFJ--some of it, I simply didn't like; some of it, I knew would never be accepted--like the Special Master, for example.) |
| #11 By 61 (65.32.168.97) at 6/19/2002 11:56:05 PM |
|
Realist:
All sucessful companies have money in the bank, the more sucessful, the more the money that is available. That money is for things like a rainy day, pursuing intrests in other markets, buying out companies in order to add another division to Microsoft Corp. You forget to mention that the price of Windows has not changed since the release of Windows95! Microsoft certainly did not have a monopoly on the market then, seeing where as it was the beginning of true desktop operating systems coming around. Previous versions of other OS's didn't cut it for a wide-spread desktop market (ie, was too hard for the people who are scared of computers). Since then there has been drastic improvments to Windows, as well as other, competing products, and yet, the price STILL remains the same. Explain that, why don't you? Please give me any other company that does not make the same kind of remarks within the executive ranks. To think that any other company is ANY different is crazy and outright stupid. The only difference here is Microsft is the big boy and everyone wants a piece (especially Microsoft's competitors). You may have not gone out and said that Microsoft is not aloud to add features (or maybe you have, but don't think of it the same way), but many have. Microsoft ships Windows with IE, the developers rejoice for creating a common API that they can use in their own apps in order to incorporate certain features in their own apps. Microsoft starts writing help files in HTML which is much more versatile for that sort of thing. Consumers have a new user interface that is more browser-like, as well as support for the internet right out of the box. And guess what, EVERY SINGLE other OS developer starts shipping a browser with their own OS. Yet it is still said the motive that MS did this was simply to "kill" Netscape, and that there was no technical advatage for Microsoft doing this (when, obviously, there was). Microsoft makes Windows Media Player more advanced than the older versions, we now get great support for digital media right out of the box.... but what does Real Networks do? They say that Microsoft "broke" Real Player ,which may or may not have happened to much older versions of Real Player, Pre-G2, due to API changes, but has not been proven. People say that the reason Microsoft gained almost total market share with IE was because it was integrated into the OS, however, WMP was integrated into the OS and that didn't trigger the same effect. I know many non-technical people who still go out and download WinAMP or Sonique.... same sort of thing goes for Windows Messenger. Including all these things have been said to be illegal, and done purely to gain market share, however, there are great benefits to both developers and the end-users as a result of these things. Every single thing that Microsoft adds to the OS is said to be illegal... smart tags, cd-burning, light support for mp3-encoding (light meaning restricted due to licensing costs that people say is free, open, and non-proprietary, which is all wrong) then removing of the mp3-encoding, removal of Java, re-instatement of Java... and the list goes on, and on, and on. Anyway, now this short post has turned into a long rant. This post was edited by CPUGuy on Wednesday, June 19, 2002 at 23:56. |
| #12 By 20 (24.243.51.87) at 6/20/2002 2:07:35 PM |
|
#24: Come on. The States remaining are only the Paid Employees of Microsoft's "competitors" who can't really compete in the marketplace, so they must sue and buy off politicians.
The DOJ had their case, they won and they gave MS their "punishment" in the form of a settlement. The States don't want justice, they want to cripple MS so MS' competitors can rush in and exploit the void. You think MS is screwing over consumers? They haven't raised the price of Windows since Windows 95. Think of how much your life would suck if there were Sun Microsystems desktops with Novell NetWare servers. Dear Lord! MS has agreed to do some things and stop doing others. Beyond that, the States just want to unfairly take away MS intellectual property, prevent them from competing like everyone else, and screw them so hard, it'll take them years to come back, where, in the meanwhile, Sun, Novell, AOL, and others will screw the consumers so hard, they won't know what happened to their paychecks. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 305 Last | Next |
The time now is
12:02:30 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
