A federal matter of fact.
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| dinotrac Nov 06, 2005 11:57 AM EDT |
Not to say anything, especially considering that the current administration has completely dropped the ball on this issue, but... Microsoft was found to violate federal law by abusing it's monopoly on PC desktops. That finding was upheld by a unanimous Court of Appeals. That finding required that consumers be harmed by Microsoft's actions. So, it ain't me, babe, it's two levels of Federal Courts and a unanimous decision that means the Supreme Court would never choose to review it. Microsoft has stuck it to us all. |
| tadelste Nov 06, 2005 12:06 PM EDT |
Dino: I still don't think we have answered the guy's points well. Even in the Intel story, they don't complain about Microsoft, but say Linux is the fastest growing desktop OS and that some say MS will lose market share. In my heart, I know the answer to his question, but it's difficult to argue. I think their behavior is unethical but are we too focused on them? |
| tuxchick Nov 06, 2005 12:17 PM EDT |
"are we too focused on them?" That's a legitimate question. Take a look at the stories visible on the front page now, three contain criticism of Microsoft: Intel®'s Bold Move with Linux™ Comment of the Day- November 6, 2005 What did Microsoft ever do to you? Intel® Linux™ versus Microsoft® Windows out of 30 stories. We don't want to turn into the Ranting Voices of Doom, but 3 out of 30, and two of them are the same story, hardly seems excessive. Out of the next 40 stories, 4 could be considered critical of microsoft, but again two of them are the Intel story. The other two are "IE is dangerous" and "Firefox beats IE." Considering the barrage of lies and propaganda that MS unleashes on a daily basis, I do not believe we are over-doing it. Oh yeah, and we try to tell the truth. |
| tadelste Nov 06, 2005 12:34 PM EDT |
Well, I see some others, but then MySQL and Firefox run on Windows. And since I read all the comments, I see a lot that mention MS negatively. My contention with them has to do with restraint of trade. I question their control of the government. I thought their connection with the BSA and their Software Assurance version 6 was a significant cost during bad financial times in the country and the industry. I don't like the way they compete. They create filters to connect to other people's formats but don't want people connecting to theirs. They make interoperability difficult a la IBM in the 1960's - 1990's. I believe they have a big hand in keeping people from using their computers for watching DVDs and digital movies exacting a bounty unnecessarily. Those are the kinds of things I think we should address as well as information sharing, staying true to Internet RFC's, etc. |
| jimf Nov 06, 2005 1:34 PM EDT |
MS slimy business dealings, the DMCA's infringement of our rights, none of this is new people, it goes well back into the 1800's with the oil and rail barons. MS and the multimedia industry are merely the last in a line of beneficiaries. This all goes back to the head of the dragon, 'Government'. Historically it has taken a huge public outcry to even make the dragon twitch it's ear. Most times an ear twitching is all you will get (notice that the oil barons are still on top). Still, those are the only people that can actually correct the situation at this point. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!