[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[FWD]: my thoughts on MS and the DoJ
To: Members of the Appraising Microsoft List:
Happy Hannukah, Kwanzaa, Ramadan [coming on Dec 31] and Christmas Eve eve
and Happy Winter Solstice to All!
This was sent to me by my "best internet friend" Jorah Lavin..Thought it
on-topic here.The author [fully documented at the bottom of the
post,including info about the list where it was posted ..webdesign-l] is
Steven Champeon <email@example.com>
For your information and any discussion....
You can also reply to the author directly at the address given above
============= begin forwarded message ========================
>I've started to write several different messages over the last few
>weeks, trying to summarize my thoughts about the case, it's specifics,
>the wider implications, and what I hear my friends and other folks
>saying about everything.
>Now that the contempt hearing has been scheduled, and Jesse Berst has
>come out saying that it will be better for MS and everyone if MS loses
>the suit (because it will make them underdogs again, or some such vapid
>nonsense) I feel like I'm ready to talk about it. I'll try to keep it
>short, so we can get some discussion going.
>Here's what I think:
> 1) government interference (especially uneducated gov't interference)
> in the free market is wrong. However, it happens all the time, so
> it may as well be fair. I don't think it is fair for the DoJ to
> decide what MS can put into its OS. However, it is even less fair
> of MS to be developing the OS and apps with such a transparent
> line between them, and hiding behind one or the other side when
> they are challenged. ("It's a browser. It's an OS. It's a browser.
> It's just an icon, the rest are DLLs.") It gets annoying when its
> done in advertising. It faces contempt charges when it is done in
> 2) the MS/Netscape browser war is killing all of us. As Jeffrey Zeldman
> has pointed out on another list, IE and NS have horribly broken CSS
> implementations, and continue to cost us money to do what we need to
> be able to do. Let's focus on the core capabilities and stop spending
> so much time fussing over the useless crap like "push". There's a
> bug in Netscape Nav 3+ whereby a textarea can only contain 30,000
> characters. It's been there for more than a year. Why? Netcaster
> and an ugly GUI redesign took precedence.
> 3) the XML issues looming on the horizon are going to make the MS/DoJ
> suit look like a walk in the park. We're all going to get screwed,
> and we're not going to enjoy it. If MS embraces XML and makes it into
> a proprietary file format, we may as well go back to typewriters.
> 4) MS deserves to spend eternity in Hell (or whatever your favorite
> Place of Eternal Punishment may be) for its insistence on screwing
> with the conventional terminology associated with anything it steals
> from other companies or groups. If MS had its way, the Internet (of
> which little is actually run on Microsoft tools) would have been
> called the "Microsoft Network". If Teledesic happens, it may yet.
> The Explorer icon in Win95? "The Internet". Bookmarks? "Favorites".
> By confusing the distinction between local and network files and
> local and network services, MS makes it harder for the professional
> and amateur alike to know where their content is coming from, and
> for that matter, where it is going. CIFS is a great example of this.
> 5) The current flap over the meaning of "installed" vs. "uninstalled"
> is going to be interesting. If it goes the way I think it probably
> will, MS will get away with being able to leave 99% of MSIE installed
> with Win95/Win98, and users will be able to switch back and forth
> between having an icon on their desktop or not. This makes it hard
> for Netscape to compete, especially with the 20+MB downloads. I
> wonder how the defense is going to deal with this - essentially,
> the appearance or disappearance of an icon on the desktop is a very
> different matter than that raised by the ease of installation issue.
> Put in perspective: it would be the same as having a Netscape Navigator
> shortcut on the desktop removed from or returned to the desktop
> whenever the user "installed" or "uninstalled" it, while leaving the
> .exe files around. Will MS now have to come up with a new term to
> refer to "uninstalling and actually removing the files"? I know for
> sure we will, as administrators and users. But will they?
> I think I'll uninstall Windows95 on my laptop by choosing a new
> desktop graphic that looks like the Mac Finder. What do you think?
> 6) If Microsoft did as much thinking about the strategic importance of
> keeping its OS and applications separate as it does about the nature
> of the desktop market and protecting its delicate position at #1,
> they wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. I'm inclined to
> think that the Windows folks are thinking too much like Macintosh
> programmers and not enough like UNIX programmers. This is what has
> ruined the Macintosh, among other things... Not enough abstraction
> protecting the hardware from the OS from the apps.
> 7) Watch the Sun/Intel deal - this is where Intel breaks with MS as a
> sole supplier of the Intel-based OS (I think Linux has a place in
> this but not at the consumer market level or the corporate level,
> which for some reason wants to pay for everything. Free is not
> acceptable.) Andy Grove isn't stupid. Even more interesting is
> what happens to PowerPC if Intel and Sun team up.
> 8) Rhapsody stands a chance if it can be written to support FAT and
> NTFS filesystems as well as Mac HFS and transparently provide file
> services, robust Web/ftp services, and db/print/fax services for
> Win95/Win3.1 clients. And I think it can. I'm hopeful.
> 9) We are looking at what may be the fall of Microsoft, although I
> suspect it began when Win95 came out. They topped the charts with
> Win95 - NT has so far been a boring also-ran, despite the eager
> move to NT from UNIX made by some zealous (if not technically
> minded) executives. If you can't hearts-and-minds the IT staff
> and other folks who have to work with and support the OS, the best
> people leave and your overall quality suffers. I strongly believe
> this and have seen it over and over again. NT is dead, except when
> introduced into Novell-only shops. And if Novell can turn it around
> at least well enough to keep its market share (doubtful) NT is
> dead there, too. There are too many CNEs out there.
>That's the current contents of my head. I welcome discussion. Please
>tell me if I'm wrong, why, and how it affects your future as a Web designer
>or site architect or even as a user of computers for work or pleasure.
>Steven Champeon | Go n-ithe an cat thÃº, is go
>http://hesketh.com/schampeo/ | n-ithe an diabhal an cat!
>http://a.jaundicedeye.com | - Gaelic curse
> more info about webdesign-l: http://www.hesketh.com/lists/
========== end forwarded message ==================================
================ Don't Believe Everything You Think ========================
Heather Wimberly Beech,A.I.A.
Green Rose Design
Hosting the ***NEW Feline Bureau of Investigation***:
"Specializing in Corporate Deconstruction,Groundless Speculation, Rumor,
and Induced Hysteria for the Macintosh Community"
3114 Paty Drive