07.11.08
Posted in Microsoft, Antitrust at 5:07 am by Roy Schestowitz
Hot from the news:
Microsoft anti-malware tool removes Firefox 3
WE’VE RECEIVED a report that suggests Microsoft might be up to its old tricks again.
Windows 95 wouldn’t permit users to run DR-DOS instead of MS-DOS. Back in the day, Caldera sued Microsoft, and the case was settled out of court for an undisclosed sum.
[…]
Mozilla’s lawyers should be reaching for their phones and legal pads even as you read this.
“b) put a kind gentle message in setup. like an incompatible tsr message, but not everytime the user starts windows. […] the most sensible thing from a development standpoint is to continue to build dependencies on msdos into windows.”
–Brad Silverberg, Microsoft
Permalink
Send this to a friend 
View as PDF
06.30.08
Posted in Microsoft, Europe, Antitrust, FOSS at 4:36 pm by Roy Schestowitz
Shunning your partners’ number-one rival at taxpayers’ expense
I
n our last post about the BBC, some visitors argued that we had taken things out of proportion. Some were convinced and some were not. In any event, should one find legitimacy in the new antitrust barrier that has just met by iPlayer? Should it not be an indication that the problem is recognised at a high level? How about all those complaints that reached the European Commission, which in turn promised to handle this along with similar complaints around Europe (not only the UK is affected by such a scam).
Commercial iPlayer faces anti-trust shakedown
Project Kangaroo, the commercial on-demand web TV service being developed by BBC Worldwide, ITV and Channel 4, will be investigated by the Competition Commission amid concern that it could stifle rival online efforts.
For those who are in a mood for exploration, Glyn Moody identified and shared another little nugget from the UK:
MPs are still not getting it. Instead of embracing the principal of open government and beginning the slow process of re-building their reputation with the public, they want to give themselves more money by stealth.
[…]
However, I should tell those who press and press such issues that, sooner or later, the allowances will be rolled into our salary, handed out without any claim mechanism or dealt with under some other device, because it is intolerable that this intrusion into Members’ private lives should have to be endured or should be permitted, and something will happen to prevent it from going too far. We can see what will happen: local news reporters and local political opponents will start trying to air these issues in public, which will be demeaning, as well as reducing the stature of Parliament and damaging our democracy. It cannot be right that things should reach such lengths.”
More possible new scandals include the following:
U.S. and Europe Near Agreement on Private Data
[…]
But the two sides are still at odds on several other matters, including whether European citizens should be able to sue the United States government over its handling of their personal data, the report said.
We recently wrote about the use of propaganda terms like “harmonisation” and “digital manners” to pass malicious laws. “The war on terror” is another such example and here are Moody’s comments on that latest developments (cited above).
Laws which are apparently being chucked away purely because America wants to disregard them. This is what happens when European government mouth fatuities about the so-called “war on terror”: they then get hoist by their own rhetorical petard.
What’s amazing is that probably 90% of Europeans would be against giving this kind of data to the US if they were ever given any way to choose. Which they won’t be, of course: that’s democracy?
One more issue that we regularly keep an eye on is the effect of lobbying on Free software. Microsoft is the #1 felon in its area and here comes another suspicion that may or may not affect the reception of Free software in healthcare.
Alberto Borges, MD writes in with news that a major Health IT bill is up for approval in Congress and that Cerner spent $180,000 in lobbying the government in the 1st quarter alone. Might the passage of this bill heavily favor the formation of a cartel of proprietary vendors?
“Lobbying” is another propaganda term that could equally well be labeled “legalised bribery”, “political intervention”, or “manufacturing of laws”. Knowing the world we live in is the first step to realisation of its ills. Then we can understand how to find solutions. █
“I thanked [Compaq’s John] Rose for all of his trips to Seattle and his willingness to distract a lot of time for the lawsuit.”
–Bill Gates
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.27.08
Posted in Microsoft, Windows, Antitrust, Interoperability at 3:29 pm by Roy Schestowitz
Some things never change. Such is the nature of the serial monopoly abuser, whose compliance with government orders is likely to be come roughly a decade late — at which point the output becomes outdated and irrelevant anyway.
Microsoft promises to deliver interoperability documents by March 2009
[…]
Whatever. It has taken Microsoft many years and it still can’t - or, rather, won’t - provide documentation that it must already have internally?
Microsoft also promised to deliver Longhorn (Vista) in 2003. This endless, tedious game which involves Microsoft and the United States government is one of a scorpion and a frog. Guess which one is the frog? The complaints just keep on coming.
Microsoft Corp was criticized on Tuesday for being slow to resolve problems in the technical documentation it was required to provide to rival software makers as part of its 2001 antitrust settlement.
“2001 antitrust settlement,” eh? Well, if Microsoft’s procrastination-riddled schedules are anything to go by, then “March 2009″ might as well mean “March 2011″. Only a decade to comply? Not too bad, if that ever becomes a reality at all. █
“I am convinced we have to use Windows – this is the one thing they don’t have. We have to be competitive with features, but we need something more — Windows integration.”
–Jim Allchin, Microsoft
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.25.08
Posted in Microsoft, Apple, Office Suites, OpenDocument, America, Antitrust, Open XML at 5:34 am by Roy Schestowitz
Cover-up Work
I
n an earlier post, we showed that ODF adoption is definitely increasing. Microsoft meanwhile resorts to EEE (embrace, extend, and extinguish) because it’s the only method it understands. That, however, is not the subject of this one particular post.
According to observations made about a new article, Microsoft has little or no guilt after its merciless abuse of the whole system, which even its next-door press seems to be well aware of (whilst a reformed ISO and Microsoft blatantly deny). Watch this shrewd take.
Microsoft admits they were a bit clueless about the standardisation process, but they do not regret having stuffed the committees at the same time.
When it comes to standards, Microsoft does have prior experience. It ridicules and regularly manipulates such as process, as Bruce Perens confessed only yesterday, but they try to act dumb, knowing too well what they have done. They try to blame ignorance and thus find shelter in merits of innocence.
ODF from Microsoft? Keep Dreaming.
Just as Bob Sutor predicted at times of skepticism (regarding ODF support from Microsoft), half-hearted attempts are only to be expected.
Remember that it’s only a marketing push . It’s about putting the “ODF supported” label on shrink-wrapped boxes of Microsoft Office, thereby securing some business and government contracts. It’s all based on false assumptions. It’s about circumventing policies and having migrations to Office alternatives grind to a halt.
ODF support in Office for Mac? Forget about it.
And while ODF support has been promised for Office 2007 SP2, there’s no sign of it for Office 2008.
Never forget that the Mac version of Office is incompatible that that of Windows. Part of the many possible causes is OOXML, which is too messy even for Microsoft to manage.
Poor Documentation as Standard
Yesterday we wrote about Microsoft’s alleged destruction of key documentation that is needed for interoperability. Here comes some more damaging complaints, whose core resembles the high defect rate found in OOXML.
Plaintiffs Complain About Microsoft Docs”
[…]
There are now 1,276 identified problems with the technical documentation, compared to fewer than 900 at the beginning of the year, said Stephen Houck, a lawyer representing the so-called California group of states that are plaintiffs in the case.
By the nature of the business model, namely lock-in, interoperability is never part of Microsoft’s plan (unless it can cash in on it, e.g. using software patents, or if antitrust fines become too severe to bear). Need it be added that a lot of Microsoft’s technical documentation is a software patents bait? █
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.24.08
Posted in Microsoft, Novell, Standard, America, Antitrust, Interoperability at 1:47 pm by Roy Schestowitz
“The more things change, the more they stay the same”
A few days ago we showed that Microsoft continues to disobey demands and requirements imposed by the United States Government. To make matters worse, it was almost as though this disdain could be characterised as patronisation. A story we told here a very long time ago is about Novell’s foolishness — believing that it can actually change Microsoft’s ways and receive what was promised.
The latest development is rather astonishing but not particularly surprising. Regulators seem to suggest that Microsoft deleted interoperability documents, proving that it continues to recklessly abuse its dominant position and probably break the law too.
Microsoft Deleted Windows Interoperability Documents, Feds Say
[…]
Microsoft has stopped publishing some of the technical documentation that rival software makers may need to make their products interoperable with the Windows operating system, according to a court-mandated committee overseeing Microsoft’s compliance with a federal antitrust settlement.
Should anyone be surprised?
In case it is not obvious why interoperability — preferably attained through open standards — is important, have a look at this good new post from Brendan Scott.
The lack of interoperability is an enormous problem because interoperability is a precondition to competition. When software lacks interoperability it is a symptom that there is no competition in the market. As competition in a market decreases not only do the costs of products in the market become artificially inflated, but the quality and diversity of the products simultaneously decreases. Lack of interoperability means that a customer cannot avail themselves of self help to implement features that they want in a product or remove dis-features (1) (2) from a product. As we mentioned above, unless your requirements are shared by a substantial proportion of the target market, you will be unlikely to be able to have specific features implemented - even if you are willing to pay the cost of implementation.
To sum up, Microsoft not only fails to deliver or produce necessary documentation. It’s claimed to already got possession of it. If the supposition and evidence is compelling enough, then Microsoft shreds it, essentially destroying what’s already available to satisfy the market wacthers’ commands. How’s that for being cooperative? Microsoft never changed its ways. Never. It learned how to pretend though. █
“We’ve got to put a lot of money into changing behavior.”
–Bill Gates
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.23.08
Posted in Microsoft, Office Suites, Europe, America, Antitrust, Interoperability at 6:55 am by Roy Schestowitz
There is quite a lot of stuff going on at the moment. To bring you up to date, here are some of the more noteworthy reports. What was already mentioned yesterday is Microsoft’s goalposts-moving routine and now comes an interesting interpretation from Matt Asay.
I’d encourage you to sift through the report and Groklaw’s response. Microsoft feels more like Job Trotter every day: Outwardly smiling to hide a shifty internal countenance. In The Pickwick Papers Trotter eventually comes clean. Will Microsoft?
By the way, I actually do care about the answer, as interoperability with Microsoft is a big deal. I’m just not sure how to accomplish it on fair and level terms, given Microsoft’s seeming inability to engage openly on interoperability. If Microsoft treats the US government with this much disdain, how can a business partner possibly hope to be…
Unfortunately for him, his company needs to interact with Microsoft for documentation. Surely it’s no easy task, especially with the software patents trap. In order to cover the same topic, Linux.com is citing the write-ups of Microsoft Paul (along the lines of Microsoft Jack), which was a decision tactless enough to attract angry responses.
That disgusts me. It disgusts me that Linux.com is perpetuating the myth that “Open Source” is a hobby and not a business model.
I guess Linux.com doesn’t think we need software freedom in our businesses!
This is what happens when you call the operating system “Linux.” This is what happens when you ignore the GNU project. This is what destroys competition in the software industry.
[…]
Paul Thurrot is just another pro-American anti-everyone else idiot. What he fails to realise is that Microsoft would not have released any documentation at all if it wasn’t for the EU pushing them. Neelie Kroes deserves a lot of praise for pushing Microsoft. The US DoJ did nothing. They still haven’t got Microsoft to comply to one thing in what, 5-7 years!!!!
This hopefully gets the picture across. Microsoft never cared about standards and useful documentation. Its business model depends heavily on denial and deprivation when it comes to information.
Over at Slashdot, a sister site of Linux.com, someone raises the known issue of Microsoft’s incompatibilities with Mozilla Firefox.
An anonymous reader notes that Hotmail’s full version doesn’t work with Firefox 3. Users get the following message when they try to log in: You are temporarily on the classic version of Windows Live Hotmail due to an error encountered during login. Before trying again, please clear your cache and cookies.
As s side note, maybe it’s a case of flaming, adding ‘balance’ or aggravating for attention, but with new posts like this Microsoft ‘PR’, Slashdot continues to seem a tad suspicious.
With regards to that Firefox story, there are other similar examples. Only yesterday a reader sent us the following E-mail:
msOffice required to view website and it of course don’t work in Firefox .. 
——-
One Moment Please…
To help optimize how your Web pages are displayed, we are checking to see if a 2007 Microsoft Office program is installed.
If this page does not automatically redirect, you have scripts disabled. See more information on scripts.
Follow this link if the page is not redirected.
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/templates/TC102478171033.aspx?CategoryID=CT102530531033
Would it be surprising that, according to Linux World, antitrust regulators are now scrutinising Windows 7 and Internet Explorer 8?
Antitrust regulators are evaluating the forthcoming Windows 7 and Internet Explorer 8 as part of ongoing activities to ensure Microsoft is in compliance with the final judgment in two landmark antitrust cases that involved individual states and the U.S. government.
Microsoft is planning to integrate more and more in order to stifle competition. As a Wall Street Journal blog put it just a couple of days ago:
Microsoft to Internet: Drop Dead
Here you can see a microcosm of what has made Microsoft’s path just that much rockier and harder than it could have been, and why Silicon Valley considers the company to be the bull-in-a-china-shop of the technology world. The definition of death, in corporate America, is believing you don’t have any competition. The definition of being in a coma may be underestimating that competition.
There are many more dirty tricks that we find today. Stay tuned. █
“I am convinced we have to use Windows – this is the one thing they don’t have. We have to be competitive with features, but we need something more — Windows integration.”
–Jim Allchin, Microsoft
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.21.08
Posted in Microsoft, GNU/Linux, Deception, Antitrust at 6:04 am by Roy Schestowitz
Whitewashing, on to writing cheques
Discretion may be needed because there is some toxic stuff in the mainstream press at the moment. The previous post touched on one historical aspect of Microsoft dirty tricks, which Novell now embraces as well. It worries to see that Microsoft goes out of its way to make credible storytellers, including many of those who were directly harmed, evaporate or overridden by disinformation.
The BBC has been virtually impossible to trust ever since its deal with Microsoft and occupation by former Microsoft employees. A reader of ours has complained about what he calls “BBC on the breakthrough deal.” He points to this new article, which is just one among several at the moment which glorify Gates in his press. A part of it says:
Summer and Autumn 1980
Gates agrees to produce the operating system for the personal computer being developed by IBM
“I kinda remember it differently,” says the reader. “MS-DOS aka QDOS was bought by Microsoft from Seattle Computing, MS also hired on it’s chief creator Tim Patterson to rework QDOS into MS-DOS.”
As another example consider this one.
Sir Alan believes he got the better of it, buying MS-DOS for a pittance, a figure he’s legally unable to disclose to this day according to the contract he signed with Microsoft
This is contradicted by the following antitrust exhibit.
Customer System Royalty Rate ($US)
Exhibit D1 $5.50
Exhibit D2 $7.50
Exhibit D3 $14,00
Exhibit D4 $16.00
This seems like a typical case of whitewashing, unless it’s an innocent mistake. The same type of thing we already find in OOXML (post the corruption). Rewriting of history is a very dangerous thing to permit. Bear in mind that Bill Gates writes for the BBC sometimes. He does. That’s just how close they are.
“History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.”
–Winston Churchill
Our reader expresses his frustration with what seems like corporate-serving press. “It really pisses me of the way they laud him as some kind of software guru that brought computing to the masses. The reality being that he skated in on the coat tails of IBM with the help of some rich and influential parents. He also ****** over so many people along the way that I’ve lost count.
“Finally I resent working for peanuts while Sir billie get[s] even richer .. Microsoft, a gigantic pyramid scheme, you know they work. In Microsoft’s case, you get to fix my crappy computers and get to pay me for the privilege.”
“Rewriting of history is a very dangerous thing to permit.”The BBC is just one example among others. Several similar instances were brought up in the IRC channel yesterday and some are still being found even weeks before Gates semi-departs to play more ‘politics’.
Microsoft’s long-time friend, David Kirkpatrick, seems to be doing Microsoft PR in Fortune at the moment (and yes, it’s a pattern from him). He even makes incorrect claims and slams the potential of GNU/Linux and “open source” (no hyperlink as that would only feed him).
All in all, there is a lot of Gates glorification going on in his the press at the moment. It just shows how much he owns it (see reference to concrete proof at the top). Even Groklaw has noticed this. PJ, for instance, has posted a modified headline with a pointer to the BBC. It reads: “The secret of Bill Gates’ success - according to Bill Gates”
She provides as an example a portion of the text where Gates attributes competitors’ mistakes to their decline or eventual death, rather than malicious intervention and breaking of rules by Microsoft.
For credible information about Microsoft’s history and ’success’, the last source you want to consult is Microsoft itself (or its media/business partners, of which there are plenty). █
“37 letters with exactly the same words. Some of the senders didn’t even care to remove the ‘Type company name here’ text.
Simular letters has been circulating in Denmark as an e-mail from the Danish MD Jørgen Bardenfleth to customers and business partners.
I call it fraud, cheating and disgusting. If I wasn’t anti-Microsoft before, I am now. Disgusting !”
–Leif Lodahl
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
06.18.08
Posted in Microsoft, Asia, Antitrust at 9:17 am by Roy Schestowitz
When it rains, it pours. Earlier today we mentioned Microsoft’s situation in Europe. Now comes this news from China.
China in anti-monopoly probe of Microsoft
China has begun an anti-monopoly investigation into US giant Microsoft and several other global software firms, the country’s intellectual property watchdog said Wednesday.
The development comes with Microsoft already embroiled in a standoff with the top antitrust watchdog in Europe, where officials have long accused the software titan of abusing its dominant market power.
We’ll update this entry if we find more information. █
“The government is not trying to destroy Microsoft, it’s simply seeking to compel Microsoft to obey the law. It’s quite revealing that Mr. Gates equates the two.”
–Government official
Permalink
Send this to a friend View as PDF
« Previous entries ·
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.