backtop


Print 69 comment(s) - last by otispunkmeyer.. on Oct 16 at 6:25 AM

Microsoft makes changes to its Windows Vista operating system to conform to EU and S. Korean demands

Microsoft is giving in to demands from the European Union (EU) and will be releasing a stripped-down version of Windows Vista for that region. The company will also offer a similar version of Windows for the South Korean market in order to stave off further litigation.

"Microsoft agreed to make each of the changes that the Commission advises us today. Having made these changes, the company and (Microsoft Chief Executive) Steve Ballmer feel comfortable moving forward, feel confident that we are in compliance with our EU competition law obligation," said Brad Smith, an attorney for Microsoft. Whether the changes made will appease the EU remain to be seen.

Reuters
reports "The Commission, the EU's executive, said it recognized that Microsoft had made the changes to Vista but declined to comment on whether it was satisfied, reiterating that it was not up to the EU executive to give Vista a green light."

A number of companies have expressed their concerns to the EU over possible anti-trust violations in Windows Vista. Symantec and Adobe complained about Windows PatchGuard and the XPS document format respectively. Likewise, in the United States, Microsoft has also come under fire from McAfee and was the subject of a rather negative newspaper ad.

Despite the changes made to the operating system, Vista's launch will not be delayed in Europe or South Korea. The company had once threatened to delay the release of Vista due to uncompromising demands from the EU, but everything appears to be on track as of now. As it stands, Microsoft is set on a worldwide volume licensee release on November 30.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

...
By AmpedSilence on 10/13/2006 4:43:36 PM , Rating: 1
I'm not a supporter of MS at all, but I have to say that i really don't like this move. I completely think that MS was right in this ONE (and let me repeat, ONE) issue.

I would have prefered to see what would happen if they withdrew from the market and made all versions of Office from here on out incompatable with Windows Vista and lower. As one of my bosses said, its not Windows thats driving sales, its Office. The total integration that Office in the workplace is prety crazy. Such a move would have probably changed the EU attitude.

Also, because of this move, I wonder how much more of a target the EU will become to viruses/worms/spyware.

Things to ponder...




RE: ...
By hannons on 10/13/2006 4:51:01 PM , Rating: 2
Not only that, but what about driving up the cost of the OS for the rest of us.

The EU just don't seem to get it. They impose specific guidelines for MS to follow, then MS does what they say. Money thrown away at a non-problem. Look at the sales of the Windows XP N version: practically nonexistent.

I guess that's what happens when politicians decide everything.


RE: ...
By Wwhat on 10/13/06, Rating: 0
RE: ...
By ecktt on 10/13/2006 11:33:38 PM , Rating: 3
Isn't it up the retailer to sell something or not? If there is a low demand for WinXP N why would they stock it for sale?


RE: ...
By Xavian on 10/13/06, Rating: -1
RE: ...
By therealnickdanger on 10/13/06, Rating: 0
RE: ...
By Tsuwamono on 10/13/06, Rating: 0
RE: ...
By ecktt on 10/13/2006 11:37:02 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, for all those who like a primitive mono-kernel with poor driver support and that requires you to go to run level 3 and re-compile the kernel for ever little thing, YES Linux for the win.


RE: ...
By cochy on 10/14/2006 3:39:23 PM , Rating: 1
lol


RE: ...
By Wwhat on 10/13/2006 10:04:12 PM , Rating: 2
Legitimate company that was sued more than once by the US governement and lost, but excuse me for pointing out the truth, go back to sleep.


RE: ...
By Varun on 10/13/2006 5:00:56 PM , Rating: 4
I also agree that the EU is out to lunch on this one. It doesn't sound like the antivirus companies got their way though, at least not as far as having direct access to the kernel.


RE: ...
By rcc on 10/13/2006 5:02:09 PM , Rating: 2
lol, it all makes sense really. You just have to remember that the EU exists to make sure that companies of members states get shares of work within the EU, or are given preferential considerations in contracting such work.

It's a hold over from the French attitudes in the 70s and 80s. In order to sell equipment over there, my company had to find a French company and put their name on the product instead of ours, before we could sell product there. Needless to say, that company got a cut on everything shipped there regardless of their involvement or lack thereof.



RE: ...
By Wwhat on 10/13/2006 10:06:55 PM , Rating: 3
Yes and america would never dream on strongarming and making rules to stem trade that affects their economy would they? perhaps you should read up on that a bit and see how many regulation america has before you embarrass yourself even more?


RE: ...
By Ringold on 10/14/2006 12:38:10 AM , Rating: 1
If you'd educate yourself first, you'd see who the lesser of the two evils is on terms of free trade, and it isn't the United States.

Now, none of us can hold a candle to Hong Kong, but we're closer to that ideal than the EU.

And I wouldn't say the EU represents a 'holdover' from French attitudes of the 70s and 80s. I'd say it pretty accurately reflects attitudes of 2005 and 2006! Remember, France tried to tinker with their socialist labor laws I think it was last year and what happened? Insane riots.

I like the random socialist rant I heard someone say on CNBC this morning talking about the markets over in "socialist land"; "That's the problem with socialists, not only do you have to invite them to the party but you have to pour the drinks for them." (refering to the global rally -- global for everyone but some socialists).

Anyway, don't embarrass yourself, comrade Wwhat.


RE: ...
By Wwhat on 10/14/06, Rating: 0
RE: ...
By Ringold on 10/14/2006 12:44:18 PM , Rating: 1
Oh yes, the economic prosperity, the low unemployment, the stability, the constant flow of innovative new products and information, and an ever increasing amount of luxury services affordable by even those at the bottom of our economic food chain! How Horrible! And oh, those poor, poor lazy people at the bottom, how horrible it is that they are held responsible and get only what they seek in life, how wretched.

Yes, I'll go turn pinko right now, how silly of me!


RE: ...
By cochy on 10/14/2006 3:43:44 PM , Rating: 2
Ridiculous arguing over what social system works best. Since they are ALL far from perfect. Good of you to remind people to vote Bush. Oh wait he's not running in the next election.


RE: ...
By DWarp9 on 10/15/2006 8:26:38 AM , Rating: 2
As to whether or not Microsoft is attempting to push third-party vendors off the market by locking down the kernel, I would like to quote Scott Field's article http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsvistasecurity/archive...
quote:
It's important to note that Kernel Patch Protection applies uniformly to Microsoft products as well as third party products. No code is allowed to modify the kernel using unsupported patching techniques. Security products developed by Microsoft only have access to the same supported interfaces that any other vendor would use.

I cannot see how debate can continue in light of that fact; Microsoft cannot be giving itself an unfair advantage over third-party security vendor (eg. Symantec and McAfee) when the same restrictions apply to their own proprietary software.

On another note, I find it amusing you label us "socialist land". I live in Denmark, where we can pride ourselves of having the worlds highest income tax, namely 60%, plus a vat on goods at 25%. Nonetheless we are one of the richest countries per citizen as well.
That's enough politics for now.

That being said, I hold a more liberal view on things, and I dislike the morale that this anti-competition legislation seem to promote: That succes should be punished by imposing insane demands on you behavior.
The only difference between Microsoft, Apple and various major linux distributers are their market shares. All of them bundle media players, security features and document creation apps with their OS.
It seem to me the unfair advantage is given Apple and linux distributers, since they may include software with their OS, whilst Microsoft may not.

It seems to me aswell that the whole discussion is somewhat rhetorical: The average Joe using Windows will not care what software he uses for various applications as long as they function well enough. He may even not be aware enough of security risks that he'll download additional protection. For him integrated security is a good idea.
If, like most of this forum, you are educated on how to protect your computer and prefer another set of security utilities, then it shouldn't be a problem downloading them and supplanting Microsoft's.
I think the small nuisance it is for us to download uninstall Microsoft software is a small price to pay for a lot of more secure computers in the hands of Joes around the world. Joes who isn't even part of McAfee or Symantec target market.


RE: ...
By DWarp9 on 10/15/2006 9:06:21 AM , Rating: 2
Amusing notion:
Instead of locking down the kernel via PatchGuard, let it reside on a ROM chip bundled with Windows. Perhaps a PCI-e card with superfetch RAM and kernel ROM?


RE: ...
By mariush on 10/13/06, Rating: -1
RE: ...
By elmer92413 on 10/13/2006 9:45:07 PM , Rating: 2
You not only have the right to use what ever software you want...
But I also have the right to get everything that Microsofts wants to include...
We already pay quite a bit...
We deserve every line of code that Microsoft will give us...
And if competing companies want my business they better start bringing their prices down...
I can use Microsofts "subpar" stuff or get great free stuff for all my needs...
And besides that...
Who defines what an OS is...???
Why shouldn't Firewalls, Media Players, Anti-Virus, ect. software be standard...???
Especially in this day when most people don't know enough about computers to know what they need...
I'd rather they had basic tools than nothing...
Especially Anti-virus stuff as we don't need more Zombie PCs on the net...
...
..
.


RE: ...
By Wwhat on 10/13/06, Rating: 0
RE: ...
By Ringold on 10/14/2006 12:45:36 AM , Rating: 1
Microsoft supplies what is demanded. EU retailers dont stock Win:N, why? Because even socialist trained economists, marketing people, etc, know it wouldn't justify the cost to do so (because nobody cares enough to buy it). Microsoft compiles a product it knows will sell the most, or will help drive future sales or sales of related products; profit incentive.

Now, I don't know about over in socialist land, but last time I checked, Microsoft was not a total monopoly. What, does Apple not sell in the EU? Does the government have to TELL you people to buy Apple, is anybody putting a gun to anybodys head and saying "No Linux or OSX for you!"?

There's some days walking around college I think I'm the only one that DOESNT have a Mac, for christ sake.. or an iPod, for that matter.

But of course, the above would tear up the socialist rant, and will be ignored, I know, it's okay. :)


RE: ...
By NT78stonewobble on 10/16/2006 5:09:32 AM , Rating: 2
You know quite well there is no accurate rules for whenever anything is a monopoly.

You can quite clearly say that microsoft is the defacto standard in operating systems and office packages.

Any alternatives has nothing to do with it since they are such a low percentage of users.

I do think however that instead of fining M$ the EU should perhaps to stand out as a good example and use some kind of opensouree OS and programmes.





RE: ...
By cochy on 10/14/2006 3:51:06 PM , Rating: 3
This entire line of arguments don't make any sense what so ever. If you don't like the MS bundled software DON'T USE IT! Whats the matter with you people? How hard is it to download Firefox and set it to default brower? lol! And for the people who don't know better to download 3rd party applications...well guess what: They don't know how to download and install 3rd party application . Meaning they won't be using them anyway might as well use MS Media Player and IE and whatever...honestly the EU needs more cheese with their WHINE!


RE: ...
By otispunkmeyer on 10/16/2006 6:23:38 AM , Rating: 2
the arguments dont make sense because the EU is completely devoid of common sense.


RE: ...
By Montrevux on 10/13/2006 11:36:17 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, that is complete crap.

You have no right to decide what Microsoft can sell as a company. If Microsoft decided to include anything extra, the only right you are allowed to take is to not buy the product.

And second of all, Microsoft is in the business to make money. Why in the world would any company purposely cripple their product to suit the means of another company? Yeah, Microsoft cares about themselves first, but so do the Anti-Virus Software Companies. Why is Microsoft placed in bad light simply for being successful?

Your socialistic babble is severely annoying and largely ignorant.


RE: ...
By ecktt on 10/13/2006 11:43:23 PM , Rating: 2
Would not have used those words but i agree.


RE: ...
By Ringold on 10/14/2006 12:50:25 AM , Rating: 2
Montrevux, got to keep in mind you're debating people who seem to think its a grand idea to have labor unions represent 50% of the board of directors of companies like Volkswagen, and then wonder why every car sold in competitive markets like the US is done so at a loss. :)

That said, I agree with you, but I get the feeling they morally really do feel some repugnance towards companies or people that exist to make extreme amounts of profits for itself and shareholders. Theres no other explanation. Some even seem to think that just because one person gets richer, ie, gets a larger piece of the 'pie', that that means others must be worse off, ie, less pie left for them (which leads to limiting working hours) instead of understanding the pie grows.

It all makes me sad inside. And then I drive by a Walmart, and my capitalist heart smiles.


RE: ...
By NT78stonewobble on 10/16/2006 5:17:49 AM , Rating: 2
Well, I've got nothing against capitalism. In small doses.

I do seem to think that people that are either supportive of a capitalist society or a socialist society without knowing why is somewhat of intellectually challenged person.

PS: What is wrong with unions? If you support the point that you can have a huge marketshare on a given product (monopoly like microsoft) and that is part of liberalism. Then you must surely agree on the fairness on the same kind of "monopoly" on human ressources as in unions?

Pressing wages upward is just as legal as pushing prices upward wouldnt you agree?



RE: ...
By otispunkmeyer on 10/16/2006 6:25:45 AM , Rating: 2
agreed

if only ploiticians had this level of common nouse.


RE: ...
By xsilver on 10/14/2006 4:24:18 AM , Rating: 3
In other news:
Microsoft will be shipping windows 3.11 and rebadging it as windows Vista for North Koreans because they dont need all the functions!

seriously is this all a joke? I mean, if GM said for their new vehicle they will be providing free of charge, top of the line sound systems would all the audio car companies jump up and down like baboons because they just got taken out of the market? And then to top it off, the government gets in and says; NO GM, UR TOO NICE, give people crappy sound systems so that pioneer/jvc/clarion etc. can stay in buisness.. LOL


RE: ...
By FNG on 10/16/2006 5:30:41 AM , Rating: 2
Do you think that bundled = free? Just like when you buy a menu meal at a fast food joint the fries are not free, they are just bundled (albeit slightly cheaper than separate). The cost of the OS is a pretty large chunk of the cost of a new PC. Crazy!


RE: ...
By Randalllind on 10/15/2006 9:09:31 AM , Rating: 2
It's all about $$ MS would lose a good chuck of change so why not just do what they want while the courts hammer it out.

It is not fair to users to have to do without a new version of Windows just because Bill Gates and company are in a fight with the EU board.


NOT US vs EU
By Wwhat on 10/13/2006 10:33:40 PM , Rating: 2
This is not the EU vs the US, this is the EU doing what under normal circumstances the US government would do also (and might still do and did in the past), namely apply existing anti monopoly laws that exist in the US too and are typically persued in the US as well as other countries several times a year to control large corporations.






RE: NOT US vs EU
By Xavian on 10/13/2006 11:49:04 PM , Rating: 2
This is completely true, although you'll probably be rated down to oblivion. The US has the same anti-monopoly laws as the EU, its just the EU pursues them, the US used to, but doesn't anymore.

Probably because of the green stuff.


RE: NOT US vs EU
By Ringold on 10/14/2006 12:57:00 AM , Rating: 2
Given that Apple and Linux machines can be bought globally, and that the US has already taken a pass on MS, I really do see this at least partly as a either the EU milking the MS cow in fines or a little anti-US backlash.

The equivalent would be us taking a shot at EADS. Consumers can buy Boeing, but EADS has monopoly pricing power as well... and communist-esque grants and mega-low interest rate loans.. However.. thanks to the wonders of socialist work ethic.. EADS is doing a very excellent job finding a tall tree, throwing a rope over a limb, and tying its own noose. :)


RE: NOT US vs EU
By Strunf on 10/14/2006 7:10:34 AM , Rating: 2
lol Both the EADS and Boeing are supported by the governments trough different programs, but I guess is the usual we can do it but you cant, just like the subsidies on agriculture...


RE: NOT US vs EU
By Ringold on 10/14/2006 12:57:20 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, Boeing really gets next to nothing; EADS is practically a state-owned company if you look at the things its received. But I was really just trying to show that the EU, if it wanted to have what they seem outwardly to want which is a free competitive capitalist market then they have larger targets they should be focusing on instead of MS, therefore making MS a political or financial target. They complain about MS yet stand back engage in some of the most blatant anti-competitive practice going on in high-tech large-cap industry today. And the last time the US even brought it up, they threatened practical trade war. Geez.

I'd say the US should target a large, powerful, healthy and innovative EU company in retaliation, but, gee, can't think of one. :)


RE: NOT US vs EU
By crystal clear on 10/14/2006 1:11:35 PM , Rating: 2
"I'd say the US should target a large, powerful, healthy and innovative EU company in retaliation, but, gee, can't think of one. :) "

Here one for you-the Banking sector(or Banks) vs the US. Homeland Security.
Subject-EU or their Banking secrecy laws & reporting of transactions.


RE: NOT US vs EU
By Ringold on 10/14/2006 1:14:42 PM , Rating: 2
Thats political, but not anticompetitive. I see adds for some Dutch bank all the time; our banking sector is wide open, or at least no more difficult for foreign entry than for someone to enter in to it domestically.

Secrecy, reporting of transactions, that should all be just as important to Europeans since they've been collectively hit more than we have since 9-11-01. But not a competitive issue, purely political/war time.


RE: NOT US vs EU
By Ringold on 10/14/2006 1:17:02 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, or are you saying EU banks are better at detection or the likes? I'm sorry, I don't know much about any of that, they may very will be the innovative champions of stopping terrorist $$. I dont know.


RE: NOT US vs EU
By crystal clear on 10/14/2006 4:02:31 PM , Rating: 2
"But not a competitive issue, purely political/war time."

EU banking thrive on their secrecy laws-a competitive edge
over US banking.
Here comes the homeland security & says "give us the
information we need"
The EU banks fear to lose that competitive edge,that will make it no better than any bank in the USA.
Its not only the terror $ but the drug $ & other types
of Accounts/transactions of illegal nature.

So I am with you on the subject


RE: NOT US vs EU
By Wwhat on 10/15/2006 5:00:22 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure what you people are on about but the EU completely sucks up to bush and all banks shuffle over information about international transactions to the US enthusiatically (bastards).



Other version available?
By Gentleman on 10/13/2006 8:29:34 PM , Rating: 2
Would MS also make the full version available to EU as well?




RE: Other version available?
By Nekrik on 10/13/2006 8:58:57 PM , Rating: 2
While I really wish they wouldn't I would imagine so since they offered both the full and the N versions of XP.


RE: Other version available?
By Flunk on 10/13/2006 9:23:29 PM , Rating: 2
I predict this to be a repeat of the Windows XP N garbage and MS will release the neutered version of Vista, but no one will buy it.


RE: Other version available?
By Wwhat on 10/13/06, Rating: 0
RE: Other version available?
By Nekrik on 10/13/2006 10:35:27 PM , Rating: 2
It was but never sold. Were you actually ever looking for it? You seem to despise MS in genral so it would make sense that you don't shop for their products too often.


RE: Other version available?
By Murst on 10/13/2006 10:43:32 PM , Rating: 2
Then complain to your merchants, do not complain about Microsoft. What the EU did was require MS to make a verision of Vista and provide it to the merchants, if they request it. Very few merchants ever requested it (who would buy a stripped down version of Vista if the full version costs the same price?), so it wasn't widely available for your buying pleasure at your local store.

Its not Microsoft's job to force merchants to sell a particular version of Windows. If that was the case, I'm sure you'd be whining about it too. Its a free market (well, mostly). If there was demand for the product, it'd be on your store's shelves.


RE: Other version available?
By Xavian on 10/13/2006 11:46:56 PM , Rating: 1
It is Microsoft's job to have actual stock of the product, however as we ALL know, Windows:N was a phantom product, made merely to appease the EU and never to sell.


RE: Other version available?
By Nekrik on 10/14/2006 12:11:41 AM , Rating: 2
Nice going with a new conspiracy theorey :).

It had it's time sitting on a shelf right next to the full version, everyone picked the full version so the N variants were removed. They were also sold for the same price, but the N version should have cost more due to the amount of money it cost to develop. Of course, thanks to the EU, we can be sure that cost will be passed back to the consumer. Great fricken job there.


So Silly
By Viper007Bond on 10/13/2006 9:43:16 PM , Rating: 2
How retarded. It's their OS, they can do as they please. It's not their fault that they have a huge ass market share.

I mean, if I bought a GM car and was forced to only put GM parts on the car rather than generic ones in order to not void the warranty, is that lack of competition? I mean sure, I can buy a non-GM car if I want just like I can buy a Mac or use Linux.




RE: So Silly
By Wwhat on 10/13/06, Rating: 0
RE: So Silly
By Ringold on 10/14/2006 1:00:51 AM , Rating: 2
Unsigned *drivers*.

Like I said two or three times up in the thread, and maybe commies have a hard time with it, Vista exists to make money. People complained, Europeans complained, for years about Window's security being nonexistent -- legs wide open. Now they lock down the kernel and drivers to attempt to keep the bad guys out, and the same people are turning out in droves to complain! Yes, programs like, uh, Daemon Tools will have to get signed, but so what? It wont be problem unless their code is horrendous. It would do MS no good to release another vulnerable OS, and indeed could end up destroying them, but of course the cup is always half empty with you types.


RE: So Silly
By Gooberslot on 10/14/2006 4:50:20 AM , Rating: 2
I guess it depends on who you consider a "bad guy." Am I a bad guy because I want to have complete control over my computer and install any crap I want? Most people would say no. Frankly, I think all this PatchGuard and crap is really about DRM with the security aspects as secondary benefits.


RE: So Silly
By Spivonious on 10/14/2006 11:32:28 AM , Rating: 2
WTF? DRM has nothing to do with any of this. Get a clue.


RE: So Silly
By Gooberslot on 10/15/2006 1:00:34 AM , Rating: 2
DRM doesn't have anything to do with the EU mess but I do believe it has something to do with not allowing unsigned code in certain areas of the system. If you can use hacked drivers and such then breaking DRM becomes a lot easier. Just imagine a hacked video card driver that'll output HD over an analog connection no matter what the content producers want. If you honestly believe that protecting DRM has nothing to do with not allowing unsigned code in sensitive areas of the system then you are the one who needs a clue.


RE: So Silly
By Disorganise on 10/15/2006 2:38:07 AM , Rating: 2
You DO have complete control to install whatever you want. Nothing stopping you installing Linux or whatever, and no-one forcing you to install vista if you disagree with the degree of accessibility.

MS have a product with which they make money - simple business. After years of criticism for slack security, they fix it; and now some of the AV vendors whinge and EU seem to back them. I don't recall similar rantings when car companies introduced additional key security to help stop thieves taking our cars (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question282.htm) from key cutters and the like.

I think MS has done the right thing in locking down vista - the AV companies need to find ways to add value in their own right. Same applies with media players etc - I have a PDA and found the calendar system wanting; so purchased a 3rd party. As it happens, I find IE more than meets my needs so thank MS for bundling it.



FFS!
By anselhelm on 10/14/2006 7:32:50 PM , Rating: 4
What the hell is up with half of these comments today?

True, the EU isn't right half the time, but Microsoft cannot be supported for locking other security vendors out of its code completely. If you people cannot argue over this issue, don't post your biased anti-socialist views in this thread. (For the record, I am not a socialist: I just strongly dislike people who feel the need to keep pushing their own agenda on here in any post related to the EU!!!)

Would you rather we entrust Microsoft to get everything right and update it all on time? Come on people. I'm no Microsoft basher, but -- and I hate myself for using this analogy -- you cannot put all your eggs in one basket. Microsoft needs to learn with play with other children rather than maintaining its current level of hubris. Maybe then the EU wouldn't be forced to step in, cos we all know the US government has other things on its mind right now to care about Vista.

A little enlightened DEBATE rather than socialist bashing would seriously help make some of these dailytech posts a lot less like American economic propaganda. We might as well get some AOL users to post on here!!!




RE: FFS!
By INeedCache on 10/14/2006 11:47:56 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, Microsoft can be supported for locking other security vendors out of its code completely. In fact, Kaspersky already did! People scream for more security from Microsoft, then when they make an attempt, this is the garbage they get. The more keys you hand out for your house, the more likely you'll be robbed. Say that isn't so without lying. The EU - Evil Union, needs a good dose of reality and sense of fair play. Yes, fair play. Windows is Microsoft's OS and it is THEIR code. Maybe they don't do everything right all of the time because nobody does. But it is their OS. Not yours, not mine, not the EU's. Again, Kaspersky doesn't have a problem, and they are not an American company by the way. If they can live with it, why can't the other AV vendors, and the EU? Tell me if this sort of thing were being done to you, you wouldn't have any problems. Yea, right. No socialist bashing here, just the facts. It's actually the EU in this situation pushing an agenda. I have no stake in Microsoft. I would be supporting any other company in this type of situation because it's the right thing to do, unless you want an organization like the EU making all of the rules for you. By the way, you have no standing or right to tell anyone what they can or cannot post here, anti-socialist or not. You're actually the one who appears to want to limit, or eliminate debate by limiting people's views.


RE: FFS!
By anselhelm on 10/15/2006 6:55:51 AM , Rating: 3
You're limited by the same quasi-logic as most people who post on here. You act as if it's an attack on yourself personally, defending Microsoft with useless analogies of robbing or fair play.

Also, you use "facts" like the others too my friend: worryingly & incorrectly.

It isn't about handing out keys to your house, it's about not letting people install any kind of extra kernal protection because you've completely locked them out of the kernal!!! Microsoft didn't do this in XP so security vendors were able to get their programs to work quite well within the boundaries of the OS. Vista locks them out entirely, or at least that was Microsoft's initial intention.

If you honestly think this debate is about whether or not the EU is being fair, then you are simply missing the point. It's about the fact that Microsoft WILL FAIL to anticipate every security issue and WILL NOT react quickly to patching holes. At least currently we can use a suite of security programs to beef up Windows XP and we can trust that a larger number of companies will probably get it right.

See, this is where the "eggs in one basket" comes from.

Microsoft may own the code, but in a world where hackers and viruses are not just a small pain but will lead to loss of billions of any currency and quite likely fuel further crime or even terrorism, it is simply idiotic to assume Microsoft can do everything itself.

Microsoft is a freaking company afterall: not your one true god.

Go on: tell me I'm honestly lying about that.


RE: FFS!
By INeedCache on 10/15/2006 8:23:25 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, you are correct, they are a company, not a god. Actually, it's the EU trying to play god here, anyway. But, since you admitted they are a company, how do you justify anyone else telling them how to administrate their product when they are already within the law? It is idiotic to assume Microsoft, or any other company for that matter, can do everything itself. Which, by the way, I did not even insinuate. Does that make it right for them to be told and forced what to do with THEIR product? The crux of all this is that Microsoft does own the code, and hence if they wish to keep it locked, that should be their prerogative, for good or bad. It is false to assume that other antivirus programs will not work with Vista since Kaspersky already has no problem with Microsoft's decision, and other antivirus programs can be used.

By the way, you didn't give an honest answer as to how you would react if someone else tried to force you to do something with a product belonging to you that you didn't want to do. You don't have to answer, I already know how you'd react. And I'm not missing the point. The fact that the EU is unfair is simply an aside here. The real issue is them trying to force a company to divulge code that it doesn't wish to divulge. So your logic, or lack thereof, escapes me. Apparently, in your world, things like patents, copyrights, intellectual property, etc., simply don't exist, or at least, shouldn't exist. Or is it simply the law should apply to everyone except Microsoft, whom you obviously have contempt for. Talk about taking things personally, you should talk my friend. You apparently don't like Microsoft and think they should be forced to do whatever suits your fancy, regardless of the fact that they are being treated unfairly. Yes, it is a fact that they are being treated unfairly by the EU, since I haven't seen them force any other software vendor to divulge their own code to a third party. Maybe the E in EU stands for extortion. I don't know what situation will be better in the long term, locking others out of the code or giving it to them. As far as I'm concerned, that's irrelevant. I am not arguing that Microsoft will do better. I'm arguing for their right to do it, since it is their code. If they are forced to give it out, and viruses run rampant anyway, who will you blame? You'll blame Microsoft anyway, either way. My simple solution to you and all others like you - don't use windows, or any other Microsoft products for that matter. Then your life will be blissful and secure. Right.


OH FFS
By otispunkmeyer on 10/16/2006 3:34:33 AM , Rating: 2
friggin great, now theres even less point in upgrading. im guessing theyre changing all the stuff that actually makes vista worth while (improved secruity stuff)

ill jus get Media center 2005 and be done.

i hate the fecking EU, goddam interfering busy bodies, i wish they'd actually do a useful job because to me all i see them doing is sitting in brussels and farting about n telling the UK how to live.

i cant wait to get the feck out the UK and i definately cant wait to get the feck out of europe.




RE: OH FFS
By NT78stonewobble on 10/16/2006 5:25:32 AM , Rating: 2
Thats whats so great about the land of the brave and land of the free. :D

You're free to sod off...

Personally I am a strong support of the EU.

Both as a counterweight to the US, but also as a bigger stronger ally to the US in the future.

And I can't really see how you can be against some things like working together in europol and getting standards across like the euro :) and eg. industrial standards.

I do think its a HUGE buracracy but that can be cleaned up later.



RE: OH FFS
By otispunkmeyer on 10/16/2006 6:17:42 AM , Rating: 2
lol

not sure where your from, but if your out side the EU then you have the other end of the spectrum. your looking in and im looking out

probably a case of the grass is always greener on the otherside.

im in the EU and wanna get out, then theres people outside the EU who wanna get in

i dont like the euro (currency) btw, i do enjoy the strenght of the pound, especially when i visit the US :D

i dunno, i guess the EU could be worse lol, i jus hate politicians... they pretend they know alot about everything, when in reality they are completely clueless unless its to do with lining their own pockets.

politicians live in their own little world, where everything is ideal, but real life doesnt work like that and they are very much detached from real life i think.

i hate people who medel with our lives, especially health and safety bods. this notion that no one should ever get hurt ever ever is daft. no wonder kids are fat....its much safer to stay inside and play PS2 than it is to actually go oustide and play games.

there was one thing, and im not joking, some MP guy was on about kids wearing hard hats and hi-vis jackets in a play ground

now come on thats just retarded. how are you supposed to learn lifes lessons without getting hurt? read them in a book? i dont think so. Human race would not be where it is today if there werent risk takers.... but H&S seems to want to put a stop to that.

all governments would be much better if they had real, down to earth, common sense guys called dave running the show, they really would. common sense seems to be lacking these days.

tho i do agree with jack straws views on the veil muslim ladies wear.

however gordon brown has introduced yet more stealth taxes...on pensions and pensioners... i just dont wanna live in a country where you work all your life, hand over most of your wages back to the government, then as a reward for your years of service still get the shaft when you want to enjoy retirement.

sorry its not really on topic but meh.. i hate tony blair, and i hate gordon brown even more, i hate how my country is run and the only option i see is to get the feck out because i dont see it changing. big business probably dictates the government...and big business couldnt care less so long as its profitable for them

my 2 favourite options are the US and OZ... where should i go?


Official Responses.
By crystal clear on 10/14/2006 9:00:10 AM , Rating: 2
“We recognize that the European Commission does not give ‘green lights’ for new products, and we have not asked for one,” Smith said. “We appreciate the constructive dialogue we have had with the commission and the guidance the commission has provided. Based on this guidance, we have made changes to ensure that we’re in compliance with our competition law obligations,"

The above is a portion of MS press release.

The below is the official response of EU

Competition: Commission statement on Microsoft Vista

------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------


Reference: MEMO/06/377 Date: 13/10/2006

HTML: EN
PDF: EN
DOC: EN


MEMO/06/377

Brussels, 13th October 2006

Competition: Commission statement on Microsoft Vista
The European Commission has been informed of Microsoft’s intention to deliver its Vista operating system worldwide, with no delay in Europe.

The Commission has not given a "green light" to Microsoft to deliver Vista because, as the Commission has consistently stated, Microsoft must shoulder its own responsibilities to ensure that Vista is fully compliant with EC Treaty competition rules and in particular with the principles laid down in the March 2004 Commission anti-trust decision concerning Microsoft (see IP/04/382 and MEMO/04/70).

In line with the Commission's obligations under the EC Treaty and its practice, the Commission will closely monitor the effects of Vista in the market and, in particular, examine any complaints concerning Vista on their own merits.

Unquote-
This portion below (of the EU response) keeps all options open for EU-

"the Commission will closely monitor the effects of Vista in the market and, in particular, examine any complaints concerning Vista on their own merits."

So the field is open for more debates/discussions/fines/etc
This is only the begining of the long road ahead.

Its very important for those commenting on the subject to read & note the responses of the both the parties.












Hackers Paradise
By crystal clear on 10/14/2006 9:45:57 AM , Rating: 2
The core of the problem is about "Vista's search functions, security, and ability to save documents as pdfs."
Soon the above problems will be minor with the launch of

"GOOGLE CODE SEARCH"-so called Google HACKING.

*Google hacking has been picked as a technique by virus writers.
*It makes Hackers/virus writers more efficient.Special ROOT KITS are being developed to prevent anti virus software to work.

Conclusion- No security/No privacy-all antivirus programmes will not be effective.

So in short no OS will be safe from attacks.

The EU commission should look further down the road-
Hackers Paradise awaiting them.




Task Force
By cscpianoman on 10/14/06, Rating: 0
"There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere." -- Isaac Asimov














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki