Compliance Toolkit

Story: Microsoft's antitrust concessions are 'pointless'

• 
• 

Jon,
You really do have very little understanding of the real world or IT.
The fact (and this is a fact, I have seen this with my own eyes) is that IT skills can easily pass between computer platforms. People can switch between applications on Windows, Mac, Linux, etc. with very little difficulty. In fact, it is often less disruptive than switching between different versions of Word.

The big mistake the MS advocates are making are:
* Assuming that FOSS are stealing something from the likes of Microsoft. In most cases they are not. Providing compatibility with a system (Samba being a case in point) is not "stealing".

* Assuming this is all about supporting FOSS. It is not! It is about supporting choice (whether that is Windows, Linux, Mac, or other), and ensuring that all of us don't get screwed by monopolistic organisations imposing standards we don't need in order to protect their own fragile business.

A classic example of this is the WMA format. The ONLY reason people use this is because it is the default for the Windows Desktop. It isn't new, it isn't innovative, and it really isn't particularly good. And yet it has become a standard and MS are earning significant licence fees from it simply because they own the desktop market. A don't see how anyone can possibly argue that this is a good thing for anyone.

If Windows really is better, why are Microsoft artificially creating barriers (both legal and technical) to stop it interworking with other systems? Why are Microsoft creating proprietary versions of technology where standards already exist? Why are Microsoft running scared and spreading misinformation about competing technologies?

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread