Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: European Commission vs. Microsoft: Who is being unreasonable?

  • Subject: Re: European Commission vs. Microsoft: Who is being unreasonable?
  • From: Hadron <hadronquark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:01:08 +0100
  • Bytes: 4627
  • Cancel-lock: sha1:EyaIQH1s6KppCKDV0u1yVGLVDpc=
  • Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAKlBMVEUEAgJbIBVoY15hUCmc FhbtGBOVZkLntRzywheujjymop7OsJ7u07Lq6eilId+TAAAACXBIWXMAAABIAAAASABGyWs+AAAB 60lEQVQ4y83STUgVURjG8f85k6j3lp6xTS6MMaGNGiP0DQVhtAssolbWLAJBau2mYnLRx06Ckhbl bIooBGkXGAZBFPQxcKNNdNNNRMid46LIdDot7nTHcaZ9Zzk/znvmfXgk/zjyv4ftqhjkvRvF0Cp6 txWCoPbQKQKD/Hw5D5a7gqbDWg/WqzvT4oq52AzQFYCE6QBo4ffPqKYqWwD0fpDg+vWbQj1STy4B OMvpqBjhg1R9LsgZAxLCx8Ay/AAwIaKXsoMEtzwA8RlMAHyFvhkYR1IivODAh6nB+5raUagAZUfS g+v6YG4ed0d2HQGsGBiXlg8xAN78JwMQ7x6if68sAaEH8K2a/KGuDFsvZVc/30/+zcE+fMIGeDEk pFVhR/rdFoMAvB+WuM8bue+kyWv2kqSb3niNgBWy2xxL0n3beAAgMitWvgw2lCYIiuujk6Uy4Ca0 HjbUa/UuB5tmdRTpgpZEWq0+VcnAzBvWYsji7LM8rM5pMxflR2VPHsRABjw6gE727Rk7NbEGrM7b ZwHn6oFD8CUFcWtrtUfRelB0K8XmFFpqUB1RbYIlkgrU4bRYsG3b0/VQSinYKMD+1Q6w5KfgAGDM uQUdtU3qFKYAzDzx5LXro3rNHq/bNWwM8pvHo3c/PjifCeAPa9eNC9aoFNgAAAAaelRYdEpQRUct Q29sb3JzcGFjZQAAeNozAgAAMwAzERZ+YwAAACp6VFh0SlBFRy1TYW1wbGluZy1mYWN0b3JzAAB4 2jOqMNIxrDDUMawwBAARgwLpBsTKKAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark
  • References: <15ae85d2-510d-459a-8f5e-2f2844513c54@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ds1j95-su4.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <un2j95-su4.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <2509821.KzMXgC3hkB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <cOudnS2o6c-Ua1vanZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu Debian-Lenny)
  • Xref: ellandroad.demon.co.uk comp.os.linux.advocacy:613305
alt <spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:26:31 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> ____/ Mark Kent on Thursday 28 February 2008 16:05 : \____
>> 
>>> Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>> Ramon F Herrera <ramon@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>>> 
>>>>> "Now we know another reason Microsoft rolled out with great fanfare
>>>>> last week its interoperability principles. Not only was it hoping for
>>>>> one more chance to claim openness around its Office Open XML document
>>>>> format, but it was also hoping to head off another hefty antitrust
>>>>> fine from the European Commission.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On February 27, it became clear that Microsoft's effort on the EC
>>>>> front was in vain: The EC announced it planned to charge Microsoft
>>>>> $1.3 billion for failing to comply with terms from EC's 2004
>>>>> antitrust case. The EC said the new fine (on top of the $1.2 billion
>>>>> it had already charged Microsoft) was for failing to provide
>>>>> competitors access to its protocols at a reasonable price, enabling
>>>>> them to build compatible solutions."
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> If Microsoft have not put in the anti-free software provisions, then
>>>                ^^^^->had
>>>> it's just possible that they might've done enough.  Clearly, they were
>>>> hoping that they could get away with attempting to isolate foss with
>>>> the EU's backing, but thankfully that was unsuccessful.  I wonder how
>>>> much more money Microsoft will be willing to gamble on this?
>> 
>> I suppose you know this already, but the 'openness' (last Thursday) was
>> more harm than good. it's about turning Free software to Free [sic]
>> Software (using patents).
>> 
>> Microsoft should be slammed, not praised for it.
>
> Well, we should continue to NOT trust Microsoft. It's pretty obvious that 
> they have no interest in true interoperability.
>
> What we should be doing is writing our own software stacks for Windows 
> instead of relying on them to open their protocols.
>

Off you go then. Post your first "SW stack" here for review by your
fellow COLA peers.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index