Posted on 03/04/2002 11:14:46 PM PST by kattracks
WASHINGTON, Mar 05, 2002 (AP Online via COMTEX) -- Microsoft Corp.'s chief executive and the top executive involved with its Windows operating system are sticking with a position the company has held since the outset of the four-year antitrust case: They cannot pull the Internet Explorer Web browser out of Windows.
Nine states suing Microsoft for antitrust violations want to force the company to offer a version of Windows without the browser and other added features.
That would allow computer makers to install competitors' products, if they chose, without taking on the added cost of supporting both products. Currently, Microsoft's ubiquitous Windows has a leg up on competitors vying for the hearts of consumers and software designers.
In a videotaped deposition released Monday, Microsoft vice president and Windows chief Jim Allchin said Microsoft has "no way" to remove the browser from the company's flagship operating system.
"I couldn't do what you've got here," said Allchin, suffering from a severe cold. "Forget about any business thing. Technically I just couldn't do it."
Allchin said the company has done no studies to see if it could be done.
He referred to an especially embarrassing part of Microsoft's case, in which the company showed a videotape to make the argument that Windows would be damaged if a user attempted to remove the Internet Explorer Web browser. Microsoft later admitted the demonstration computer was rigged.
"Do you have any expectation as to whether or not you will be putting together a similar demonstration for this part of the case?" state lawyers asked.
"Not exactly like that one," Allchin said.
Steve Ballmer, a college friend of company founder Bill Gates and current chief executive officer, said Microsoft would be forced to offer an infinite number of Windows versions under the states' demands, all with or without extra features.
Ballmer said if the states should prevail with their demands, the decision would serve the interests of neither computer manufacturers nor users.
Instead, Ballmer said companies like Sun Microsystems, whose relationship with Microsoft is notoriously prickly, would dedicate themselves to frustrating Microsoft engineers.
"Sun Microsystems (can) go buy 10,000 copies, and they can have people just sit there and generate work requests to us every minute of every day," Ballmer said. "Somebody could say, 'Look, I want to make Microsoft's life miserable; so I'll tell you what, I'll pay you $10 million a year to torture Microsoft."'
The nine states revised their proposed penalties Monday. The new version reflects many complaints leveled by Ballmer and other executives.
For example, Microsoft would have to offer only one stripped-down version of Windows instead of many different ones.
Ballmer complained that it would be too expensive to build a version of the Java programming language to package with Windows, as requested by the states. The states clarified that Microsoft wouldn't have to bear those costs.
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said the modifications "clarify and sharpen our proposed remedies, without weakening them."
"The modified measures should deflate Microsoft's overblown rhetoric and apocalyptic predictions about the proposed remedies," Blumenthal said.
Brad Smith, Microsoft's general counsel, would not comment on the changes.
"It appears to be a number of changes made very late," Smith said. The company is still reviewing the document, he said.
Allchin admitted to lawyers for the states that Microsoft violated the law but refused to specify the violations.
"I don't think that I can summarize those," Allchin said. "I'm not an attorney."
The company faces several allegations of violations that involve infringing on consumer choice and unfairly hurting competitors.
The states' lawyers, Stephen Houck and Mark Breckler, asked if it would be important for the head Windows executive to know what the violations were, so they wouldn't be repeated.
"Well, it's a very complicated area," Allchin said. "Very complicated,"
---
On the Net: Microsoft: http://www.microsoft.com
Connecticut Attorney General: http://www.cslib.org/attygenl/
By D. IAN HOPPER AP Technology Writer
Copyright 2002 Associated Press, All rights reserved
No, you say. I am the customer. You explain that you want your new automobile to run on Perrellis, and you want them to sell you a car with Perrelli tires installed from the dealership. They again refuse and tell you that they cannot sell you a car without Bill's Motor Company Brand Tires. You offer to buy the new car without the tires and will pay for the Perrelli tires sepatately because you want to install your tires at the dealership. This they refuse to do, maintaining that they cannot sell you a car without Bill's Motor Company Brand Tires.
You offer to pay full price for your new car, and ask that they not install tires at all, because you will go to a third party shop and install new tires. They still refuse, but this time they make the claim that your new car will not run without Bill's Motor Company Brand Tires installed on your wheels.
There is no such thing as an internet requirement to install, authenticate or update XP, nor does XP ever require re-authentication, unless you swap the motherboard and hard drive -- indicating, of course that you have a new and possibly second computer. All authentication takes place over the phone.
I have no idea how service packs for XP will work, but Microsoft has never required or collected any info from the computer during product updates.
The next time I tried to use Word, it would not work. I got a pop up saying that some file was outdated. My computer was just a couple of months old at the time. A brand new Dell. I checked around, and was told to go to the Microsoft website and install some file. But, when I tried to install the file, it said that I could not install that file unless I had IE installed on my system.
At this point, I remembered about having removed the IE browser, and figured that was why Word would not work. So, I reinstalled IE and sure enough, Word worked just fine, without the file from Microsoft.
I have windows 98. Microsoft FORCES you to keep their browser on your system, taking up space whether you want to or not!!
Granted, I did not do an inventory of executables and runtime dll's to see if IE was totally removed, but it was unregistered from add/remove programs and off the menu's and taskbar.
Ummmm....this is actually not possible. IE 6.0 DOES NOT show up in the Add/Remove Programs applet for the Windows XP Professional (or Home) operating system. IE 6.0 is built in. The only way you might have seen it in your add/remove programs (and therefore thought you were uninstalling it) was if you had installed it on an earlier version of Windows and then upgraded that version of Windows to XP Provessional. Then the IE app might give you the option to uninstall, but all you'd really be doing was replacing IE 6.0 with.....IE 6.0.
Obviously a bad analogy (wasn't mine to begin with, btw), since one does not need more than one color of paint.
Still, an earlier post pointed out the importance for multiple browsers and multiple paint color is not as important.
Although... if you wanted to put yellow FORD paint on the hood of your Jag... (OMG! - lol) would you expect the entire paint job to have a meltdown?
Sounds like fraud to me.
And the court let them get away with it?
Steve Ballmer, a college friend of company founder Bill Gates and current chief executive officer, said Microsoft would be forced to offer an infinite number of Windows versions under the states' demands, all with or without extra features.
This is getting pahetic. They're beginning to sound like Muslims now.
A red herring.
The only extra feature under discussion or litigation here and now is that damned web browser!
No, I don't think he's a moron at all.
I do think it obvious, however, that he has an agenda. And, I think he's being very disingenuous about it, playing the altruist (with other people's assets, of course), in a transparent attempt to smack Microsoft.
That's the thing about MS-haters. They think they're so bloody slick, when in practice, they're as transparent as the day is long.
Yeah, dood, sock it to 'em!
At the rate it's going, before too long they'll be just like Apple! And if you want to hear how bad that is, tune into one of the Macolyte threads, where The Faithfull -- while damning Microsoft for bundling features, wax eloqent in praise of Steeeeeeviejobs for tying hardware, operating system, and applications together. According to Der Maq Faythfool, the more things that are made unter the same roof, the better.
Unless it's Microsoft's roof, of course.
The MS-haters are like Ol' Nick. They can try to sound like your nice old auntie who Only Wants What's Best For You, but sooner or later, "she" crosses "her" leg, and out sticks that telltail cloven hoof.
Oops.
They start out telling you how good something is that someone or other does, and then when you point out "hey, Microsoft does that too," they immediately switch gears, and tell you how bad it is to do that.
You can always tell an MS-hater, but you can't tell him much.
Are you afraid they'll rig it to root out napster-stolen music files and rat the thieves out to the IP owners? :)
Oh you poor baby! I can see your plight! Oh, dear, and it's even worse, because I found out that they also bundle video and printer drivers, even though you can get those separately!
But wait, there's more!
Those heartless bastards also force copies of Notepad, Wordpad, Paint, and even a god-forsaken Calculator program on their hapless (and helpless!) customers!
Oh, the humanity!
Don't be silly. Telling an MS-hater to "get over it" is like telling Jesse Jackson to "get a job."
If you want to play the "like a car" game, then use a racecar where the engine is an integral part of the frame. Then demand that the manufacturer sell it without an engine. And then demand that they make it so that it can use any competitor's engine.
Then, after they waste billions of dollars complying with your in-the-pocket commissars' demands -- and you see just how ugly and useless such a compliant "vehicle" is, when "built to spec", you can berate them for "selling junk that no one in his right mind would want to buy."
I wish you MS-haters would be honest enough to admit that it's not about getting a free browser that you don't want, but it's about putting socialism into action, to get Big Gov to apply the Death of a Thousand Cuts to Microsoft, because you hate them.
You had me doubting myself so I went back and double-checked. YES, it in fact does show up. Here are the steps:
1. Select My Computer, then Control Panel
2. Select Add or Remove Programs
3. When Add or Remove Programs comes up, select Add/Remove Windows Components.
4. Un-Check Internet Explorer & Select Next
This removes Internet Explorer 6 on WindowsXP.
The steps I described above is EXACTLY how I did it, and I walked through the process (short of actually uninstalling IE) while writing this post.
Perhaps you were looking under Change or Remove Programs, instead of Add/Remove Windows Components? Been there, done that. :)
"'Consumer Advocate' Scott McNeally immediately filed suit in federal court, demanding that Microsoft be dismantled, because the required base system -- available off the shelf for $275 from every known vendor except for a company called 'Sun' -- is an unfair hardship on the consumers."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.