DoJ Finds Microsoft Antitrust Compliance 'On Track' 110
eldavojohn writes "Despite demand for more oversight from the states, the Department of Justice has found that Microsoft's antitrust compliance plan is right on track. These specific investigations centered around Vista's compliance with Google's concerns surrounding search tools for the desktop. From the article: 'Preliminary testing shows the new version, which will let Vista users set a competing search program as their default and see it in the Windows Start menu, works as expected. The changes will be available in Service Pack 1, a package of upgrades and fixes expected in the first quarter of 2008, the department said. The department also said in its report that it is looking into differences between original technical documentation and rewritten versions from Microsoft, and that it is testing fixes Microsoft made to some software.'"
Of course it does... (Score:5, Interesting)
Quote from http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/arti
Antitrust (Score:4, Interesting)
I never quite understood the rationale behind, for example, trying to force Windows Media Player out of the Windows XP bundle. Really, Microsoft sells an OS and its customers want a somewhat functional system at that. These days, a PC isn't really complete until it can play some digital media and thus MS includes a media player with its OS.
I don't use windows unless I really have to. I don't use Windows media player unless I happen to find myself on a deserted island in the body of an evil zombie pirate with two matching pink socks.
I also don't encourage others to use Windows Media Player or Internet Explorer or any of the other crud that MS ships with their (Others, that is) new computers.
Still, isn't this a bit out of line? Why on earth should they not be allowed to supply a search function in their own OS (And as far as I understand, they still claim that Windows => IE?)
Why is anyone at all listening to the people who complain about Opera/VLC/whatever not getting a fair chance on the windows market?
I say "no" to Microsoft products, but I don't think we should force anyone to come to the same conclusion like this.
Re:Joke (Score:1, Interesting)
At this point, yes it is. But that's because the people that are supposed to be overseeing the whole thing are about the biggest pro-business group you can find. If we had an administration that actually cared about anything more than money, then it wouldn't be such a joke. And for all you Ron Paul fans out there, keep in mind that in his ideal world there's no such thing as antitrust. It's all about business, and anything and everything in the world should be bought or sold, as far as he's concerned.
Re:Of course it does... (Score:3, Interesting)
The US government isn't just corrupt and pandering to these two groups for no reason. Yes, they are corrupt, but they aren't stupid - IMO they see supporting these groups as vital to the future of the nation. And that is why you get things like the DMCA and a lack of antitrust litigation against Microsoft. If you thought these two things weren't connected, then I think you were wrong.
If/when piracy is stamped out in Asia, then Microsoft and Big Content will get around $100 per computer sold there, and $10 per movie watched (rough figures, but you get the idea). The crucial issue is that (1) the US has an advantage in manufacturing both types of content (by history and monopoly), and (2) in both cases there is no need to 'scale up' your actual physical manufacturing processes, since there are none (although support staff, perhaps) - you can adapt to 1,000,000 new Chinese users of Microsoft software by basically doing nothing. Copying them Windows is no problem.
As a Linux user this issue concerns me, since it indicates that in the US we basically have no hope of winning out against Microsoft; the government will step in (or not step in) to assure their continued domination. The hope, if any, lies overseas.
Re:Agriculture (Score:1, Interesting)
Dutch export of agriculture in 2006 was 50 billion euros. Import was close to 31 billion euros. So even if that number of yours is the difference (19 billion euros here) then you should still consider that the Netherlands are a tiny country compared to the USA.
Re:Agriculture (Score:5, Interesting)
Wait a second, that's wrong! Our trade deficit is roughly $60 billion per month. In the face of that, $79 billion is a drop in the bucket. We're hemorrhaging money, jobs, and manufacturing capacity and if we don't end it and encourage domestic manufacturing, we'll be totally fucked soon, ESPECIALLY if WWIII breaks out (that's where we're heading with our current foreign policies) and need to manufacture artillery and vehicles on short order.
Check this out for monthly trade deficit tallies: http://www.americaneconomicalert.org/ticker_home.
For a US trade deficit graph underscoring the seriousness of the matter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_surplus#United
Re:Agriculture (Score:1, Interesting)
The Netherlands are one of the most densily populated countries in the world. Still we manage to feed our small amount of 16 million people with the area left (and import) and have good export (probably because the agricultural goods we're exporting are of high value, compared to what we import; about EUR 7 billion is for flower export).
Anyway, the deficiency issue stated in another reply to the parent illustrates this parent's point being moot even better.
Re:Of course it does... (Score:3, Interesting)
It fails top take into account that if you need to pay others for something, you need to earn the money from them and not earn it from yourself. Taking money from your left pocket and putting it in the right pocet does not make you richer.
And you won't get rich by getting the commission on lending your money to people who are not economically viable, but have falsified the paperwork.