Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th Jul 2006 21:08 UTC
Microsoft In a Q&A, Neelie Kroes, who fined MS for not complying with the EC's antitrust ruling, said: "I regret that the Commission has had to take such a step today, but given Microsoft's continued non-compliance to date, I have been left with no alternative. Today's decision reflects my determination to ensure that Microsoft complies with its obligations.Microsoft has claimed that its obligations in the decision are not clear, or that the obligations have changed. I cannot accept this characterisation - Microsoft's obligations are clearly outlined in the 2004 decision and have remained constant since then."
Permalink for comment 143123
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Outrageous
by MollyC on Sat 15th Jul 2006 02:58 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Outrageous"
Member since:

"None of the analogous statements are true for Microsoft's platforms. Microsoft's closed APIs prevent Microsoft customers from easily switching to competing platforms, and they prevent people from running most software written for Microsoft platforms on alternative platforms (i.e. WINE often doesn't cut it, and it never will if Microsoft doesn't open their APIs). Businesses have a heck of a time integrating competing platforms into their predominantly Microsoft infrastructure."

You're not making much sense.
Microsoft's public APIs aren't closed. See How do you think Windows programs get written if the apis are closed?

And what does WINE have to do with it? The APIs that WINE is trying to mimic are open. If they don't know how those APIs are implemented, too bad. Apple doesn't document the internal functions of Carbon or Cocoa.

What you are asking for is for all internal functions to be public APIs, which is just pure idiocy.

Reply Parent Score: 0