The company announced this week it will post nearly 300 new APIs to the Microsoft Developer Network on Aug. 28 as part of a plan to adopt some of the remedies proposed by the long-running antitrust settlement. Also touted is the September release of a Service Pack for Windows XP that’s designed to let system manufacturers and users select or remove middleware offerings such as Internet Explorer browser, Media Player, Outlook Express, Microsoft Messenger, and Microsoft Java Virtual Machine. Read the full report at InfoWorld.
Microsoft Clouds API Waters
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
What is going on? I am sure the MicroSoft had people swear under oath that they were not using any hidden calls, but here there are publishing 300 of them? I am sure the MicroSoft had people swear under oath that they could not remove Internet Explorer browser or Media Player because Windows needed them to operate, but now they are telling you that you can remove them? And we are to trust “Secure Computing” to these guys?
Well, this is what *InfoWorld* reports. In fact, Infoworld uses the words “also touted…”. Under no circumstances Microsoft have said anything about being able to remove IE and the rest of the middleware. This is just what InfoWorld says that it is “touted”.
Personally, I would wait for the actual day that the opening of the code will be happening and not believe everything or anyone, as a lot people are trying to mud Ms for whatever reason. Just wait…
“Internet Explorer is not separate, it’s never been separate. We’ve provided a mechanism as part of the consent decree to remove access to Internet Explorer but there’s API’s related to IE that are part of the Windows platform,” Cullinan said.
What about Windows 95? Didn’t it come without IE? Also, there was a product called something like “Windows 98 Lite” that would remove IE from Windows 98.
Now, all MS is doing is hiding the icons for IE, if I remember correctly. I wish you could actually remove it. Windows 95 was faster without IE than Windows 98 with IE. Fewer system resources were used.
… only in a perfect world where all the good apps weren’t dependent on ie’s rendering engine and/or special window classes.
To Microsoft, “removing” Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player means taking the link out of the start menu. AFAIK the software still exists on the user’s hard drive .. just without a link.
Who really knows what is happening?
Do these old APIs matter with Microsoft moving to .NET and a completely new unpublished internal API in Longhorn?
This is just more of a publicity stunt, carefully timed to coincide with Microsoft’s appearance at Linux World Expo.
#m
InfoWorld: […]system manufacturers and users select or remove middleware offerings[…]
The middleware can be hidden (which to the users would be completely gone) but not removed. The reason: ISVs depend on the DLLs these middleware bring. OEMs can hide whatever software they like, however after 12 days of use, the user would be prompted in a non-discriminary way on whether to continue hiding the middleware that is hidden, or to allow the usage.
Earl Colby Pottinger: I am sure the MicroSoft had people swear under oath that they could not remove Internet Explorer browser or Media Player because Windows needed them to operate, but now they are telling you that you can remove them?
Infoworld is wrong. The settlement Microsoft is following states Microsoft has to hide the middleware, not remove them. If these middleware, except for Windows Messenger – even the shell (explorer.exe) wouldn’t work.
Any Nonmouse: What about Windows 95? Didn’t it come without IE? Also, there was a product called something like “Windows 98 Lite” that would remove IE from Windows 98.
Try running any new app on Windows 95 or Windows 98 Lite – most of them wouldn’t work. They might work if Internet Explorer is there. Apps like Photoshop, Quicken, Office, WP Office, etc. EVen StarOffice 5.2 uses IE.
Any Nonmouse: Now, all MS is doing is hiding the icons for IE, if I remember correctly. I wish you could actually remove it.
Removing it would make most new apps cease to work. If you really want a system that isn’t resource hungry, get an early version of OS/2. Like WIndows 95, you could use old software with it.
To Microsoft, “removing” Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player means taking the link out of the start menu. AFAIK the software still exists on the user’s hard drive .. just without a link.
To the average Joe, this means the app isn’t there. My Mandrake system automatically installs GDM on it (don’t ask me why), and it uses KDM. But to the user, GDM isn’t on the system.
Androo: Do these old APIs matter with Microsoft moving to .NET and a completely new unpublished internal API in Longhorn?
Even though most of .NET isn’t under the EMCA and is tied by patents, they have documentations to allow Windows developers to use it. Besides, Longhorn’s API isn’t complete. Why release something that isn’t ready yet?
Michael: This is just more of a publicity stunt, carefully timed to coincide with Microsoft’s appearance at Linux World Expo.
Accroading to Microsoft, their appreance at LinuxWorld is to promote its offerings over Linux, especially for servers/ back ends, and the embedded arena. Seems pretty legal and okay to me.
—
For supporters of the Non-settling States Settlement Proposal, just something for you. That settlement was obviosuly written for a bunch of companies that vocally what Microsoft dead and gone, Sun, AOL and Be. Other competitors recieved little to no attention. If you ask me, Jackson’s punishment is much more effective, yet less likely to cause Microsoft bankruptcy than the States Settlement. Plus, Jackson’s punishment had little negative effect on the consumer. But if you ask me which I support the most (I don’t support anti trust at all, BTW), would be the current DOJ settlement.
Why it’s totally foolish for anyone to try and really compete with Microsoft on the Windows platform. They keep parts of the API secret so they can continue to “innovate” with *their* products, and the competitors get left in the dust. I remember back when I was a beta tester for Win95. What came in my beta pack? Office 95 beta. It was a good year after the introduction of Win95 before Lotus and Novell? (can’t remember who owned WP at that point) could come out with their 32 bit office suites that worked with the new interface. And the pattern repeats itself again and again. IE (to replace Netscape, and do things it couldn’t do), WMP (RealPlayer), Microsoft Fax (WinFax, et. al.), Outlook Express (Eudora), etc. etc.
As for the middleware options, I installed SP3 on my w2k box, and the control panel applet to allow you to choose your preferred applications simply refuses to function. Says I don’t have enough memory (512M/5+gigs free on HD), even in safe mode.
This move: Publicity ploy? Maybe. Will it help the few companies who might want to use some of those APIs? Maybe. But I’d just like some names of those companies, because I don’t think there’s many of them out there. And I’d imagine if they release their proprietary extensions to open protocols, there’d be some sort of specific prohibition to keep free software from connecting.
I understand why you hate microsoft but claiming that these people lied under oath, and you are the only genius who just caugth them and the justice deparment and other lawyer couldn’t do that, because they are so dumb that, they didn’t realize this news proves your argument, is so stupid and so stupid that, please read the news and try to understand what does this mean?
Clearly, it is not the microsoft but you who are lying and making false accusations.
Yah, I can develop good Windows app without knowledge of HUNDREDS of API.
Yah, I can give Microsoft BILLION DOLLAR for development and ONE YEAR MORE TIME.
Yah, I am paid Microsoft shill.
Yah, you compete with Microsoft on Windows, sooner or later you fuckin DIE and we LAUGH at you.
MONOPOLY!!!!! WE LOVE IT. WE WIN. YOU LOSE!
#m
It is simply the way Microsoft operates. There was no reason why they had to set things up to make it almost impossible for other software companies to compete with them. Recently, Apple has been criticized for bundling their iApps. But, they are not tied to the OS. It is just part of the Digital Hub thing Jobs is trying to promote. There are other similar products (some superior) to the iApps that are out there like iViewMedia Pro, Audion and Toast. This isn’t meant as an MS vs. Apple rant at all – just that a company can bundle well integrated applications with their basic OS package and they don’t have to be tied to the OS or be “secret”.
Look at Netscape and what Microsoft did. Looking back on it, what reason was there for MS to do every anti-competitive thing they could think of to crush Netscape? There was no reason. MS could have turned on a dime, like they did, made IE and Outlook Express as good as they are without the anti-competitive tricks. In free enterprise, it it is golden rule that competition brings out the best. But MS didn’t follow the the rule. They seek and destroy. As someone in another thread so aptly said, Gates and comapny have been a burden to the computing industry. I do not have a “destroy MS” attititude either – I use XP Pro and think it’s great. You can plant and grow a beautiful garden without destroying everyone else’s, so your’s is the only one left <g>.
I am lying? You mean microsoft employees did not swear under oath these things? Or that microsoft is no using apis that it knows about but has not published?
And what is suprising about calling the a bunch of government lawyers dumb about computers (read http://www.techtales sometimes) these people spent a decade or more of thier lives learning law, they never had time to learn the basics of computers that any interested teenager knows today, much less the history and technical changes microsoft has forced on the industry.
Ok now we discover that there are about 300 not documented API, next time you discover that your data were just collected my MS spyware…
Try running any new app on Windows 95 or Windows 98 Lite – most of them wouldn’t work.
The apps run, the help files don’t work unless you make some registry changes to have Mozilla open the “Compiled Hypertext Markup” files.
MONOPOLY!!!!! WE LOVE IT. WE WIN. YOU LOSE!
Umm, everyone loses except Microsoft.
As for the middleware options, I installed SP3 on my w2k box, and the control panel applet to allow you to choose your preferred applications simply refuses to function. Says I don’t have enough memory (512M/5+gigs free on HD), even in safe mode.
So that is what did it. I installed SP3 on a fresh Win2k setup and found that I could no longer update drivers from the Device Manager! The checkbox was there, but greyed out. The only way is through Windows Update. It was a mess since I hadn’t installed a video driver yet, and Windows Update couldn’t update what wasn’t there to start with. I had to go to Dell’s site (“Dude, you’re going to register!”) to get the driver.
I wonder what else they did to my setup with SP3 to protect me from myself.
Now I know for sure not to install sp3 on my win2000 box. THanks.
IFightMIBs: IE (to replace Netscape, and do things it couldn’t do), WMP (RealPlayer), Microsoft Fax (WinFax, et. al.), Outlook Express (Eudora), etc. etc.
Netscape barely uses any Win32 APIs (it keeps its protablity motto). RealONE works fine on Windows XP (RealPlayer looks ugly on Windows XP :-). I use WinFax on Windows XP, and my dad uses Eudora (his Office uses it) again, on Windows.
Windows 3.1 to Windows 95 was very huge, compared to Windows Me/2000 to Windows XP. Reason: Win32. Microsoft develops Windows. It has alpha versions of Win32. The port could have started much earlier. This is the same thing that was done by Apple for OS X. AppleWorks came out for OS X faster than any other competiting app.
Will it help the few companies who might want to use some of those APIs?
I bet I could hear champagne bottles opening at AOL and places like KaZaa…. to make their apps even more annoying :-D.
Recently, Apple has been criticized for bundling their iApps.[…]
I would say Apple is much smarter than Microsoft… or at least they learnt from Microsoft mistakes. They seperate the API from the app, and bundle it into Cocoa/Carbon for their third party devs to use.
Looking back on it, what reason was there for MS to do every anti-competitive thing they could think of to crush Netscape? There was no reason.
Notice for quite some time, many software boxes list “Internet Explorer x.x and above” as one of the requirements. Why? IE gave third party developers the APIs they previously have to pay for from Netscape or Opera. Pretty much all the stuff Microsoft did to Windows in its history was to make ISVs and IHVs lifes easier.
I am lying? You mean microsoft employees did not swear under oath these things? Or that microsoft is no using apis that it knows about but has not published?
Many APIs aren’t published because Microsoft knows it would either cause a security havoc (if you think now is bad enough, think again) or even more annoying apps.
The apps run, the help files don’t work unless you make some registry changes to have Mozilla open the “Compiled Hypertext Markup” files.
I did say *NEW* apps, right?
I wonder what else they did to my setup with SP3 to protect me from myself.
It’s a bug, not a feature…. at least that’s what I have heard.