In an email, Microsoft outlines the reason why they think that customers have stuck with Windows despite Microsoft’s shortcomings. He attributes their loyalty to the high costs of switching away from their existing heavy investment in the Windows Application Programming Interfaces (APIs). In fact, Microsoft feels that the pressure from Linux will lead the company to innovate more. In the meantime EU published their verdict (in PDF).
MS: ‘We’d Have Been Dead a Long Time Ago without Windows APIs’
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
So, the EU based their verdict in part on emails from 1996 and 1997?
Even more reason to reject the verdict.
“In an email, Microsoft outlines the reason why they think that customers have stuck with Windows despite Microsoft’s shortcomings.”
You go buy a computer and 90 something percent of the time, there’s Windows. He makes it sound like people are actual loyal to Windows out of the goodness of their hearts.
As said before, they acted as if there was no MS vs. DOJ trial in US.
I think it’s more reason to Accept the Verdict.
If this Culture has been ingrained in Microsoft since 1996/97, it’s unlikely that a fairer system would ever be introduced. Microsoft has had 7-8 years to Lock in it’s Software Vendors, without any effective competition to the Win32 AP, except for WINE.
Also, it’s pretty damning that both Aaron Contorer and Bob Muglia had such little Faith in their Operating System, back then. Hopefully they have more faith now.
No, becuase the complaint was initially filed in 1998.
I don’t see a single valid reason to reject the verdict. If you are going to abuse the system, you have to be able to accept the consequences.
Please stop arguing that people only use windows because it is installed on all the computers. The Linux desktop argument has been beaten to the ground, they are no victors in a religious argument, only frustration. Linix is still several years off mainsream desktops for technical reasons and not just marketing reasons
As said before, they acted as if there was no MS vs. DOJ trial in US.
How about the Lindows case? In the US the ruling was that Lindows didn’t need to change its name, but Microsoft didn’t agree and filed cases in European countries. In the end the Netherlands – so not even the EU – forced the rename of Lindows to Linspire. Isn’t that just as bad?
Besides that, before any comparisons with cars are made: Microsoft has a monopoly – 80% of the price of Windows is profit, which isn’t normal.
“Please stop arguing that people only use windows because it is installed on all the computers.”
I don’t have to argue it. It’s obvious. It ain’t about religion, it’s about choice. It’s about when I walk into a store, that I get to decide what OS will be on my pc, not an OEM, not Microsoft. It’s like going to a car lot and 97 of 100 cars are all exactly the same. But for 50% more, you can buy one of the other 3, though you may not understand why you should spend that extra %50. Windows fanatics are no better than the most virulent Linux zealots. They too insist we use their OS rather we want to or not.
It’s only within this last year or so that computers with alternate OSes preinstalled have become available. Of course you can’t walk in and buy them most of the time, you have to order them or have some back alley tech build you one (and gouge you on the price).
Innovate MORE! I like that. MORE and even MORE innovation! Can’t get enough. What have they been doing all these years?
The only surprise that Microsoft “would have been dead a long time ago” without the Windows APIs is that the commission was able to find it on a memo and present it as evidence. Anybody who has been involved in computing in the last ten years would have to come to the same conclusion. And I say this neither as a boost nor a jibe at Microsoft, it’s simply part of vendor lock-in.
Re: Infinity Watch
That is because a year ago Linux was unusable to nearly anyone but “skilled professionals”
If I want a specialized automobile like a kit car I can’t go the local auto dealer and pick one off the lot. I am building it, or ordering from someone who deals with specialized autos.
Drawing analogies are pointless though, since the 2 things are not the same.
If I want my PC to come with a Dvorak keyboard I would probably have to order that also.
PC makers are simply in it to make money, although most people tht bundle Linux pay as much for it as a copy of windows, they could install the free version on PC’s and not have to pay anything at all. Even then they still decide to pay for and bundle windows becasue Linux is not what their customers want. The customers that do tend to want Linux usually prefer to install their own anyway.
If I sold Linux boxes to joe shmoes, they would be back 2 days later to buy a copy of windows.
Linux might be ready for the corporate desktop, but is at least a decade off for the home consumer. Linux desktop development is too fragmented, there is no leadership, shady hardware vendor support, shitty development environments, too much fanboism…
I’m sure there will be a nice little disclaimer on those JDS-walmart boxes that say “If you change any of this hardware, forget about support”.
Linux might(if it’s lucky) have a 10% home user market share in 15-20 years. And it really doesn’t matter how many fanboys, open source religious nutballs, and RMS cult members scream about it.
I love Microsoft’s “Bring it on Linux” in that one article. Linux doesn’t innovate. It never has, never will. It just copies. In reality, Microsoft is just mocking linux. With Longhorn and OSX continuing to innovate, Linux will just continue to be left in the dust. Maybe if the fanboys didn’t insist on getting the source code and not having to pay for everything Linux would have a chance, but until then Linux on the desktop will continue to be a cobbled together mess.
That’s why many of us are loyal to the Windows platform.
‘Nuf said.
“If I sold Linux boxes to joe shmoes, they would be back 2 days later to buy a copy of windows.”
Maybe, maybe not, but as I said, that should be Joe Schmoe’s decision to make, nobody else’s.
Your right. Some people I know, have not purchased MACs because they are serious gamers, and just want the games that only come on a PC.
Or perhaps a buisness application.
Or perhaps ….
Admit it, you have to use an emulator every once and a while if you run Linux or OSX
“Linux doesn’t innovate. It never has, never will.”
But Microsoft, a company that bought DOS, bought IE, bought a bunch of it’s software and “borrowed” a bunch more, does? We’ve yet to see any innovation from them, and of Longhorn, we only have a bunch of hot air and half baked prototypes. Let’s face it, Apple are the only big innovators. MS copies with the best of them, especially since they have the most amount of people to do it with.
>>>Admit it, you have to use an emulator every once and a while if you run Linux or OSX
I wont admit it because I don’t.
Not only do I not emulate Windows, I’ve never had a reason to. I’ve never done without any productivity application.
As far as games are concerned, every game I ever want is typically released at the same time or made available a couple months after the Windows release.
Last time I checked, Mac OS X was released years ago. And yes, I too believe they “innovate”. Longhorn is going to take god knows how long to get released. It may have potential in concept, but you’re going to say it’s god’s gift to man just because of what Microsoft says? Please.
Linux innovations:
Linux was the first general available operating system to the public that:
– could do internet sharing.
– had virtual consoles built-in the operating system
– had a filesystem that stores small files efficiënt (Reiserfs)
– could be a thin client
– could just as well be a heavy server
How about an Apache innovation?
– DNS based virtual hosting
Linux desktop innovation?
– Completely user customizable desktop
Multimedia innovation?
– FFmpeg is most the verstatile video encoder/decoder.
There’s lot more……..
Microsoft is always late. Nothing new there, especially when you consider that this isn’t just a ’95-to-’98 update OS. The reason it will be successful is because (1) if it’s just as good of an update from say ’98 to XP then that’s pretty substantial (2) It’ll be the best developer platform hands down.
KDE has a pretty good development environment, but the issues surrounding Qt will always hamper it. Gnome is just a mess with most development still being done in straight C. If the Gnome people can get their act together and offer a decent development platform (which will take years) then they have a shot. And all of this time, Microsoft and Apple have thousands of programmers working on their stuff 10 hours a day, 5 days a week (if not more). Not part-time developers that can hack when they get off their real job.
What_do_you_mean_about_gnome?
Anyhow, take a look at the rate at which KDE (and even GNOME) have progressed in just 2 years. It’s definitely quite an accelerated rate.
Open Source may have a lot of smaller groups than the Redmond behemouth, but keep in mind when you sum them all up they’re a powerful force. KDE (a desktop environment) need not worry about the device drivers, as long as standards exist.
My point is that look at the overall development, not just the size of one group.
If you like Microsoft so much, follow their example: be scared of Linux. They certainly are. 2 years ago they laughed it off. Now-a-days they’re advertising heavily against it. How’s that saying go, first they laugh at you, then they compete with you, then finally… you finish it.
> So, the EU based their verdict in part on emails from 1996 and 1997?
Have you read the verdict ?
http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/antitrust/cases/decisions/377…
More than 300 pages. This is not a mail.
The freely available BSD could do most, if not all, of that before GNU was a gleam in Stallman’s eye. If BSD doesn’t count as publically available, then BSD/386 was able to do [all(?) of] the above before GNU/Linux was first packaged as a distribution.
“With Longhorn and OSX continuing to innovate, Linux will just continue to be left in the dust”
What does Longhorn innovate? WinFS? ReiserFS4 was (and most likely will be) earlier. Avalon? OSX has that already (therefore, who copies?) and Linux FD.O XServer + extentions will have that + more too (most likely also earlier than 2006).
Anyway, please name us 10 Microsoft (and Apple) innovations. Then, i will name 10 FLOSS innovations which weren’t copied; which are original, very different from status quo but not necessarily succesful or known.
If you have them, please also mail Mrs. Brisby of nimh.org because she is investing so much time and energy to find even one innovation by Microsoft.
“That’s why many of us are loyal to the Windows platform.”
Yeah. But not only merely because of quality. Traditionals also play a role: “I want app X, and not any alternative” (aka zealotry).
If the interface is different than the status quo (GIMP, Blender) it is people like you whining the program’s interface is “bad”. If the interface is the same as an earlier program it is “copying”. Whiners.
Wow. Not busted? Brave! (: anyhow i’m interested into descriptive stories for analysis about the evictions wednesday. Do you have information?
“The freely available BSD could do most, if not all, of that before GNU was a gleam in Stallman’s eye. If BSD doesn’t count as publically available, then BSD/386 was able to do [all(?) of] the above before GNU/Linux was first packaged as a distribution.”
Your source? Time line?
PS: Sun also made thin clients. With X and NFS (NFS is from Sun). These were used at Uni’s before Windows 9x was status quo. I think that was the sun4c generation and IIRC Torvalds used them at Helsinki before he started hacking on the Linux kernel.
Linux might (if it’s lucky) have a 10% home user market share in 15-20 years.
Maybe if the fanboys didn’t insist on getting the source code and not having to pay for everything Linux would have a chance, but until then Linux on the desktop will continue to be a cobbled together mess.
It is often money and business dominance that rule in this world. And a cheaper price is quite an important point for many too, btw. Also, if, for eample, SUSE Linux, or any other relatively easy to use OS, was preinstalled on most PCs sold at shops today (like MS Windows is nowadays), most people would use that OS, hardware vendors would support especially that OS etc.
As to a cobbled together mess:
Today I voluntarily helped a small non-profit organization that has several PCs in public use to get their (once more) totally messed MS Windows based computers back into condition: by removing lots of spyware & viruses (there is supposed to be a firewall and antivirus protection), fixing and removing totally messed software etc. Of course, often only formatting the whole harddisk and reinstalling Windows is the only realistic option. Also, they had to use older versions of MS Windows, because safer XP or W2k simply wouldn’t run on that older hardware, and they don’t have money to buy newer PC’s.
I could only humbly hope in my mind that maybe someday such poor organizations with small IT resources, or for example poor third world countries that tend to use pirate software, would have a chance to use a cheap, truly secure and stable, multiuser and light weight OS, not so hungry on hardware resources, not designed from commercial points of views only, and that they could afford to update and upgrade too – even if that OS might be sligthly more difficult to learn and use first for ordinary users.
Linux doesn’t innovate. It never has, never will.
That is, of course, just nonsense. Linux innovates, Microsoft innovates, Apple innovates, SkyOS innovates, we all innovate…:) If you mean that some ideas in Linux are partly borrowed from others, well, so ideas are usually… Developers (MS, Apple, Linux, SkyOS, BSD) borrow good ideas from others too. Free change of ideas is good for innovation and development (which, by the way, is one reason why software patents are so bad for software development).
“I could only humbly hope in my mind that maybe someday such poor organizations with small IT resources, or for example poor third world countries that tend to use pirate software, would have a chance to use a cheap, truly secure and stable, multiuser and light weight OS, not so hungry on hardware resources, not designed from commercial points of views only, and that they could afford to update and upgrade too – even if that OS might be sligthly more difficult to learn and use first for ordinary users.”
What exactly do you need to run on it? I happen to volunteer for a small non-profit organisation as well (an internet workplace) and we use XFce4 as DE, Galeon as web-browser and XFE as file manager over there. For easy mounting, we use Mtools IIRC although someone else integrated that into the DE. We’re running a slighly customized XFce4. For example we had to install xscreensaver seperately and had to integrate XFE and Mtools into it manually. After evaluation we chose for XFce over IceWM or Fluxbox because users stated they found XFce more user-friendly (version 4). Some faster computers run GNOME though. The computers running XFce4 (fast!) are P1/133’s with 32 MB RAM till P1/233’s with 128 MB RAM. And a few P2/400’s too, which run FreeBSD IIRC.
Futhermore, Debian’s package management is perfect. For burning something we have one computer which is accessable via SSH. The standard password needs to be filled in (key-based under way) after which a burning script is fired up via remote. For e-mail people tend to use web-based solution though we’re also not using centralized data storage or private accounts yet. One computer has a sound-card with XMMS as media player and then there’s even a SGI computer usable for 3D work. Almost all computers run Debian GNU/Linux Sarge.
Image of the config or of the system et voila.
What exactly do you need to run on it? I happen to volunteer for a small non-profit organisation as well (an internet workplace) and we use XFce4 as DE.
Some faster computers run GNOME though.
Futhermore, Debian’s package management is perfect.
Exactly!! You found the solution… 😉
I have indeed suggested that they could give Linux a try. But I haven’t got them convinced – at least yet. (I only occasionally help that small non profit organization, cannot make any decisions for them.)
But as the article here is about MS Windows, I better stop here before this goes too much out of topic…;)
It’s only within this last year or so that computers with alternate OSes preinstalled have become available.
Bullshit. You’ve always been able to buy PCs without an OS.
Of course you can’t walk in and buy them most of the time, you have to order them or have some back alley tech build you one (and gouge you on the price).
White box PCs are nearly always cheaper than name brand PCs.
But Microsoft, a company that bought DOS, bought IE, bought a bunch of it’s software and “borrowed” a bunch more, does?
And… what ? You think that software hasn’t changed since the day it was bought ?
We’ve yet to see any innovation from them, and of Longhorn, we only have a bunch of hot air and half baked prototypes. Let’s face it, Apple are the only big innovators.
Apple ? You mean the mob that uses OSS or bought software for just about everything ?
Sure, despite all of that Linux is even worse. No cohesive desktop environment across applications, no standard cross-distribution user-friendly install method, spotty hardware detection and driver support. When was Linux finally able to properly resize a desktop, by the way? Like six months ago? Hey, at least you can spend your time looking at source code though.
Linux innovations:
Linux was the first general available operating system to the public that:
– could do internet sharing.
– had virtual consoles built-in the operating system
– had a filesystem that stores small files efficiënt (Reiserfs)
– could be a thin client
– could just as well be a heavy server
There have allways been other operating systems that could do all this.
How about an Apache innovation?
– DNS based virtual hosting
What does apache have to do with Linux??
Linux desktop innovation?
– Completely user customizable desktop
I could do that years ago with litestep 😛
Multimedia innovation?
– FFmpeg is most the verstatile video encoder/decoder.
Gordian knot, xvid, divx, avisynth, virtualdub, matroska. Any of these ring a bell?
There’s lot more……..
Like what?
All this innovation crap is nothing but bullshit and FUD regardless of the OS.
I’d agree that the linux desktop is still a way off due to technical reasons. I’m hoping the bigger linux vendors wont try and push it too hard before it’s stable enough for the average user to use without having to resort to the command line.
However, one of the main reasons for MS’s dominance is in fact that they have their OS put on most pre-built PC’s and they’ve also managed to make themselves very much known to joe sixpack.
Would you buy a volkswagen over a ford if you’ve never even HEARD of VW?
litestep is based on afterstep (for X11).
I don’t this all being just Microsoft’s doing that they have such a large market share. They put it in motion but they haven’t stayed there by themselves even with there monopolistic practices.
I think the statement “In short, without this exclusive franchise called the Windows API, we would have been dead a long time ago.” Sums things up but only if you look at what that results in. Having a standard API, with easy to use development tools are what put MS where it is today. They’ve always recognized they need to support the developers. Companies like Borland also aided in this in making still more tools. This is evident in the fact that despite not having access to Windows’ source code, thousands of developers are able to produce quality, useful, easy to use software that to each of there own select audience. (There’s also a lot more software that just pieces of crap but most of it has a use to someone.)
The result of this was an explosion of new software being available. When I first got a connections to the online services of the day I was able to download enough freeware/shareware in that the only MS product I used was Windows itself. This is still true today. The biggest thing I’ve found that ties people to Windows is that they have some piece of NON-MS software that only is available for Windows. In most businesses or corporation this is a piece of proprietary software in which no alternatives exist but the businesses rely on it. My mom for example has a very specialized library software that only runs on Windows. She has enough problems with Windows that she rather not use it. But she alse cannot be without her library software or else she may as well not have a computer.
The other thing is that running emulation/vmware/wine type software usually is not an option that most people want to consider. Doing that also negates most support contracts fot the software. So if they can do everything from one OS then they only want use that OS. Also certain branches of the US government strictly require that if any computers are employed for use to complete a project for them it HAS tobe a Windows 2000/XP machine with MS Office, no exceptions.
.NET is the extension of MS supplying new set APIs/technology aimed specifically at developers to garner there attention back towards MS to supply the next generation of apps that tie people to Windows. However if Mono can achieve in what it’s set out to be this could be a plus because people can then choose what OS they want to use on the OS’s merit and not because that’s the only OS they’re allowed to use.
The problem with using prehistoric e-mails is that the context in which they were framed is long gone.
For example, in 1997 the vast majority of the installed base of windows PC’s had Windows 3.1 installed.
Yet the ex-politicians at the EU are using this old e-mail to try to influence opinion in an IT world in which Win 95/98 and NT/Win2K/XP are far, far better.
Win 3.1 was unstable, slow with a very poor interface IMHO. THAT IMHO is the historical context of the e-mail.
It is pure spin of the worst kind, a partial truth taken out of context aimed to confuse and manipulate.
IMHO This just confirms that this is a political prosecution aimed at a US company that has a product, WMP, which appears to threaten a large EU based company, Nokia, with competition.
IMHO The EU is dominated by left-wing and centerist statist lawyers from “old Europe” with an anti-american agenda, just look how much money they pumped into loss-making Airbus in order to cripple Boeing.
Microsoft charges too much IMHO for Office and XP, especially if the are not sold pre-installed on a PC.
If the EU really wanted to help consumers they would tell MS to cut prices.
But no, IMHO we have an EU agenda that is all about providing covert state-aid to European competitors like Nokia.
litestep is based on afterstep (for X11).
And afterstep is based on NextStep, wich is probably based on alls sorts of things and those things are based on other things and so on. Wich makes my point that all this talk about innovation is bullshit, innovation is an abstract word that depends on wich context you are using it.
Anyhow, take a look at the rate at which KDE (and even GNOME) have progressed in just 2 years. It’s definitely quite an accelerated rate.
KDE yes.
As for Gnome, yeah, at least they got a Save File dialog semi-right.
What is wrong with you people? I never use to see the “reporting” as much, but now I see it for just about any reason. Just because people don’t agree with you doesn’t mean it’s abuse, even if they’re sharp about it. Grow up.
Do you really need that much pity and approval from the mods? Why do you have a need to feel “justified” by Computer News website? You’re abusing the “report abuse” system.
I bet Eugenia has better things to do than listen to tattle-telling to point where it might be a hassle. Reporting should be reserved for the really obvious stuff, but it seems like for every 40 comments or so, 10 are reported.
It isn’t right when you consider how many fill up in a day. Why not just walk away when someone pisses you off?
“NEXTSTEP” 😉
@ Metic
We (volunteers) have the advantage that we’re all pro-FLOSS
(website http://www.puscii.nl). A friend of mine who’s volunteer there also volunteers for a political party (“environmentals”) and he’s trying to convince them to switch from NT4 -which is pretty unstable over there- to Linux. The political party is actually pro-FLOSS so it isn’t hard. It is just a bit of work to do the transition which includes a DB and such.
Ummmm . . . the api’s are what facilitated the writing of those apps.
In the directx example alone, one could point out over 5 years ago how much easier MS makes it for developers. Instead of struggling to make your game talk to every conceivable sound and video card out there, you only have to figure out how to make your game talk to directx. Granted, you still heard about Valve struggling to make some rendering features work completely with certain Nvidia chipsets (this has since been resolved). But for the latest iteration of the unreal engine, the only stipulation that is heard is that a card must support the latest directx.
http://www.reactos.com
Windows NT (4,5,5.1) binary and driver compatibity is the goal. You can download the latest CVS ISO image from http://www.reactsoft.com
Open source windows is a dream come true
MS: ‘We’d Have Been Dead a Long Time Ago without Windows APIs’