Microsoft Violated Sherman Antitrust Act
Monday April 3rd, 2000
In his ruling today, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson found Microsoft in violation of the Sherman Antritrust Act, stating that "The Court concludes that Microsoft maintained its monopoly power by anticompetitive means and attempted to monopolize the Web browser market".
Microsoft's problem was that they had lost all credibility with the judge, and thus he had no option but to side with the facts presented by the government.
Click here to read an excerpt at ABCNews.com.
Here's a link to the ruling. Click "Full Article" below for some of our own excerpts. More to come, as we go over the ruling in more detail.
Tuesday April 4th, 2000 2:33 PM
You are replying to this message
Look, IE is not part of the NT Kernel or Win95 kernel, and if you so desired, you could rip out IE. You would lose Explorer for dealing with browsing your filesystem, but you can stick to Cygnus's GNU utilities, like bash for Windows, or even COMMAND.COM.
You can say "libhtml.so can be uninstalled". But so what? Just *TRY* uninstalling libgtk.so for example. 100% of your GTK apps won't work, including the GNOME "explorer" clone. If *ALL* the standard linux applets depended on libhtml.so for displaying a GUI, then you could NOT removing libhtml without disabling alot of functionality.
You could theoretically rip-out GDI.EXE and replace the desktop with another shell. It's been done. You could also rip out X-Windows from Unix.
So are you claiming that X-Windows isn't part of the OS? I would claim that it is an essential part of any Desktop Linux and can not be removed, even if it is possible to remove it.
When the vast majority of programs start to depend on a library, it cannot be removed because it would break everything. In the case of IE's libraries, most of Win98/Windows2000 is now HTML/HTTP/internet enabled. You cannot remove these libraries without disabling things like online-help, clickable links inside apps, WebDAV/WebFolders support, etc.
The term "operating system" is a loaded word. Is the OS simply the Kernel? Linux people seem to think OS == Kernel, and that if you simply booted to /bin/sh, you'd have a working OS.
In my opinion, an OS is the sum total of all the neccessary pieces to provide a standard user experience. If most apps and users depend on transparent HTML access, than it is part of the OS.
GNOME and KDE are following suit.