I bet opening the source is the best way to induce the competitions into the market while not penalizing M$ from fair competitions.

Although some would say treat M$ as public utility would do, some economists hold another view: it protects M$ too.

Opening the source code of windoze will really using the market power.

The "break the company up" option was too limiting. I don't want to see it broken up by category. I would like to see it cloned, to create instant competition among each of the product lines.

Three companies, each owning total rights to the complete MS code base. Each company would be prohibited from secret contacts with the others, but in the interest of compatibility, each would be (okay, should be) interested in publishing all interfaces to new features they include in their version of the products.

A baseline of compatibility is assured (Win 98, Win 2000, NT 4.0, whatever is current when the split occurs). Additional features can be added, or perhaps the benefit of a particular distribution will be increased stability.

While I'd like to see Windows and Office open-sourced, I'm not sure DoJ will be amenable to such remedies.

"Irregardless" is a double negative. The correct word in the context would be regardless meaning "without regard". Irregardless would mean "with regard". Sorry. Not only is the (mis)use of the word a pet peeve, but when you are talking about the legal implications of what to do about MicroSoft, the grammar should be correct so as not to confuse the issue...

What does this have to do with Mozilla?

To those of you who think that "irregardless" is not a word, I refer you to Dictionary.com:

http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?db=*&term=irregardless

and Merriam-Webster's site:

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=irregardless

Please look at the etymology of the word.

Webster's Third New International Dictionary (1981), defines it as "a blend of irrespective and regardless".

Whether you like the word or not, there it is. It's in common use, and there's even an Irregardless Cafe in Raleigh, NC

http://www.citysearch11.com/E/V/RDUNC/1000/07/26/

The University of Victoria states that there is no such word, but who really gives a damn what they think?

http://www.maclab.uvic.ca/writersguide/Pages/UsIrregardless.html

Many style guides warn against its usage, and curiously I see no indication that any have used the etymology to create a more precise definition for the word.

I personally don't consider "irregardless" a double negative. Rather, I feel that the dual-negativity in "irregardless" acts as a reinforcement instead of a cancellation. Redundant, maybe, but I'm not too concerned. It's interesting to note that some style guides call it a double-negative, and others a redundancy. The word has been in use since 1912, and you would think there would be some consensus on the word's usage.

Jack Lynch's style guide states that "irregardless" is not a word to use in respectable company. Need I say more? :)

http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/

I have, for the first time, deleted a response in our forums. I can tolerate spirited debate, but I will not tolerate personal attacks that have no constructive merit. If you want engage in personal attacks, go somewhere else. It doesn't matter if these attacks are aimed at me or another reader. Any personal attacks that lend no constructive merit to the argument will not be tolerated.

I'm very interested in allowing criticism of my site, and have never had to resort to deleting posts before. I've recognized that mozillaZine's readers are interested in mz doing things properly, and they have not resorted to scurrilous personal attacks. Many of these criticisms I have acted on (the redesign of this site addressed many such concerns).

If you are interested in engaging in malicious character defamation, do not use this forum. If you feel that this restriction limits your personal freedom too much, I have no apologies. There are many other forums on the Internet that will allow you to act the way you want. Please feel free to seek them out.

Microsoft has destroyed the business and operating systems software markets causing at least a trillion dollars in cummulative damage to the US GDP.

Where these used to be thriving competitive industries, both of them are dominated by a single company that is raising prices and preventing innovation or competition.

Microsofts illegal activities: price-fixing, extortion, theft of source code (quicktime and stacker are most well known examples), slander and libel are well known.

Criminals should not be allowed to continue their activity, and given that we live in a country where selling $1,000 worth of drugs will net you the death sentance, only a similar sentance is appropriate for microsoft.

Microsoft should be shut down and dissolved. This is the only just solution to their continued criminal activities.

I'm dismayed to see that this is not even an option on your poll. It doesn't surprise me that it isn't being considered by the DoJ, given that the rich never get justice applied to them, but we should have the opportunity to vote for it.

It is the only just solution.

I'd like to force them to publish APIs, prevent their prohibitive contracts and split the OS and apps divisions into separate companies. There's currently no way to put this in the poll

Re: <em>Allow OEMs to Ship Products from MS Competitors, Irregardless of Current License Terms</em> <br>I don't mean to be a weenie, but I think you mean regardless not irregardless. <br>I vote for the utility/wedgie combo.

This is the only option that gives other OS's and browsers a chance. All the other options punish MS but you'll still be forced to use Windows.

Prohibit MS From Entering Into Exclusive Contracts

Rather straightforward. Microsoft cannot enter into contracts with OEMs or other agencies that limit those agencies' ability to enter into deals with Microsoft competitors.

I would have no problems with using windows if they would just make Internet Exploiter an option. I think that making Windows open source would greatly increase the quality thought.