eWeek Microsoft Watch
Advertisement
Advertisement
July 20, 2006 12:45 PM

Microsoft's Tenets: Old Words in New Bottles



For Microsoft historians who've kept tabs on Microsoft's dealings with its PC and software partners during the past decade, the words "Microsoft" and "principle" make strange bedfellows.

It was ten years ago this coming October that the U.S. Department of Justice filed its antitrust lawsuit of Microsoft, based on what the DOJ considered a breach of terms outlined by a 1994 consent decree with Microsoft. After years of damning testimony, via which Microsoft's unscrupulous business practices involving its OEM partners came to light, Microsoft was found guilty of abusing its desktop Windows monopoly. Since then, Microsoft has been slapped with a number of additional antitrust suits, here and abroad.

That's all ancient history, company officials insist. Microsoft has learned its lesson. To prove it, the Redmond software maker issued this week 12 "new" tenets, or guiding principles, that Microsoft officials are claiming will insure the company will play nicer with its partners and customers.

Company officials issued these principles – a week after it was fined $357 million by the European Commission for failing to play nice, by the way – in order to "promote competitive opportunities and otherwise enhance the appeal of Windows to developers and users."

I have to agree with Jupiter Research analyst Joe Wilcox: There is next-to-nothing new in these "new" tenets. The majority are restatements of promises and commitments that Microsoft has been required to make under terms of previous antitrust settlements. OEMs already have the right to preload other vendors' software on PCs. They already can include icons and shortcuts to non-Microsoft programs on new PCs. They already (theoretically, at least) won't be penalized – in pricing, licensing or other ways -- for promoting non-Microsoft programs. And they've been free to license Microsoft's growing arsenal of patents all along.

Some Microsoft watchers got excited about the principle that will "allow" OEMs to set their search default to something other than MSN Search. When Google attempted to cry foul over Microsoft setting the Internet Explorer 7.0 search setting to MSN, the DOJ wouldn't bite. No one would have difficulty changing the default search setting in IE/Vista, DOJ officials said. So why the need for a principle acknowledging what Microsoft's been saying all along?

And on the application programming interface (API) front, how many times over the years have we heard the Redmondians insist that there are no hidden Windows APIs? (Forget the fact that there have been entire books written documenting the undocumented APIs.) If Microsoft hasn't been hiding anything from non-Microsoft developers, why the need for a brand-new promise to document all Windows and Windows Live APIs?

The one tenet I did find interesting was Microsoft's commitment to allow users to "choose Windows with or without Windows Live." As far as I know, Microsoft has not said anything publicly about bundling Windows Live services with current or future versions of Windows. Some of us (including yours truly) have speculated that Microsoft was on a path to use Windows Live as a way to continue to bundle new features and functionality into Windows without alerting the antitrust watchdogs. The inclusion of this tenet on Microsoft's short list leads us to believe this is, indeed, Microsoft's strategy.

What do you say, readers? Does Microsoft's latest list of promises impress any of you hardware makers, software vendors or customers? Are there other commitments you wish the Redmondians would have etched in stone so you could sleep better at night? Talk back below or write me at mswatch@ziffdavis.com and
let me know what you think.

TrackBack

TrackBack

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/cgi-bin/mte/mt-tb.cgi/4780

Comments (2)

Keith Risler :

Microsoft has always maintained a cheery open-sounding rhetoric in this area. Several editions of Visual Basic Professional (4, 5 and 6 to my recollection) even included a little API database examiner that would purportedly display the API calls that one could make to the Windows API.It always struck me as one of Redmond’s in-joke standing ironies (the Windows 95 slogan "Where do you want to go today?" was another such MS irony that the jokesters in MS simply could not help turning into a marketing brag--the joke being that we were gonna go where MS took us, period) that programmers were also sternly cautioned against using undocumented APIs, as these may not be supported in later Windows versions. Mind you, the documents never explained exactly what these undocumented calls were doing there in the first place. Only a naive person would assume MS programmers like to leave stray code in their product just for the fun of it.There was one MS recommended documented API call that could be made from VB3 Pro that related to how to determine when a shelled process terminated that, following the MS advice, I relied on for an application, only to see that API call FAIL as soon as Windows 95 was issued--the particular API call was not actually supported in Windows 95! Delrina's WinFax application failed in what seemed to me to be the same way in my experience, suggesting that the WinFax coders ran up against the same carpet-pull that I experienced, or something similar.And at the same time there were always books available documenting some of the secrets of the Windows API--and indeed the undocumented stuff often was a better way to do things.I believe I see a new in-joke standing irony in this latest MS epiphany on openness re Vista: The firm can be more open about the desktop API to a greater degree now that the desktop is not the battleground; what matters now is the Windows-within-Windows "framework" sandbox that has variously been called .Net and Windows Live.Just as it no longer matters whether other browsers challenges Explorer because Explorer is no longer the Maginot line of the applications barrier to entry, the desktop portion of the OS I would predict may not be the repository of the meaningful beat-the-competitors APIs of Vista and later OS releases. These we may suspect will reside deep in the bowels of the .Net framework.

ogmanx :

...pure marketing and legal maneuvering. I hate to say it, but Microsoft's motives are often as hidden as their APIs. These "principles" merely provide their base supporters with some defensive argument, probably to counter future bad acts, which certainly could include suggestion regarding the bundling of Windows Live. What they don't seem to get is that, beyond that base, the more they try to tie people to MS only products the more people seem to drift over to Google or Yahoo products. Not to mention disasters like Office Live that are so broken they actually anger the customer.

Post a Comment

 
 
RSS Syndication

Advertisement
Advertisement
Microsoft Watch     Contact Us | Advertise | Site Map
Ziff Davis Enterprise