[Flipside]

I'll agree, it's not impossible that this was 'helped' on its way, and I would be far from running around shocked if they had, but that's the thing, I'm just feeling a little Internet-weary tonight, you end up hearing so many conspiracy theories on the Internet it's hardly a wonder our societies are becoming paranoid I might feel differently tomorrow, but at the moment I'm willing to wait.

[Descenterace]

Aside from that, I don't think microsoft should have to give away proprietary information. Information in the wrong hands that might make windows less secure based on what is in it.

So security through obscurity is a good thing? It's that kind of thinking that's responsible for some of the more ludicrous security hooles in Windows. When a hole is found by someone poking around with malicious intent, chances are no one else knows about it and they can exploit it as much as they like until MS releases a patch. If full documentation is available, the large numbers of developers will be able to work around any flaws before they're exploited.
If such flaws are not visible in the documentation, obscurity is not compromised anyway.

Besides, the info MS was asked to release is protocol and API documentation, the sort of stuff that every OS is required to expose to the programmers. The reason MS hides or distorts this kind of stuff is to prevent other software working as well with Windows as their own. Security has nothing to do with it.

Hell, UNIX has full API and protocol documentation. The code's still proprietary and kept under wraps, but the docs are accurate and anyone can write UNIX software that will interoperate correctly with the OS.
If MS are going to create new standards, they have to tell us what those standards are. As it is, they're changing the rules everytime a competitor finds out what those rules are, which gives them a huge and very unfair advantage. That's the sort of behaviour the Anti Trust lawsuit is about.

[Cyker]

This whole thing is just a money grab - You think they give a flying f**k about the interface protocols? This is just flagwaving and the opportunity to extort a crapload of money out of Microsoft.

MS already submitted a bunch of docs, but they (EU) just turned around and said, "Nope, not good enough!", and they've done that a few times now. Nomatter what MS submit, even if it's the entire Windows Source code, they're still gonna get fined, and it doesn't make a iota of difference anyway because WE are NEVER going to see that data either way. What we will is are the price hikes for Vista.

The stupidest thing is that some of the interfaces they are asked to submit is things that aren't even supposed to be accessing - This would be like the EU fining Linus because he refused to release kernel binary driver interfaces! (Because there isn't one; It's for internal kernel use only and changes with each kernel because the only drivers permitted are Sourcecode-based drivers!)

While not a big MS fan by any stretch of the imagination, I can't help feeling they're getting screwed over here...

[aldo_14]

No, like in the US, what really initiated the Anti-Trust actions by the justice department was the fact that microsofts competitors had made large donations to the Clinton Administration. I am not convinced EU and other European Governing authorities would be any different.

Aside from that, I don't think microsoft should have to give away proprietary information. Information in the wrong hands that might make windows less secure based on what is in it. Ultimatly I am not convinced that this will do more good than harm. Fines, ok fine. But giving other companies a leg up by forcing microsoft to give up a bonafied strategic advantage, I don't think so. I honestly hate microsoft, but I hate all forms of "anti-trust" law just as much. The most fundamental example is that of ALCOA.

It's an operating system.  The fundamental purpose of an operating system is to allow access by programs, to the hardware.  If the OS cannot allow access to user programs without ****ing itself up, then it's quite simply bad OS programming.

[IceFire]

It really does seem like the EU is just sticking it to Microsoft.  Still...I'm pleased to see the giant empire with all of its hostility and arrogance towards the average consumer getting whacked a good one upside the head.  They have been running rampant for far far too long and the chance to put them in their place in the US has long since been lost.  MS has done some good stuff over the years bringing standardization to computing...but they are getting far too much for themselves.  Diaster after glossed over diaster and yet there is no alternative because people are stuck.  So its good to see some effort being made to level the playing field a bit.  Windows should win because its the superior product...not because people can't use anything else.

In my mind, Windows is still my primary OS...partly because its actually quite decent for my uses but partially because I still haven't gotten into the Linux thing wholeheartedly.  One day maybe.