____/ Mark Kent on Thursday 28 February 2008 16:05 : \____
> Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> Ramon F Herrera <ramon@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>
>>> "Now we know another reason Microsoft rolled out with great fanfare
>>> last week its interoperability principles. Not only was it hoping for
>>> one more chance to claim openness around its Office Open XML document
>>> format, but it was also hoping to head off another hefty antitrust
>>> fine from the European Commission.
>>>
>>> On February 27, it became clear that Microsoft's effort on the EC
>>> front was in vain: The EC announced it planned to charge Microsoft
>>> $1.3 billion for failing to comply with terms from EC's 2004 antitrust
>>> case. The EC said the new fine (on top of the $1.2 billion it had
>>> already charged Microsoft) was for failing to provide competitors
>>> access to its protocols at a reasonable price, enabling them to build
>>> compatible solutions."
>>>
>>
>>
>> If Microsoft have not put in the anti-free software provisions, then
> ^^^^->had
>> it's just possible that they might've done enough. Clearly, they were
>> hoping that they could get away with attempting to isolate foss with
>> the EU's backing, but thankfully that was unsuccessful. I wonder how
>> much more money Microsoft will be willing to gamble on this?
I suppose you know this already, but the 'openness' (last Thursday) was more
harm than good. it's about turning Free software to Free [sic] Software (using
patents).
Microsoft should be slammed, not praised for it.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Avoid missing ball for higher score"
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Mem: 515500k total, 445512k used, 69988k free, 3244k buffers
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
