“Microsoft went on the offensive Friday in the antitrust case brought against it by Sun Microsystems, accusing its bitter rival of violating California law through ‘unfair competition.’ In a court filing, the software giant asked a judge for attorney’s fees and damages to cover what it characterized as Sun’s unlawful violation of a settlement inked in an earlier lawsuit over the Java programming language.” Read more at News.com.
LoL – Kettle calling the pot black !
Pretty soon Sun is going to say Microsoft is doomed because they don’t have any intellectual property.
now this is the place for all the red hatters to join in and start
screaming about how they want to be the next microsoft.
rolling on the floor
jump on in guys
actually this is the place for all the Ximian Monkeysoft/GNOME/MONO fan boys to claim that they are the next microsoft, having done the most direct ripoffs of microsoft products, much of it paid for by SUN. now that is going to look good in court.
The irony… 🙂
If they use antitrust laws against Sun, I wouldn’t support it, though matter how good the reason (I after all don’t believe in antitrust laws and no, I don’t want to have a 50-comment long debate *again*)
Ironic when MS is complaining about “unfair competition”.
As if M$ isn’t guilty of ‘unfair competition’
Farking retards
What?? Huh?? I know this is a Saturday morning and I’m suffering lack of sleep and allergies… so maybe I didn’t actually just read that Microsoft is accusing someone else of unfair competition…
“Hah! What a country!” [spoken with stereotype Russian accent]
Being convicted doesn’t mean you can accuse someone else in the courts of a similar crime…
wrong: Being convicted doesn’t mean you can accuse someone else in the courts of a similar crime…
Correction: Being convicted doesn’t mean you can’t accuse someone else in the courts of a similar crime…
Anyone with an IQ of 50 or more should know this Micro$oft tune by heart – Sung to the tune of “Until You Go Bankrupt or It Just Doesn’t Matter Anymore – Whichever Comes First”…
DELAY, DELAY, DELAY, DELAY, DELAY, DELAY, DELAY, DELAY, DELAY, DELAY, DELAY, DELAY, DELAY…
I think it should be named “Song Of The Vole”.
First off the California law section 17200 sounds so vague and ambiguous as to be meaningless in a case as complex and technical as this. MS is deflecting attention and trying to get off the defensive for a change.
———————-
[Sun says, “Microsoft has refused to port (its popular) Office (software) to competing platforms in order to illegally maintain its monopoly”]
It would be a terrible business decision to release Office for Linux, Solaris, or BeOS. Sales would be so low as to not cover the cost or porting. Would Linux or Solaris users really dish out hundreds of dollars to MS instead of using OpenOffice? MS is making a wise decision not reaching too far out into the non-Windows world where anti-MS sentiment is plentiful.
———————–
[In the current lawsuit, Sun argues that Microsoft is now trying to supplement–or even replace–its Windows monopoly by encouraging developers to write code for the .Net platform instead of for Java.]
If MS can create a replacement for an industry standard that isn’t really a standard anyway, why not do it? Does Sun really think that it can stop MS from developing “new” products? The 20-million Sun received because MS was misrepresenting the compatibility sounds like a fair settlement. Now it sounds like they’re grasping for straws.
-Bob
“It would be a terrible business decision to release Office for Linux, Solaris, or BeOS. Sales would be so low as to not cover the cost or porting”
———————————-
Microsoft had a version of internet explorer available for Solaris, and although a nice (free) browser, it ws not very popular at all. MS Office on Linux would have to be supported by MS and I just cannot see that happening. It is already available for Apple OSX. And Solaris is used more as a server OS than a workstation. Nothing like running Outlook on a 1 & 1/2 million dollar server. BeOS is dead and I do see some people using Solaris on workstations (like me, see also Sun Rayâ„¢), but isn’t that what Star Office is for?
Microsoft is right on the issue, Sun acted improperly with bad faith. They should be phunished for that. People are unfortunately too ignorant or stupid to see this fact, but judges may not be that stupid. Sun has changed the rules of java compliance to fail Microsoft. They forced Microsoft to include various unrelated java technologies in IE, such as RMI. At the end, Microsoft will be successful, and Sun will be history.
> Sun has changed the rules of Java complience.
Sun added now tests for complience. Ignore the additions of RMI and JNI MS did two obvious things wrong:
– JavaDoc tags (@<whatever>) that caused the compiler
to generate difference code depending on if the MS or
any other Java compiler was used. JavaDoc comments
are not allowed to affect the runtime behaviour of
the code.
– Added non-private/non-pacakge level fields to various
classes in the java.* package namesapace.
Apparently, Sun’s biggest complaint in the previous breach of contract case was that JNI and RMI was missing..
Anyway, currently, if there is any injunction I would agree, it is one where Microsoft can bundle any J2SE 1.4 *compliant* JRE. Meaning they can hire BEA or IBM or make their own. But then again, I would think that’s stupid – but forcing MS to bundle Sun’s JRE is far more stupid.