EU Warns Microsoft Against Making Vista Too Secure
from the monopoly dept
There's no doubt that the European Union has taken a much harder line in its anti-trust actions against Microsoft than regulators have in the US. The company is still facing fines in Europe, and arguing about what features are legitimate, whereas Stateside the legal action is basically finished. A few months ago, we asked whether Microsoft's decision to beef up the security features in Vista might get them into legal hot water, in the same way as it has with Internet Explorer and the Windows Media Player. It doesn't seem like it's going to be an issue for US regulators, but again, the EU is concerned. A spokesman warned that Microsoft should not build security features into Vista, as it would shut out third party vendors and hurt consumers. Now, people can disagree about whether Microsoft's actions will make Vista more or less secure, but the idea that it shouldn't address security issues, so as to leave a market for other companies is odd. Shouldn't Vista users be allowed an inherently secure (in theory) operating system, without the need to spend extra on security software, and enjoy the same peace of mind held by Linux and Apple users all these years? Since added security is thought to be one of the main reasons to upgrade to Vista, limitations on what the company can offer could hurt Microsoft in the important European market.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Who profits from this?
the consumer. Any pretenses that they
will are a deception. They are angling for a
bigger cut of of pie.
I hope microsoft builds two OS versions (again)
one that's as secure as is reasonable and one
that's crap to satisfy the EU's demands.
Then let the consumers decide on which they
prefer. Oh, wait... the EU probably won't allow
that either.
What I'd like to know is this...
Which palms are being greased and Who will profit
from these actions?
I'm nt buying the reasons given so far.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who profits from this?
One can still create a secure operating system and allow third party software to run on it. Half the time it's the consumers own ignorance of software that causes things like viruses/worms/spam/etc to get passed around anyways. Why should Microshaft compensate for the consumers ignorance?!
Always the stupid PEBKAC errors... Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Who profits from this?
Government entities are one giant shakedown and they don't give a crap about the people. In a sense, they are non-free market entities within a free market that use mobster tactics to fill their pockets.
I know someone who opened a pool hall years ago in Massachusetts... Nice place - yet the local paper used to run a smear campaign against it everyday, until of course he hired a police detail every night to sit in a chair and collect $45/hr.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Who profits from this?
altruistic governing body with the best interest of the
common man at heart.
On and off over the last thirty years I've been responsible
for international regulatory agency compliance for a
couple of companies.
Protectionism often the result of subtle tweaks to
standards. It's quite real. Sometimes adding a bit
more European content to a product makes problems
disapear.
I have no doubt that protectionism motivated this
attack against Microsoft whom I have little love for.
I just don't know who in the EU will profit from selling
this security software for Vista.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Who profits from this?
Any time a government agency can use nonsensical rhetoric to bring about litigation against some entity (especially one that it doesn't tax), it seems to be advantageous. It allows that agency to grow, and to acquire more public funds in order to support itself. Funding and justification are the name of the game in the public sector - it 'creates jobs' and creates 'paybacks' and loopholes for all those involved. It is a cancer to the free market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who profits from this?
The question at hand is monopoly.
Who benefits from a monopoly? Is it a capitalist ideal? (lest for shareholders)
Does it promote ingenuity or provide better solutions for the general public? No it does not, quite to the contrary. And it is far too vital an area these years not to be contested.
It may be hard for the US of A to contradict anything that shows that kind of profits, especially since it's an american company.
But if a european (or lets say a 3rd world country) company held that kind of near monopoly against the american society, few sanctions would surprize me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
my humble opinion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: my humble opinion
But, alas, Linux is getting to be as bad as windows.
Oversized by trying to support everything under the sun right out of the box, dependency hell (which I've been through a LOT, even with installing everything under the sun) and general sluggish performance of the GUI...'Shrug'.
I'll stick with Windows for everyday use, and GUIless linux for a firewall (I'll NEVER EVER EVER EVER TO INFINITY, connect a windows box directly to the internet) which (barring any stupidity on my part for such actions I deserve what I get) covers my ass nicely.
So all in all, unless Linux GUI's improve and more applications are native (Not ported) for linux, not really worth the time and effort. Nice for somethings, but not everyday.
Just thought I would share, not bashing anyone or anything, just how I feel.
BTW, I think all this bullshit with the EU is a double edged sword.
Who determins what is "secure enough"? Personally, I had to turn off the "show updates" on my add/'remove programs window because of the 120 hotfixes/critical updates I've had to install since 11/05.
Anwyay, ta
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
internet taking into places I did not ask to go
some other place, which I did not click into or go
anyplace close to that site.
Thanks, Dorothy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: internet taking into places I did not ask to g
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: internet taking into places I did not ask to g
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: internet taking into places I did not ask
I'd advise an enema.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the EU is anti-capitalist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrong take on this...
What's wrong with that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wrong take on this...
i highly doubt you'll be forced to use their anti-virus software. even if they did, the market dictates what the market is. the anti-virus market was created because people started making them. MS isn't moving into that market, its redefining the market which i don't think is a problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The problem here is that most computer users in the world today use Windows and as we all know, Windows was oringinally built as a stand-alone/Personal Computer (PC) operating system (i.e. Single User, not connected to other computers or the internet).
While Windows OS is, in my opinon, the most user friendly OS in the market today, it is not really built to be used the way how most of us use computers (i.e. connecting to other computers or the internet). Becuase of its design, MS Windows is not as secure as Linux, or Unix (which were built to be used by many users, connecting to other computers).
From what I understand, Microsoft is releasing its own anti-virus, and anti-spam software to protect its operating system. As dominant software maker, this might potentially take most Anti-Virus software companies out of the market. This is why the EU Commission thinks that the move by microsoft is not just for the interest of its consumers...but a move by microsoft to take on new markets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't worry EU there will still be business for your 3rd party programs to make money from even with a "Secure OS"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This mess is going to far. Imagine a company wants to offer a competing Explorer.exe... What then? MS can no longer budle it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The difference
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A company releases a flawed product, and you create a business patching the holes. Now the company comes up with a new version, not quite so flawed, which now threatens you. Tough...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is the same story again
This is a natural progression as the computer industry and what users do with computers changes. every time this happens, all of the software companies that were filling the hole complain about anticompetitive practices.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vista Security....
My understanding that the "problem" my company and others in the same market face is that with Vista we are locked out of the kernel due to security features that MS has implemented. As a result some of the security solutions out there or that my company and others are trying to come up with are not usable on Vista.
Given this situation and knowing that Vista will have many security holes and exploits that will be exposed in due course, that leaves consumers and businesses with only a single "security" vendor able to protect Vista effectively. That vendor would be Microsoft. Somehow I don't think this is a good idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Vista Security....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: automobile anti-theft
To be consistent, the EU should tell Mercedes they can no longer install door locks in their cars as built in features as it unfairly excludes the padlock manufacturers from competing for the car security business.
Oh wait ... the EU bureaucracy is dominated by the French and their followers . .. they are incapable of logical consistency.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This has got to be the most dumbest thing I've ever read.
"Do *not* build security features" and "it would ... hurt consumers" in the same sentence... I am in awe right now.
Either this spokesman is very dumb, or is being paid under the tables by 3rd party security companys. I dare this person to rationalise their sentence.
It is no wonder the EU is still ongoing with their pointless lawsuits against MS when people with misguided minds like that are within.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Again, that is asking to not include saftey or you will hurt consumers. Which does not make any logical sense at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Security yes! WMP... No...
The IE and the WMP are added on extras, while more (or should I say enough?) security seems to be the bare basics of any operation system. The third party security providers are at the moment just trying to fix the mistakes MS makes, why should MS not be allowed to fix the errors themselves? It seems ridiculous that MS should ship a broken and vulnerable product just so that those security companies should survive! On the other side, they do have an extremely strong monopoly position and including WMP and IE does not fix errors but uses the monopoly to leverage other products! I could easily imagine a situation in a few years where MS adds a "SkypeOut" function to the Messenger everyone will be using MS Voice services (Or whatever they will call it) This would be a good thing, if there was a serious competition in the market and this would give MS a competitive edge, but then Microsoft has an unfair monopoly and should take the responsibilities that come with this!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fuck Europe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
News Release
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Try this again.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Release "Windows EU" - strip ALL the security out of it, don't patch it either - as patches are frequenty 'security based'. Then third parties can make all kinda of cash! Because their greed is more important than Microsoft's greed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's fine for MS to take away the need or introduce a competing product, but they shouldn't be able to force consumers into using their product because their's is the only one that will work. That's my take anyway. I can't believe that anyone would tell MS to make the OS less secure in the way that most people are thinking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Building in as much security as possible is good for most users and thus good for networks of "most users" like say, the Internet. Third party companies that live on developing software for Windows have already chosen to be at the mercy of Windows in their business model and should be prepared to change with the times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Blank
Wow... I think you're one of the only people on here that understood that article... Well Golly Jee Willikers!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Linux and Mac security
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One last thought
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lockdown?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Microsoft and EU
I would not won't to see the MS lock all software out that someone would like to run in place of a MS product. i.e. Internet explorer.
I see no resaon the EU can't ask for this and the US should as well if MS is planing on locking out other vendor add ons that would help protect some computer from damage or just having to rebuild the thing cause someone downloaded spyware to it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BOOOO
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: BOOOO
Oh and by the way... I'm not trying to defend MS in any way... I personally can't stand the fact that DirectX9 Games will not be truly hardware supported in Vista. Apparently you can run in DX9 "compatibility" mode... but yeah... we all saw how well that worked with XP and a majority of software that was meant to run on 9x/ME. Compatibility my arse!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps you're confused?
This isn't about Microsoft making Vista completely safe (fat chance with that), this is about Microsoft being the only source able to make it safe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You answered your own question. In a free market economy, no one makes demands about anything - the success and direction of a product depends on whether or not people pay for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EU blows
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Windows is not secure enough, so 3rd party devs do their best to make it so.
People whine that Windows is so insecure they have to buy 3rd party products to protect the OS.
Microsoft attempts to stave off such complaints by locking down the kernel so that it cannot be comprimised.
3rd party vendors bitch that they can't get in.
Governments hear and cry "Monopoly!"
Microsoft is forced to unlock it's kernel, thus allowing 3rd party developers (and malware) to interact with it.
Consumers *still* get shit upon, but this time, it's the Gov's fault, and not Microsoft's.
Fuck the EU. Fuck Symantec an their ilk. They created a business based on flaws in another product. What the Fucking Hell did they expect would happen when the company making that product decided to do something about those flaws?
Ya know what's really scary? That they and the gov might actually get their way and *BLOCK* Microsoft from releasing a more stable and secure OS.
UnFuckingBelievable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Close-Minded and Uneducated.
My Reply: Yes, it IS ok, because it's their software, and you and everyone else on the planet can choose another operating system if they would rather. The best way to secure an operating system, is to lock "other people" out of the important system areas...that's how security is obtained in the world of UNIX/Linux and it has worked superbly for years. That does NOT mean that the software will not communicate, it means that it will not allow you to write software that injects a bunch of crap into it's core processing space.
someonespecial said: "Heh... according to your comment you're apparently not aware that Microshaft has restricted just about 95% of the world's software market to the Windows Operating System. i'm sure if you'd like the get the next best 97 version of Office to run on your linux box... be my guest. Hope your documents are ok when you try to open up a 2003 version document that someone sent from a Windows XP box. Unless of course you don't care about formatting and are willing to put the time in to fix the it."
My Reply: You should really spend more time learning what you speak of before you decide to flame about it, because I use the one single Linux based laptop in my company of over 1000 other machines that run in an almost purely MS environment. I browse network shares, read/write/modify/create office documents in MS Office file formats and have no issues with formatting, even when going back and forth from Office 2K3. On top of that, you can install and run nearly all MS Office products with commercially supported emulation software on a Linux machine if you want to purchase the software(I prefer OpenOffice instead).
I have a vast working knowledge of both Windows machines and Linux machines and prefer Linux for almost every thing, but that doesn't mean that I can support an argument against MS that is so full of BS.
Thank you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Close-Minded and Uneducated.
What you want is:
1. an unhackable kernel.
2, you want the customer to be able to permit installation of other s/w.
Given that autos can have 3rd party equipment - I bet that MS could provide 3rd party to run with their s/w.
But, since the monoply is best for MS, they will not do so
unless they are forced, which is what the EU us doing.
Compare hardware ansd s/w: the existance of AMD
has driven AMD and Intel to provide the consumer with amazing value and technoligy improvements.
It is a pity there is no software MS competitor to
provide the same incentive to MS.
Perhaps the unintended effect of the s/w patent and copyright system is to prevent that growth of such a company. It would be good for the industry and consumer to have this.
Imagine if a modern laptop, which has the power of a old Cray, cost $1 million instead of $1000. There would not be too many sales. This is truly the miracle of the amazing engineers and competition!
How ro make this work in software! ?
That is the quesstion?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
short memory
Not so far in past, M$ destroy the market of word processor and worksheets, at least, by selling it as a bundle on Windows. Many other software suffering with this procedure.
Helloooooooo!!! Windows is to be a Operation System that's it!
If a car came with first aid, do probably with products made it from other players. I never ever read about GM Ford or other car maker doing band-aid, tylenol, etc.
If they will do (and put it in WIN) all kind of software... Let's close corel, IBM, Oracle, Adobe, etc, etc.
And... If this came true... We laa are in a big trouble hehehehehe!!!
~
Ed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
short memory
Not so far in past, M$ destroy the market of word processor and worksheets, at least, by selling it as a bundle on Windows. Many other software suffering with this procedure.
Helloooooooo!!! Windows is to be a Operation System that's it!
If a car came with first aid, do probably with products made it from other players. I never ever read about GM Ford or other car maker doing band-aid, tylenol, etc.
If they will do (and put it in WIN) all kind of software... Let's close corel, IBM, Oracle, Adobe, etc, etc.
And... If this came true... We all are in a big trouble hehehehehe!!!
~
Ed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sorry for the doubled post
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Windows on EUrope ? FINALLY!!!!
I already did THANK YOU!
>The best way to secure an operating system, is to lock "other people" out >of the important system areas...that's how security is obtained in the >world of UNIX/Linux and it has worked superbly for years.
Since when you're locked out of the kernel ?!?
>That does NOT mean that the software will not communicate, it means >that it will not allow you to write software that injects a bunch of crap into >it's core processing space.
You never compiled a driver in linux did you ?
>Oversized by trying to support everything under the sun right out of the >box, dependency hell (which I've been through a LOT, even with >installing everything under the sun) and general sluggish performance of >the GUI...'Shrug'.
I thought that was the problem with Windows, backwards compability, not Linux problem!
That's funny, considering i can use Linux ( even with GNOME ) in a Pentium 200MMX without a hitch and i cant even get Vista to be usable in my Pentium M 2.0Ghz laptop...
>--FLASH-- Microsoft announces that VISTA will not be marketed to the >EU. In what has been a surprise announcement a more simplistic OS >will be offered to the EU consortium code named SCEWEM. SCREWEM >is more recognizable to long term computer users as DOS 7.0 and is >expected to allow EU based Software Developers the fair market share of >OS integration software and Utilities.
I for one would LOVE to see that, Europe finally rid of a piece of software crap! THANK GOD! Most European countries already have far more linux penetration than the US, many EU countries already traded their Windows boxes for Linux-based ones in their governmental/institutional and financial organizations, my local university has unix classes as mandatory in IT courses and most of the workstatios are Mac/*nix based.
So what if Microsoft doesn't ship Vista in the EU ? Most companies already own Windows 2000 and XP, and they last enough to support a Windows -> Linux transition, hell, most companies wont be upgrading to Vista anytime soon. The cost of deploying linux and teach the employees to use it is far cheaper than upgrading to Vista.
Get your fat ass out of the sofa, stop eating fusking fat food and stop bashing EU for doing what you should do in the US but are too lazy to do. You lack the cojones to do something about it, so you start bitching about the others that do have them. You badmouth the French, but YOU'RE the pussy ones, at least the french girls are sexy and not some big ass fat chick like your's.
GOOOOOOOOOOD
Stupid Americans ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Windows on EUrope ? FINALLY!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
competition driven by the least capable.
In no other industry can we see this incredible demand for a manufacturer to break their product apart to become a piecemeal construction of third party vendors.
Someone made the comparison “If windows was a car”… well what if it was..
Security: It would be illegal for the manufacturer to install door locks, seat belts, air bags, without offering the customer the option to remove them completely.
They would not be able to install a proprietary stereo. But would be forced to make their design based on third party formatting so that they could pry another stereo in there.
And if the new stereo shorted out the ignition system, it would somehow be the manufacturer of the car that did something wrong.
I am all for MS having the right and responsibility to provide their customers with the best possible solution they can muster. Its not just good sense to let a company own their own product, it is their responsibility to make sure that their product is every bit as good as they can make it, this is how they fulfill their sole responsibility to the share holders. Nothing makes a stock drop faster than a product problem. Especially when the product is by all measures the face of the company.
Microsoft is the biggest, most powerful company in the computer operating system arena, by far – no doubt about it. But they are there not because they are run by some kind of mafia. They are there because they provided the functionality of a GUI to a platform that was much more versatile and flexible than the Apple. They are the world leaders because they found a need and filled it to the best of their ability.
I feel for the Linux and apple users out there, it is basically sad because they are both good systems, but incapable of filling the need that Microsoft has created. And it doesn’t matter where the need comes from, its just a matter of filling it.
Lets look at that from the Car standpoint again. Is it really important to know why the Freeways have popped up all over the world, or is it important to realize that building a car that can only travel at 30mph / 50kmh is not going to have a large market outside of city regions, and a limited one inside those as well.
I wish that the limitations on MS would end. They have the ball, we should let them run with it. Not change the rules of the game as we go along to prevent them from scoring.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Flip4Mac DO NOT DOWNLOAD!!!!!
If you try to uninstall Flip4Mac, you when trying to delete file off my computer I get the following message: The operation cannot be completed because you do not have sufficient privileges for "Flip4Mac WMV.mpkg". Fuck that! I don't have permission to delete a wmv file off my own computer. Microsoft IS a virus.
Microsoft or Apple, I don't care but proprietary software and systems which do not allow the user/owner to easily delete is trespassing on your computer. Europeans, Americans and All: Call this violation into question.
Yahoo is no friggen better
[ link to this | view in chronology ]