Federal antitrust oversight of Microsoft formally ends | Hacker News Reader

Federal antitrust oversight of Microsoft formally ends

news.yahoo.com

10 pointsendergen8 comments

I remember watching the anti-trust tapes of Bill G's deposition.

The prosecution was absolutely clueless about the technology in question, to the extreme point of trying to link Windows "shortcuts" to some type of anti-competitive behavior.

With a large organization such as Microsoft, you will generate a lot of "dots" (random internal memos/conversation and other other points) that will then be further connected by "lines" (in the court room), and your guilt will be obvious.

I'm not saying that Microsoft did not engage in anti-competitive behavior, but just that the courtroom is the last place you will find the truth.

I thought Microsoft required OEMs to place shortcuts to its pre-installed software while disallowing them to install shortcuts to competitors' software.

Is this what you're talking about? If it is, don't you think it is indeed an anti-competitive practice?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYLBA1Ldq6M

It's in one of the 10 parts.

There was a misunderstanding about what a desktop shortcut was.

It will be interesting to see if Microsoft's behavior changes. I suspect it will get worse now that oversight is gone. Ballmer's the kind of guy who would want to take the lead in shady PR back from Facebook.

Perhaps I will be surprised, though.

Unlikely. The company is still under intense scrutiny from the EU to publish API documentation.

It's actually kind of sad, because the company burns thousands of man years writing API docs for things no one actually uses. It's certainly not the only reason, but it's another factor in why they ship so infrequently.

It's not ridiculously hard to generate automatic documentation from comments. A healthy side-effect would be that the quality of the code would increase and precisely match the quality of the documentation. If the documentation is lacking, incomplete or wrong, you go and fix the comments in the source code and regenerate the docs.

If a programmer told you that if skipping documenting the source code would allow it to be delivered sooner, would you buy it? What's next? Skipping tests?

In my projects my team routinely generates not only API documentation, but also unit-tests from comments. This way, if the docs are wrong, the tests fail.

API documentation isn't the issue. MS has that covered easy. Rather its protocols. And the EU standard is a fair bit higher than say the C standard, because there is no such thing as undefined behavior.

MS must specify what happens in all conditions on all potential configurations of all their systems. I need to look it up but I think its like 50K plus pages of non API docs.

Don't they at least have documentation for people who are expected to use these APIs internally? How could they not? And why would that info not be suitable for public release after minor redaction?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com