Previous message: "Microsoft asks for 4-mo delay before antitrust punishments levied" http://www.politechbot.com/p-02962.html ******* To: declanat_private cc: politechat_private, geerat_private Subject: Re: FC: Justice Department offes details of Microsoft antitrust deal In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 15 Nov 2001 19:39:51 EST." <5.1.0.14.0.20011115192825.02381500at_private> Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 22:19:16 -0500 From: Dan Geer <geerat_private> So you remember that old joke? The masochist and the sadist are walking down the street. The masochist says "Beat me." The sadist says "No." Well, here's my idea. The remedy that Microsoft succefully avoided was to have its code base broken up among two or more units. However, as we all know, the quality control cost of any system rises with the square of the number of components. Since Microsoft cannot charge the usurious upgrade prices on which their revenue growth, and therefore their shareholder value, depends without substantial feature expansion, the component count must grow linearly (50 new features) if not geometrically (10% new features) per unit time, the quality control costs for them face a cost curve that becomes untenable at some point, the only question being when not if. Therefore, the greatest punishment you can possibly impose on Microsoft is to forbid them to break up their code base into integrable product lines as it marries them to a cost curve that will kill them in due course. Having sworn in court, settled in camera, and committed their reputation in public to the common argument that their code base cannot be broken up, they will now either reverse their position or march off the cliff. YMMV, --dan ******* Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 09:36:43 +0100 To: declanat_private From: Peter Kaiser <kaiserat_private> Subject: Re: FC: Microsoft fesses up to huge security breach in Windows XP Cc: kaiserat_private In-Reply-To: <20011221122734.A18069at_private> > Microsoft spokesman Tom Laemmel said the flaw "slipped through" the > company's testing process but that XP's security still is superior to > that of previous Windows versions. > > "When we say Windows XP is the most secure system ever we're not saying > it's perfect," he said. "No, we're saying it's the most secure system we've marketed under the 'Windows' brand with an 'X' designation this year. On that we stand firmly committed." It's the timing that makes the comedian. (Note that in French the word "comedien" means simply "actor".) ___Pete ******* ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/ To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Dec 23 2001 - 22:57:39 PST