Windows IT Pro is the leading independent community for IT professionals deploying Microsoft Windows server and client applications and technologies.
  
  
  Advanced Search 


February 06, 2004

WinInfo Short Takes: Week of February 9

RSS
Subscribe to Windows IT Pro | See More News and Analysis Articles Here | Reprints | Or get the Monthly Online Pass—only $5.95 a month!

An often irreverent look at some of the week's other news...

What's Up with IE and the Eolas Patent?
   When Microsoft announced last week that it wouldn't change Microsoft Internet Explorer (IE) slightly to accommodate Eolas's controversial patent for Web browser add-ons, many readers asked me whether that decision means that Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2) won't include any of the IE changes we've already seen in the SP2 beta. Here's the good news: In XP SP2, Microsoft will indeed update IE to include most of the changes we've already seen, including the pop-up ad blocker. Only the changes that the Eolas patent required, which involve the way IE handles add-ons, won't be included.

Microsoft Offers MyDoom Removal Tool
   Yesterday, Microsoft released a small, free tool that will remove the MyDoom and MyDoom.B viruses from computers running XP and Windows 2000. According to the company, "the tool automatically checks for infection and removes the worm(s) if found. If a machine is infected with MyDoom.B, the tool will also provide the user with the default version of the 'host' file and set the 'read-only' attribute for that file. This action will allow the user to visit previously blocked Microsoft and antivirus Web sites. After execution, the tool pops up a message describing the outcome of the detection/removal. The tool can be safely deleted after execution." You can find more information about the tool and grab the free download from the Microsoft Web site

What to Expect in Xbox Next
   Microsoft's next-generation Xbox console (Xbox Next in Redmond parlance) might still be more than a year away, but details about the product are starting to leak. According to reports, Xbox Next will feature three 64-bit IBM microprocessors, a next-generation ATI Technologies graphics chip and Longhorn-based graphics libraries, 256MB to 512MB of RAM, and a DVD or Blu-ray drive. The most important feature of Xbox Next, however, is its delivery schedule. For Microsoft to be successful with this release, the company must ship the console before Sony launches its eagerly awaited PlayStation 3, now expected in 2006. Also, Microsoft is reportedly wrestling with how to make Xbox Next compatible with the first generation of Xbox titles, given the changes to the underlying platform. Heads up, Microsoft: If Xbox Next doesn't run first-generation Xbox games, you might as well just pack it up and go home.

California Consumers Not Taking Advantage of Microsoft Settlement
   Microsoft settled a massive class-action antitrust lawsuit with the state of California months ago, giving residents in the state the chance to collect $1.1 billion worth of vouchers they can use to purchase computer hardware or software products of their choice. The settlement was a big win for consumer-friendly California, with just one caveat: To date, few Californians have actually taken advantage of the voucher program. "USA TODAY" noted that fewer than 1 million residents have responded, despite notification mailings to 17 million people. The deadline for filing a claim is March 15, and if Californians don't take advantage of the program, Microsoft will give a portion of the total settlement amount to the state's poorest schools and will keep the rest.

IE Changes Protect Users. What About Mozilla and Safari?
   This week, Microsoft disabled a standards-based Web browser authentication method that malicious attackers are using in so-called phishing operations to scam people into revealing their credit card numbers and other personal information. But other browsers, such as Mozilla and Apple Computer's Safari, still exhibit this behavior, and users of those products could easily be scammed. I wonder when other browser makers will start protecting their users. You can find more information about this tactic on the Microsoft Web Site.

Microsoft Heads to Trial ... In Minnesota
   Microsoft is facing a damaging antitrust trial again, but this time the US government or the European Union (EU) isn't squaring off against the software monopolist--the state of Minnesota is. Unlike many states, Minnesota hasn't settled a class-action lawsuit it brought against Microsoft for overpricing its products between 1994 and 2001. The case will go to trial March 1, with Minnesota seeking an estimated $285 million to $425 million in damages. Humorously, Microsoft says it has never overcharged for its software, but the company has already paid $1.55 billion to settle similar class-action lawsuits in nine other states and the District of Columbia.

Where Are All the Games We Were Promised?
   "Half-Life 2." "Doom 3." "Halo 2." The list of pulse-pounding, next-generation, first-person shooters many gamers had expected to be enjoying by late last year but have instead slipped into the nether regions of 2004 is expanding at an alarming rate. I have to wonder what's going on. Come on, guys, I can only replay "Medal of Honor" so many times.

Mike Rowe Cashes In on Microsoft Lawsuit ... On eBay
   Canadian teenager Mike Rowe might have folded like the proverbial stack of playing cards in the face of a legal challenge from Microsoft over his MikeRoweSoft domain name, but the plucky Xbox owner is making up for it in a different way--by auctioning his legal correspondence with Microsoft on eBay. Rowe reportedly earned more than $1000 for the paperwork, a far cry from the millions of dollars he probably could have earned for embarrassing Microsoft in court. Ah well.

Conflict of Interest? Microsoft Lawyer Joins Antitrust Panel
   Isn't this situation the same as the head of a beef council leading a panel on mad cow disease? In what can only be termed "News of the Bizarre," one of Microsoft's top lawyers will run a legal committee that will influence how much oversight US courts can exercise in antitrust settlements. Microsoft, you'll likely recall, was the benefactor of the softest antitrust settlement in US history, but the company isn't interested in ensuring that future monopolists get the same break it did. Instead, Microsoft will actually have a say in determining how the courts can oversee its current settlement, if you can believe that. This state of affairs isn't just ironic; it should be illegal.

Microsoft Wins a Patent Case--Really
   With all the gloomy legal news surrounding Microsoft lately (the previous blurb notwithstanding), you might be interested to hear that the company recently beat back a patent-infringement claim in a successful court case. This week, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in a 2-to-1 ruling that the software giant didn't violate Multi-Tech Systems' patents. Based in Minneapolis, Multi-Tech holds various patents relating to transferring data, video, and voice through communications hardware, and the company had previously (and unsuccessfully) tried to sue Compaq, Dell, and Gateway. Companies like this are an embarrassment to the industry. Shame on you, Multi-Tech.

IIS Number One Among Top Internet Sites
   This statistic might sound like an April fool's joke, but a new survey of the top 1000 Internet sites--which researchers at Port80 Software say is a meaningful way to measure actual Web server product use--says that Microsoft IIS, not Apache, is the most-often-used Web server product in the world. Port80 Software says that IIS controls 43.1 percent of the top 1000 sites, compared with 39.7 for Apache and 8.7 percent for Netscape. Port80 Software is a privately held company and, no, Microsoft didn't instigate or fund the survey. 

End of Article



Reader Comments
While I generally support the use of the Port80 statistics, rather than Netcraft's, I must point out that their survey is of the Fortune 1000 companies, not of the 'Top 1000 Internet Sites'. Some of these companies have quite small sites. It also doesn't cover, for example, government departments.

I do think it's a more meaningful statistic than Netcraft's, which heavily favours hosting companies and ISPs.

Mike Dimmick February 06, 2004


Paul,

It seems like you have been attacked so hard that you are now reaching for stuff to attack MS on.

The government committee thing was one such reach. Does this lawer still works for MS? Is MS the only "monopoly" in the US? Is this the only committee on this topic? Does the committee have any real power? ...

Sam Jones February 06, 2004


I bought a 9600 in the hope that HL2 would atleast ship by Christmas. Oh well.

Now Valve is saying Summer 2004:

http://money.cnn.com/2004/02/02/commentary/game_over/column_gaming/index.htm

Lynn Eriksen February 06, 2004


The California settlement proves... No matter how much the states claim the consumer has been harmed, the consumer doesn't feel harmed to the degree of seeking compensation.

This situation isn't about Microsoft doing genuine harm to consumers (competing products, MacOS, boxed Red Hat, etc are all in the same price category), but rather competitors of Microsoft using the courts to compete in a manner they are otherwise incapable in the open market.

Software platform (and related services) is one of the few places that I feel a near-monopoly is beneficial. We can't plunge back into the days of worrying about interoperability. Just a few years ago we lost far too much time 'making things work'.

Speaking as a software architect of enterprise software, Microsoft is not standing in my way... If I had really wanted to write a competing product to MS Exchange, SQL Server, etc, I have plenty of documentation to do so. The problem is that almost every single competitor of Microsoft doesn't have nearly the R&D budget to create something of quality. These other firms don't understand that competition is a Herculean effort. Outsourcing the lion's share of development to the lowest over-seas, third-party sweat-shop, will not yield software quality even remotely comparable. If MS is guilty of anything, it's usually hiring the brightest people and paying them handfuls of cash.

Put another way, whenever I pitch the architectural plan to a new package I usually go in with a high-end and low-end plan. The high-end is always the most professional way to go, with the low-end plan being described as 'Workable, but the ramifications of this decision might not be known for some time until issues become manifest.' Take a guess which one gets selected?

Christopher February 06, 2004


As good as it is that the top 1000 web sites run IIS, what does this say about everyone else, not in that top 1000.
Surely those using Apache, are doing so because it's cheaper that having to buy Windows, and is pretty easy to configure (even my friend with no server skills and bad eyesight has managed to set up his own apache server).

I'm a Microsoft person, I've learnt my trade on Microsoft platforms - but had I been more aggressive in my teenage years, and wanted to set up my own server at home and set up my own website, I could not have afforded the cost of buying a Microsoft Server product - I could have afforded Linux though.

I've often wondered if Microsoft is loosing out, because young teenage geeks, wanting to learn about servers in their bedroom, are turning to the affordable Linux, and then, a few years later, entering the market with Linux skills.

Mark Lomas February 06, 2004


IE Changes Protect Users. What About Mozilla and Safari?

They don't have to. Remember the reason this mode was dropped was so that the non-visible URL bug in IE would not be exploited (i.e. a URL with say www.microsoft.com\0@www.myevilwebsite.com) IE would only show you www.microsoft.com but you would really go to myevilwebsite.com. Neither Safari or Mozilla have this bug so you can see where you are going. Remember the stuff before @ was supposed to a username/password to get into a website. (There is an RFC on this.) Sending a password in the clear is not too smart but that's a problem of the website designer not the browser. Anyway since neither Safari or Mozilla have the hide the website name problem they don't have to reduce the functionality of the browser and not fully meet the RFC specifications of HTTP.

--jim

Jim Schimpf February 06, 2004


The "standards-based Web browser authentication method" that Microsoft disabled in the IE patch is in fact not a standard. The general URL format can include a username:password@host syntax, however the HTTP URL format explicitly specifies that this syntax is not to be used.

http://www.w3.org/Addressing/rfc1738.txt

Section 3.3: "An HTTP URL takes the form:
http://<host>:<port>/<path>?<searchpart>
...
No user name or password is allowed.
..."

So, kudos for MS for reverting back to the real standard, although this technicality was not the reason for the change.

Jonathan H. February 06, 2004


> but when will other browser makers protect their users as well?

Excuse me? M$ is responsible for untold billions of dollars of productivity lost because they fail to ship a secure OS (as delivered, or otherwise.) Good attempt to throw stones at Apple, but it just doesn't ring true!

What's the frequency, Kenneth February 06, 2004


Where can I read the Port80 report about IIS?

James Kelly February 06, 2004


A couple of points about the "IIS Number One" blurb. Port80 Software's business is "Web Server Modules for Microsoft IIS." I think that's important. Second, the top 100 sites includes at least nine that are run by Microsoft itself. These are:

Microsoft.com
Msn.com
Passport.com
Passport.net
Windowsmedia.com
Msnbc.com
Go.com
Expedia.com
Windows.com

Each of these are counted separately. Surely, this study is not telling the whole story, and particularly not saying what your blurb implies, that people other than Microsoft more often choose IIS than Apache. I'd like to see the numbers with people that have a stake in the servers taken out (AOL for AOL Server, Microsoft/MSN/Go.com/Passport for IIS, and apache.org/Redhat/Apple/perhaps IBM for Apache). This would represent a study that tried to show what customers most often choose.

Ben

Ben

Ben February 06, 2004


 See More Comments  1   2   3 

You must be a registered user or online subscriber to comment on this article. Please log on before posting a comment. Are you a new visitor? Register now




Top Viewed ArticlesView all articles
Confirmed: Battery Life Issues Not Windows 7's Fault

Microsoft on Monday issued a lengthy statement about the recent Windows 7 battery controversy, echoing my assessment from earlier in the day, but backing it up with hard, cold evidence. ...

Battery Life Issues Almost Certainly Not Windows 7's Fault

While Microsoft is still investigating a notebook battery life issue that was supposedly caused by Windows 7, some interesting trends have emerged. ...

Microsoft Warns of Windows Version Expirations

Microsoft warned that this year will see three out-of-date Windows versions slip into retirement. ...


Related Events Check out our list of Free Email Newsletters!

News and Analysis eBooks Getting Maximum Performance from Your Web-based Applications

Business Process Automation - Managing Cost in Your Enterprise

Related News and Analysis Resources Introducing Left-Brain.com, the online IT bookstore
Looking for books, CDs, toolkits, eBooks? Prime your mind at Left-Brain.com

Discover Windows IT Pro eLearning Series!
Clear & detailed technical information and helpful how-to's, all in our trademark no-nonsense format


Windows IT Pro Home Register FAQ for Windows WinInfo News
Europe Edition About Us Contact Us/Customer Service Media Kit Affiliates / Licensing  
SQL Server Magazine Office & SharePoint Pro DevProConnections IT Job Hound
Left-Brain.com Technology Resource Directory asp.netPRO ITTV Windows SuperSite 
 
 Windows IT Pro is a Division of Penton Media Inc.
 © 2010 Penton Media, Inc. Terms of Use | Privacy Statement