3 ms·
I think they did this because the anti-trust ruling from the early 2000s does not apply to ARM-based computers, only Intel-based machines. I guess the software
by narrator 9y ago
I think they did this because the anti-trust ruling from the early 2000s does not apply to ARM-based computers, only Intel-based machines. I guess the software lockdown proves that Microsoft hasn't changed and the late 90s Microsoft is still with us.
- newhouseb 9y agoNot that I don't believe you, but is there a source for this (the anti-trust ruling being specific to Intel hardware)? I'd love to read more about the specifics.
- narrator 9y agoIf you read the Wikipedia page and the linked ruling, you'll see that the language is very specific to "Operating Systems on Intel Compatible PCs". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_C....
- benaadams 9y agoAnd it expired 8 - 10 years ago > Microsoft's obligations under the settlement, as originally drafted, expired on November 12, 2007. However, Microsoft later "agreed to consent to a two-year extension of part of the Final Judgments" dealing with communications protocol licensing.