3 ms·

> Microsoft now finds themselves in the same position their competitors found themselves in the IE6 era. Could you please give some examples ? Did windows ever

> Microsoft now finds themselves in the same position their competitors found themselves in the IE6 era. Could you please give some examples ? Did windows ever blocked a competitors product ?

msla 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code > The AARD code was a segment of code in a beta release of Microsoft Windows 3.1 that would determine whether Windows was running on MS-DOS or PC DOS, rather than a competing workalike such as DR-DOS, and would result in a cryptic error message in the latter case. This XOR-encrypted, self-modifying, and deliberately obfuscated machine code used a variety of undocumented DOS structures and functions to perform its work, and appeared in the installer, WIN.COM, and several other executables in the OS.[1] https://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/11/05/how_ms_played_the_incompatibility/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/11/05/how_ms_played_the_i... > Microsoft had several methods of detecting and sabotaging the use of DR-DOS with Windows, one incorporated into "Bambi", the code name that Microsoft used for its disk cache utility (SMARTDRV) that detected DR-DOS and refused to load it for Windows 3.1. The AARD code trickery is well-known, but Caldera is now pursuing four other deliberate incompatibilities. One of them was a version check in XMS in the Windows 3.1 setup program which produced the message: "The XMS driver you have installed is not compatible with Windows. You must remove it before setup can successfully install Windows."
- aksss 7y ago
  I think question was about ie6 era, which is like 2001.
  - dblohm7 7y ago
    In 2001 US v Microsoft was still ongoing and Microsoft was just about to sign their consent decree with the USDOJ[1]. Those kinds of shenanigans weren't really possible for them until the consent decrees expired. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
  - cmendel 7y ago
    1999 and 2001 are only 2 years apart though...
AaronFriel 7y ago
They find themselves in the same position of being a minority with a powerful, majority market share competitor that has the ability to put their products front and center (e.g.: on google.com and other Google properties). I think the IE6 era was bad for the web for a lot of reasons, but fortunately the investigations into Microsoft made it harder for them to abuse their overwhelming marketshare.

> Microsoft now finds themselves in the same position their competitors found themselves in the IE6 era. Could you please give some examples ? Did windows ever blocked a competitors product ?

msla 7y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code > The AARD code was a segment of code in a beta release of Microsoft Windows 3.1 that would determine whether Windows was running on MS-DOS or PC DOS, rather than a competing workalike such as DR-DOS, and would result in a cryptic error message in the latter case. This XOR-encrypted, self-modifying, and deliberately obfuscated machine code used a variety of undocumented DOS structures and functions to perform its work, and appeared in the installer, WIN.COM, and several other executables in the OS.[1] https://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/11/05/how_ms_played_the_incompatibility/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/11/05/how_ms_played_the_i... > Microsoft had several methods of detecting and sabotaging the use of DR-DOS with Windows, one incorporated into "Bambi", the code name that Microsoft used for its disk cache utility (SMARTDRV) that detected DR-DOS and refused to load it for Windows 3.1. The AARD code trickery is well-known, but Caldera is now pursuing four other deliberate incompatibilities. One of them was a version check in XMS in the Windows 3.1 setup program which produced the message: "The XMS driver you have installed is not compatible with Windows. You must remove it before setup can successfully install Windows."

aksss 7y ago
I think question was about ie6 era, which is like 2001.
- dblohm7 7y ago
  In 2001 US v Microsoft was still ongoing and Microsoft was just about to sign their consent decree with the USDOJ[1]. Those kinds of shenanigans weren't really possible for them until the consent decrees expired. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
- cmendel 7y ago
  1999 and 2001 are only 2 years apart though...

AaronFriel 7y ago

They find themselves in the same position of being a minority with a powerful, majority market share competitor that has the ability to put their products front and center (e.g.: on google.com and other Google properties). I think the IE6 era was bad for the web for a lot of reasons, but fortunately the investigations into Microsoft made it harder for them to abuse their overwhelming marketshare.