News Stay informed about the latest enterprise technology news and product updates.

EC to Microsoft on interop: Show me

Prove it.

The European Commission has heard it all before when it comes to Microsoft’s vows to be more interoperable and generally better behaved than in the past. Basically, Microsoft has never won good marks in the “works well with others” category, at least in the eyes of European regulators.

Microsoft’s latest interoperability  efforts — were outlined today by Steve Ballmer, Ray Ozzie, Bob Muglia and Brad Smith on a conference call. And the moves appear to be pretty aggressive.

But the EC appears unmoved.

In a statement posted to its Web site, the EC says it’s heard all this before.

Money quote:

“The European Commission takes note of today’s announcement by Microsoft of its intention to commit to a number of principles in order to promote interoperability with some of its high market share software products. This announcement does not relate to the question of whether or not Microsoft has been complying with EU antitrust rules in this area in the past. The Commission would welcome any move towards genuine interoperability. Nonetheless, the Commission notes that today’s announcement follows at least four similar statements by Microsoft in the past on the importance of interoperability.”

So there.

Join the conversation


Send me notifications when other members comment.

Please create a username to comment.

There's a mistake in---individuals and interactions over processes and documentation...It;s not documentation instead it's tools.
At my organization, we are organized around product divisions. I think that it works out well for us, for the most part. It's been this way for years, and I can't really think of instances in which we ended up duplicating code across teams. Usually, different products that we work on have such different functionalities and requirements that we rarely need to do similar things. On the other hand, the products do tend to require a good deal of domain knowledge, so I think that most of us prefer for our teams to be organized around products.
What is 'magile'?   Or is that a typo for agile?  Wasn't sure if the author was trying to coin a term or if it was an error?