Microsoft: Difference between revisions

Line 9:

}}[[Wikipedia:Microsoft|'''''Microsoft Corporation''''']] was founded in 1975 by ''Bill Gates'' and ''Paul Allen'' in Albuquerque, New Mexico. It is one of the "Big Five" tech giants, well known for licensing ''Q-DOS'' from ''Seattle Computer Product''s as ''MS-DOS'' prior to purchasing it in 1980, as well as ''Windows'', the graphical extension to ''MS-DO''S. They are also known for developing the ''Microsoft'' ''Office Suite; Access,'' ''Excel, PowerPoint, Publisher, and'' ''Word''. Additionally, they developed the Xbox under ''the Microsoft'' ''Gaming'' division and the ''Surface'' line of laptop devices and the cloud platform ''Azure''.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Zachary |first=Gregg Pascal |last2=Hall |first2=Mark |last3=Montevirgen |first3=Karl |title=Microsoft-Corporation |url=https://www.britannica.com/money/Microsoft-Corporation |url-status=live |website=britannica.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Miller |first=Michael |date=August 12, 2021 |title=The Rise of DOS: How Microsoft Got the IBM PC OS Contract |url=https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-rise-of-dos-how-microsoft-got-the-ibm-pc-os-contract |url-status=live |website=PCmag}}</ref>

Through business acquisitions they own numerous other tech-related businesses. They invest heavily in artificial intelligence enterprises, ''OpenAI'' (best known for creating ''ChatGPT'').

Through business acquisitions they own numerous other tech-related businesses.{{Citation needed|reason=which companies? why is this relevant?}} They invest heavily in artificial intelligence enterprises, ''OpenAI'' (best known for creating ''ChatGPT'').{{Citation needed}}

==Consumer impact summary==

Line 41:

===Privacy and data exploitation===

*'''Collaboration with surveillance'''

:Working with the NSA and FBI to bypass encryption (PRISM program) and access user data (Skype, Outlook).~~<ref name=":5">~~{{Cite web |last=Milin-Ashmore |first=James |date=October 15, 2019 |title=Microsoft Alternatives Guide: How (and Why) to Avoid Microsoft |url=https://ethical.net/ethical/microsoft-alternatives/ |website= }}~~</ref>~~

:Working with the NSA and FBI to bypass encryption (PRISM program) and access user data (Skype, Outlook).{{Citation needed}}

*'''Unauthorized data collection'''

:Contractors reportedly listened to Xbox/Skype/Cortana audio without clear user consent.~~<ref name=":5"></ref>~~

:Contractors reportedly listened to Xbox/Skype/Cortana audio without clear user consent.{{Citation needed}}

*'''Dark patterns in Windows'''

:Manipulative UI designs to nudge users toward data-sharing opt-ins.~~<ref name=":5"></ref>~~

:Manipulative UI designs to nudge users toward data-sharing opt-ins.{{Citation needed}}

===Ethical and legal controversies===

*'''Censorship compliance'''

:Removing content from Bing/LinkedIn to appease authoritarian regimes (e.g., China).~~<ref name=":5"></ref>~~

:Removing content from Bing/LinkedIn to appease authoritarian regimes (e.g., China).{{Citation needed}}

*'''Military contracts'''

:Developing ''HoloLens AR'' tech for the U.S. Army to "turn warfare into a video game," contrary to employee expectations.~~<ref name=":5"></ref>~~

:Developing ''HoloLens AR'' tech for the U.S. Army to "turn warfare into a video game," contrary to employee expectations.{{Citation needed}}

*'''Patent aggression'''

:Threatening open-source projects like calling Linux a "cancer" and suing small entities such as MikeRoweSoft.com.~~<ref name=":5"></ref>~~

:Threatening open-source projects like calling Linux a "cancer" and suing small entities such as MikeRoweSoft.com.{{Citation needed}}

===Market manipulation and stifling innovation===

*'''Artificial price inflation'''

:Overcharging consumers by $20–30 billion for Windows licenses in the 1990s by hiding costs in PC bundles.<ref name=":0"></ref>

*'''Acquisition dominance'''

:Buying competitors like GitHub, VS Code, and LinkedIn to absorb markets and limit alternatives.~~<ref name=":5"></ref>~~

:Buying competitors like GitHub, VS Code, and LinkedIn to absorb markets and limit alternatives.{{Citation needed}}

*'''Delaying competitors'''

:Intentionally slowing development of rival products like IBM and Apple through contractual or technical barriers.<ref name=":0"></ref>

===Monopolization===

*Exclusive licensing agreements with ''IBM'' and other PC manufacturers ensured that ''MS-DOS'' became the dominant OS.

*Exclusive licensing agreements with ''IBM'' and other PC manufacturers ensured that ''MS-DOS'' became the dominant OS.{{Citation needed}}

*Priced ''MS-DOS'' significantly lower than competitors, making it the default choice for PC makers.

*Priced ''MS-DOS'' significantly lower than competitors, making it the default choice for PC makers.{{Citation needed}}

*Launched ''Windows 1.0'' in 1985, as a graphical extension of ''MS-DOS''. They had over 90% of the PC market by the 1990's.<ref>{{Cite web |date=January 29, 2002 |title=Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices And Consumer Harm In The Software Industry: An Analysis Of The Inadequacies Of The Microsoft-Department Of Justice Proposed Final Judgment |url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |website=justice.gov }}</ref>

*Integrated ''Internet Explorer'' (IE) with ''Windows'', making it difficult for users to choose alternatives like ''Netscape Navigator''. This led to the U.S. vs. Microsoft antitrust case (1998), where the company was found guilty of illegally maintaining a monopoly.~~<ref name=":5" />~~

*Integrated ''Internet Explorer'' (IE) with ''Windows'', making it difficult for users to choose alternatives like ''Netscape Navigator''. This led to the U.S. vs. Microsoft antitrust case (1998), where the company was found guilty of illegally maintaining a monopoly.{{Citation needed}}

*Allegedly used "embrace, extend, extinguish" tactics; adopting open standards, extending them with proprietary features, and then pushing competitors out.<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |date=January 25, 2002 |title=Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices And Consumer Harm In The Software Industry: An Analysis Of The Inadequacies Of The Microsoft-Department Of Justice Proposed Final Judgment |url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |website=justice.gov}}</ref>

*Charging higher fees for running ''Windows Server'' on rival clouds (e.g., ''AWS'', ''Google Cloud'') versus ''Azure''.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Browne |first=Ryan |date=December 3, 2024 |title=Microsoft faces £1 billion lawsuit in UK for allegedly overcharging rival cloud firms’ customers |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2024/12/03/microsoft-overcharging-rival-cloud-firms-customers-uk-lawsuit-says.html |website=CNBC}}</ref>

Line 83:

===Court cases up to the early 2000s===

In a major antitrust case brought by the ''US Department of Justice'', ''U.S. v.'' Microsoft Corp'''''.''','' 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001),~~<ref name=":5">[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/253/34/576095/ "U.S. v. Microsoft Corp., 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001)"] - law.justia.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref>~~ Microsoft argued that there was no barrier to entry in the market they were in. A central issue at that time was whether Microsoft could bundle the web browser ''Internet Explorer'' with the Microsoft Windows operating system. The ''District Court'' stated the following in the court case: <blockquote>"The District Court condemned a number of provisions in Microsoft's agreements licensing Windows to OEMs, because it found that Microsoft's imposition of those provisions (like many of Microsoft's other actions at issue in this case) serves to reduce usage share of ''Netscape''<nowiki/>'s browser and, hence, protect Microsoft's operating system monopoly."</blockquote>The court specifically identified three main license restrictions for [[Original Equipment Manufacturers]] (OEMs) that were considered problematic:

In a major antitrust case brought by the ''US Department of Justice'', ''U.S. v.'' Microsoft Corp'''''.''','' 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001),{{Citation needed}} Microsoft argued that there was no barrier to entry in the market they were in. A central issue at that time was whether Microsoft could bundle the web browser ''Internet Explorer'' with the Microsoft Windows operating system. The ''District Court'' stated the following in the court case: <blockquote>"The District Court condemned a number of provisions in Microsoft's agreements licensing Windows to OEMs, because it found that Microsoft's imposition of those provisions (like many of Microsoft's other actions at issue in this case) serves to reduce usage share of ''Netscape''<nowiki/>'s browser and, hence, protect Microsoft's operating system monopoly."</blockquote>The court specifically identified three main license restrictions for [[Original Equipment Manufacturers]] (OEMs) that were considered problematic:

#The prohibition upon the removal of desktop icons, folders, and Start menu entries

Line 97:

===Xbox 360 Defect - The "Red Ring of Death"===

In 2005, Microsoft released the ''Xbox 360''. Not very long after, consumers started reporting problems with their consoles- three red flashing lights on the ring around the power button. This was coined by consumers as the "''Red Ring of Death''", and by 2007, ''Xbox''<nowiki/>'s hardware engineers eventually discovered that the reason for it was a defect in the ''Xbox 360''<nowiki/>'s GPU.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=December 13, 2021 |title=Power On: The Story of Xbox {{!}} Chapter 5: The Red Ring of Death |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch? |url-status=live |access-date=June 4, 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref>

In 2005, Microsoft released the ''Xbox 360''. Not very long after, consumers started reporting problems with their consoles- three red flashing lights on the ring around the power button. This was coined by consumers as the "''Red Ring of Death''", and by 2007, ''Xbox''<nowiki/>'s hardware engineers eventually discovered that the reason for it was a defect in the ''Xbox 360''<nowiki/>'s GPU.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=December 13, 2021 |title=Power On: The Story of Xbox {{!}} Chapter 5: The Red Ring of Death |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch? |url-status=live |access-date=June 4, 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref>

For the first several months of this incident's height of prevalence in 2006, consumers had to pay to get their consoles fixed by Microsoft if the console was outside of its one year warranty. However, by September 2007, they chose to extend the warranty to three years from the date of original purchase, and refunded anyone who had previously paid to get this issue fixed.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Moore |first=Peter |date=2007 |title=Open Letter from Peter Moore |url=http://xbox.com/en-ca/support/petermooreletter.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071023004948/http://xbox.com/en-ca/support/petermooreletter.htm |archive-date=23 Oct 2007 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=Xbox}}</ref> Judging from current and former employees' comments in the ''Xbox'' documentary, ''Power On: The Story of Xbox'', Microsoft seemed to have primarily done this to rescue the ''Xbox'' brand.<ref name=":2" /> Nonetheless, this was still beneficial to consumers who had made an investment in and enjoyed games from Microsoft's console.

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 }}[[Wikipedia:Microsoft|'''''Microsoft Corporation''''']] was founded in 1975 by ''Bill Gates'' and ''Paul Allen'' in Albuquerque, New Mexico. It is one of the "Big Five" tech giants, well known for licensing ''Q-DOS'' from ''Seattle Computer Product''s as ''MS-DOS'' prior to purchasing it in 1980, as well as ''Windows'', the graphical extension to ''MS-DO''S. They are also known for developing the ''Microsoft'' ''Office Suite; Access,'' ''Excel, PowerPoint, Publisher, and'' ''Word''. Additionally, they developed the Xbox under ''the Microsoft'' ''Gaming'' division and the ''Surface'' line of laptop devices and the cloud platform ''Azure''.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Zachary |first=Gregg Pascal |last2=Hall |first2=Mark |last3=Montevirgen |first3=Karl |title=Microsoft-Corporation |url=https://www.britannica.com/money/Microsoft-Corporation |url-status=live |website=britannica.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Miller |first=Michael |date=August 12, 2021 |title=The Rise of DOS: How Microsoft Got the IBM PC OS Contract |url=https://www.pcmag.com/news/the-rise-of-dos-how-microsoft-got-the-ibm-pc-os-contract |url-status=live |website=PCmag}}</ref>
-Through business acquisitions they own numerous other tech-related businesses. They invest heavily in artificial intelligence enterprises, ''OpenAI'' (best known for creating ''ChatGPT'').
+Through business acquisitions they own numerous other tech-related businesses.{{Citation needed|reason=which companies? why is this relevant?}} They invest heavily in artificial intelligence enterprises, ''OpenAI'' (best known for creating ''ChatGPT'').{{Citation needed}}
 ==Consumer impact summary==
@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 ===Privacy and data exploitation===
 *'''Collaboration with surveillance'''
-:Working with the NSA and FBI to bypass encryption (PRISM program) and access user data (Skype, Outlook).<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |last=Milin-Ashmore |first=James |date=October 15, 2019 |title=Microsoft Alternatives Guide: How (and Why) to Avoid Microsoft |url=https://ethical.net/ethical/microsoft-alternatives/ |website= }}</ref>
+:Working with the NSA and FBI to bypass encryption (PRISM program) and access user data (Skype, Outlook).{{Citation needed}}
 *'''Unauthorized data collection'''
-:Contractors reportedly listened to Xbox/Skype/Cortana audio without clear user consent.<ref name=":5"></ref>
+:Contractors reportedly listened to Xbox/Skype/Cortana audio without clear user consent.{{Citation needed}}
 *'''Dark patterns in Windows'''
-:Manipulative UI designs to nudge users toward data-sharing opt-ins.<ref name=":5"></ref>
+:Manipulative UI designs to nudge users toward data-sharing opt-ins.{{Citation needed}}
 ===Ethical and legal controversies===
 *'''Censorship compliance'''
-:Removing content from Bing/LinkedIn to appease authoritarian regimes (e.g., China).<ref name=":5"></ref>
+:Removing content from Bing/LinkedIn to appease authoritarian regimes (e.g., China).{{Citation needed}}
 *'''Military contracts'''
-:Developing ''HoloLens AR'' tech for the U.S. Army to "turn warfare into a video game," contrary to employee expectations.<ref name=":5"></ref>
+:Developing ''HoloLens AR'' tech for the U.S. Army to "turn warfare into a video game," contrary to employee expectations.{{Citation needed}}
 *'''Patent aggression'''
-:Threatening open-source projects like calling Linux a "cancer" and suing small entities such as MikeRoweSoft.com.<ref name=":5"></ref>
+:Threatening open-source projects like calling Linux a "cancer" and suing small entities such as MikeRoweSoft.com.{{Citation needed}}
 ===Market manipulation and stifling innovation===
 *'''Artificial price inflation'''
 :Overcharging consumers by $20–30 billion for Windows licenses in the 1990s by hiding costs in PC bundles.<ref name=":0"></ref>
 *'''Acquisition dominance'''
-:Buying competitors like GitHub, VS Code, and LinkedIn to absorb markets and limit alternatives.<ref name=":5"></ref>
+:Buying competitors like GitHub, VS Code, and LinkedIn to absorb markets and limit alternatives.{{Citation needed}}
 *'''Delaying competitors'''
 :Intentionally slowing development of rival products like IBM and Apple through contractual or technical barriers.<ref name=":0"></ref>
 ===Monopolization===
-*Exclusive licensing agreements with ''IBM'' and other PC manufacturers ensured that ''MS-DOS'' became the dominant OS.
+*Exclusive licensing agreements with ''IBM'' and other PC manufacturers ensured that ''MS-DOS'' became the dominant OS.{{Citation needed}}
-*Priced ''MS-DOS'' significantly lower than competitors, making it the default choice for PC makers.
+*Priced ''MS-DOS'' significantly lower than competitors, making it the default choice for PC makers.{{Citation needed}}
 *Launched ''Windows 1.0'' in 1985, as a graphical extension of ''MS-DOS''. They had over 90% of the PC market by the 1990's.<ref>{{Cite web |date=January 29, 2002 |title=Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices And Consumer Harm In The Software Industry: An Analysis Of The Inadequacies Of The Microsoft-Department Of Justice Proposed Final Judgment |url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |website=justice.gov }}</ref>
-*Integrated ''Internet Explorer'' (IE) with ''Windows'', making it difficult for users to choose alternatives like ''Netscape Navigator''. This led to the U.S. vs. Microsoft antitrust case (1998), where the company was found guilty of illegally maintaining a monopoly.<ref name=":5" />
+*Integrated ''Internet Explorer'' (IE) with ''Windows'', making it difficult for users to choose alternatives like ''Netscape Navigator''. This led to the U.S. vs. Microsoft antitrust case (1998), where the company was found guilty of illegally maintaining a monopoly.{{Citation needed}}
 *Allegedly used "embrace, extend, extinguish" tactics; adopting open standards, extending them with proprietary features, and then pushing competitors out.<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |date=January 25, 2002 |title=Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices And Consumer Harm In The Software Industry: An Analysis Of The Inadequacies Of The Microsoft-Department Of Justice Proposed Final Judgment |url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |website=justice.gov}}</ref>
 *Charging higher fees for running ''Windows Server'' on rival clouds (e.g., ''AWS'', ''Google Cloud'') versus ''Azure''.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Browne |first=Ryan |date=December 3, 2024 |title=Microsoft faces £1 billion lawsuit in UK for allegedly overcharging rival cloud firms’ customers |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2024/12/03/microsoft-overcharging-rival-cloud-firms-customers-uk-lawsuit-says.html |website=CNBC}}</ref>
@@ Line 83: / Line 83: @@
 ===Court cases up to the early 2000s===
-In a major antitrust case brought by the ''US Department of Justice'', ''U.S. v.'' Microsoft Corp'''''.''','' 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001),<ref name=":5">[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/253/34/576095/ "U.S. v. Microsoft Corp., 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001)"] - law.justia.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref> Microsoft argued that there was no barrier to entry in the market they were in. A central issue at that time was whether Microsoft could bundle the web browser ''Internet Explorer'' with the Microsoft Windows operating system. The ''District Court'' stated the following in the court case: <blockquote>"The District Court condemned a number of provisions in Microsoft's agreements licensing Windows to OEMs, because it found that Microsoft's imposition of those provisions (like many of Microsoft's other actions at issue in this case) serves to reduce usage share of ''Netscape''<nowiki/>'s browser and, hence, protect Microsoft's operating system monopoly."</blockquote>The court specifically identified three main license restrictions for [[Original Equipment Manufacturers]] (OEMs) that were considered problematic:
+In a major antitrust case brought by the ''US Department of Justice'', ''U.S. v.'' Microsoft Corp'''''.''','' 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001),{{Citation needed}} Microsoft argued that there was no barrier to entry in the market they were in. A central issue at that time was whether Microsoft could bundle the web browser ''Internet Explorer'' with the Microsoft Windows operating system. The ''District Court'' stated the following in the court case: <blockquote>"The District Court condemned a number of provisions in Microsoft's agreements licensing Windows to OEMs, because it found that Microsoft's imposition of those provisions (like many of Microsoft's other actions at issue in this case) serves to reduce usage share of ''Netscape''<nowiki/>'s browser and, hence, protect Microsoft's operating system monopoly."</blockquote>The court specifically identified three main license restrictions for [[Original Equipment Manufacturers]] (OEMs) that were considered problematic:
 #The prohibition upon the removal of desktop icons, folders, and Start menu entries
@@ Line 97: / Line 97: @@
 ===Xbox 360 Defect - The "Red Ring of Death"<!-- I don't know for sure if we should have a dedicated Company article for Xbox, or if we should just redirect red links for Xbox to this article (Microsoft). Personally, I think what they do is MS's responsibility because MS is the parent company, so Xbox's issues should be mentioned here. Either way- I'm just going to place this info here for now for folks to edit or change appropriately. -->===
 {{Main|Bumpgate}}
-In 2005, Microsoft released the ''Xbox 360''. Not very long after, consumers started reporting problems with their consoles- three red flashing lights on the ring around the power button. This was coined by consumers as the "''Red Ring of Death''", and by 2007, ''Xbox''<nowiki/>'s hardware engineers eventually discovered that the reason for it was a defect in the ''Xbox 360''<nowiki/>'s GPU.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=December 13, 2021 |title=Power On: The Story of Xbox {{!}} Chapter 5: The Red Ring of Death |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch? |url-status=live |access-date=June 4, 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref>
+In 2005, Microsoft released the ''Xbox 360''. Not very long after, consumers started reporting problems with their consoles- three red flashing lights on the ring around the power button. This was coined by consumers as the "''Red Ring of Death''", and by 2007, ''Xbox''<nowiki/>'s hardware engineers eventually discovered that th<!-- I don't know for sure if we should have a dedicated Company article for Xbox, or if we should just redirect red links for Xbox to this article (Microsoft). Personally, I think what they do is MS's responsibility because MS is the parent company, so Xbox's issues should be mentioned here. Either way- I'm just going to place this info here for now for folks to edit or change appropriately. -->e reason for it was a defect in the ''Xbox 360''<nowiki/>'s GPU.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |date=December 13, 2021 |title=Power On: The Story of Xbox {{!}} Chapter 5: The Red Ring of Death |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch? |url-status=live |access-date=June 4, 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref>
 For the first several months of this incident's height of prevalence in 2006, consumers had to pay to get their consoles fixed by Microsoft if the console was outside of its one year warranty. However, by September 2007, they chose to extend the warranty to three years from the date of original purchase, and refunded anyone who had previously paid to get this issue fixed.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Moore |first=Peter |date=2007 |title=Open Letter from Peter Moore |url=http://xbox.com/en-ca/support/petermooreletter.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071023004948/http://xbox.com/en-ca/support/petermooreletter.htm |archive-date=23 Oct 2007 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=Xbox}}</ref> Judging from current and former employees' comments in the ''Xbox'' documentary, ''Power On: The Story of Xbox'', Microsoft seemed to have primarily done this to rescue the ''Xbox'' brand.<ref name=":2" /> Nonetheless, this was still beneficial to consumers who had made an investment in and enjoyed games from Microsoft's console.