Microsoft Contractor Steals Rival Code

[MidnightCowboy]

Yet another example of the 'dark side' of this industry.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8415597.stm

I'm not blaming MS because I know only too well from personal experience the challenges faced when trying to control third party outsourcing. In fact I applaud the way in which MS is handling this issue. A lesson to some others we won't mention

[wdhpr]

In fact I applaud the way in which MS is handling this issue. A lesson to some others we won't mention

Well considering the experience they have in this area they have learned to handle it better.

Cheers
Wdhpr

[Jojoyee]

Though on a different matter, this also reminds me of who has the licensed GUI in Apple vs Microsoft lawsuit.

[wdhpr]

Wow

That decision had a major and far reaching impact on events leading up to what we have today ........ What it had gone the other way?

Cheers
Wdhpr

[Jojoyee]

Originally Posted by wdhpr

Wow

That decision had a major and far reaching impact on events leading up to what we have today ........ What it had gone the other way?

Everybody uses "Apple Windows".

[wdhpr]

Everybody uses "Apple Windows."

It would appear so.

Cheers
Wdhpr

[wdhpr]

Originally Posted by MidnightCowboy

Yet another example of the 'dark side' of this industry.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8415597.stm

I'm not blaming MS because I know only too well from personal experience the challenges faced when trying to control third party outsourcing. In fact I applaud the way in which MS is handling this issue. A lesson to some others we won't mention

Hi MC

Not trying to rehash things too much but after reading this I wonder if other software developers could have experienced this same thing? What crucial decisions were made on how to proceed with something like this. The wrong decision could make you look like a low down cheat. The other.... Passes the blame on a lower level action thus deflecting the blame from the mother ship. Intent is then obscured by perception.
Just a thought.

Cheers
Wdhpr

[MidnightCowboy]

Yeah, this is why I referred to the 'dark side' in my opening post.

It's not unknown for vendors to stage such things deliberately and then by "discovering" them and admitting liability bathe themselves in the resulting glow of admiration (and publicity) for their efforts.

I remember years back in the UK a struggling big name manufacturer suddenly announced a major product recall to replace a faulty component. The costs of doing so only added to their already substantial debt but the publicity brought them back to national attention and within a year they were solvent again. The exercise was revealed as a marketing driven lie by an ex employee two years later, but was he himself telling the truth? Certainly his story was given a lot of credibility at the time by the industry press, but then this too is no guarantee of accuracy.

Basically though there is a standard operating formula employed by all damage limitation departments when faulty components are discovered no matter whether they make soup, cars or baby buggies. If the cost of defending litigation and/or likely compensation awards is less than the cost of a recall then the problem don't get fixed No matter how the words might be dressed up, no one has yet managed to convince me that this isn't true. Granted, if events accelerate beyond their ability to realistically contain the fallout then maybe they don't have a choice, but minimizing their financial losses will always be the priority focus.

[wdhpr]

MC I believe you hit the nail on the head. This was along the lines I was thinking.
Although you said it more eloquently then I could.

Cheers
Wdhpr