Criticism of Microsoft

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Criticism of Microsoft has followed various aspects of its products and business practices. Issues with ease of use, robustness, and security of the company's software are common targets for critics. In the 2000s, a number of malware mishaps targeted security flaws in Windows and other products. Microsoft was also accused of locking vendors and consumers in to their products, and of not following or complying with existing standards in its software.[1][2] Total cost of ownership comparisons between Linux and Microsoft Windows are a continuous point of debate.[3]

The company has been the subject of numerous lawsuits, brought by several governments and by other companies, for unlawful monopolistic practices. In 2004, the European Union found Microsoft guilty in the European Union Microsoft competition case. Additionally, EULAs for Microsoft programs are often criticized for being too restrictive.[4]

Military ties[edit]

In February 2019, some of Microsoft employees protested the company’s war profiteering from a $480 million contract to develop augmented reality headsets for the United States Army.[5]

Vendor lock-in[edit]

From its inception, Microsoft defined itself as a platform company and understood the importance of attracting third-party programmers. It did so by providing development tools, training, access to proprietary APIs in early versions, and partner programs. Although the resulting ubiquity of Microsoft software allows a user to benefit from network effects, critics and even Microsoft itself decry what they consider to be an "embrace, extend and extinguish" strategy of adding proprietary features to open standards or their software implementations, thereby using its market dominance to gain unofficial ownership of standards "extended" in this way.[6][7][8][9]

Microsoft software is also presented as a "safe" choice for IT managers purchasing software systems. In an internal memo for senior management Microsoft's head of C++ development, Aaron Contorer, stated:[10]

More recently, Microsoft had their OOXML specification approved by the ISO standards body in a manner consistent with previous attempts to control standards.[11]

With the release of Windows 8, Microsoft began requiring OEM devices to ship with UEFI system firmware, configured by default to only allow the execution of operating system binaries digitally signed by Microsoft (UEFI secure boot). Concerns were raised that this requirement would hinder the use of alternate operating systems such as Linux. In a post discussing secure boot on the Building Windows 8 blog, Microsoft developer Tony Mangefeste indicated that vendors would provide means to customize secure boot, stating that "At the end of the day, the customer is in control of their PC. Microsoft's philosophy is to provide customers with the best experience first, and allow them to make decisions themselves."[12][13] As such, vendors were required to provide means for users to re-configure or disable secure boot (although devices running Windows RT, a variation of Windows 8 for ARM architecture, have locked firmware where this cannot be disabled).[14][14][15][16] No mandate is made regarding the installation of third-party certificates that would enable running alternative programs.[17][18][19]

Copyright enforcement[edit]

When Microsoft discovered that its first product, Altair BASIC, was subject to widespread unauthorized copying, Microsoft founder Bill Gates wrote an Open Letter to Hobbyists that openly accused many hobbyists of stealing software. Gates' letter provoked many responses, with some hobbyists objecting to the broad accusation, and others supporting the principle of compensation.[20] This disagreement over whether software should be proprietary continues into the present day under the banner of the free software movement, with Microsoft characterizing free software released under the terms of the GPL as being "potentially viral"[21] and the GNU General Public License itself as a "viral license" which "infects" proprietary software and forces its developer to have to release proprietary source to the public.[22]

The Halloween documents, internal Microsoft memos which were leaked to the open source community beginning in 1998, indicate that some Microsoft employees perceive "open source" software — in particular, Linux — as a growing long-term threat to Microsoft's position in the software industry. The Halloween documents acknowledged that parts of Linux are superior to the versions of Microsoft Windows available at the time, and outlined a strategy of "de-commoditize[ing] protocols & applications."[6][7][8][9][23] Microsoft stated in its 2006 Annual Report that it was a defendant in at least 35 patent infringement lawsuits.[24] The company's litigation expenses for April 2004 through March 2007 exceed $4.3 billion: over $4 billion in payouts, plus $300 million in legal fees.[25]

Another concern of critics is that Microsoft may be using the distribution of shared source software to harvest names of developers who have been exposed to Microsoft code, as some believe that these developers could someday be the target of lawsuits if they were ever to participate in the development of competing products. This issue is addressed in published papers from several organizations including the American Bar Association and the Open Source Initiative.[26][27]

Starting in the 1990s, Microsoft was accused of maintaining "hidden" or "secret" APIs: interfaces to its operating system software that it deliberately keeps undocumented to gain a competitive advantage in its application software products.[28] Microsoft employees have consistently denied this;[29][30] they claim that application developers inside and outside Microsoft routinely reverse-engineered DOS and 16-bit versions of Windows without any inside help, creating legacy support problems that far exceeded any alleged benefit to Microsoft.[31][32] In response to court orders, Microsoft has published interfaces between components of its operating system software, including components like Internet Explorer, Active Directory, and Windows Media that sell as part of Windows but compete with application software.

On October 10, 2018, Microsoft joined the Open Invention Network community despite holding more than 60,000 patents.[33]

Licensing agreements[edit]

A common complaint[34] comes from those who want to purchase a computer that usually comes preinstalled with Windows without a copy of Windows pre-installed and without paying extra for the license either so that another operating system can be used or because a license was already acquired elsewhere, such as through the MSDN Academic Alliance program.[35] Microsoft encourages original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to supply computers with Windows pre-installed[36] by presenting their dominance in computer sales[37] and arguing that consumers benefit by not having to install an operating system.[38] Because the price of the license varies depending on discounts given to the OEM and because there is no similar computer that the OEM offers without Windows, there is no immediate way to find the size of the refund. In 2009, Microsoft stated that it has always charged OEMs about $50 for a Windows license on a $1,000 computer.[39]

While it is possible to obtain a computer with no or free operating systems,[40] virtually all large computer vendors continue to bundle Microsoft Windows with the majority of the personal computers in their ranges. The claimed increase in the price of a computer resulting from the inclusion of a Windows license has been called the "Windows tax" or "Microsoft tax" by opposing computer users.[41][42] The Findings of Fact in the United States Microsoft antitrust case of 1998 established that "One of the ways Microsoft combats piracy is by advising OEMs that they will be charged a higher price for Windows unless they drastically limit the number of PCs that they sell without an operating system pre-installed. In 1998, all major OEMs agreed to this restriction."[43] Microsoft also once assessed license fees based on the number of computers an OEM sold, regardless of whether a Windows license was included; Microsoft was forced to end this practice due to a consent decree.[41] In 2010, Microsoft stated that its agreements with OEMs to distribute Windows are nonexclusive, and OEMs are free to distribute computers with a different operating system or without any operating system.[38]

Microsoft does not provide refunds for Windows licenses sold through an OEM, including licenses that come with the purchase of a computer or are pre-installed on a computer.[44]

According to Microsoft's End User License Agreement for Windows 7 the ability to receive a refund for the operating system is determined by the hardware manufacturer:[45]

By using the software, you accept these terms. If you do not accept them, do not use the software. Instead, contact the manufacturer or installer to determine its return policy. You must comply with that policy, which might limit your rights or require you to return the entire system on which the software is installed.

— Microsoft Software License Terms: Windows 7 Professional

Acer Inc. has a policy of requiring the customer to return items at his or her own expense, and the balance received by the customer can be as low as €30.[46] In other cases, vendors have asked that customers requesting refunds sign non-disclosure agreements.[47][48] Older versions of Microsoft Windows had different license terms with respect to the availability of a refund for Windows:[49]

By using the software, you accept these terms. If you do not accept them, do not use the software. Instead, contact the manufacturer or installer to determine their return policy for a refund or credit.

— Microsoft software license terms for Windows Vista Home Basic, Home Premium and Ultimate versions

Based on the updated language, vendors refused to issue partial refunds for Windows licenses, requiring that the computer be returned altogether. In some countries, this practice has been ruled a violation of consumer protection law.[50][51]


Microsoft's market dominance and business practices have attracted widespread resentment, which is not necessarily restricted to the company's competitors. In a 2003 publication, Dan Geer argued the prevalence of Microsoft products has resulted in a monoculture which is dangerously easy for viruses to exploit.[52]

Labor practices[edit]

While Microsoft's permanent workers enjoy some of the best corporate treatment,[original research?] a large part of Microsoft's labor pool exists outside this privileged class. This includes the use of permatemp employees (employees employed for years as "temporary," and therefore without medical benefits), use of forced retention tactics, where departing employees would be sued to prevent departure, as well as more traditional cost-saving measures, ranging from cutting medical benefits, to not providing towels in company locker rooms.[53]

Historically, Microsoft has also been accused of overworking employees, in many cases, leading to burnout within just a few years of joining the company. The company is often referred to as a "Velvet Sweatshop", a term which originated in a 1989 Seattle Times article,[54] and later became used to describe the company by some of Microsoft's own employees.[55] This characterization is derived from the perception that Microsoft provides nearly everything for its employees in a convenient place, but in turn overworks them to a point where it would be bad for their (possibly long-term) health. For example, the kitchenettes have free beverages and many buildings include exercise rooms and showers. However, the company has been accused of attempting to keep employees at the company for unreasonably long hours and working them too much. This is detailed in several books about Microsoft, including Hard Drive: Bill Gates and the Making of the Microsoft Empire.

A US state lawsuit was brought against Microsoft in 1992 representing 8,558 current and former employees that had been classified as "temporary" and "freelance", and became known as Vizcaino v. Microsoft. In 1993, the suit became a US Federal Class Action in the United States District Court Western District Of Washington At Seattle as No. C93-178C. The Final Settlement[56] came in 2005. The case was decided on the (IRS-defined) basis that such "permatemps" had their jobs defined by Microsoft, worked alongside regular employees doing the same work, and worked for long terms. After a series of court setbacks including three reversals on appeal, Microsoft settled the suit for US $93 million.

A side effect of the "permatemp" lawsuit is that now contract employees are prevented from participating in team morale events and other activities that could be construed as making them "employees". They are also limited to 18-month contracts and must leave after that time for 6 months before returning under contract.

Microsoft is the largest American corporate user of H-1B guest worker visas and has joined other large technology companies like Google in recently lobbying for looser H-1B visa restrictions.[57][58][59]

Advertising and public relations[edit]

Critics have alleged that Microsoft has used funding to drum up support from think tanks and trade organizations such as the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (AdTI), the Independent Institute, and Americans for Technology Leadership (ATL). During the antitrust case United States v. Microsoft, ATL sent a poll to 19 state attorneys general purporting to show that "the public believes state AGs should devote their energy to causes other than Microsoft".[60] Also during the case the Independent Institute ran full-page advertisements in The New York Times and The Washington Post defending Microsoft, which was later revealed to have funded the ad campaign.[61] The institute published Winners, Losers, and Microsoft: Competition and Antitrust in High Technology shortly thereafter.[62]

In June 2002, the AdTI published a report, quickly pulled under the argument that it was a draft version, which contained criticism of the copyleft model and the GNU General Public License. A May 2002 press release for the report stated that it would contain arguments suggesting that governments could be threatened by hackers and terrorists (who could study potential vulnerabilities due to source availability) if it used open source software. However, the draft contained no references to these topics. Open Source Initiative (OSI) founder Bruce Perens felt that the report had "Microsoft's paws all over [it]".[63][64] Microsoft argued that its funding was for AdTI's operations as a whole, and not relevant to any specific research by the organization.[63]

"Champagne", a 2002 British television advert for the Xbox, received 136 complaints from viewers to the Independent Television Commission (ITC) over its content. The advert featured a newborn baby being launched out of its mother—aging as it flies through the air, and crashing into a gravestone. It contained the tagline "Life is short, play more." The advert was banned from television by the ITC, who considered it to be "offensive, shocking and in bad taste", noting complaints citing the advert's themes of death and the "traumatic experience" the person was facing in the ad.[65][66]

In August 2004, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ordered Microsoft to pull ads in Britain that claimed that the total cost of ownership of Linux servers was ten times that of Windows Server 2003. The comparison included the cost of hardware, and put Linux at a disadvantage by installing it on more expensive but poorer-performing hardware compared to that used for Windows.[67][68]

On January 22, 2007, Rick Jelliffe made a claim on his blog[69] that a Microsoft employee offered to pay him to make corrections in English Wikipedia articles concerning Office Open XML. Microsoft spokesperson Catherine Brooker expressed the belief that the article had been "heavily written" by IBM employees who supported the rival OpenDocument format, though she provided no specific evidence. Internet entrepreneur and Wikimedia Foundation founder Jimmy Wales described Microsoft's offer as unethical.[70]

In 2009, it was found that a photo on the Polish version of Microsoft's business productivity website—which depicted three people of various races during an office meeting—had been edited to replace the head of an African-American man with that of a Caucasian, whilst also failing to edit the person's hand to match the different skin color. Microsoft apologized and quickly removed the image.[71][72]

In 2011, alleged that two "anonymous comments boosting their product"—one by a Nokia employee and another by a Microsoft employee—were posted on their review of Nokia Lumia 800, which was based only on the "technical specifications" and the reviewer "hadn't laid a finger on the phone".[73] In conclusion, Charles Arthur argued "Nobody has come out of the episode looking good. Sapkale was accused of breaking his own site's privacy policy by posting the IP and email addresses of the commenters, while the commenting duo's failure to declare any interest looked, at best, like astroturfing."[73]

In 2014 details on a partnership between and Microsoft came to light regarding a marketing campaign for Xbox One. Machinima would offer some of its users $3 per thousand views if the user showed 30 seconds of an Xbox One game and mentioned the system by name.[74] Controversy arose when it was reported that, under the terms of the promotion, participants were not allowed to disclose that they were being paid for said endorsements, which Ars Technica said conflicted with FTC regulations requiring recipients to fully disclose when such actions occur.[74] Machinima stated that the confidentiality clause only applied to the terms of the agreement, and not to the existence of the agreement, and Microsoft ended the promotion and directed Machinima to add disclosures to the videos involved.[74] In September 2015, Machinima settled with the FTC over charges that the ad campaign failed to comply with FTC endorsement guidelines; the FTC decided not to take action against Microsoft since it already has "policies and procedures designed to prevent such lapses".[75]

Blacklisting of journalists[edit]

John C. Dvorak said that in the 1980s, Microsoft classified journalists as "Okay", "Sketchy", or "Needs work" and targeted "Needs work" journalists in an attempt to have them terminated. Dvorak said that he was denied information about Windows because he was on a blacklist.[76] Mary Jo Foley stated that she was denied interviews with Microsoft personnel for several years following the publication of a story based on a memo describing the number of bugs in Windows 2000 at release.[77]

Censorship in China[edit]

Microsoft (along with Google, Yahoo, Cisco, AOL, Skype, and other companies) has cooperated with the Chinese government in implementing a system of Internet censorship.[78] Human rights advocates such as Human Rights Watch and media groups such as Reporters Without Borders criticized the companies, noting for example that it is "ironic that companies whose existence depends on freedom of information and expression have taken on the role of censor."[79]

Privacy issues[edit]

Collaboration with the NSA on internet surveillance[edit]

Microsoft was the first company to participate in the PRISM surveillance program, according to leaked NSA documents obtained by The Guardian[80] and The Washington Post[81] in June 2013, and acknowledged by government officials following the leak.[82] The program authorizes the government to secretly access data of non-US citizens hosted by American companies without a warrant. Microsoft has denied[83] the participation in such a program.

In July 2013, The Guardian elaborated that leaked documents show that

  • Microsoft helped the NSA to circumvent its encryption to intercept web chats on and gave it unencrypted access to and Hotmail email.
  • Microsoft provided the NSA with access to users' data on its cloud storage service OneDrive (formerly SkyDrive).
  • After Microsoft bought Skype, the NSA tripled the amount of Skype video calls being collected through PRISM[84]

In a statement, Microsoft said that they "provide customer data only in response to legal processes."[84]

Telemetry and data collection[edit]

Windows 10 was criticized on-launch for having default settings that send various information regarding user behaviors to Microsoft and its "trusted partners", such as data regarding user contacts and calendar events (to optimize text and speech input), location data and history, system "telemetry" and diagnostics information (which could not be fully disabled on non-enterprise versions of the OS), an "advertising ID", as well as further data when the Cortana assistant is enabled in full.[85][86][87]

Microsoft faced criticism from France's data protection commission and the European Union for its practices in regards to Windows 10. On subsequent iterations of the OS, Microsoft has clarified its data collection policies, and made its out-of-box experience provide clearer information on Windows privacy settings, and the effects they have on the overall user experience.[88][89][90][91] Microsoft also simplified its "telemetry" options to only consist of "Basic" and "Full" modes, and reduced the amount of system information collected in "Basic" mode.[92]

In November 2018, the Dutch government issued a report stating that telemetry implementations in Office 365 violated the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).[93]

Xbox Live prohibition on use of the word "gay"[edit]

Microsoft has come under some criticism for its attitude to homosexuality and Xbox Live. Users may not use the string "gay" in a gamertag (even in a non-homosexual context, for example as part of a surname), or refer to homosexuality in their profile (including self-identifying as such), as the company considers this "content of a sexual nature" or "offensive" to other users and therefore unsuitable for the service.[94][95][96] After banning 'Teresa', a lesbian gamer who had been harassed by other users for being a homosexual, a senior Xbox Live team member, Stephen Toulouse, has clarified the policy, stating that "Expression of any sexual orientation [...] is not allowed in gamertags" but that they are "examining how we can provide it in a way that won't get misused".[97][98] GLAAD weighed in on the controversy as well, supporting the steps that Microsoft has taken over the years to engage the LGBT community.[99]

Workforce diversity[edit]

Jesse Jackson believes Microsoft should hire more minorities and women. Jackson has urged other companies to diversify their workforce. He believes that Microsoft made some progress when it appointed two women to its board of directors in 2015.[100]

See also[edit]

Criticism of other software companies:

General mechanisms at work:


  1. ^ "Microsoft A History of Anticompetitive Behavior and Consumer Harm" (PDF). European Committee for Interoperable Systems. March 31, 2009. Retrieved May 25, 2009.
  2. ^ Orlowski, Andrew (April 25, 2003). "Writing history with Microsoft's Office lock-in". The Register. Archived from the original on May 17, 2019. Retrieved May 17, 2019.
  3. ^ Orzech, Dan (April 29, 2009). "Linux TCO: Less Than Half The Cost of Windows". CIO Updates. Archived from the original on February 8, 2015. Retrieved January 29, 2015.
  4. ^ Granneman, Scott (September 27, 2009). "Surprises Inside Microsoft Vista's EULA". Symantec. Retrieved May 17, 2019.
  5. ^ Wong, Julia Carrie (February 22, 2019). "'We won't be war profiteers': Microsoft workers protest $480m army contract". The Guardian.
  6. ^ a b Rodger, Will (November 8, 1998). "Intel exec: MS wanted to 'extend, embrace and extinguish' competition". ZDNet. Archived from the original on December 11, 2006. Retrieved February 5, 2007.
  7. ^ a b Alepin, Ronald (January 8, 2007). "Expert Testimony of Ronald Alepin in Comes v. Microsoft - Embrace, Extend, Extinguish". Groklaw. Archived from the original on May 17, 2019. Retrieved May 17, 2019.
  8. ^ a b Erickson, Jonathan (August 1, 2000). "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish: Three Strikes And You're Out". Dr. Dobb's Portal. Retrieved May 17, 2019.
  9. ^ a b Livingston, Brian (May 15, 2000). "Is Microsoft's change in Kerberos security a form of 'embrace, extend, extinguish'?". InfoWorld. Archived from the original on January 28, 2007. Retrieved February 5, 2007.
  10. ^ "EU report takes Microsoft to task". Retrieved June 6, 2006.
  11. ^ Jones, Pamela (February 17, 2008). "How to Get Your Platform Accepted as a Standard - Microsoft Style". Groklaw News. Archived from the original on May 13, 2019. Retrieved May 17, 2019.
  12. ^ Mangefeste, Tony (September 22, 2011). "Protecting the pre-OS environment with UEFI". Building Windows 8. Archived from the original on August 2, 2012. Retrieved October 17, 2011.
  13. ^ Noyes, Katherine (January 18, 2012). "Windows 8 Secure Boot: The Controversy Continues". PCWorld. IDG. Retrieved August 3, 2012.
  14. ^ a b Warren, Tom (January 16, 2012). "Windows 8 ARM devices won't have the option to switch off Secure Boot". The Verge. Retrieved August 3, 2012.
  15. ^ Garling, Caleb (September 23, 2011). "Windows 8 Secure Boot Sparks Linux Furor, and a Microsoft Response". Condé Nast. Retrieved August 3, 2012.
  16. ^ Brodkin, Jon (January 16, 2012). "Microsoft mandating Secure Boot on ARM, making Linux installs difficult". Ars Technica. Condé Nast. Retrieved August 3, 2012.
  17. ^ Moody, Glyn (January 12, 2012). "Is Microsoft Blocking Linux Booting on ARM Hardware?". Computerworld. IDG.
  18. ^ "Why Microsoft should lift the possible ban on Linux booting on Windows 8 ARM devices". Computerworld. IDG. January 13, 2012. Archived from the original on May 18, 2012. Retrieved January 27, 2012.
  19. ^ Niccolai, James (January 13, 2012). "Windows 8 on ARM: You can look but you can't touch". Computerworld. IDG. Retrieved January 27, 2012.
  20. ^ Gates, Bill (April 1976). "A Second and Final Letter". Computer Notes. Archived from the original on March 23, 2012. Retrieved March 23, 2012.
  21. ^ "Open source terror stalks Microsoft's lawyers".
  22. ^ Albert, Phil (June 8, 2004). "The EULA, the GPL and the Wisdom of Fortune Cookies". LinuxInsider. Retrieved May 17, 2019.
  23. ^ Raymond, Eric S. "Halloween Document 8".
  24. ^ "MSFT Annual Report 2006". Archived from the original on February 14, 2009. Retrieved January 30, 2019.
  25. ^ "Windows vs. Linux: The Patent Tax". April 16, 2007. Retrieved May 17, 2019.
  26. ^ "Open Source Software - A Legal Framework" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on March 16, 2009. Retrieved June 23, 2009.
  27. ^ "Shared Source: A Dangerous Virus". Archived from the original on September 24, 2006.
  28. ^ Consumer Federation of America and Consumers Union (January 25, 2005). "Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices and Consumer Harm in the Software Industry" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on June 25, 2008. Retrieved April 13, 2008. (public comment on US v. Microsoft under the Tunney Act)
  29. ^ Henderson, Ken (2003). The Guru's Guide to SQL Server Architecture and Internals. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 0-201-70047-6. Retrieved November 21, 2006. Contrary to what some people believed at the time, SQL Server 6.5 made no use of hidden APIs to reach the scalability levels it achieved.[permanent dead link]
  30. ^ Pratley, Chris (April 28, 2004). "Word Myths and Feedback". Chris Pratley's OneNote Blog. Retrieved November 21, 2006. I also detected another old saw about hidden advantages or undocumented APIs that somehow made Word better than competing apps. The reality on this is so counter to the conspiracy it is astounding. The Office team barely talks to the Windows team.
  31. ^ Chen, Raymond. "What about BOZOSLIVEHERE and TABTHETEXTOUTFORWIMPS?". The Old New Thing. Retrieved September 18, 2007.
  32. ^ Spolsky, Joel. "How Microsoft Lost the API War".
  33. ^ Speed, Richard (October 10, 2018). "Microsoft has signed up to the Open Invention Network. We repeat. Microsoft has signed up to the OIN". The Register. Retrieved May 17, 2019.
  34. ^ "Buying without Windows-Don't want Windows?". Best Price Computers Ltd. February 2007. Archived from the original on March 18, 2012.
  35. ^ "Call on students". September 27, 2009.
  36. ^ "MS: it's (nearly) illegal to buy PCs without Windows". November 28, 2000.
  37. ^ "Microsoft's Dirty OEM-Secret". October 23, 2001.
  38. ^ a b Protalinski, Emil (January 7, 2010). "Italian class-action suit targets unwanted Windows installs". Ars Technica. Conde Nast. Retrieved December 28, 2012. 'However, consumers benefit from the preinstallation of Windows on PCs. It provides the best user experience from the time a consumer first turns on the PC, and saves consumers the substantial effort and resources associated with having to install an operating system that functions properly' ... 'Computer manufacturers are free to sell PCs pre-installed with another operating system or no operating system at all,' the [Microsoft] spokesperson continued. 'It's also important to note that Microsoft's agreements with OEMs are nonexclusive.'
  39. ^ Protalinski, Emil (September 16, 2009). "OEMs pay Microsoft about $50 for each copy of Windows". Ars Technica. Conde Nast. Retrieved December 28, 2012.
  40. ^ "Microsoft official "valued customer" statement".
  41. ^ a b Jeremy Reimer (May 25, 2007). "Dell goes Ubuntu; "Windows tax" is $50 according to pricing".
  42. ^ Charlie Demerjian (March 3, 2007). "Cost of Windows tax calculated". Archived from the original on January 9, 2009.
  43. ^ "U.S. v. Microsoft: Court's Findings of Fact".
  44. ^ "Microsoft North American Retail Product Refund Guidelines". Microsoft. Archived from the original on September 6, 2012. Retrieved August 27, 2012.
  45. ^ "Microsoft Software License Terms: Windows 7 Professional" (PDF).
  46. ^ "Man wins damages from Acer over Voleware refund". September 22, 2007. Archived from the original on April 6, 2009.
  47. ^ Gijs Hillenius (October 1, 2008). "CZ: Lenovo fails to silence GNU/Linux user on Windows refund".
  48. ^ Niv Lillian (December 3, 2008). "Dell customer awarded Windows refund".
  49. ^ "Microsoft software license terms for Windows Vista Home Basic, Home Premium and Ultimate versions" (PDF).
  50. ^ "Cour de cassation, civile, Chambre civile 1, 15 novembre 2010, 09-11.161, Publié au bulletin". November 15, 2010.
  52. ^ "Cyberinsecurity: The Cost of Monopoly" (PDF). September 24, 2003. Archived from the original (PDF) on March 25, 2009.
  53. ^ "Troubling Exits At Microsoft". Archived from the original on May 2, 2007.
  54. ^ Andrews, Paul (April 23, 1989). "A 'Velvet Sweatshop' or a High-Tech Heaven?". The Seattle Times. Archived from the original on June 29, 2012.
  55. ^ "Editor's note, MSJ August 1997". Archived from the original on February 14, 2007. Retrieved September 27, 2005.
  56. ^ Bendich, Stobaugh and Strong P.C. (June 18, 2007). "Vizcaino Final Settlement". Retrieved October 14, 2009.
  57. ^ Allison, Kevin (March 7, 2007). "Gates warns on US immigration curbs" – via Financial Times.
  58. ^ "Senators: Companies with "mass layoffs" shouldn't hire more foreign workers".
  59. ^ Gates, Bill (February 25, 2007). "How to Keep America Competitive" – via
  60. ^ Carney, Dan (May 15, 2000). "Microsoft's All-Out Counterattack". Business Week. Archived from the original on January 18, 2011. Retrieved November 8, 2012.
  61. ^ Brinkley, Joel (September 18, 1999). "Microsoft Covered Cost of Ads Backing It in Antitrust Suit". The New York Times. Retrieved November 8, 2012.
  62. ^ Liebowitz, Stan J.; Margolis, Stephen E. (1999). Winners, Losers, and Microsoft: Competition and Antitrust in High Technology. Independent Institute. p. 344. ISBN 978-0-94599-980-5.
  63. ^ a b Manjoo, Farhad (June 11, 2002). "Report Flays Open-Source Licenses". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved May 30, 2019.
  64. ^ Lemos, Robert. "Linux makes a run for government". CNET. Retrieved May 30, 2019.
  65. ^ Milmo, Cahal (June 6, 2002). "Xbox's advert pulled after protest from TV watchdog". The Independent. Retrieved April 24, 2017.
  66. ^ "15 years on: The story behind one of Xbox's most notorious TV ads". Retrieved May 30, 2019.
  67. ^ "Non-broadcast Adjudication". Advertising Standards Authority. Archived from the original on January 29, 2006. Retrieved March 31, 2006.
  68. ^ Kuchinskas, Susan (August 26, 2004). "Microsoft Ordered to Pull Anti-Linux Ad". IT Business Edge. Retrieved March 31, 2006.
  69. ^ Rick Jelliffe (January 22, 2007). "An interesting offer: get paid to contribute to Wikipedia". Retrieved January 29, 2015.
  70. ^ Brian Bergstein (January 23, 2007). "Microsoft offers cash for Wikipedia edit". Retrieved May 25, 2009.
  71. ^ "Microsoft in web photo racism row". BBC News. August 26, 2009. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  72. ^ Johnson, Bobbie; Francisco, San (August 26, 2009). "Microsoft apologises over race-swap gaffe". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  73. ^ a b Arthur, Charles (October 18, 2011). "Nokia and Microsoft fingered over comments on adverse Lumia review". London: The Guardian. Retrieved January 14, 2012.
  74. ^ a b c Orland, Kyle (January 20, 2014). "Stealth marketing: Microsoft paying YouTubers for Xbox One mentions". arstechnicha. Retrieved January 21, 2014.
  75. ^ Orland, Kyle (September 2, 2015). "Machinima settles with FTC over "deceptive" Xbox promotion". Ars Technica. Retrieved September 4, 2015.
  76. ^ Dvorak, John C. (July 17, 2008). "Microsoft, the Spandex Granny". PC Magazine.
  77. ^ Mary Jo Foley: The Exit Interview - Robert McLaws: Windows Vista Edition Archived January 13, 2015, at the Wayback Machine
  78. ^ "Corporate Complicity in Chinese Internet Censorship". Retrieved November 23, 2006.
  79. ^ "China: Internet Companies Aid Censorship". Retrieved February 6, 2007.
  80. ^ Greenwald, Glenn (June 6, 2013). "NSA taps in to internet giants' systems to mine user data, secret files reveal". The Guardian. London. Retrieved June 6, 2013.
  81. ^ Gellman, Barton; Poitras, Laura (June 6, 2013). "U.S. intelligence mining data from nine U.S. Internet companies in broad secret program". The Washington Post. Retrieved June 6, 2013.
  82. ^ Savage, Charlie; Wyatt, Edward; Baker, Peter (June 6, 2013). "U.S. says it gathers online data abroad". The New York Times.
  83. ^ "Google, Facebook, Dropbox, Yahoo, Microsoft And Apple Deny Participation In NSA PRISM Surveillance Program". Tech Crunch. June 6, 2013. Retrieved June 6, 2013.
  84. ^ a b Greenwald, Glenn; Ewen MacAskill; Laura Poitras; Spencer Ackerman; Dominic Rushe (July 12, 2013). "How Microsoft handed the NSA access to encrypted messages". The Guardian. London. Retrieved July 12, 2013.
  85. ^ Anthony, Sebastian (August 4, 2015). "Windows 10 doesn't offer much privacy by default: Here's how to fix it". Ars Technica. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  86. ^ "Windows 10s default privacy settings and controls leave much to be desired". ExtremeTech. Ziff Davis. Retrieved July 31, 2015.
  87. ^ Hern, Alex (August 1, 2015). "Windows 10: Microsoft under attack over privacy". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  88. ^ Warren, Tom (March 6, 2018). "Microsoft's new Windows 10 privacy controls should avoid 'keylogger' concerns". The Verge. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  89. ^ Toor, Amar (July 21, 2016). "France orders Microsoft to stop tracking Windows 10 users". The Verge. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  90. ^ Warren, Tom (April 5, 2017). "Microsoft finally reveals what data Windows 10 really collects". The Verge. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  91. ^ Warren, Tom (February 21, 2017). "EU still concerned over Windows 10 privacy despite Microsoft's changes". The Verge. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  92. ^ "Upcoming Windows 10 update reduces spying, but Microsoft is still mum on which data it specifically collects". ExtremeTech. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  93. ^ Cimpanu, Catalin. "Dutch government report says Microsoft Office telemetry collection breaks GDPR". ZDNet. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  94. ^ Alexander, Leigh. ""theGAYERGamer" Gets Xbox Live Ban, Microsoft Explains".
  95. ^ Alexander, Leigh. "Microsoft Explains "Gaywood" Ban".
  96. ^ "Identifying Yourself As A Lesbian Gets You Banned On XBOX Live". February 25, 2009.
  97. ^ Plunkett, Luke. "Microsoft Looking To Change Xbox Live Sexual "Discrimination"". Archived from the original on May 16, 2013. Retrieved March 4, 2009.
  98. ^ "Xbox LIVE policy and Gamertags/Profiles Redux"[permanent dead link]
  99. ^ "XBox Live, Homophobia, and Online Gaming Policy". September 14, 2011.
  100. ^ Gross, Ashley. "Rev. Jesse Jackson Praises Microsoft's Diversity Efforts, But Urges The Company To Do More". Archived from the original on December 8, 2015. Retrieved December 3, 2015.

Further reading[edit]

  • Charles, John. "Indecent proposal? Doing Business With Microsoft". IEEE Software. January/February 1998. pp. 113–117.
  • Clark, Jim with Owen Edwards. Netscape Time: The Making of the Billion Dollar Start-up That Took on Microsoft. New York, Saint Martin's Press, 1999
  • Cusumano, Michael A.; Selby, Richard W. Microsoft Secrets: How the World's Most Powerful Software Company Creates Technology, Shapes Markets and Manages People. New York: Free Press, 1995.
  • Edstrom, Jennifer; Eller, Marlin. Barbarians Led by Bill Gates: Microsoft from inside: How the World's Richest Corporation Wields its Power. N.Y. Holt, 1998.
  • Gavil, Andrew I.; First, Harry (December 9, 2014). The Microsoft Antitrust Cases - Competition Policy for the Twenty-first Century. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-02776-2. ISBN 0-262-02776-3.
  • Goldman Rohm, Wendy (September 1998). The Microsoft File: the secret case against Bill Gates. New York, NY 10022, USA: Times Books. ISBN 0-8129-2716-8.
  • Lemos, Robert. (2003). U.S. funds study of tech monocultures. Retrieved December 20, 2003, from
  • Moody, Fred. I Sing the Body Electronic: A Year With Microsoft on the Multimedia Frontier. New York: Viking, 1995.
  • National Science Foundation. (2003). Taking Cues from Mother Nature to Foil Cyber Attacks. Retrieved December 20, 2003, from
  • Bozman, Jean; Gillen, Al; Kolodgy, Charles; Kusnetzky, Dan; Perry, Randy; & Shiang, David (October 2002). "Windows 2000 Versus Linux in Enterprise Computing: An assessment of business value for selected workloads". IDC, sponsored by Microsoft Corporation. White paper.
  • In an article published by BusinessWeek, Dan Kunsnetzky suggests that study was stacked against Linux'.[1]
  • Groklaw portal on Microsoft litigation Microsoft Litigation
  • Matthew Newman "Microsoft Fined Record EU899 Million by EU Regulator (Update1)". Bloomberg, February 27, 2008
  • "EU says could have fined Microsoft up to 1.5 bln eur over antitrust decision". CNNMoney, February 27, 2008
  • "Microsoft fined 899 mln eur by EU for failure to comply with ruling UPDATE". CNNMoney, February 27, 2008
  • Reporting by David Lawsky; Editing by Dale Hudson "EU fines Microsoft record $1.35 billion". Reuters, February 27, 2008
  • "EU fines Microsoft record $1.3 billion". CNNMoney, February 27, 2008
  • Parmy Olson "Q&A: Microsoft's Multi-Billion Dollar EU Fine"., February 27, 2008
  • Leo Cendrowicz "EC fines Microsoft a record $1.4 bil". The Hollywood Reporter, February 27, 2008
  • Mike Ricciut "EU slaps Microsoft with $1.35 billion fine". CNet News, February 27, 2008
  • "Microsoft fined 899 mln eur by EU for failure to comply with ruling UPDATE". CNNMoney, February 27, 2008
  • Rory Watson "Microsoft hit by €899m fine for failure to comply with EU ruling". Times, February 27, 2008
  • "EU hits Microsoft with record 899 million euro anti-trust fine". AFP, February 27, 2008
  • Benjamin J. Romano "In the bad timing category: EU fine rains on Microsoft launch parade". The Seattle Times, February 27, 2008
  • Aoife white "Record EU Fine for Microsoft". The Associated Press, February 27, 2008
  • Stephen Castle "EU fine sends message to Microsoft and others". International Herald Tribune, February 27, 2008
  • Damon Poeter "EU Slams Microsoft With Record $1.35 Billion Fine". Channelweb Network, February 27, 2008
  • Ina Fried "Ballmer on EU, Yahoo". CNet News, February 27, 2008
  • David Prosser "Microsoft fined record €899m by EU over market abuse". The Independent, February 28, 2008

External links[edit]

Discussions of Microsoft's business practices:


Tax evasion:

User feedback:

Related media[edit]