Microsoft-Justice Battle Has Roots in 1960s nytimes.com
This is the main article from yesterday's Times, the previous one was a sidebar thing. Again, a little late, but a brave attempt to clarify that which is beyond the comprehension of mere mortals.
One crucial advance was to split software codes into "modules," which were then interconnected in clearly defined ways. Like toy Lego blocks, modern software has increasingly been assembled in code modules that snap together. . . .
Microsoft's Windows 95 exhibits some of these qualities of modern software design. Many of its functions are organized into files known as dynamic linked libraries which are loaded in a computer's memory by a program or operating system.
But rather than stress the modularity of its operating system, Microsoft emphasizes the idea of integration, adding new functions to existing modules and insisting that Windows 95 be treated as a unit, not a collection of components.
Depending on the context, of course. Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, and nobody ever accused the Microsofties of small mindedness. But that's another definitional thing, I guess.
The company's critics say this strategy is based on competitive business needs, not software design principles. They contend that integration, as Microsoft defines it, gives the company huge leverage over the industry.
Ok, I'm a critic as well as a cynic. So sue me.
Cheers, Dan. |
