I was more than a little surprised the other day upon learning that Microsoft had been enjoined by a court to stop selling Microsoft Word. At first I thought I read it wrong. That would be like a court prohibiting McDonald’s from selling Quarter Pounders with Cheese–it doesn’t seem likely in the least. Yet it happened.

The reactions so far have run along some common themes. Most agree that Microsoft will eventually carry the day, and it’s only a matter of how much money will have to change hands. The financial markets are singularly unconcerned, evidenced by Microsoft’s stock price which has continued to climb in recent days despite the ruling. I wonder how much money it will take, and what in what form will Microsoft’s victory come?

The first option that occurred to me is that Microsoft would simply buy i4i, the company holding the patent that Microsoft infringed. However such action could incur the wrath of federal regulators, and Microsoft has been somewhat more reticent in recent years of taking actions that could be construed as anti-competitive. Their epic legal tangle with the Department of Justice may have been lost some years ago, but recent events show that their regulatory troubles haven’t ended just yet.

Microsoft swears that they will press the fight on appeal. They may yet prevail there. The patent ruling was handed down in an East Texas court notorious for leniency towards patent plaintiffs. A legal battle takes a lot of time and money, and right now Microsoft has 60 days to stop selling Word. However I wouldn’t be surprised to see Microsoft’s legal team use file for a temporary stay to the injunction and buy time with classic delaying tactics so that they may continue selling Word while the appeal process drags out. Even still, victory on appeal would be expensive. I wonder if a lengthy trial would be even more expensive than buying a small company such as i4i?

More realistically Microsoft and i4i will come to some kind of licensing agreement, and Microsoft will simply have to pay i4i for the use of it’s technology. Given i4i’s victory, I would have to think i4i will charge them a lot–a whole lot. But i4i must be careful not to try and extract more from Microsoft than Microsoft would have to spend on appeal. If Microsoft can get their stay, once the appeals process takes the trial out of East Texas, legal advantage will begin to shift back to Microsoft.

Stray thought: somewhere right now there is a lawyer who is (was?) in the employ of Microsoft that advised, “We’re not going to settle with these bozos! We’ll just bury them at trial.” How bad does it suck to be that person right now?

I got a chance to take a look at the new objectives for 220-701, which is the number for the new 2009 CompTIA A+ Essentials test. Overall I’m surprised by how few surprises are in store.
One would expect a few updates relating to new technology, and one would be right. Vista finally makes an appearance on the A+ test. Also included at long last is 64 bit CPUs and terminology, such as x64.
I was surprised to see that they changed the troubleshooting model, and unimpressed by the changes. Alas, trying quick, simple fixes and searching online sources are not specifically mentioned, which in my mind makes the troubleshooting model less realistic.
The bulk of the 2006 objectives remain in place, including the material on communications and professionalism, though they are downplayed in the 2009 objectives. There are a few small additions I approve of. Installing from a recovery partition is good information to add for those of us who support home users and don’t have the luxury of reimaging. The User State Migration Tool and dxdiag are specifically mentioned, which surprised me. I don’t know any techs who use the USMT regularly, but like the aforementioned recovery partitions, it’s a good add for the SOHO support crowd. I also found interesting that RFI is specifically set apart from EMI, and RFI sources such as cordless phones and microwave ovens are called out. I can’t help thinking that those were made separate bullet points in the new objectives to justify test questions that mention them.
I was mildly put off by how the new objectives list “All 802.11 types” as required knowledge for wireless networking. Really, all types? How comfortable are you with the specs for 802.11e? Do you 802.11w much? Me neither. Again, my skeptical side wonders if CompTIA is covering themselves for the presence of squirrelly questions on the 220-701 exam.
Overall, I thought the new 2009 CompTIA A+ objectives would have more! But for those concerned that the tech industry and A+ certification is leaving them in the dust can rest assured that the A+ fundamentals remain stable, with only incremental changes.

CompTIA has released the details for their latest update to the A+ certification program. The new A+ 2009 certification completely rearranges the objectives (which are the subjects tested on), and the tests themselves. The separate elective exams for specialized IT Technician, Remote Support Technician and Depot Technician are gone. One must still pass two tests, however, and one of them is the A+ Essentials. The other test is the A+ Practical Application test, which is more oriented towards troubleshooting and “hands-on” scenarios. Both tests are 100 questions with a time limit of 90 minutes.

I’ve downloaded the objectives and glanced at them. The domains (major topic areas) have completely changed. There are fewer domains, as laptops and printers are now being lumped into one domain called Hardware. The Communications and Professionalism domain is gone, as is Safety and Environmental Issues. I’ll be curious to see if the knowledge required by those domains is still present under a different title. I’ll do some comparisons and post more once I’ve had a chance to form an opinion.