Microsoft Blames Anti-trust Legal Fees for Price Increases 570
jm.one writes "BBC news has an article about the Californian anti-trust case and points out that Microsoft tells users would suffer from this: 'Somebody ends up paying for this,' said Microsoft attorney Robert Rosenfeld. 'These large fee awards get passed on to consumers.'
Do they really understand why there are laws?"
Only reasonable (Score:5, Interesting)
I wish I could make up hourly charges like that (Score:5, Interesting)
Well. (Score:3, Interesting)
No. Plus they have a cash reservers that can last them 5 years of $0 in sales. they can easily eat it up. It is more of a scare tactic to prevent the states from doing it again. In fear if they do it again then then they will need to rase prices again. This does really hurt consumers in many levels including people who wish to purchase commercial distributions or linux, What business like to do is keep their prices no more then half of their competiors prices, so when Microsoft sells XP for $250 its competiors like Apple and the Linuxs will sell it for $125. If Microsoft sells it OS (like back in the good old days) for $80 Apple and the Linux's would sell for $40. The problem is that there are to many Supid consumers out there combined with their fear of computers. Makes this worse. People see something expensive they think "gee it must be good" and then they see how many people are using the product then they go "Well if everyone else is using is then it must be good" While the minority who actually knows economics and goes well I see that everyone is using it so demand is up so the price will rise, no mater what the quality is. So I will look for a product that is just as good but is not much in demand then buy that because it will be cheaper. Popularity and Price have nothing do with the quality of the products. If everyone went to Microsoft your prices are to high we will switch to an other os unless you lower your cost. Then Microsoft will lower its cost no mater how many states are suing them. Microsoft is working with a 20's mob mentality, with out perhaps the drugs and murdering.
Simple (Score:3, Interesting)
STOP SPREADING FUD! LINUX IS NO LONGER HARD (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, modern linux distributions such as Fedora, Mandrake, SuSE and even Debian put a browser ICON right in front of your face! There is a lot of work to get winmodems working, espceilly in the pay for distros.
Why do people keep spreading fud about Linux being hard to use? I think everyone who claims that should try KDE 3.2 or GNOME 2.6.
Re:They're not complaining about the fines... (Score:3, Interesting)
If Microsoft hadn't broken any laws to begin with then there wouldn't have been any legal fees to pay! Correct?
Re:If they're charging more for Windoze (Score:4, Interesting)
If the cost keeps going up, no matter the reason, so will piracy of the product. Wed like to think more people would try linux, but they wont. My brother pirates windows; ive hadned him linux demos and despite only listening to mp3s and surfing the web hed rather pirate the windows he knows; then get a free operating system he DOESNT know; that may or may not work with all his hardware.
In fact, he reccomended to my mother the other day she try linux, she won't and its not because of the price. She "doesnt want to learn anything new"
Shed rather live with constant viruses with Windows and Outlook and problems with Internet Explorer than even try Thunderbird or Firefox and "learn something new" despite ALL the buttons are pretty clearly labeled, and you have to be just plain lazy to use that as an excuse. I even offered to switch all her contacts and bookmarks over, and get her junk mail filtereing started (something Outlook doesnt have) so she could email in peace...still no.
As much as Id love to see linux mature and be better for everyday everybody use; I think its going to take that and then some to get people to actually use it once its ready.
Personally, I think it sucks. Id prefer linux myself, except Im a gamer...and tuxracer isnt what Im looking for.
The cost of doing business is always passed along (Score:5, Interesting)
Litigation resulting in cash penalities are the easiest for corporations like MS to handle. I believe that state and foreign governments sue not for whats "right" or "fair" but because its a backdoor method of taxing the public.
IMHO, the best solution to deal with MS was the original penalty of splitting the OS and Apps segments of MS into two separate entities. You can't pass that along to consumers. No wonder MS fought so hard to get that reversed.
BTW - Here's another little fact. Corporations don't pay taxes (technically) either. So before getting all huffy that MS is getting away with it again, take a good hard look at the runaway litigation in the world and ask yourself where all of the money is going!
This makes no economic sense (Score:1, Interesting)
The claim is made even more ridiculous since software has zero marginal cost!
Pure FUD from Robert Rosenfeld, plain and simple.
It's about time to dissolve the company... (Score:2, Interesting)
Technology has been hindered because of Microsoft. Reports have shown that innovation and advancment in technology has been deeply stifled by at least 10 years because of the monopolistic influence that Microsoft imposes on others. Microsoft has (on many occasions) paid other companies (Intel) to NOT release a certain product for fear that it would, in some manner, hurt profitability of Microsoft.
Their Blatant disregard for law is disgusting. Law doesn't affect them. They simply have way too much money. Instead of fining them $600 million, fine them 75% of their assets. Since this won't happen, they will continue to trample all over the law and simply shrug it off with a, "OOhh teehee, I'll just throw cash at it till it disappears.." They are no different than your street thug going back to jail for repeat offenses. Eventually the thug will get life in jail, but what will MS get? Nothing.
They do nothing positive except generate enough revenue that makes the govt grin in the amount of taxes they pull in. Fucking get rid of them. Make a law specifically for Microsoft that prohibits them from further operation.
This NEEDS to happen.
Corporations shouldn't be fined People should. (Score:5, Interesting)
Law School (Score:2, Interesting)
Remember when... (Score:3, Interesting)
Consumers to the burden of proof, added their personal information to the cost of using MSFT's software, and software prices went down across the board, right? Quite the contrary, you now get the burden of proof, a hoop you have to jump through every time you change hardware, AND higher prices.
Hey, as long as the MSFT sheeple keep taking it up the pooper you can't get mad because Redmond takes advantage of the situation.
Just got done isolating the last Windows machine on my network so it can't access the Internet. That's a Win2K box. The last piece of MS crapware I purchased at home since...2001. Wow, time flies when you're having fun instead of spending all you time patching Windows.
And I have to say it feels good when stories like this and the virus of the day come by. Not that I'd ever taunt the sheep by saying something like NEENER, NEENER, NEENER. And though I might be tempted to think they're technology LOOOOOOSSSEERRRS, manners would prevent me from saying so out loud. Instead I'd pretend to be sympathetic and understanding and wait until their back is turned and they're a polite distance out of earshot to start laughing.
Re:There outta be a law (Score:3, Interesting)
Before anyone starts claiming that this is over the top, remember, Corporations are granted a charter expressly to advance the public good. thier charter can be revoked if they are found to not be doing that.
Re:Corporations shouldn't be fined People should. (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.ratical.org/corporations/TCoBeij.htm
I think this idea is worth re-examining.
WINDOWS XP SETUP DOES NOT JUST WORK! (Score:1, Interesting)
99% of problems are the distros fault, report the bugs to fedora, and help beta test Fedora core 2 so it will just work in the future!
Re:I wish I could make up hourly charges like that (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, if you're wondering why lawyers often charge on the order of $200/hour with a straight face, it's because they have to pay their secretaries, paralegals, bookkeepers, phone bill, LEXIS-NEXIS subscription, malpractice insurance, rent, and, of course, Windows licensing fees. My parents are both attorneys with excellent professional reputations, and fairly thrifty people, but I still have college loans, having already spent many thousands of dollars on tuition out of my own savings. The savings didn't come from gifts or anything like that, they came from working since I was 15. It would be far worse if I had gone to college out of state, but we simply couldn't afford that at all. I don't blame my parents for any of this, because it's not like they've been neglecting me. They're doing the best they can. There's a fairly decent chance that at age 21 I'll have a higher income as a software developer than they do as (very good) attorneys.
There are certainly lawyers who become quite wealthy from their profession, but most of them end up somewhere in the middle class. If you can think of a way to streamline the legal system to significantly reduce those costs, your lawyer will surely pass the savings on to you. Unlike Microsoft, your lawyer has to compete.
Re:Excellent (Score:2, Interesting)
My dell inspiron 8500 can run it just fine, but the software I have to use do not even run on XP without a special lpt driver (since the software is win3.11 based).
I have to run "Multisim" which has a rather annoying license system that tracks hardware and software changes making it a bit hard to fake-
And, running linux is a _lot_ more work than running winXP.
I have used linux on my server for about 2 years but it is still not _easy_.
Most users out there are simply dont have enough skills to use linux. In another post I just read, calling linux hard was apparently "Fud".
Try this:
Person downloads rpm, clicks on it to install, gets a dependency error. Then what...
Many regular users cant even figure out winXP, how are you going to make them understand linux?
A problem i run into all the time is skilled people not wanting to help in any way and just saying "Rtfm" or "stfw".
This is not the way to get people interested in linux
Linux is nice for a lot of things, but there is still a bit of ground to cover. And most people are not getting smarter or any less lazy
*back to playing on lensmoor.org*
Re:They predicted it... it came true. (Score:4, Interesting)
Simpler and more effective would be largish excess profits tax on monopolies.
Re:Well, I think it makes sense... (Score:3, Interesting)
If I were runing a small business and got hit with fines for violating the laws that regulated my business, say I was a hotel chain that got hit with a fine by the health department, and I raised my rates and put a sign in the lobby saying "we apologise for the rate increases, but the health department forced us to raise rates", and didn't actually do anything about what I was doing... how long would I be in business?
The only small business I can think of that can get away with saying "the government's really cracking down so we have to raise prices" are criminal enterprises: drug dealers, illegal gambling joints, loan sharks,
Is that the analogy you REALLY want to use for Microsoft?
Re:They predicted it... it came true. (Score:5, Interesting)
If that weren't true then the company could have imagined they already had some sort of cost to passed on and charged that higher price in the first place, then simply pocket that imaginary "passed-on cost" as more profits and been making more profits in the first place. QED.
So either (A) he's blowing smoke out his ass with bogus threats of "passing on costs to customers", or (B) he's actually threatening to abuse their monopoly position to extort monopoly rents out of the public.
So either Microsoft was LYING to the court in an effort to dodge court ordered damages, or Microsoft was threatening to abuse their monopoly to extort monopoly rents.
Neither option reflects particularly well on Microsoft. Not that either sort of bad reflection could possibly tarnish their image any further.
-
Re:They predicted it... it came true. (Score:3, Interesting)
This is a company with (supposedly) billions of dollars in the bank. How much does it cost them to mint a CD? Pennies. You have to pay for phone support, so you aren't getting that for your purchase price. They have been posting obscene profit after obscene profit.
You are paying for their overhead, screwups, and legal schenanigans. Kind of makes you wish they had to print where your money actually goes on the side of a product. Kind of like the ingredients, and nutritional info.
Re:So fines on a know monopoly become taxes... (Score:2, Interesting)
Walk into any computer store and try to buy a non-Windows PC. I've tried it at MicroCenter, CompUSA, and Fry's. Fry's offered a Yellow Dog distro system that was a Celeron 1.2ghz system. That was it. Granted they have an alternative, not only is it using older technology, but it's using a Chinese Distro with it's default language of Simplistic Chinese selected. MicroCenter's Sales Associates told me the reason they don't offer Linux is "Everyone wants Windows, and Windows is the best." -- I asked them to tell me why it's the best "Because it is more stable, it can run for over a week." I laughed at them for that. CompUSA refused to answer, they just tried to influence me into a Windows box... I told them I know enough about computers to not run a Windows infested machine that the minute I hook it to the net I'll have viruses, worms, and trojans.. before I have the chance to update.
Public. Linux + StarOffice - Get real. The configuration woes of setting up Linux are what us geeks when through in our DOS and Win3x days. Do you think anyone wants to do that now? Run Mandrake, or Fedora. It'll install everything clean and simple. Although the higher end Linux users detest running those simplistic distros once you get the feel of the Operator system, they are great. Hell if you want really easy to use, use Lindo--Linspire.. (*ducks from flying fists*).
The fact is, Microsoft is passing the fines to us because they have a monopoly. You said it yourself. With only having Windows boxes in computer stores, there is no alternative. I've been asked if I run Windows at home by a few general computer users, I said no, they asked if I had a mac, I said no... they asked what I run. I told them Debian Linux... they asked what Linux was. That's the problem. Microsoft is hiding it's competition (which can be good or bad depending on your view).
Re:They predicted it... it came true. (Score:4, Interesting)
Consumers are not forced to buy MS - and this is more the case every day rather than less - add to that the aditional cost of litigation with no benefit to the product and the effect will accelerate.
So "passing on the cost to the consumer" is not necessarily a panacea.
(As other post express - monopoly positions, addictive products, and bundling can distort the effects of fining a specific vendor in an uncompetative market place. - OS is mostly uncompetative - not completely however - and that is where there will be shifts in market share as a result.)
AIK
Yes Massa! (Score:3, Interesting)
"Anyone who reports of abuses in this shop will be beaten severely!"
Re:So fines on a know monopoly become taxes... (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft controlled the OS. If they didn't like you your application would accidently break every time they upgraded the OS. If they decided to compete with you, same thing.
It's like buying every bridge in town (matters more in some towns than others) and claiming that you don't represent a monopoly because you've only got 1/7000th of the road surface in town. Bridges are a bottleneck of driving. Like an OS. Nobody buys a computer for the OS, they buy it to do things, the OS is just like the mechanics of the car - something that makes the car do what you bought it to do.
With Microsoft's control over a large segment of the industry (90%?) they could bully other companies into not writing software for other OSes, or selling computers with other OSes.
In other words, they started to be able to extert non-market pressures. An ideal market has perfect knowledge and perfect availability. Microsoft is trying to remove these as much as possible. They don't want people to know about alternatives, nor be able to use them if they hear about them. If you do buy a competing office suite, which you can't get pre-installed, it'll break when MS "upgrades" something.
A capitalist would embrace the market. They would strive to offer a better service, or a better price, and draw customers voluntarily. Microsoft instead is paying people to mislead you and restrict your choice of competitors. Like bribing the city to rezone your property, or accidently shutting off your electricity, if you dare to compete with them. Or sabotaging their own product (car for instance) when you install a third-party product (stereo) in order to scare everyone away from non-Microsoft add-ons.
Re:They predicted it... it came true. (Score:3, Interesting)
In which case what kind of sanctions should be applied to companies who break the law?
Re:They predicted it... it came true. (Score:3, Interesting)
First, you seem to have glossed over the first sentence of my post: "The issue is that if they weren't a monopoly it would be impossible to 'pass such costs on to customers'."
Second, I'd have to double check the details and math, but I'm almost certain that a fixed cost like a lawsuit does not affect marginal cost or marginal revenue. Therefore there is no change in the monopoly price either.
Third, the monopoly price is what I was reffering to when I said "extort monopoly rents". You can only charge (extort) the monopoly price when you have monopoly power.
I think the final result is that we agree that the only way Microsoft could "pass it on to customers" is if Microsoft isn't already charging the full monopoly price and proceeds to increase the monopoly rents they collect towards the full monopoly limit.
-
Re:They predicted it... it came true. (Score:4, Interesting)
What does that say about Linux on the desktop? It is free and readily available yet almost nobody is using it.
So why else are people using XP, if they aren't being forced to and there is an alternative? I've been reminded of why yet once again. My current project is a digital picture frame inspired by a previous slashdot story. It took several days of hacking to get RedHat 9 to do what I wanted (boot, log in, and go to a slideshow with no mouse cursor and never go into standby, and power down gracefully when the ATX power button is pressed. Well, just about nothing was pre-compiled. I had to compile the slideshow, Feh, along with imlib2 and several dependencies. I had to search all over and finally find and compile "unclutter", an app that would make the cursor go away. I had to do a kernel mod (powewswitch.o) which I still don't fully understand that picked up on the APM suspend hint and instead runs "shutdown -h now). Also, I was running KDE but then realized it was uncessary to use it's bloatware for this so went with Icewm only to find now a lot of the things I had configured to do with powerdown and stuff now had to be tweaked back to the Xfree86 config file. Also, RH 9 threw me for a few loops because it still used GDM even if you don't install Gnome and only run KDE. However, they put KDM stuff in the control panel making you think you can change login options there, only to get frustrated when they have no effect.
Anyway, this is a propietary project of course but a lot of the things were things oridinary users might want (slideshow apps, powerdown on power switch press, etc). Secondly, XP still would have been a better choice I think. It still boots much faster than RH 9 with everything turned off and IceWM. And, it would have been easier to configure- because most software is ALREADY COMPILED for one. So I did this project using Linux because I'm a geek and wanted to learn something new. Joe User however is going to turn to XP. Not because Microsoft is a monopoly but because it does things better than everyone else- like it or not.
P.S. I guess I can expect a flame now on the way I did things with my RH 9 install. Remember, though- I'm a software engineer and have loaded Linux on several boxes at my shop over the years. My whole point is usability by everyday people.
When fees get out of line, the "class" files suit (Score:2, Interesting)
yeah right... (Score:1, Interesting)
command and control. (Score:4, Interesting)
Essentially, Microsoft now has enough economic power to also possess de-facto political power.
Clarification... (Score:2, Interesting)
"A company that is convicted of being a monopoly can't be sued into behaving."
I don't disagree with your point, but I do have semantic correction to make: A company cannot be convicted of being a monopoly, as being a monopoly is not an illegal offense. A company can be convicted of abusing the powers that they possess as a monopoly and THAT is what MS got in trouble for.
-=(Lord Crosis)=-Andy Rooney of Borg: "Ya ever wonder WHY resistance is futile?"