Microsoft and EU Talks End 1028
Paul Longford writes "Microsoft talks with the EC have collapsed. The competition commisioner Mario Monti just made this statement in which he said: 'I'd just like to inform you that a settlement on the Microsoft case has not been possible. I therefore intend to propose to my colleagues in the Commission next Wednesday to adopt a decision, which has already received the unanimous backing of Member States.' This is bad news for Microsoft - it looking at a considerable fine and possibly being forced to open up Windows. It looks like it will be a harsh decision too. Monti says: 'In the end, I had to decide what was best for competition and consumers in Europe. I believe they will be better served with a decision that creates a strong precedent.'"
It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Interesting)
Time will tell.
Rigor Morty
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's about time. (Score:4, Insightful)
It's a punishment for wrongdoing. How is taking away some of their rights regarding their software any different to say, a massive fine (the government is taking my property (money), or imprisonment)? This wouldn't be happening if Microsoft had not abused (or still plans to abuse - won't come to an agreement on future conduct) it's defacto monopoly position.
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's about time. (Score:4, Insightful)
Quite right, and I'd go even further by saying that the only thing that stops the capitalist system being the perfect system it should be (were everyone fairly competes and prices are lowered to their minimum levels &c) is the existence of companies. They go against the capitilist ideal.
(Aside: I'm not quite clear on the details of a communists system but a perfect capitilist system (were their is an infinite number of competitors <voice style="peter jones">which is of course impossible</voice>) is probably the same as a communist system -- but without the problem of having to have someone in charge (who everyone has to trust) to co-ordinate it).
The capitalist system is quite a good idea -- maybe the least worst one -- however it only works if people spend their own money to buy/make things then sell them on themselves. If people can make lots of abstract entities (companies) which are difficult to sue, are not accountable to anyone and which can be bankcrupted without anyone having to pay (except of course all the staff, investors and people they owe money to), the whole system gets messed up -- IMO it is companies not capitalism that causes the racing scenario put foward by RMS in the GNU project manifesto thingy, and if their werrent companies their problem would be little need for regulation.
Re:It's about time. (Score:4, Interesting)
Capital.
Capitalism is about allowing capital to be gathered from many persons to accomplish things that are more expensive than one person could ever hope to be able to afford. If everything had to be accomplished by one person, not a lot would be accomplished... As soon as you have just two people doing something together, you have a company, wether it has a legal status or not. As soon as you have something jointly owned by more than one person, you have some kind of a company. You're not planning to make owning things together illegal, are you?
Another purpose of a company is shared risk. If people would have to risk everything for anything they do, not a lot would get accomplished.
And there's a reason why you might want to have a lot accomplished. For example ancient American Indians probably didn't really have the concept of a company as we know it, and their society probably worked quite nicely too, until the Europeans came and slaughtered them in the process of the birth of the USA...
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Interesting)
What is needed is something that will actually repair the damage caused by MS's illegal behavior. Microsoft needs to be held responsible for the damage they caused, which means that they need to pay the price. The damage is so significant to Thousands of companies worldwide, it needs to be a very large price - one that will reinstate true competition.
Personally, I could care less about the code which we all know sucks - I want the file formats, protocols, and API's opened. May need to force a few patents open too (at least RAND licensing with an open source exemption.)
Going back to the axe murderer land owner (poor) analogy, think of it as a life sentance of restitution.
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
A lot of people have been doing a lot of comparing of what antitrust means because the concept is kind of difficult for many people to grasp.
You refer to Killing of Competition, which has some accuracy, but I prefer the comparison to what Marth Stewart was convicted of, Insider Trading.
I prefer this comparison because most people instantly understand insider trading; a person has special knowledge others don't have and can't have and they use it as an unfair advantage.
MS has used its "insider" position to do things that others can't to give it an unfair advantage. They've advertised where others can't (on the desktop for MSN) made their instalations easier than others can(Can't be easier than the media player being built-in) and they've steadfastly refused to let others share their advantages (licenses forbid others from preinstalling their software in the same way).
In fact MS is worse than Martha because the insider knowledge that gave Martha an advantage was made public the very next day; MS has fought long hard battles to keep their advantages from ever being made public. Martha has a felony conviction and will likely face prison time for her crime even though it was only a one-day advantage, but MS argues that they should be able to keep their advantage forever with no repercussions.
Martha is an individual and MS is a corporation so the remedies for this kind of broken law are, and should be different. But the intensity should be, the same. MS should get the equivilant of being behind bars for their crime and a Billion Euros doesn't even come close.
TW
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, if revenue dries up but expenses stay the same, something is going to get cut back. This could be as minimal as the stoppage of contributions to MS's $50B piggy bank or it could mean cutbacks in developer jobs, but rest assured, something will get cut. So overall, this probably doesn't bode well for Microsoft, even if they do open up their sources or API's.
Re:It's about time. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
I would hardly call .NET retarded. Maybe you were referring only to VB.NET and not .NET in general, but given your Java reference, I'm assuming you're talking about .NET in general. MS commits many crimes and uses a lot of underhanded tactics. They also screw up their software in a lot of ways. Even with all that though, MS does do some things right. .NET is a good idea and is even being emulated by open source developers now. Knock them where they deserve it, but give them credit when they do something well. .NET is something that is done well.
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
I've written code for other people on enough systems over the years (everything from the Atari 400 to a Cray Y-MP) that I've come to realize it just doesn't matter in the end. Trying my best to find elegant, clean ways to solve the problem at hand no matter what the language or support technology is -- that's where the challenge and fun lies. If the technology base is primitive, the feeling of accomplishment is that much more complete. Whether I'm typing my code into an xterm or a Visual Studio window is way down the relevance list.
Adaptability is a good thing.
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's about time. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Insightful)
The basic case is that the courts have changed antitrust in such a way as to make it impossible for the plaintiff to win. For example, they've added an argument that the plaintiff must prove "harm to the consumer". In the Microsoft case, Netscape proved that Microsoft had used it's Windows monopoly to destroy Netscape's market share, but Microsoft argued that doing so had not harmed the consumer. Such an argument can't be proved either way without using a crystal ball. It used to be assumed that limiting competition harmed the consumer. Competition is what capitalism is supposed to be about, right?
Microsoft also argued that Netscape might have gone bankrupt anyway due to their own poor business decisions. That's kind of like arguing that the guy you just shot might have been hit by a car because he got a jaywalking ticket last week, but the court's seem to have bought the argument.
Since when has Windows not harmed the consumer? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, no harm to the consumer there.
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's about time. (Score:4, Interesting)
IIRC the judiciary pursues what the head of law enforcement wants it to. The head of law enforcement is the cheif executive. The president.
If the president doesn't want to enforce a law or wants to enforce it only with a wink and a nod, that's their discretion.
Now, it's nice to see that, once again Europe is showing some balls. I really expect there's some phone calling between Washington DC and Europe trying to weasel some leniency in this matter. You and I won't be privy to these calls, but in the wake of the Spanish Election, this is another instance of that disorganized herd of sheep standing up for their own beliefs. Another blow, really, for the current administration (which went all limp-wristed on Microsoft.)
By this time we should be getting used to the rest of the world questioning the US goverment stands and going their own way. As the economies of Europe and China approach their full potential, so grow their clout. Too bad we've been wasting some checks over the years, now they're going to be in shorter supply.
Re:It's about time. (Score:5, Funny)
Doesn't that make them a monopoly on anti-monopoly journals?
A chilling phrase if you're MS (Score:5, Informative)
Steve Balmer rushed over in a last-ditch attempt to try and come to a deal, but the commissioner apparently demanded even-tougher remedies if a negative precedent was not to be set...
The fine is expected to be between 67 million UK pounds, and 670 million UK pounds . Ouch. That's a fair old amount of latitude in the range, but even MS would presumably rather not pay a billion-dollar fine. I know their cash reserves are up in the 40 billion dollar range, but even so it has to hurt. I'd expect the commission to fine them again if they don't do as they're told, as well....
Simon
Re:A chilling phrase if you're MS (Score:4, Funny)
even MS would presumably rather not pay a billion-dollar fine. I know their cash reserves are up in the 40 billion dollar range
Quick! Short Microsoft!
This sound investment advice bought to you by slashdot.
Re:A chilling phrase if you're MS (Score:5, Informative)
Huh? SCO's stock (SCOX) has fallen more than 50% in the last 3 months. Everyone here on Slashdot knew long ago that SCO's claims were bogus and were likely a pump-n-dump scheme by SCO execs. The investing public took much longer to figure that out. Anyone who followed the advice given here has made a very tidy profit on SCOX.
Additionally, the parent post's comment (which has been modded as funny) about shorting MSFT was also sound. MSFT is down almost 2% today.
The best place to find insightful information about tech companies is places where tech-knowledgable people talk. Like Slashdot.
Re:A chilling phrase if you're MS (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A chilling phrase if you're MS (Score:5, Funny)
That is probably what made things collapse. I can see the EU report now...
"After negotiations broke down between us and Microsoft, the current CEO, Steve Ballmer, decided to get personally involved. However, he simply arrived, and jumped up and down chanting like a prick".
Re:Why the commision will fold and MS will get off (Score:4, Insightful)
Errr.. I am.. lots of news jobs for Linux-savvy people like me, with MSc's in computer science but a lame job.
I for one welcome... a... uh.... new job?
Re:A chilling phrase if you're MS (Score:3, Interesting)
OK so they get fined and told how to distribute... (Score:5, Insightful)
Who thinks this will REALLY change anything? That MS will go a little bit more restricted in how media stuff is installed from a start, but they'll keep on doing the same old crap in every other part of their dealings with the EU
Re:OK so they get fined and told how to distribute (Score:5, Insightful)
that's why they want the strong precident so they go after MS again and again until they play fair (or they go bankrupt wwhich lets face it is more likley than them playing fair)
Re:OK so they get fined and told how to distribute (Score:5, Insightful)
Open Source is nice, for example, but does that mean proprietary software is "unfair?"
So we can come to the car analogy again, for example, if someone starts putting proprietary air filters or even a proprietary stereo (where you can't figure out the connections, for example - you'd have to rip out all the old speakers and everything and completely replace it to put a new one in). Those things would really suck, and make me not want to buy that car, but would it really be "unfair?" Should the government step in and say that car manufacturer can no longer install stock stereo systems?
I realize we can go around in circles about what consumers are "forced" to buy when they buy a new computer, but the fact is that now, more than there has been in the past 20 years, there is a choice. So we can rag on all the losers that don't know a bit from a byte or what an OS even is, but if they are the majority and they want their "free" media player/browser/whatever installed when they buy the computer, is it "fair" to tell them they can't have that? Isn't this just making things difficult for the vast majority of the people involved?
I suppose we can look at future rewards from current hardships, but we have to ask if it's really necessary.
For the record, I don't buy MS software, I won't even buy an X-Box even though I love games, I just can't bear the thought of giving my money to MS. However, I'm not such an idiot that I don't understand why other people do it, and they should be free to do it if they want. People should start taking personal responsibility, if they put up with that crap, the manufacturers will abuse them - the same as we are being abused by the RIAA and MPAA and keep going back for more. If enough people abandon MS, they will get the picture.
A subscription to Mandrake, for example, is a good start... so is not buying cheapbytes discs, but buying them from the actual distributers. Macinstosh, for many, is also a fine solution, although I have no doubt that given the market share they'd be just as bad, if not worse, than MS.
Let's assume there's 500,000 slashdot subscribers. Let's assume 80% are open source advocates who use Linux. Let's assume they all did the $60/year Mandrake subscription. That's 400,000 * 60 = $24,000,000 that goes to Mandrake Linux. Let's say Mandrake is supporting a number of OpenSource projects. All those projects improve (not necessarily) and create more demand. After two years, 800,000 people subscribe. That's how it's supposed to happen, not by crying to the government to impose restrictions on your competition so that everything is "fair" - that's like a Harrison Bergeron world.
I'm really beginning to hate the word "fair", because I don't think most people actually understand what it means.
BTW, cheers to the people in the EU who fought this fight and made it happen. I don't know about any of your constitutions as much as I'd certainly like to, but the U.S. constition has no provision that life will be "fair".
This is not to say I don't agree with laws banning some monopoly tactics (like dumping and tying), just that I think it's not as clear cut as a lot of people think (is MS dumping their product by giving it for free with the OS when other companies don't charge for their media players or browsers?) Even the tying claims are difficult because it does give better performance to integrate some things with the OS, even if we all disagree that the performance gains outweight the problems that can cause.
I guess my biggest problem with all this is that it is not going to make MS go away, or even lose marketshare. As such, it's not going to cause third party developers to support linux or open standards (which is what we really want, isn't it?). We can't rely on the government to do that.
MS cannot "beat" OpenSource software, but it can keep us b
Re:OK so they get fined and told how to distribute (Score:5, Insightful)
So we can come to the car analogy again, for example, if someone starts putting proprietary air filters or even a proprietary stereo (where you can't figure out the connections, for example - you'd have to rip out all the old speakers and everything and completely replace it to put a new one in). Those things would really suck, and make me not want to buy that car, but would it really be "unfair?" Should the government step in and say that car manufacturer can no longer install stock stereo systems?
If you couldn't get your car without the Stereo, the multiple cd changer. Sure, it's free, wink wink, nudge, nudge.
Do you remember that Netscape wanted and needed to change for their browser? And Bill Gates said in a public forum that MS still had OS revenue and they could "compete" in the "free" browser market while he didn't see how Netscape could.
After MS included the browser for free, loaded on the machine, and excluded any other browsers, Netscape was forced to enter the "Free" browser market and simply make money on server products. (They're not free, Netscape had to try to leverage it's server market products market-share to support the "free" browser.) I can't find quotes, as they're old but some of the statements by Gates are pretty damning.
It's been said many times before, but once you reach monopoly status, you can't use the same tactics to force people out of your markets. The power and ability to do so, the theory goes is too great and the results always ultimately hurt consumers.
So, no, I don't think this is unjustified. Sure, it's way late and probably will only serve to increase the rising tide against MS, rather than early on where it could have turned the tide. That's too bad, but we shouldn't give up on prosecuting the murderer simply because it was 20 years ago and he's in jail on bank fraud. (Not to mention, we don't know where things will go tomorrow and having a judgement in the bank will go a long ways to prevent abuse as much as possible as MS either reforms or dies.)
Anyway...
Cheers,
Greg
Re:OK so they get fined and told how to distribute (Score:5, Insightful)
Currently they've only written about trying to embrace and extend certain necessary protocols to kill Linux, they've had close dealing with SCO, etc.
While at any one time there may not be enough to say MS should be shut down for, the company has had a history of outright criminal actions.
This isn't an MS thing, this is an accountability thing. If you harm your competitors though criminal actions you NEED to be punished. Otherwise we're simply saying to everyone that if you want to succeed you need to break the law, and that you won't be punished for doing so. Not if you break really big laws at any rate. Rob a 7-11 and go to jail for life. Steal billions and we'll let you keep your ill-gotten gains.
I couldn't care less if MS made a complete reversal and was now sponsoring needy children in Africa, they need to be smacked around for their past transgresions that put them where they are today. The fact they haven't stopped just makes it worse.
Re:OK so they get fined and told how to distribute (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm still wondering what "fair" means as applied to Microsoft, as in "Microsoft is not playing fair". How are they not playing fair? Is bundling a media play with windows somehow unfair to the consumer?
I can see how you can say it's unfair to the competition, but again I ask if that's not ALWAYS the case? For example, most Hondas come with a rebranded Honda stereo. These days, you don't even have a choice - the car comes with a stereo. Find me one that doesn't. So is that "unfair" to JVC or Sony or other manufacturers? Seems to me the aftermarket stereo market is quite brisk.
And so the question is if you really think it is unfair, how do you make it fair?
If you require it to be a download, %99 of the people are going to download WMP. The only people who will download quicktime, for example, would have done it anyway.
If you require choice in installation (i.e. the Windows installation requires you to select none or more of WMP, QT, and Real) then what about OTHER mediaplayers? Do you have to be a big business in order to be included (mplayer, vlc, etc.)? Soon you will need several extra discs just to hold all the choices for browsers, word processers (hey! bundling word-pad is unfair!), mediaplayers, text editors... where does the line get drawn so that it's "fair" for all companies?
As far as the definition goes, I still see it being arguable that MS is not (in this case) being "unfair." If there was a contract about what consumers should get, and they weren't getting it, then they'd be unfair with respect to definition 7. Otherwise it's subjective (what's a fair profit for MS?).
In definition 8, MS is certainly consisten with the logic of increasing value (if only percieved value, which is valuable in its own right) of their products. I don't know that it's ethicly wrong to include a mediaplayer with an OS. If it is for one, it should be for all. I won't complain that mandrake includes mediaplayers. And that brings us to rules. These rules are too subjective... what makes MS a monopoly (I'm not arguing they're not)? What rules do they have to follow? Are those rules different from what everyone else has to follow? Is that, in itself, "fair?"
The reason I bring up the whole "fair" thing is because people throw that word around in a very selfish manner, which is totally against any meaning of "fair" there is. Most people here who whine that something isn't fair are complaining that they are not getting something they want, or some group they are associated with, or some company they support, are actually forced to play by the same rules everyone else plays by, and somehow that's not "fair".
It's like a very large number of people who believe rich people are not paying their "fair" share of income tax in the U.S. I don't want to get into a political argument, it's the idea of what people actually think is "fair". What is fair? Not a textbook definition, but what do you think would be fair and equitable for everyone?
Is there anything MS could do, while being a monopoly, that slashdotters would think is "fair?"
Re:OK so they get fined and told how to distribute (Score:5, Insightful)
It will change the consumers' perception of what Microsoft actually is: An anti-competitive monopolist with questionable business practices.
Re:OK so they get fined and told how to distribute (Score:5, Funny)
Re:OK so they get fined and told how to distribute (Score:3, Insightful)
Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.. (Score:4, Funny)
Speaking of sentiments... (Score:5, Informative)
... There seems to be a good amount of "they-are-all-out-to-get-us" sentiment in the parent's remark. Let's put some things in perspective here:
You see, courts in Europe have this strange idea that they are there to enforce the law and protect consumers. To make matters more absurd, they choose to stick to their principles even if large companies are involved. Strange, huh? ;)
And now the facts: the EU will, and has done so numerous times in the past, also punish European companies if they break antitrust laws. A complete list of antitrust cases from 1964 is here [eu.int]. And to give a nice example: in the cases so far in 2004 [eu.int], all of the listed companies are European.
That goes to show you.
Re:Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's anti-Bush sentiment. Of course Bush supporters don't see any difference, but there is one.
Re:Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.. (Score:4, Funny)
Jealous? How could anyone ever be jealous of a country where a woman can't get her tits out without causing a national crisis?
Re:Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.. (Score:5, Interesting)
It is not clear whether or not the effective monopoly of Microsoft has benefited the world. Quite possibly the standards setting effect of the monopoly has done more good than bad in the long term. However perpetual market distortion cannot be tolerated indefinitely.
Part of the problem is determining exactly what should be done to remove distortions from the market whilst not throwing away global standards. It is not clear that the proposed fines and unbundling will do anything more than split the market up into different competing standards - all owned by American companies incidentally.
Re:Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.. (Score:3, Informative)
Heres a free clue for you: The largest single fine impossed by the EU trade commision was against a European company. Free bonus clue: The majority of companies that the EU trade commision takes action against are Europea
This is a lie (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Harsh?!? Opening? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is next to nothing. Nothing short of breaking up MS and demanding published, open APIs, protocols and file formats will do.
Re:Harsh?!? Opening? (Score:5, Insightful)
I have to say that much as I am anti-Microsoft and think they've got a monopoly that needs dealing with, I am rather worried about what this will mean.
Well, slightly worried, anyway.
If Windows is deemed anticompetitive in the media-stakes, well all that can really be done is to force MS to allow WIndows to come with alternatives installed. That's not really gonna affect them. It sure ain't gonna affect me, as should I ever buy another Windows PC then the first thing I'll do (like with my current one) is to repartition and reinstall to my tastes. So if Real & Quicktime are included, they won't be for long.
And there's no easy way they can force MS to include them on an installation disc, at least not wtihout clearing the licensing with Apple and Real.
And in all honesty, I can't see MS being forced to break up and open up any time soon. It just isn't going to happen.
TiggsRe:Harsh?!? Opening? (Score:5, Insightful)
So think OEMs, these are the companies that actually distribute Windows, not Microsoft.
Careful.. (Score:5, Funny)
MS contributes a lot of money to both US political parties.. Europe may need "liberating" soon..
Re:Careful.. (Score:5, Funny)
Bush: Hi
Blair: Yes.. speaking, how can I help you?
Bush: I'm taking us to war.. against this place called Europe, are you in?
Blair: Uhmm.. *worried* no.. I don't think I can help..
Bush: Pleeeease.. I need someone to show me where it is.. I was never good at this jog-raphy thing.
Blair: Oh.. yes.. ok.. I'll join in.. I can show you what bits you need to bomb.. *aside to secretary* Get me maps of France!
Re:Careful.. (Score:3, Informative)
yeah, because Russians had NOTHING to do with defeating the Nazis! They just fought the longest, caused the most losses, fought the biggest battles, tied up bulk of the Wehrmacht (even after Normandy, something like 70-80% of German troops were in the Eastern Front) etc. etc. No sirre, it was all American show! Rest of us were just along for the ri
Re:Careful.. (Score:5, Insightful)
While US supplies did help (of course they did) they were not be all end all in the war. For example, most of the tanks that were shipped to USSR were old and crappier than the ones Russians used. Native Russian production of war-material far outstripped the amount of goods that was shipped to them by the Allied. When it comes to tanks, Russia received about 12.000 of them, most being old and/or phased out by the western powers. In comparison, production of T-34-tank alone (A tank that was far superior to anything that was shipped to USSR by USA) numbered in the tens of thousands!
In the end, the war was decided by Russian soldiers who fought the Germans.
And he is well backed (Score:5, Informative)
This could be more fun than the SCO fiasco....Bill, open the file marked JudgementDay.pif :-)
And now... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is very indirect... (Score:3, Insightful)
It is an extremely indirect form for democracy, at best, and it is easy to influence by lobbyism and somewhat prone to corruptions. And it is damn slow. However, it is much harder to influe
Re:And now... (Score:3, Insightful)
The commission is not elected, and is in fact more powerful than the parliament. Not very democratic, but on the other hand also not subject to the kind of manipulation that you point out (and that is so common in the US).
Reignite Competition (Score:5, Interesting)
For those not sure if this will help the US adoption of alternate products, it will. Businesses aren't just local, they import products, export products, and deal in Europe all the time. When Europeans move to other products, the US will make the move, or force Microsoft to adopt the standards the EU companies do.
This doesn't spell the end for Microsoft, but rather, it helps to open up a standards based computing environment. One where if your product is closed and completely proprietary, and threatens vendor lock-in, it won't be well appreciated, nor will it really be possible.
Re:Reignite Competition (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do they use Windows? Because it's default, it's the defacto, it's the "standard" that has been created. They send and receive Word
So I hear reports that Microsoft is patenting it's XML formats (or something along those lines) for the next version of Word. When OpenOffice can't read these files for legal reasons, is that going to be Microsoft's fault, or OpenOffice's fault? We know what the answer is, but these guys don't care. They aren't lawyers, and they just want to do their job without worrying about what license their computer is operating under.
Microsoft abused it's power. It's that simple. The fact that competition is starting to come out is a good thing, but you don't have to be the only one to violate anti-trust laws (or else Microsoft would never have gone to trial in the first place, as other OS's have always existed). However, I don't know the EU anti-trust laws at all, so I can only imagine they broke them there as well.
The point is, by forcing this on Microsoft, it will ensure competition. I don't want to see the end of Microsoft, but rather, I want to see the beginning of a standards based environment where competitors compete on the quality of their product.
Hopefully this decision will allow such an environment to prosper and grow.
I want to know... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sad but true.
Re:I want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
You make it sound like Europeans buying Macs is a bad thing... I beg to differ. Giving a larger infusion into Apple means more useful R&D. Microsoft spends a lot on R&D and still cannot make its products immune from script kiddies or crashes and the like. Getting more Macs (and hopefully G5 Macs) means giving a larger stake of the industry over to IBM and the PPC architecture, which is good for competition. Look at Intel; footdragging on 64 bit consumer chips, running hotter with each model, and power consumption is getting out of hand. Perhaps such a shift in an important market like Europe would return their focus back to their design centers and start taking a serious look at power consumption.
And as for the open source side, the last time I checked, Apple's Safari is based upon KHTML, and that comes from the Linux side. An operating system based upon BSD. Those are some credentials when compared to the current standard (Microsoft). So why are you complaining?
And just as a note, just because Best Buy (here in the US) is dropping Macs from their stores does not mean people aren't switching to Macs; it just means that Best Buy employees do not know how to successfully sell them. You can get some deals on eMacs and PowerMac G4's right now there. They haven't cut the prices on the iBooks or PowerBooks yet though...
Re:I want to know... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I want to know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Plus, what's so bad about people running Macs these days?
Cooper
--
Don't you just love the sound of nature?
- Ginger Snaps II -
Re:I want to know... (Score:3, Insightful)
And besides, it's not like there isn't a lot of MS property in the EU that can be dispossessed (there are probably a
Appeals? (Score:5, Interesting)
hmmmm.... works out math (Score:3, Informative)
I'd also rip support of all European languages unless you paid mucho..
I'd also invalidate ALL licenes in Europe..
I'd also go cry to Bush to have them treat ol' MS like a picked on kid....
Course, if they do pull out of Europe, it means Linux would be on the rise, and fast.
Re:hmmmm.... works out math (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:hmmmm.... works out math (Score:5, Funny)
forced to 'open up' windows (Score:3, Interesting)
tell me, what6's the solution if a monopoly takes on a government, by closing up shop? closes all offices in EU member countries, and no longer licenses it's products for use in those countries..
Hmm, people will import it, and microsoft won't have to support it... hmmm...
Don't laugh too soon (Score:3, Insightful)
Eventually no apps? (Score:4, Insightful)
No Web Browser (Netscape)
No Media Player (Real)
No Word/Wordpad (Wordperfect)
No Imaging (ACDSee)
No Defrag (Notron Works)
No Zip support (WinZip)
No Solitaire (...)
Seems pretty useless to Joe Average, who just wants to turn on his new PC and play his MP3s and check his email.
Re:Eventually no apps? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Ford is not a monopoly,... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ford (Microsoft) has 90% of the market. Gas stations have pumps (hardware/drivers) that only work on Fords and virtually all dealers (dell, gateway, etc..) will only sell you a Ford. Parking spots, roadways
You could buy a Toyota (Red Hat). Unfortunately when you do, you realize that you end up having to find different pumps to get gas (which are few and far between), cannot buy a Toyota fully assembled (computer w/Red Hat installed) and end up having to buy a Ford (Wintel machine) and installing Toyota parts (Red Hat & software). Of course, even after you have your Toyota and you realize it is better (more fuel efficient, more reliable, more features, etc..), you find that Ford's dominance adversely affects the full potential of your Toyota. You no longer can use the local pumps down the street, you end up having to do maintenance by yourself (as very few if any of the shops will service your Toyota), and worse of all, your favorite parking spots, streets and music (software) is not supported full on the Toyota so you end up either having to find completely new music, new places to drive and new parking spots or end up simply being constrained on where you can go.
The bottom line is this -- cars don't work this way. I had a Honda and bought a Toyota. My CDs still worked in in, I could still get the same gas, drive the same roads, park in the same parking spots. The basic fundamental "user interface" is the same -- perhaps laid out slightly different. I can get it serviced at a wide variety of places, get the oil changed at the neighborhood gas station. No problems.
Unfortunately, when talking about computer system choice, this is obviously not as "drop in and go" as you make it out to be. The fact that Microsoft monopolized the market, coerced OEMs into supporting only MS products (bundling deals and the like), effectively dumps their product to get people hooked and does not follow industry standards to maintain a certain level of lock-in adversely affects everyone.
Re:Eventually no apps? (Score:5, Insightful)
Web Browser
[ ] IE
[ ] Mozilla
Media Player
[ ] WMP
[ ] Real
[ ] WinAmp
Text Editing
[ ] Wordpad
[ ] Notepad
[ ] OpenOffice
Imaging
[ ] ACDSee
[ ] MS Imaging
[ ] Gimp
[ ] MS Paint
don't get too excited - see link.... (Score:5, Insightful)
"The company is certain to appeal against a Commission decision in the European courts. Litigation could take several years."
At which time any verdict will be pretty much irrelevant.
Wonder how this affects Longhorn planning. Anyone with insight on this?
No it is still bad for them (Score:5, Informative)
2. A appeal does not guarantee that the restrictions being placed on them will not be imposed while the appeal is running.
Microsoft can thank Bush (Score:3, Insightful)
When Microsoft is forced to behave everywhere _except_ the United States, then they will end up having to behave in the USA as well.
Getting an easy sentence from the US Anti-Trust conviction may not have been as favorable as it looked originally.
Why the settlements failed. (Score:4, Interesting)
To waive the ruling, Monti asked Microsoft to commit not to distort competition by bundling peripheral software programs to Windows in the future. Microsoft, it would appear, declined.
It seems that real problem was not about including WMP in Windows, but Microsoft refusing to stop doing similar things in the future.
Is EU anti-monopoly or just pro-europe? (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder if it's just easier for the EU to do this type of thing to an outsider to Europe as opposed to an already entrenched monopoly that started in Europe. Is this just protectionism, or will the EU actually stand up to all Monopolies, foreign and domestic?
US involvement? (Score:3, Insightful)
Denver Post cartoon (Score:3, Funny)
Transcript (Score:4, Funny)
Monty: Microsoft, we're going to levy heavy penalties for your past behavior.
MS: Now, wait here: let's compromise.
Monty: Okay, let's here it.
MS: How about you don't levy heavy penalties for our past behavior.
Monty: [silence]
MS: Well?
Monty: Heavier fines.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:10% fine and removal of WMP? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:10% fine and removal of WMP? (Score:5, Funny)
Yep. Definitely.
Weapons of mass Procrastination
Known to some as MineSweeper and Solitaire
Re:Microsoft must have a plan (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Microsoft must have a plan (Score:5, Interesting)
Go running to Washington, and ask for a trade embargo to be imposed on European software?
Re:Disincentive (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Disincentive (Score:3, Insightful)
It's poorly phrased, but that's a very interesting question. In the fight for the desktop, Microsoft has two big guns, MS Windows and MS Office. These two products enable them to sell all sorts of server stuff to support them - things like Exchange Server and MS SQL Server and, to a lesser extent, other types of collaborative software. Open Source companies have correctly identified this situation, so you see a
Re:Good job EU! (Score:5, Informative)
1: They're making their own X86 compatible chip called Dragonballz (or whatever silly name it is). They're around 500MHz or so..
2: They're eradicating Windows in the govt and replacing it with Red Flag Linux. Chinese-ified Red Hat.
3: Getting their country more self-sufficient in everything...
Re:Good job EU! (Score:4, Informative)
Actually the "Dragon Chip" (Godson-I/II chips) are MIPS based [techimo.com].
Re:Good job EU! (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem was the Bush Justice Department. Ashcroft simply refused to do anything, and let the decision be unenforced, thus snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
The judicial system worked, after all those long years. Bush, who believes any regulation of business is socialistic if not outright communistic, according to an old Harvard business professor of his, finds the anti-monopoly laws distasteful in the extreme, and his cohorts are vetted to agree with such beliefs. When Bush was elected, the Microsoft case was effectively lost.
Re:Good job EU! (Score:4, Insightful)
read the article a little more carefully (Score:3)
Re:What if M$ pulls the plug on Europe? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Is it just me? (Score:5, Insightful)
The EU commission does enforce anti-trust laws on European companies on a regular basis. And yes, they would love Europe to have a stronger position in the global software market.
However, in this case, it's hard to see a strong domestic interest. Who benefits: Apple, Real? They aren't well-known European companies.
Re:Is it just me? (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically, they're showing that they have teeth to ALL who trade in the EU, both native and foreign.
If MS had been based in the EU, they'd have been defanged harshly at the initial hearing (unlike in the US where they got given a slap on the wrist, told to be good boys, and let loose to cause havoc again).
The reason Linux has been getting used in Governments is to help stop frequent virus infections, use an OS which they can tailor themselves, and isn't locked in to one vendor saying what they can and cannot do with it, and charging extortionate prices for that.
Even if they used Windows to run Government offices, they'd still need local contractors to run the machines..
If the offices believe they save money, then it's a fair bet in the long run that they will.
And it certainly stops the 'single point of failure' that a single vendor solution presents.
Astroturf sensors just overloaded (Score:5, Insightful)
It's straight-forward execution of the state's obligation to enforce rules of fair play as defined by consensus and trial-and-error through the ages. One of those is to prevent manipulation of markets by parties powerful enough to take a monopoly position.
Monopolists distort the markets and supress free competition so as to extract maximum resources from consumers. This is bad for innovation, for economic performance and for society as a whole. There is only one organ that we grant the right to raise taxes, and that is the State itself.
The EU are doing their job. The US have failed to do this perhaps because the State and Business are too close together.
BTW, wtf does p-C m-f-e-n actually mean? I mean, wtfffff??
Re:Checks and Balances (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:the double standard (Score:3, Insightful)
I donno about you but I use my computer more than diamonds!
Re:the double standard (Score:5, Informative)
- Its De Beers, not DuBeers. Get your names straight. It does not bode well for the rest of your arguments.
- De Beers is founded and largely still operates from South Africa, not the EU.
- The MS EU show is about misuse, NOT -having- a monopoly, please show how DE Beers misuses their monopoly, and how this is "magnitudes worse" for WE, the people, then MS'ses -proven- misuse.
Thanks
"/Dread"