No, but FF is the first company that hasn't been lazy since IE. But they are beginning to be lazy. No tv adverts anymore..
EU says Microsoft violated law with IE on Windows
- Thread starter BlackDragon
- Start date
No, but FF is the first company that hasn't been lazy since IE. But they are beginning to be lazy. No tv adverts anymore..
Exatcltly, you dont see car companies getting into trouble for fitting their own steering wheels rather than offering a choice of standard, MOMO, OMP or cobra wheels - most drivers dont care, its round and it steers - end of story.
Anymore? I have never seen a FF tv advert
I thought there was , there was certainly main stream newspaper adds. Which they don't do anymore.
The difference is, and I've said this three or four times in this thread already, dominance. It is unusual for anti-competitive practices to be claimed unless the company is in a dominant position within the industry because, otherwise, it doesn't affect the industry too much. Microsoft is in a dominant position. No single motor manufacturer is in a dominant position.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 8,537
same goes for tesco, i cant stand the company myself, but they're doing tremendously well, why should their growth be limited? if they work that hard to source cheaper suppliers and help to keep the prices down by forcing other companies to keep up then fair play to them and if the other companies can't keep up? then they don't deserve to be in competition. if you can't stand the heat get out of the fire as the old saying goes.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
What happens if you don't want FF? Why is FF installed defaultly? Isn't that hypocritical?
Thing is though, it's still wrong, I use both IE and firefox, not that it matters.
Its just extortion, if 3rd party software isnt popular, its usualy because its pants, or undermarketed. These companies simply need to get thier act together, and improve their product and advertising, not whine about other products.
Going back to the WMP fiasco:
"Microsoft recently reached a settlement with RealNetworks, a key participant in Europe's antitrust actions against Microsoft. In return for $460 million in cash and other investments from Microsoft, Real agreed to end its involvement in antitrust investigations across the globe. "
So the company that makes Real, blackmailed MS out of £500 million !!!!!
This is a perfect example of this kind of abuse, Realplayer has more in common with a virus than it does with a media player, and yet its MS that are preventing thier success? some of these companies need to take a look in the mirror. So does the god-forsaken EU.
Its just extortion, if 3rd party software isnt popular, its usualy because its pants, or undermarketed. These companies simply need to get thier act together, and improve their product and advertising, not whine about other products.
Going back to the WMP fiasco:
"Microsoft recently reached a settlement with RealNetworks, a key participant in Europe's antitrust actions against Microsoft. In return for $460 million in cash and other investments from Microsoft, Real agreed to end its involvement in antitrust investigations across the globe. "
So the company that makes Real, blackmailed MS out of £500 million !!!!!
This is a perfect example of this kind of abuse, Realplayer has more in common with a virus than it does with a media player, and yet its MS that are preventing thier success? some of these companies need to take a look in the mirror. So does the god-forsaken EU.
They could, but why would they? I know I certainly wouldnt do that if Windows was my product...it would be kind of self defeating.
At the end of the day, the market will decide what works, at the moment its windows with all it built in functionality.
If the market didnt demand it, then it would not be here, so there is no need for law suits of this kind, if there was more demand for different products, then different products would be viable and we would see OEMs offering much more dynamic software packages.
The fact is its not viable for a very sound reason - its not needed or wanted, and therefore not catered for.
If I was an OEM, i dunno, say MESH, and I got told I had to start offering certain types of configuration, I would say "sod off"
I sell my own configuration, thats my choice as a business, change such as this could add a lot of cost to the product and put you out of business...its just silly.
Im near sure theres some guy on here (or used to be) that worked for them and of course supported everything they did against microsoft. Id love to know where the money from these fines goes. Probably gold plated bog seats.
Mostly on key infrastructure projects throughout the EU.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 7,775
- Location
- Under the Hill
Bad analogy. Imagine instead that we only had Panasonic shops on the high street because they saw the gap in the market and invested in the infrastructue. Should they be forced to sell Sony TVs? Should they be prevented from having their own TVs for sale in their shops?
IMO, if other companies have an issue, they should develope their own OS and integrate what they like.
Don't get me wrong, I am a firefox user, but how do you get it if IE is not available at install? I am aware that it may be an integration issue that they have the problem with, but it's still a waste of effort to fine them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 8,537
That MS paid Real half a billion dollars is an acknowledgement that they know they have behaved illegally. Whatever you think about Real player (I hate it) they haven't as far as I'm aware broken the law and have a right to do business. Microsoft does not have the right to abuse its market dominance to muscle in on a competitive marketplace - if it wants to compete then it should compete, not crush the opposition.
Microsoft would have been broken up by now if Al Gore had have won the 2000 US presidential election. The most damning legacy of George W Bush's presidency is that he caved into an illegal, abusive monopoly that is still operating today.
Incomplete analogy. Imagine we only had Panasonic shops on the high street and they prevented competitors shops such as Sony from starting up. Should this be legal because Panasonic got their first?