Microsoft must pay $1.4bn to EU

gjrc said:
why should they be allowed to. fine don't bundle the software but why should MS give them all the information with regard to the OS. its their product - they designed it why do they have to give it to third parties.

the only reason i can see is because they have become victims of their own success. not an argument that holds any merit.
Click to expand...

I don't care that they bundle it, I care that IE and WMP take advatange of features in the OS that 3rd party developers don't have access to. Which IMO, is unfair considering Microsoft's monopoly position (using their monopoly in one field to gain a monopoly in another, unfairly). Microsoft was supposed to release information about how their software ties in with the OS so that competing companies can at least compete on an even playing field.

I also don't agree with Apple tieing everything and everybody in with iPods and iTunesm but that's another issue.
 
I doubt they'll that money in years, it'll get stuck in appeals and then appeals and then when all legal avenues have been exhausted they'll work out a payment plan that spreads it across decades.
 
daz said:
I don't care that they bundle it, I care that IE and WMP take advatange of features in the OS that 3rd party developers don't have access to. Which IMO, is unfair considering Microsoft's monopoly position (using their monopoly in one field to gain a monopoly in another, unfairly). Microsoft was supposed to release information about how their software ties in with the OS so that competing companies can at least compete on an even playing field.

I also don't agree with Apple tieing everything and everybody in with iPods and iTunesm but that's another issue.
Click to expand...

how uneven is uneven? also how much does your average consumer care?
 
gjrc said:
how uneven is uneven? also how much does your average consumer care?
Click to expand...

They care because without competition we'd still be using IE6 or worse, non-standards compliant and basically a pretty poor product.

As it is IE7 was forced to become a decent product. :)
 
colinuk said:
But if the media player that comes with the OS is good enough for what you want. why change?
Click to expand...


That's exactly the point rival companies are making.

colinuk said:
If the other software was that good, we would use it, we dont use it for a reason, its not that much better than the one we have.... why is that MS fault?
Click to expand...

If other software had access to the same info MS has then who knows how much better it could be?

colinuk said:
I dont use media player btw, i prefer VLC, bought it and use that as i prefer not having to download codex all the time. I use IE as it does everything i need it too. Why would i pay for firefox if the one i get for free, given to me by the same people who write the OS, does all i need.
Click to expand...

You don't need to pay for firefox it's free.

colinuk said:
Tell me, what does firefox do that IE doesnt? that would want me to pay extra for it?
Click to expand...

Firefox is free and it can do quite a bit more than IE and hackers are less likely to exploit it to get at your bank details.

Another reason why I don't really like IE being so deeply integrated to my OS and would pefer if the shop I bought the PC from said you can either have a free copy of firefox or IE7 when you choose your new pc?

If it were my choice IE7 would not be part of my PC. But again that's another agruement that's going through the courts at present.
 
From what I know of the situation, the charge against Microsoft was purposefully using a commercial advantage (ie Windows' market share) in one area (Operating systems) to gain leverage in another area (web browsers/media players etc). A big part of the case against MS in the US DoJ's case (remember, the EU aren't the only ones who have attacked MS for the same reason) was that there was a memo within Microsoft specifically stating their intention to do this. They weren't trying to make the experience easier for the user.
 
colinuk said:
I may have missed the point here, but from what i can see, hear and read it looks like this.

Microsoft spend a lot of money, time and effort getting a OS that works better than the others that where out there at the time, make it look nice, have features built in to make it user friendly.

Now they have become a large firm that has a product that people use/want, other companies now want microsoft to let them see how it is writen and let them write other apps, that do the same as what microsoft do in the 1st place, so they can make money? Isnt that busisness suicide?

Maybe the reason 97% share of the OS is windows, is becasue windows is better than the rest? Sure it has flaws, but you know what your getting, has a large user base, gets fixes, updates and 9/10 times does what its meant too. If you wanted to break this 97%, dont complain you cant and its not fair, get off ya bums and come up with somethig new. And when you do, and Bill comes along with a cheque so big you can buy the town your living in, tell him no thanks or do what everyother small company has done, and sell out.

But for the love of god, no one moans about tesco's milk being cheap and forcing milk men out of busisness, or the fact there is only two types of fuel in 90% of petrol stations that limits the sales of other fuels or god forbid we mention the BBC licience fee great rip off... No, lets pick on Microsoft, a firm that worked out what we wanted, then gave it to us, now we sue them for doing a good job LOL....

Again, i may be misinformed, but this is my take on it. If i was MS, id tell the EU to go take a long walk of a small pier, put in the secret code and crash all their PC's! hehe.

<ColiN>
Click to expand...

Yes it's nice it's pretty much universally used and free. But Microsoft is still using it's monopoly to engage in anti-competitive behaviour causing a lack of innovation and less incentive to create better innovative products, and this ruling, were it to have an effect, is in the benefit of the user.

Using you milk analogy for MS, it's the equivalent of your milk company subsidising it's unpasteurised milk using it's widely used cheese business, resulting in no-one creating unpasteurised milk.
 
I'm guessing there is some kind of fundemental behvaiours or features that an OS must have in order to be considered an OS; could Microsoft not just argue that both IE and WMP are now part of that operating system?

All seems like a load of rubbish to me. If I get free software that does the job as soon as I install an OS, I'm happy. If I want something else, I'll go out and buy it.
 
platypus said:
I wonder if Microsoft would consider withdrawing software from Europe.
Click to expand...

LOL it'd be their worst nightmare, an entire continent not using MS products. Remember that MS tolerates piracy of its products in certain far east countries for fear that Linux will gain a foothold there and once everyone realises Linux is pretty good it will start spreading.
 
scorza said:
LOL it'd be their worst nightmare, an entire continent not using MS products. Remember that MS tolerates piracy of its products in certain far east countries for fear that Linux will gain a foothold there and once everyone realises Linux is pretty good it will start spreading.
Click to expand...

i dont think it would be MS's nightmare, it would be a nightmare for European businesses if MS pulled out of Europe. It would cripple IT in the EU if MS withdrew all of its products.
 
Who will actually make MS pay this fine, its not as if they can be banned from the EU states that MS as 90% of large businesses must use there products.
 
It doesn't seem fair to me that they have been sued for this. I recognise that because of bundled software such as IE and WMP they are more popular as people already have them and don't feel the need to use a different one, however there is nothing stopping people from using third party software, I use firefox, thunderbird, VLC, foobar2000 etc.

Should Microsoft be sued for including a calculator? I'm sure some offices don't have calculators now and it's ruining competition for other calculator software. Sue them a few billon dollars for being so unfair and evil :rolleyes:. Wordpad could be ruining competition for other word processing software, it just goes on.

They just seem to be picking on Microsoft because of how much money they can keep taking from them, without much consequence.
 
mattyrigby00 said:
i wonder why the EU dont consider that apple's ipod + itunes combo an "illegal anti-competitive monopoly".

also it would be just plain stupid removing IE from windows... you would have to download IE or opera or firefox on another pc then transfer it on a disk... and if you dont already have a computer youd need to get someone with one to download it for you
Click to expand...

/slaps forehead. They do: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6520677.stm

I highly doubt that new PCs would be shipped without a web browser app pre-installed. Anyone who can build their own PC is clever enough to use FTP imo.
 
scorza said:
/slaps forehead. They do: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6520677.stm

I highly doubt that new PCs would be shipped without a web browser app pre-installed. Anyone who can build their own PC is clever enough to use FTP imo.
Click to expand...

That apple investigation is just about supply of the tunes though isn't it? I mean rather than having to use proprietary software or file types.
 
Quite ridiculous, its their operating system, they should be able to do what they want with it. If you dont like, dont buy it, there are plenty of alternatives! It really is that simple!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom