+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 27 of 27
Windows 7 Thread, Microsoft in new EU Browser Offer in Technical; I think you're forgetting the whole thing about US and EU law on monopolies and being anti-competitive. Microsoft was found ...
  1. #16

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,639
    Thank Post
    514
    Thanked 2,443 Times in 1,891 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    831
    I think you're forgetting the whole thing about US and EU law on monopolies and being anti-competitive.

    Microsoft was found to be a monopoly, both in the USA and in the EU. They were then found to be leveraging this monopoly in order to force their way into various markets, whilst destroying the alternatives by using secret API calls and various other means. This was shown to be happening in their handling of the whole Windows running on non-MS-DOS, with internet explorer, and again with media player.

    The purpose of these actions against Microsoft is not to just punish them for their poor behaviour. It is to force them to change the way they operate, in order to prevent the end user from being screwed over.

    They aren't turning to MS and saying 'the EU likes Opera and Winamp, you don't include these, therefore you're bad. Give us a billion euros.', they're saying 'your position of being the monopoly operating system provider in the EU is unique, and due to that position, your company has to behave in such a way so as to not stifle competition and choice. You have been found to be ignoring this responsibility several times. Give us a billion euros, and change your ways!'...

    How is that anything buy good?

  2. #17
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by Simcfc73 View Post
    Probably MS trying to stop payrolling the biggest Quango in history. They'll probably fine then for only installing one version of solitaire next.

    Apple must be so squeaky clean.... or Brussells gets nice shiney macs every year for a discount.
    well, if apple get above 10% 'pc' market share in the US and fair considerably better worldwide in terms of % of overall pc shipments, then the EU will doubtless take a look.

    But as of now, they're behind the likes of Dell, HP and Toshiba in both US and worldwide market share.

    Infact no-one stands out as having as dominant a market share in the PC market as microsoft has within the OS market, or to a lesser extent as intel has in the processor market.

  3. #18

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,639
    Thank Post
    514
    Thanked 2,443 Times in 1,891 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    831
    Can I just point out that I do think Apple should face an investigation regarding their ipod/itunes/blocking palm-pre thing. They do seem to have a monopoly when it comes to this area, and they do seem to be using that monopoly to force competitors out.

  4. #19
    Diello's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Kent, England
    Posts
    1,063
    Thank Post
    112
    Thanked 228 Times in 128 Posts
    Rep Power
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    They aren't turning to MS and saying 'the EU likes Opera and Winamp, you don't include these, therefore you're bad. Give us a billion euros.', they're saying 'your position of being the monopoly operating system provider in the EU is unique, and due to that position, your company has to behave in such a way so as to not stifle competition and choice. You have been found to be ignoring this responsibility several times. Give us a billion euros, and change your ways!'...

    How is that anything buy good?
    This whole thing angers me so much! Since when did a "monopoly" equal "the most successful". The EU, and the US for that matter, basically say "if you're the most successful, you must help those that aren't to catch up with you"... sorry, this isn't a charity, it's a business, designed to make money for shareholders. If Opera was the most amazing web browser in history, then install with Windows or not, people would use it. Waving it right in peoples face isn't going to help it become a better browser, all that'll happen is someone with no knowledge of browsers will probably end up installing it, then wonder why it's not "working properly".

    Have MS made some questionable decision in the past and stifled innovation, undoubtedly - Is not bundling other people's browsers with your OS anti-competitive? No, not really. If you DO want to make such a move, then that's fine, but make it across the industry, allowing Apple to bundle iTunes, Safari, and heck knows how many other apps should be stopped to, not because they're necessarily anti-competitive, but if a level playing field is what you want, then you can't have one rule for one, and one rule for another. Consumer choice is great, when it really is that, not when it's "beat on the successful company under a veil of legitimacy". What if I want to but a Mac have be able to choose Firefox as my browser?! It should be just as easy as Microsoft may well have to do.

    This whole - Beat MS as the big evil, love Apple, they can do no wrong, and it's DIFFERENT - arguments is moronic.

  5. #20

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,639
    Thank Post
    514
    Thanked 2,443 Times in 1,891 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    831
    Quote Originally Posted by Diello View Post
    This whole thing angers me so much! Since when did a "monopoly" equal "the most successful". The EU, and the US for that matter, basically say "if you're the most successful, you must help those that aren't to catch up with you"... sorry, this isn't a charity, it's a business, designed to make money for shareholders. If Opera was the most amazing web browser in history, then install with Windows or not, people would use it. Waving it right in peoples face isn't going to help it become a better browser, all that'll happen is someone with no knowledge of browsers will probably end up installing it, then wonder why it's not "working properly".

    Have MS made some questionable decision in the past and stifled innovation, undoubtedly - Is not bundling other people's browsers with your OS anti-competitive? No, not really. If you DO want to make such a move, then that's fine, but make it across the industry, allowing Apple to bundle iTunes, Safari, and heck knows how many other apps should be stopped to, not because they're necessarily anti-competitive, but if a level playing field is what you want, then you can't have one rule for one, and one rule for another. Consumer choice is great, when it really is that, not when it's "beat on the successful company under a veil of legitimacy". What if I want to but a Mac have be able to choose Firefox as my browser?! It should be just as easy as Microsoft may well have to do.

    This whole - Beat MS as the big evil, love Apple, they can do no wrong, and it's DIFFERENT - arguments is moronic.
    So you'd be happy if MS turned around and stopped those alternative software's from working with their OS? Or made it so that they would be eternally crippled, compared to their offering?

    You are missing the point. Microsoft have a monopoly in the OS market. Fact. Because of this, they have a legal responsibility to promote competition (this is enshrined in US, UK and EU law! If you disagree with this law, campaign to have it changed). Microsoft have not been following their responsibilities.

    It isn't the EU you've got a problem with - it's the laws. We vote these people in, so we can vote them out. However, I won't be voting against these laws...

  6. #21

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,072
    Thank Post
    853
    Thanked 2,676 Times in 2,270 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    So you'd be happy if MS turned around and stopped those alternative software's from working with their OS? Or made it so that they would be eternally crippled, compared to their offering?
    ??
    But winamp and firefox do work with Windows, and instead of being crippled do manage to offer some features that the Windows embedded solutions don't. I don't think that they would purposfully stop the code from running, not now.

    There is a certain user benifit of having an integrated system as well. If you make your content to work with say MS media player then it should work on most systems easily. If you start adding dependencies here and there for every different codec under the sun you will end up with a confusing mess like linux which people are unwilling to develop certain types of content for. This because it is such a PITA to get all of the appropriate dependencies and APIs in the right place and order on anything more than one or two distributions.

    Choice is a good thing but this is playing into the regulation for the stupid side of things, like the sunscreen thread. The government should not need to mandate bundling to make up for its own citizens skills deficiencies. This is all part of the nasty and continual slide into an idiocracy (a great, pressient movie).
    Last edited by SYNACK; 25th July 2009 at 03:06 PM.

  7. #22

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,639
    Thank Post
    514
    Thanked 2,443 Times in 1,891 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    831
    Quote Originally Posted by SYNACK View Post
    ??
    But winamp and firefox do work with Windows, and instead of being crippled do manage to offer some features that the Windows embedded solutions don't. I don't think that they would purposfully stop the code from running, not now.
    Microsoft used secret API calls and similar for its own products. These abilities give it an unfair advantage over competition. (This was the ruling of the court btw...) It was ordered to release the details of these APIs and to release a version of Windows which didn't include Media Player (and was fined). It shuffled around on the first point, and ended up being fined again.

    [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_competition_case]European Union Microsoft competition case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

    There is a certain user benifit of having an integrated system as well. If you make your content to work with say MS media player then it should work on most systems easily. If you start adding dependencies here and there for every different codec under the sun you will end up with a confusing mess like linux which people are unwilling to develop certain types of content for. This because it is such a PITA to get all of the appropriate dependencies and APIs in the right place and order on anything more than one or two distributions.
    Sorry what? Linux is 1000 times easier to develop for because of its dependency system. You need libc6? include it and add that requirement to your debian package or rpm package. With Windows, you can only use what MS say you can use to interface with the OS. This is the problem that the EU had.

    Choice is a good thing but this is playing into the regulation for the stupid side of things, like the sunscreen thread. The government should not need to mandate bundling to make up for its own citizens skills deficiencies. This is all part of the nasty and continual slide into an idiocracy (a great, pressient movie).
    No, it isn't. Microsoft have a monopoly. That monopoly isn't going to go anywhere soon (no matter what advocates of linux say), and as such MS can't simply do whatever it wants.

  8. #23
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by Diello View Post
    all that'll happen is someone with no knowledge of browsers will probably end up just end up using IE7 or IE8
    .

    corrected for you.

    This whole - Beat MS as the big evil, love Apple, they can do no wrong, and it's DIFFERENT - arguments is moronic.
    I think apple should be doing out of choice what microsoft are doing. Give the user a choice within the operating system for various applications, and the capability for the user to select the option to remove osx bundled apps if they chose. absolutely.

    It should be beholden on any OS provider to not lock out choice by design. I think everyone would agree, it's how far they choose [or are forced] to facilitate that end user choice that's debated.

    IT's why i think some people get fed up with some decisions by bodies like the EU, because in their bid to protect consumers you can end up with counter-intuitive end results.

  9. #24

    SYNACK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,072
    Thank Post
    853
    Thanked 2,676 Times in 2,270 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Microsoft used secret API calls and similar for its own products. These abilities give it an unfair advantage over competition. (This was the ruling of the court btw...) It was ordered to release the details of these APIs and to release a version of Windows which didn't include Media Player (and was fined). It shuffled around on the first point, and ended up being fined again.

    European Union Microsoft competition case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    .
    It made their stuff go faster but did not break the other stuff, it still worked fine and possibly more securely because of it. I agreed earlier that this was worthy of being investigated and acted upon. A disagree that media player should have been removed though. The EU will not be happy untill you just get a command prompt with windows so that it does not tread on any EU developers toes. Windows PE is probably the next version that the EU will demand.

    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Sorry what? Linux is 1000 times easier to develop for because of its dependency system. You need libc6? include it and add that requirement to your debian package or rpm package. With Windows, you can only use what MS say you can use to interface with the OS. This is the problem that the EU had.
    Which distribution? writing a full on media app for linux is like writing a single new bible for every religion on earth. Media is handled by different subsystems in different distributions, there are also different incompatible formats for installers, some are good, others are laughable. If you need to spend 90% of your design time allowing for all of these variables then how much time do you have to actually program the app.

    Lots of the education based stuff that the teachers seem to like are built in the simplest most cross platform tools avalible to them at the time. Is there a simple media framework that can be developed in that will actually work on the large majority of distributions?

    Linux can be good I am sure but it is by no means the pinical of achivement and the best at everything. Sometimes to hit a nail the easiets way is to use a hammer.

    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    No, it isn't. Microsoft have a monopoly. That monopoly isn't going to go anywhere soon (no matter what advocates of linux say), and as such MS can't simply do whatever it wants.
    So you are saying that this is ok and will not lead to more idiot tax being applied because for the moment MS can stand up to them? If the govenrment can't get its citizens up to speed with installing a browser then they should offload that onto the company. I have yet to hear of a government going after car companies because its citizens can't imediatly drive them without training.

    The EU already has one of the highest uptakes of non MS browsers, can they not be trusted to keep going on this trend. Is MS stuff really so addictive that people can't possibly use anything else and if it is that good won't people just keep using it. Corporate IT uses IE mostly because of its ease of managment and integration (+ legacy apps for some). Where is the official MSI and adm/admx templates for Opera or Firefox (not CTP). If they are so much better and so desperate to get into the Office then why have they not even made this effort. Litigation is the fallback of those who do not want to compete. Laws infact are specificaly designed to limit or eradicate conflict/compotition for the sake of peace at variable costs.
    Last edited by SYNACK; 25th July 2009 at 03:57 PM.

  10. #25

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Staffs
    Posts
    76
    Thank Post
    10
    Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
    Rep Power
    12
    A big thanks goes out to the EU. Once again they have stepped in and made a decision where one wasn't required.

    Has anyone ever thought, damn my Windows install has IE with it, what will I do?

    Or to simplify it further. You can buy a different car stereo to the one you have pre built into your car, are the EU going to force ford to stop putting ford stereo's in their new cars and instead replace it with a sticker saying "You could have a ford stereo or you could have one of these?" I dont think so!

    Overpaid, underworked idiots, and we think that the UK government is bad!!

  11. #26
    R0M
    R0M is offline
    R0M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    68
    Thank Post
    7
    Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Rep Power
    12
    I tend to agree that it was a bad move by the EU, sure Microsoft are a bunch of overly aggressive anti-competitive whatevers that have the whole market cornered... but I don't think that making Windows 7 it support more than one browse out of the box was the way to fix that. I see that as being a pain to support if people get a choice but don't know what they are picking. As much as I love Firefox over IE, many users who will go down to the nearest electronics store and buy a new laptop that is underpowered for Windows 7 anyway just because its new. IE will do all the things they want.

    I don't know what the solution is, fines don't seam to work because even $1,000,000,000 is pea-nuts to MS and they will happily pay that and do the wrong thing because they will make it back in months. But not making them support more than one browser... who is that helping?

  12. #27


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    The EU are just upholding a law which is designed to protect us !
    They are not just 'going after' microsoft. They do it to other (non-tech) companies as well.

    I this case, there is clear legislation to prevent monopolies from exploiting the public.
    EU/Competition/Article 82 of the EC Treaty (ex Article 86)

    Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the common market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the common market insofar as it may affect trade between Member States.

    Such abuse may, in particular, consist in:

    (a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices or other unfair trading conditions;

    (b) limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers;

    (c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;

    (d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.
    When a complain was made against MS - the EU investigated and found:

    The evidence gathered during the investigation leads the Commission to believe that the tying of Internet Explorer with Windows, which makes Internet Explorer available on 90% of the world's PCs, distorts competition on the merits between competing web browsers insofar as it provides Internet Explorer with an artificial distribution advantage which other web browsers are unable to match. The Commission is concerned that through the tying, Microsoft shields Internet Explorer from head to head competition with other browsers which is detrimental to the pace of product innovation and to the quality of products which consumers ultimately obtain. In addition, the Commission is concerned that the ubiquity of Internet Explorer creates artificial incentives for content providers and software developers to design websites or software primarily for Internet Explorer which ultimately risks undermining competition and innovation in the provision of services to consumers.
    EUROPA - Press Releases - Antitrust: Commission confirms sending a Statement of Objections to Microsoft on the tying of Internet Explorer to Windows

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. which browser??
    By mikeymike in forum Educational Software
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 15th August 2011, 05:54 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 4th March 2009, 10:26 AM
  3. Quake in your browser!!
    By Dos_Box in forum Gaming
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 26th February 2009, 08:38 AM
  4. What's your browser?
    By iSteve in forum Mac
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 14th January 2009, 08:38 PM
  5. Browser in VB errors
    By Shrimpersfan in forum Windows
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2nd May 2008, 12:05 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •