Microsoft hit by record EU fine

[Titian]

I don't think that this fine has anything to do with MS or computers or OS.
The EU needs a lot of money for their intention of expanding to the east. Ar the moment they are short of cash.

They are at the moment trying to put a lot of pressure on Switzerland in order to receive more money from them.
The EU is trying to get money where they can and where there is. I wouldn't be surprised if MS will remain the only US company which will get fined.
After all the EU has learnt from the USA which used and will still uses this strategy to keep their own companies competitive and to fill their own pockets.
This is simply an economic war but don't worry... no blood is involved.

 

[Foocha]

This is why the bother with Office for Mac.

As I understand, Microsoft's Macintosh Business Unit is a profitable division of Microsoft - unlike much of the rest of Microsoft (only Windows & Office make a profit). So it's not a philanthropic gesture of Microsoft's behalf, or even an attempt to demonstrate that they're not a monopoly - it's a viable business in its own right. If that situation ever changed, I'm sure that they would scrap it altogether.

 

[gwangung]

I'm actually suprise by how much support Microsoft are getting on this thread, considering this forum is for Mac users.

Also, Microsoft did not win their case against the US DOJ, they lost it... and now they've lost it in the EU as well. I don't see how double jepardy applies.

Double jeopardy only applies if you think the US legal system is the supreme legal system of the world...

[C'mon, people, think! If you run an Internet scam that vicitimizes a person in California and one in New York, you've committed two crimes, not one]

 

[dekator]

England has NO part in this...

Hey, this is the very first time anybody had the guts to really do something about M$! A 500 million fine + opening up of code + Media Player restriction isn't at all bad. How can you give this a bad rating ?
As for the English remarks on 'EU ministers': It is *because* of the EU and its functionaries that something is done. If it were for the UK, we wouldn't have *any* anti-monopoly laws or the like (all laws applicable in this respect were opposed by Britain). Indeed, may I remind you that Bill Gates was honoured by the Queen for his merits and the wonderful role M$ has played in the British industry? So you guys better seriously shut up. The EU does a much better job than you will ever realise.
I hope we'll get rid of you blinded-by-prejudice europhobics sooner than later. You're not even really a part of Europe, so get your butts out of the EU. It's a fine club and you certainly don't belong in there. Gosh, I hope next time Windows 'is ****ting down' it will be on you, perhpas-not-so-intelligent whiners.

 

[rhpenguin]

This is a good thing. I dont care about the fines to MS, but them being forced to remove un-intergrate WMP is okay in my books. That piece of software is absolutely horrible and since there is no way to actually kill it, your stuck with it there on your system. Also if it breaks its a major pain in the rear to fix it (Its like trying to reinstall IE which is just one big registry hack). I am a big fan of choice, and this ruling (while it wont affect me directly because im in North America) will atleast be a good thing for Windows users overseas from me that want choice as well.

Anyway, thats enough rambling for now.

 

[Makosuke]

Believe me, I hate MS as much as the next guy, but business is business - the point is to make a superior product and CRUSH the competition.

This, and all the other comments about MS being just another business are true. But when you own 95% of a market, you are a monopolist, period, and that is illegal in almost every country in the world, because it hurts consumers. The best a monopoly can hope for is price-controls and regulation like a utility--power companies, etc.

How does it hurt consumers? Easy, look at MS's bottom line:

http://www.microsoft.com/msft/earn.mspx

They turn profits on the order of 30% at least. Furthermore, if you look at the breakdown, their OS division makes at least 50% profit, and those monopoplistic profits are used to subsidize other divisions into monopolistic positions--the XBox, for example, or MSN.

Normal companies do not make 50% after-expense profit on sales; another company will usually step in with a product selling for half of what your product sells for, and force your prices down or force you out of the market entirely. But if you're a monopoly, you can do anything you want, since there is, in theory, no other choice. This is why Office is a $400 piece of software, when 95% of people would be happy with a word processor that costs $100 and does half as much twice as well.

This is all basic economics, but the bottom line is it's bad for us as consumers, any software monoculture is dangerous for the world at large, and they're a backhanded and petty corporation to boot.

What if Apple owned 95% of the market? Seeing as they make the hardware AND software, what kind of monopoly would people call that?...

A monopoly. Just like I'd call any other company with 95% of any other market (Google comes to mind). And if Apple ever owned 95% of the market, they'd be just as deserving of regulation as MS, if not more.

But, at this point, Apple's not a monopoly and MS is.

 

[daveL]

why do you all think microsoft is this big evil company? let's be honest people, they've made a lot of good innovations in technology. if we didn't have one main os in the market, not as many people would be using a computer. your average person doesn't want to have to learn another os. i use my ibook for portable things and my pc for my home so i'm not partial to either format. both have their advantages. i do think that if microsoft didn't try to include things such as a media player people would have no idea how to play files. my mom could sit down and if a sound file didn't open up she'd have no idea how to fix that. people want an os that will work. i think the same thing can be said for apple too. why does it come with ilife and quicktime? honestly, if you took ms out of the picture what os would take over? the average person buying a $499 computer system from dell can't afford a $2000 system from apple. is linux a viable option? not at all. it seems the governments are going after microsoft while the normal computer user doesn't care.

Name one. MS has never innovated anything. They copy other peoples innovations. Embrace and extend.

 

[eric_n_dfw]

Dell $399 PC

I don't personally know anyone who has actually bought a $499 computer from Dell (or anyone else). By the time they they throw in all the other add-ons required to make it even a marginally desirable system, they spend considerably more. The '$499' figure just helps promote the myth that PCs cost far less than Macs.

Actually, for $399 (after $100 rebate), right now, you get:

• 2.6GHz Celleron with 400Mhz FSB (effectively 333MHz due to the RAM speed)
• 256MB DDR RAM @333MHz
• 40GB HD (add $10 for 7200RPM, $40 for 80GB 7200RPM, $80 for 120GB 7200RPM)
• 48x CD-ROM
• 48x CD-RW
• 17" CRT
• 1 Year Warranty (add $29 for 2 Year)
• "Integrated" Intel Video Card (good enough for the target audience)
  
  That's $399 folks. Like it or not.
  
  Not a kick-butt gaming rig or anything, but more than capable of day-to-day pc usage.
  
  Oh - it comes with XP Home, Word Perfect and MS Money, FWIW.

 

[dekator]

I don't think that this fine has anything to do with MS or computers or OS.
The EU needs a lot of money for their intention of expanding to the east. Ar the moment they are short of cash.

They are at the moment trying to put a lot of pressure on Switzerland in order to receive more money from them.
The EU is trying to get money where they can and where there is. I wouldn't be surprised if MS will remain the only US company which will get fined.
After all the EU has learnt from the USA which used and will still uses this strategy to keep their own companies competitive and to fill their own pockets.
This is simply an economic war but don't worry... no blood is involved.

All previously fined companies were EU companies. The EU needs money, to be sure. Who doesn't ? However, there are far more serious issues at hand here. Europe has been very uncomfortable with Microsoft's software monomania for a long time and there is no reason to trivialize it. Look, there is no country that has payed more or is paying more money in the EU than Germany. Although I understand that money is very, very dear to the Swiss, you shouldn't really get upset about the mosquito crap Switzerland may have to pay...

 

[eric_n_dfw]

Name one. MS has never innovated anything. They copy other peoples innovations. Embrace and extend.

XP's fast user switching comes to mind.

Maybe not an "invention" so-to-speak, but I was sure happy with OS X got it last summer. The best part of 10.3 as far as I'm concerned.

 

[jsw]

XP's fast user switching comes to mind.

Maybe not an "invention" so-to-speak, but I was sure happy with OS X got it last summer. The best part of 10.3 as far as I'm concerned.

Of course, it looks cooler on the Mac than on XP.

 

[Foxer]

Name one. MS has never innovated anything. They copy other peoples innovations. Embrace and extend.

Microsoft Bob.

 

[RHutch]

Why is this being voted as positive? If MS is forced to remove browser/mediaplayers/IMclients from Windows, MacOS, Linux, and others may be subject to the same restrictions. Integrated or not, if you force one company to do without, they will all need to follow suit.

Blind MS haters are going to find themselves in a lurch soon.

Please read the rest of the thread. There is a difference between distributing other software with an OS (like QT player) and making software a part of the OS. They are not going to have Apple remove these pieces from Macs because they are extra, not things included in the OS.

Also, you don't have to make everyone do the same thing. They are only applying this to MS because they have found MS to be abusing their monopoly. The punishment fits the crime.

 

[slowtreme]

They are being forced to remove this because they are using it unfairly, and making it hard for competitors to make their own IM/Browsers/Media Players.

If you force one company to do without, they will all need to follow suit. Take off the blinders and you will see this too. If any vendor today sold an OS without these tools it would be considered incomplete.

I don't see a reason why any product should be coded with the option to randomly delete parts of it either. I wouldn't like customers hacking parts of my apps out, and then complaining that XX addon doesn't work as well.

Clearly you can install alternative Browsers, Media Players, etc. on Windows and they will operate. On my windows box at home and I never see IE, WMP, or MSN. It doesn't affect me, and it does not limit me from using alternatives.

 

[Trimix]

Today Entourage packed up - seriously, I had a mesage in my delete folder, which I tried to delete-delete and everytime I would mark it, Entourage froze and gave me the BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH - it was so funny. In the end Entourage could not even be started up again. Now with a semi-comatose MS-Entourage (6 hours of heavy duty rescuscitation failed), I set up MAIL in 5 minutes and continued working. You MS apologetics out there - you know what that is called ? Choice.
And to those who use their Moms as examples, give the ladies more credit - and realistically - we do not know where we would be today without MS, but it might just be that they stifled innovation - that at least seems the complaint levelled against them. Microsoft feeds the smallest common denominator as its operating system must work for 98% of the world population - that is hardly the stuff of innovation and advancement but rather dull and mediocre.

 

[RHutch]

I'm actually suprise by how much support Microsoft are getting on this thread, considering this forum is for Mac users.

Also, Microsoft did not win their case against the US DOJ, they lost it... and now they've lost it in the EU as well. I don't see how double jepardy applies.

Also, double jeopardy only applies to actions in the US. Just because you have had a trial in one country for what you did wrong there doesn't mean you can't be tried in another country for crimes committed there. MS's business practices have affected people all over the world, not just in the US.

 

[Spades]

How does it hurt consumers? Easy, look at MS's bottom line:

It's even easier than that. Go back the American case a few years ago. That case concerned Netscape and Microsoft bundling Internet Explorer. Did Microsoft's actions hurt the consumer? Were they unfair to Netscape? Without a doubt. Netscape no longer produces their own browser. They just rebrand Mozilla. Netscape is little more than a portal site now. Meanwhile, Internet Explorer is still one of the most popular browsers, despite not having been updated in over two and a half years. (8/28/2001 seems to be the release date for IE6. Since then it hasn't even had any minor releases. Just a service pack and security fixes.) It remains popular mostly because MS still gets to bundle IE with the OS. There are definitely better alternatives now. Most alternative browsers support much newer standards than IE6 does. But, because MS still gets to bundle, people do not use the better alternatives.

So, yes, the actions of Microsoft that concerned the US case were indeed anti-competative and bad for the consumer. And they were found guilty. Unfortunately, no useful penalty was enforced, and nothing has really changed.

Of course, that's all PC stuff. I know we're not supposed to like MS (and I don't), but what does this story really have to do with Macs?

 

[RHutch]

If you force one company to do without, they will all need to follow suit. Take off the blinders and you will see this too. If any vendor today sold an OS without these tools it would be considered incomplete.

I don't see a reason why any product should be coded with the option to randomly delete parts of it either. I wouldn't like customers hacking parts of my apps out, and then complaining that XX addon doesn't work as well.

Clearly you can install alternative Browsers, Media Players, etc. on Windows and they will operate. On my windows box at home and I never see IE, WMP, or MSN. It doesn't affect me, and it does not limit me from using alternatives.

MS is not being required to get rid of their media player. They are being told to make it a separate piece of software that can be removed from one's hard drive if they choose, rather than being part of the OS that you don't have a choice about. This is a piece of software that the user has control over. And why would removing it cause the system not to work properly? No one should have to call and complain because removing a media player should not break your system.

Are you seeing the difference yet between this and Apple's QT player?

 

[RHutch]

/*Windows source code.*/
/*
TOP SECRET Microsoft(c) Code
Project: Chicago(tm)
Projected release-date: Summer 1998
*/
:
:
:
while(something)
{
sleep(5);
get_user_input();
sleep(5);
act_on_user_input();
sleep(5);
}
create_general_protection_fault();

}

This is the funniest thing I have read in a long time. I literally had tears streaming down my face, and I had to hold in my laughing so that all the people in the cubes around didn't think I was going crazy. Thanks for the entertainment.

 

[slowtreme]

Did Microsoft's actions hurt the consumer? Were they unfair to Netscape? Without a doubt. Netscape no longer produces their own browser. They just rebrand Mozilla. Netscape is little more than a portal site now.

Wow this really sucks that I am defending MS here.

Microsoft created a better alternative to the Netscape product. When IE took off in popularity Netscape was horrible, hands down. MS provided a free and functioning alternative. They took away Netscape's market, actually they showed that there was no need for NS to bother selling thier product anymore, it was crap, and there already free alternatives (other than IE). This is also the same time Software like BeOS was hitting the street with with integrated browser, and every other OS vendor was starting to follow suit. MS was following the market. It wasn't until IE5 that MS began to merge/share code with the file explorer. At the time IE was easily the best functioning browser, integrated or not.

For all of Window's pitfalls, I don't see how removing IE makes it a better product for consumers.

 

[slowtreme]

And why would removing it cause the system not to work properly?

It doesn't. As a matter of fact WMP9 was a seperate download, it didn't even come with windows (when this case started) The bundled product like WMP6 can be deleted and forgotten. Windows won't stop running if you delete or uninstall WMP. You will lose a default viewer for much of the rich content available for PCs, but that's your call as a user.

 

[Sedulous]

I'm pretty certain that the EU ruling to seperate the Media Player from Windows was intended to be a slap... a means to hobble Microscoft as they are attempting to dominate the media industry too.

 

[Foocha]

You're not even really a part of Europe

Au contraire. The UK is very much a part of Europe - geographically, politically and ecconomically. We are (I think) the second largest net contributor to the EU budget, and have every right to be interested in how European income from fines and such are distributed!

Everyone in Euorpe and on this message board surely have the right to express their opinions, provided they conduct themselves in a measured and reasonable manner.

 

[Spades]

They merged the code with the release of IE4 and Windows 98. IE4 is also the last time IE and Netscape were about equivalent. At least it was in my opinion, and the opinion of many people I know. Yes, IE5 was better, but that came after the bundling had occured and the damage to Netscape started.

Anyways, the issue is this. Any OS should have a browser included these days. The question is, what browser? Most operating systems give you a choice. Pick any two Linux distros, and you'll probably find two different default browsers. There's a sign of competition. Look at OS X. Apple is the only distributor of OS X, so...you get Safari as a default. But you also get Internet Explorer, and you can, if you want, remove either one of them.

Now look at Windows. There are multiple OEMs that use Windows, yet every Windows PC will come with exactly one web browser that cannot be removed. No competition. Anti-competative even. The key here is that OEMs need the option to remove IE and install another browser. Providing alternatives increases competition, and if IE is actually forced to compete with the likes of Mozilla and Opera, MS will have to begin to improve IE again. But, as long as it comes, no questions asked, as the default browser of Windows, people will not explore competative options. Minimal competiton means MS continues to let IE stagnate.

Wow this really sucks that I am defending MS here.

Microsoft created a better alternative to the Netscape product. When IE took off in popularity Netscape was horrible, hands down. MS provided a free and functioning alternative. They took away Netscape's market, actually they showed that there was no need for NS to bother selling thier product anymore, it was crap, and there already free alternatives (other than IE). This is also the same time Software like BeOS was hitting the street with with integrated browser, and every other OS vendor was starting to follow suit. MS was following the market. It wasn't until IE5 that MS began to merge/share code with the file explorer. At the time IE was easily the best functioning browser, integrated or not.

For all of Window's pitfalls, I don't see how removing IE makes it a better product for consumers.

 

[SiliconAddict]

I don't care for Microsoft or its products anymore then the next guy, but I think this "holy war" mentality needs to end.

These rulings are coming down from world-class moronic beauracrats, they don't understand how operating systems or computers work. IE, WMP, they are all integrated into XP; just like QuickTime, iTunes, and Safari are integrated into OS X. Take out those components, and that removes a lot of the capabilities of the OS. For example, doesn't OS X use QuickTime to display some of the effects? Like Expose? It's biased, and really comes across as jealousy more then anything else, to think you can rule on Microsoft in one way and let everyone else do the same thing.

Do people spew forth the crap uttered by Microsoft without THINKING about it first?!?!

It was proven during Microsoft's antitrust trial that you could indeed remove internet explorer without killing the functionality much to Microsoft's chagrin. Since that time yes. They have further integrated the browser into Windows since that trial but saying it can't be removed is purely asinine as is the notion that media player can't be removed. Media Player and part of Internet Explore both reside as stand alone executables for the OS. (See below.) Both of these files are necessary for media player and IE to function and I would put forth that since no one know what windows source code looks like that no one really knows how integrated it is and would suggest Microsoft is lying out of their *** when it comes to how hard it would be. Think about it a second. Without that monopoly MS would NEVER have won the browser wars. I will say this about media player. See bullcrap1. This is a hidden option in Windows XP. You have to tweak an INF file to get it to show up. Unchackmarking that doesn't remove the files but it starts the process. Once done you will see in bullcrap2 that those files for media player are located under program files. An odd place to store OS files but I digress. In bullcrap3 you will see I've renamed all the files along with the 3 other locations hidden in windows where it backs the files up to. Reboot and no more media player and lo and behold Windows still works! It’s a freaking miracle !
Look everyone in the last 5-10 years has demonized the word monopoly to the point of it being a swear. In reality its not. Its what you DO with that monopoly is what matters and Microsoft has screwed the industry over as much as possible with that monopoly. They use **** tactics. They create phony campaigns to try and swing political opinion. They by out the competition when they can't compete. In summery they are the most sleazy, dirtball, lowlife company on this planet. Unfortunately what happens when you don't discipline a child?
Think about it a second.
That's where the DOJ failed miserably.
Antitrust rules are here for a reason in this country. If Microsoft was forced to remove IE, and media player from Windows and allowed the OEM to make the choice as to which browser to use you would see iTunes and FireFox make short work out of Media Player and Internet Imploder. Simply put the only reason these apps own the market is because Microsoft owns the market. A monopoly can NOT be compaired to the rest of the pack. They are special because they own the market. People think this is picking on MS. Its not. Its trying to play fair and to play fair you need to look at MS as a 80 ton gorilla vs a 30 pound chimp.

PS- One final note. The notion of integrating an app into the OS. That idea could only be born out of a boardroom. What a perfect excuse to tell a court. I can't remove it because it would be too hard. What a load of bull.