Microsoft v. the EU: Bill loses his appeal :)

[thequicksilver]

legally perceived to be the only option?

im not sure what kind of buds you smoke in england but this my friend is a hideous attempt at backing your arguement. a similar example would be to say i was forced into buying a chevy because the nearest car dealer is miles and miles away. does this mean im legally obligated to buy this chevy i do not want due to my lack of effort?<snip>

Were Chevrolet judged to have a monopoly of the motor car market by the US DoJ? Did they act illegally to obtain a 90%+ share of that market?

Please don't make snap judgements about me. If you have any questions about me, just ask.

As it stands, I've no particular long term angst about Microsoft in its current form. Granted, I've had serious issues with their stuff in the 1995-2000 era (cioè Windows ME, their actions in the browser wars most notably), but I've learnt to live with it and still own a PC along with my Mac. XP's a pretty decent OS (it's no OS X, but it's no Win ME either), and Office is still unsurpassed as a general productivity app.

I don't smoke any 'buds', nor do I smoke anything in fact. It's called having a different opinion and making an informed opinion based on the facts I have available to me. For me, having been legally judged to be a monopoly is quite enough evidence. If you can provide facts to back up your conflicting opinion, please go ahead. I'd be interested in reading them.

If you manage it, also consider taking it up with the US DoJ and the EU…

 

[johnnyjibbs]

I can see the argument that most users think that Windows is the only option and so are "forced into" Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player and MSN out of their own ignorance. However, I still fail to see how Apple should not be exempt. At what point does Apple have to begin to comply with similar limitations? When/If Mac sales outstrip Windows sales? QuickTime is no less a building block of the Mac OS than Internet Explorer is on Windows.

And why is QuickTime Player included with Mac OS X when Windows Media and Real Player are not? Why are both Safari and Internet Explorer for Mac included as browsers, but not Netscape, Firefox or Camino? Why not just supply Safari?

Last time I looked, iTMS had the monopoly on music stores. No-one bats an eye-lid to only iTunes being installed on Macs. (To be fair, Mac users don't have much choice on the digital music store front).

I'm not particularly anti-Microsoft or anti-Apple, but I think the same rules should apply to everyone. I do think Microsoft stifles innovation and that no-one else really has a chance. But the situation is not all Microsoft's doing or fault. And Apple is guilty of similar practices (iTunes/iPod/Fairplay is the most obvious one, and the answer doesn't have to be to support WMA).

On a side note...

Personally I think Windows XP is the worst Windows of the lot, as it breaks too many usability rules. Give me '98 any day. My opinion though.

Because of that I use Mac OS X. It is my choice. And it's up to Apple to tell more people that Macs are a choice. Most people don't think about getting a Mac when buying a new PC. Usually they just haven't thought about it. Or that it's because it's alien to them and people are sheep. Windows PCs are easier because that's what they've always had before. And that's what most people have. They can put up with all the issues because that's what they've always done.

 

[Zaty]

I just wanted to jump onto the discussion whether there is an option when it comes to buying a computer. Of course, as we all know, there are alternatives to Windows, but as a matter of fact, hundreds of thousands of computer users don't know about alternatives to Windows. Why? Because when you walk through many different kind of stores selling PCs, you can easily get the idea there are only Windows PCs. Apple has started to run ads for iPods and iTunes in papers and magazines, but (at least here in Switzerland) you hardly ever see ads for Macs. As for other options such as Linux, many PC dealer have started selling Linux ditros, (mostly Suse and, to a lesser degree, RedHat, for those who are interested), but since there is still a process of installing the OS onto the PC involved, most PC users don't seem to think this is an option because they lack, or at least believe they do, the knowledge it takes to install an OS from scratch. So Microsoft has a monopoly and they do nothing to make people realise that there are other programs for listening to music or watching movies or surfing the net. They just pre-install their software and sort of silently tell people, here you have all the software you ever need, don't even bother to look for other software. Unlike Microsoft, Apple doesn't have a monopoly and yes, they bundle the iLife Apps with every new Mac, but thats more of a bonus for buying a new Mac whereas everyone else has to shell out $49 for those apps.

 

[jadam]

i wouldn't mind microsoft installing ie and wimp if they would provide alternatives too. installing firefox and itunes for example, or netscape and winamp. no desktop icons for whatever app, and each app only in the start menu. that would be fair.

Umm its not their software, why should they offer it? Its up to the vendors who sell you the PCs to put those apps on your desktop, not microsoft.

 

[munkle]

I think some people are a little confused by the charges levied against Microsoft. They have not been penalised for being a monopoly or for bundling software with Windows. Rather, they have been penalised for abusing their monopolistic position and illegally tying their media player into Windows. Removing windows media player will break some aspects of Windows operability, so basically you can't. The courts have also ordered Microsoft to disclose interface information so that other players can actually compete on a level footing.

Yes MacOSX does come bundled with Quicktime/iTunes etc but you can easily delete these apps, if you don't want them, without compromising the OS. To be honest it's just good basic design to keep the OS separate from the applications. In fact it's absolutely elementary! MS hasn't' done this and made WMP part of the OS, thus giving them an unfair advantage and not allowed other players to compete. They've further compounded this unfair advantage by not revealing interface information. So the comparisons being made thus far in this thread are mute I'm afraid.

 

[wdlove]

Europe seems to be much tougher that the US when it comes to going after Microsoft. If this holds up after appeals, it will be truly remarkable.

 

[5300cs]

...Microsoft is not forcing you to use internet explorer...

When you browse files locally on your machine, you are using explorer. So in fact, you are being forced to use it.

Office is bloatware and unfortunately has a strangle-hold on the market now. If people could pry themselves off it and onto something else (that was good) then m$ (not MS in my book) might start running for the hills.

I applaud the Europeans for doing what the US DOJ couldn't/didn't.