EU May Fine Microsoft

Yokaze writes: "The Wall Street Journal reports about a leaked European Comission document, that suggests that the EU may fine MS for anti-competitive behaviour. The fine can be up to 10% of the annual revenue, or $2.5 billion and may include the demand to remove certain programs from Windows. The report harshly criticized MS way of taking influence in the case, even speaking of trying to mislead the observers. Regarding the report of the WSJ, European Competition Commissioner Mario Monti said, that the case is still at a preliminary stage, since MS still has the right to defend itself at a hearing. Or in his own words: 'To speak of a fine when Microsoft has not yet disputed the Commission's preliminary findings both in fact and law -- as it it's right -- is premature.' Since the original is for subscribers only, take a look at Yahoo or the more detailed report from BBC News. Lastly with some different details a report from Heise in German."

Comments

Re:Hey, who /.ed /. ???

[tulare]

"Connection refused by http://slashdot.org"

I thought it was just me.

Put the fine to use

[0tim0]

Personally, I would be happy with a fine in the US -- if the fine could be used to support an open source consumer OS.

IOW, fine MS a billion or so dollars and use it to fund an (OSX-like) GUI for, say, linux (or FreeBSD, or whatever).

MS would gladly pay the money to get out of this mess. And it would be the only viable way (that I can think of) to actually have a real Windows alternative. Everybody wins.

I don't know if our courts are allowed to make creative punishments like that. But it probably could be a decent settlement.

--tim

Re:Put the fine to use

[zottel]

i'm not so sure microsoft would be very happy with that kind of solution... i'm sure they got the money to pay, but having it used to fund an alternative that might eventually become a better and even more widely used alterantive to windows is most certainly NOT something they would like to see.

Re:Put the fine to use

[SamBeckett]

Why exactly is it our (the USA) government's job to fund an alternative OS? If there were money to be made for an alternative OS, people would make the OS for the money...

But Microsoft is a monopoly you say... -- Exactly the point of the case.. Don't allow Microsoft to use their normal strong-arm tacticts (at the fear of further punishment, break-ups) so any and all competitors won't be crushed.

That is why I think any one who wants the government to force Microsoft to open Windows' source code is on crack. Well, that and another reason-- if we all agree that Windows sucks *ss, then why do we want the source code so bad?

Re:Put the fine to use

[liquidsin]

As much as I think this is a fantastic idea, I doubt that the U.S. gov't would force a company to fund their competitors. Too bad though...

Re:Put the fine to use

[gmag3]

No one gladly pays a billion dollar fine.

Re:Put the fine to use

[Jburkholder]

>i'm not so sure microsoft would be very happy with that kind of solution

I wasn't aware that there was any expectation that Microsoft had to be happy with anything that results from their "anti-competitive behaviour".

In fact, I'm almost positive that a punishment, such as a fine, is expressly intended to be something that makes Microsoft unhappy. ;-)

>...a better and even more widely used alterantive to windows is most certainly NOT something they would like to see.

Good point. That might level the playing field and disassemble their monopoly. Microsoft wouldn't like that. ;-)

But, as to using the fine to fund an opensource consumer OS:

I'm having a hard time imagining how that could ever happen. Is there any precedent for government imposed fines to be given to a third party for *any* purpose?

Re:Put the fine to use

[Anonymous Coward]

mmm... how about using a possible fine to house you and others who come up with similar ideas in
mental institutions

Re:Put the fine to use

[Jburkholder]

Ugh, nevermind. I went back and reread the post at the top of this thread and realised the post I was replying to was responding to this:

>MS would gladly pay the money to get out of this mess

I will go stand in the corner now for the next five minutes.

Re:Put the fine to use

[motorsabbath]

Actually, people would want the source to Office to get the ability to seamlessly export/import Office docs so all he Office-junkies could use other apps (plug: try Applixware). Also, openin the source to wDOS is the *only* way the os will ever be secured and have its holes properly patched.

Re:Put the fine to use

[Pyrosz]

That is why I think any one who wants the government to force Microsoft to open Windows' source code is on crack. Well, that and another reason-- if we all agree that Windows sucks *ss, then why do we want the source code so bad?

There would be one good outcome to getting the source to Windows. It would be much easier to develop something like WINE. This would allow you to use another OS but still use those few programs that require Windows.

Re:Put the fine to use

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a stupid idea. That's like fining Ford for releasing their rollover-prone Explorer and giving those funds to GM for development of the TrailBlazer.

Re:Put the fine to use

[anandsr]

Opening Windows Source is bad, but a better
alternative would be to force them to produce an
open source emulator, which would run any and every
software that they do not bundle with their OS.
Make it mandatory that all of their software must
run on that emulator. Also they should also
be forced to open their file formats.
The other thing is that this open source emulator
must also run on another OS which is not from MS.
This will keep them honest and their interfaces
open. It will also let them INNOVATE as much as
they want without stopping others from innovating.

Re:Put the fine to use

[tsa]

If MS is fined, I can imagine a new item on MS's financial charts: annual fines. They don't care about USD 2billion! And business continues as usual... A much better approach would be to force MS to open all file formats and API's all their programs use, for the next ten years or so. In this way the competition can make software that can read and write MS files, and can interact with the OS in a 'Microsoft' way. This paves the way for real competition.

Re:Put the fine to use

[DickBreath]

fine MS a billion or so dollars and use it to fund [open source alternative]

Others here have already said what a stupid idea this is.

So at the risk of being modded down as redundant, I'll just echo the same.

What a stupid idea it is to fine a lawbreaker and use the proceeds in an attempt to try and undo the irreperable harm the lawbreaker has caused with their criminal conduct. Stupid man.

The government should not be trying to take money from our poor tobacco companies to pay for health care costs caused by lung cancer. And it would be insane to try to use seized organized crime assets to fund law enforcement efforts. Where will this insanity end? Next you'll be telling me that we should use seized assets from terrorist organizations to help fund the war on terrorism.

Don't suggest such stupid ideas here. After all, this is slashdot. We must protect our corporations. If we were to fine Microsoft it would hopelessly plunge the world economy into a downward spiral from which it would never recover and would ultimately spell the doom of everyone on the planet. And the court or govenment has no business trying to fine anyone. Or taxes either.

Re:Put the fine to use

[GooberToo]

You would never want to place an arbitrary time frame on it. Rather, they should be forced to prove to the courts that the market has healed significantly enough to justify a specific clause should be lifted. That way, if it takes 20 years or 5 years, the market can be allowed to progress and function as it should as soon as can. This is more or less what IBM's been having to do. And rightly so!

Re:Put the fine to use

[buzzini]

Two points:

1. Microsoft already pays billion in taxes, and that revenue can be used however govts please.

2. Throwing money at losing companies is not a very effective way to generate competition, at least in the long-term. If the companies are sound, the market will support them through the well-established mechanisms.

Re:Put the fine to use

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux does not need yet another gui, what it needs is more applications.
But I am sure the open source community will solve that problem without the help of microsoft.

--John Engdal

Re:Put the fine to use

[tsa]

That is indeed a better idea. But then you have to define 'healed significantly enough'.

Re:Put the fine to use

[mark_lybarger]

can you explain why you think the idea (let alone the man) is stupid? you call it insanity and compare the idea to pulling money from tobacco to pay for health costs, but I don't exactly see your reasoning why it's a bad idea?

i personally think it's a good idea, and i'll tell you why. if a person does damage to another person or their property, they should be responsible to replace or repair the damages (along with other penalties depending upon the crime). say i go and loot a few houses. along with the jail time i should expect to recieve for that crime, i should also be held accountable for the items i stole. in the same manner, if a corporation has committed a crime against another via it's anti-competitive, they should be reponsible to undo that damage. specifically, it was noted in the microsoft trial that they used anti-competitive practices twords netscape. i think they should have to pay a large sum of money to netscape to get it back into the browser business (mainstream). i also believe that it was pointed out during the trial that MS wouldn't allow OEM's to install alternative operating systems (OS/2, linux, whatever). they should then also kick some cash to some of those os distributors (RedHat, IBM, and others).

and yes, this is slashdot.

Re:Put the fine to use

[JabberWokky]

and yes, this is slashdot.

Yes, this is slashdot, where a long post, dripping with so much sarcasm it made my desk under my monitors wet, was completely missed.

Read the frickin thing again, and think: 'sarastic tone'.

--
Evan

Re:Put the fine to use

[Mr_Ust]

This is the most blatantly anti-capitalist statement I have heard in a long time. Open Source software does NOT need charity. By accepting charity instead of becoming successful on its own merit, it undermines its very foundation and eliminates the possibility of ever becoming a legitimate competitor to M$.

Re:Put the fine to use

[Mr_Ust]

Why not? They've done it before. Read up on the Canadian soft lumber dispute that was still going on as of four months ago. The US thinks British Columbia is flooding the market with cheap lumber, so they put up a 30% tarrif and gave that money to competitors in the US. In effect, Canadian companies are being punished twice!

Re:Put the fine to use

[dillon_rinker]

You need Geritol, because you have irony-poor blood.

Re:Put the fine to use

[liquidsin]

Haven't read anything on that, but I should. But it's a different idea. If you don't want to pay a tarrif, don't export to that country. There wouldn't be an option for Microsoft to not pay the fine - they'd have no choice. But I'd love to see about that lumber case - sounds like the U.S. is fudging on NAFTA with that one.

Re:Put the fine to use

[GooberToo]

That's really up to the courts. Basically the idea is that if MS can prove the market can compete and that the clause no longer has it's desired effect on that market, then it should be lifted.

Re:Put the fine to use

[Anonymous Coward]

The money was given to people actually hurt by the trade practices.

Microsoft ran Netscape and numerous others out of business, but giving money to RedHat won't stop that.

Would Slashdot be so supportive if Microsoft was paying fines to Real, Apple, and IBM?

Re:Put the fine to use

[taniwha]

Why exactly is it our (the USA) government's job to fund an alternative OS?

It's not - it's the govt's job to promote the public good. In this case the govt has a law that encourages competition because it's for the public good. M$ has been found guilty in a court of law of breaching that law and is now going to be punished for doing that. Punishment often has two components - the first restitution to those hurt by a crime, and a punative component designed to hurt the guilty party in a manner intended to discourage them from repeating their transgression.

It seems to me that fining M$, who appears to have money flowing from all bodily orifices, isn't going to have a lot of effect, unless it's a really big fine - enough to hurt their stock price (and therefore cause the company's managers to be put under pressure to change by the stockholders). I think that a having smaller fine, one that's more likely to be upheld in court, and then taking that money and using it to fund Open Source programs would be a wonderfull way to truely punish M$, encourage them to really compete, and would in the long term provide relief, in the form of a viable alternative, to those people hurt by the existing abuse of monopoly

Re:Put the fine to use

[dgb2n]

Also at the risk of being redundant, I'd like to add my voice the chorus of voices saying what a ridiculous idea this is.

It reminds me too much of the great tobacco lawsuits that were supposed to go to the "victims" of tobacco use. Instead, the proceeds went largely to the attorneys involved. Settlements with individual states have gone to pay for everything from prescription drugs to road repair. Go ahead and fine them if they deserve it. Just don't fool yourself into thinking you can direct the proceeds to a specific cause.

Re:Put the fine to use

[Anonymous Coward]

you know, this reminds me of a phenomenon i used to see during fraternity rush when i was an undergrad. as with any other university, my school's Inter-Fraternity Council had certain rules that all fraternities had to follow before and during rush, like "no letters visible before rush opens," "you must make a prospective member available if another house calls for him during the rush period," and so on. rush violations were punishable by, among other things, monetary fines meted out by the IFC.

having gone through the process a few times i learned that some houses (not mine, fortunately) actually had line items in their rush budgets for IFC violations -- it was actually cost-effective to pay out these fines in order to keep the prospective pledges they really liked!

Re:Put the fine to use

[Billly Gates]

"Personally, I would be happy with a fine in the US -- if the fine could be used to support an open source consumer OS"

...and Microsoft in return would raise the price of windows %10 to make up for the cost. Microsoft is very good at managing money. I bet they may even put out a notice telling consumers you will be ripped off by %10 and here are the email addresses of politicians to express your concerns over this whole thing.

Re:Put the fine to use

[maxpublic]

'blatanty anti-capitalist'. Either an Ayn Rand fanboy or someone who's got theirs and fuck everyone else.

Max

Re:Put the fine to use

[4of12]

Mod up Geritol, please!

(It took me 2.5 paragraphs before I noticed the fishing line tied to the front end, but there's no excuse for not getting it by the end of the post.)

Re:Put the fine to use

[Anonymous Coward]

Netscape was rolling along just fine until the Microsoft machine turned out a better browser. Boo, and hoo.

Re:Put the fine to use

[Mr_Ust]

Well, the whole issue behind the softwood dispute is that there used to be no tarrif, except the US had volume restrictions on softwood imports. That agreement has now expired and the US still wants to protect its industries. That's not what free trade is about.

As to the original point of punishing a company twice by fining it and then giving money to competitors, read this .

From the article: "Under the Byrd amendment, enacted last year, tens of millions of dollars in fines collected by the U.S. government will be handed over to companies that lodge complaints against foreign exporters judged to be 'dumping' products at artificially low prices."

Sounds pretty fishy to me.

Re:Put the fine to use

[0tim0]

If they got this case dropped, it would (conservativly) add about $100 billion to their market cap. I think the shareholders /might/ be willing to make that trade ;)

--t

Re:Put the fine to use

[Mr_Ust]

I have read Ayn Rand, but I think of her books more as a thought exercise than anything practical. Her characters are naive and simplistic and her philosophy is just ridiculous. What I meant by capitalist is free market, rather than government controlled (which includes subsidies, special tax breaks, and price fixing). Charity should not apply to business. Either you make it on your own merits, or make room for someone who can.

Having said that, it's still important for competition to exist and monopolies should be broken up if they use unfair tactics (dumping and certain M$ tactics come to mind). However, my entire point was that Linux/BSD are strong enough of their own and are competitors in their own right. They don't need government handouts.

Re:Put the fine to use

[Anonymous Coward]

1) MS paid NO federal taxes last year, nor the year before...

In fact, they use a loophole in the federal tax code that allows them to avoid such taxes - simply because they give their employees *massive* stock options. These are deductions, *even if* the employee does not exercise the option(s) - thus, for example, if an employee makes 50K/year in salary, and another 50K/year in options - the former is a deduction, but costs them money, the latter is a deduction, but costs them *nothing* so long as the options aren't exercised... if you're an MS employee, aren't you going to hang onto the stock options? Sure you are! Thus, MS gets "money for nothing" in the form of write offs... and so, if they have enough of them, pays *no* taxes... of course, this dilutes the stock, but who cares, right(sarcastically)?

Pretty sad, IMHO.

Re:Put the fine to use

[Malcontent]

That would be great! More incentive to switch to the now much improved free OS.

Hey...

[ekrout]

that's "Fine" with me ;-)

And yet you curse the DMCA?

[dave-fu]

We're quickly moving back to the old notion of city-states with their own conflicting sets of laws. It's looking harder and harder to do business on a global scale as you open yourself up to provincial, myopic laws of other lands (just ask Dmitry), which I guess is an interesting dichotomy from the WTO's vision of "one world, one corporation".
I'd be happy if Microsoft had the huevos to not even bother to dispute the charges and just pulled all of its software out of the EU, flipping them the bird and leaving them to scramble for dry ground. It'd be a trial by fire for free software supporters, and I'd be very interested to see how it turns out.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[lcypher]

Score 3 "Interesting"?

I'd be happy if Microsoft had the huevos to not even bother to dispute the charges and just pulled all of it's software out of the U.S., flipping them the bird and leaving them to scramble for dry ground.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[imadork]

I'd be happy if Microsoft had the huevos to not even bother to dispute the charges and just pulled all of its software out of the EU, flipping them the bird and leaving them to scramble for dry ground. It'd be a trial by fire for free software supporters, and I'd be very interested to see how it turns out.

We can only hope! Can you imagine all that money that used to go to MS licenses going instead to fund new software development because Microsoft is too arrogant to play nice, so it takes its ball and goes home? Something good would come out of that, I'm sure.

The first thing that would be done is every single MS proprietaty protocol will be reverse-engineered (and legally, too, at least for Europe!). Even if those of us in the U.S. wouldn't be able to use it legally, I'm sure it would be useful to us.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think there would be much of a problem.
M$ can't stop the use of already sold software licenses so developers would have at least 2 years to port everything to another OS - should be more than enough

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[PastaAnta]

We're quickly moving back to the old notion of city-states with their own conflicting sets of laws.

Au contraire! The EU has its foundation in removing barriers of trade (primarily in Europe of course..). And the borders are getting less visible for every year.

You may also say, that removing barriers of trade is all about securing a healthy competition on a larger scale in a smaller world. This is exactly the same reason for which you have laws against monopolies - to secure a healthy competition.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[antek9]

It would turn out to be the one kick in the development of *X that the world needed. Pulling out of Europe for Microsoft would be the same as involuntarily creating the Borg (I know, reversed roles..) and they'd have to suffer the consequences.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[stephend]

In this case, the EU would be trying MS on basically the same laws that got them into trouble in the states. I don't think that's really a "myopic law from another country" and comparing it to Dmitry's case makes absolutely no sense.

And who would it benefit for MS to pull out of Europe? The population of Europe is probably greater than that of the US. They'd lose a huge amount of money, much more than the 10% that the EU could fine them.

For all their faults, Microsoft know how to make money.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

You, like so many other slashdotters, seem to forget that just because you don't agree with an opinion, it needn't necessarily be "-1 flamebait."

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Diabolical]

Microsoft does not constitute to our countries as large as it does to the US. Scrambling out the EU is going to hurt MS more than the proposed fine.

And provincial? Myopic? Last time i checked we were not a province of the US nor was Russia (Dmitry's homeland)... Please.. leave your backhoe opinions at home when you try to communicate with others.. get educated..

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Atargul]

The population of Europe is probably greater than that of the US.

Err, yes, by 450 million people. Even just the EU has about 100 million more.

Anyway, even though the US is a bigger marketplace for MS, I doubt pulling out has even been considered for a single second.

Question: What would this mean for piracy? Can they still prosecute people for using windows in europe if they weren't to sell it here?

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Mike McTernan]

> just pulled all of its software out of the EU, flipping them the bird and leaving them to
> scramble for dry ground

I think that the EU constitutes such a large market that it would be a major portion of MS revenus to lose; I doubt they would want that.

Also, there are many alternatives to MS products, and it would surely just fuel the market for the alternatives. In fact, if MS did pull out of the EU it might give competition products the market space needed to pose a really threat to MS products....

The US is not the centre of the world, and you need to appreciate this.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds to me like this larger governmental body (the EU) is grabbing power widely and becoming a monopoly itself.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dmitry works for a company that sells commercial software for harvesting email addresses from online content.

Yes, he and his company make their living empowering spammers who otherwise wouldn't be able to spam nearly as widely.

So, as many of us in the anti-Spam movement believe, anything that takes that f*cker down is okay with us.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Amazing Quantum Man]

I'd be happy if Microsoft had the huevos to not even bother to dispute the charges and just pulled all of its software out of the EU, flipping them the bird and leaving them to scramble for dry ground

Thereby proving the point that they have not only a monopoly, but that said monopoly is a danger.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[sydb]

An economic unit's profit can only come from selling (exports, in the case of a nation) or theft (slavery, collonialism). Isolationism is not a growth-enabling attitude. If MS pulled out of Europe, jobs in the US would be lost (and in Europe too... MS do have overseas offices and labs).

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Happy Monkey]

The US is not the centre of the world, and you need to appreciate this.

Well, from MS's POV, it is. But it isn't the whole world, and you are probably right that they'd hate to lose the market.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Face it,
You have nothing and MS success is bothering you a lot ?
Hell, even Linux can now be considered American product... ( frankly, being a Unix clone it always was)

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

Sounds to me like this larger governmental body (the EU) is grabbing power widely and becoming a monopoly itself.

Well, governments do tend to have a monopoly on power, that's why they're called the government .

That state of affairs where the power of government is divided between a few hands, we usually call "civil war."

That state of affairs where the power of government is divided between many hands, we usually call "anarchy", or "lawlessness".

;-)

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

'...just pulled all of its software out of the EU, flipping them the bird and leaving them to scramble for dry ground.'

Troll.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[lcypher]

What is particularly 'interesting' or 'insightful' about suggesting that Microsoft give up 25 billion dollars in revenue? At least the comment finally got modded down to the flamebait that it is.

Nobody, not even noone, would just give away 25 billion dollars because they might lose 10% of it. If you do the math, that would mean a 100% loss.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds to me like this larger governmental body (the EU) is grabbing power widely and becoming a monopoly itself

It's not. It's just enforcing European law. IT'S ILLEGAL TO ABUSE A MONOPOLY. Period. Whether it's in UK, Germany, France, Sweden, ... If it wasn't for EU, most individual states would have individually punished/corrected the abuses of Microsoft.

Re:And yet you curse the DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it would be more shameful if the US Government failed to protect the property rights of its citizens from being infringed under sanction of a foriegn government(s).

Article

[Anonymous Coward]

Would anyone like to translate this article into proper English? Its hard to read all the run-on sentences and decipher the meaning of the misplaced commas.

Re:Article

[motherhead]

babalfish translation of the German article

Microsoft threatens high punishment of the European Union trust guards

The European union could impose a high punishment in in August the officially initiated trust legal procedure against Microsoft and force the company to remove features from Windows. This comes out from a confidential document of the European Union commission, which is present the barrier Street journal. The US business paper reported that the commission in unusually sharp tone determines, Microsoft tried, the Ermittler in errs to lead and the procedure obstruct. From this reason a possible punishment will more highly fail, as if Microsoft would have cooperated. The European Union commission could impose a punishment, which amounts to 10 per cent of Microsofts year's turnover, that is 2.5 billion US Dollar.

The Ermittler of the European Union commission is the opinion that Microsoft abused its supremacy in illegal way at Windows and Office software, in order to become generally accepted in the fast growing market for Business and Internet software. Additionally Microsoft tried to displace audio and video often commodity of other manufacturers with the Windows Media Player quotes barrier the Street journal of the European Union paper. Additionally the commission determines, which the Redmonder its operating system Windows 2000 and other applications with intention would have arranged in such a way that these do not co-operate with software of the competitors. In the document the Ermittler suggests requiring modifications at the products in order to prevent such offences in the future.

Additionally the commission accessed Microsofts " abusive and discriminating license policy " on, as well as the refusal of thecompany to put interfaces for competitors openly. The criticism is not directed openly against the new Windows XP, this can however change.

The collecting main of 34 letters, in which Microsofts customers support the company in the procedure allegedly, analyses the commission as attempt, the procedure to obstruct. Many of these letters were written by Microsoft, in other cases knew the companies concerned not that their expression than evidence should serve, place the European Union Kommisssion firmly ( kav / c't)

Re:Article

[antek9]

The Heise article is quite good, I'll translate the last paragraph for you:

The commission values Microsoft's presentation of 34 letters of support said to be from their customers as a try to hinder the case. They say many of those letters were written by Microsoft itself and in other cases the companies in question didn't know their letters would be used as evidence.

I figure MS' tactics department could use some fresh heads...

Re:Article

[Voidhobo]

I'll try my very best...

"The EU could fine Microsoft a large sum in the anti-trust case which officially started in August. They might force the company to remove features from Windows. A classified document of the Commission which the Wall Street Journal got it's hands on implies that. The US-American economy newspaper reports that the Commission was unusually harsh in noting that MS tried to mislead the investigators and obstrucing down the trial. Because of that, the possible fine will be higher than it would have been had MS cooperated. The Commission could issue a fine as large as 10% of Microsoft's annual income; that would be 2.5 billion USD.

The investigators of the EU-Commission are of the opinion that MS illegally used it's dominant position in regard to Windows- and Office-software, to gain the upper hand in the rapidly expanding market for business and Internet software.Furthermore, Microsoft tried to crowd out audio and video software of competing companies with its Windows Media Player, the Wall Street Journal quotes the EU document. The Commission notes that the Redmonders purposely designed their operating system Windows 2000 and other applications so they would not support the software of their competitors. In the document the investigators suggest changes in the products to hinder such offenses in the future.

"Furthermore, the Commission attacked Microsoft's 'abusive and discrimminating licensing politics' as well as the company's refusal to lay open interfaces to competitors. This criticism was not aimed at the new Windows XP, but that could change soon.

"The presentation of 34 letters, in which Microsoft's customers supposedly offer their support for the company in the trial is regarded as an attempt to hinder the trial. Many of these letters had been written by Microsoft itself, in other cases the concerned customers didn't know that their letters were intended as evidence [in Microsoft's trial], the Commission noted."

copyright Verlag Heinz Heise

Re:Hey, who /.ed /. ???

[kubrick]

Shouldn't they call that getting goatse'd?

Yuck...

Looking out or the people

[saridder]

I like the fact that at least some gov't agencies are looking out for what's best for the people, and not big business. Please take note America.

I think this will have a major impact on Microsoft's business practices here and overseas, as I really can't envision Microsoft making a EU compliant Windows sans IE, Windows Media, Chat, etc., for them and a bundled Windows for the rest of the world.

And it's a testament to the impact of globalizaton, and interesting to see how foreign government's can influence American businesses in such a major way.

Shame on the bush administraion for letting up on Microsoft. And for the record, I am a huge Microsoft fan, and believe they do make some superior products. Note I said "some". I also love some of thier business practices, and believe business students will be studing these for years to come in universities all over the USA.

Re:Looking out or the people

[macsforever2001]

I also love some of thier business practices, and believe business students will be studing these for years to come in universities all over the USA.

Which ones are you referring to?

• Embrace and Extend
• "Lobby" to get the politicians who support you elected
• Leverage one market with your monopoly in another
• Censorship
• If you can't beat them buy them

Re:Looking out or the people

[saridder]

Merger and acquisitions are perfectly respected and legitimate practices. I can name plenty of respected technology companies who do the exact same thing through shrewd acquisition strategies (Cisco for starters).

Their marketing strategy to basic consumers is top notch and rival such companies such as Proctor & Gamble (in fact, they have their Marketing Director).

They do extensive market research and consumer testing.

Their financial practices are in order and have over $30 billion in cold hard cash (not stocks) sitting in the bank to weather any storm (most companies in the world don't have a market cap near 30 billion, never mind cash).

I agree with some of your points. I can't stand their "Embrace and Extend" strategy, their bullying of competitors, arrogant attitude towards government and competitors, and their "Big Brother" approach to software licensing and registration. I believe they are a monopoly, but haven't destroyed all competition yet.

Sony will still be a strong competitor in the video came console market, AOL stomps all over MSN's subscription base and Real Networks kill's MS in the digital media market.

Re:Looking out or the people

[adewolf]

Once again we get to hear about the sizzle but where's the beef. We always talk about the "mahketing", but how about the product. This has allways irritated me aboout advertising, it re-directs your attention from the product to the image.
Who is M$soft's competitors out side of the OpenSource community? M$ seems to either buy or "strong arm" them out of existance. M$ has not yet destroyed any competition be cause of superior product.
Alex DeWolf

Re:Looking out or the people

[Anonymous Coward]

They play catchup to scum like Larry Ellison in a number of those areas of business practice.

Let's face it, there are a lot of sore losers out there who have political power and charisma to the Media.

Re:Looking out or the people

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple. Windows is way more versitile.

IE4. I think it was better than Netscape 4, and that would have counted as a superior product, it wasn't given away. Netscape's Composer was better than Outlook Express, but the IE browser was faster, and that's the most important issue in my book.

Re:Looking out or the people

[IPFreely]

Any foreign government is more likely to pound on MS than the US would. MS funnels money out of other countries and into the US. The US government likes this, the others don't. As long as MS brings in the money (read: Trade Balance) then they are doing some good for the US economy at least on paper. The fact that many US companies have also been the victim of this doesn't show up very well on the overall statistics.

Re:Looking out or the people

[ethereal]

I also love some of thier business practices, and believe business students will be studing these for years to come in universities all over the USA.

Not to mention students of criminology :)

Re:Looking out or the people

[Chris Johnson]

Yes, absolutely. In future years students will learn, "These are some of the historical ways a trust can gain and wield absolute control over their market. Believe it or not, at one time the venture capitalists of the era actually would consult directly with Microsoft before investing in companies in the same field, for fear of giving money to something that Microsoft had targetted! These abuses led, through slow, painful, and rabidly opposed progress, to a fuller understanding of how a healthy market operates, and what the requirements are for running a system that lives up to the promise of capitalism. Ironically, at the time Microsoft strongly felt they epitomized capitalism, though in retrospect the system they were aiming towards was more characteristic of classic Soviet Union communism, with themselves as the central authorities."

You better believe people will be studying what Microsoft does. People study crimes, or diseases, too! You mustn't assume people will be studying Microsoft to _emulate_ them: for one, you can't. There's only one Microsoft and no room for another. Once we've straightened that out it will only be in a context where nobody else has such an easy, unopposed path to that kind of economic authority.

Business students will be studying Microsoft as an example of an unsustainable local profit maximum, kind of like a pyramid scheme. If conditions are right you can ride such a situation to the very top- at which point, you're damaging capitalism so badly that you can't continue, and you can't expand any further, and the best possible outcome is decline and fall. Screw things up and you're looking at a crash, instead. That is of _great_ interest to business students, particularly ones that seek long rewarding careers in business.

Re:Looking out or the people

[Shotgun]

I really can't envision Microsoft making a EU compliant Windows sans IE, Windows Media, Chat, etc., for them and a bundled Windows for the rest of the world.

Why? I work in telecom. We make equipment that supports Sonet in Europe and SDH in the US. You have products everywhere that are customized for target markets. The EU is a HUGE, why would M$ flinch at a customized version for such a HUGE market especially when they already have customized version for French, German, Spanish,...?

Re:Looking out or the people

[motorsabbath]

Apple. Windows is way more versitile.


not any more.

Re:Looking out or the people

[Anonymous Coward]

And they've proved capable of removing quite large components from the OS to please the european market before - the german government required the removal of a disk defragger, because it was scientologist*-drerived.

*Scientology is a dangerous cult, started (as a bet!) by schlock science fiction author L. Ron. Hubbard. They have their fingers in several important areas - notably the IRS and Microsoft. They also have a few armed ships in international waters. Scary people. See here for more details./

Re:Looking out or the people

[Danse]

Their financial practices are in order and have over $30 billion in cold hard cash (not stocks) sitting in the bank to weather any storm (most companies in the world don't have a market cap near 30 billion, never mind cash).

According to one of Microsoft's witnesses in the trial, they keep track of their sales data on little scraps of paper :)

Re:Looking out or the people

[Anonymous Coward]

They probably didn't want to publically admit that they run their business on AS/400s.

Re:Looking out or the people

[Anonymous Coward]

They do extensive market research and consumer testing.

Which is why their products are so robust?

Europe is just out to get the States

[Anonymous Coward]

Not since the French banned the word "e-mail" has Europe seemed so anti-American.
Over the last six weeks, the European Union has given a big thumbs-down to a series of telecom and technology mergers driven by U.S.-based companies, from AOL-Time Warner to WorldCom and Sprint. Pointing to the global reach of these proposed deals, Mario Monti, the European competition commissioner, seems to have thrown down the gauntlet to a number of American companies with market-grabbing megamergers on their minds.

By far, the most effective strike was the ruling by the EU Competition Commission against WorldCom's proposed takeover of Sprint. Monti reasoned that yoking together the companies' significant Internet backbone holdings in Europe would give the merged entity so much power that it could effectively make decisions independent of both its competitors and its customers.

Late last week, WorldCom and Sprint formally withdrew all merger plans, officially burying any sort of union.

The EU's move to reject the deal has raised suspicions in the United States about what the Europeans are up to. Timing is a factor in the paranoia. The WorldCom-Sprint move comes on the heels of Brussels' June 19 announcement that it plans to launch a four-month investigation into the AOL-Time Warner deal. American misgivings increased when, barely a week after nixing the WorldCom-Sprint marriage, Monti prevented Microsoft from taking a controlling stake in British cable company Telewest Communications.

So, WorldCom-Sprint fell apart because of Monti and his gang, right? Not so fast.

The Union's ruling was hardly the dealbreaker. It occurred after the U.S. Justice Department had already said it would block the merger and after WorldCom and Sprint had formally withdrawn their application from the EU.

That said, suspicions of anti-Americanism persist nevertheless. After all, the EU hasn't demonstrated the same level of concern with similar deals involving European companies. It approved the merger of Mannesmann and Vodafone, reported to be the world's largest hostile takeover, once Mannesmann ditched its British mobile-phone operator, Orange. Of the dozen EU media and technology cases the Competition Commission has considered since June, four have focused on U.S. companies, and all four have led to extended investigations that blocked mergers, ultimately limiting U.S. control.

If there is a conspiracy afoot, plenty of observers in the United States are ready to root it out. The Washington Post even goes so far as to suggest Monti is trying to stymie U.S. companies to give European telecommunications and Internet companies a chance to catch up. Meanwhile, on the other side of the Atlantic, hard-core "Ameriphobes" were happy to see Europe apparently standing up to U.S. globalization.

But between the posturing and the transatlantic bluster, the real story behind the U.S. companies' woes has less to do with favoritism than it does the regulatory obstacle course that huge U.S. and European deals will face in the future.

Rather than gunning for American companies, the EU's Competition Commission is more likely reacting to the size of the deals being brokered. The scale of many of the latest proposed mergers is unprecedented. The companies best positioned to pull off these megadeals right now just happen to be American. But that won't be true for long.

"I don't think there are any grounds to say the commission is out to get U.S. companies," says Olivier Kaiser, chair of the competition subcommittee for the American Chamber of Commerce's EU office. "The economy in general is American these days. It just happens to be those American companies that merge. The commission is just applying the rules, but applying them to bigger mergers."

Even Microsoft, which has come under European scrutiny twice in recent months, bears no grudge. It is currently facing an EU investigation for anticompetitive behavior in the packaging and sale of its Windows 98 software. And after consultation with the EU on the company's plans to invest in Telewest, Microsoft agreed to restructure the terms of the deal so it would not have a controlling interest.

Re:Europe is just out to get the States

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure that there are numerous cases where the US has judged unfairly on European companies trying to do similar things in the US.

Infact, was it not recently that the US was being taken to the WTO because of unfair import taxes that were being applied to foreign imports to the US to ensure that imported products prices would not undercut US products?

You yanks should realise that we don't all love you as the 11th proves.

Aim Gun, Shoot Foot...

[FatRatBastard]

Microsoft yet again (apparently) makes life more difficult for themselves. I'm no huge fan of the company, but even I think that they would have had a *much* better time in both the US trial and EU investigation if they didn't play so dirty (the whole video debacle at the US trial, the apparent obstruction of justice with the EU trial)

Monopoly cases are HARD to prove (and should be, as bad as a true monopoly can be I think the bar should be set very high when determining if a company is an abusive monopoly). While under investigation Intel played ball, didn't get into a "winning at all cost" mentality, consented to a few behavioral changes, and came out of it intact.

I wonder if the threat of a big $$$ (er.. $EU) settlement will finally piss a few of the large MS stockholders into applying a little pressure on MS management to change tactics.

Re:Aim Gun, Shoot Foot...

[Surak]

I wonder if the threat of a big $$$ (er.. $EU) settlement will finally piss a few of the large MS stockholders into applying a little pressure on MS management to change tactics.

Ermmm, most of the large stockholders are Microsoft executives, so I rather doubt it. :) Then there's always Warren Buffet, but he's not likely to make much of a stink given that he's pretty much in lock-step with BillG himself.

Re:Aim Gun, Shoot Foot...

[Odinson]

Ahhh Microsoft sharholders meeting...

"You Will Never Find a More Wretched
Hive ... Scum and Villany"

UK Web site

[Hunts]

I've often wondered how the out come of the EU case would affect the UK governments attitude towards its gateway site for government services.
Was MS dubious practices responsible for our being stuck with this system and could we now look to more open ways to connect with our elected officials?

Same thing, only different

[Red Aardvark House]

From the article:

It says that bundling new features into Windows and Windows server software "has a chilling effect on innovation and competition," according to the report.

That kind of wording is almost identical to that used by the companies which have complained to both Brussels and the US Justice Department about Microsoft's behaviour.

The DoJ and the EU say the same thing, but only the EU will have the resolve to see this through. Opposed to the DoJ's potential wristslpa, the EU starts with a monetary fine and then gets to the heart of the problem! Instead of trying to break up the company, just break up the software, get rid of the bundling which causes the interoperability with other software, allowing other software vendors to break into the MS Windows software market.

If I were Microsoft

[banuaba]

I think I would just tell the EU "If you fellas don't like the way we do business, we can go back to Seattle."

It just gives me this wonderful mental image of some european guy, sitting at a table with a little tiny cup of coffee, chainsmoking Gauliouses and screaming at a laptop: "Kerneel paneek!? Whut ze sheet is thees? Ahye gheef you segfawlt wheen you geet thees boot out of your hart drife"

Of course, I have an overactive imagination and a twisted view of what Europeans look and act like. But it'd still be funny

Re:If I were Microsoft

[Daniel Dvorkin]

"I think I would just tell the EU 'If you fellas don't like the way we do business, we can go back to Seattle.'"

To which the appropriate European response would be, "Okay, don't let the door hit you in the ass (or arse, since most Europeans speak British English) on the way out. See, there's this fellow named Linus ..."

M$ needs the EU a hell of a lot more than the EU needs M$. M$, as far as I can tell, is running into the limits of growth in the US; this isn't a political/judicial problem as much as it is a simple economic one. Gates, Ballmer et al know this, and they also know that Europe, software-wise, is about where the US was five years ago -- which happens to be the period M$ was experiencing the greatest growth period in its history. They simply cannot walk away from the EU.

Personally, I hope the EU sends them back to Redmond with their tails between their legs. A mass European movement to open-source would have a more powerful effect on the worldwide software market than anything the current US Justic Dept. is likely to do, that's for damn sure ...

Re:If I were Microsoft

[PastaAnta]

"If you fellas don't like the way we do business, we can go back to Seattle."

Heh, you make it sound like it is a threat....

Re:If I were Microsoft

[antek9]

It just gives me this wonderful mental image of some european guy, sitting at a table with a little tiny cup of coffee, chainsmoking Gauliouses and screaming at a laptop: "Kerneel paneek!? Whut ze sheet is thees? Ahye gheef you segfawlt wheen you geet thees boot out of your hart drife"

I fail to see the difference to the same guy sitting before the same laptop now screaming "Why hus it purrformed an ileegal operashun again? Damn, the backup file iz not reedable any more!! Wot, it does reboot widout asking now? Hellooo?!". Which goes to show, stupid users are no excuse for dirty tactics nor badly written software.

Of course, I have an overactive imagination and a twisted view of what Europeans look and act like.

Maybe.

Re:If I were Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh thats right. Linux also has a very friendly user interface for the masses

Re:If I were Microsoft

[maxpublic]

And, as usual, only anonymous cowards with no balls or spine post these sorts of comment. Grow up, laughable little fanboy.

Max

Good news, of a sort.

[RareHeintz]

How nice to know that somebody's law enforcement apparatus hasn't been bought.

Yet.

OK,
- B

Re:Good news, of a sort.

[jmcnamera]

How do you know the EC commissioners weren't bought?

It was Sun Microsystems that brought this suit into being.

Regardless of feelings towards MS, it seems the EU has an unfair legal system where the judges are the jury and the prosecution.

Re:Good news, of a sort.

[Dufffader]

I believe they call it "lobbying". Sometimes I think they should call it "buying favor" or something like that.

Re:Good news, of a sort.

[donutello]

No, it only means that if they were bought, it was by someone on your side of this particular debate - Like Sun, or Oracle.

Remember that politicians and political appointees do very little unless it is influenced by either their constituents or campaign contributors. I don't see the greater public up in arms about the bunling (heck, they don't even seem to know what it means or why it is bad) so it's probably the campaign contributions. Microsoft contributed little or no money until a couple of years ago and now they're paying for it.

Re:Good news, of a sort.

[Yokaze]

>it seems the EU has an unfair legal system where the judges are the jury and the prosecution.
The European Comission is just the prosecution.

May I draw an analogy:

You're driving too fast.
A policeman stops you and fines you.
Now you can try to convince the policeman not to fine you ("it's an emergency").
Then he may still fine you or maybe let you go depending on his judgement.

Is the policeman, judge, jury and prosecution?

Somehow yes. But not really, because you still have the right to appeal to court.

Same with MS, there is still the European Court.

Re:Good news, of a sort.

[Si]

No, it should be called what it is: bribery.

Re:Good news, of a sort.

[Stultsinator]

How nice to know that somebody's law enforcement apparatus hasn't been bought.

Yet.

I think that's the whole point of this announcement. The EU just hinting at what their price is.

Re:Good news, of a sort.

[itachi]

That or neighborhood watch. "Hey there local law enforcement type, that corporation just abused monopoly power!" Semantics are boring, though.

itachi

Re:Good news, of a sort.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it only means that if they were bought, it was by someone on your side of this particular debate - Like Sun, or Oracle.

Remember that politicians and political appointees do very little unless it is influenced by either their constituents or campaign contributors.

This is U.S. type of politics (where the winner is, in 90% of the cases, the richest). In Europe, it's mostly illegal for business to "contribute" to a candidate ; campaigns are founded by parties, and in many cases, the gov. also pays the parties depending on their result.

This explains why left-wing (social democrat) parties, which fit less businesses, are still well alive on this side of the Atlantic.

Cajones

[GearheadX]

It's good to see that *someone* out there has the nerve to stand up to The Black Goat of the Woods With a Thousand Young of the software industry. Amazing how much of a difference politicians not owing their positions to these guys makes, isn't it?

removing of programs

[osiris]

I certainly agree about the removal of programs from windows because if you look at it like this, when windows is installed, it installs media player, internet explorer, outlook express, and possibly a few other programs without much of a choice for which program you want to you. this is especially true for pre-installed versions of windows or newbie installs where they pretty much install everything.

the average user can not be bother to go and look for better/other software and is then tied in to using the default microsoft products. in a way this is supposed to be userfriendly, but you can see it as pushing out the competition. do you really think the avererage user would try and find a different email client, even after all the security alerts, when outlook express is just sitting there ready to use?

i think not.

of course, i would imagine that most slashdot'ers would have the sense to use what ever program they want for the task, but not the average joe. they'll use whatever is there, or most convinient to use.

this is pretty much the main reason why so many people use outlook/outlook express, because it's there!

doesnt give other apps much of a chance does it.

just my thoughts...

Re:removing of programs

[$eRvmanIO]

"I certainly agree about the removal of programs from windows because if you look at it like this, when windows is installed, it installs media player, internet explorer, outlook express, and possibly a few other programs without much of a choice for which program you want to you. this is especially true for pre-installed versions of windows or newbie installs where they pretty much install everything."

Would you say the same for a Linux Distro then? Personally, I enjoy Linux coming with a ton of free apps. Saves me from downloading them. If Microsoft wants to give it to you "free", why not use it? It makes it easier for the non-techie to use. Though I wouldn't advocate having Grandma using Outlook Express to open e-mails with subjects "I Love You;)"

Besides, I just got the final OEM version of XP Pro on my desktop. Hell, I like it. I think its better than Windows 2000 (or atleast it runs on my system better than Win2k did).

Re:removing of programs

[osiris]

I see your point. however, even though linux distros come with a whole pile of programs, it doesnt tie you into any particular one. you have a choice.

with windows, you still have a choice to some degree, but it certainly is a lot more inconvenient than firing up, say, outlook express.

as for you running XP, each to their own i guess ;)

Re:removing of programs

[BumbaCLot]

How do you expect Joe Blow to download anything without clicking on an Internet Explorer icon? Or even used web-based e-mail if he has no Outlook Express? If anything, MS should bloat the hell out of Windows with alternatives, not be forced to remove things. Imagine a 2-7 cd Windows, with 200 apps built into the image. Reminds me of the first install of SuSE I did years back. People who sit and complain about inclusion of pretty basic things into an OS should be focusing their time and effort into developing the next killer app, not complaining because Microsoft allows a person with the courage to click on The Internet Icon the ability to do so. I for one would have been awfully disappointed when sticking a music CD into my brand new computer back in 1995 if it sat there and did nothing because I had to go out and make an ill-informed (and possibly expensive) decision due to some people/government complaining that 'they didn't have a chance to compete'. Why don't all of you MS haters combine your efforts into something constructive and let those less technologically able go on with their discovery of the electronic world out there.

Re:removing of programs

[infiniti99]

I used to be a die-hard Netscape user, back during Win95 days. When I upgraded to Win98, I found IE 4.0 was sitting on my drive. I had already installed Netscape, but eventually I started using IE more often. Pretty soon I stopped using Netscape entirely.

Why did I like IE? First off, if it didn't come with the computer then I never would have used it. Second, it loaded FAST. And you know what? I _knew_ that it was because of preloading. But who cares? Why should that stop me? Bottom line is that it loaded faster than Netscape so I used it. I also used Outlook Express instead of Netscape mail. I ended up using that before I had installed Netscape, and I got used to it.

I consider myself a techie. But if I was able to fall into this trap then how the hell would your "average Joe" ever get out? Anytime Microsoft bundles an application with the OS, it will mean the _end_ of any competing applications. It may be user-friendly and convenient for the rest of us, but it destroys competition. This is truly a problematic situation, even if you are a Microsoft die-hard.

Linux distributions do contain a lot of bundled software. Take the latest version of any of the major distros and the number of packages included will put any Windows install to shame. However, this isn't quite the same problem as Windows software bundling. Linux distributions consist of tools coming from various sources, so there isn't this "master software vendor." Also, often times many different programs that do the same thing are included (how many email clients come with Slackware? I can count at least 6) Finally, there are many Linux distributions to choose from, so again you're not getting force-fed by the master software vendor.

Linux distributions areall about choice. Microsoft is not.

Re:removing of programs

[Anonymous Coward]

IE preloads. But that is because it is a fundamental part of the OS. (their argument, not mine)

Outlook Express does not preload, though. There is no reason for it to perform any better than any other application you buy.

That being said, I have no problem with apps being preinstalled - yeah it sucks to be the competition but the end-user benefits. As it exists, end-users use the bundled products because they offer a better value proposition than any products they have to buy/download/install in addition.

My libertarian mind does not see a problem.

Re:removing of programs

[Anonymous Coward]

osiris, i totally agree. What you are trying to say, I believe, is that the guy who enjoys "a ton of free apps" probably runs mandrake, and gets a real buzz out of peppering his wm with icons to all these 'free apps' most of which he probably has no clue about, anyway. As for WinXP, perhaps it's the colourfulness of the UI, that piques our linuxly-disabled friends interest? hrm..

Re:removing of programs

[$eRvmanIO]

Same here on the IE and Netscape use. I was a die hard Netscape user. I didn't change because it was there, however. I changed to IE because Netscape dropped the ball and Microsoft ran with it. I can't remember how many times I would resize my Netscape browser window to watch it reload itself. That's a pain over a dialup modem. Even today, Netscape 4.X still does this and I'm still on a 26.4k dial up! (that's another story)

True, Linux distro apps are made from independent vendors, but some of those apps don't always work correctly. I can't remember which distro it was, but XBill wouldn't run! Come on, that's a killer app in Linux:)

I like Windows and Linux for both of their strengths. One day, we may have a open source OS and Apps that compete on the desktop market. Do I think that MS is a monopoly? Yes. Do I think there is a alternative in the desktop market? Not for the average consumer.

Re:removing of programs

[1g$man]

oh yeah. that's brilliant.

and, they should unbundle Microsoft(R) Notepad(tm) as well. i mean, how can GNU EMacs compete with software like Microsoft(R) Notepad when Notepad is bundled with the operating system. This is unfair competition at it's worst.

Microsoft should only be allowed to ship the Windows Kernel by itself. OEMS should be forced to separately license Microsoft(R) BootLoader XP, Microsoft(R) IDE Driver XP, Microsoft Calculator XP, Microsoft Notepad XP, etc.

This will allow GNU EMacs to better compete with Microsoft Notepad in the market for text-editing software.

</sarcasm>

Re:removing of programs

[Nater]

Would you say the same for a Linux Distro then? Personally, I enjoy Linux coming with a ton of free apps.

That's all a distro is. Most distributors do some leg work on the software that they eventually distribute, but by large, they don't actually produce any of it. And they don't have to have meetings and make deals to put any of it on the CD, they just do it. Such is free software.

With Windows, though, all that stuff on the CD is either a Microsoft piece of code or some code that got on there via a hearty round of business meetings. There certainly was no end-user input on the subject of which of a particular genre of gizmo was chosen.

Take these two examples:

Red Hat was at one time, and I haven't followed much, but probably still is a very big GNOME supporter. That is, they employed quite a few developers who hacked on GNOME. However, since KDE is just as or more popular, it's also on the CD. Mind you that despite Red Hat's involvement, GNOME is still not a "Red Hat product".

Microsoft produced Internet Explorer. I don't think there is any doubt that Internet Explorer is a Microsoft product, or for that matter that it is a Microsoft product to a far greater extent than even Red Hat Package Manager is a "Red Hat product". Jump back a few years and think about browser market share in, for example, 1997. Did Microsoft ever include the more popular browser in its distribution of Windows? Not until recently, when the browser it did include became the most popular browser. Exactly the same situation exists with WinAmp and Windows Media Player, with the exception that there is still hope for WinAmp if certain goverments and their appropriate organs rightly apply the law.

Re:removing of programs

[maxpublic]

Why don't all of you MS haters combine your efforts into something constructive

We did. It's called Linux.

Max

Re:removing of programs

[Anonymous Coward]

As it exists, end-users use the bundled products because they offer a better value proposition than any products they have to buy/download/install in addition.

Well, how much does cost IE ? Zero dollar. Was the development cost equal to zero ? No. The development cost is paid by increasing the price of the monopolistic product. This is as close as abuse of monopolistic position it gets.

My libertarian mind does not see a problem.

Apparently, you skipped the "monopoly" lesson of Economics 101. Either that, or you don't believe in competition at all.

Re:removing of programs

[A_Non_Moose]

Sorry, not trolling, just need to go to bed..

You wrote: Microsoft(R) BootLoader XP,
I thought you said: Microsoft(R) ButtLoader XP

(Bwahahahah...{sniff}..hehehehe, giggle...{sniff}...{chuckle}...{slaps own cheek.."stop that"}...{snort}.

Some may find that funny...especially the sleep deprived...

Moose.

I've removed the +1 bonus, hell this comment will stand or fall on its own merits.
'nite all.

Mod parent up as funny!

[phillymjs]

I have nothing else to say, though I am required to write something here, so consider this it.

Odd stuff

[Otis_INF]

I don't know this for sure, since IANAL, but how can a commission first make its own laws and then by these own laws sue a company to pay a fine to that same commission? Isn't that odd? Shouldn't an independent judge, that is: independent of the EC and EU, rule on this, instead of the EC and/or EU?

Also, how on earth can windows media player be the KEY feature so Sun (the major complaining company in this case) sells less servers... Does the EU have any person on board with a clue or not?

(mind you: next time these clueless morons are sueing a linux related company over what they think shouldn't be happening while they don't understand one single bit (pun intended))

Re:Odd stuff

[Diabolical]

This commission did not make the laws. they just investigate if the laws are truelly followed.

This is by the way not a criminal thing but an economical thing. Thus a judge has very little to say in this. A judge can only weigh evidence pro and contra. And from what i have learned over the years from everything concerning MS it will be more contra than pro MS.

And how are judges in the US independent from the government? Please do not look at what they should be but at what they are...

Re:Odd stuff

[Denito]

While EU powers are more limited than, say, the US federal Gov., the EU is a government organization. If you replace the word 'commission' with federal government, you have a summary of the US case. The European parliment are, in fact elected by the member states. So it's really not that odd.
For example:
"I don't know this for sure, since IANAL, but how can a government first make its own laws and then by these own laws sue a company to pay a fine to that same government ? Isn't that odd? Shouldn't an independent judge, that is: independent of the government , rule on this, instead of the government ? "

-Dennis

Re:Odd stuff

[Roxy]

Sigh.... The EU can sue a company in the same way the US can sue a company (and the congress and the president sign of on these laws; there isn't impartiality?).

Get a grip on reality.

Re:Odd stuff

[Yokaze]

May I ask, who fines you for speeding? A judge?
No, the executive branch does, the police.
But you have the right to appeal the decision at a court.

From the official site, more exactly from here.

"Although the Commission makes the proposals, all the major decisions on important legislation are taken by the ministers of the Member States in the Council of the European Union, in co-decision (or, in some cases, consultation) with the democratically elected European Parliament."

So they don't enact law, but what is their task?
Among other: (same source)

It acts as the guardian of the EU treaties to ensure that European legislation is applied correctly

As the Union's executive body, the Commission manages policies and negotiates international trade and cooperation agreements

Don't mix the European Commission (EC) with the European Council (EC).

It's no decision, neither an "objective statement" it's a "statement of objections". And Microsoft still has to explain its view.
Lastly they can still appeal the European Court of Justice

how on earth can windows media player be the KEY feature so Sun (the major complaining company in this case) sells less servers... Does the EU have any person on board with a clue or not?

Well, since they've drawn their own conclusions, and not just reiterated Suns demands, it seams they have at least one.

You're surely a competitor of the free market, please explain to me how bundling of products helps you as a consumer?
Do you get more choices?
Lower prices?

Re:Odd stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

>I don't know this for sure, since IANAL, but how can a commission first make its own laws and then by
>these own laws sue a company to pay a fine to that same commission? Isn't that odd? Shouldn't an
>independent judge, that is: independent of the EC and EU, rule on this, instead of the EC and/or EU?

Off course that would be odd! The European Commission doesn't fine anyone. The Competition Directorate of the Commission investigates issues and presents them to the EU Court of Justice. And the Commission doesn't "make it's own laws. They have the right to initiate drafting of new laws but these must pass both the EU Council and the EU Parliament (and those two share the legislative power).

>Also, how on earth can windows media player be the KEY feature so Sun (the major complaining
>company in this case) sells less servers... Does the EU have any person on board with a clue or not?

How do you know that this is a KEY feature? There is no certain way of telling what the Commission is focusing on before the case is presented before the Court of Justice.

>(mind you: next time these clueless morons are sueing a linux related company over what they think
>shouldn't be happening while they don't understand one single bit (pun intended))

And obviously we can all see who is clueless in the parent post since that person hasn't bothered to check one damn fact. As for the fact if the epithet following "clueless" fits as well I leave to the reader to decide.

JK

Why pick on MS?

[Anonymous Coward]

Face it for the average joe-blow that likes pointy-clicky things why would they switch over to an OS like linux that is hard to install, setup and generally use.

Think I'm a liar, then why is Linux going the way of Windows with fancy GUI's and shiny install programs?

At this point in time Windows [Win98 anyways] is far more useable as an OS than Redhat 7.1. And lets not overlook that on my MS [evil?] OS I am using tons of OSS such as GNU C Compiler, Mozilla, etc..

Using Windows and OSS should not be mutually exclusive like some OSS zealots think it is....

My 2 cents.

ambiguous figures

[breyguhn]

The fine can be up to 10% of the annual revenue, or $2.5 billion

Ambiguous phrase: does that mean 10% of their revenue is $2.5 billion (ie annual revenue $25 billion), or that their revenue is $2.5 billion, so they can be fined $250 million?

Re:ambiguous figures

[birder]

Or...Does it mean either 10% of revenue or $2.5 billion, possibly because of some upper limit.

Re:ambiguous figures

[Yokaze]

It does mean up to 10% of the annual revenue which roughly equates to a $2.5 billion for MS.

Where's the news here?

[jayhawk88]

OK, the "drop features" part is news, but as for the fine: It seems like they're basically saying, "If and when we find MS did VeryBadThings(tm), we may decide to fine them".

Isn't this a little like a prosecutor saying, "If and when this man is found guilty, he may spend time in prison"? Of course they're going to fine them: what else can they do?

Im all for this...

[night_flyer]

Its not that I am Anti M$, but that they cant compete on the open market with their product... so they bundle it up with the OS...

would a person, if they had a choice pick windows media player over WinAmp if they had to do research and make a choice?

would they pick (or Buy) Outlook (Express) or would they choose (Free) Agent?

Would they buy windows compression over winzip?

Would they choose IE over Netscape?

How about Defrag over Norton Utilities? (even thought they use the same engine)

let the market decide... if they dont then let those greater than them (in power anyway) punish them...

Re:Im all for this...

[neema]

"would a person, if they had a choice pick windows media player over WinAmp if they had to do research and make a choice?"

WinAmp is the most popular mp3 client for Windows. Obviously their attempt at a monopoly failed there.

"Would they buy windows compression over winzip?"

Again, WinZip is more popular.

"Would they choose IE over Netscape?"

I use to use Netscape a bit ago. Use to hate IE. However, Netscape's software around the 4.6 series turned into shit and I turned to IE. I was quite pleased with it and am running IE6 with no problems. Netscape had the market a while back, they just couldn't hold it.

The fact of the matter is that the fact that Microsoft bundles it's own software with it's OS challenges programmers to make a program that destroys programs that Microsoft includes. A truly good program will get downloads to replace the Microsoft one, even from Average users. WinAmp is a perfect example. And while Microsoft's buisness practices are unethical, rather then bitch about it, we should see more software that is superior to Microsoft products.

Re:Im all for this...

[Flakeloaf]

If it wasn't for the obscene price jump I might just suggest using Spinrite instead of Norton.

Yet one more piece of evidence to be added to the campaign to have Steve Gibson committed.

Re:Im all for this...

[tsetem]

WinAmp is the most popular mp3 client for Windows. Obviously their attempt at a monopoly failed there.

All it takes is for the MS Media Player to take over the MP3's, and provide a pleasant experience for all of the new Windows XP users. The first versions kind of stunk (like IE), but it seems like MS is getting it together and improving it so that it's competitive.

Most people using IE use it because it's standard, and they don't update IE because they don't know how, or dial-up takes too long.

Once people don't have to look for an MP3 player, MS will have a lock-in with those users. After that, it's time to squeeze out MP3's, and push for the proprietary formats.

As for the compression SW, it's probobally small beans to MS. But if they see money is to be made, WinZip will probobally be in a big world of hurt.

Re:Im all for this...

[Captain_Frisk]

Its not that I am Anti M$, but that they cant compete on the open market with their product... so they bundle it up with the OS...

MS isn't competing at all. Its adding value to its product. I use winamp over media player, but I love built in zip support that Plus! for Win98 had. Winzip is more powerful... sure. But its not free (nagware), and you have to open a seperate program to use it. Compressed folders are a snap with the MS version.

IE kicks the crap out of Nutscrape. Also, if Netscape (AOL now by the way ... evil) had its way, you'd be paying $30 for your browser. MS made a better product, and gave it to you for free.

As for defrag, i use it because its free. I don't want to pay an extra $50 to norton. I'd rather have it included, and so does the average joe.

I know everyone here wants all software to be free as in beer, but I think we all know deep down that things don't work that way. If MS didn't have all of these things build into windows, not only would you have to pay for windows, but you'd probably have to shell out an extra $100-200 to pay for critical software... (media player, browser, system utilities) etc. We might have slightly better software as a result, but how much better does defrag need to be?

If MS sold their OS without SW installed, so you could buy it like a car... base unit, with options... everyone here would bitch that MS was trying to rake you over to coals with all of the bundled options.

Do you guys want MS to take out Paint, Calc, Notepad, to open up the market to competition? There are better products on the market, if you want ot pay for them, and some people do. But if you bought WindowsBM and all you could do was run applications with it (ie shipped with a clean slate), you'd be pretty pissed.

Seriously folks... calm down about the bundling. Sure, a few companies are probably out of business, or never started, but free software (the stuff you guys like) can still compete, but for the average user, what MS does really does help out. Grandma isn't going to figure out how to download and configure winzip, or winamp. Media player is the right thing for her. 90% of the people out there use their computers in this capacity. The rest of us can download and install whatever we please.

Captain_Frisk

Re:Im all for this...

[macpeep]

Let's see..

I'd pick IE over Netscape (or any other browser) ANY day of the week.

I'd pick MS Office over Star Office.

I'd pick Netscape over Outlook.

I'd pick WinZip over Windows CAB's.

I'd pick Visual C++ over Power++, Borland, GCC etc.

I'd pick WinAmp & QuickTime & Real over Windows Media Player.

I'd also - currently - pick Windows 2000 over Linux, for use both at home and at work.

It's not that easy. Microsoft has some good software. They have some bad software. They have some absolutely HORRIBLE software too..

Re:Im all for this...

[(H)elix1]

If MS sold their OS without SW installed, so you could buy it like a car... base unit, with options... everyone here would bitch that MS was trying to rake you over to coals with all of the bundled options.

Try to add a CD-ROM to your BMW 740 some time... Rather than use the same kind of interface the rest of the world uses, or even the 3x or 5x series, they came up with some funky plug that would cost me an extra $500 above and beyond the $500+ for one (two if you use the OEM version) BMW CD player option. Granted the CD player can make system calls to the dash and steering wheel, but finding info to hack a MP3 player audio output into the trunk has been rough.

Its not the bundling, its the bloody undocumented interfaces....

Re:Im all for this...

[Anonymous Coward]

WindowsBM? Oh man, I can already see what's gonna come from THAT!

Re:Im all for this...

[hexix]

WinAmp is the most popular mp3 client for Windows. Obviously their attempt at a monopoly failed there.

It'll be interesting to see how long this lasts, my bet is not for long. A friend of mine got a new computer with XP on it, guess what media playing program he uses? That's right, the one that is forced upon him in XP (Windows Media Player).


Again, WinZip is more popular.

Only because you needed it in order to unzip things in windows 95/98. I see this changing very fast too as zip is builtin to windows XP (and 2000/ME isn't it?)


Netscape's software around the 4.6 series turned into shit and I turned to IE.

I think you summed up the problem right there. How is a company expected to compete with a product that is released free of charge by a company with very very deep pockets? Especially when the company pretty much relies on it for its revenue, or at least a way to get its name out for its server products. I imagine if your boss stopped paying you your productivity level would plummet too.


This is why it's so silly for people to like Microsoft and hate open source. As I see it Microsoft is creating open source by not letting small business make money off their products. It seems the only way to compete with them now is to band together large amounts of programmers and just do it for the hell of it, if you try to make money you're going to see Microsoft crushing you sooner or later.

Re:Im all for this...

[donutello]

Its not the bundling, its the bloody undocumented interfaces....

That's the difference between what MS does and what car manufacturers do - and don't get bitched at. The interfaces are bloody well documented. You CAN write your own mail software, MP3 player, browser etc. on top of the OS - nothing is preventing you from doing that. The interfaces are there and documented well enough that others have used them to do so.

Compare this to what other OSes have been doing all along - Mac, Linux all come with bundled applications. Do you want to require Windows to not do what its competition does and thereby force it to be at a disadvantage to them?

Re:Im all for this...

[Stonehead]

No, the bundling is exactly my point. Defrag would not be my preferred example; I do not consider defrag "added value" - it just should be part of the base install. (Imagine Linux without fsck..) My point is that the average joe should have, nicely pointy-clicky, a CHOICE. Would Joe be interested in something like Passport? Of course not. But he has to sign up before he can actually do anything. Now is that user-friendly?
You ask, would I want to remove Paint from the base install? For sure. Joe does not need Paint Shop Pro. Joe might not need The Gimp. But exactly Paint is the reason, why everyone has stopped making light drawing programs. Just remember the DOS age: that's how it should have been. Paint was included (and possible not even changed) since Windows 1.0 - it was one of the reasons why people were expected to choose graphics above a console shell.
I hope this gives you some insight: Microsoft could play fair, and Joe could be happy, at the same time. I will never forbid anyone to run only Microsoft programs. But the price should be fair.
(I freely admit it's a bit strange to defend commercial developers while I like open source most myself.. Of course I hope more people will see the light. Of course I hope, and I think that commercial developers won't die. Microsoft's standardization has done many good, but it has really slowed down new inventions too. If I have to choose between one boss and several bosses, the latter case might cost some overhead but it will give me more freedom.)

Re:Im all for this...

[arkanes]

Bunch of problems here :P

IE kicks the crap out of Nutscrape. Also, if Netscape (AOL now by the way ... evil) had its way, you'd be paying $30 for your browser. MS made a better product, and gave it to you for free.

This is whats classically known as a loss-leader - you give something away for free (or cheap) in order to put your competition out of buissness, eating the losses because you have more cash on hand. Once your opposistion is gone, you up the price. Yes, I know IE is "free". However, you pay for it when you buy windows. Same with all these other "free" apps - they aren't free! It's part of the OS cost.

The point is not that the OS ships with these apps - the point is that MS makes them integral parts of the OS. For example, with win2k, you can't remove outlook express. Sure, I can choose not to use it, but it's always there, and from time to time it pops up and tries to be my mail client again. I could probably stop this behavior, but it's incredibly non-trivial, and wouldn't be if MS wasn't leveraging it's OS monopoly into applications. Same with IE, of course. Zip support, now that doesn't bother me so much. Seems to me that since zip compressions is so widespread, having your file manager know how to decompress it is reasonable. But media player part of the OS? And don't forget the license agreements that come with the new versions of Media Player, and that you agree to implicitly when you agree to the Windows license...

Simple fact is this - theres no long any room for debate. MS IS a monopoly. They use thier monopoly power to illegaly manipulate the market. They've been found guilty of this by one of the most pro-big-buisness administrations EVER, even if the Bush administration is backing down, cause it's even MORE pro-big-buisness. Don't forget, if MS was forced to not bundle apps, OEMs would bundle them - but thats the job of the OEMs! It allows for diversity and innovation. So your grandma would still get a computer that can play MP3s. Except that it would come an OEM version of WinAmp, rather than MS Media Player.

Re:Im all for this...

[1g$man]

You don't understand.

It's all software. In one way or another it's all the same. Software. Whether its a kernel, word processor, web browser, it's all machine code doing something.

Microsoft is in the software business. They create software that does a lot of things. Most of the stuff "bundled" with windows isn't necessarily better than it's competitors, but it generally gets the job done. Windows isn't just an "operating system". It's software that allows people to get things they need to done.

And if people didn't get what they needed done, they would look elsewhere. Whether somebody else packages it all up nicely or has a nice component. Whatever. The market is working, just not in the favor of the Netscapes of the world. Pity. They don't produce what people want. people don't want to buy software X and software Y. They want a package to get done and go on with life.

See MacOS X.

I'm not saying Microsoft has done nothing wrong. Forcing OEMS to *not* bundle competitive software is entirely anti-competitive and illegal and should be dealt with. Breaking up Microsoft isn't a fitting punishment, IMHO.

It's this whole bundling argument that is ludicrous.

Re:Im all for this...

[jawtheshark]

Winzip is more powerful... sure. But its not free (nagware), and you have to open a seperate program to use it. Compressed folders are a snap with the MS version.

So you like WinZip but you compain it is nagware an not free? Ehm, you paid for Windows didn't you? Well, WinZip never nags me because -just like you-, I like it. That is the reason that I paid for it. Go figure... I'm not too greedy to buy the software I like.
Same for my email client, you know, it is free if you don't mind those ads, but I like the software and I want to show that. Yes, the email client I talk about is Eudora and yes I paid for it.
I'm currently considering buying Opera....I like Opera: I now can browse quite fast on an older Linux machine without having to cope with Netscape 4.76 to crash every fifth page I visit.

Yes, I do use some unregistred software but it's software I do not use regularly. Why should I register Realplayer (for example) if I use it once in a blue moon?

No seriously, I think that you should pay for the software you like . If every user has your attitude (and unfortunately they have), it is no wonder that bundeling of software makes Microsofts monopoly stronger. You don't really think that IE or Outlook Express or even Windows Media Player are really free? Everytime someone buys an MS operating system those programs are paid for. I payed for them three times: for each OEM machine I bought.
To state the obvious: there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Re:Im all for this...

[1g$man]

You said:

"This is why it's so silly for people to like Microsoft and hate open source. As I see it Microsoft is creating open source by not letting small business make money off their products. It seems the only way to compete with them now is to band together large amounts of programmers and just do it for the hell of it, if you try to make money you're going to see Microsoft crushing you sooner or later."

---

Why do you want to create a market that has no need for existence? Why should WinZip get special treatment. WinZip was a nice piece of software that filled a nice market. But it hasn't done anything innovative since.

The small companies you speak of should be out innovating to earn and keep their place in the market, not sitting and crying when somebody gets the job done just as well. A company that isn't coming out with innovative new products will be crushed by Microsoft, that is true and as it should be.

Re:Im all for this...

[1g$man]

"(I freely admit it's a bit strange to defend commercial developers while I like open source most myself.. Of course I hope more people will see the light. Of course I hope, and I think that commercial developers won't die. Microsoft's standardization has done many good, but it has really slowed down new inventions too. If I have to choose between one boss and several bosses, the latter case might cost some overhead but it will give me more freedom.) "

Has Microsoft really slowed down new inventions? Can you prove that? What if Microsoft didn't bundle cruddy little things like Paint, Notepad, etc. Then we'd have a bunch of small companies in business rehashing these things rather than innovating new products. I argue Microsoft *promotes* innovation in small companies. They *have* to come up with new killer apps that Microsoft doesn't bundle or else go out of business.

Re:Im all for this...

[(H)elix1]

You CAN write your own mail software, MP3 player, browser etc. on top of the OS - nothing is preventing you from doing that. The interfaces are there and documented well enough that others have used them to do so.

I'm currently digging into some of the Active Directory stuff trying to use the LDAP protocals rather than ADSI. This week, I beg to differ on what is documented and what is not. (grin)

Anyhow, the point I was trying to make is I just can't plug in a standard widget, I have to use BMW's because of the undocumented interface for my app (audio input). Sure, I could buy a different car or use an approved CD player - but I really don't have many options. They expose what they want to expose, and god help you if you need to touch an area they feel you should use something else.

Not that I'm bitter about the CD player -- I just don't want to blow out the dash trying to get the audio tapped in. If I spend a grand on a car system, you better believe it will upload music to the car via wireless lan and turn the CD's into legacy components. Thats how I'll (try to) get it past my wife's budget review anyhow...

Re:Im all for this...

[hexix]

Ummm, so you think the builtin zip support in windows XP is more innovative? Well I'll tell you my opinion, no, not even close. It is just bare bones zip support.

Face it, innovation has nothing to do with it anymore. Products are not getting compared by their merits. Nearly all users will just use what is given to them, and that is not fair to all those other people out there trying to make money through software.

Seems the only way to make money in software is to come out with something totally new, but then you only have so long to live before Microsoft will come knocking at your door. For example, how much longer do you think Real is going to survive? Why should they have to compete with a free product that is being shipped with an Operating System.

Sounds to me like things need to change.

Re:Im all for this...

[Anonymous Coward]

MS made a better product, and gave it to you for free.

Question: choose the correct answer in the following: a) IE designes, programmers and testers are working for free, b) God automatically materialize some money in the accounts of IE team, c) you are actually paying by some means the development team.

Which ones would those be?

[dave-fu]

The .Net framework? SOAP? XML? Kerberos? SMB? Don't be afraid to name names.

Simply Shocked

[Alien54]

I am simply shocked that that anyone at MS would do anything like this. Given the outstanding and excellent quality of Microsoft's products, you would expect the same high standards of quality product to apply to the legal and marketing departments.

Wait, it looks like they do.

Re:Simply Shocked

[Anonymous Coward]

And there we have it.

The big anti-Microsoft myth.

It's a big target, and their product line covers such a wide range of targeted hardware that it's bound to have problems in certain areas.

Any competitor who captures a similar portion of the market will face similar issues.

Linux doesn't count, and never will count. Because users will never accept it. And the security risk inherent in a multi-user OS like Linux with such crude granular security (get Root and you have it all!) is staggering.

But it's fun to complain because your shit video card crashes the machine when you pump in too much software from Tucows.

Re:Simply Shocked

[Alien54]

Linux doesn't count, and never will count. Because users will never accept it. And the security risk inherent in a multi-user OS like Linux with such crude granular security (get Root and you have it all!) is staggering.

So your solution is to remove the concept of super user, User configuration tools, etc. and give all of that functionality to the Microsoft .NET under Passport??

Remember, XP ships with the equivalent of Root as the default setting for the system. All Users are Root.

You trapped yourself, given the actual practices of MS.

Actually, the solution the thing you call a problem is to keep more people clueless. now what would benefit humanity more, to increase the amount of cluelessness? or to decrease it?

Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Stonehead]

Microsoft can easily buy a small country. A fine doesn't help Microsofts victims, doesn't help end users, doesn't fix any lawsuit. Microsoft will laugh its ass off. Those Europeans! (I'm Dutch myself..)
Why not tackle the problem itself? Microsoft is bundling its software to force competition out of the market. Why not force Microsoft to leave IE, Media Player, video editing software, hell even Minesweeper out of the default Windows package? (How much cheaper would it become?:)
There's the application barrier. Force it down! It should be possible to run Win32-applications in a legal way under any operating system. Yes, games too - DirectX should be opened or ported too.
Last but not least, Microsoft should cooperate with developers who struggle with Microsoft Word (or in general, OLE2) import/export filters and other proprietary Microsoft formats (NTFS, WMA, name it..)
If you think that I am radical, you probably don't have an idea of Microsofts power, budgets and market share. Microsoft is of course not evil itself. Their software looks and works actually pretty good, except for their obvious brain damage in security. Their management, their strategy and their habits of misusing their monopoly need a hard kick.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[WildBeast]

I don't know how much cheaper it would become but I wouldn't buy it even if it was free. I will be forced to switch to OS X. an OS without an Internet browser, a Media Player, an IM, CD copying, video editing, a few games, etc. wouldn't be worth much. Really who would buy an OS that won't let'm do his common daily tasks?

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Syberghost]

Why not tackle the problem itself? Microsoft is bundling its software to force competition out of the market. Why not force Microsoft to leave IE, Media Player, video editing software, hell even Minesweeper out of the default Windows package? (How much cheaper would it become?:)

Why not just don't choose to purchase Windows yourself? Are you really forced to buy it?

You may be forced to USE it, but the same would be true if your office selected Linux, or Mac, or CP/M.

Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, because you don't *HAVE* to buy their product. This isn't like Standard Oil, where you needed to heat your house to live through the winter.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[yooden]

Why not tackle the problem itself?
Why not reading the synopsis, if not the actual article?

My emphasis:
The fine can be up to 10% of the annual revenue, or $2.5 billion and may include the demand to remove certain programs from Windows.

(Which morons voted this 'interesting'?)

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Stonehead]

Who would buy a FreeBSD kernel without the ports collection? You're putting my statement to an extreme. Microsoft is misusing its market share to get its own applications everywhere "for free". Of course bundling should be possible, just like Linux distributions. But Microsoft doesn't allow that either. (Ever seen an official cd-set with Windows XP, Excel, WordPerfect, Adobe Acrobat and CorelDraw? Hmmm.) Reading mail is a common daily task. Microsoft throws Outlook on your harddisk for that. Why not first have choice? My grandmother might like Eudora better, but currently she won't even know that it exists.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Stonehead]

Oh come on. You know what I mean. If Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, I encourage you to make a living of a random piece of closed-source software for a non-Microsoft OS. Have luck.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[WildBeast]

Linux distributions don't have much software to call their own, and when they do, they make sure to bundle it with the distribution and it's perfectly understandable. Imagine what will happen if KDE sued RedHat because GNOME is installed as the default desktop. If mySQL sued Mandrake because only postgreSQL is included with Mandrake. You can't possibly expect Linux distributions to bundle hundreds of software that do the same thing. And you can't possibly expect, Windows, a proprietary OS to bundle software made by it's competitors.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Stonehead]

Would Coca Cola sue the New York Times because they run an advert for Pepsi? This kind of bundling is understandable indeed. I think it would be quite nice for the Windows platform. By the way, as far as I know, Mandrake and RedHat ship both desktops and databases: you HAVE the choice.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[alumshubby]

Microsoft is of course not evil itself.

Worse, from an ethical point of view, than being "evil," they're amoral. Their business decisions arise from the unified goal of maximizing their return on their stockholders' investment. Period. I argue that this motivation, especially in the context of responsibility distributed and diluted over such a large organization as Microsoft, tends to blind the company to the moral and ethical contexts of the issues at hand.

Their software looks and works actually pretty good, except for their obvious brain damage in security.

I think shortcomings in software are inevitable and forgivable, but it's their response (or sometimes the lack of it) that's often the problem. Coming from the tech-writing side of things, I'd say the infamous "Master Document" feature in Word is the most glaring example I can think of -- it's existed since Word 6 and has yet to be fixed satisfactorily. It's treacherous: When it works, it's wonderful to have a "master" document act as a container for constituent documents. But occasionally, inexplicably, unpredictably, unrecoverably and unforgiveably, a master document corrupts itself and all the documents contained within it, rendering a writer's work useless. Savvy technical writers know this "feature" and avoid it, but every once in a while an unwarned (I hate to say "ignorant") writer innocently loses an entire manual to this dragon.

Surely Microsoft could do better.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Uerige]

The problem is: The user needs some basic programs for the system to be usable. One could say, okay, this software can be downloaded from the web. But how do you want to download something if you don't have a browser (or at least an ftp client)? So, of course, MS bundles IE and Windows (noone, really, would think they'd put Netscape in the "distribution". That'd be plain silly). Also true for most other programs/utilities. It is the same with some Linux distribs. They do a "standard" installation, and if you want to use some other software, you've got to install it by yourself, what many new Linux users just won't do because they don't know that, for example, GNOME exists if they use KDE.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Syberghost]

If Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly, I encourage you to make a living of a random piece of closed-source software for a non-Microsoft OS.

I don't write code. I get payed handsomely to administrate non-Microsoft OSes, actually.

The hundreds of folks getting paid to write our closed-source programs for those non-Microsoft OS need me.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Stonehead]

That's why I would want not Microsoft to make such a "bundle", but some other company. I agree with you: bundling a browser adds value indeed. But Mozilla, or Opera, still are choices. I think it is a pity that Microsoft has used IE for its own standards (activex, document.all) and that these now seem "standard" too - I like an independent web more. But that's another discussion.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Stonehead]

I still don't think those hundreds of folks will agree with your statement that Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly.
Thanks for wasting my time anyway.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Syberghost]

I still don't think those hundreds of folks will agree with your statement that Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly.

So what? The mob's opinion is always right?

The majority of people in the world don't live as long as Americans, it doesn't mean I'm gonna give up medicine.

At one time, most people in the world (and it's possible this could still be the case) thought the Earth was flat; they weren't right.

99% of the population of the world hasn't thought three seconds about whether or not Microsoft is a monopoly. They only know what the press tells them, so it became a monopoly in their eyes the minute the press said so.

Meanwhile, the majority of the computer code in the world continues to be written for non-Microsoft operating systems, and I continue to get real work done on a daily basis without Windows, and Microsoft's pricing practices don't bother me one whit. I hope they double the damn price, it'll drive more business to me.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Stonehead]

(first version of this reply deleted)
Sorry, I was having fun in the meantime - I will try not to react angry, though you don't seem to get my point. My definition of a monopoly must be something else than yours. In my book, Microsoft's monopoly is obvious (spelled "D-O-H"). You seem to be more subtle and I should have respect for that. I would like to be in your situation; I already am happily using Linux and BSD. Now if only Microsoft didn't exist.. ;)

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Lumpy]

Direct X? Why?? SDL is 10 times better and faster.

it's open spource, ported to more platforms than linux and is easy enough to write for that it makes it easy to create an app instead of fighting with microsoft's stupidly complex API.

No thanks, I dont want their horribly written software, and i really dont want it on my OS.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Syberghost]

My definition of a monopoly must be something else than yours.

That was the entire point.

I already am happily using Linux and BSD.

Which underscores my point that they're not a monopoly. Standard Oil was a monopoly; you couldn't buy your oil from anybody else, you didn't have a choice.

You can buy your PC OS from several different places. Microsoft is doing mean, nasty, awful things to get their market share, but preventing people from having a choice in toto is not among them.

Yes, some of the things they've done in the past (and may or may not be doing still, I have an opinion but I'm not gonna bet my ass on it in court) were illegal. The question is, should they have been illegal?

Should a court be able to decide, for instance, that Microsoft can't ship Internet Explorer in Windows? If they do, should it be legal for RedHat to include Mozilla and Lynx?

Do we want a court deciding that? Or does it make more sense in a free society that individuals make those decisions, and that companies be free to enter into contracts.

I'm not talking about click-through UCITA crap here, I'm talking about two marketting and legal teams sitting down and deciding on a contract. The fact that it's hard to compete for specific markets if you don't sign that contract doesn't make someone a monopoly, it makes them successful.

And, it's not illegal to be a monopoly in the US; it's only illegal to be a monopoly *AND* use that power to prevent other options from existing. Since RedHat has revenues in the millions, and Sun has revenues in the billions, it's clear that Microsoft doesn't even have a monopoly, just a very, very successful business built on a foundation of weak software, strong marketting, and duplicity. That's not illegal, nor should it be.

You can't legislate against offering people bad choices just because some people are stupid enough to take them.

The ONLY action the government should take against Microsoft's supposed monopoly is to stop buying their products. If the US government was constrained to use free software wherever possible, it would not only force changes at Microsoft, but it would spur free software development *AND* save the taxpayers money, both in the form of less taxes spent on computer software, *AND* lower costs of goods and services as businesses would see better free software choices themselves.

Documents would eventually have to be interchanged in an open format, so that businesses using Windows could transfer them to and from government entities, and that would force Microsoft to either document what they've got, or use something documented. If Microsoft could write a word processor around those formats that people still wanted to pay for, more power to 'em.

Re:Why a fine? Solve the problem please!

[Anonymous Coward]

you are an idiot. the only relevent defination of monopoly is a legal one. That issue has been decided and you are still and idiot.

Re:this aint communism

[Sloppy]

hey, how about your give your life savings to the government so starving people in this country can eat??

That is not comparable, unless the life savings in question, was profit from a crime.

Are you in favor of criminals getting to keep ill-gotten gains? For example, if I rob a bank and get caught, do I still get to keep the money? The situation is no different with Microsoft and the sales revenue that they got from illegal trade-restraining per-processor contracts. If Microsoft were willing to compete in a free market, none of this would be happening to them. Free market advocates != commies. Law and justice advocates != commies.

What amazes me is the fine's 10% of revenue limit. That's like I rob a bank and get caught, and only have to give 10% back.

They need oversight

[Sturm]

Just like in the US, it won't do a bit of good to just fine Microsoft no matter how much it is. $2.5billion is probably (in MS's opinion) a small price to pay to retain their monopoly. The key to keeping MS from abusing their monopoly is constant oversight by not just bureaucrats, but also people who are familiar with technological and financial aspects of the business. Otherwise, MS will just "pay the toll" and conitinue on their merry way.

Re:They need oversight

[Technician]

Do ya think Microsoft would add the cost of the "EU" tax on top of the product? Do you think they would shame the EU by advertising the cost went up because of the EU tax (fine)? They have a monopoly. They can jack up the price without loosing too much market share. If you don't believe me, Star Office cost me less than $70 for the windows/linux retail non upgrade retail boxed version. MS office pro runs about $500. They do about the same thing... If you communicate business to business, It's MS or nothing in most shops.

Hmm. Interesting.

[dave-fu]

I see this as the new cash cow for states and nations the world over.
Business A is found guilty of something. Business A does business in both Nation X and State Y. This act of which they've been found guilty (in Home Nation P) is, under their respective laws, punishable by a hefty fine. No need for a trial, as they're already guilty, just send them the bill.
I like it a lot.

favorite quote

[LanceSchumacher]

"We remain committed to working with
he Commission to resolving this."
--MicroSoft spolesman

Read as: We will be giving money to EU officials until they give up.

"ADVANCED" options

[Anonymous Coward]

Should be renamed to be "More..."

This should eliminate part of their propaganda.

Hmmm... i wonder what this really costs them...

[motherhead]

Does anyone know how much money Microsoft is pumping into lobbying the European Union or EU government officials? Actually, if they could just argue to mitigate the "removal of programs" part of the decision against them, I wonder if 2.4 billion is less then they spend on "the cost of doing business" in Washington. yes 2.5 billion is a lot of money... but they are the teflon company... and teflon isn't cheap on the hill. (also, i would love to hear that it was 2.5 English billions (trillions to us).

Re:Hmmm... i wonder what this really costs them...

[Dufffader]

If MS gets fined $2.5Billion, what makes us think that they wont increase the price of Windows in the EU to cover the "setback".

Then it all starts all over again. The EU commissioners will have to think of a better punishment.

Re:Hmm. Interesting.

[MfA]

They seem to have a right to a hearing.

BTW whats the alternative? If you think they shouldnt be allowed to fine foreign companies then I assume you must be suggesting that all anti trust laws be abolished (since fines are the only way you have any sway over foreign companies, and if you can escape all anti trust laws simply by setting up shop in the country with the laws which suit you then there is very little use for them anywhere in a world with a globalized economy).

Once they threaten that, they're dead (in europe)

[Baki]

I could imagine Microsoft threatening pulling out it's software, thinking it might scare Europe and have them come back at their knees.

Well, they might, just for short term tactics.
However such a move would create a shock in Europe, making everyone to realise how very dangerous the current situation is, being so dependant upon the software of a single (foreign) company.

Surely, this shock would initiate a big effort to get rid of this dangerous dependance and spell the end of MSFT software in Europe.

I can only hope they pull out their software or at least threaten to do it. It might finally open the eyes of many.

Cute and Cuddly Always Works

[BurritoWarrior]

Perhaps if Mr. Gates poses in public with Mr. Bigglesworth, he wont have to pay two and half BEEELYON dollars.

Heck, its a better defense than the fiasco the MS lawyers put up.

Mod this up as even funnier

[ch-chuck]

I was going to post the same thing (and it wouldn't have been good either).

Corrupt politics in the US

[pubjames]

What I don't understand is, why do Americans seem to be so complacent about their corrupt legal and political system?

I'm not an American, and haven't spent much time there, so I'm only going by what I see and read on the web and newspapers. But it seems to me that a great number of Americans believe their politicians and law makers are highly influenced by the men with the money. In Europe, that kind of thing is seen as very corrupt and not worthy of a modern, democratic society. Frankly it is viewed as a bit backward and a sign of a democratic system that hasn't matured yet. Italy comes to mind as a country in Europe that has a similar reputation.

How is it that Americans are so convinced of the superiority of their country, say it is 'the land of the free', has a large number of intellectuals, etc, and yet don't seem to be worried about such a corrupt system?

This isn't a troll, and I'm not bashing America (both Europe and the US have their good and bad points), but I would like opinions about why Americans seem to have this blindspot.

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[WildBeast]

I was thinking that EU is corrupt because they're the one asking for money from MS. How low can they go?

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[pubjames]

I was thinking that EU is corrupt because they're the one asking for money from MS. How low can they go?

Erm... I'm not sure how to respond to that. I think you're kind of missing the point.

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[kin_korn_karn]

Americans feel this way because we're stuck.

There are effectively two governments here: the corporations and the true government.

The corporations own the people. If we fight them, we lose our jobs, and everybody gets hurt in the long run, because money isn't in it economy, and blah blah blah.

The government is de facto controlled by the corporations due to lobbying interests and the way political campaigns are financed in the USA. If we fight the government, we are criminals, and with the interlocking of law enforcement, credit reporting, and the continual effort to learn as much about us as they can, there is literally no recourse.

Lobbying was meant to bring the people to Congress to for oversight of our representatives, but it's become an auction of legislators. Corporations hire lobbying companies to push their agendas.

So we're stuck in a cycle. Fight the corps, lose your money. Fight the government, lose your money AND your freedom. The only thing that could fix it is a catastrophic deconstruction of the corporate system that controls us, but the government will always quell such things in the name of the economy and keeping their pockets full.

So you tell me - short of a second civil war, what COULD we do??

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

I think Jamie summed it up quite nicely.

Jamie Love:
Politics have gone downhill ever since the US Supreme Court decision in Buckley v. Valeo. By making campaign spending a constitutionally protected form of speech, and essentially legalizing bribery, we created a system where the average member of Congress spends most of his waking hours trying to raise money, just to compete with some other person who might do the same thing. Now the new members of Congress are people who excel at fundraising, or have money to begin with. Once they get on this treadmill, the spent all their time socializing and speaking with the lobbyists who can raise more money. It isn't so important that a politician be genius, or have deep insights of their own into problems, but if you hang out too much with lobbyists and make friends with people just to ask for money, you get a warped and fairly limited view of the world.

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[Qbertino]

I'm a former american citizen (now german) and must say you observe very accurate. From the distance from across the pond and a few years back I get the very same impression. America needs a change, just like Europe is changing now. Or better, even more so - so to get things really right.
What was that last election all about? Are you guys back in gods own country gonna change your election laws? Just as an example...

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[pubjames]

That's a great summary.

Shouldn't you guys be out on the streets protesting about this? This seems to be the root cause of so many of the issues that are currently coming up on Slashdot. Is there not a political movement in the states to try to change this? It seems pretty fundamental to me.

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[Winged Cat]

Is there not a political movement in the states to try to change this?

There was. They got bought out.

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[dgb2n]

In Europe, that kind of thing is seen as very corrupt and not worthy of a modern, democratic society.

I'm an American who's lived a decade in Europe. You are both right and wrong on this point. Americans simply accept that to believe that we live in a utopian society with government officials motivated purely by the desire to serve the public is utter nonsense.

Money corrupts. It does so in Europe and it does so in the United States.

We don't accept it. We don't condone it. We just don't delude ourselves into believing that it doesn't apply to our country.

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[Koreantoast]

The problem isn't one that can easily be defined as right or wrong.

For one, the people with the money are not all rich businessmen representing massive American and foreign megacorporations. A huge chunk of that money comes from citizen-based interest groups known as PAC's (political action committees). In 2000, the top donor was not a corporation, but a labor union, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, who gave twice as much as Microsoft did that year. It should be noted that labor unions made up 6 of the top 10 contributors (AT&T, Microsoft, Citibank, and Goldman Sachs the other 4). Other notable groups include issue-based coalitions such as the NRA (the pro-firearms lobby). Any radical funding reforms would be extrememly dangerous for PACs in the United States, not just corporations.

And as much as many Americans may bash special interest groups, many of these interests provide a strong collective voice in the political system for large factions within the United States populace. Many of the intellectuals you mention are active, but they decide to play the game and battle their opponents in the political arena.

I'm not saying reform isn't necessary; like any human endeavor, the American system isn't perfect. However, the system does work... you just need to know how to play it. It's a lot more complex and gray than many people percieve it to be.

Perhaps we should take lessons from the NRA... I'm sure collectively, tech workers can scrape together more money than a bunch of guntotin' blue collar workers.

Oh... FYI

http://www.opensecrets.org/2000elect/storysofar/ to pcontribs.asp?Bkdn=Source

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

Money corrupts. It does so in Europe and it does so in the United States.

But it can't corrupt to the exact same level, since political life and laws are very different (real left and right wing alternances, dominance of parties over individuals, ...).

Re:Corrupt politics in the US

[Malcontent]

What you fail to mention is this.

While it's true that a Union doles out cash to political parties the members of that union usually don't hand out wads of cash (mainly because they have mouths to feed and bills to pay). A corporation on the other hand not only has a lot of money but also has some very rich shareholders. The corporation gives money, the shareholders give money and they also sink unlimited amount of funds into so called think tanks. That along with the soft money funds adds up to a mountain compared to a unions ant hill. Think about it like this.
When was the last time the US chamber of commerce backed a democrat? When was the last time the cato institute backed a democrat?. These organizations are thinly veiled fund raising arms of the republican party and you can give them an infinate amount of money and you don't even have to report it. The corruption in the system is vast and deep.

Mod parent down as ignorant

[KrunZ]

Slashdot is truely full of nationalistic yankees. Jokes about american-stereotype is mod'ed down, but jokes concerning europeans, asians, etc. are funny.

If big corps are doing something to the american people SlashDot is full of anti-commercial comments. But in Europe M$ can behave as they please.

I thought the fight against monopolies was concerning the entire world.

Re:Mod parent down as ignorant

[BenjyD]

Oh, come on, jokes about French people are always funny.

Re:Mod parent down as ignorant

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the Europeans need to stop letting their huge government beauracracies establish Monopoly control over their marketplaces.

Then perhaps we can talk about a worldwide fight against monopolies.

Re:Mod parent down as ignorant

[easter1916]

As are jokes about ugly Americans.

EU IT had enough with Microsoft already

[bryanbrunton]

Microsoft's profits last year in its European, Middle East and Africa region:

4.8 Billion.

Microsoft's profits from two years ago in its European, Middle East and Africa region:

5.1 Billion.

This was the only region in which MS profits declined over this period.

Microsoft's Quarterly Reports

Re:EU IT had enough with Microsoft already

[DMoylan]

Or maybe more people have cd burners?

No Consumer OS will succeed w/o MSOffice and IE

[Anonymous Coward]

These are the two things that nearly everyone insists upon. They must have MS Office and they must have a good browser. Netscape has lost the browser war and MS has no intention of making Office for linux.

I would love to see linux become a common desktop solution. The business model for a MS-free enterprise makes so much sense. But, corporate America will not let go of MS office. Nothing else matters, unfortunately.

Re:this aint communism

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you in favor of criminals getting to keep ill-gotten gains?

Well, apparently most American Liberals are.

The Kennedy family, for instance, is founded on Joe Kennedy's bootlegging operations during the prohibition era.

So the whole Kennedy empire should be shut down. The Kennedy compounds impounded and sold at auction.

Ted Kennedy can become a bus boy at some less-than swank Washington DC establishment to pay for his booze habit.

Re:I guess Slashdot Needed Some Traffic.....

[antek9]

Right. Let's all just remain calm the next time MS faces another trial. No news really. Not worth a mention.

Not unprecedented -- Europe spanked IBM once

[ch-chuck]

Or did it? Seems I heard once the IBM got in trouble for their attempts to 'lock in' customers by playing games with connectors, similar to Msft's API's. All I can find is this:

[from: http://163.18.14.55/datapro/06090-1.htm]

"A System/390 plug-compatible system is a mainframe computer or other device (such as a storage or tape subsystem) supplied by a vendor that interfaces to IBM's systems or which can substitute for IBM's equipment and run the same programs and peripherals without modification. The original IBM PCM market was effectively created over 40 years ago with the 1956 Consent Decree--the landmark U.S. antitrust legislation that forced IBM to share its technology with other manufacturers. The terms of that decree were largely revoked in January 1996, however. PCM manufacturers are sometimes called "IBMulators" or software-compatible vendor (SCVs)."

I think that antitrust action is necessary to create an "Msft Compatible Application" MARKET (not "monopoly") which will encourage competition, innovation and ultimately benefit the consumer, similar to action taken with IBM to create the Plug Compatible Mainframe MARKET.

Cf. also connector conspiracy.

EU to fine Microsoft?

[Russ Nelson]

"EU to fine Microsoft?"

Oh God, dare I say it? Please forgive me, Lord, for the pun I am about to make:

"That would be fine by me."
-russ

Individuals, group or companies against MS!!???

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does individuals, group or companies do not sue MS?
Can't we sue them for security problem in their products, Anti-Competitive behaviors and so on???
If MS had hundreds of company cases + hundreds of group and individuals cases, things would change.

Easy money :)

I hate PowerPoint!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh they could do without Office, it's PowerPoint that they couldn't live without. I wouldn't be surprised if all these fanatics hated Microsoft simply for the fact that they developed PowerPoint. (I don't care if they didn't, PowerPoint is the only one left.) Anyone else with a real job who has ever had to sit through a presentation, or worse create one for a higher-up, will understand. Programmers and network jockeys may not understand since they are exempt from PowerPoint hell and sit around playing Quake all day, but I'm sure they can relate! Consulting is the worst too....all our managers are PowerPoint happy!

You fool!

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft hasn't really contributed much money until the last couple of years. On the other hand you should see the contributions Sun, Oracle and AOL-TW have made. You will feel very stupid when you do.

Re:this aint communism

[Anonymous Coward]

how is microsoft robbing people???

nobody sticks a gun to peoples' heads to force them to buy windows.

true, they are a monopoly, but equating it with robbery is ludicrous and you know it.

btw, the awful moderation this thread proves my original point.

Fines == Taxes?

[Pyrosz]

This (if it goes through) will end up being another tax on EU buyers. Think about it for a sec. They fine MS 10% of its annual revenue, ok, MS just increases the cost of the software by 11%. This in effect puts the revenue back to the same level as before the fine. But puts the cost to buyer. Due to this effect, this equals a tax to the buyer of MS software.

Re:Fines == Taxes?

[Amazing Quantum Man]

Simple. As part of the ruling imposing the fine, the EU states that MS may not increase the price of [windows/office/whatever] beyond the listed price as of yesterday (being the day before the ruling).

Re:Fines == Taxes?

[mimbleton]

Yeah, sounds more and more like Soviet system.

Re:Fines == Taxes?

[Eccles]

They fine MS 10% of its annual revenue, ok, MS just increases the cost of the software by 11%.

If Microsoft could do this without affecting sales, why haven't they done it already anyway?

If you increase the price of something, you increase the number of people who will look for alternatives, skip upgrading, or just say "f--- it, I don't really need a computer." Microsoft's pricing is most likely already at that point that maximizes their profits.

Read about marginal value theory sometime.

Re:Fines == Taxes?

[deaddrunk]

Since the Soviet Union had no private companies, I fail to see any comparison. Although having giant, unaccountable monopolies were part of the system...

Re:Fines == Taxes?

[mimbleton]

Really?
Having bunch of political operatives limiting and deciding about "socially" acceptable prices for various products was a big part of soviet system.

Watch out for sin taxes

[AllInOne]

Watch out! This could be like putting a "sin tax" on Microsoft.

Sin taxes are leveled on products and services that the government wants to discourage but is afraid to outlaw: gambling, liquor, tobacco...

At first the money that comes in is just "surplus", but very soon it gets its own constituancy -- the money is earmarked to support specific programs.

Next thing you know you can't afford to restrict the "sin" because it is supporting essential social programs.

You hear: "We can't outlaw the lottery (even tho it is essentially a tax on those who can least afford it ) because without the lottery would wouldn't have funds for X (in PA it's senior citizens, in NY it's schools)"

When the government collects 10% more from the sale of Microsoft products through a sin tax than they do from a Microsoft competitor they are no longer indifferent between a Microsoft product and a competitor, they favor Microsoft! This ends up having the exact opposite from the effect indended.

As other posters have submitted, it would be very important to watch where the collected funds would go, especially for this reason...

Re:Watch out for sin taxes

[Anonymous Coward]

Watch out! This could be like putting a "sin tax" on Microsoft.

Stop the nonsens. EU daily fines companies (of about all the kinds) who broke the economic laws.

And what would you have us do?

[Greyfox]

Me: Republican party! I'm outraged at your obvious back-scratching of microsoft! I'm going to send the Democratic party $100 and vote Democrat next election!
Microsoft: Republican party! Thank you for scratching our back. We'll give you $500,000,000 for the next election!

You see the problem? Personally I think prohibiting any corporation from making any political contribution would be in order but I also know that hell will freeze over before that happens.

Re:And what would you have us do?

[pubjames]

Well, an obvious solution is to legally limit the politican donation system. That's what happens in most European countries.

Re:And what would you have us do?

[Winged Cat]

It's been tried in America. The problem is that those who pass the laws have already been bought out to the point where they never let such bills become laws. It's a catch 21: can't pass campaign finance reform when most lawmakers are corrupt; can't get many non-corrupt lawmakers elected without campaign finance reform. (This last might not seem to be, until one realizes that the "sheeple" which constitute the majority of the American populace have been brought up conditioned to respond to advertising and media, which money buys. Deprogramming these sheeple would eliminate this problem, but I haven't seen any workable proposals to do that.)

EU is Anti-American

[WildBeast]

I've been to Europe a few times and their's plenty of Anti-American sentiment in their. They're extremely Jealous of the U.S..

If I was MS, I would stop publishing Windows in Europe, besides who'll buy Windows without the bundled software? Europeans will be forced to switch to Linux, the best European OS. Their's no way a European OS will get sued.

I've got only one thing to say to the EU. Take your Window CD's, shine them up real good and stick them up your candy asses.

Re:EU is Anti-American

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet there is a lot of antiamericanism in Europe : you've been there. I would myself be an anti-american if I had met you.

Re:EU is Anti-American

[mimbleton]

Linux is not strictly European OS.
It is more like their clone of US OS.

The DOJ spanked IBM once

[Greyfox]

And they lived in fear of the consent decree for years after that. I believe it was only lifted a couple of years ago.

Microsoft managed to wiggle out that spanking. I believe they're even more dangerous that IBM was when they were slapped with the consent decree.

Re:Once they threaten that, they're dead (in europ

[IPFreely]

I doubt MS would ever even consider pulling out of any area. A desktop without MS software is a desktop with something else. Microsofts whole tactic has been to eliminate competition whatever the cost, even at a big loss. They usually do this by displacing competative software on as many desktops as possible, not leaving any profit space for the competition to live in.

Pulling out of the EU would create a huge profit space for competition.

Re:this aint communism

[MindStalker]

Ok, so the money wasn't exaclty stolen. What comparison would you buy.
A con-artist would be forced to give all of the money back plus some. (which would be a fine way of dealing with MS force companies to give an extimate of how much damage MS has caused them, then give them 20% of that figure (I'm saying this because companies overestimate damages to the point of about 5x))
A company who sells you goods that don't work and offers no warrenties would eventually get punished and forced to replace items for free.
I could come up with more examples, but I'm tired. I ain't got now job, so how can I pay the rent.

Re:Corrupt politics everywhere

[cqnn]

I think you miss the point, Americans believe that politicians
worldwide are highly influenced by the men with the money.
It is not just our own politicians that we think of as slightly
corrupt, or at least tempted by power; it is all political,
religious, or economic leaders that we view with equal suspicion.

It is considered a sign (for us) of a free and democratic
society that its citizens have the ability to question each
and every decision made by that societies lawmakers, regardless
of any prior trust.

We would probably consider it a sign of an immature democracy to
see such easy acceptance of political decision making that you
imply other world governments pass off.

I'd say it is more a matter of perspective and underlying culture.
The EU states had a much smoother transition from Monarchy, Theocracy,
and Military rule to a state of Democratic governance. While the
very establishment of the United States was set on the precedent of
revolutionary change in political systems, while carrying forward
the philosophy that the people might have to do so again some day.

Tsk Tsk

[killmenow]

Or in his own words: 'To speak of a fine when Microsoft has not yet disputed the Commission's preliminary findings both in fact and law -- as it it's right -- is premature.'

Nevermind the typo using the word "it" instead of "is" in that quote, I feel bad for that poor apostrophe.

Re:Tsk Tsk

[Anonymous Coward]

Commission's - possesive, belonging to the Commission, that's correct use of an apostrophe.

It's - contraction of "it is" is also correct.

What's you're problem ?

Re:Tsk Tsk

[killmenow]

It's - contraction of "it is" is also correct. What's you're problem ?

try saying "as is it is perogative" and then try saying "as is its perogative" and you'll know what the problem is.

it's - indeed this is a contraction of "it is" but the phrase there obviously was possessive.

It (being Microsoft) has a perogative...therefore it is its perogative.

Re:Corrupt politics everywhere

[pubjames]

I think you miss the point, Americans believe that politicians worldwide are highly influenced by the men with the money.

Perhaps that's just a reflection of your culture. If you think it's ok in the US because it's the norm elsewhere then I can honestly say that I think you are wrong. In Europe, at least in the northern European countries, there are a lot of checks in place to prevent this type of corruption. Contributions from companies to political parties are limited, in some countries to very small amounts. Politicians have to decare any business interests publicly. 'Backhanders' are sometimes caught by the press and politicians have to resign.

I'm not saying that Europe is corruption free. It just seems that the people of (mainly Northern) Europe seem to be a lot less willing to put up with this type of corruption than Americans.

Can we smart bomb seattle?

[cooperj72]

'Cause Microsoft has been terrorizing Americans since 1995!

-Jason

Bought US Gov cheap $6M

[Anonymous Coward]

MS bought the US government- Bush and the Supremes- or only $6 million in lobbying fees. I wonder what the price of the EU is?

$2.5 billion fine

[segfault7375]

$2.5 billion euros? Big deal, that's like $20US, right? :-)

EULA acceptance = no Microsoft liability

[phillymjs]

Anyone running Microsoft software has accepted the EULA for that software. No matter what Microsoft claims in their marketing materials about how robust, secure, etc. their products are, the EULA usually quite specifically absolves Microsoft of any liability at all, should their products not perform as advertised and instead cause damage to or destruction of the hardware on which it is used, monetary loss, injury or loss of life, or anything else that most people would term "bad" and start looking for someone to sue over.

This is patently ridiculous, IMHO. Imagine if GM bragged in their commercials about how safe their cars are because they have airbags, and then printed a EULA on their airbags that absolved them of any liability if the user died from using the airbag. Would people still buy GM cars? Probably not. Until software companies can be held totally accountable for the claims they make about the robustness and security of their products, the users of those products will always get the shaft, and have little recourse when they do.

~Philly

Re:EULA acceptance = no Microsoft liability

[ThePof]

Which is why most countries (or at least some) has laws that tell what a seller is allowed to make agreements on with the customer. Usually not allowing for example such things as "not having any liability" or "not guaranteeing a product works" or "not having any responsability for what it does". Such agreements or parts of agreements would be void. Thus it would not matter if you agree to them, sign papers or whatever since the alw forbids such agreements. Perhaps it IS allowed in some countries, I really don't know, but not in all for sure.

Re:EULA acceptance = no Microsoft liability

[subsolar2]

Yeah, well we ages ago we built an Windows 95 OSR 2.1 image on an 430hx based motherboard, and put it on five systems with a slightly newer 430FX based botherboard from the same vendor. As soon as 95 booted it fried the IDE controller in the chipset. Called MS about the issue and was basically told to we don't support imaging and any damage is your tough luck, and why are you imaging them anyways and told it was probably a violation of the licence.

We ended up getting the hardware MFG to replace the MB and created an image from scratch for dozen systems we bought with the different MG.

- subsolar

Ignorant

[poet]

This is an ingnorant statement. No I am not flaming. Ignorance is not a bad thing, it just means you don't know.

2.5 Billion (if they could pull that off) would hurt Microsoft ALOT. Yes Microsoft has enough money to buy a small country but 2.5 Billion is a lot of CASH.

Also, if the EU does fine Microsoft that much, they will most certainly exercise their right to make Microsoft remove some programs from Windows.

Finally, the stock market would probably be very brutal to Microsoft if they had to pay out 2.5 Billion.

Re:Ignorant

[Anonymous Coward]

Now if they could make it $2.5 billion A YEAR, that would add up to real cash.

Microsoft currently has $30 billion US in cash. It really would be fine to be able do a countdown to zero on Microsoft's cash position!!! Think of the office pools, etc.

Re:Ignorant

[Craig Davison]

Don't be stupid. When it's no longer profitable for Microsoft to pay the fine, they will stop selling their product in Europe.

Details of the "obstruction" charge

[null_session]

Check the Reg -

it has the details of the obstruction charge. Apparently they were writing letters from various companies in support of themselves and submitting them as evidence. This is misconduct of the grossest nature - here is an excerpt of an email I wrote a friend (I don't want to retype my point)

Look at the very last part. I've talked to you about this before... Microsoft has now been confirmed to have created misleading commentary and opinions in the following areas: Letters to congress, state officials (recently, in support of dropping the antitrust case); Random individuals writing opinion letters to various local papers (came out in the first antitrust investigation in the win 3.1 days), creating fony "trade groups" to lobby and publish opinions, and now they have been caught submitting false opinions from other companies. It really is the boy who cried wolf, you can't believe pro Microsoft (even deserved) information in any context because they have a history of buying reports and opinions in almost every context. This is a good trick if you can handle it, but it appears that it is going to backfire on MS.

Re:Details of the "obstruction" charge

[muonman]

The thought has even occurred to me that there might be (shudder) paid M$ trolls submitting comments to /.

I'm probably just paranoid, tho.

Actually, I guess the real question is, do they
outnumber the bonafide contributors yet?

Re:this aint communism

[Anonymous Coward]

"I ain't got now job"
Oh yea, good grammar there budy...

Re:Once they threaten that, they're dead (in europ

[Mekanix]

However such a move would create a shock in Europe, making everyone to realise how very dangerous the current situation is, being so dependant upon the software of a single (foreign) company.

Hah. Code Red, I Love You, Sir Cam, Nimda, whatever, should have tought that lesson long time ago.

You know what? I like it.

[ghislain_leblanc]

This whole software bundling issue. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Linux AND Windows NT sysadmin. At home, I use Windows most of the time because the software I use to create music in my spare time (Cubase) does not run on Linux (yet). But anyway, that's not the point...

I just wanted to say that I actualy like the fact that all this software is included in Windows 2000, why? Because it's all "windows friendly" in the way that all is connected with everything else in OLE and DDE. I know these are usable for other software vendors but for some reason, it's just not as transparent as when it is Microsoft native stuff. All their software looks and acts the same (if it works well is another story...), I feel confort in the fact that I won't have any interface surprises with them as opposed to some other vendors who put stuff "just because it can be done".

Oh really???

[volpe]

I really can't envision Microsoft making a EU compliant Windows sans IE, Windows Media, Chat, etc., for them and a bundled Windows for the rest of the world.

You can't?? Surely you must be aware of what lengths corporations will go to in order to maximize profits in multiple markets.

HA ha

[Anonymous Coward]

a lowly ac troll has broken your uber trolls chain hahaha you lamers. I know the real meaning of indent power. Do not test me!

Re:HA ha

[Anonymous Coward]

Now I am going to have to show you lamers I mean business and show you what I am talking about. Real troll power comes from posting so many of these that it actually widens the slashdot page width to beyond 800x600 veiwing.

Re:HA ha

[Anonymous Coward]

Why dave? why? why does slashdot delete my post when I hit the back button. It seems like this is a new feature (Bug) in slashcode 2.2. ahh yes slashcode 2.2. Its enough to drive me to troll on slashdot 24/7. taco doesn't even understand. I hardly trolled here at all until after slash 2.2. Now slashdot deserves this!

Re:HA ha

[Anonymous Coward]

OK continuing my troll quest for the right margin. Yeah the right margin will be meaningless in a few moments. Trolls browsing slashdot at -1 won't know what they are looking at yeah. The troll power will continue for at least another 2 or 3 posts. Go troll!

Re:HA ha

[Anonymous Coward]

Boy this is going to be rammed right up there on the right there yeah it will be sitting right up agains the side there the subject may end up looking like
RE:HA
Ha
Instead of on one line yeah slashdot formatting is pretty bad. Well got to go.

Re:HA ha

[Anonymous Coward]

Great finally yeah! Go for troll! Go troll! Yo Troll. Uh oh I think I used the word troll to many times. Yeah bzhit might get some good comprezzion on that! Yeah oh uh I think I may have said yeah too many times as well.

Its 10% of turnover - not revenue

[pervez.choudhury]

The European Commission can fine up to 10% of annual turnover - and not 'annual revenue' as was reported.

The European Commission will treat any European subidiary of Microsoft as a part of a larger company and the 10% will be calculated from Microsfot as one large worldwide company.

This means that Microsoft stands to lose 10% of its annual turnover from its entire global operations.

It's the world today babe ;-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Do not miss EU commission their goal is to avoid monopols in any ways, and if it implies to refuse mergers then YES it's their right !

For instance, at this time the EU commision is about to brake a major merger between Legrand Eletrics and Schneider Eletrics which was supposed to build the #1 in comsumer electrics stuffs !!!

Both corp. are EU and the EU commision will 99% refuse the merge (news is expected on friday evening CET)

What may scares you is that US have less and less power, but this is just the reality.

The introduction of Euro common curency will just prove to the whole world what exist in fact since a couple of decades : europe is one of the big ones ;)

Do not miss europeans, we are allies of US. But beeing friends do not mean getting rid of critics !

For instance for us, a country where people have can own guns and where death penalty is day job is just a jungle country.
For you europe is still in the 50s years ... but we've moved babe ;)

Just looking at how Orlando's Disney themes parks shows england, france, deutchland, ... it is just fun to see ;-)
I did not know we were still using donkeys, and driving WWII cars !!!

Open your eyes ... and the world will be clear...

Anyways, do not miss my post, it's quite US friendly.

-4R34'.

Penalties by third party greater than by friends

[WillSeattle]

One of the key mistakes MSFT has made is in trying to avoid having a US court rule on punishment. By doing so, they forced the EU (EEC) to act, and unlike America where MSFT has some support and lobbying dollars, the EU does not like MSFT.

It's better to be punished by people who think you're a good guy than by people who are convinced you are bad. But they still persist in thinking that they can escape punishment through trickery.

What would happen if MSFT pulled out of EU

[WillSeattle]

Unlike many other posters, I believe that, should MSFT pull out of the EU, that the EU (EEC actually) would force the local companies to public domain the software that existed up to that date.

Realize that the EU trade rules apply to many other countries than Europe, including Mexico.

This would be a serious mistake by MSFT, although I'm sure the Open Source folks would love it.

Re:this aint communism

[MindStalker]

It was a typo, I meant to say
"I ain't got no job"
It was intended as a quote btw from a song.

Americans Don't Vote!

[Anonymous Coward]

The USA has one of the worst records of any democracy for their voters not getting out and voting.

I can only conclude that American voters are so unsophisticated that they don't see the connection between voters who refuse to vote and the inevitable corrupt elected officials.

There is an almost perfect "catch 22" at work here. The common voter says to himself, "Who would vote for such corrupt politicians, anyway?". The answer is, of course, that Big Money and Special Interests DO get out and vote.

Re:Americans Don't Vote!

[slow_flight]

Get out and vote for what? The latest homogenized, pre-packaged liberal media poster child, that's what. By the time we get to vote, the candidates have been winnowed down to a win-win situation for the corporate backers. Example: what's the difference between Al Gore and George Bush? Nothing! Any candidate that offered any real promise of change was knocked out of the election early on by our liberal media magnates digging through their trash to find even the hint of impropriety, with no statute of limitations. "This man is not suitable for leadership - thirty-eight years ago he didn't claim the $15 he won at a church raffle to the IRS."

By the time we get to make our choice, there is no real choice left to make.

Re:Americans Don't Vote!

[maxpublic]

Exactly! Every candidate I've ever liked has been sabotaged long before they ever reach the finals. I've done my part and voted my conscience, but really - just look at the last presidential election. Al Gore and George Bush, two sides of the same coin, and Nader (a fanatic that I don't care for) so slandered by the press that virtually no one voted for him.

Yeah. Some choice. Rather, *no* choice.

Max

Lovecraft

[Anonymous Coward]

Which one of the Ancient Ones was that again? Shub-Niggurath?

Re:Lovecraft

[NeoSkandranon]

Ia! Ia! Shub-Niggurath, the Goat with a Thousand Young!

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu fthagn !

Re:Corrupt politics everywhere

[mimbleton]

Prohibiting contributions does not work and simply forces politicians to come up with workarounds, which often end up being outside of the law.
US political system acknowledges this fact and allows people to transfer money in the open which allows us to KNOW who is giving who and how much.
We can judge their intentions and loyalties based on that knowledge.
Europe is just as corrupted as US is , the difference being that you don't know who is paying who until there is a big scandal and suddenly public learns that this well liked person has been taking bribes for the last 10 years.

PS.
I am US citizen born and raised in Europe.

Re:Corrupt politics everywhere

[pubjames]

Prohibiting contributions does not work and simply forces politicians to come up with workarounds, which often end up being outside of the law.

Geez, you don't have much faith in politicians, do you? That's a bit sad. Do you really believe what you're saying? Go live in Sweden, Denmark, or even the UK. I think it will change your mind.

Re:Corrupt politics everywhere

[mimbleton]

No I prefer US.
I actually have more fight in US politicians than I ever had in Eurocrats.

YESSSSSSS!

[Anonymous Coward]

You are finally catching on!

You can take great pride in knowing that you are more perceptive than Microsoft's top brass!!! (not to mention most of the USA posters here)

So? It's only 2.5 months...

[Anonymous Coward]

It is my understanding that MicroFaust's cash reserves are building at the rate of a billion dollars a month

Aim Gun, Miss Foot, Collect Check, Reload...

[hey!]

Microsoft yet again (apparently) makes life more difficult for themselves. I'm no huge fan of the company, but even I think that they would have had a *much* better time in both the US trial and EU investigation if they didn't play so dirty (the whole video debacle at the US trial, the apparent obstruction of justice with the EU trial)

Judging by how lucrative MS's practices are, I almost wish some of the stocks I own would get in the habit of shooting themselves in the foot. Eventually MS will tap out, but it's been a hell of a ride for a long time -- which is about all you can ask for as a shareholder. Err, other than ethical behavior, that is; but that only concerns a few eccentric cranks.

I have on occasion been in business situations that involved ticklish ethical questions. For example in the early 90s I was involved with a group where the marketing director wanted to carpet bomb various usenet groups with postings (this was before anyone heard of spam). If I hadn't already been an old timer who could point out the damage to our reputation that thoughtless posting on what was a cooperative medium, we would have been pioneering spammers. It's hard to maintain your integrity and maximize your chances for success. More often than not these aspects of a decision get confused, which if you think about it is not surprising: if you are successful, almost nobody questions you; if you fail, then they question everything, including your ethics. And people tend look to each other for confirmation that they haven't gone beyond the pale of decency. It's normally a healthy thing. But success tends to bless any practice that would be reviled if failure followed it, independent of its own usefulness or morality. I suspect that given enough success a group of people will eventually develop a culture that is proud of things that disgust ordinary people.

A little failure is character building; but MS is a company that has never ever had any failure that mattered. So, is it any wonder that shame doesn't figure into their corporate culture? It looks to us like they shot themselve in the foot because they acted in a way that would make anyone else blush. But it doesn't matter, because none of it has affected the bottom line. And, it seems like with the DOJ rolling over and dying, once again the bullet has missed their foot.

Which given normal business psychology justifies everything that they have done. Like the GM chairman who said "What's good for GM is good for the country," they must have a very unshakable sense of the rightness of their cause.

Re:Aim Gun, Miss Foot, Collect Check, Reload...

[FatRatBastard]

In a lot of ways you're right. In fact, I think you hit the nail on the head with the Aim Gun, Miss Foot, Reload bit. And that's the point I guess I was trying to get at.

Yes, Microsoft has dodged some bullets, but I wonder if it was out of brilliance or just dumb luck (I would less of the first and more of the second). The fact that they *keep* reloading and aiming for thier foot -- to me -- says that one of these days they're going to hit the target, which in this case may be the EU fine (should it ever come to be. They may dodge that one too).

Had Microsoft (Gates in particular) not shot his mouth off on national TV the day that Microsoft signed the concent agreement with the Gov't in the early 90s one wonders whether the Gov't would have gone after MS a second time (or at least as hard as they did) (I remember reading somewhere that the DOJ were livid after seeing Gates say "This will not effect MS business practices in the least" right after the agreement).

Remember, the first anti-trust investigation hardly played at all in the mainstream press. Gates and MS were still considered to be the good guys (well, to everyone except maybe IBM and some other software developers). It didn't tarnish MS reputation at all and they continued to do "business as usual". After the second investigation and trial there was considerable image damage to MS. Not to mention that even though it looks like they'll get a slap on the wrist at worst, they have been found guilty of abusing a monopoly position and will forever have to worry about having the Feds (and state gov't) focusing on their behavior.

Microsoft continuing to do thing such as obstruting investigation, lying, mis-representing things, etc do *way* more harm than good. If you get caught it just sours you in the view of those who are judging you. It happend in the DOJ case, and they were fortunatle enough to have a judge who talked too much followed by a favorable change in the executive branch to help bail them out. In Europe, though, they may not be so lucky.

Fine isn't fine

[Anonymous Coward]

M$ will just raise the price of Windoze/Office/Xbox/whatever to compensate the loss. If EU want to charge heavy toll on the company, get M$ stock (voting shares preferred).

Watch out RedHat!!!!!!!

[JeffMagnus]

Better watch what you bundled with RedHat Linux...... Those browsers, editors, and utilities have got to go!

Re:Watch out RedHat!!!!!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

When will this Red Herring go away? For your edification how about you go to RedHat and download Cygwin. Install it on any Windows OS 9x - xp. Now download the source code and compile any of the software bundled with RedHat on windows.
Now explain to me how bundling by RedHat is at all comparable to MS practises.

Ya ain't no nuttin' of us, man

[Anonymous Coward]

Groin' up with Public Enemy and shit like that!

Bundling within the Plus pack

[Macka]

Had Microsoft chosen to keep the base OS fairly light, and instead bundled all the extras like Outlook, MediaPlayer, IE, themes, etc in the OS Plus pack, then they would have avoided all this mess and come out of it richer and stronger.

The value proposition for buying the plus pack would have been too compelling to ignore for the majority of people, and the combined revenue from both products would have generated much more cash.

Also, no one could have accused them of bundling with the operating system, so there probably wouldn't have been a law suit in the first place.

Hind sight is a wonderful thing :)

Re:Bundling within the Plus pack

[Anonymous Coward]

Bundle everything with MSPlus! and charge extra?

Then all these M'$' bashers would have to criticize Microsoft for not giving consumers any software. Wouldn't the correct thing to now do is turn around and remove ALL software from Linux Distros except the Kernel, and release such things as X-server, etc on a LinuxAddition! CD?

Microsoft OWN the license for windows? As far as I am aware they do. Ergo: They can put whatever software they want on their CD. Just write it on te side of the box, and consumers (and competitors alike) will have ever chance to know what is on the CD's.

If PackardBell released their computers with Hitachi monitors, would you be criticizing them with claims that "It doesn't give the other Monitor maufacturers a chance!"... I didn't think so.

Which european country should I migrate to?

[Anonymous Coward]

I must confess I'm Italian and I don't feel at ease with Italian laws/society/political system.
I've been wondering for some time now which country I should migrate to.
I'd _really_ prefer a European country...
Has anybody got a good suggestion?

Re:Which european country should I migrate to?

[pubjames]

Really depends what you want - they're all different!

I've moved around a bit and I'm quite happy in Spain. Good climate, great food, friendly people. The legal system is screwed up but the politics isn't as corrupt as I expected it to be and it's improving all the time.

Re:Which european country should I migrate to?

[easter1916]

Most Italians really enjoy Ireland, but maybe that because apart from the fact that a) we're ugly, you lot are good-looking, b) our weather is dreadful and yours is good, and c) you speak Italian and we speak hiberno-English, the two places are practically the same.

Re:Which european country should I migrate to?

[easter1916]

I hasten to add that the above is *not* a good example of Hiberno-English, just of my hitting send before double-checking spelling, grammar, etc.

Thanks, Captain Obvious.

[Anonymous Coward]

Up to 5, down to 2. C'est la vie.

Kennedy is a patriot

[Anonymous Coward]

The Kennedy family, for instance, is founded on Joe Kennedy's bootlegging operations during the prohibition era.

The "prohibition era" was a time when this nation was as Communist and totalitarian as it has ever been. It was an example of an oppressive government attempting to legislate morality, and it was a law that was blatantly immoral and inexcusable. Joe Kennedy and all of the "lawbreaking" bootleggers of the time were fighting for their country. They were Christian patriots acting in defense of the principles that the nation was built on. Unjust laws need to be challenged and broken. By your logic we ought to just sit back and let the gov. pass the DCMA and SSSCA. Right?

This country could use a few more patriots like the Kennedys.

Re:How did this get modded up?!

[maxpublic]

A shitty OS? You mean WinBloze XP? Dude, that particular piece of crap isn't open source, and MS owns it....

Max

Unbundle and document!

[IGnatius T Foobar]

Those of you who remember the IBM antitrust years may recall one of the outcomes of that debacle: IBM was forced to unbundle its services from its products, and forced to document its interfaces. The birth of a reasonably fair aftermarket soon followed.

Let's home this happens to Microsoft too, and they have to completely remove all mentions of Passport/Hotmail from Windows, as well as IE and Media Player.

Why open the source?

[SiriusBlack]

We need access to the M$ source because the market realities dictate that for any new OS to be accepted, it must be backwards compatible with older OSes that customers already have a huge software investment with. In other words, I won't buy an OS if I can't run my old DOS games on it. As the WINE folks have discovered, being backwards compatible with code from a company that deliberately obfuscates it's code and uses hidden APIs for it's own applications is not easy -- in fact, I don't think any of Microsoft's releases have ever acheived perfect backwards compatibility with their previous releases!

It's all relative

[SiriusBlack]

If your own alternatives are to pay a 1 billion dollar fine or to pay a 10 billion dollar fine, you'd probably be pretty happy to pay a 1 billion dollar fine. Put another way, every time Ballmer says something stupid the market capitalization of MSFT drops more than 1 billion dollars in a single day, but nobody fired him yet!

That's very generous of them.

[dave-fu]

Why try them unless they want to be tried?
Not saying countries should turn a blind eye to the machinations of other countries' courts, only that, you know. They not be lazy fucking slobs and piggyback on other peoples' rulings.
That and yes. It does make things a bit hazy. American companies like to move their factories down to Mexico because of looser labor and environmental laws; what they're doing there is illegal here. Can we sue them for that or do we have to let the other countries apply their own rulings? And once they're found guilty there, likewise here?
These are questions for courts, not committees, to answer.

Re: Information

[Anonymous Coward]

It is not EEC actualy. EEC (European Economic Comunity) ceased to exist in 1992 (or around) with the Maastrich treaty. It is EU (European Union) since.

Re:Once they threaten that, they're dead (in europ

[Anonymous Coward]

I could imagine Microsoft threatening pulling out it's software, thinking it might scare Europe and have them come back at their knees.

The shareholders won't let this, as probably European market is not much less big then US market. In addition, to losing many revenues and going on debt, this is a invitation for the EU to create a EU OS company as big as Microsoft.

No, that's not true

[Moritz Moeller - Her]

Members of the European Paliament are elected in free elections all across Europe. The Parliament is quite weak though. Much more power lies in the commission, which consists of representatioves of the nations (2 for the big ones, one for the small nations), and who from the "European Government" if you wish. [Though our antieuropean British friends would become hysterical if you told them there was a European government).

Corporate Veil

[Anonymous Coward]

How Interesting that you would get upset with M$'s treatment by EU. Here in the States, the judicial system could ( and probably would have ) stated that M$ pierced there corporate veil and as such would have made Balmer and Gates Criminally liable. That is, they almost certainly would have gone to prison and been fined.

Microsoft is people too.

[Anonymous Coward]

So you would force microsoft to fund its competitors?
Thats the thing about Microsoft products. Its THEIR products. You ever here of a concept called Property rights. The same law that allows you to own a house, and the computer you are using to post (if inteed you are on your own computer) protects microsofts right to encode their proprietry file formats anyway they please.
You know, America was built on: "life, liberty, and the pursuit of hapiness". You seek to take away Microsoft's liberty? Microsoft is people too.