Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the does-this-thing-ever-end dept.
T-Kir writes "The BBC has an interesting article saying that now Microsoft has had the settlement granted in the US, it still faces EU sanctions concerning software bundling (or should that be bungling?) into its OS and deliberate attempts at inoperability with non-MS server operating systems."
Maybe the people in EU actualy have....
by
2000+Britneys
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Some common sense. I mean cmon if quacks like a duck, looks like a duck it must be a duck.
As for myself I would love to see some of the major computer makers (Dell, Gateway, Compaq, IBM) start pushing Linux and other OSes with their hardware.
Three problems
by
MosesJones
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
1) US courts regularly deny the authority of courts abroad
2) US courts regularly assume their rules apply abroad.
3) When the EU has ruled against US product before (growth hormone is not allowed in beef sold in the EU) the US claims it is a restraint of trade and raises it to the EU.
So what will probably happen is MS will rightly be found guilty, they will ignore the remedy, and when it is enforced they will bleat to the president who will "defend US interests", he will ignore the rights of foreign courts and claim this is purely anti-competative and anti-US rather than being a different resolution applied to EXACTLY the same finding of guilt found in the US.
Personally I hope the EU stands up and gives them a bloody nose, and makes its move over to Open Source even quicker.
-- An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
Re:Three problems
by
albanac
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
All of your points are accurate. WRT the first two, however, there is no way the US could (under legal arenas) challenge an EU court ruling, and I don't think they'd be stupid enough to try. The one piece of information you didn't catch is that some four months ago, when the EU declared it's intention to pursue MS independently of the US DOJ, the State Deparmemnt immediately issued sabre-rattlings to the effect that if the EU attempted to do anything different or more realistic than the DOJ had done, the US would embark on an immediate and GDP-wide trade-war against the entire EU, covering everything from steel to immigration visas, until the EU backed off. The EUs response was to ignore them.
if what you say is true (and we of the sheep have no reason to doubt), then the EU ranks right up there with the rest of those wrongdoing terrorist organizations and we should exercise our god given right to pre-emptively smite then into oblivion! fetche le hellfire!
Re:Three problems
by
sql*kitten
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
1) US courts regularly deny the authority of courts abroad
2) US courts regularly assume their rules apply abroad.
So what will probably happen is MS will rightly be found guilty, they will ignore the remedy
More likely is that MS will ignore the EU court, as most EU members do, and nothing will happen until national governments (most likely the Germans or Spanish, who seem to be the most unfriendly to MS) take an interest.
Re:Three problems
by
ninthwave
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
That might have to do with the fact that steel tarifs were pushed through with no regard to Europe or Asia. And the EU has decided that if the US will use tarifs against the global rules it pushes than they have to be flexible when it comes to their own local interests also. The US economy is currently bolster by 2/3s income coming from internal consumer spending and debt. Consumer confidence is starting to slip. Foreign markets are important and not pissing off large markets will need to be taken into account. With China developing its own os and chipsets, India moving to open source. The foreign market is shrinking for Microsoft. So it might want to play ball with documentation of its api's. Or it can squeeze more money out of its current customers with subscriber based liscenses (wait I believe that is happening). I don't like governments interferring with trade but this includes governments enforcing global trade laws that limit countries from starting their own products. All and all it is silly but at the end a government needs to take care of its industries and peoples and if it needs to limit an external company than it has a right to do such. Be it the EU telling off microsoft or GWBush and steel tarifs.
-- I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
Re:Three problems
by
pubjames
·
· Score: 5, Informative
1) US courts regularly deny the authority of courts abroad
2) US courts regularly assume their rules apply abroad.
This stuff doesn't really matter but the EU is dealing with trade within the EU zone. So it doesn't really matter that much what the US thinks. And don't assume that the US can just do whatever it wants and get away with it. There's something called the WTO, which has ruled heavily against the US and in favour of the EU recently with regards to steel tarrifs. It's true that the US is a big bully, but the EU is growing and seems increasingly confident fighting back.
Tough Cookie
by
mmport80
·
· Score: 5, Informative
For those who don't know much about the EU's competition commisioner - he is a tough cookie and isn't afraid to take on large companies.
Look at what he did to Nintendo recently and also the $45bn GE and Honeywell merger - which he basically stopped - even thought the US would have allowed it. The last case shows what the competition commision thinks about "consistency".
Re:Does the EU have power?
by
BabyDave
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Could someone explain what the EU has power to do?
Seems to me like they couldn't do much...
What the EU can do...
by
MosesJones
·
· Score: 5, Informative
1) Fine MS, this could be a small amount (say similar to the $150m it fined Nintendo) or a large amount (its MS what should the limit be).
2) Reorganise the way MS products are classified which could change the way they are taxed.
3) Ban certain products from being sold in the EU.
4) Declare certain individuals to be culpable for the violations and have them subject to arrest if they enter the EU.
Quite a few other things, saying they can't do much is like when President Bush demanded the Chinese do nothing to that spy plane.... so they sent it back in crates.
-- An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
Re:What the EU can do...
by
Mr_Dyqik
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The limit of the fines that the EU can levy is 10% of either profits or revenue (can't remember which) which would be a nice addition to the EU budget.
I assume they can also impose conditions that Microsoft have to meet to avoid the above.
They might also be able to recommend that EU governments stop using Microsoft products.
Re:Does the EU have power?
by
meringuoid
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Could someone explain what the EU has power to do? Seems to me like they couldn't do much...
They can't split Microsoft, because they're a foreign corporation. They can, however, impose conditions on Microsoft which they will have to obey if they want to continue doing business in the EU.
It's unlikely to come to a trade war; EU business is too addicted to MS software to allow Brussels to impose punitive tariffs, for instance. Chances are MS will be fined a comparatively small amount and told not to do it again...
-- Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Re:Does the EU have power?
by
Shimbo
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Could someone explain what the EU has power to do? Seems to me like they couldn't do much...
Different point of view
by
InrdZQdxdqn
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
"Our case is quite different from a factual point of view," (Quoted from the article)
Yes, it is.
For Europe the question is more like:
Do we want an american company to control nearly all desktops in Europe (in the world) ?
The answer in the US might be "yes, that's fine". But I hope we'll do better in Europe.
Remember Echelon?
This will hopefully put M$ in the right place
by
suman28
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
We have seen the EU take on Honeywell before and the deal was struck down. Hopefully, M$ will be found guilty and be forced to reduce their market share at least in Europe. This with the addition of some govts promoting Linux as a cheaper alternative will eventually cut M$ down to size. Then ofcourse, there is the M$ driving their "customers" away with promoting valid licenses. With Longhorn, I can see less and less people buying/installing Windows to avoid the hassle. M$ won't go down over night, but every dog has its day, though I would hate to call M$ a dog, because atleast my dog is my very best friend.
I remember when Oem's were selling beOS in a dual boot configuration with Microsoft. Microsoft began using its market control to force the Oem's to drop Beos. BeOS is a dead OS now but it was very good at what it did and had potential. But in the market environment it had no chance. This isn't just Linux getting better than Windows, it is about the software that was better than Windows getting a chance. If Microsoft didn't force BeOS out of the ipaq they would have had capital to keep developing. If they would have had device manufacturers working with them instead of scared of losing the works with window logo on their packaging it would have had more hardware support. And this is just one example of the problem with a monopoly affecting innovation. There are more out there. So by all means for me it is not about Linux or Microsoft, it is about a market that allows the best product to surface.
-- I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
Re:Does the EU have power?
by
MoobY
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
> Could someone explain what the EU has power to do?
Note that Europe is growing bigger than the US every minute, not only in population, which will soon be over 500 million (200million more than the US, IIRC), but also economically. Europe isn't some small kid the US can wack down! It's insane to think that Europe doesn't have any power and pretty US-narrow-minded.
-- ---
Sigmentation Fault - Comments Dumped
Re:Does the EU have power?
by
albanac
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Firstly, they can (and have in the past) impose fairly epic fine levels on companies they feel to be Not Nice People. The recent Nintendo judgement was relatively leniant.
Secondly, they can ban sales of bundled os + integrated apps within the EU by MS. And they can do it without having any impact on people like SuSE; that is in fact one of the courses already discussed by the commissioner in question.
Thirdly, they can adjudge MS' EULA's illegal under EU human rights laws. This is another remedy which has been discussed.
Basically, they can make life very hard for MS in the market from which MS derives it's larges revenues (they sell more software here than there).
~cHris
Maybe by 2010...
by
Kjella
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
The EU beaurocracy is not exactly known for being speed, and I'm sure MS will manage to get loopholes in any ruling big enough to ram a small country through, at least on the first try.
If anything, MS will try to break compatibility somehow using their "Trusted Computing" newspeak, before the Linux marked share gets too big to handle. While Linux might not be the big home desktop hit, it is making inroads in the corporate and educational community.
Problem is, that these lawsuits are kinda like submarine patent suits.
1. They take way too long before they are filed (by desire by the submariners, by beaurocracy by EU/US) 2. By the time they actually do everybody is using it (gif patent or IE) 3. Any ruling won't do anything about that, and when they try to resolve it the technology has evolved beyond that point to new problems (.gif patent by.png, but lots of other submarines. IE now removable, but WMP/Messenger/whatever is not)
Don't expect laws to help Linux. If anything, pray that the pirates won't find any ways to pirate secure Windows/Office/whatever. Then we'll see how many who will truly cough up $$$ for those products.
Kjella
-- Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:Maybe by 2010...
by
pubjames
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The EU beaurocracy is not exactly known for being speed
2001 Simultaneously introduce new currency across 11 countries
2004 Expand union to include another 10 countries
Yep, they sure look like slow movers to me.
It's not about you...
by
danro
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Keep in mind that there are over 60 thousand employees at Microsoft. All of us have families and mortgages to pay just like you
And what those 60 000 people do, or more to the point, what their executives do effects millions of people all over the world in a negative way.
No wonder people are "anti-microsoft". I have no beef with MS emplyees, but the pracices of MS the company is a daily annoyance to me and gets _me_ home later to _my_ family.
Even if you work at MS you must be blind not to see why a lot of computer professionals have no trouble finding reasons to dislike MS products.
...and of course there is the howling mass of teenage slashroids. They annoy me too sometimes.
--
"First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
They can't stop MS..
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
..besides, business is not where to try to hit them.
You see, the world's offices run on Office. Deny them that, and they get cranky. They start making campaign contributions, and suddenly, laws everywhere become the plaything of Microsoft.
Even if it'd cost more to buy some politicians than to switch to Open Office or something else, businesses won't stand for it. Why? Because - business despises the idea of governments telling them what they can and can't do. Businesses like *telling* governments what they can and can't do.
What would be great is if the EU frees European OEMs from the threats of Microsoft. Now, that would cause slight pain.
You see, consumers dislike the idea of paying for things they believe they do not need. How many of you here know people who still run Win 98? I can't count the people I know who are still running it. Each one of those is money that's not being sent to One Microsoft Way.
Will people, given the choice, stop buying upgrades with each computer? Yes, they will. Installing an operating system is *NOT* rocket science, and almost everyone has a kid down the street who will do it for $10.
$10, versus the Microsoft Tax. Sounds like a sweet deal, eh?
EU is different from US courts
by
Alain+Williams
·
· Score: 5, Informative
M$ is not an corporation from an EU country, there is no direct economic advantage to the EU of supporting M$'s illegal activities.
The powerful EU officials are not directly elected by the populace; so they are not quite so easy to buy.
A change of administration in one EU country is not so far reaching as the change in a single country (ie the US).
Individual countries have also expressed strong interest in Open Source.
What they should do...
by
danro
·
· Score: 3, Informative
...is promote OSS in the EU administration and in the member states administration.
It would have the tripple advantage of:
Lower costs. (In the emedium to long run, say 2 years to break even.)
Inject some much needed energy in the IT sector.
Not take the risk of having important EU/state data held "hostage" in proprietary formats. And thus decrease the EU's dependance on a single private and unaccountable foreign entity. (Yes Bill, I am looking at you!)
...oh, yeah, and as a side effect Microsoft would loose significant marketshare in a pretty large market. But I don't think punishment should be the top priority, I would rather see them aim for less vulnerability to future abuses of the MS monopoly.
--
"First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
Most likely EU response
by
ites
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Will be a punative fine set high enough to hurt Microsoft.
The US response will be very significant. If the US government complains and retaliates, its intentions WRT Microsoft will be clear.
If OTOH the US government keeps quiet, as it did with the Honeywell case, MS is in for a beating in Europe.
It cannot afford to stop trading in Europe. It cannot escape a fine, since it has a financial presence in Europe.
The EU may choose to combine this with other moves, such as a well-timed announcement that Windows will be phased out in favor of Linux, Sun, and IBM products in the EU itself.
Microsoft only really has one card to play, and that is bribery and corruption.
-- Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
Re:Most likely EU response
by
Corporate+Troll
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
notifies all their customers in the United States, Asia, and South America that in order to pay the "unjust fine levied by European bureaucrats", they will have to raise the price of Office 15%.
Result:
a) South America switches completely to Open Source as they have already threathened so often. No more sales in South America.
b) Asia could do the same, or heck, with China developping their own OS at least China -a big market after all- could switch to something else entirely. The rest of Asia might just say? "Copyright"? We dunno what that means... and pirate happily. Result: much less sales in Asia.
c) North America: whines and bitches, and with the current economical slup they are in many companies that freeze the IT budget entirely and will continue to work with currently existing installations. Heck, many still are using Office 97 on NT4 which is perfectly viable. Net result: much less sales in North America.
Now who do you think Microsoft will hurt when they would pull a stunt like that?
Re:Most likely EU response
by
sphealey
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Result:
a) South America switches completely to Open Source as they have already threathened so often. No more sales in South America.
Believe me, I wish I could agree with you. But as October_30th describes below, it doesn't seem to be happening that way. A fair number of people are somewhat upset about Microsoft's licensing policies and costs. Hundreds of millions are physically, legally, and/or psychologically locked into Microsoft products, particuarly Office. Think about law offices in North America - they are still locked into WordPerfect, 10 years after that product lost the fight. Now multiply that by several 100,000,000s.
And realistically, does the typical purchaser care if he pays $213 or $232 for that bundled copy of Office on his shiny new Dude PC? Does he even know?
I am afraid that while there may be some smoke around the idea of replacing Microsoft on the desktop, it isn't happening yet.
sPh
Airbus, Eurofighter, A400M
by
sphealey
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
If one looks at the entire history of Airbus, or the more recent histories of the Eurofigher and the A400M projects, it isn't much of a stretch to conclude that those who direct the EU do not want their agglomeration to be dependent on the United States in any way for critical technology. And that that they are willing to pay (or have their taxpayers pay) a substantial price to avoid that dependence.
The A400M is particularly instructive: the required capabilities are available today, off-the-shelf, at lower cost, in the form of the C-17 and C-130J. But the EU continues to push the A400 project despite it being 10 years late and at least 8 years from availability. And I suspect they will get their plane, in the end.
So, does the EU plan the same process with Microsoft? Remember that those who direct the EU behind the scenes don't have the same concerns about "cost" as managers of private companies, because they impose "directives" that governments and private companies must obey. Are the recent announcements by SuSE a testing of the waters for the imposition of a Linux desktop on EU organizations?
sPh
Re:Basically, the EU is mean to american companies
by
ninthwave
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I lived in the US for the first 28 years of my life. For the last two years have lived in Europe and your comment about the EU decisions makers not being knowledgable in the computer technical issues as the american judges is just complete bullshite.
The GM food issue isn't just a government issue it is a populace issue. If the government accepts gm food here they will have voters voting them out. The people don't want GM food at this point in time, the governments generally want the GM food business but they don't have the popular support to do it. So the ban on GM food isn't a trade issue as it is a consumer issue. Consumers won't buy food.
The banan fiasco was that, but the US has some silly trade mark games not
Fool. And what about those who worked for BeOS? Or any of those who worked for any of the companies that MS has tried to crush into oblivion (Netscape, RealAudio, SGI, Corel, Lotus, need I go on?). I don't mind you earning a living at all, but don't try and make out that MS is all about feeding children and building families, cos it ain't, it's about a handful of people getting really wealthy at the expense of a lot of other people. They only pay you at all because the haven't (yet) found a way to get wealthy without paying you. If they had, you'd know about it very quickly. I am, unfortunately, one of the people for whom MS does everything but get me home to my family early.
Re:Basically, the EU is mean to american companies
by
JanneM
·
· Score: 3, Informative
That is actually not true. Internal issues are likely not very publicized in the US, but EU has come down hard on a number of proposed mergers within EU the last few years, precisely for the risk of creating market monopolies.
As for the food issue, another poster here is quite correct that the push to ban GM foods and meat raised with antibiotics comes from the people, not from the member governments or EU itself. Another sticking point is that according to most member states' laws, all foods (from within EU or from without) must be declared where it was grown or raised, and american producers have resisted, fearing (perhaps rightly) that consumers will choose not to by american produce.
-- Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
EU Court may not approve of Commision
by
LeftOfCentre
·
· Score: 3, Informative
If commisioner Monti and his staff decide on sanctions against Microsoft, Microsoft will surely appeal to the European Court of Justice. Such a case could drag on for years, and furthermore the court has a recent history of overturning decisions made by the European Commision.
Did any one of the mentioned company shell out a budget to support an alternate OS such as LINUX, BSD, BeOS or even MAC
In a word, yes. Netscape was available on just about everything, BeOS obviously spent a great deal of their time supporting non-MS Windows platforms, given that they were one themselves (WTF?). Corel not only had WordPerfect running on Linux (albeit with WINE), they even had a linux distro. SGI, apart from their IRIX platform has a technology called OpenGL that is available on just about anything. What was your point again?
here's the deal...
by
zogger
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
...here's the deal. Ok, swell, 60,000 employees. Ya'all produce products, great! No probs! except..... there are 280 MILLION people just in the united States. For better or worse, "the internet" is an integral part of our ECONOMY and NATIONAL SECURITY. Using fraud, deceit, extortion, theft, etc, microsoft has become a dominant player in desktop pc's and is roughly 1/4 to 1/3 the servers out there. the stuff is INSECURE and buggy and insists on closed propietary "solutions" that make other peoples efforts (people with families and mortgages and whatnot) NOT WORK, work badly or not at all. They expose EVERYONE to ridiculously easy to use security exploits because of their pervasivness that is extant. They-the company-has a verifiable track record of IGNORING security problems until it's been rubbed in their face for extended periods of time, for example, I'll refresh you to the BO debacle, where microsoft just slap refused to acknowledge that gaping holes in their system, denied it existed, in essence, lied through their teeth, hiding behind their weight and arrogance. They put all 280 million people in the US at risk over this, and who knows what eles is out there. this nations business NEEDS the net now, there ain't no going back. it's not a luxury it's a NECESSITY. They did this so they could make more profit. They have 40 billion in the bank, like I have written before, is there any rational explanation they couldn't have instead used 1/2 (pick a big fraction or number here) of this money to actually CODE BETTER? How many programmers and engineers could they have hired for 20 billion, and given them a directive to make SURE that their products worked as advertised and were secure? I don't have an exact number, but it looks like thousands more-but they voluntarily CHOSE to accumulate more profits INSTEAD of making their products secure and functional. This is called short sighted GREED. The security of the nation's internet infrastructure should not have become hostage to this GREED, and the needs and security of the other 279,940,000 people are MORE IMPORTANT than the 60,000 microsoft employees money.
Sorry, that's the way it is. The internet is for EVERYONE, not for just MICROSOFT. They don't OWN it much as they would like to and have actively sought to. Their efforts are severly mucking up the ability of non microsoft ANYTHING to do anything, and if palladium gets mandated directly into hardware... huh?
You drive to work? You want the road you are on to only be allowed to owners of belchfire cars, and all the gas stations to only have gas that works only in belchfire cars? Oh what's that, you don't want to run a belchfire because you notice that every belchfire needs it's own full time mechanic to keep it running and not blowing up, you can't lock the doors so every time you stop and park and go into a store you come out and your stuff is stolen, the car stops working every 2 years requiring a new engine, it then takes a "new" kind of gas, and their gas comes chunky style with crud and whatnot floating in it every single new version of gas?
Too bad, see, belchfire is "the standard" now, even if you want to buy another brand of car-which you still can- soon you'll need a "passport" to use the road, you'll need to filter your gas, and well, the drivetrain is still gonna be a palladiumBelchfire drivetrain and you'll be required to only drive on belchfire tollroads and only stop at belchfire stores. Oh ya, the want to know every place you go to, this info gets sent automatically back to belchfire headquarters. Every_place_you_go. Oh, you added a non belchfire fender to replace the one that got banged up? Too bad, your car won't start now. On and on. You want that kind of "choice"?
Sure, you still got a choice, go get your non belchfire car, good luck running it soon after the new tollroads for belchfire-only are in place and all you can get is belchfire gas. We aren't 100% of the way there yet, but we are over 90% of the way there.. No belchfire car running belchfire gas, soon you'll be hitchhiking to work, not driving, or I guess you can just buy a belchfire, right? I mean it's "fair" and you got that choice........the rest of us think that sucks, if you ain't getting it by now you just ain't never gonna get it.
I'm not an IT guy just a "car driver". I actually don't like belchfires, they have never worked all that well for me when I tried them out. yes I've owned and driven belchfires. Hmm, they actually don't work that well. In fact I've tried several belchfires, the "new and improved" are pretty much old belchfires with new body styles, the door locks don't work, I can't use anything but belchfire gas in them, and dang if every third tank of gas I put in it seemed to bust another part. That sorta suxs. I just find this sorta weird and annoying. So far I can struggle by with non belchfire, but I'm not looking forward to the new toll roads, and dang I'm getting tired of dodging all the broken down belchfires spread out on the road, and gee whizz, half the traffic is tow trucks towing in belchfires, all those broken belchfires are hurting the economy, which is hurting me in general, the real work delivery trucks can't hardly get through anymore, and I got to keep looking further and further for non belchfire gas.
Enough's enough, become part of the solution, stop being part of the problem. This belchfire leopard ain't changing it's spots, slap new paint on it, it's still a belchfire. They been asked nicey nice for years now, to PLEASE just change a few things abvout how they go about this business, they refused and even got nastier, they ain't changing except for MORE belchfire. Give it up, accept reality, belchfires useability is broken and is hindering everyone else. Your profits aren't worth the grief everyone is going through. It's just plain rank nasty wrong.
Re:Basically, the EU is mean to american companies
by
Jeppe+Salvesen
·
· Score: 3, Informative
GM food ban was to the best of my knowledge consumer-driven. Are you mad at the EU for being more democratic than the USA? There is a lot of discussion about this issue still going on, and there might be reversal later on. However, I would argue that GM foods need to be tested and monitored very carefully before they are used. They are potentially extremely beneficial, so it would be disaterous for the planet's future if they are widely adopted too soon (since that could both threaten the planet, or threaten the future of GM foods).
So - no - the EU is not essentially mean to US companies. However, it has high standards, sometimes higher than the US standards. When US companies face EU standards, they prefer to confront the standards as anticompetitive, rather than raise their own standards. That approach is much cheaper.
--
Stop the brainwash
You troll, I byte
by
CaptainZapp
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Basically, the EU is mean to american companies
No, the EU (or better, their competition commision) is mean to anybody who violates the law. Ask Volkswagen, Tetra Pack or Roche, which are all European companies (they are nummerous more).
Recall that the heavily subsidized Airbus was started by these people basically because they didn't like having to buy american planes.
Ah, here we go again. The Airbus consortium is a private company which received funding capital as a credit. Airbus is in no way subsidized nowadays as opposed to (e.g.) Boieng which relies heavily on defense contracts, which can be construed a subsidy in itself.
The reason why Airbus is vastly successful is that they sell better planes which are cheaper to maintain. At least that's the take of a lot of airlines, including major ones in the US.
and how europe has basically banned american GM food?
The issue is (same as with growth hormones, which are banned here) that European consumers just don't want to buy this crap. Don't you think it's a little bit odd that Novartis is heavily opposed towards GM crop in Europe and tell an entire different story in the US? In a nutshell: It's not an evil conspiracy towards the good people of the US (Novartis and Aventis are European companies after all) it's just that consumers - with the ultimate buying power - don't want this shit here; end of story.
I wouldn't count on microsoft getting off easy in europe.
If they violated the law, which is subject of an ongoing investigation, you can bank on it that they won't get off easy.
The EU decisions makers are also not as knowledgable in computer technical issues as even the virtually computer-illiterate american judges.
I'm sure you can provide us with data to back up this assessment; because otherwise: Go away, troll!
Like with cars, they could enforce that every computer program sold must comply with certain requirements. For instance, it would be really cool if every computer program sold in the EU must come with a manual that describes every file format it uses in detail so the data generated with that program can in principle be read and used by other programs with no big problems.
... I've really got to say something about this. I know it's meant to be funny, but it's not, at least to anyone who has the slightest grasp of military history.
Well, I must assume then that Commissioner Mario Monti couldn't be French then, or the EU would have surrendered by now.
The French didn't roll over in WW2. They were beaten, on the battlefield, by an army which was at the time far and away the best in the world. What the Germans did to France, they could easily have done to Russia, England, and even the US, if it hadn't been for space and cold, the English Channel, and the Atlantic Ocean, respectively. Anyone who thinks cowardice is a French national characteristic should go count the graves at Verdun.
At the very least, do a Google search on the phrase "ils ne passeront pas" before you post stuff like this.
-- The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
The parable of the selfish pricks
by
Anarchofascist
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Keep in mind that there are over 60 thousand employees at Microsoft. All of us have families and mortgages to pay just like you...
Reminds me of a story...
One upon a time there was a dangerous slippery cliff at the end of a road before a little village.
Every so often travellers along the road would slip, slip, slip over the cliff edge and fall to their deaths; and be collected by the village funeral director. Or they would slip, slip, slip over the edge and be badly injured; and the village doctors and nurses would tend to their wounds.
Eventually the mayor of the town announced a fence should be built at the top of the cliff, warning people of the danger.
"No!" cried the doctors and nurses. "We have families and mortgages to pay with the money we get for treating the injured!"
"No!" cried the funeral directors and morgue attendants. "We need the money from the funerals to support our families and mortgages too!"
The mayor was saddened by this reaction, but decided upon a compromise. The fence would not be built, but a sign would be erected saying "please support the local economy - jump off the cliff!"
The sign was erected, and is still there this very day.
-- Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more, Or close the wall up with our American dead!
Slashdot Mirror
Some common sense. I mean cmon if quacks like a duck, looks like a duck it must be a duck.
As for myself I would love to see some of the major computer makers (Dell, Gateway, Compaq, IBM) start pushing Linux and other OSes with their hardware.
1) US courts regularly deny the authority of courts abroad
2) US courts regularly assume their rules apply abroad.
3) When the EU has ruled against US product before (growth hormone is not allowed in beef sold in the EU) the US claims it is a restraint of trade and raises it to the EU.
So what will probably happen is MS will rightly be found guilty, they will ignore the remedy, and when it is enforced they will bleat to the president who will "defend US interests", he will ignore the rights of foreign courts and claim this is purely anti-competative and anti-US rather than being a different resolution applied to EXACTLY the same finding of guilt found in the US.
Personally I hope the EU stands up and gives them a bloody nose, and makes its move over to Open Source even quicker.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
For those who don't know much about the EU's competition commisioner - he is a tough cookie and isn't afraid to take on large companies.
Look at what he did to Nintendo recently and also the $45bn GE and Honeywell merger - which he basically stopped - even thought the US would have allowed it. The last case shows what the competition commision thinks about "consistency".
Tell that to Nintendo.
1) Fine MS, this could be a small amount (say similar to the $150m it fined Nintendo) or a large amount (its MS what should the limit be).
2) Reorganise the way MS products are classified which could change the way they are taxed.
3) Ban certain products from being sold in the EU.
4) Declare certain individuals to be culpable for the violations and have them subject to arrest if they enter the EU.
Quite a few other things, saying they can't do much is like when President Bush demanded the Chinese do nothing to that spy plane.... so they sent it back in crates.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
They can't split Microsoft, because they're a foreign corporation. They can, however, impose conditions on Microsoft which they will have to obey if they want to continue doing business in the EU.
It's unlikely to come to a trade war; EU business is too addicted to MS software to allow Brussels to impose punitive tariffs, for instance. Chances are MS will be fined a comparatively small amount and told not to do it again...
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Could someone explain what the EU has power to do?
Seems to me like they couldn't do much...
Microsoft could be in line for fines totalling up to $2.5bn (£1.75bn) levied by the European Commission.
Nuff said.
"Our case is quite different from a factual point of view," (Quoted from the article)
Yes, it is.
For Europe the question is more like:
Do we want an american company to control nearly all desktops in Europe (in the world) ?
The answer in the US might be "yes, that's fine". But I hope we'll do better in Europe.
Remember Echelon?
We have seen the EU take on Honeywell before and the deal was struck down. Hopefully, M$ will be found guilty and be forced to reduce their market share at least in Europe. This with the addition of some govts promoting Linux as a cheaper alternative will eventually cut M$ down to size. Then ofcourse, there is the M$ driving their "customers" away with promoting valid licenses. With Longhorn, I can see less and less people buying/installing Windows to avoid the hassle. M$ won't go down over night, but every dog has its day, though I would hate to call M$ a dog, because atleast my dog is my very best friend.
I remember when Oem's were selling beOS in a dual boot configuration with Microsoft. Microsoft began using its market control to force the Oem's to drop Beos. BeOS is a dead OS now but it was very good at what it did and had potential. But in the market environment it had no chance. This isn't just Linux getting better than Windows, it is about the software that was better than Windows getting a chance. If Microsoft didn't force BeOS out of the ipaq they would have had capital to keep developing. If they would have had device manufacturers working with them instead of scared of losing the works with window logo on their packaging it would have had more hardware support. And this is just one example of the problem with a monopoly affecting innovation. There are more out there. So by all means for me it is not about Linux or Microsoft, it is about a market that allows the best product to surface.
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
> Could someone explain what the EU has power to do?
Note that Europe is growing bigger than the US every minute, not only in population, which will soon be over 500 million (200million more than the US, IIRC), but also economically. Europe isn't some small kid the US can wack down! It's insane to think that Europe doesn't have any power and pretty US-narrow-minded.
--- Sigmentation Fault - Comments Dumped
Firstly, they can (and have in the past) impose fairly epic fine levels on companies they feel to be Not Nice People. The recent Nintendo judgement was relatively leniant.
Secondly, they can ban sales of bundled os + integrated apps within the EU by MS. And they can do it without having any impact on people like SuSE; that is in fact one of the courses already discussed by the commissioner in question.
Thirdly, they can adjudge MS' EULA's illegal under EU human rights laws. This is another remedy which has been discussed.
Basically, they can make life very hard for MS in the market from which MS derives it's larges revenues (they sell more software here than there).
~cHris
The EU beaurocracy is not exactly known for being speed, and I'm sure MS will manage to get loopholes in any ruling big enough to ram a small country through, at least on the first try.
.png, but lots of other submarines. IE now removable, but WMP/Messenger/whatever is not)
If anything, MS will try to break compatibility somehow using their "Trusted Computing" newspeak, before the Linux marked share gets too big to handle. While Linux might not be the big home desktop hit, it is making inroads in the corporate and educational community.
Problem is, that these lawsuits are kinda like submarine patent suits.
1. They take way too long before they are filed (by desire by the submariners, by beaurocracy by EU/US)
2. By the time they actually do everybody is using it (gif patent or IE)
3. Any ruling won't do anything about that, and when they try to resolve it the technology has evolved beyond that point to new problems (.gif patent by
Don't expect laws to help Linux. If anything, pray that the pirates won't find any ways to pirate secure Windows/Office/whatever. Then we'll see how many who will truly cough up $$$ for those products.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Keep in mind that there are over 60 thousand employees at Microsoft. All of us have families and mortgages to pay just like you
And what those 60 000 people do, or more to the point, what their executives do effects millions of people all over the world in a negative way. No wonder people are "anti-microsoft".
I have no beef with MS emplyees, but the pracices of MS the company is a daily annoyance to me and gets _me_ home later to _my_ family.
Even if you work at MS you must be blind not to see why a lot of computer professionals have no trouble finding reasons to dislike MS products.
...and of course there is the howling mass of teenage slashroids. They annoy me too sometimes.
"First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
..besides, business is not where to try to hit them.
You see, the world's offices run on Office. Deny them that, and they get cranky. They start making campaign contributions, and suddenly, laws everywhere become the plaything of Microsoft.
Even if it'd cost more to buy some politicians than to switch to Open Office or something else, businesses won't stand for it. Why? Because - business despises the idea of governments telling them what they can and can't do. Businesses like *telling* governments what they can and can't do.
What would be great is if the EU frees European OEMs from the threats of Microsoft. Now, that would cause slight pain.
You see, consumers dislike the idea of paying for things they believe they do not need. How many of you here know people who still run Win 98? I can't count the people I know who are still running it. Each one of those is money that's not being sent to One Microsoft Way.
Will people, given the choice, stop buying upgrades with each computer? Yes, they will. Installing an operating system is *NOT* rocket science, and almost everyone has a kid down the street who will do it for $10.
$10, versus the Microsoft Tax. Sounds like a sweet deal, eh?
M$ is not an corporation from an EU country, there is no direct economic advantage to the EU of supporting M$'s illegal activities.
The powerful EU officials are not directly elected by the populace; so they are not quite so easy to buy.
A change of administration in one EU country is not so far reaching as the change in a single country (ie the US).
The EU has deomstrated an interest in Open Source:
EU Studies Linux Migration
Individual countries have also expressed strong interest in Open Source.
It would have the tripple advantage of:
But I don't think punishment should be the top priority, I would rather see them aim for less vulnerability to future abuses of the MS monopoly.
"First lesson," Jon said. "Stick them with the pointy end."
Will be a punative fine set high enough to hurt Microsoft.
The US response will be very significant. If the US government complains and retaliates, its intentions WRT Microsoft will be clear.
If OTOH the US government keeps quiet, as it did with the Honeywell case, MS is in for a beating in Europe.
It cannot afford to stop trading in Europe. It cannot escape a fine, since it has a financial presence in Europe.
The EU may choose to combine this with other moves, such as a well-timed announcement that Windows will be phased out in favor of Linux, Sun, and IBM products in the EU itself.
Microsoft only really has one card to play, and that is bribery and corruption.
Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
The A400M is particularly instructive: the required capabilities are available today, off-the-shelf, at lower cost, in the form of the C-17 and C-130J. But the EU continues to push the A400 project despite it being 10 years late and at least 8 years from availability. And I suspect they will get their plane, in the end.
So, does the EU plan the same process with Microsoft? Remember that those who direct the EU behind the scenes don't have the same concerns about "cost" as managers of private companies, because they impose "directives" that governments and private companies must obey. Are the recent announcements by SuSE a testing of the waters for the imposition of a Linux desktop on EU organizations?
sPh
I lived in the US for the first 28 years of my life. For the last two years have lived in Europe and your comment about the EU decisions makers not being knowledgable in the computer technical issues as the american judges is just complete bullshite.
The GM food issue isn't just a government issue it is a populace issue. If the government accepts gm food here they will have voters voting them out. The people don't want GM food at this point in time, the governments generally want the GM food business but they don't have the popular support to do it. So the ban on GM food isn't a trade issue as it is a consumer issue. Consumers won't buy food.
The banan fiasco was that, but the US has some silly trade mark games not
Check out this
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
Fool. And what about those who worked for BeOS? Or any of those who worked for any of the companies that MS has tried to crush into oblivion (Netscape, RealAudio, SGI, Corel, Lotus, need I go on?). I don't mind you earning a living at all, but don't try and make out that MS is all about feeding children and building families, cos it ain't, it's about a handful of people getting really wealthy at the expense of a lot of other people. They only pay you at all because the haven't (yet) found a way to get wealthy without paying you. If they had, you'd know about it very quickly. I am, unfortunately, one of the people for whom MS does everything but get me home to my family early.
Try NetBSD... safe,straightforward,useful.
That is actually not true. Internal issues are likely not very publicized in the US, but EU has come down hard on a number of proposed mergers within EU the last few years, precisely for the risk of creating market monopolies.
As for the food issue, another poster here is quite correct that the push to ban GM foods and meat raised with antibiotics comes from the people, not from the member governments or EU itself. Another sticking point is that according to most member states' laws, all foods (from within EU or from without) must be declared where it was grown or raised, and american producers have resisted, fearing (perhaps rightly) that consumers will choose not to by american produce.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
If commisioner Monti and his staff decide on sanctions against Microsoft, Microsoft will surely appeal to the European Court of Justice. Such a case could drag on for years, and furthermore the court has a recent history of overturning decisions made by the European Commision.
Did any one of the mentioned company shell out a budget to support an alternate OS such as LINUX, BSD, BeOS or even MAC
In a word, yes. Netscape was available on just about everything, BeOS obviously spent a great deal of their time supporting non-MS Windows platforms, given that they were one themselves (WTF?). Corel not only had WordPerfect running on Linux (albeit with WINE), they even had a linux distro. SGI, apart from their IRIX platform has a technology called OpenGL that is available on just about anything. What was your point again?
Try NetBSD... safe,straightforward,useful.
...here's the deal. Ok, swell, 60,000 employees. Ya'all produce products, great! No probs! except..... there are 280 MILLION people just in the united States. For better or worse, "the internet" is an integral part of our ECONOMY and NATIONAL SECURITY. Using fraud, deceit, extortion, theft, etc, microsoft has become a dominant player in desktop pc's and is roughly 1/4 to 1/3 the servers out there. the stuff is INSECURE and buggy and insists on closed propietary "solutions" that make other peoples efforts (people with families and mortgages and whatnot) NOT WORK, work badly or not at all. They expose EVERYONE to ridiculously easy to use security exploits because of their pervasivness that is extant. They-the company-has a verifiable track record of IGNORING security problems until it's been rubbed in their face for extended periods of time, for example, I'll refresh you to the BO debacle, where microsoft just slap refused to acknowledge that gaping holes in their system, denied it existed, in essence, lied through their teeth, hiding behind their weight and arrogance. They put all 280 million people in the US at risk over this, and who knows what eles is out there. this nations business NEEDS the net now, there ain't no going back. it's not a luxury it's a NECESSITY. They did this so they could make more profit. They have 40 billion in the bank, like I have written before, is there any rational explanation they couldn't have instead used 1/2 (pick a big fraction or number here) of this money to actually CODE BETTER? How many programmers and engineers could they have hired for 20 billion, and given them a directive to make SURE that their products worked as advertised and were secure? I don't have an exact number, but it looks like thousands more-but they voluntarily CHOSE to accumulate more profits INSTEAD of making their products secure and functional. This is called short sighted GREED. The security of the nation's internet infrastructure should not have become hostage to this GREED, and the needs and security of the other 279,940,000 people are MORE IMPORTANT than the 60,000 microsoft employees money.
....the rest of us think that sucks, if you ain't getting it by now you just ain't never gonna get it.
Sorry, that's the way it is. The internet is for EVERYONE, not for just MICROSOFT. They don't OWN it much as they would like to and have actively sought to. Their efforts are severly mucking up the ability of non microsoft ANYTHING to do anything, and if palladium gets mandated directly into hardware... huh?
You drive to work? You want the road you are on to only be allowed to owners of belchfire cars, and all the gas stations to only have gas that works only in belchfire cars? Oh what's that, you don't want to run a belchfire because you notice that every belchfire needs it's own full time mechanic to keep it running and not blowing up, you can't lock the doors so every time you stop and park and go into a store you come out and your stuff is stolen, the car stops working every 2 years requiring a new engine, it then takes a "new" kind of gas, and their gas comes chunky style with crud and whatnot floating in it every single new version of gas?
Too bad, see, belchfire is "the standard" now, even if you want to buy another brand of car-which you still can- soon you'll need a "passport" to use the road, you'll need to filter your gas, and well, the drivetrain is still gonna be a palladiumBelchfire drivetrain and you'll be required to only drive on belchfire tollroads and only stop at belchfire stores. Oh ya, the want to know every place you go to, this info gets sent automatically back to belchfire headquarters. Every_place_you_go. Oh, you added a non belchfire fender to replace the one that got banged up? Too bad, your car won't start now. On and on. You want that kind of "choice"?
Sure, you still got a choice, go get your non belchfire car, good luck running it soon after the new tollroads for belchfire-only are in place and all you can get is belchfire gas. We aren't 100% of the way there yet, but we are over 90% of the way there.. No belchfire car running belchfire gas, soon you'll be hitchhiking to work, not driving, or I guess you can just buy a belchfire, right? I mean it's "fair" and you got that choice....
I'm not an IT guy just a "car driver". I actually don't like belchfires, they have never worked all that well for me when I tried them out. yes I've owned and driven belchfires. Hmm, they actually don't work that well. In fact I've tried several belchfires, the "new and improved" are pretty much old belchfires with new body styles, the door locks don't work, I can't use anything but belchfire gas in them, and dang if every third tank of gas I put in it seemed to bust another part. That sorta suxs. I just find this sorta weird and annoying. So far I can struggle by with non belchfire, but I'm not looking forward to the new toll roads, and dang I'm getting tired of dodging all the broken down belchfires spread out on the road, and gee whizz, half the traffic is tow trucks towing in belchfires, all those broken belchfires are hurting the economy, which is hurting me in general, the real work delivery trucks can't hardly get through anymore, and I got to keep looking further and further for non belchfire gas.
Enough's enough, become part of the solution, stop being part of the problem. This belchfire leopard ain't changing it's spots, slap new paint on it, it's still a belchfire. They been asked nicey nice for years now, to PLEASE just change a few things abvout how they go about this business, they refused and even got nastier, they ain't changing except for MORE belchfire. Give it up, accept reality, belchfires useability is broken and is hindering everyone else. Your profits aren't worth the grief everyone is going through. It's just plain rank nasty wrong.
GM food ban was to the best of my knowledge consumer-driven. Are you mad at the EU for being more democratic than the USA? There is a lot of discussion about this issue still going on, and there might be reversal later on. However, I would argue that GM foods need to be tested and monitored very carefully before they are used. They are potentially extremely beneficial, so it would be disaterous for the planet's future if they are widely adopted too soon (since that could both threaten the planet, or threaten the future of GM foods).
So - no - the EU is not essentially mean to US companies. However, it has high standards, sometimes higher than the US standards. When US companies face EU standards, they prefer to confront the standards as anticompetitive, rather than raise their own standards. That approach is much cheaper.
Stop the brainwash
No, the EU (or better, their competition commision) is mean to anybody who violates the law. Ask Volkswagen, Tetra Pack or Roche, which are all European companies (they are nummerous more).
Ah, here we go again. The Airbus consortium is a private company which received funding capital as a credit. Airbus is in no way subsidized nowadays as opposed to (e.g.) Boieng which relies heavily on defense contracts, which can be construed a subsidy in itself.
The reason why Airbus is vastly successful is that they sell better planes which are cheaper to maintain. At least that's the take of a lot of airlines, including major ones in the US.
The issue is (same as with growth hormones, which are banned here) that European consumers just don't want to buy this crap. Don't you think it's a little bit odd that Novartis is heavily opposed towards GM crop in Europe and tell an entire different story in the US? In a nutshell: It's not an evil conspiracy towards the good people of the US (Novartis and Aventis are European companies after all) it's just that consumers - with the ultimate buying power - don't want this shit here; end of story.
If they violated the law, which is subject of an ongoing investigation, you can bank on it that they won't get off easy.
I'm sure you can provide us with data to back up this assessment; because otherwise: Go away, troll!
ich bin der musikant
mit taschenrechner in der hand
kraftwerk
Like with cars, they could enforce that every computer program sold must comply with certain requirements. For instance, it would be really cool if every computer program sold in the EU must come with a manual that describes every file format it uses in detail so the data generated with that program can in principle be read and used by other programs with no big problems.
-- Cheers!
At the very least, do a Google search on the phrase "ils ne passeront pas" before you post stuff like this.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
Keep in mind that there are over 60 thousand employees at Microsoft. All of us have families and mortgages to pay just like you...
Reminds me of a story...
One upon a time there was a dangerous slippery cliff at the end of a road before a little village.
Every so often travellers along the road would slip, slip, slip over the cliff edge and fall to their deaths; and be collected by the village funeral director. Or they would slip, slip, slip over the edge and be badly injured; and the village doctors and nurses would tend to their wounds.
Eventually the mayor of the town announced a fence should be built at the top of the cliff, warning people of the danger.
"No!" cried the doctors and nurses. "We have families and mortgages to pay with the money we get for treating the injured!"
"No!" cried the funeral directors and morgue attendants. "We need the money from the funerals to support our families and mortgages too!"
The mayor was saddened by this reaction, but decided upon a compromise. The fence would not be built, but a sign would be erected saying "please support the local economy - jump off the cliff!"
The sign was erected, and is still there this very day.
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more, Or close the wall up with our American dead!