Slashdot Mirror
EU Considering Another MS Antitrust Suit
mesozoic writes "Yahoo! News is reporting that the European Union is considering *another* antitrust suit against Microsoft, this time having to do with anticompetitive behavior in the market for mobile phone software. While I haven't seen any signs Microsoft is going to dominate the industry here in the States, cell phones are a much bigger deal in Europe, so I can understand why they'd be nervous."
fighting M$ at every little turn. What ever happened to boycotting. Wouldn't the lawsuit fees be better spent switching from M$ products?
Money not found! A)bort, R)etry, D)eclare Bankruptcy
The reason for the lawsuit is clearly seen in the article:
.Net initiative attempts to link Internet users to the Microsoft system by giving them a "passport" that authenticates their identity and gives them access to Microsoft Web sites for e-mail and online games, and e-commerce sites that conform to the .Net idea.
.NET servers, further binding them to MS software, etc.
;)
The
This phone uses passport to authenticate users on phone-based services. This allows business users, etc to easily tie their mobile phones to their central
My question is, where's the Linux based Open Source phones?
I work in as a cell phone cie customer service rep, and beleive me when I say that a MS OS cant be worse than the Nokia, Motorolla or Vtech one. I did have to explain to customer that they needed to to see a store tech to flash to a newer software version (ie : Why can't Nokia get a grip about pressing and holding 0+8 for emergency call EVEN WHEN THE KEYPAD IS LOCKED? Ask your local emergency service... Up to 10% of all the call are Nokia pocket calls... And they change that behavior at every friggin update!)
In Europe there are smartphones based on MS PocketPC. Some cellphones (e.g. Sony CMD-J7) also use MS Mobile Explorer for Web Browsing (which is kind of cool, because it attempts to display HTML, not only WML).
Besides, if you read the article, you will see that it talks about "suspicions" about Microsoft's plans, not its current market share in mobile phones. The EU fears that mobile phones will become like IBM-compatible PCs - commodity hardware all running the same software. Which, given Microsoft's resources and competitive strategies, seems like a very likely scenario.
It doesn't matter that Stinger has 0 percent market penetration right now. With the promise of the best interoperability with other devices, Microsoft's reign in the next 5 years is practically certain. Sure, MS' first attempt will fail as usual. But their war chest is filled and they'll keep at it until Symbian is just a distant memory (hello OS/2, Wordperfect, Palm, Nintendo)
Microsoft's licensing agreement for its phone OS is like an echo from a past 5 years before the US found MS guilty of abusing its monopoly. Manufacturers and operators are allowed exactly zero options in changing the look and feel of the phones they sell. No logoes, no additional programs, it's their OEM desktop OS with mandatory Internet Explorer and MSN icon routine all over again.
Apropos Internet Explorer, the dingy browser that MS ships on their phones has nothing but the name in common. It doesn't even support frames. Why anyone would want precious phone memory wasted on that is beyond me.
They started backing off about a year before Bush took office (ie Clinton, mr tell the SEC to do nothing about the rampent rip off going on in the market). They just were not paying the political tax (ie bushals of money into the coffers of political campaigns). They went from a few thousand dollars a year to one of the TOP contributers in little under a year. If there is something senators, congressmen, and presidents listen to is the contributers....
Microsoft can and does make mistakes. But busnesswise they rarely make the same one twice. Their software on the other hand they make MANY mistakes. But we keep buying it. So why should they BOTHER to fix the stuff?
Apparently MS didnt pay enough political slush fund money to bribe, YES BRIBE, the EU into not going after them. You will see them go from a ho-hum contributer in the EU to a TOP one. They will bribe their way out of it. You will see another inefecive lawsuit and a LARGE waste of EU's taxpayers money. All the while the EU people will pat themselves on the back for going after MS when the US didnt do such a good job. Sounds like an expensive pat on the back to me...
The people they should be going after are the movie companies for price fixing, or regions for DVD's. But the movie companies been paying the bribe for years...
Throwing stones is easy. Putting a pain of glass back together is NOT.
This is almost like when someone gets arrested for a large crime. They charge him with just about everything they can think of and hope something sticks. They know he is guilty, but they do not know just HOW guilty he is.
Here, Microsoft has been hit with just about every sort of suit imaginable, because everyone knows they have been pushing the limits of their monoplolistic powers. We are just hoping one of these suits will finally give them what they deserve.
Why? Because the alternative is carrying a PDA and a phone together. And I've tried that, and it doesn't work. And there are advantages of having the two in one unit anyway, such as being able to have your contacts list in one place (rather than lists of phone numbers on the phone, and lists of names and addresses and other details on the PDA.), and, of course, you can browse the web, write and receive email, and other such nicities.
The only proviso is that if you're planning on having a smartphone, MAKE SURE IT'S A GSM NETWORK YOU'RE GOING TO BE USING. CDMA and "D-AMPS" (the older digital US standard still used by most of AT&T and Cingular though both are upgrading) type networks tie your phone service to one phone. There are occasions in which a smartphone is too bulky (and too valuable) to be something you'll want to drag around with you. With GSM, you have the option of just taking out the SIM and putting it in a smaller phone. With CDMA and D-AMPS, you have the choice of putting up with the risks/discomfort of taking it with you, or losing phone service completely.
I love my Nokia 9290. The whole is definitely greater than the sum (PDA + phone).
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I currently use Verizon Wireless for my cell phone. When I signed up for the Verizon Wireless service - Verizon ran its own messaging infrastructure. Verizon has since discontinued their own messaging infrastructure and are now forcing existing customers to sign up with Microsoft and get accounts on either Hotmail or MSN in order to have email addresses for instant messaging (e.g., stock prices, sports scores, etc.).
Needless to say I am annoyed with this. The registration process does not work with Mozilla 1.2b (must I use IE? where will it end?) - and the instant messaging services via email addresses does not work unless I sign up with Microsoft - and provide them with all necessary registration data: name, date-of-birth, gender, zip code, occupation, etc.
I need a Microsoft passport id for installing Windows XP. I have an MSDN subscription through work - and I need a passport id in order to use that effectively. I need a passport id to have access to Hotmail (which I don't want) and the instant messaging functionality on my phone. And probably more such 3rd party services coming in the future. All of this stuff can be traced and linked to a single on-line identity.
This is too much information to be providing Microsoft (and the "partners" they share it with). I was "slammed" here on my cell phone service. I would have picked a different wireless provider if I knew I would need a passport ID in order to use the Verizon Wireless services. I don't like Microsoft's Big Brother-like passport concepts - and don't want to put my credentials in a single Mircosoft-owned basket.
I suspect that this is what is happening with other cell phone users with different companies - both here and outside the US. It is all part of Microsoft's grand plot to track us all - not just on the web, but through our cell phones, and who knows what's next? On-line banking?
I can see why people are annoyed. All power to the EU here.
IE started with zero penetration.
For the most part violations of antitrust law have little to do with how successful your illegal acts are. Or even if they were necessary.
There exceptions such as charges of attempted monopolization where somewhat in excess of 50% of the market is the benchmark for that charge. And, that is why Microsoft has not yet been convicted of attempted monopolization of the browser market. It is not because they have not tried that. And, it is not because they have not done it. It is only because the appellate court could only review the facts as of the time of the trial. And, at that time 50% or so was the magic number.
But, the issue here for the EU is the use of the OS monopoly to force the use of other technology in a number of other markets. The EU is about to announce their decision in regard to the media player and server tie-ins. This article just points out that they have a heads on possible illegal acts in regard to the cell phone services as well. But, do not worry if Microsoft does not in fact try to make an illegal tie with the cell phone services, nothing the EU does will affect them.
The EU is certainly not going to penalize MS because of what they might do. But, making sure Microsoft does not violate the laws again in the same manner as they clearly have to date is just good planning.
If you are one of those who claim the browser wars are over so get over it, then you must agree to prohibit Microsoft from even thinking about repeating that kind of illegal act. The browser wars are not over. It is not even a war. Fair and open competition is still precluded by illegal acts. But, any market can recover once illegal acts cease.
Do not worry. If each consumer has to pay $35 for IE or leave it at the store, a very high percentage will leave it or buy another brand. But, as long as the DOJ also favors forcing the sale of IE upon everyone, there will be no competition. The monopoly in browsers will be maintained indefinately. Or, at least until the monopoly OS goes away.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Just remember that IE started with a zero percent share.
It was the illegal use of the OS monopoly that gave MS the monopoly in browsers.
And, it is the illegal bundling of IE with the OS that will maintain it as long as the OS is dominant.
You will buy IE again and again no matter what you think, want or need.
You may not like AOL, but the AOL law suit is about the only hope that fair and open markets will exist on the Microsoft platforms until such as they are eliminated.
The stupid DOJ wants a monopoly in browsers for Microsoft. The DOJ wants a monopoly in media players for Microsoft too.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Many people accuse me of "bashing" Microsoft because I spout dire disdain against the company. Do these people forget what Microsoft has done? Do any of these people realize how much needless costs Microsoft imposes upon companies? DOes any of these people understand how far they have set us back? Has any of these people ever had to sit across a table from a squad of Microsoft sales people and listen to them out right lie to your management, selling them "solutions" that you know will force your company to can two or three good people a year from now just to afford it?
Microsoft will go down in history as one of the great evils of our capitalistic age. Microsoft taxes the world more then the old "Trust" could have ever hoped to. Microsoft is unabashed about whose pockets they will drain againt their will, or what tactics they will stoop to in order to gain a share of a market. Just as car salesman pitches a deal that is "too good to be true" to a blue collar worker, Microsoft conceals itself in the garb of a sheep and hunts the third world with the ploy of "gifts".
We need to knuckle up. If they win everything will continue to change for the worse. Before long it will be too late to fight, and we will all be asking ourselves "why the hell didn't we fight them when we had the chance?"
This case has NOTHING to do with antitrust... it has to do with the EU protecting their home turf (for good reason). European wireless telecommunications are FAR beyond North American levels. Do you think the EU wants a U.S. corporation famous for the 'blue screen of death' becomming the dominant handset manufacturer? Naa, The EU is protecting their local (domestic) interests... If M$ was interested in competing with Nokia/Errikson/vodaphone etc they would BUY one of them... the fact that they are entering the market by themselves it is almost implied that they inted to leverage their OS monopoly. _CMC
Bad spellers of the world untie!
I'm sorry, but you're mistaken. I just went out and bought a PC without any OS preinstalled. I can choose to install any bleeding OS I choose on it, and I'm under no obligation whatsoever to buy or use either Windows or IE.
Another computer I bought came with Windows and AOL, and a whole host of other software on it. Was I forced to buy them? No. The overall package, including some software I have no use for, was a good deal, even though some parts of the package aren't of any use to me.
Bundling, both hardware and software, is common throughout the computer industry, and does not amount to 'forcing' people to buy things. For example, I was looking at two motherboards, one of which contained inbuilt audio (which I don't need since I've got a better sound card). This one was better overall for my needs, and so I *chose* to buy it, inbuilt audio and all, and then use my sound card with it. Force never entered into it.