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."

16 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. Re:why waste the money? by parnold · · Score: 5, Informative

    the point is that you can't boycott a monoploy. if microsoft gains market dominance in mobile phones there shall be no choice. unlike pc's its quite hard to change the software on your phone. a antitrust cast may be the only way to stop this.

    --
    this sig intentionally left blank
  2. reason for suit by Slashdotess · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The reason for the lawsuit is clearly seen in the article:

    The .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.

    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 .NET servers, further binding them to MS software, etc.

    My question is, where's the Linux based Open Source phones? ;)

    1. Re:reason for suit by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Remember, it's not a crime to have a monopoly.

      Yes, but Microsoft has already been convicted in the US for using their monopoly power to stifle competition. I think that this conviction in itself makes news of similar suits in other juristictions and other technologies quite understandable.

      Personally I feel as a computer professional that Microsoft's monopoly has done a lot to prevent new ideas and technologies from reaching the market, and has in fact hurt the IT industry considerably. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to me that the remidies that are in place are sufficient to reverse this damage.

      Perhaps the EU will be more succesful at coming up with a solution. I hope so.

  3. At least we'll already know the error messages. by erik_fredricks · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Fatal Error. You need to restart your computer. You will lose all unsaved...oops, I mean, We're sorry-your call could not be completed as dialed. Please hang up and try again."

    --

    THE GOOD HUMOR MAN CAN ONLY BE PUSHED SO FAR
    Bart Simpson on chalkboard in episode 2F18

  4. microsoft cellphones? by absurdhero · · Score: 5, Funny

    good thing Microsoft doesn't have a hold on this market. I wouldn't want clippy asking me, "Are you breaking up with your girlfriend? I can help!"

  5. What for? by evil_one · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can someone PLEASE explain to me what the deal is with 'smartphones'?
    I have a nokia 5160, and I can place calls with it. I can receive calls with it. I can receive text messages too. Shit, I can play nibbles on the damn thing!
    WHY would I want more than that on a phone?

    I've got a computer for internet access - it stays at my desk. Contrary to popular belief, checking /. every 5 minutes isn't necessary for geek survival.
    I have heard the excuse that some poeple want to check and reply to their email on the go - that's what a secretary is for. If not a secretary, there are a plethora of alternatives - Laptops, Wireless/Wired palm/pocketce devices and internet booths spring to mind.

    Convince me we need smartphones. I just don't see it.

    --
    Desperation is a stinky cologne
  6. Re:Will Microsoft Ever Stop? by runenfool · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They may just try to claim that they settled the antitrust complaints, but the EU (besides being a completely separate entity) is going after them for different infractions than the US was.

    I think there are a lot of countries around the world that are nervous about the behavior that came out during the antitrust trial. They see Microsoft gaining more and more political power in the US (the trial taught Microsoft that its stupid for a company of their size to not 'play the game' in Washington) and they are worried that a major part of their infrastructure will be dominated by a US company. It goes to countries feeling threatened so much by Microsoft that they will go so far as to spend money to develop alternatives, or mandate use of open source, or in this case - they bring antitrust laws to bear on the company. To not take Microsoft as a serious threat to their countries would be folly, as MS could simply double licensing fees at will and cause government expenses to skyrocket (or possibly even more nefarious things like NSA backdoors or security holes causing massive problems for governments).

    In the end hopefully this will simply serve to give us a more balanced computing environment. I would hate for Microsoft to simply be exterminated - thats not what we need no matter how bad the company has been. What we need is healthy vibrant competition in the computing marketplace - at all levels including the ones that are currently dominated by Microsoft.

  7. Any signs... by DrunkenPenguin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "While I haven't seen any signs Microsoft is going to dominate the industry here in the States.."

    Well, did you see any signs when Microsoft started a browser war against the de facto standard Netscape browser back in the old days? I mean, who would have believed back then that Microsoft would be able to beat Netscape in browser war?
    ----

  8. It has already begun by florin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  9. Re:*sigh* by h0tblack · · Score: 5, Funny

    Na, Apple cornered that a long time ago with the iBrator ;) Damn sight more user-friendly than any stimulus M$ could up with.... I mean, erm, or so I'm told.

  10. Re:Microsoft monopolizing AGAIN... by cstrommen · · Score: 5, Informative

    I can't speak for the others, but Nokia isn't using Microsoft's os as they have their own (Symbian) and it seems that most phone-providers are actually switching to this one. Sendo is a good example of this, as told in a previous slashdot story.

    The companies that have been using the Windows Smartphone, now known as Windows CE .NET as far as I can tell, have reported a lot of serious problems with the os. It constantly crashes and freezes (no, this is not a joke nor a flame, this is a fact), something that is driving more and more of them over to the Symbian OS.

    To conclude, there are many companies that have decided to use the Microsoft alternative, but more and more of these are ditching it in favour of the more commonly used Nokia os.

    --

    --
    \ Christian A Strømmen

  11. Litmus test? by Lumpish+Scholar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is Microsoft in this business (they label it "CE/Mobility") because they want to make a profit in this business? Or are they taking advantage of other strengths of their company to dominate the new sector?

    Microsoft's recent Form 10-Q shows that, between June 1 and September 30, 2002, Microsoft lost $33M (U.S. dollars) on revenues of $17M in this part of their business. (Look for the second occurance of "CE/Mobility", the one under "Three months ending September 30" and "2002," about halfway down the page.) In other words, they spent a total of about $50M (in three months!), and lost almost three dollars for every dollar they spent.

    This isn't proof by any means; but it's one interesting test in trying to decide Microsoft's corporate intentions.

    P.S.: This rate may represent Microsoft scaling back their efforts! From June 1 to September 30, 2001, Microsoft lost $48M on revenues of $14M; so a total expenditure of $62M, or more than four dollars for ever one they made. Remember that Windows CE devices started shipping in early 1997; this is not a new business for them, but one that's almost six years old.

    --
    Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
  12. Re:why waste the money? by pcardoso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    what about just leaving them alone and trying to sell their products?

    I love MS as much as the next guy here on /., and while I partially agree with this suit, the market still has the final word to say.

    I submitted a while ago a story about Microsoft's attempt at interactive TV here in Portugal. It got rejected, but the point here is that it failed. Microsoft's testbed for iTV failed because the problems we have today with windows translated to the same problems with the MS iTV's software. The service was also a bit expensive (whether or not related to the MS tax), the set top box crashed a lot, and few saw the benefits of iTV. We are a bit behind europe in smoe areas, but in technology we are at about the same level so it was not a people's problem. (in a country of 10 million there are about 7 or 8 million cellphones; our ATM system allows for any kind of bank operation in any bank's ATM from withdrawing money to buying train tickets to paying the telephone or electricity bills; we have a nation-wide non-stop automated system for paying the highway toll).

    MS failed because of the product they were trying to sell wasn't what the people wanted, they wanted to make us use the TV as a computer but we didn't. When they come with this cellphoneOS, let the people decide. Say what you want about mobile internet, games, messengers, digital built-in cameras, and all the rest of the crap, that while make cool geek toys (which I like to play with), the vast majority just wants to call someone.

    And it's not going to be easy to de-throne the appeal Nokia has.

    Microsoft may be the monopoly in computer operating systems and Office suits, but in other ponds they are the little fish.

  13. Re:What a bunch of BS by Soko · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What I gather is that the EU is trying to protect an emerging market. Microsoft is able to tie thier SmartPhones to thier Windows and .Net platform, further leveraging the Windows monopoly, and in doing so would strengthen that monopoly. This would effectively short-circuit any compeditors products.

    If .Net is truly open, I would agree with you in that Microsoft would simply be providing infrastructure on an even basis with any prospective competitors. If they purposely leverage their Windows monopoly in order to gain un-fair advantage in the smartphone market, that's a different matter - they would be attepmting to acquire another monopoly. The EU is trying to keep the competition even, at the start anyway. If everyone in the Phone/PDA combo market is afforded the same advantages, and Microsoft still wins, OK, fine, they deserved it. As it is, there won't be much - if any at all - competition due to the Windows juggernaught.

    Crap. The reason I'm never thrilled with Microsoft is that they present a lose-lose situation. Sure, they should be allowed to "innovate" to thier hearts content - everyone is even before the law, after all. Everytime they do, however, they seem to desolate the compeditive landscape by nuking everything with thier Windows-leverage bomb.

    Bleah. 'Nuff typing - I'm going back to my bottle of rye...

    Soko

    --
    "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
  14. IE started with zero penetration by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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
  15. Eu law is different than the US antitrust law. by miffo.swe · · Score: 5, Informative

    In the US its ok to use and abuse a monopoly if it doesnt hurt the comsumer. The law doesnt take other companies in account that may be killed off by abusive monopolies.

    Eu law in the other hand is all about keeping a level playing field among the companies themselves. Microsoft has more to fear from that law. Many European companies have been slapped with very big fines for much smaller offences than MS have made.

    Then again i dont know if we should worry. All MS can succed in if they continue alienating their customers and locking people into Windows etc. is a total fork of the internet. Geeks on one side on open systems and Windows users locked into MSN and NET servers. I dont know if that should be so bad. I could live with it but could MS?

    --
    HTTP/1.1 400