Slashdot Mirror
EU Says Microsoft's Abuses Are Ongoing
levell writes "Although the legal difficulties Microsoft was having in the US seem to be drawing to a close, it's not yet over in the EU. In this story, the BBC reports that the EU says it is still abusing its monopoly with Windows Media Player, and perhaps more interestingly from a Linux point of view, also in the low-end server market. The story is also being covered on CNN, Ananova, Reuters, etc." The EU's press release is informative.
Yeah, because we should trust the Europeans and listen to what they have to say about OUR companies.
Please... If Mandrake were a monopoly, do you think the French government would be suing them? That is a joke. I say fuck all you euro-trash pseudo-sophisticate posers. We'll put a boot in your ass. Its the American way.
Bush and Company are on the payroll.
Quite simply, I felt, like most people, that Netscape was out of line in attacking Microsoft over IE. After all, didn't Netscape simply appropriate Mosiac and start selling it? Didn't Microsoft out-engineer Netscape, and produce a better, faster browser?
Of course they did. But, just as predicted, Microsoft, once they solidified their market hold, quickly abused it. Recent announcements indicate that IE 6 is the last IE that can be downloaded for any platform, and future web browsers will only be available with their new OS's. Which is exactly the kind of abuse that is prohibited by Taft/Hartley.
Well, anyway, it shows that what we need is serious campaign finance reform, so that business will stop bribing our public officials. While Gates paying off the government to avoid prosecution is bad, Kenneth Lay using his beltway connections to avoid a life tossing salad in fed. pen is even worse.
A several billion dollars fine would be perceived as a fine on the US economy from a EU who doesn't want to play the game of free market.
Therefore, no big fine will be paid (if ever asked).
Besides, Microsoft Army is stronger than the EU ones, so there is no point is discussing any form of sentence regarding a US company.
Microsoft did have a hold on the computing world for quite some time and still do to some extent, but it's not a monopoly. The resurgence of Apple has made a dent, if even a small one, in Billy's power. I don't see them fading off anytime soon. Sure I buy PC's right now for the office, but my next home computer will probably be a Mac. Linux is basically the new kid on the block, but with so many places out there pimping for them, it has to cause a ripple some time. Maybe I'm just naive, but I just don't see the anti-trust case as it stands right now being able to hold up. I will place my hope in the free-market can take down Microsoft the same way it built the complany.
Best Web Based Game
Competition is good, and you obviously don't truly think so if you want to invoke the force of the government in order to hinder a company.
Yet, somehow your post gets modded as informative? Oh yeah, I forgot, this is slashdot, logic and reason are irrelevant here.
Ask yourself, do you really want to give the government the power to shut down any company that it deams worthy of its wrath?
Moderators: get a clue. All other slashdotters: Think about the economy. If you really want to help it, hurting one of your best and most profitable companies is not the way to do so.
I would think that slashdotters of all people would at least see that MS defintely does have competition. Obviusly the whiny slashdotters that want MS to be broken up havn't ever even tried Linux or Macs.
Hey! A voice of reason!
It makes NO sense. Honestly, should Joe Average have to try and figure out how to download a browser and media player? Especially without a browser there in the first place to go look for what they want? What if they don't have internet access? How are they going to get programs to play any media then?
Bundling these products is GOOD FOR THE CONSUMER. People who know how and want something else can go out and download other browsers or media players. People who don't have the knowledge to do that can use the ones pre-installed. Why is this such a problem?
The answer is NOT to bundle someone ELSE'S software with Windows. Sure, some people might like it, but why should one company be forced to promote someone else's product? Would it be fair to make McDonald's sell Burger King's food just because they're the most successful and it's "unfair" to BK? How would you feel if (insert Linux distribution here) became the #1 OS and they were forced to bundle IE with it to be fair to Microsoft? Sure, you could say "I could just install something else...", but that's exactly what you can do now!
This shouldn't be a problem. People always have a choice. They can always go out and get what they want. If they're not knowledgeable enough to do that, then they're not knowledgeable enough to go get something in the first place, hence the bundling.
-- Dr. Eldarion --
I like Windows and thank God for Microsoft everyday. Do you think it is easy authoring and maintaining something as large as Windows? I think not.
Yeah, I tried all of the other operating systems, and software, and I always seem to find the most use in Microsoft products. If there was something better, I would use it. But there is not.
So all of you people who seem to wallow in your hatred for Microsoft can just @#$% off.
We at /. should know this better than most.
/.
No, you just ignore more facts than most.
Someone with a six digit userid shouldn't be claiming to speak for