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.
They need to be split, and now. Just my opinion...
if MS had to cease Eurpoean operations like SCO did. It would cause them to lose a huge chunk of sales and cause their stock to sink like a rock. In addition, US companies with European branches may become wary of buying from Microsoft, hopefully allowing its competitors to gain some ground lost by MS abusing its monopoly.
Microsoft will have to pay a fine of tens of millions of dollars if it does not implement the remedies.
Big freaking deal
They'll just shrug, pay the fine, and continue as before. Or will the EU undertake further actions against MS, if they persist in these practices even after paying the fines?
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
In theory, how much control does the EU have over Microsoft? I know they talked about separating WMP from Windows or bundling other media players with Windows. Could they force Microsoft to take even more drastic measures (such as breaking up the company's overseas operations)?
This isn't about the EU wanting to 'make a difference'. This is about the EU wanting MS to abide by the laws it is trading (in the EU) under.
The interesting thing about the forthcoming EU fine (they're _not_ going to escape it at this stage) is that they've got a history of setting the size of the fine at levels commensurate with the wrong-doing and size of the company concerned. In the case of Microsoft, this could well mean more than a billion dollars.
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
That one is good punishment. Because they abused their low end desktop monopoly, force them to buy their competitor's media players and include them all without charge. Ogg Vorbis could set a reasonable price for prcompiled binarys, I'm sure. Everyone but Microsoft would win.
More than that, I like their reesoning about leveraging. It was as simple to prove as asking people buying low end servers for their low end desktops if "interoperability" and secret interfaces made a difference in their purchasing. Bingo, nothing meritorius there, just a bunch of crap they won't share and a dominant market position.
The proposed solution, to force M$ to open up their interfaces is great stuff. Less time would have to be dedicated to deciphering their crap. I wonder if they can force NTFS open too, after all the inability to write to the file system is a hinderence.
M$ may try to wriggle out of this by making EU only software that plays nice, but they won't get far. They can not escape the black eye solid reasoning is giving them. Solid reasoning from impartial parties and published with all the resources of a large govenment.
It's just more reason to ditch M$ all together. Who needs a low end desktop anyway? That would be the best thing of all.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Ahhh, but they could go up to apple and say. Don't do XXXX or YYYY, and if you do then the next version of Office for the Mac will be years late and run like crap.
They have hung that over Apples head for a long time. That is what kept IE on the Mac instead of Netscape for many years.
Also what exactly is the marketshare for Macintosh systems these days? Even the graphic shops I go in to are starting to use Wintel machines (not that I think they should use them).
As far as Linux goes, as long as it is free and has the large number of developers working on it, it will continue to make inroads in to Microsoft's monopoly. This is ONLY because people are generally cheap. For the life of me I can't get people to try out OpenOffice, but once I explain that Microsoft Office will cost them >$200.00, suddenly they want to take a long hard look at it.
I fully expect Microsoft to do everything they can to protect their monopoly, as they have done so in the past. Their history has shown that they are not above breaking laws to continue their stranglehold on the software industry, however at this point and time they have little threat of Linux, Apple, OpenOffice on the desktop or office level. This will probably change once more governments start using free software, but at this time they are still the 800 pound gorilla. It also shows why they fight so hard not to loose any government business to Linux.
The more I learn about science, the more my faith in God increases.
just take SMB as an example
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Of all the areas to attack them on, the Media Player is a strange one.
Firstly, it is probably the best out of Real Player and Quicktime so really I cannot see anyone wanting to swap Media Player for a crappy RP which pops up every two minutes and basically complains if you don't use it or upgrade it! Quicktime isn't really a big player in any event on the PC for any formats really. So, even if they do succeed in getting Media Player as something you have to 'opt in' to installing I'd guess that the experienced users won't use RP or QT.
Secondly, Media Player is integral to Windows - certainly XP. From the Windows Explorer you can preview media, view films, burn CD's etc etc with it. Ok, I suppose you could take out this functionality but as someone who uses it a lot I don't see why -I- should have my OS experience reduced just so I can get Real Player telling me I have messages every few hours.
Thirdly, as I think some of the other posters have said, there is a gradual blurring between PCs and TVs/hi fi nowadays and it is realistic to be able to have a media player as part of the OS.
I know I will be shot down for this, but the target market for Windows doesn't want to have to select which media player they want - most people won't have a clue anyway - they just want to go to 'My Music' and click on the MP3 and listen to some music whilst they browse the web or whatever.
They certainly have abused their monopoly, but this is just a typical EU style charge (I live in England). A lot of hot air, lots of reports, a good idea but poorly enacted.
Microsoft can afford to ignore this, and they'll just pay the fine and 'look at how we can open up' and do nothing.
The EU cannot stop them trading in the EU at all! Anyone who seriously thinks that is plain daft! I mean, I guess around 95%+ of PC's etc run MS software and if they have to stop trading it would have such a serious impact on business it simply won't happen!
The exercise of pre existing power does not represent an expansion of government power.
The law is wrong. It should be changed.
No, anti-competitive practices are wrong. They put people out of business - that's means people lose jobs and have their lives fucked around. Anti-competitive practices are also designed to bring more than fair market value for goods and services. In the end, everyone pays for them. If a free market is good, then what Microsfoft does is very bad. Preventing this kind of racketeering is as good a government exercise as the prevention of murder or stock fraud. Yes, economic upheaval can be fatal.
Like you, I have my doubts about the way government regualtion plays out. In the case of phone and electric service, we are moving toward unregulated but protected monopolies, the very worst case. In automobiles, we have government protection and even cash bailouts. In steel, there's essentially a monopoly poorly protected against forgein makers. In software, we have the spectical of government violating all purchasing sense and sole sourcing six years worth of purchasing to some of the worst software available.
The intent, especially in the Microsoft case, is correct. Don't confuse intent with the way Anti-trust laws are not followed through perverted.
Doing nothing does just that and that might be fatal for the US computer industry. The glass making industry never gained significant competion in the US, did it? It took the invention of a whole new light material, plastic, and a shipping revolution to bring competition to bottle making. If Microsoft is uninhibited, they might be might be able to pull off Paladium, which would end all software and hardware competition on just about all platforms. It is by no means certian that chip makers will be able to resist Paladium in the commodity market. The alternatives are expensive custom hardware from makers like Sun, worth it to companies but not individuals. The xbox is a peek into Microsfoft's dream world. The implications for all software and hardware makers are obvious.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
That from http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p _action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/03/1150%7C0%7CRAPID&lg=EN ;
hey note theres a .ksh in the URL - think they run korn shell cgi's in brussels? :)
Anyway that says OPEN YOUR API TOTALLY MS or face punishmnet. GREAT NEWS for interoperability! Samba and dozens of other programs will benefit immensely.
Of those to whom much is given, much is required.
You do not understand. It is difficult to compete because we cannot provide our services on an equal footing with Microsoft because they won't tell us how to interoperate with their systems. If we can't interoperate with MS systems, and everyone else is using MS systems, then open source options aren't really viable, are they?
(Well, in some cases we are viable -- but only because MS wasn't able to stop all the open standards. Look where all of the major open-source successes have been:
If you substituted ``Microsoft`` with ``Big Tobacco``, would you change your mind?
You're missing the fact that people have been locked into using MS-only systems and *even if they wanted to* would find it very hard to stop. Think about it: they, in effect, provide a significant proportion of our computing infrastructure -- and are preventing anyone from competing with them by not disclosing the vital inferface information about the systems they built that others would need to compete.
They work very hard to maintain the monopoly stranglehold they have created. They bombard the young and impressionable with advertising in print, on television, on billboards. They push ``cheap`` versions of their product on impressional students in schools and universities.
They lobby govenments around the world to say "You should let project leaders make their own choice!" when it comes to choosing between a MS or OSS deployment -- whilst simultaneously doing their utmost to prevent any OSS option from becoming viable.
"Just educate people to do something else" you say. If only it were that easy. To stop smoking is a painful and difficult task at the best of times; divorcing yourself of the MS infrastructure that entangles everything we do is no different.
Microsoft has a monopoly. Nobody disputes that fact. They are using their monopoly position to extend their influence and take control of new markets. This is also not in dispute.
If the United States refuses to take substantive action, then that's their choice. But you're starting to hurt *us* now, we will not stand idly by. The EU, our representatives, have asked Microsoft nicely, patiently, to cease their damaging practices. Three times, they told them stop! And yet they persist, relentlessly.
Well, no more. We're done asking.