Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Defies EU Commission
otahkgeek writes "Wired News is reporting that Microsoft claims that by removing Windows Media Player from Windows, it would be forced to ship a substandard version to European consumers. This is on the heels of a three-day hearing by a European commission to determine the validity of charges that Microsoft illegally abused its power over the home computer market."
Call it what it is: A Feature!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
If it works... dont fix it! This is why MS needs to be put in check.
~ Maintainer of the Skajake Projects
Or put some kind of huge levy on them, like $20 per copy of Windows brought into the country untill the WMP is removed, and ban Microsoft from raising the price (both to consumers and to OEMs) so that they can't pass on the cost. Again, when they start to lose a lot of money, maybe they're realize that something bad WILL happen to them, it's not just a bluff.
Either way, I'd like to see the EU (or ANYONE) just stick it to MS for once to show them they can't keep pushing everyone around. And, if the EU forces someone to offer a "inferior version", shouldn't they be forced to sell that inferior version or NOTHING? Microsoft has called your bluff, so step up to the plate!
At this point, I think that a breakup (into OS, Office, Games, Hardware, and Other) would have made things so much better for us all.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
I know this goes against the grain of what most Slashdotters believe, but Microsoft is not a monopoly. A monopoly is a company that gets exclusive market rights from the government. The US Postal Service is a monopoly, because (IIRC) the US government forbids anyone from charging lower postage for first class mail within the US, for example.
If you don't like IE, use Netscape or Opera or lynx or whatever. If you don't like Windows, use Linux or BSD or HURD or BeOS or MacOS or...
If you don't like Windows Media Player, use Winamp or RealPlayer or Quicktime or whatever you want.
Customers who aren't satisfied with Microsoft don't sue them. They simply switch to a better solution. Microsoft simply does not have the legal ability to force alternatives out of existence. They are not a legal monopoly.
I wish the governments of the world would get that already, and stop wasting our tax money on lawyers. And stop wasting our tax money on Microsoft licenses too, whose prices are inflated by Microsoft's legal fees.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, switch to open-source software and stop being so sue-happy. Stupid governments.
I claim first use of "Error No. 0B" - or "No. 0B error." It'll be the new ID 10T!
I suspect you're referring to the same "most people" who don't use Internet Explorer (a truly inferior product) for their web-browsing needs - in other words, "a minority of people." I use Windows XP (surprisingly, the best Microsoft OS I've used) and I find that that Windows Media Player, with the appropriate codecs installed, works quite well for a wide variety of multimedia files. The idea that "most people" using Windows are using an outside multimedia viewer/player when the software that comes with the system works fine is laughable.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
That being the case, how many here think the EU will actually bother to stand up to Microsoft in the end? My bet is that the EU will continue to make noise about Microsoft until Microsoft pays them off (quietly, behind the scenes, of course), at which point the EU will quietly decide not to "go forward" with any sort of real action against Microsoft. At most, the EU will probably give Microsoft a good wrist-slapping ("Stop, or I shall say 'stop' again!").
Only if a more powerful multinational corporation attempts to influence the EU against Microsoft will the EU really do anything.
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
you speak as if the WTO matters. They don't...a governing body is only as powerful as its enforcers
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
So linux distros aren't going to be allowed to ship xmms, or do we need to wait until Linux is a monopoly.
The fact is MS is right, shipping an OS without a media player is substandard. When you install a modern OS, you expect a media player to come with it. The problem isn't forcing people to use Windows Media Player, the problem is they are leveraging their monopoly on desktops to impose their proprietary codec as a defacto standard thus forcing everyone who wants to sell multimedia related stuff for the MS platform to pay them royalties to support that standard.
... sam thing with Office. I don't mind if you use it but I shouldn't be forced to use it as well to read your documents!
They don't make money with WMP, they make money with third parties having to support the MS codec since that's what everyone uses on their desktop. That's what is illegal forcing a proprietary codec down everyone's throath!
I couldn't give two hoots about Real to be honest. Their product has always been substandard and intensely irritating. What I am concerned about is that by muscling the competition out that MSFT get to set the standards for file formats, network protocols etc. This is far more lucrative to them, and has far more potential to limit our choices as users. It certainly won't be favourable to our pocket books.
Besides, the closest competition that the article mentions, RealPlayer, has constantly been flamed as bloated spyware. What's the difference between WMP and RP? Choice? I can choose to load up IE (or Opera, or Firebird, or Lynx W32) and download a different media player.
If the EU forces MS to take out WMP, then they should also remove Notepad, Calculator, MS Paint, Address Book, Hyperterminal... the list goes on.
What MS could do instead: ship with a non-WMP Windows version, then ask the user every day if they'd like to update their computer to include WMP.
[__] No thanks, go away
[__] Yes please!
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
Since it will have a "feature" missing, does this mean it will cost less?
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Don'tcount it out... Europe hasn't forgotten the bad experiences they've had in appeasing bullies. Besides that, they woudln't have to switch everything to linux overnight. Microsoft can't delete the windows installed already.
The EU should be cracking down on Linux distributions as well. They bundle more applicatioins with their operating system than Microsoft do.
The same goes for Apple. Their notepad program can even open word files.
Untying WMP from Windows wouldn't result in PCs shipping with no media player installed -- it would just put the choice in the hands of OEMs, rather than Microsoft.
This space unintentionally left unblank.
It is truly hypocritical, how Microsoft comments about how it's *free* version of a media player has begun beating the paints off the other guys who are trying to make money off their RealPlayer.
Give it away for free, that's the key part isn't it. A company can't really compete with a free product especially when it is integrated with the OS.
Microsoft shouldn't really complain about the free software model being somehow destructive to it's model, now should it? After all, that is exactly what it is doing to other companies.
Is it not?
if this isn't a prime example of the dangers of a computing monoculture, i don't know what is.
say it with me:
repeat forever.pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
I see your point. MOST people really seem to use the inferior solutions, like windows. I mean, MOST human beings are dumb as fucking cattle. Among them you find the MOST subset (MOST = dumb majority) using windows. And among them, MOST use windows media player.
So you see, we've distilled several steps to get the dumbest fucking human beings on earth... and their still the majority. Sad isn't it?
Lets go over this one last time-- YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BUY WINDOWS. MICROSOFT CAN INCLUDE ANY FEATURES IT DAMN WELL SEES FIT IN ITS OWN PRODUCT. Yes, yes... We know they were engaged in anti-competitive practices, but that really doesn't have a thing to do with this. Exactly which media alternative have they been supressing with this one? I know, winamp, right?
No, lets look at it from a different angle. Such as this one.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
When will governments learn? Just as the US government crippled its antitrust case against microsoft by focusing on bundling rather than on Microsoft's contracts with OEMs, the European Union is making the same mistake. It's not the bundling that's the problem, it's Microsoft's stranglehold over the OEM market that's the problem. Address that instead of forcing them to remove a useful part of the Windows bundle.
That said, I do wish that governments would do something about preserving fair use in a world full of DRM software. While Windows Media Player may itself contribute to restrictions on fair use, it is by no means the only mechanism - nor even the primary mechanism - through which DRM content will be delivered. DRM is a great deal more dangerous than the bundling of media player software. The EU makes a big fuss about Windows Media Player, but what are they doing to mitigate the negative effects of DRM? Nothing at all.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
There are times when I wish we could mod stories down, so that stories like this could be killed. For anyone that reads the article, it talks about what MS told the EU about what they insist are the ramifications of removing WMP from Windows, but the title is "Microsoft Defies EU Commission". Please tell me where it states that MS isn't complying with the EU, or otherwise doing something that is defying the EU(other than the monopoly issue at hand). This is a disagreement with the EU, perhaps even a strong one, but for MS to defy the EU they must either act when they shouldn't, or not act when they should; you can't defy the EU when the action in question never left the proposal stage.
I'm sure this will get modded down as a troll, but I feel I must clear my chest. I say bravo to Microsoft for giving them the finger. You buy the software "as is". Windows comes with Internet Explorer, Outbreak Express, and the Win Media Player - for everyone. That's the way it is. They are not in the business of customizing their operating system for certain audiences. It is my uderstanding that the EU sees WMP as a threat to other multimedia technologies, but I don't think they should force MS to remove their application as a solution. Truth of the matter is you don't see anyone jumping on Apple's case for having built-in web, email, and multimedia. If roles were reversed, and everybody used a Mac, would the EU be telling Apple that they should unbundle Quicktime with their os due to monopolistic practices?? I feel the Union is overstepping its boundries... I don't belive that Microsoft has a superior product with WMP, and I believe their response to the EU was a nice way of saying, "screw off, we're not going to reengineer our crap!" And honestly people, how many times have you wanted to say that yourself?
I planned on inserting something witty here but never got around to it.
I would be happy if they sold an operating system, rather than the cobbled-together collection of hacks buried under a pile of mind-numbing UI candyfloss that comprises XP. Seems that every time I try to get anything done on those machines, the object of the OS is to prevent the user from operating the system.
Piss off the Europeans enough and they'd simply do what they did to the drug companies and threaten to bust their patents. Oh, you know there had to be a reason other countries sell the same drugs at a fraction of the price in other countries. We can't win an economic sanction war against the EU.
The Europeans will see this as an opportunity to hit back at M$ and snub the US in one motion. I wouldn't expect them to back down. In fact, M$'s comments were the worst possible thing they could've said. It backs up European fears about being subject to an American monopoly and gives them bad Bush flashbacks. This was sort of the coporate version of the "bring 'em on" comment.
Not only would I be surprised if they back down on sanctions, but I'd expect them to start funding development of a new EuroLinux alternative, ala Airbus.
I can sometimes see why they think we're a bunch of wankers over here when you look at things from their perspective.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Hard to say. One thing that must be remembered is that MS is a US monopoly that is also trying to leverage its monopoly to the detriment of several large European software companies.
MS certainly will not get the same level of sympathy from the EU commission that they have gotten from the US Justice system.
Sure, all of Europe could convert to Linux... but they'd be forced to.
Nahh, the EU could just announce that they're not going to enforce Microsoft's copyrights for the duration of the ban. No forced conversions. The US would raise a fuss about treaty violations, but I think the EU could successfully argue overriding concerns. And although the US government may have given up trying to nail MS, I doubt a lot of politicians are going to be lining up to champion the convicted anti-competitive monopolist.
a lot of hardware would have to be replaced
Eh? Most of the large organizations switching to Linux cite *savings* on hardware as one of the Linux advantages. Linux runs better than XP on older hardware. Sure, there are a few winmodems and a few winprinters for which drivers don't exist, and they might have to be replaced, but that's about it. You rarely find those in businesses anyway. And maybe having a market the size of the EU decide to stop buying those devices might just convince the manufacturers to provide Linux drivers, too.
Microsoft can't bully the EU.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Well, define operating system. I wouldnt buy a floppy with COMMAND.COM, IO.SYS and MSDOS.SYS, or whatever the correspondent files are in NT-based systems, only to be told I needed to buy a separate GUI pack and application pack... the software that comes with a computer should meet people's reasonable expectations. People expect to be able to burn CDs and browse the web nowadays. Actually I've been screaming for integrated CD burning since Windows 95! Took them long enough, dammit!
Bundling is often a good thing when it isnt done to abuse a monopoly position. Linux distros bundle one heck of a lot more than Windows does and we all love them for it. At least I do. I wish Windows came with as many cool games and apps as your average Red Hat or Mandrake ISO...
Why not just ship windows with a selection of media players installed allong with windows media player?
All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
"Threaten" to walk away?
I don't think MS has this sort of leverage. I think Europe could ban MS -- this doesn't mean formatting every European's hardrive.
All it would mean is that the next upgrade cycle would necessarily be something else, that's all.
I can see how Microsoft loses, I don't see how Europe would lose.
say it with me:
standard protocols.
standard file formats.
open source software.
If you have standard protocols and standard file formats, it doesn't matter much if your software is open source or not. Standard protocols and file formats ensure you're not locked in to a vendor even if the source is closed.
Peon: Sir, we need to figure out which browser, video player and instant messaging system to put into our computers.
CEO: Huh, what? I was sleeping.
Peon: And very well, too, sir.
CEO: So what did you want again?
Peon: We need to put a browser, video player and instant messaging system on our computers and I need to know which ones to use.
CEO: There's more than one? Damn. Well, how do we make money?
Peon: The Real people are offering us $2 million a year to put their software on our computers, but it drains system resources, it's hard to uninst...
CEO: Excellent! Use that!
Peon: But sir, there are a couple of better free programs we could put on the systems.
CEO: So what? Two million is two million, baby! Cha-ching!
Peon: Okay, what about the instant messaging and internet browser?
CEO: Just get the most money you can for each.
Peon: What about quality, sir?
CEO: Seriously, man. I'd really rather not fire you. Most of the time you're pretty good about knowing when I'm napping. Get the picture?
Peon: Absolutely, sir. Money for placement. Hope you enjoy the rest of your nap, sir.
CEO: I will now.
How long are governments going to pursue this endless litigation of companies who have monopolistic practices? Have we not learned anything from the IBM anti-trust lawsuit which went on for 13 years and ended with a hung jury? If Microsoft is truly producing an inferior product then in time it will get replaced by something better. However, nobody in this forum can really claim that linux is ready to be used by the average home consumer. So in short the US government as well as the EU should stop wasting their money and let the natural forces of competition weather away Microsoft's market position.
PS. If dealing with Microsoft as a monopoly is absolutly necessary there are better ways than breaking it up.
I've browsed the numerous posts on the subject, and I've seen many reactions that emphasize the fact that EU is repeating the US government mistakes, that lawsuits suck etc.
/. readers at the same moment as it is to MS leaders ? EU and MS are by now negotiating around the terms of an agreement, because the agreement has no importance. What is important here is to say ; hey MS, we're considering other way to comprehend the computer world. This is a signal, sent to both MS and newspaper readers. It doesn't mean a clash, it doesn't mean a shift. It means a possibility that MS may -or may not- be able to tackle well. Shifting to another possibility (ie Linux or similar) is a very expensive and brain-sucking thing to do, so the EU is considering in which ways they could accept to stay in a under-efficient situation.
/.ers : there are some people that want their computer to work, pure and simple. It took two months to my mother to understand where the power button was ; she's far from being stupid, but she is not interested in computer stuff, and that's it. So, for her, Microsoft is a fucking monopoly, mainly because all the conditions for making it a practical (by opposition to a theorical one) one are here. I'm not going to enter the details, but just for the anecdote, you'll find that many reports describing the computer world as obscure and te
So far, readers should consider giving some original responses, just as they ask for original tackling of the MS issue.
I'd like you to think about another way of considering the problem. The main question is : why did the EU do that ? Why did they do it *that* way and not another ?
It is a bit of a political thinking. I've red that the EU would suffer massive damage if they filed a too blunt lawsuit against MS. I've red that the WMP thing was a pretext to send a signal to Microsoft. I've red that the Echelon program was used sometimes through MS products. All these statements were in my mind since some time, and I think that, with a bit of political understanding of the situation, one can draw some different conclusions than the average "it means nothing" ones.
First of all, do you really think that EU political leaders are that stupid ? We've all seen that there was a study advising to bypass Windows and change to Linux. And one of the greatest advantage (among too much drawbacks) of the EU is that many voices are taken into account when a decision is made.
So my point is that EU policy-makers were in this state of mind : we may consider a shifting in our computer policy, but for that we need to make it clear, just because MS may answer our needs correctly. I think that this lawsuit is a part of this movement.
But the EU can't afford to 'defy' MS, because retaliation would be a disaster, in any form (withdrawal of software, intensifying of industrial-spying, which stays a hot issue between EU and the US, I trust MS to find some awkward ways to do it).
Furthermore, do you think that such a lawsuit is revealed to
Taken form this perspective, the EU action means something. And it means a lot ; the way it has been offered to MS is all the same that the recent dispute between US/MS, but the underlying message is all the more different. This is *diplomacy*.
The answer of Microsoft is elusive, for it doesn't say yes or no. It says, basically, piss off, which is very different from a simple no. We just be aware that much things that happen on that level are unknown. Things keep being interesting.
Last but not least, I've red a post saying that MS was not a monopoly. In fact, it was said that is was not a *legal* monopoly. I'd like the writer to understand that reality has not been embedded in an economics book yet. MS, de facto, *is* a monopoly, because the very proper definition of a monopoly implies choice. But not the choice to change the product after you were compelled to use it to understand how your fucking computer work. You may realize that the vast majority of people using computers are not
Let's overcome our weakness.
Actually the EU has a history of taking quite unexpected steps against companies or governments that do not comply with its regulations. It may be very boring and sometimes hard to follow, but the EU (both as an organization and as a trade block) is a true powerhouse when it comes to economics that does not think lightly of splitting up companies, refusing mergers, forcing governments to change centuries old judicial procedures, ban politically sensitive subsidies et cetera. If they set their minds to it, Microsoft may be in for a bigger fight than they were in the United States.
Actually, no. People aren't really stupid; they have just been passivated. The consumer culture in itself is to blame; for most of the people in the western countries, survival doesn't require thinking. In fact, thinking makes it harder to survive; because if you think, and notice things, then you'll also have to act, or become a bitter cynic. So, as the result, we have three classes of people: the ones who don't want to think, the ones who think and become embittered, and the ones that think and act, and are consequently branded loonies or killed outright.
:(... That's why the Internet is a threat to those in power now: it could potentially make the passive consumers into active producers, and powers-that-be don't want that.
It's actually quite simple: if you can fill your belly without taking any unneccessary risks or expending energy, it would be foolish to not do so. This is perfectly reasonable in a world of scarcity and danger, but, unfortunately, makes people very vulnerable to domination by anyone who can feed them.
So, basically, life is too easy nowadays, and as a result, people have become fat and lazy. They are, as you said, consumers: they consume but won't product, and as a result are completely in the mercy of those who do produce. Why do you think governments and corporations are trying so hard to stop people from producing (with laws like DRM) ? If everyone was actually producing things independently, and as a result be awake, the power would also rest in everyone, and not on those few giants who now wield it. But, unfortunately, it is the human nature to take the path of least resistance at any given choice
In other words: people aren't stupid, just lazy and selfish.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Why should you be wondering, when you can actually know ?
Is cd burning part of the OS? The direct instructions that control the burner, yeah, the pretty interface, nay.
Web browser? You must be joking, but hopefully you have been educated....
IANAL but write like a drunk one.