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."

15 of 872 comments (clear)

  1. Re:M$ vs WinAmp by skajake · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Very true, but remember the important rule of thumb.. If it is default, 99% of users will not go the extra mile of finding a better alternative.

    If it works... dont fix it! This is why MS needs to be put in check.

    --

    ~ Maintainer of the Skajake Projects

  2. Ban 'em! by MBCook · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I, for one, am sick of all of this. I must say that I would LOVE to see the EU place an import ban on Microsoft Software (at least Windows), even if for only for a week, or even a day. See what a few billion in lost revenues does to 'em.

    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.
    1. Re:Ban 'em! by Zeinfeld · · Score: 3, Insightful
      A few years ago they were Realplayer or Quicktime. Some Sites still run 2 or 3 Different players but more and more are just playing WMP. Is it because WMP is cheaper? Is it because WMP is better? or Is it because WMP comes on 90% of PC sold in the last 3 to 4 Years?

      Maybe its because Realplayer fucks up your PC completely with its numerous nagware components. There is a stupid icon in your system tray that keeps blinking away forever, the user interface is clumsy and ad laden.

      Quicktime is nowhere near as offensive but it is an irritation to have to keep clicking away the offer to spend $30 on a stupid CODEC.

      It would be a different issue if the competitors were genuinely open and unencumbered standards. They are not, the cost of server licenses for streaming video is ridiculous. There is no reason they should cost one penny more than Apache.

      Microsoft just have a more clueful business model, if you look into the pricing of the systems you will quickly see the smart move to make.

      Ogg would be better, if it was really all there.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  3. Re:As if this was a bad thing... by Babbster · · Score: 5, Insightful
    First of all, MS can't be saying that it's WMP that's making Windows superior? You've got to be kidding me. Most people don't even use that app for their multimedia needs.

    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.

  4. The EU probably won't do anything to Microsoft... by kcbrown · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't think the EU is much less in the pockets of corporations than the U.S. government, considering how quickly they've done things like passing an even worse version of the DMCA than the DMCA itself is.

    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.
  5. It's not about the applications by Malc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  6. Is it really that important? by Txiasaeia · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This is NOT a big deal. So Windows comes with a media player -- so what? It's even half-decent -- if people don't want it, they can download other players. Even if they don't, it's not like there are tons of media players out there that cost money -- the big ones, Winamp and even QT are free to use for personal use.

    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.
    1. Re:Is it really that important? by dameron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If it's installed by default it's what most people will use. If a media player plays an MP3 file, a video, does streaming content that's pretty much all most people want from a media player. MS has been shown to have a monopoly in the desktop OS market. They abused that monopoly to squish alternative browsers and they're trying to do the same thing to media players.

      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.

      Well, that'd be a good start and hints at how long this has been going on and the depth of the problem. Suppose you work for a software company that provides an interesting utility, like a zip program or a telnet client. Should MS decide to add such a program to the OS, like they did with a zip utility in recent incarnations, your business could dry up and die because you never got a chance to compete. Suddenly 90% of computers sold can already do what your program does.

      What if you'd purchased a car from MS and it came with a free television. Normally that's not too bad a deal, and sometimes you see things like this in real life so you might thing there's nothing wrong with that. Now suppose that there was only one source of cars and pretty much everybody who purchased a car had to buy it from Microsoft and got that free tv. Now imagine that you make competing televisions.

      Now imagine you purchase the car, got the free tv, and now suddenly your VCR doesn't work, you need a Microsoft VCR.

      That's why it's important. I don't want to have to buy MS brand toilet paper one day to make my ass compatible.

      -dameron

  7. Re:As if this was a bad thing... by znu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  8. The No Spin Zone by rsmith-mac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  9. Re:fact is MS is right by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Insightful
    That's right, it's the file formats that are the real problem. Microsoft maintains its monopoly largely because their competitors must spend so much effort trying to reverse engineer the ever-changing secret file formats and APIs that they don't have resources left over to innovate new improvements.

    A simple tweak to copyright laws would largely fix this. Make secret file formats and copyright protection a mutually exclusive choice. Copyright was originally instituted to encourage open publication. Therefore, it should only be fair that software which enjoys copyright protection must be provided with the full open specifications of the file formats it uses. This ensures that there will always be a free market for that type of application, and users are better off because their their valuable data is not held hostage under the exclusive control of an external vendor.

    Of course, if a file format is so stupendously elite that a software vendor can't stand to publish it, they could always choose to release their programs without copyright protection. The choice would be theirs.

    Even if people don't have the guts to univerally institute a reform like this today (and they most certainly don't), this condition could have been applied very effectively to the special case of the original Microsoft antitrust trial. It would have been less absurd than breaking the company up, and it would help restore a free market in desktop software. We wouldn't have to worry about WMP and its proprietary formats taking over the digital television and movie publication markets just because Microsoft locks in deals with a critical mass of content producers and nobody else can figure out how it works. They could bundle WMP to their heart's content, but competitors wouldn't be locked out of using native WMA formats.

    There are those that would argue that exposing secret file formats is unfair to the software vendor. However, there are times when the harm to the public of keeping product information secret outweighs the economic benefit gained by the industry selling the products. Not many people today would argue that we should abolish food ingredients lists on labels to help protect the proprietary interests of food manufacturers. Now, it's just a fact of doing business in the food industry. They compete in other areas than top secret ingredients lists, and we all benefit from being able to know what we're eating.

  10. Go Microsoft by Jubii · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
  11. Re:Discount by BrokenHalo · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I certainly wish that they would be forced to sell just an operating system.

    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.

  12. Re:Stupid anti-trust lawsuits by shaitand · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft did NOT develop the concept of an operating system if that whats you mean. They didn't develope the concept of personal computers. They didn't develope the concept of operating systems for personal computers. They didn't develop the concept of a windowing system and graphical interface. They didn't develop the concept of a web browser. They didn't write the code that formed MS-DOS, they didn't write the code that formed NT, they didn't develope the concept of a media player. They didn't develope the concept of a terminal server, mail server, games, dialer, card games, command line, batch files, file system permissions, compression, acl's, networkable drives, web server, ftp server, text editor the list goes on and on.

    The list of things that weren't microsoft's idea goes forward to encompase every concept and application you will find produced by Microsoft (not just all the ones in the operating system).

    They invented... NONE of it. They innovated... NONE of it. They developed... NONE of it.

    They may have written some fringe code themselves (not sure it can be proven microsoft itself has even written a line to be honest), but they certainly didn't write any of the core functionality.

    Who knows it might be a mistake to say microsoft writes bad code, if they ever actually wrote some it might be pretty good stuff. But it's all theory until they do, for now I expect they'll continue to get it all via subcontracting and stealing the produce from business deals in which they screw the other party (*cough* NT *cough*).

  13. Re:The EU probably won't do anything to Microsoft. by etyam · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.