Slashdot Mirror
EU Releases Microsoft Antitrust Report
Hassman writes "Ever wondered the reasoning behind the EU fining Microsoft and ordering them to sell a Media Player free version of Windows? Well now you can stop wondering. If you aren't up for the full read (it is 302 pages), check out the Reuters summary. Want more? Check out a quote from the summary: 'There is a huge switching cost to using a different operating system [as in not Windows],' he [a MS exec] wrote Gates. 'It is this switching cost that has given customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO, our lack of a sexy version at times...' Mmm...sexy indeed." Reader BrerBear writes "News.com is reporting that the European Union has released its report on Microsoft's conduct, to which Microsoft has pre-emptively responded. Inside are more classic examples of what one should never write in an internal memo: 'In short, without this exclusive franchise called the Windows API, we would have been dead a long time ago,' from Microsoft Sr. VP Bob Muglia."
For those who won't RTF 7 page MS response, here's my "flaimbait" quote from Microsoft's response.
All other contemporary operating systems, such as Apple's OS X, similarly tout their integrated media capabilities. The Decision expressly rejects (Para. 822) the principle that tying analysis for finished products should focus not on whether there exists a separate demand for a component but on whether there is any demand for the finished product with that component missing. For example, the fact that there is a market for shoelaces does not mean there is a market for shoes that have their laces missing. Common sense dictates that it would be misguided for regulators to require shoes to be sold in such a manner, even if this would create greater opportunities for companies that sell shoelaces. 1 The Decision goes on to dismiss the fact that all other operating systems also come with media playback software, ostensibly because some (but not all) of these finished products incorporate media players developed by other suppliers. (Para. 822.)
Go ahead, mod me down for common sense ...
..about these internal memos, sometimes they're too funny to be true, its like they feel compelled to give us even more ammo!
It's hard enough to remember my opinions, never mind the reasons for them..
This is news to whom?
Can I bum a sig?
So, the memos point out things we already knew. At least they are smart enough to admit that they don't have a great product. If only they were smart enough to fix it and do right in the future.
Evolution or ID?
Then why don't make the one without WMP as expensive (or more expensive even) as the one with and let the market sort it out?
Or would the EUC be so bold as to tell some company how their products should be priced?
The man of knowledge must be able not only to love his enemies but also to hate his friends.
'It is this switching cost that has given customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO, our lack of a sexy version at times...'
I wouldn't exactly say patience is the right word, how about ignorance? It was very difficult for most computer users to leave the more comfortable Windows enviroment, but then again I learned DOS when I was 6 yrs old to play Montezuma's Revenge. So it cant be that hard.
> 'It is this switching cost that has given customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO, our lack of a sexy version at times...' Mmm...sexy indeed.
Let me just say, there is no switching cost: you have been fooled. It's not your fault; Microsoft has been fooling billions of people the same way you have been fooled. Offset training and allocation of new resources in your company for purging out Microsoft as being standard operating costs (upgrade costs), not "switching" costs; it's a farce to think otherwise.
Long term benefit in using a reliable system makes any switching price worth every penny. Short term benefits are that you can simply ignore the next bout of viruses, your staff will love you and you can also take credit for the increased profits from operating a tight ship.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Don't forget that in the US MS was convicted as well.
The fact that they are convicted twice won't change a thing until they actually *PAY* the fine.
MP3 Search Engine
The United States has declared the enforcement of a sovereign nation's own laws to be weapons of monopoly destruction.
Doing the Right Thing should not be preempted by making a buck.
... and about the only thing that makes Linux "sexy" is the photoshoped "Linux Girls." It's an operating system for cryin out loud ...
It's the #1 player why?
Probably because there hasn't been any alternatives, since Microsoft has been stifling them. User indifference matters here; re Netscape vs. Microsoft.
Try using the free Media Player Classic.
Doing the Right Thing should not be preempted by making a buck.
Which is exactly one of the reasons the competitors get no chance and why the EU has made this decision.
BTW, QuickTime works just fine on Windows afaik and I see it used quite a lot by people other than Apple (though often alongside other formats, rather than as the only format)
I've always figured that MS execs were smart enough to know that their products are garbage. This just confirms that.
It's nice to rely on the fact that most people have this installed.
Kinda like how it's nice to rely on the fact that everyone uses Internet Explorer. How irritating.
President Ed Black wrote letters to Secretary of State Colin Powell and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, telling them he knew they had been asked to "take extraordinary actions" because of the European decision.
Black urged them not to intervene. He said Microsoft was pressuring the U.S. government to pressure the European Union to ease off Microsoft.
Am I the only European here scared by this snipet from the Reuters article? Are we going to be bombed? Colin Powell is involved, next will it be Rumsfeld? What kind of excuse will he find this time?
I'll do it for cheesy poofs.
Standards are needed - and despite Real's protestations to the contrary, there are two main reasons their "product" has lost market share left and right.
#1, they feel the need to load it down over and over with spyware - especially that Gator crap. And then they put in the constant-nagware messenger of their OWN with that "Real Messenger" garbage.
#2, their encoding schemes SUCK. Compared to the visual quality of Divx encoding, WMF, or even earlier-series Quicktime (which had some real nasty blocking problems), even modern Realplayer blows chunks.
This exec spreads fear and dissent. But it is all lies. He lies. Alternatives to Windows for individuals (Customers, if you will) are often obtained for the cost of 720MB of bandwidth, which is often "unlimited" or "unmetered" over the course of a month and already paid for. The only cost involved for an individual to switch is the time and effort to learn the other operating system. The cost for a company will be high since they are expected to compensate their employees for their time. But the cost for individuals to switch is low. If they are a homeless greasy bum with nothing else to do, naturally this cost will be very low.
We will surround their pricey vendor lock-in, and then it will be they who will be surrounded. We will continue to give away our free alternative operating systems for the price of what it costs you to download it, and a shoe.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
I think that if M$ had decided upon an open source standard media format, this would have been a mute point, but since they created a proprietary format (for better or for worse), their monopoly of the OS Market puts them in a uniquely vulnerable position. By essentially forcing all Windows users to use WMP whether they want to or not, they have carefully, if not cleverly, created a situation where a monopolistic practice can almost be explained away. I think that we can all agree that Real is destined for the garbage heap. Back before WMP, Real survived because of their accidental monopoly. It is a sad day when even Microsoft can make a product better than yours. Quicktime may become a contender faster than everyone thinks. Apple gives away their Quicktime Streaming Server software for FREE, with unlimited user licenses. They do bundle Quicktime with the Mac OS, but only because the only other medial player available for a long time was Real. I now have Windows Media Player, Quicktime, and Real running on my Mac. The only one that I want to get rid of is Real. WMP for Mac is a very simple interpretation. It only plays the Windows Media format files, but it does it well enough and finally is integrated with the Web browser so that I don't have to download all of the links anymore.
Why doesn't anything interesting happen when I have mod points?
My options are
At a cost of CAD $399 (not including the box) my choice will be #2
And really, MFC gets a bit of a bad rap. Sure, Document/View is horrible, but other parts of MFC are pretty well done. That, and one thing MS has done pretty well is release a good IDE. It's mostly consistent, and yeah, .NET IDE is drastically different at first, but it took me about 5 minutes to get it to behave like VC 6.
Now please just don't get me started on the clusterf*ck known as COM/DCOM or the abomination that is .NET... both of which make me glad I switched to Linux 3 years ago at home.
I have been thinking all week why the NIST should standardize the windows API.
I think that NIST would be better than ISO/ANSI/IEEE, and they have a working agreement with ANSI. Also the specification would cost less (if at all) than an ANSI/ISO version.
By standardizing the API, you immediately have the government buy the software that uses this standard. It would make our country secure not to be dependent upon one single supplier of an OS (as much as Microsoft thinks otherwise).
It also means that Windows stops being the moving target that it is.
Before you troll me with free enterprise/right to innovate/unnecessary/linux blah blah blah, anything that lessens the cost for everybody is a good idea. The OS is the only thing that has increased in cost as compared to other parts to the computer.
I know linux is free, but the fact remains that the vast majority of computer users use a Microsoft product, and wants to keep their software investment minimal (even though all the software companies want us to continually upgrade).
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
"Inside are more classic examples of what one should never write in an internal memo...."
I disagree. It is sometimes one's duty to point out that one's employer has weaknesses. These are exactly the sort of things one *should* write in internal memos to people who can and should do things about them. *Good* leadership wants to hear about the company's weak spots so that they may be addressed.
Yes, sometimes bearing bad news gets you fired. In the short run that's really bad, but in the long run I'd rather not be working for weaklings and cowards anyway.
I reckon you have never been to the red-light district of Amsterdam...
This is a common tactic that is used to confuse people into thinking that Microsoft is just trying to do normal business and not using monopolistic tactics to keep people from switching OS's. Almost everything Microsoft does is designed around keeping people from switching. That includes, extending standards, proprietary file formats, licensing agreements ect. You can never stop Microsoft until you break their tactics. Of course, they camouflage their real tactics with simple analogies that they expect everyone to believe.
There is a huge switching cost to using a different operating system
The switching cost definately is a reason for large companies not to switch to Linux, but there is a totally different reason for small companies. I have been working with, for, and around small companies (25 employees) for years and almost all of them are running some flavor of windows/windows server because Bob from accounting knows about computers and knows how to fix issues if they come up. These companies do not have the budget for a full time system administrator, so they make do with what they've got. Since most people are running windows at home, Windows is going to be the easiest thing for these companies to use at work.
Johnkoerner.com
I'll place my vote with "Because the competition spends more time complaining about fairness then they do producing a quality product" option.
For years, I hated installing RealPlayer. For a long time it was the standard when it came to streaming media. I hated having to mount Sherpa guided expeditions through real.com in order to find the real player. Only to have to do so again a month or two later after my version 'expired' and had to be 'upgraded'. I hated having to uncheck multiple check boxes in order to keep from being bothered by requests to buy the full version, but those prompts would still appear.
I came to prefer Windows Media Player for most streaming as it offered a far better experience then Real did. Feel free to blame Microsoft for driving Real to such tactics if you want... always remember that it was up to Real in the end how to treat their customers.
Yes, there are alternatives to Real, however for my needs, Windows Media Player does handles most of them. (although more recently, iTunes is beating it out for almost anything audio).
I for one welcome our new/old Microsoft masters! Almost everything I need in a single box? I call it Windows 2000.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
There is absolutely no need to trash Microsoft this time... they did it themselves!
'There is a huge switching cost to using a different operating system [as in not Windows],' he [a MS exec] wrote Gates. 'It is this switching cost that has given customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO, our lack of a sexy version at times...'
and
'In short, without this exclusive franchise called the Windows API, we would have been dead a long time ago,' from Microsoft Sr. VP Bob Muglia.
and isn't that the truth? I write software for a living. If I did my job as bad as Microsoft has over the years, I'd be fired!
If I lived under a brutal dictatorship, I'd want someone to intervene on my behalf
Are you really sure about that?
I live in Spain, which had a dictator (who was sometimes brutal) up until about 25 years ago. But if you ask people today I think most would tell you that they wouldn't have wanted the USA to invade to get rid of him.
People everywhere have pride. They like to sort out their own problems. That's as true in the USA as anywhere else. I'm sure if Bush suddenly decided he was a dictator and was going to halt democratic elections the people of the USA wouldn't be clamouring for the Europeans or Chinese to "liberate" them.
> Then your computers must be from some magical fairy land where patches never come out, new versions of XXX are never released and users never break anything.
Oh Jesus! That made me laugh really hard. I remember trying to show a new website to a manager once. The site was coded with XHTML and CSS. He was running IE 5.0 at the time; this was about a month ago. I guess up until that point, he thought his system was running perfectly, too. And he was wrong. When he pulled up the site to look at it, the CSS didn't show up so all he could see was the basic web page -- and he got hopping mad about it; asking why we spent so much money developing it. He basically shot first and forgot to ask questions later. He's the manager nobody likes very much, so I guess IT just kept skipping his office upgrades, as punishment. When I updated his system, he asked what I did with the old crappy site because he wanted to show someone how much money we wasted. He liked the *new* site though.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
That is precicly what this is about, everyone realizes that switching costs are high in software, and standardization is really nice for everyone involved. Having control of the standards is a very valuable thing, as you can collect some value from uses (as long as the value is lower than switching costs). The issue is whether MS used their Windows monopoly to extend standards they contol to other markets (in this case media players). That is illegal.
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
I always thought it was so cheesy when the villian in some movie would capture the hero and say, "I want you to die knowing my evil plot. This will be my last punishment." Then you just know the hero is going to escape, and use this newfound knowledge to thwart the villian. This has been so overdone that you'd think everyone would have seen it at least once and gone "mental note..."
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
Let's see -- it seems that with every release of Windows the printing specifications have changed. Enough to break quirky old app's that *WILL* remain running until I deem necessary. I'm also getting sick of digging in different places for system settings. In Windows 98 they were here, then in 2K over there, and now with XP someplace else.
... and you know, most of the Netware servers are notorious for running *YEARS* without a reboot or any issues. My record is just under a decade before I _really_ had to replace the last Netware 3.12 server (every fan in the system was dead after we finally found where it was hidden :).
... buh-bye Microsoft. Too much money (WAY TOO MUCH) much too fast...
Have you USED their operating systems? Now, have you *USED* Linux and OS X extensively. I have placed each platform in front of myself and used it solely at home for months on end with each. The Windows box almost got thrown out the Window, but stopped myself short (good hardware) and reformatted Linux and used that. Then I put a Mac in front of myself and continue to use that to this day (Linux is still plugging away in the basement, thank you).
Have you ever used & maintained a Windows Server? How about BSD? Linux? QNX? Netware? Well, again, I have. It also happens to be my job. There's little wonder why there are -0- Windows servers in the data-centers
And people don't wonder why I've been mythodically replacing the Windows boxes in the offices with Linux and Mac's. Particularly after they're up and running on their new system.
As for Microsoft business practices... Yeah, I still want my many THOUSANDS of dollars back for Windows licensing that I _had_ to purchase if I wanted decent hardware through normal OEM channels from many years ago. Funny, but those servers are still running Linux to this day...
I don't care that they dominate the market. Their operating system, well, does suck pretty bad. They've never been leaders, but wanna-be followers who have stolen and cheated their way to the top.
I love Apple's offerings today -- if you've worked with their stuff you'd understand. I wouldn't be without my iPod, and until you sit in front of a iSight you just won't understand. I also have little doubt that if Apple had risen to the top they'd pull the exact same tricks IBM did, Microsoft is, and the next big company probably will. In the mean time
It is real easy to see that Apple is doing most of the stuff that MS is doing, with the only difference being that Apple has an extremely small market share.
The other difference is that Microsoft is a monopolist, and has been convicted of this in a court of law in the U.S. This is a sufficient difference, because the law applies differently to monopolies than it does to other companies. That's how antitrust laws work.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Not exactly
/* first */ /* then */
Despite the fact that Windows is more prone to things like viruses and malwares (which'd not be the case if it's not the dominant OS), its API is a pain in the ass to use compared to POSIX. Their Platform SDK documentation in MSDN isn't very useful either. Yes MSDN is big, but that's just because it includes a lot of useless information that you don't want. The Win32 APIs themselves look ugly compared to POSIX's. Say, for example, I want to do an mmap.
In Linux, it is:
void * mmap(void *start, size_t length, int prot , int flags, int fd, off_t offset);
Simple, elegant.
In Windows, the function calls stink just from the look of it.
HANDLE CreateFileMapping(
HANDLE hFile,
LPSECURITY_ATTRIBUTES lpAttributes,
DWORD flProtect,
DWORD dwMaximumSizeHigh,
DWORD dwMaximumSizeLow,
LPCTSTR lpName
);
LPVOID MapViewOfFile(
HANDLE hFileMappingObject,
DWORD dwDesiredAccess,
DWORD dwFileOffsetHigh,
DWORD dwFileOffsetLow,
SIZE_T dwNumberOfBytesToMap
);
You see... I just want a pointer where I can access it as a file. In Windows I need to write more code, memorize more parameters and (just one in this example) data types just to do simple file mapping. In POSIX it's a breeze.
By unbundling Media Player, users are *forced* to "care", because they'll have to manually install software to play media files with. If they "don't care", they'll never get to play anything.
It's true that markets aren't fair. But they *are* supposed to be "free markets". A market in which any new entrant has no chance of getting a foothold, and the factors causing that are 100% predictable/static, is not free. And non-free markets are very bad, because they screw up the core ideas of capitalism. Maybe not everyone can have a share of the money/market, but everyone should have a *chance* of doing so, not be frozen out by 100% predictable/static factors. Capitalism depends on some chaos and instability in the system.
MS is singled out for two reasons. First, because Windows is a monopoly. And second, because Windows maintains its monopoly, not by being good, by just being a monopoly. Windows has a monopoly because it supports a wide range of hardware, right? Nope, it's the other way round, Windows is a monopoly because hardware devices support *it*.
Businesses are not like nature. Nature is not directed by self aware entities making choices.
Businesses don't think or make choices for themselves. Businesses are ethereal structures that only exist by the permission of the society/government.
Businesses are made of people that wield power and make decisions.
Those people will try to convince society/government that their business is good for the public and that they should retain control.
Those people make choices that will help customers/society/technology/progress or hurt it.
Those people are ethical or not.
Those people can delude themselves that unethical behaviour is for the good of the business to benefit their own greed at the expense of others.
Those people will hide behind the face of a business to avoid showing their ethics whenever they know they are being unethical.
Since a business is not a real entity, if a society/government chooses, it can disband a business and take away everything from it.
Business does not equate directly to money.
Money is an intended side effect.
Business can be run ethically and still be competitive and make money. Many businesses do. Because the individuals running the business make ethical choices.
Unethical business practices is like harboring a traitor. How long before their traitorous values are used against you? Employees that are not ethical outside the business cannot be trusted to be ethical inside the business.
People who are ethical fight within a business against unethical actions. When unsupported, ethical people will leave businesses that don't reinforce ethics and the degeneration spirals.
I have personally watched businesses implode because of exactly this kind of problem.
There are business ethics - it is the ethics of the individuals running the business.
The truth is that Bill Gates doesn't trust the society that he lives in to make the best choices and will push society to his own benefit.
You act like this place is full of Microsoft "apologists," when the majority of the readers are rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth radicals who think everything should be free.
In case you haven't noticed, Slashdot is full of 'foaming-at-the-mouth' loons from both sides of the aisle. The difference between the two groups is minor, even trivial; they both want everyone else to think the same lock-step, ask-no-questions, vomit-the-party-line way that they do, and view any opposition to their blather as heresy. The actual argument is irrelevant when it comes to fanatics; they're all the same animal, all looking to impose their morally/intellectually superior view on everyone else.
Fanatics are the bane of civilized society. Fanatics oppose freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and freedom of action. Fanatics are little would-be tin-pot dictators whose most cherished goal is to gain power over everyone else around them. The actual point of contention is is just a means to achieve this; it's the fanaticism itself, and the imposition of it on everyone else, that's the real goal.
So we have groups like this:
- MS is evil. Down with Satan!
- I worship Bill Gates! I dream of blowing him!
And like this:
- Open source = communism! Communists suck!
- Open source is divine writ!
Not to mention this:
- monopoly capitalism and corporate oligarchy are they greatest economic systems on the planet! I know, 'cuz I'm so smart and cool I'm going to be in the inner circle someday - I just know it!
- socialism is the only way to go! For the 'greater good'. Which is defined by my own morally superior self, of course. Bow down before me, you ignorant, capitalist swine!
And like this:
- Free software is anti-capitalist!
- All software should be free! Kill the capitalist pigs!
And, of course, this:
- The RIAA/MPAA are the Holy Church! Kill the piratical, thieving infidels! Oh, and ignore the fact that copyright violation is neither piracy nor theft, we'll be sure to buy enough Congressmen to change that soon enough!
- information wants to be freeeeee! Unless it's my credit card number, and social security number, and my email password, and, um, forget that, at least it wants to be free when I'm downloading music that I'm going to keep and have no intention of ever buying!
Fanatics, one and all. Filthy little vermin who take great joy in trying to make the vast majority of us moderates miserable - because how else can you tell whether or not you have power over someone, unless you make them miserable?
Would that we could sterilize them all at birth. Or at least conduct some post-natal abortions.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
Americans of the late 19th century would have understood. Having been beaten into economic submission by the railroad and oil trusts, they howled for reform. That's how we got the laws that occasionally have been used to protect us: citizen action. Unfortunately, the sorry history of US antitrust law since is one of big money obstructing progress and undoing results at nearly every step.
If we're ever to get out from under the yoke of our Microsofts and Wal-Marts, which depress innovation, cripple competition, batter markets and saddle society with a host of costs and social ills, we'll need to resurrect that lost spirit of the engaged American--the citizen who knows his interests and how to fight for them.