Slashdot Mirror
Appeals Court OKs Microsoft Antitrust Settlement
mbstone writes "The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has upheld [pdf] the settlement reached between Microsoft and the U.S. Justice Department in the antitrust case filed in 1998, beating back a challenge by Massachusetts, the only state that didn't settle. Many critics, of course, believe that Attorney General John Ashcroft took a dive on the case which was originally filed by former Clinton Administration Attorney General Janet Reno."
I wonder what'll happen in the EU anti-trust sanctions. If they manage to get off the hook there, it'll be hard to convinve me that they didn't buy the European politicians.
Under construction: swpat politics overview article
The blame starts with Reno and the people that were assigned to the case. A big dose of blame then belongs with the idiot Judges involved.
Blaming Ashcroft if demonstration of ignorance caused by political based hatred.
The anti-trust case seemed to disappear from the media very quickly once the Bush administration came in. I think Microsoft is going to get less support now because of the EU anti-trust lawsuits as well. It will be interesting to see if there is a different decision reached between the states and the EU.
GroupShares Inc. - A Free and Interactive Investment Community
-------
artlu.net
I suppose after 6 years the state decided it had sunk enough money into this morass and tried to cut its losses.
"Piter, too, is dead."
The government is notorious for being both sloppy with its networks and being computer illiterate. The prosecutor in the anti-trust case didn't even have an email address as of late 2000.
There was an article by Scott Hacker called He who controls the boot loader. It mentions how the DOJ missed the real issue entirely.
It wasn't web integration that did the damage. It was Microsoft classifying its boot loader as a trade secret that toppled competition.
Declining returns means more effort put in for less yield, like a mine what was initially opened because rich deposites of ore were found on the surface, now poorer ore is deeper down and requires more expense to extract. Windows, in case you haven't noticed, and to which I alluded, isn't about the operating system, but all the junk that comes bundled with it. To maintain the same profit margin and growth Microsoft has enjoyed for years they need to find some way for you the NEED the n, n+1, n+2...nth version but making it do all sorts of things a computer operating system isn't at all about.
On an unrelated topic, something like the RIAA example of not knowing how to deal with all the innovation comming in.
The RIAA simply wasn't forward looking, they were content to sit on their fat asses and collect on old works, invent new manufactured acts of shite music and screw to death anyone who tried to cut their own slice of the pie. Simply put, it was all about fear of losing control and not wanting to actually work out where music needed to go for the future, like MP3's and such. They've got a buddy in Microsoft though, who will work with them to ensure they both get rich and keep consumers under their thumb with DMCA an DRM.
On the other hand, Linux may commercialize, gain momentum and start having all the risks the windows market have. But, by the way how things are set up right now. At least I can control what goes into my source/applicaiton tree.
The beauty of Linux is the many distros and different packaging available. You can build your own OS with no more or no less than you need. It's far harder for some scumbags to put in a half-assed effort and distribute bug-riddled code, since it's checked by many eyes. It's also very hard for a special interest to force upon Linux things like DRM, since the code is open and a reasonably bright programmer could work around it. Which probably has something to do with more crap winding up in firmware for devices, like DVD drives, which are outside a programmers control.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
...how is this a victory for consumers when most of them complain that they buy Windows and then need seperate antivirus software, seperate firewall, and seperate software to do everything? Making MS not bundle WMP or IE with their software is just going to make it more difficult for Joe Public consumer and they'll probably just go to Microsoft.com and download all the MS software anyway.
So does this mean that PC companies like Dell will be able to bundle RealPlayer with their PCs instead of WMP? How does this benefit the consumer? It's just going to lead to more people clogging up support sites with basic queries as they try to use the WMP and find out that it's called RealPlayer, is shit, and has a different interface.
Yet another insane BushCo attack/apology, from an Anonymous inverted Coward. Reno won her antitrust case against M$. Ashcroft ignored the monopoly, cutting a cheap deal that keeps M$ in control of the sick state of disrepair from which we all suffer. The fact that Ashcroft is required to protect us from cyberterror is yet another reason the guy should be fired and prosecuted for malfeasance, and even treason. But of course, ACs like the parent poster will instead call for his elevation to the Supreme Court for his crimes. Why do they hate America?
--
make install -not war
MS has more money than they have use for anyway. What matters is whether or not they're going to have to disist the forced exclusive bundling of Windows Media Player with Microsoft Windows.
Look up sometime how much money Microsoft is throwing away on the XBox with no apparent hope of recouping a cent of it anytime in the forseeable future. Next to that 500 million euros doesn't seem significant.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts