Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Won't Appeal EU Ruling

Ec|ipse writes "Microsoft has decided not to appeal the European court order to implement antitrust sanctions, Instead, Microsoft hopes to win their main appeal that they (Microsoft) had abused their software dominance."

188 comments

  1. Heh by WillerZ · · Score: 5, Funny

    Probably realised the lawyers would cost more than the fines.

    --
    I guess today is a passable day to die.
    1. Re:Heh by PopeAlien · · Score: 2, Funny

      ..or its much simpler to simply buy the EU and bundle free copies of Euro-Clippy with all products to appease the grumpy naysayers that want 'competition' instead of 'innovation'. Hey look! a paperclip! and its talking to me!

    2. Re:Heh by bonch · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As if Microsoft cares. They're happy to pay lawyer's fees if it saves them face. I think they must've recognized that in some way, they simply would not win and that their money is better-spent on some different campaign. Expect them to publicly play "oppressed victim of the EU" soon.

    3. Re:Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Probably not if they pay the lawyers in US$ and the fine in Euros.

    4. Re:Heh by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      A company as big as Microsoft almost certainly has staff attorneys, likely getting paid whether they are actually doing anything or not. In that sense, it's almost more cost-effective to go ahead and appeal; you stand some chance of winning while paying the same amount instead of 0% by not trying.

    5. Re:Heh by DarkMantle · · Score: 1

      But you see, Competition stems Innovation.

      For example, prior to Firefox's release and initial succes. Microsoft was going to use a patched version of IE 6 in longhorn. After firefox they finally decided on making an IE 7.

      I just hope this time it can be removed.

      --
      DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
    6. Re:Heh by ischorr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What makes you think that IE 7 won't simply be a "patched version of IE 6"?

      I don't doubt that regardless of Firefox's emergence as a hotshot browser, Microsoft would not have been providing a browser in Longhorn with particularly new or innovative functionality, but it'd be odd for the marketing droids to allow IE to retain the "IE 6" moniker. Instead, I'd expect it to be named "IE NG" (next-generation) or something similar, after they'd revamped it with an Avalon interface (or something)?

    7. Re:Heh by truthsearch · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "...if it saves them face"

      No, if it saves them market share. It should be pretty obvious by now they don't care what you think of them, as long as you continue to "need" their software and no markets are closed off to them. They fight tooth and nail when a market is open to more competition for them or if they have to limit the bundling of their software. But patent and monopoly abuse cases are just settled, saving them money.

    8. Re:Heh by kkovach · · Score: 0

      Are you sure you want to remove Internet Explorer 7?

      | OK | | Cancel |

      --
      The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act.
    9. Re:Heh by edxwelch · · Score: 2, Funny

      Plus, they already wasted enough money trying to buy off the CCIA $10M and Novell

    10. Re:Heh by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      Their lawyers may also have had difficulty finding grounds for appeal which didn't attack the original ruling. I would't read much into this.

    11. Re:Heh by flyingsquid · · Score: 2, Funny
      they simply would not win and that their money is better-spent on some different campaign.

      Like maybe a military campaign? I can almost picture Gates rubbing his hands together in Redmond and going, "Sure, I'll let you win this round, Europe" before launching his full-scale invasion of Europe.

      Of course, the winter assault on Moscow will be his undoing.

    12. Re:Heh by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they realized that at this point everyone knows they are slime it hasn't hurt their profit margins a bit. Spending money on lawyers to defend percieved honor that they don't have would hurt their profit margins however.

    13. Re:Heh by DarkMantle · · Score: 1

      I can't click the OK button :(

      --
      DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
    14. Re:Heh by purple_cobra · · Score: 2, Funny

      And when his tanks fall stationary after experiencing a BSOD I'll bop him with my Mac. :)

    15. Re:Heh by Not_Wiggins · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, if it saves them market share.

      More to the point, it costs them less to pay legal fees and fines than it would cost them to "play fair." I don't think any legal system moves fast enough to make the cost of non-compliance more expensive to Microsoft than the cost of compliance; hence, they'll continue to play these legal games.

      --
      Diplomacy is the art of saying, "Nice doggie!" until you can find a rock.
  2. Why media player? by Bumjubeo · · Score: 2, Funny

    So they couldnt get internet explorer, they targeted media player. Microsoft sure has been playing it smart, I want a stripped down version without WMP!

    1. Re:Why media player? by geekylinuxkid · · Score: 1

      I want one to be available, not saying I would use it however. Everyone knows debian is the best. ;) It would be one step closer to 'domination.'

    2. Re:Why media player? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What I want is to be able to remove Media Player, Internet Explorer, and Outlook Express.

      These three are just security holes.

    3. Re:Why media player? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      # apt-get install iexplore-base gtk-iexplore

    4. Re:Why media player? by oconnorcjo · · Score: 4, Interesting
      What I want is to be able to remove Media Player, Internet Explorer, and Outlook Express.

      These three are just security holes.

      They are just three SYMPTOMS of one security hole and that security hole is called ActiveX. If Microsoft was REAL serious about security in Longhorn, ActiveX would be rewritten with security in mind. Anything that is "ActiveX aware" can reformat your hard drive and more. These things include MS Office, IE, Outlook Express, Outlook, WMP, and the list goes on. COM/OLE objects are great but having a web site be able to run/install a com object onto a machine from IE is INSANE!!!! Somebody at Microsoft should have asked "what is to stop someone from abusing this technology?" and then decided not to implement it because they did not have a good answer to that question. If it was not for the lack of security in ActiveX technologies, MS security would not be so abismally shoddy.

      --
      I miss the Karma Whores.
    5. Re:Why media player? by iwan-nl · · Score: 1

      And msn! Don't forget msn!

      --
      I'm trying to improve my English. Please correct me on any spelling/grammar errors in this post.
    6. Re:Why media player? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Active X is only one of the security holes. Most of the recent security problems with IE, Outlook, MS in general have nothing to do with Active X. Heck, even SP 2, which disables Active X by default, still leaves the PC prone to several buffer overflow attacks and more.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  3. It's a shame by SCHecklerX · · Score: 3, Insightful
    That nothing was really done to a company that was found guilty of abusing its monopoly power

    Microsoft are criminals. Nobody should be doing business with them.

    1. Re:It's a shame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Are you kidding?

      MS is a gang of criminals?

      What about EVERYONE who downloads a MP3 but never buys the album.

      Are they a bunch of criminal and should they be ignored.

      the anti-trust case was all political anyway, it means nothing, it didn't mean anythign when the doj decided it except that the doj wanted a cut of the proverbial MS pie and since BIll wasn't willign to cough up the dough in te normal fashion of bribes they decided to take it.

      stop spewing forth the verbal garbage adn think before you post.

    2. Re:It's a shame by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      By that measure, IBM are also criminals, yet a lot of people on this forum seem to hold them up as bastions of all that is good. MS was found guilty of abusing its manopoly, but this case was just money grabbing on the part of the EU (and I live in the EU) - an OS is expected to be able to do certain things out of the box, and I have no issues with MS bundling MediaPlayer to fulfil those expectations.

      But then, what do I care anymore, I just moved to the Mac.

    3. Re:It's a shame by PedanticSpellingTrol · · Score: 1
      All your processor are belong to us.

      Love, Big Blue.

    4. Re:It's a shame by KiltedKnight · · Score: 1
      I wholeheartedly agree with you.

      That aside, this is just the EU's way of saying that they don't want to be utterly beholden to a US-based corporation for everything. In terms of the EU ruling, it's fines and penalties.

      With the US ruling, Microsoft is to donate computers, equipment, etc, to schools. Sounds rather fishy, huh? They end up geting exactly what they want... a way into the schools... a venue predominantly occupied by Apple.

      --
      OCO is Loco
    5. Re:It's a shame by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Interesting
      IBM got bitch slapped for their abuses of their monopoly status. One of the reasons they couldn't market OS/2 effectively was because they were being so careful not to violate the terms of their agreement with the DOJ. Among other things, they were not allowed to announce products or features of products prior to the release of the product. If Microsoft were to be put under the restrictions that IBM was, we wouldn't hear anything out of them for the next two decades, because all of their current advertising methods would be in violation of the agreement.

      IBM is no longer the monopolist it once was, in large part because of the punishment they suffered for abusing their position. I don't think you could say the same of Microsoft. And I'm sure that Bill can accumulate the amount of the fine by simply going through the couches at his mansion.

      We could take a page from their marketing department though. Linus should announce a huge list of features for the 2.7/2.8 kernel series. If they don't all make it in, he can just announce that they've just been "delayed" until the "Linux Longhorn" release in 2020. Heh heh heh...

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    6. Re:It's a shame by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

      The difference being, of course, that IBM paid for it. There has yet been no justice for what Microsoft has done.

    7. Re:It's a shame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it's a shame that people can be paid a large sum to look the other way. This is the only explanation as to why M$ got off to easily.

      Some government you have there, yes, it's a shame.

    8. Re:It's a shame by bob+beta · · Score: 1

      Nope. The case against IBM didn't result in IBM being 'punished' in any of the colorful ways that people suggest Microsoft be punished.

      IBM couldn't market OS/2 because they were in the PC hardware business. With the royalties they wanted for each copy of OS/2 bundled, PC clone makers would often be giving more money to their competitor in the hardware business (IBM) than they would make themselves. Not a good way to compete in the hardware market. It was much more attractive to bundle Microsoft software, because MS wasn't a competitor.

  4. MicroSoft by kerby74 · · Score: 5, Funny

    But.... Longhorn will fix all this, we promise.

  5. Nah, most probably by DJPaddy · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...They are afraid that some of the people in court might be reading slashdot, and saw yesterday's Ballmer ad, so they decided to abandon the case until this is forgotten. After all nobody wants to be laughed by a federal judge.

    1. Re:Nah, most probably by paulatz · · Score: 1

      After all nobody wants to be laughed by a federal judge. There is no fedral judge in europe.

      --
      this post contain no useful information, no need to mod it down
    2. Re:Nah, most probably by bonch · · Score: 1

      I know it was funny, but to be fair (and for the sake of informing) it wasn't really an ad. It was an internal company joke. I imagine if you work for a giant like Microsoft, it helps morale to see your bosses not taking themselves quite so seriously once in a while.

    3. Re:Nah, most probably by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      Speaking for myself I prefer to see my bosses doing their best to run the company in such a way that they increase my wages, don't lose me my job and manage to business to sensible long term goals.

      Anything which isn't directly related to doing that e.g. writing pointless circulars announcing great new initiative #18472, spending time telling us all how it great it is to cruise around in the company yacht and telling us our wages will be frozen for year because of a lack of money ( which curiosily doesn't affect the comany yacht or the vast amount of money printing glossy brochures for new initiative #18472 or sycophantic company newspapers ).

    4. Re:Nah, most probably by alw53 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually MS seems to make pissing off judges part of their strategy. If they can get the judge to do something foolish, they get an appealable issue. This has worked in the past for them. I'm not really sure how well it works in Europe, probably U.S. is not too popular and MS even less so.

    5. Re:Nah, most probably by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YHBT. YHL. HAND.

      Love,
      bonch (aka rd_syringe aka Overly Critical Guy)

  6. So let me get this straight... by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft will accept the penalty incurred under the anti-trust ruling, but will still appeal the foundation ruling in general?

    I'm glad IANAL.

    --

    I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    1. Re:So let me get this straight... by dknight · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I havent RTFA, of course, but it seems to me that they're shooting to have the bigger case overturned. Why pay the court costs to fight 2 battles, when you can just fight one? If they get the decision overturned, then the penalties will cease to be. Saves time and money for them.

    2. Re:So let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      I'm glad IANAL.

      So... you want to hook up or something?

    3. Re:So let me get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL... so much for getting it straight...

    4. Re:So let me get this straight... by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1

      That's right. But it seems to me that by accepting the penalty, they're telling the court that they agree with the original ruling to a small extent - thus validating it. I can't imagine this not being used against them in some way.

      --

      I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    5. Re:So let me get this straight... by dknight · · Score: 1

      Nah, I mean, think of it this way:

      IF they were guilty, they would have no problem with that punishment. But since they're not (as far as they're concerned), they're gonna fight the ruling that says they are, and not the punishment itself.

      Basically its saying "yes, the punishment fits the crime... but we're not guilty of the crime"

    6. Re:So let me get this straight... by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1

      And this would be the point where the jury's head explodes? ;-)

      --

      I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    7. Re:So let me get this straight... by AkaXakA · · Score: 1

      And this would be the point where there isn't a jury.

  7. WTF? by ackthpt · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Microsoft has decided not to appeal the European court order to implement antitrust sanctions, Instead, Microsoft hopes to win their main appeal that they (Microsoft) had abused their software dominance."

    Damn, good sportsmanship, of all the low-down-sneaky tactics. Without Microsoft's Euro antics what are we supposed to discuss!!! Gotta dig for more dirt on other things, maybe run that article about Will Eisner dying or something, man, this really cuts into /. material...

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  8. Headline by WillerZ · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't it read: Microsoft hopes to win their main appeal that they (Microsoft) had *not* abused their software dominance.

    Either that or: Microsoft hopes to win their main appeal against the ruling that they (Microsoft) had abused their software dominance.

    --
    I guess today is a passable day to die.
    1. Re:Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you must be new here, welcome to teh slashdot!

    2. Re:Headline by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      From the context of the sentence, it could only logically be the latter. The wording certainly was screwed up though.

  9. So, what issues are they not appealing? by Onimaru · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm no expert in the EU legal system, so I could be out to lunch here, but I don't think an appeal is just another chance to duke it out. Usually there have to be specific issues preserved and reopened on appeal, and I can't think of what those issues would be in such a decision. Does anyone know what their grounds for appeal would have been? The law student in me is deathly curious.

    --
    adam b.
  10. Hadn't? by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

    ... don't you mean their appeal that they hadn't abused the services? Are they appealing the decision that they had, or is their appeal actually that they had abused the services?

    --
    stuff |
  11. API's by digitalchinky · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was kind of hoping they would release the API's to the 'public' rather than just those willing to pay the extortion fee.

    Nice to see they are doing something, it's better than dragging it through the courts for years on end.

    1. Re:API's by Frankie70 · · Score: 1

      What API's are you talking about?

    2. Re:API's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you not read the article or follow the court case at all?

    3. Re:API's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are being forced at gunpoint to pay for their API's? I feel so bad for you!

  12. *eyebrow raising* by TechnologyX · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seems like they might have something up their sleeve.

    It would be nice to see them have to strip WMP and IE out of Windows, or at least preload Firefox and Opera on Windows along with IE. My friend just recently was ranting about "WHY in GODS NAME do I need to have Windows Media Player EMBEDDED into my server??"*

    *Disclaimer: I've never used any Windows based servers, and I haven't used Windows period since 1999, so I don't know if you can pull WMP out or anything.

    --
    Slashdot sucks
    1. Re:*eyebrow raising* by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Its called code reuse. Not done well, mind you, but MANY MANY linux distributions have the EXACT same problem.

      Take WMP for instance. It is really just a front end to the Windows Media API. Funny thing is, to install this arguably essential component of windows, Media PLayer comes with the package. They also do this for MAPI... thats why you get Outlook Express.

      In a nutshell, Windows started out as a bunch of tech demos for the underlying technology. Now Microsoft is developing the "Proof of concept" mini-apps into full fledged applications.

      P.S. Before the grammar nzi's strike, I do know that my spelling and grammar have a lot to be desired.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    2. Re:*eyebrow raising* by jacksonj04 · · Score: 1

      Nope. Windows Server 2003 ships with all the goodies. A quick Remote Desktop into mine (which is faily base, but stripped down slightly) reveals Media Player, CD Player, Sound Recorder, Outlook Express, Paint, Imaging, Calculator, NetMeeting, Journal Viewer...

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    3. Re:*eyebrow raising* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      > MANY MANY linux distributions have the EXACT same problem

      True for desktop software, but traditionally *Nix server software has very little code reuse (see Miguel's "Unix Sucks" paper). And then you have these elaborate systems like Gentoo where people can "solve" this supposed problem by recompiling everything.

      The Linux approach of simple standalone custom-compiled apps works best for hardened Internet servers. But there is an appeal for the Windows approach on the intranet -- there are server apps which call into DirectShow or whatever for Image processing and on Windows it's always just in there without having to for sysadmins to deal with a complex chain of dependancies or a custom compile.

    4. Re:*eyebrow raising* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      with most modern distros provided you aren't doing anything too fancy dependency hell is largely a thing of the past.

      debian in particular seems like it can be very clever at times

      someone sent me a deb of lazarus (which is not yet packaged in debian sarge or sid)

      dpkg said it couldn't install it because of dependency issues

      on the next run of apt it said theier was a package not completely installed and told me to run apt-get -f install

      on doing so apt happilly installed the original lazarus package and all the dependencies it needed!

      i haven't used rpm based distros much so i don't know if the integration with apt is as good.

      in my experiance even on woody systems it is very rare to need a dependency that there is not a suitable package of in the standard repositry to install the server app you need.

      sometimes you do get dependencies you don't really need though for example mediawiki needs imagemagick (i think it allws something else as well but imagemagick is what everyone uses) to provide an image converter but imagemagick has a dependency on certain X related libs.

    5. Re:*eyebrow raising* by archen · · Score: 2, Funny

      "WHY in GODS NAME do I need to have Windows Media Player EMBEDDED into my server??"

      Clippy: "It looks like SQL Server is dying and NTFS is corrupting as we speak. Would you like to watch a video to see how to press ctrl+alt+del and pray to God that your machine can still boot?"

    6. Re:*eyebrow raising* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On windows 2000/XP workstation, your gift from the DOJ is a control panel applet named "Set Program Access and Defaults" that lets you selectively hide IE, WMP, MSIMN, and/or MSMGS. That's right, hide. As in it goes and sets the "+h" attribute on their respective directories and clobbers the default shortcuts - per user. If you attempt to delete these directories, explorer will tell you they are in use. If you delete their contents, Windows File Protection will restore them moments later.

      For 2000 and 2003 server, you don't even get the courtesy of the aforementioned control panel. Sure, it's possible to have a 2000 Server without media player or messenger, but only because they didn't exist as such when it was released. 2003 adds WMP, but neither ships with Messenger. Thank god for small blessings, eh?

    7. Re:*eyebrow raising* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be nice to see them have to strip WMP and IE out of Windows, or at least preload Firefox and Opera on Windows along with IE.

      I think they should be forced to preload Safari as well.

    8. Re:*eyebrow raising* by alephnull42 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I do know that my spelling and grammar have a lot to be desired.

      You mean that your spelling and grammar leave a lot to be desired.

      *duck*

      --
      Not confused enough? http://translate.google.com/translate?u=www.slashdot.jp&hl=en&ie=UTF8&sl=ja&tl=en
    9. Re:*eyebrow raising* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am the the average Joe User.

      I don't want Firefox or Opera preinstalled.
      I don't want real player preinstalled.
      I don't want Quicktime preinstalled.
      I don't want MusicMatch preinstalled.
      I don't want AOL preinstalled.
      I don't care if IE is integrated.
      I don't care if WMP is integrated.

      I want a base computer that works and a set of CD's If I want extra programs added.

      Stop trying to force Microsoft to add more crap to my base system.
      At the same time, stop trying to force Microsoft to remove base components in the name of 'fairness'.

    10. Re:*eyebrow raising* by YU+Nicks+NE+Way · · Score: 1
      The Linux approach of simple standalone custom-compiled apps works best for hardened Internet servers
      And this explains why all the various items which compiled the libpbm handling libraries have needed to be patched over the past few weeks? I mean, tetex needs a fix because of a bug in the JPEG handling code in libpbm?

      You may complain about DLL Hell, but the "Oh, shit, I've got to patch that one, too?" hell that Linux sysadmins have been in recently is every bit as bad!
    11. Re:*eyebrow raising* by mwood · · Score: 1

      Why on earth would any portion of Windows Media be an "essential component" of a server?

    12. Re:*eyebrow raising* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, as configs become more complex and inter-related, the Windows "in the box" approach is often the best fit. (Although the GDI+ bug is a similar situation to libpbm.)

    13. Re:*eyebrow raising* by jimicus · · Score: 1

      I haven't read the ruling, but I'm wondering if it dictates that the version without Media Player must be significantly cheaper than the version with.

      If not, I think the thing up the sleeve will be:

      Microsoft Price List 2005
      Windows XP for OEMs (with Media Player): £59.99
      Windows XP for OEMs (without Media Player): £64.99

      Either that or something equally effective like they won't allow bulk discounts on the version without media player.

    14. Re:*eyebrow raising* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before the grammar nzi's strike, I do know that my spelling and grammar have a lot to be desired.

      But are you being a grammar nazi when you correct someone for misspelling the term "grammar nazi?"

    15. Re:*eyebrow raising* by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      Under most distros, you can update the library, and leave the app using it alone. If a bug is found in libc, you replace the libc library file, not all your apps.

      Code reuse is actually extremely common under Linux. libkde, libgnome, xlib, libc, ncurses...

    16. Re:*eyebrow raising* by YU+Nicks+NE+Way · · Score: 1

      Yes, Linux supports shared objects. However, the gp post to yours advocated static linkage for stability. It's a "pay me now or pay me later" kind of thing: if you depend on so's, you get so hell. If you don't, you get patch nightmares.

      Not a pretty picture, either way. (Grumble grumble off to patch a server at home...)

    17. Re:*eyebrow raising* by jazman · · Score: 1

      > P.S. Before the grammar nzi's strike

      It's "grammar Nazis", not "grammar nzi's."

  13. Who get the $$$ from the fine? by Ironsides · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm currious here, who get the 497 million euro fine? The EU or charities or who?

    --
    Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    1. Re:Who get the $$$ from the fine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The police state benevolence fund of course.

    2. Re:Who get the $$$ from the fine? by starseeker · · Score: 1

      Hopefully whoever buys Windows products in Europe for the next few years, since they're the ones who'll really pay it.

      To me it looks like a rather indirect form of taxing the European population, unless we really think Microsoft is just going to take a chunk out of profits.

      --
      "I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
    3. Re:Who get the $$$ from the fine? by tabdelgawad · · Score: 1

      The fines are still being appealed (who wouldn't appeal half a billion Euros in fines?!). MS only agreed to strip WMP from Windows.

      --
      Imposing Libertarian views on everyone online since 1992.
    4. Re:Who get the $$$ from the fine? by m50d · · Score: 1

      If it's a *fine* rather than damages, then it goes to the EU. I think some damages go to real, who lost money because people used windows media for their streaming and not real because windows media player was on every windows pc and real player wasn't. Or something like that.

      --
      I am trolling
    5. Re:Who get the $$$ from the fine? by SlashDread · · Score: 1

      Since when does *ANY* fine go elsewhere than the gov. inning it?

      I love tsunami's like the next guy, but if this money goes to tsunami victims, I'll be moving to Thailand.

    6. Re:Who get the $$$ from the fine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The smoking man...

    7. Re:Who get the $$$ from the fine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The EU is going to pay the US? What the hell for?

    8. Re:Who get the $$$ from the fine? by asuffield · · Score: 0, Troll

      We're talking about the same EU which has not managed to balance its accounts in ten years. That doesn't mean they lost money in the sense of not making a profit - it means they lost money in the sense of "money has gone and they do not know where it went". That fine is going to be embezzeled, of course.

  14. Not a major drag by gilesjuk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's not hard for them to put out another release without WMP. They release newer OS CDs all the time, the latest boxes of XP on the shelves have SP2 integrated.

    It will be interesting to see how many people choose to install WMP.

    1. Re:Not a major drag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that would be interesting, but the problem would be how they chose to ask the user.

      if it is an advanced screen you normally dont see, it would be useless.

      if you go on about how great WMP is before saying you can choose to NOT install it.

      or if you have to ask TO install it.

      all kinds of variance exists that would screw up the possible choice.

      im not advocating any particular option, all have their own problems.

    2. Re:Not a major drag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's a huge support problem, because a large number of applications suddenly become partially or wholely broken.

      Frankly, I can't imagine any OEM shipping a WMP-less version of Windows because they would have to take the calls when some doof's powerpoint won't play music.

    3. Re:Not a major drag by MoonBuggy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I refuse on principle to install WMP on my OSX box, the fact is that not having it has (AFAICS) put me at a disadvantage in that VLC (my primary player, handles near-anything & is FOSS) can only handle some .wmv files (and wmv files are the only things I've seen that it won't accept).

      As a non-MS using geek I have had to make a conscious decision (sensible or otherwise) not to use that particular piece of software and thereby deprived myself of certain content. For an average Windows user to firstly know what WMP is when IE tells them it 'Needs to be installed to view content', secondly see any reason not to install it and thirdly put up with 'Broken files' not playing because the alternatives won't play the .wmv is pretty damn unlikely.

    4. Re:Not a major drag by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Actually, you are at no disadvantage at all. WMP for OS X is appalling. It refuses to play almost anything I give it (including the last two .wmv files linked to from the /. front page. In contrast, VLC handles most things. I have yet to find something that VLC will not handle that the OS X version of WMP will, but I have found many things for which the reverse is true, including a number of .avi and .wmv files.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:Not a major drag by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      That's completely fair. WMV is a proprietary codec, and MS is restricting playback to ensure there is no challenge to their DRM regime.

      Of course, nobody said using WMV to encode *anything* was a good idea in the first place, because there are more portable DRM free formats.

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
    6. Re:Not a major drag by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

      Depends if the settlement says stop bundling Media player or stop bundling Windows media codecs. I can't imagine them blocking codecs, they're potentially used during installation of XP, when you get that ugly animation at the first bootup of XP.

  15. Next ie? by Hosting+Geek · · Score: 0

    Will ie be next?

    --
    For FREE NO ADS! 1GB/20GB PHP MySQL With a Control Panel Hosting
  16. Software dominance? by blcamp · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "Microsoft has decided not to appeal the European court order to implement antitrust sanctions, Instead, Microsoft hopes to win their main appeal that they (Microsoft) had abused their software dominance."

    Their "dominance" will wither away, and quickly, if they don't start doing something about security issues.

    Then what will they do? Sue customers for running away?

    --
    The problem with socialism is that they always run out of other people's money. - Margaret Thatcher
    1. Re:Software dominance? by apnu · · Score: 1

      Didn't they try that already? They tried to enforce EULA agreements with anybody who had a PC, the theory being: If you had a PC then you had a copy of Windows. And if you had a copy of Windows then you have to pay for it.

      Or maybe that happened in my Orwellian nightmares.

      --
      Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. -- Groucho Marx
    2. Re:Software dominance? by netsavior · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Their "dominance" will wither away, and quickly, if they don't start doing something about security issues.

      That's like saying the U.S. is going to start to lose population quickly if they don't do something about their Medical Care or Foreign Policy. Sure Canada might have a lower crime rate and better medical care, but people just aren't willing to move away from a life that is warm, familiar, easy, etc.

      No matter what happens to windows, users will probably never switch, and certainly not "Quickly" (speaking in terms of a percentage)

    3. Re:Software dominance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Highly subjective. From what I hear, Canadians cross the boarder into the USA to get major surgery. "better health care" I think means simply "socialized health care" which means they don't have to pay for it other than in higher taxes. It says nothing about the actual quality of the health care provided.

    4. Re:Software dominance? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, actually, both wrong (parent & grand parent).

      The dominance will stay for a while, but MS won't have large revenues either. Most people won't switch to *nix from windows just like that, BUT most people won't buy a new version of windows neither. That's why you see those weird statistics about win98 being still there in the top. Although, when these systems DO get really outdated (with hardware changes), most users WILL consider switching to linux if they know about it rather than buying windows.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    5. Re:Software dominance? by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      >Most people won't switch to *nix from windows

      Why is some unix the alternative? There's a popular and commercial and well-supported platform out there for the home user. Its called a Mac. I swear, reading some of these posts its like linux is the spoiler third-party candidate.

      1. Install some linux on ma's computer.
      2. Ma gets all confused with the command line and is sick of the lack of commercial apps and decides windows is the way to be and switches back.
      3. MS wins.

      Buy Ma a Mac and chances are that old XP box with all its problems will stay on the floor.

    6. Re:Software dominance? by wfberg · · Score: 1



      >Most people won't switch to *nix from windows

      Why is some unix the alternative? There's a popular and commercial and well-supported platform out there for the home user. Its called a Mac. I swear, reading some of these posts its like linux is the spoiler third-party candidate.


      MacOS/X is based on BSD. A *nix.

      Now, AtariOS on the other hand, there's a winner!

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    7. Re:Software dominance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What you hear is wrong. I don't know a single soul here who has gone south for surgery, and I know a lot of people who have had surgery myself included.

      It's a myth. Get over it.

      Of course occasionally you'll get some rich puke who decides to shop around for a specialist and ends up in the US, but the reverse happens too. The Toronto sick kids hospital (sickkids.ca) is constantly gettin foreigners coming in.

      Basically, if you're rich it doesn't matter what kind of health care system your country has.

    8. Re:Software dominance? by qkslvrwolf · · Score: 1

      There are lots of us who would be perfectly happy to move out of the states, if we could find someplace that would take us. I was researching Ireland for awhile, but the only nationality that couldn't get a visa without some sort of expensive sponsership was Americans. Could be wrong about that, but thats what I was seeing. Canada is possible, but you have to find a job first, then move. Which can be difficult.

      --
      Or have you only comfort...that stealthy thing that enters the house and guest then becomes host, then master - KG
    9. Re:Software dominance? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Long upgrade cycles make switching to a Mac even easier. VirtualPC currently runs at about 20-40% of the speed of the host system, so if the computer you are replacing is a few years old then you can still run all of your old programs at the same speed (except ones that require 3D acceleration, for now). QEMU is also progressing well and is apparently getting close to VirtualPC in terms of speed.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    10. Re:Software dominance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you sure? I built my 60 year old father a Linux box, which he much prefers to "that Windows crap".

      I was going to do the same for my mother, but her 166MHz machine would be too slow, where Windows 98 isn't.

  17. Media Player link by CPUgrind · · Score: 3, Funny

    So now when a link to a media file is clicked instead of opening Windows Media Player, Windows will probably open a Web Browser to download Windows Medial Player.

    1. Re:Media Player link by praseodym · · Score: 1

      Off course using a bug in IE so users don't get a warning.

    2. Re:Media Player link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...which someone will exploit :)

  18. No, no. Business as usual... by KontinMonet · · Score: 2, Informative

    From TFA: "...but it [MS] is continuing with a separate, main appeal against the Commission's decision that it abused the near monopoly of its Windows operating system..."

    So if it wins here, will sanctions eventually be dropped? It's just manoeuvring by MS surely.

    --
    Did he inhale?
  19. Congratulations Europe! by inteller · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You Lose! Now everyone selling this bastardized copy will be calling tech support asking "why can't I play this movie file like on my friends (with WMP) computer?

    1. Re:Congratulations Europe! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      newsflash: people use mp3.

    2. Re:Congratulations Europe! by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Really, they use mp3 to play back movies, huh?

      If you wanted to make an intelligent response, and still flip off the original poster, you would have said that most movie files people are trading around are in MPEG4 - DivX format, and WMP doesn't play it back out of the box, you need to install the codec yourself.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    3. Re:Congratulations Europe! by inteller · · Score: 1

      the beginning user doesn't use MP3s and they don't use divx. A typical home user uses Windows Movie Maker to make home videos. Likewise a LOT of streaming content is asx/asf and if you dont have SOME sort of media player out of the box you can't view either.

  20. What a Freakin' Waste of Time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this case going to benefit anybody but Real Networks or Apple? Does anybody really give a *#@*$ about a bundled media player? Isn't that like complaining that Microsoft is monopolizing the Mine Sweeper market? Honestly, this is a completely stupid case. I thought the point of breaking up the "Microsoft Monopoly" was so that people wouldn't be "forced" into using Microsoft's unstable and unsecure operation system - I didn't realize we were now concerning ourselves with some stupid mp3/video player. This is one time where I almost actually feel bad for Microsoft (emphasis on _almost_), because this really is a waste of everybody's time, and really only serves to try and help RealNetworks' and Apple's failing media player products (they must have borrowed SCO's lawyers).

    1. Re:What a Freakin' Waste of Time! by penguinoid · · Score: 2, Informative

      How is this case going to benefit anybody but Real Networks or Apple?

      By opening competition in the media player market. Most users would be too lazy to search for and install the superior media player if one is already bundled (integrated?) into Windows. I think that it would be pretty cool if Microsoft sold Windows, and users could choose to insall any "distro" they want, or a custom one, rather than just IE + WMP + MSOffice.

      I thought the point of breaking up the "Microsoft Monopoly" was so that people wouldn't be "forced" into using Microsoft's unstable and unsecure operation system

      No, it was to prevent them from forcing people who already do use Windows to use stuff like internet explorer, allowing them to take over the browser market, etc.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    2. Re:What a Freakin' Waste of Time! by slittle · · Score: 1

      How are users being forced to use either IE or WMP, besides their own laziness? How are they "new markets" when GUIs, network stacks, file/printer sharing, defraggers, A/V, and other bits are not?

      No, this whole line of thought is completely misguided. It is nothing more than sabotage by sore losers, and doesn't correct the true problem.

      If MS are abusing their position to lock out competitors and control their current market, then it's their contracts with OEMs that should be in question.

      If MS are using their position to enter and control new markets, then it's their adherence to existing standards (eg. HTML) and the openness of their own formats (Windows Media) that should be in question.

      Having the government design Microsoft's software is just stupid.

      --
      Opportunity knocks. Karma hunts you down.
    3. Re:What a Freakin' Waste of Time! by amnesiaWind · · Score: 1

      i think you are assuming that people do not search for WMP replacements because they are too lazy - i know plenty of people that purposely use WMP because they LIKE it... even if people WERE too lazy to find a replacement - it's silly to blame microsoft for that! windows also comes with Paint - which is a total piece of junk as far as paint programs go - but has anybody ever heard of Adobe complaining that microsoft is using the windows monopoly to drive photoshop out of the market? no! because people who need more functionality than Paint provides will naturally look for that in other programs... same with WMP - if someone needs features that WMP doesn't provide, they will naturally look for another program... but if WMP satisfies a need, why should microsoft not be allowed to include it in their operating system just becasue other people also make similar products that are in competition? i don't use windows much myself and i'm no microsoft fan by any means, but i think that this whole argument is stupid... nobody is forcing you to use WMP - if you don't want to use it, you don't have to... if you want to use something else, you can, with no ill effects on the system... maybe if realplayer and quicktime didn't suck so bad people would use them more... i haven't heard nullsoft complaining about this, because they recognize that people will still use winamp because it's a good product, and microsoft's proported "media player monopoly" doesn't seem to have affected nullsoft's success with winamp... what i really hate is when companies like realnetworks can't make a good product so they try to make money via litigation instead....

    4. Re:What a Freakin' Waste of Time! by mwood · · Score: 1

      Well, it would allow me to install MS Windows (when I have to) without *any* media player. I don't want one. I don't need one.

    5. Re:What a Freakin' Waste of Time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a load of unadulterated bullshit.

      How are users being forced to use either IE or WMP, besides their own laziness? How are they "new markets" when GUIs, network stacks, file/printer sharing, defraggers, A/V, and other bits are not?

      Would you download another one, an even better one, when the current one will "make do"? Doesn't matter what your answer is, because most people wouldn't.

      No, this whole line of thought is completely misguided. It is nothing more than sabotage by sore losers, and doesn't correct the true problem.

      No, this whole line of thought is whining by some who doesn't like seeing a convicted monopolist brought up on charges of illegally maintaining a monopoly in another country.

      If MS are abusing their position to lock out competitors and control their current market, then it's their contracts with OEMs that should be in question.

      Really? Why should the contracts be in question, when it's the company that's being prosecuted that created them? No, don't answer that, I'm sure you have some bizarre reason why the contracts are at fault, and not the company responsible for them. You see, that's the little catch your childish tantrum has forgotten: the company that authors the the contract is responsible for them. You know, responsibility? Where, if you do something wrong, then you are held liable for it?

      If MS are using their position to enter and control new markets, then it's their adherence to existing standards (eg. HTML) and the openness of their own formats (Windows Media) that should be in question.

      That's moronic. You're focussing on a single factor and calling that the whole chicken.

      Having the government design Microsoft's software is just stupid.

      Tell me, how is it stupid to police a convicted monopolist? Don't start that crap about them being wrongly convicted, or they can't be a monopoly because they don't control 100% of the market, or the court lied or whatever other little fairy tale you keep telling yourself to justify your faith. Keep your fanboy bullshit admiration to yourself. They are convicted monopolists, and are properly treated as such.

  21. A good move by MS by oconnorcjo · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I think MS is playing this smart. It is better for them to cooperate now and hope to kill the monetary penalty than to say "We will fight to keep Windows the way we want it!". I know they want to use WMP to take over another market but to INSIST that it must stay would just piss too many important people off. Better to fold on this and just keep WMP an easy free download and continue to pursue the strategy of convincing content providers that using WMP formats is the way to go.

    I am in no way condoning or approving MS business tactics. I am only judging the merits of the effectiveness of such strategies.

    My own perspective is that a music/video utility should be bundled with all OS's but that WMP is evil because it is being used to promote Microsoft's proprietary sound and video formats. MS is again relying on thier tried and true tactics of "embrace and extend".

    But since the EU "picked up" on this theme it is bettor for MS to be a little more "low key" with this strategy than be arogant about it. It seems MS is grown a little wiser since the AntiTrust trial in the USA (despite winning it).

    --
    I miss the Karma Whores.
    1. Re:A good move by MS by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Better to fold on this and just keep WMP an easy free download

      You may have hit on an idea there.

      What if the version without media player still installs WMP, but disables the frontend? Then the "download" could simply enable WMP. Small, fast download, effortless and safe integration - and it doesn't affect any third party software which hooks into the media player APIs.

  22. am i missing something? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    um, i must have missed the point entirely... you CAN remove WMP very easily from the "Add/Remove Windows Components" section of the control panel... along with IE, and basically everything that is not part of the o/s core.. this has been there for as long as i can rememeber... what's the big problem here?

    1. Re:am i missing something? by SumDog · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can not remove IE. There is an option to remove it in components, but give it a try sometime, and then open up My Computer and type in a URL into the address bar.

      I haven't tried the same with Windows Media Player, but I doubt it can be fully removed either.

    2. Re:am i missing something? by edxwelch · · Score: 1

      Depends on what you define as WMP. Presumably the GUI front end is easy to remove and they aren't talking about the WMA codecs.

    3. Re:am i missing something? by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      You can hide the full application and make Firefox the only "visible" browser, but yes. IE stays forever. It's unfortunate because I'm very happy with Firefox. It's probably one of the best articles of software I have ever seen. Can't say the same for MSIE, though. Sorry Bill.

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
  23. Guess what, dude, it cost millions of dollars by melted · · Score: 1

    To write and document those APIs. So can you give me one reason why they should give them away for free?

    1. Re:Guess what, dude, it cost millions of dollars by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      No. I can not. Do I need to? I just think it would be 'nice'

      Does everything have to be for 'money' can humans not be nice just for the hell of it?

    2. Re:Guess what, dude, it cost millions of dollars by tolan-b · · Score: 1

      So they don't have any API documentation? Blimey, must be hell working for MS..

    3. Re:Guess what, dude, it cost millions of dollars by Simon+Brooke · · Score: 2, Informative
      [Guess what, dude, it cost millions of dollars] To write and document those APIs. So can you give me one reason why they should give them away for free?

      How about 'they've been found guilty of criminal activity and have been ordered by the court to do so in partial restitution'?

      --
      I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
  24. What's the similarity between MS and a Banana? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're both appealing!

    1. Re:What's the similarity between MS and a Banana? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh come on mods, give it up. that's so corny that i laughed for at least 30 seconds.

  25. Re:This is about EU vs US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    In the long run, it'll be the entire planetary economy that loses if American companies are the only ones that prosper. Competition is good for everyone, even if that competition sometimes needs a little help from government.

  26. Patents, appeals by paugq · · Score: 0

    Microsoft not appealing, the EU trying to approve software patents... Duh... no, sure there is no connection...

    1. Re:Patents, appeals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If patents approved, Open Source should exploit it - and patent everything they can.

      These patents, owned by Open Source would then restrict Microsoft's development.

      Can you imagine if HTML, the browser would have been patented and MS would not have the ability to include these web-related technologies into their products?

    2. Re:Patents, appeals by Rattencremesuppe · · Score: 1
      If patents approved, Open Source should exploit it - and patent everything they can.

      Are you sure that "Open Source" has the resources to file patents for everything?

      These patents, owned by Open Source would then restrict Microsoft's development.

      Wasting resources by filing bullshit patents and defending bullshit patents in court would restrict Open Source development.

      Can you imagine if HTML, the browser would have been patented and MS would not have the ability to include these web-related technologies into their products?

      Can you imagine that open source projects have the money to defend just a single patent against MS?

      A patent isn't worth shit if you don't have BIG TIME $$$ to defend it in court. Open source projects won't go far in this game.

    3. Re:Patents, appeals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can someone confirm, that indeed, defending a patent cost a fortune?

      There are law firms, willing to invest their work in cases, which seem to be hopeful, against rich corporations, since they can cash in, should they win - not to mention the reputation.

      The question remains:
      Can you imagine, if HTML, the browser would have been patented and MS would not have the ability to include these web-related technologies into their products?

      Can you imagine just the PR demage of such case for Microsoft - since it would have clearly demonstrated to the public, to Wallstreet and investors that they are way behind and cut out of the game in town?

    4. Re:Patents, appeals by Rattencremesuppe · · Score: 1
      Can someone confirm, that indeed, defending a patent cost a fortune?

      That's what my physics professor told us, back in the days when we were learning the basics of patent law at the university. I don't think that he was just spreading FUD...

  27. OT but still... by Doctor+Memory · · Score: 1


    You know what sucks? When a machine is used to visit a site that installs a trojan via ActiveX controls, and your virus software can't remove it, so you clean it up as best you can by hand and you install FireFox to prevent it from happening again, and make it the default web browser so all your other applications won't use IE, then you figure you should make sure you have the latest security updates for Windows and you click on the "Windows Update" link and -- it launches IE to connect! Freshly hosing this stupid machine you just spent over an hour cleaning!
    </RANT>

    Yes, Nurse, I know I'm not supposed to be...Yes I remember what the doctor...no, I haven't taken them yet, but...yes, right away.
    * Doctor Memory is away (meds)

    --
    Just junk food for thought...
    1. Re:OT but still... by Raypeso · · Score: 1

      Yea, I have one too. Firefox is my default browser at work, but in any of my other required windows apps, like messenger and outlook, any clicked hyper links open IE. Really drives me nuts. Does anyone have a fix for this?

  28. What they should do... by Nightspirit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To European customers they should sell a stripped down version for the same price that includes almost nothing. Not even notepad, IE, screensavers, windows update access, or minesweeper. Then they could sell an add-on CD for $29 that includes all the typically imbedded programs.

    1. Re:What they should do... by Anita+Coney · · Score: 1

      So basically Microsoft should start selling DOS again?

      --
      If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
    2. Re:What they should do... by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      Windows update should stay in - All OS's must contain a self-updating system (user controlled and not dubious spyware of course). This will ensure that systems are patched up to date and reduce the hideous flow of worms and spam-zombie PC's we have to contend with.

      There should be some text editor, as a text editor is a vital component of any OS.

      As strange as it sounds, I can't imagine going back to a time when an OS couldn't have you browsing the internet immediately after installation. Most Linux distros do, Macs do, why shouldn't Windows? I do object to not being able to uninstall it... and why can't Dell or HP sell me a Windows PC with MSIE uninstalled, and Firefox on the desktop? Compaq, many years ago, shipped PCs with Netscape on them. Then MS stepped in and instructed them not to. Sigh, MS is a bad MS.

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
  29. Dominance not only in software, but controling you by mudasobwa · · Score: 1

    I can't still understand, what politics think or know about such macro corporation, which has more power than some countries together.

    MS doesn't stop to abuse dominance in software. It always makes new invesment in type of wild capitalism - closed patents, lets consumers to addict to it's products at the beginning for free(not trial, but tricky control...)

    MS started invasion into space and medicine, oth.

    IT doesn't deal with common standarts or negotiate for better deal for all. Just for them, because they control..

    On that software is built eGovernments, super data centers, cars eletronics, warships and even nuclear submarines.. Closed source code(or mean of unreproducable compilation), standarts again. Nobody can really say how much MS can control all that MS software controlled systems. And seems users doesn't think much about that or investigation somewhere goes blind.

    It is bad sign for all humanity, when there still is abuyss in ethics, objectivity and life philosofphy in general. Monopoly/dominance and silent dictate is as bad as totalitarism.

    http://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/
    http://www.positivenews.co.uk/
    http://www.aynrand.org/
  30. Liar, liar, pants on fire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at what other companies are fined by the EU for abusing monopolies. Surprise! Lots of European companies! And if you think that MS doesn't abuse it's monopoly, then you're full of shit.

  31. Their attempt at owning media formats. by TheLittleJetson · · Score: 1

    It's more or less the same story as Internet Explorer. In the case of IE, Microsoft's goal was to pervert the HTML standard to the point where HTML written for IE wouldn't render in other browsers. This way they could hijack the standard, and the browser marketshare at the same time. This failed, but they came close and there are still some annoying sites that are tested to IE's broken rendering engine, and give the other browsers trouble.

    With WMP, they aren't screwing with open formats, just pushing their own proprietary format. Ideally they want all websites using their format, streaming to their client. It pisses me off because this is exactly what other media companies do (RealNetworks etc), and as a result I have a handful of movie players when I really only want ONE. "It's just like MPEG but it's owned by us" isn't a valid reason for me to use these formats...

    1. Re:Their attempt at owning media formats. by Trelane · · Score: 1

      Give a man a .rm, and he'll be viewing for a moment. Give a man a .wmv, and he'll be viewing for a month. Give a man a .theora, and he'll be viewing for the rest of his life.

      --

      --
      Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
  32. Just an FYI: by LordPixie · · Score: 1

    someone sent me a deb of lazarus (which is not yet packaged in debian sarge or sid)

    dpkg said it couldn't install it because of dependency issues

    on the next run of apt it said theier was a package not completely installed and told me to run apt-get -f install

    on doing so apt happilly installed the original lazarus package and all the dependencies it needed!



    To the average user, this IS dependency hell. Sure, perhaps not as bad as it used to be, but that doesn't mean it's easy. And it's still something more an intranet admin has to worry about. C'mon, Slashdotters. It won't kill you to admit that Microsoft's way of doing things may have some advantages.


    --LordPixie

    1. Re:Just an FYI: by ultranova · · Score: 1

      To the average user, this IS dependency hell. Sure, perhaps not as bad as it used to be, but that doesn't mean it's easy. And it's still something more an intranet admin has to worry about. C'mon, Slashdotters. It won't kill you to admit that Microsoft's way of doing things may have some advantages.

      Almost any way of doing things has advantages and disadvantages. The question is, do Windows way of doing things have a better advantage/disadvantage ratio than the Linux way ?

      One important thing about Windows, that people should remember, is that Windows programs have dependencies. They just usually package those dependencies with the program; for example, almost every game I've ever installed under Windows has asked if I want to install DirectX, and almost all programs throw dll's into the Windows folder. I've also had to go and search for dll's online to get some programs to work.

      The fun starts when it's been a while since the last reinstall and it's simply impossible to say what dll is neede by what program, if any. Not that Linux is any better - I have lots of shared libraries laying around, without any idea who uses them. However, Linux seems to keep performing well even with accumulated crud, while Windows starts slowing down and developing strange bugs.

      I've never administered a Windows greater than 98SE, so I don't know if newer versions fix this.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  33. A True Monopoly is run by the Government by SumDog · · Score: 0, Troll

    I remember learning in an economics class that a true monopoly is one where the entire industry is controlled by the government and in effect socialized. Hence the old AT&T.

    I've read several posts about countries "abusing" their monopolies and references to the recent problems with the US, EU and Airbus among others.

    So is the US welding Microsoft against the EU, causing MS to become a weapon held by the US government; a tool of the government and therefore almost a true government sanctioned monopoly?

    1. Re:A True Monopoly is run by the Government by Zey · · Score: 1
      From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:

      Monopoly \Mo*nop"o*ly\, n.; pl. {Monopolies}. [L. monopolium,
      Gr. ?, ?; mo`nos alone + ? to sell.]
      1. The exclusive power, or privilege of selling a commodity;
      the exclusive power, right, or privilege of dealing in
      some article, or of trading in some market; sole command
      of the traffic in anything, however obtained; as, the
      proprietor of a patented article is given a monopoly of
      its sale for a limited time; chartered trading companies
      have sometimes had a monopoly of trade with remote
      regions; a combination of traders may get a monopoly of a
      particular product.

      Raleigh held a monopoly of cards, Essex a monopoly
      of sweet wines. --Macaulay.

      From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:

      monopoly
      n 1: (economics) a market in which there are many buyers but only
      one seller; "a monopoly on silver"; "when you have a
      monopoly you can ask any price you like"
      2: exclusive control or possession of something; "They have no
      monopoly on intelligence"
  34. but what about people without the interweb by edgefield · · Score: 0

    if m$ doesn't include wmp, how will peopel withou acced to a downloadble player play there media???

    1. Re:but what about people without the interweb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      where exactly would these people without internet access get the media files they can't play?

    2. Re:but what about people without the interweb by Macadamizer · · Score: 1

      Every music CD I own has a bunch of files on it that can be played with WMP. My computer has a DVD player that can -- get this -- play the DVD's that I own!

      iTunes, KaZaa and BitTorrent are not the only ways to obtain media...

      --

      "That's not even wrong..." -- Wolfgang Pauli
    3. Re:but what about people without the interweb by conteXXt · · Score: 1

      if it happens globally (not likely),

      media (cds dvd's) will come with AOL style
      WMP cds.

      it's the next logical step (if they unsuccessful in hijacking the media it self)

      --
      The truth about Led Zep should never be told on /. (Karma suicide ensues)
    4. Re:but what about people without the interweb by Changa_MC · · Score: 1

      every CD I own can be played without WMP, too. No thanks to microsoft for including unnecesary software.

      --
      Changa hates change.
  35. This goes from the bottom, man by melted · · Score: 1

    If Devs are unwilling to work for free, corp will be unwilling to give their stuff away. They've paid for it, after all.

  36. Re:This is about EU vs US by Linzer · · Score: 2, Interesting
    However in the long run, it will be Europeon consumers who are the losers.
    Wait... many Europeans regard themselves as something else than mere consumers. Even if consumers lose something, it may be good news for people in general.
    --
    Gravitation is a theory, not a fact.
  37. They WILL appeal.(No one read the article, right?) by valentyn · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yes, I know this is Slashdot. Yes I know.

    Yet, the article states very clearly: "Microsoft said it would continue to appeal the Commission's landmark ruling".

    The only thing they won't appeal is the court order to "immediately implement antitrust sanctions".

    This only means they will not appeal the ruling that says "you need to implement this NOW", which is in fact a ruling to the appeal they made to the main sanctions (sorry for getting complicated).

    Appealing this "NOW!" ruling would not make any difference for the "NOW!" part, and it will not make any difference for the damages Microsoft will claim for the main case. And as there are no extra damages to the NOW! part, there's nothing to do here - which is exactly what Yahoo says.

    --
    my other sig is a 500 page novel
  38. A non-event: M$ media player has already won by JavaNerd · · Score: 1

    Microsoft is not appealing the ruling because Windows media format is one of (if not the) dominate formats used by content providers. I would wager that the number of adopters of the stripped down version of Windows will be zero, especially since M$ has made it abundantly clear that it will cost the same as windows with the media player. If you are a computer manufacturer, imagine how desirable your machine will be that does not play a common media format supported by over 90% of the other PCs out there. (Yes that was sarcastic).

  39. GREAT! way is paved for "Exchange replacement" by lkcl · · Score: 1

    okay.

    so does anyone know _how_ i can ask for specification documents and IDL files for the Exchange network interfaces?

  40. And Bill Gates will say.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Come see the violence inherent in the system. Help, help, I'm being repressed!"

  41. Great Idea Except... by EXTomar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Most of the mini-apps aren't applicable in the enterprise. If you need a cluster DB setup, why do you need the Windows Media API let alone the client bits installed on the machine? It simply isn't applicable and worse it is unremovable.

    But that is an extreme case. In a more practical setup, why does Microsoft get the say on installing any software like WMP on my grandmother's machine? As you noted, because the way Microsoft has developed the technology installing one piece of technology to solve a problem often means you install many more pieces of software none of which solve the problem (let alone you maybe interested in). Why? Because they want to sell server technology solutions to some other unrelated vendor? Something is fishy about that.

    I guess the grand question is how fair or legal is this? I don't know if the EU is doing the right or wrong things for the right reasons but I can tell you it sure stinks from an IT perspective. Being forced to solved problems on software you didn't want installed in the first place but because of some dependance you have to stinks.

    1. Re:Great Idea Except... by obeythefist · · Score: 1

      That's the real issue here. What's moral? What's legal?

      The crux is whether you consider MS to be a monopoly with no alternatives.

      If you say "Yes, there is no alternative", then morally, and legally, Microsoft can't behave the way that they do. Their OS is also the people's OS, and by making the OS unfair, it harms the people, so laws apply for the protection of the people.

      If you say, "No, there is no alternative", then morally, and legally, MS can do whatever they want. It's their OS, if they install software that sends every URL you click on straight to Bill Gate's inbox, that's completely fair, after all, you agreed to the EULA, and you have alternatives.

      What's interesting in this case is that the EU has decided on the "Yes" option. Microsoft in turn have said "Well we don't care what you might do if you say Yes, but we do think you're wrong about that Yes, and we'll contest that."

      The reason MS is going along so easily? They aren't. It's easier to say yes to the judge and keep on breaking laws behind the scenes, which is typical of MS. I would not expect them to comply with any of the remedy, not properly anyway.

      --
      I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
  42. Canada Crime Rate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The crime rate in the Northern USA drops in the winter.

    Canada has more winter than we do, so you'd expect them to have a lower crime rate- and Antarctica has one of the lowest crime rates in the world!

  43. Re:GREAT! way is paved for "Exchange replacement" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    send bill and email. bill_gates@microsoft.com

  44. 100% correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree totally. Fortunately, M$ isn't going to be around forever. More and more people are turning to Linux... I should know as I have helped almost 90 ex-microsofties switch to Linux in the last year. Microsoft would die off quickly if all Linux users did this.

  45. Outlook Express != MAPI by pwhysall · · Score: 1

    OE isn't a MAPI application.

    That'd be Outlook you're thinking of, and it's a bit more than just a wrapper around some MAPI functionality.

    --
    Peter
  46. It's a shame that people can be bought so easily.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only reason for the ease with which Microsoft got off so easily is that they paid someone to look the other way.

    It's sad when even the DOJ can be bought.

  47. Hmmm. by hey! · · Score: 1

    So, it's not clear at all what Microsoft intends to do or not do here. I doubt what they will do will give media player competitors anything like equal footing on the Windows platform.

    So, i imagine a scenario like this:

    Europe: Give us a version of windows without WMP!

    Microsoft: OK. [takes a copy of windows, rips out WMP and hands the remains, bleeding and dripping entrails of unimplemented APIs to Europe]

    Europe: But, this is a piece of shit!

    Microsoft: Yep. Told you it would be.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  48. Level Playing Field After Cliff by 4of12 · · Score: 1

    Software markets develop quickly compared to the time scales that govern the legal system.

    Consequently, a Windows XP without an embedded Microsoft media player practically becomes an inconvenience to users accustomed to it being there.

    While intended to provide a level playing field for all competitors that can provide media player technology, all the EU ruling does is to level a playing field too late, with only one player left on the field, after the near-vertical playing field has caused all lesser competitors to fall off the cliff because they have no desktop to leverage.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
    1. Re:Level Playing Field After Cliff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh, it was a piece of shit before.

  49. Sidebar re overrated by davecb · · Score: 1
    Ironsides notes I worry about moderators who mod posts as overated.

    Hmmn, I reserve that for posts whih have high scores, but contain factual errors credibly corrected in subsequent posts.

    --dave

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
  50. You know it, but there's prolly a little bit more by trezor · · Score: 1

    They might add a few more "security" warnings, internet zones, even more craptastic cookie management informing you with a big, undisableable "Ok" that a cookie has been blocked. Oh, with a "don't show me this warning again" for a per cookie basis just for the kicks of it.

    All useless features that does make the browser appear safer, better and whatever, but still doesn't adress any of the many fundamental flaws or exploits.

    And whatever it does, it will regularly inform you that you are surfing "safer". I swear, that will be written in the Longhorn installer.

    Oh, and as a final touch, the MSIE6.00000001 executable will be named explorer.exe or taskman.exe, just definetly not iexplore.exe. Anything that implies that it can't be removed from the system, really.

    Btw I'm unemployed. Does this rant qualify me to work at Microsoft's strategic planning department?

    --
    Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
  51. Same in Unix ? by DrYak · · Score: 1
    Its called code reuse. Not done well, mind you, but MANY MANY linux distributions have the EXACT same problem.


    Like what ?

    - On my desktop machine I mostly use SuSE.
    Multimedia userinterface / multimedia handling libraries / rest of system are completly independent.
    You're not forced to install Xine's userinterface, you can only install Xine's libraries if you like (and if fact the default "Desktop"-profile installation does it, and use another UI : Kaffeine).

    - You can even install only base system without any multimedia handling libraries :
    my debian headless file server / download machine has no multimedia handling at all.

    - Most of Unix way of doing thing revolve around building small specialised apps that do 1 thing but do it well.
    See Cdr-tools / cddao / lame / k3b ... etc for exemple. Nothing forces you to install all of them (or any).
    There's no huge crapastically over-loaded and bug-ridden big iron software, that you are forced to install just because a single function provided by the monster, is fundementally necessary for your kernel.

    - You don't like Konqueror on your desktop Linux installation ? Fine, there are other desktop environnements and, thanks to freedesktop.org they all allow you to run the same application in a compatible way.
    And if you want a headless server with no Desktop environnment, just don't install any, and use wget & links to download updates if you really need access to the web.

    - You don't want to have Internet Explorer installed on your windows machine ? Sorry too bad, all the file / control pannel / what-ever else management tools depend on a couple of functions provided by IE's dlls. You cannot remove it !
    What ? You say you don't need graphical file management at all, because you intend to do is a headless CLI-controlled server ? Sorry !
    No way ! This is a graphically oriented OS, which depends heavily on graphical managers, which in turns depends on internet explorer and windows media player. Sorry, you'll have to install the whole monolith.
    But don't be sad ! You can still choose not to install WordPad !!! or Minesweeper !!! See ? we give you options too !

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  52. Corporate Entities not Humane (or human) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, humans can be nice just for the hell of it but what does that have to do with Microsoft, or corporations in general?

    Under current rules, the guiding principle of a corporation is to generate a return on investment to its shareholders. In short, the right thing to do for a corporation is to make the most money it can. As long as the fines are cheaper than the cost of not polluting, paying off those who could successfully sue is cheaper than making a safe product or waiting out a potentially terminal patient is cheaper than beginning treatment, it is the corporations job to do the former not the latter.

    Its sad and wrong, but it is the system we have.

  53. Software patents ... by quarkscat · · Score: 1

    By playing ball with the EU and paying their
    fine, Microsoft improves their image in Europe,
    making way for the REAL END-RUN around F/OSS.
    MSFT will spread enough "love" around the EU MPs
    to make EU software patents happen, at which
    point they can tie all F/OSS development up
    in lawsuits. MSFT is just spending their "love"
    wisely.

  54. AMERICA TAKE NOTE. by Conor+Turton · · Score: 1
    Microsoft have decided to comply because they realised that the EU courts and politicians CANNOT be bought unlike the American political and legal system.

    Perhaps congress/senate should take a trip over here to see how things should be done.

    --
    Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
    1. Re:AMERICA TAKE NOTE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell no. The EU basically answers to the EC, which is a bunch of non-elected politicians. The EC have all the power, as you can see by their swpat maneuvers. The EU doesnt really do much except create jobs for out-of-work MPs etc.

      The EU needs to be taken down and the whole system redeveloped from scratch.

  55. Re:This is about EU vs US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the fuck are you on, monkey boy? Undeclared economic war? You should see a shrink and get something for this paranoid delusion of yours.

    Times are changing. Economies are strengthening, and weakening. The time of the US-dominated world is coming to a close, and other countries will soon take over, most likely the asian region.

    It's the way of the world. Go back to cleaning your pistols, I'm sure there are some terrorists parked outside it in a van, waiting to rob you while you sleep.

  56. It is sad because they really are guilty!!!! by davvr6 · · Score: 1

    I remember trying to download netscape with an early mac version of IE which took direct aim at netscape's website. They actually ghosted the second page so you couldn't complete your personal info and thus could not download netscape with IE. This was the first time I saw what others have seen, Microsoft for what it is. I am sure that they are guilty.

  57. Is Apple guilty too? by prioneater · · Score: 1

    Apple bundles Quicktime with OS X, and has even integrated QT with the Finder (so you can play videos in Column view). Delete Quicktime from the OS and you can still play movies in Column view. So if Microsoft is doing wrong by the consumer, isn't Apple? Don't mind me, I'm just thinking differently. ;-)

  58. Thank God that Europe hates US by Corellon+Larethian · · Score: 1

    Because MSFT has grown beyond our control. We'd really be fucked if the rest of the world fell under our jurisdiction.

  59. Re:No, no. Business as usual... by obeythefist · · Score: 1

    Yes, sanctions will be dropped if MS wins that appeal.

    Yes, MS is being shifty, because they claim they have "already provided data to competitors" regarding their API's and so on (part of the immediate remedy), but I'm not sure if the samba guys are getting any benefit, and assuredly they are the ones who stand to gain the most. The full disclosure of windows APIs would be incredibly useful for someone writing interoperability code. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, please!

    --
    I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
  60. Mods: The truth about bonch/rd_syringe/OverlyCrGuy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moderators: Please note that "bonch" is a known fanatical psycophant whose obnoxious offtopic rants are legend here on Slashdot. It doesn't matter what the topic is, he'll find a way to scrape in some pointless Microsoft shilling. While nobody expects us to love Microsoft in any way, his particularly tepid style of calling anyone he replies to "troll" or "liar" because he happens to disagree with whatever they're saying is well documented and should not be rewarded. If anything, bonch is the type of person that should not be part of the open source/free software community. He is an anathema to all that is good about free software.

    I'm posting this so that you (the moderator) have some context to consider bonch and not mod him up whenever he posts his filler preformatted rants about installing Windows or whatever that unfortunately get him karma every single time and allow him to continue posting his trademark toxic crap (read on) day in and day out. You may consider this a troll - I consider it community service. And I ain't kidding.

    If you're a /. subscriber, I invite you to look through some of his posting history. I guarantee that you'll be hard pressed to find someone that is more "out there" than bonch. You'll also probably notice he's got quite an AC following. Don't just read his posts, make sure you go through the replies.

    For example, in this recent post bonch not only calls the OP a troll but attempts to "tell it like it is" while making some vague argument about "MS". Yes, if you're confused, you're not alone. The reply (modded +0) proceeds to simply destroy his bogus argument. You will notice he did not reply. This is what some people call "drive-by advocacy". A sort of I'll just leave you with my thoughts here and move on to the next flamebait kind of deal. In fact, he almost never replies because he knows that his fanatical arguments simply do not hold up to any sort of discussion. It's not that he's chosen the wrong cause - he's just going at it in a completely wrong way.

    More? Just read though this post and the subsequent replies. I guess this stands on its own.

    More? Bad spelling in astounding conspiracy theories, more offtopic FUD and uninformed "I'm right, look at me" rants, promptly proven wrong. Worse even, bonch wants to be Bill Gates, apparently (that first one is a winner). I mean, really. You think?

    FUD, FUD, FUD, FUD, offtopic FUD, and more FUD. This guy is like the Monty Python SPAM skit, but with FUD and more FUD instead of canned meat. Amazed yet? Don't forget that KDE and Gnome make you dumb, and it's all a Slashdot conspiracy. How low do you want to go? Maybe as low as this?

    The infamous Slashdot Front Page Troll? Nuclear fireballs? It goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on (troll?). Like the energizer bunny. Or take these two, which stretch the definition of weird.

    It's up to you. We can get rid of this guy and make Slashdot a better place. I don't know about you, but I'd rather take the trolls and crapflooders over people like "bonch" any day. And I sure as hell don't want to be categorized along with him. This is not how you advocate free software, period.

  61. Mods: The truth about bonch/rd_syringe/OverlyCrGuy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moderators: Please note that "bonch" is a known fanatical psycophant whose obnoxious offtopic rants are legend here on Slashdot. It doesn't matter what the topic is, he'll find a way to scrape in some pointless Microsoft shilling. While nobody expects us to love Microsoft in any way, his particularly tepid style of calling anyone he replies to "troll" or "liar" because he happens to disagree with whatever they're saying is well documented and should not be rewarded. If anything, bonch is the type of person that should not be part of the open source/free software community. He is an anathema to all that is good about free software.

    I'm posting this so that you (the moderator) have some context to consider bonch and not mod him up whenever he posts his filler preformatted rants about installing Windows or whatever that unfortunately get him karma every single time and allow him to continue posting his trademark toxic crap (read on) day in and day out. You may consider this a troll - I consider it community service. And I ain't kidding.

    If you're a /. subscriber, I invite you to look through some of his posting history. I guarantee that you'll be hard pressed to find someone that is more "out there" than bonch. You'll also probably notice he's got quite an AC following. Don't just read his posts, make sure you go through the replies.

    For example, in this recent post bonch not only calls the OP a troll but attempts to "tell it like it is" while making some vague argument about "MS". Yes, if you're confused, you're not alone. The reply (modded +0) proceeds to simply destroy his bogus argument. You will notice he did not reply. This is what some people call "drive-by advocacy". A sort of I'll just leave you with my thoughts here and move on to the next flamebait kind of deal. In fact, he almost never replies because he knows that his fanatical arguments simply do not hold up to any sort of discussion. It's not that he's chosen the wrong cause - he's just going at it in a completely wrong way.

    More? Just read though this post and the subsequent replies. I guess this stands on its own.

    More? Bad spelling in astounding conspiracy theories, more offtopic FUD and uninformed "I'm right, look at me" rants, promptly proven wrong. Worse even, bonch wants to be Bill Gates, apparently (that first one is a winner). I mean, really. You think?

    FUD, FUD, FUD, FUD, offtopic FUD, and more FUD. This guy is like the Monty Python SPAM skit, but with FUD and more FUD instead of canned meat. Amazed yet? Don't forget that KDE and Gnome make you dumb, and it's all a Slashdot conspiracy. How low do you want to go? Maybe as low as this?

    The infamous Slashdot Front Page Troll? Nuclear fireballs? It goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on (troll?). Like the energizer bunny. Or take these two, which stretch the definition of weird.

    It's up to you. We can get rid of this guy and make Slashdot a better place. I don't know about you, but I'd rather take the trolls and crapflooders over people like "bonch" any day. And I sure as hell don't want to be categorized along with him. This is not how you advocate free software, period.

  62. If they lose to that claim, they lose elsewhere by rofthorax · · Score: 1

    European Union is whining because it can't
    compete in a market for which its not well equipped to compete.. In the same breath they discouraging open source development by patenting software.. Are they confused or something?

    How you kill Microsoft is not with legal suits,
    you compete with open source..

    They should really just sit back and let things go.

    --
    Just say no to license servers!!