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."
Probably realised the lawyers would cost more than the fines.
I guess today is a passable day to die.
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!
Microsoft are criminals. Nobody should be doing business with them.
But.... Longhorn will fix all this, we promise.
...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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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
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.
Gravitation is a theory, not a fact.
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
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.
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.