Slashdot Mirror


EC Reviews New Complaints Against Microsoft

Rob tells us that while Microsoft may still be fighting against existing antitrust sanctions the European Commission is already reviewing new complaints made against the software giant. From the article: "European Commission spokesperson, Jonathan Todd, confirmed that the competition commission is considering the complaints but said that no decision has been taken on a course of action, adding that the commission does not have to wait for formal complaints to take action against a company it suspects of anti-competitive behavior."

114 comments

  1. The Biggest Complaint? by Asshat+Canada · · Score: 1, Funny

    Not enough cowbell.

    1. Re:The Biggest Complaint? by Tikicult · · Score: 1
    2. Re:The Biggest Complaint? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vista will ship with a cowbell routine as the start-up sound. kthxbye.

  2. nothing new to see here... move along... by advocate_one · · Score: 2, Funny

    same old, same old... Microsoft upsetting people again...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    1. Re:nothing new to see here... move along... by sandman935 · · Score: 4, Funny

      True, but it's innovating. They're finding new ways to upset people.

      --

      Defecation occurs.
    2. Re:nothing new to see here... move along... by Karzz1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I found this particular paragraph interesting:

      "Ms Kroes has declared herself "determined" that open source developers should have access to the information, and Microsoft appealed to the Court of First Instance recently to get a legal decision on whether it should be required to share communications source code with open source software vendors."

      Since when does anyone give a crap about MS source code... I thought they just wanted the specifications for these protocols published in a free (beer and speech) manner?

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
    3. Re:nothing new to see here... move along... by advocate_one · · Score: 4, Funny

      correct, we do not want the source code, just properly documented APIs that aren't encumbered with ridiculous licensing agreements...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    4. Re:nothing new to see here... move along... by Karzz1 · · Score: 1

      Exactly... Do MS lawyers change arguments like this intentionally so as to muddy the waters? (rhetorical question)

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
    5. Re:nothing new to see here... move along... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, I suspect so. Microsoft apologists run with this immediately: "Microsoft shouldn't be forced to publish their source code". Which of course is correct. They shouldn't. However, it's a strawman argument. Nobody has demanded that that they should be forced to do so. What actually has been demanded is that they publish specs.

    6. Re:nothing new to see here... move along... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 2, Funny
      They're finding new ways to upset people.

      Bill Gates: Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you!

      EC official: Does not!

      ... and thus turns the wheels of commerce.

    7. Re:nothing new to see here... move along... by The+Famous+Brett+Wat · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I thought they just wanted the specifications for these protocols published...

      Microsoft is not known for having complete and accurate documentation of any of its APIs or file formats. If you want the absolute truth, you go to the source code. Think about it: if there were a discrepancy between what the documentation says, and what the code does, which one do you think will be considered "in error" in most cases?

      It's rare that "specifications" are considered authoritative over "implementation" -- more common that "specifications" are written retroactively based on the implementation when people realise that the source code is an unreadable mess, but they still need to know what it does at a glance.

      --
      proof, n. A demonstration that a conclusion is implied by certain premises and axioms.
    8. Re:nothing new to see here... move along... by kaffiene · · Score: 1
      The article didn't say they wanted code:
      "the two sides still cannot agree on whether interoperability information should be made available to open source software suppliers"
      "interoperability information" sounds a lot more like protocol & file format info to me.
    9. Re:nothing new to see here... move along... by nzkbuk · · Score: 1

      I think more so. Not only should they be forced to publish spec's. They should also be forces to keep those published spec's the same (or atleast compatable) over different versions atleast minor versions.

      A new major version can have a new (published) spec.

  3. Alternative headline... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    EC Rendered Impotent Due to Constant Examination of Microsoft.
    EC Contemplates Name Change To Microsoft Review Committee.

  4. interesting. best of luck! by ministerofsickeningr · · Score: 5, Informative

    if the EC did force M$ to embrace interoperability. it would be a boon for open source, and other software companies wanting to not get stomped on with each new rev of OS/application suite.

  5. Rather Lacking in Details by corngrower · · Score: 4, Interesting

    After reading through the article, I didn't find much in the way of information. What specifically was the problem here? Microsoft still bundling? What are they being accused of bundling this time?

    1. Re:Rather Lacking in Details by WTBF · · Score: 2, Informative

      The combination of programs in there office suite is meant to be the problem, Word and Outlook seems to be the big ones.

      The Inquirer had some extra details here.

    2. Re:Rather Lacking in Details by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 1

      The complainers think that Microsoft should remove Word and Outlook from Office leaving a $500 suite which isn't much of a suite anymore because there's only Excel and PowerPoint in it?

    3. Re:Rather Lacking in Details by hurfy · · Score: 1

      " After reading through the article, I didn't find much in the way of information."

      That would be because there was no info in the article whatsoever.
      The link to the inquirer article below links to the NYT that says it MIGHT be related to office.

      Between 3 articles we have:
      Someone thought something MS sells should not be bundled somehow. May be a current item or a planned item and it may or may not involve office noone is saying.

      That should be more than enough to comment on, right?

      All that said, always wondered why i had to buy an email program to go with Word. And why is Office Basic only OEM as far as i can see? Are Word or Excel available alone anymore or are they somehow 'inseperable' now?

    4. Re:Rather Lacking in Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can buy Outlook by itself, and all the others by themselves. The suite is most common on retail shelves, but just do a search on buy.com or something and you'll find the single application retail packages.

    5. Re:Rather Lacking in Details by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      An earlier article mentioned bundling of MS Office with Windows licenses, thus erecting a barrier to competing office suites. EU probably wants to ensure that OEMS are able to buy Windows licences cheaper than Windows+MSOffice licenses. Microsoft obviously doesn't want this.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  6. Look out, Microsoft! by cortana · · Score: 2, Funny

    The kleptocrats can't quite afford their new mansions and yauchts. They're looking for large, rich businesses to help them out.

    1. Re:Look out, Microsoft! by Pxtl · · Score: 1

      Yes. Perhaps these rich businesses can even provide them with spellcheckers for their yachts.

      So, has MS been taken to task yet for what they did to BeOS?

    2. Re:Look out, Microsoft! by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      gee, if they are really that bad, why does not MS withdraw their sales in EU? Is it possible that MS's complaints might be akin to murderer saying that they are being treated unfairly, when they are caught murdering again?

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:Look out, Microsoft! by FidelCatsro · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because even if they get sued for 1 billion and have to alter their products for the EU nations costing a further 1 billion they would have to be completely insane to give up such a large market to the competitors , never mind the profit loss they would suffer which is well in excess of 2 billion .

        Plus if they did remove the product and people still wanted to use it then there would be far less complaints if people just downloaded a pirate version

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    4. Re:Look out, Microsoft! by cortana · · Score: 1
      gee, if they are really that bad, why does not MS withdraw their sales in EU?
      They can't just withdraw from the EU. It's such a big, tasty market. If they want to do business there, then they will have to play by the bloodsucker's rules.
      Is it possible that MS's complaints might be akin to murderer saying that they are being treated unfairly, when they are caught murdering again?
      You assume that the EU Commission is on our side, that its goal in this affair is to regulate the market, thereby ensuring that Microsoft can't leverage their monopoly powers to drive their competitors out of business.

      In reality, the EU Commission's goal is to further the interests of the EU Commission; that is, increasing their influence/power while funneling as much of other people's money as possible into that convenient (for Commission members, and their mates) black box labelled "European Union Accounts".

      Did the previous judgement against Microsoft actually help us in any way? From where I am sitting it seems like they just took a whole load of money from Microsoft (good for the Commission), and forced them to release a new edition of Windows that no one wants or needs (good for the Commission's press department).

      Have Microsoft been forced to document their past, present or future protocols? Have they been made to license their media-related patents?

      Of course they have not; that would mean that something useful would have actually been accomplished during this entire sordid affair.
    5. Re:Look out, Microsoft! by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Do you really think MS has that power? Imagine this...

      MS pulls products from europe.

      Europe repeals all MS patents and copyrights. All MS software becomed public domain in Europe.

      MS shareholder crucify ballmer for making such a boneheaded decision.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    6. Re:Look out, Microsoft! by The+Original+Yama · · Score: 1

      "So, has MS been taken to task yet for what they did to BeOS?"

      Be Inc. took them to court and a settlement was made out of court.

  7. Tounge Twister by OctoberSky · · Score: 3, Funny

    "confirmed that the competition commission is considering the complaints" I can barely say that out loud, let alone imagine how Microsofts attorneys are going to understand it said with a British Accent.

    1. Re:Tounge Twister by Xarius · · Score: 1
      In the spirit of International Co-Operation, we on the Isles of Great Britain will rephrase it in a way the American Lawyers can understand:

      "They confirmed, like, that the, y'know, competition commision, like is considering, yeah, considering the complaints, yeah?"
      --
      C17H21NO4
    2. Re:Tounge Twister by jd · · Score: 1
      That only covers parts of the US. For the Southern States, you need the following translation:


      "Y'all Yurocats canfirmed that there tha competition kermission is considerin' that there complaints, y'all. Ya hear?"

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    3. Re:Tounge Twister by hplasm · · Score: 0

      For everyone-"Ow!! get your foot off my Tounge! it's all twisted, and I needed it straight for some pr0n story!!!"

      --
      ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
  8. Well, kudos to the EC by reality-bytes · · Score: 3, Insightful



    The European Commission do seem to keep pluggin on this. However, I was under the impression that their first ruling was supposed to have put this to rest.

    I know they already issued a financial punishment to Microsoft (which Microsoft could undoubtedly afford) but seeing as this has 'come back' again, you'd think they would arrange a punishment which would actually hurt Microsoft - to persuad them to Be Good(tm)

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
    1. Re:Well, kudos to the EC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because someone has filed a complaint, doesnt mean it has merit.

    2. Re:Well, kudos to the EC by einhverfr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree. And I think that people who find fault with this often don't understand how antitrust law works in the real world. IANAL, of course.

      I cannot think of any companies who have been broken up against their will as a result of antitrust procedings. Instead agreements are made regarding behavior going forward and additional, often oppresive scrutiny is applied as a way of slowly righting the wrong. The inability that AT&T had to capitalize on new markets eventually lead to their (largely) voluntary breakup. And similarly with IBM, the scrutiny cost them their hold on the market. I think that Microsoft is going to go down like IBM rather than like AT&T.

      Do there really is not much to see here. This is just a routine continuation of the antitrust complaint, IMO.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  9. Just take a look at MS' new slogan by jgbishop · · Score: 2, Funny

    These complaints come as no surprise, according to inside sources.

    --
    Go, and never darken my towels again! -- Rufus
  10. ironic... by LordSharth · · Score: 1

    .... that an microsoft antitrust article features a ginormous ad for Windows XP

  11. Helping competitors by October_30th · · Score: 0

    Why should Microsoft be forced to help their competitors? If the competitors get stomped, it's their bloody fault for not coming up with a better product.

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
    1. Re:Helping competitors by Dragon+Rojo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Unfortunately a better product doesn't alway guarantee success.

    2. Re:Helping competitors by deaddrunk · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In a truly competitive market that would be the case. The desktop and office suite markets are very far from that though. Intel have survived having to share their IP with AMD, why can't Microsoft do the same with their competitors instead of erecting artificial barriers in order to soak their customers and prevent any effective competition from emerging.

      --
      Does a Christian soccer team even need a goalkeeper?
    3. Re:Helping competitors by AvitarX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, they have the hurdle of compatability (an ever moving target) before they can even compete.

      Product A (lets call it office) Is real nice, but expensive.

      Product B (lets call it open/star office) is pretty good, but free/cheap.

      Product C (lets call it santa's magic office suite, because it doesn't really exist) is better than both other products and free/cheap

      If company X has all of there stuff in product A's proprietary format B and C can be irrelavent even though they are valid/better options, that is not competition for the best product, it is momentum of living on past success.

      The problem is the small/medium guy needs Office compatability at a 99.5% level to work smoothly with the big guys who need it at a 100% level because of legacy apps and docs.

      right now product B is around 90% compatable (can share information, but presentatin may be different), but that is not good enough in a lot of places.

      The dominance in Office is used to slow adaption of Linux, by keeping a proprietary changing format. Also, MS was forced to make Office Mac if I am not mistaken, but would probably be hard pressed to stop since OSX users are in the unenviable position of having less good choices for non-MS office suites than Linux users.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    4. Re:Helping competitors by October_30th · · Score: 2, Insightful
      How can it be a "better product" if it is not successful?

      A "better product" is both successful (ie. popular) and technologically up to date.

      --
      The owls are not what they seem
    5. Re:Helping competitors by Dragon+Rojo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      A better product is one that fills needs faster, cheaper, easier, etc. But sadly people doesn't see that. They usually want something beacuse they saw it on tv or ads. That is why marketing is so important, it doesn't matter if your product is the best of all. If it's not well marketed then it have a low possibility of succed.

    6. Re:Helping competitors by Vegard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, it can still be "better" in itself, as in having more features, better features and be more stable. And it will all be irrelevant if it isn't near 100% compatible with the monopolist. This is the reason OpenOffice has to spend time and effort chasing Microsoft all the time.

      If Microsoft could again make a super-proprietary format that only they could read, and not having regulation in one form or another stopping them, it would probably make sense, economically. And this is the reason it is important to preserve free competition in the market, to regulate the monopolists. If you can't do that, someone could end up "owning" the market without anyone being able to realistically make a dent in their market.

      That's not really free competition either.

    7. Re:Helping competitors by daniil · · Score: 1

      Clearly, you haven't used any of the "better products" you're touting.

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    8. Re:Helping competitors by westlake · · Score: 1
      Intel have survived having to share their IP with AMD

      Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't AMD license -- and pay for -- the use of Intel technologies?

      What, exactly, was Intel forced to share?

    9. Re:Helping competitors by corngrower · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Two words: Sony Betamax
      Back when VCR's (video cassette recorders) were just out, there were two competing formats. One of these was Betamax. Technically, it was superior. However Sony wanted large license fees from those companies that wanted to produce products that used this format. The competing technology, VHS, had licensing terms that were considerably more reasonable for those interested in producing VCRs.

      So while dozens of companies bought licenses to produce VCRs using the VHS format, only three or four companies made VCRs that used the Betamax tape. Naturally VHS came to dominate the market.

      So here we have, in essence, an example of a superior product(Betamax) that was not successful. This happens all the time. It's the best marketed product that wins, not necessarily the product that uses the best technology.

    10. Re:Helping competitors by Morgalyn · · Score: 1

      Also, MS was forced to make Office Mac if I am not mistaken, but would probably be hard pressed to stop since OSX users are in the unenviable position of having less good choices for non-MS office suites than Linux users.

      I just got my first Mac ever to replace a PC laptop that had gone kaput. It came with 'Microsoft Office for the Mac TESTDRIVE' which is a 30 day preview of the Microsoft product. They didn't even really integrate it into OS X. They also charge $400 for the standard edition, while the Windows version standard edition is $322 (via Amazon.com)

      In order to edit Word documents, I've downloaded and installed NeoOffice, which is an OpenOffice.org port using Carbon and Java (you can also get regular flavored OpenOffice for the Mac). So far (1 week) it works just fine.

      What I don't understand is your belief that OSX users have fewer choices than Linux users. OSX can run pretty much anything *nix runs, since its built on top of [FreeBSD?] (BTW, I can drop down to command line any day of the week and geek it up to my heart's desire). I'd argue I actually have /more/ choices, since I can also choose products specifically meant for the Mac (such as Appleworks, which also came preinstalled on the machine but which I haven't used yet).

      --
      You say you got a real solution
      Well, you know
      We'd all love to see the plan
      (The Beatles)
    11. Re:Helping competitors by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      OK here goes:

      1) X11 though good on Linux is not so on OSX, negating the every (Open Source) Linux app runs on OSX (regards to good choice).

      2) My understanding from /. is that NeoOffice is based on an old version of OO.o and has stability problems.

      So that leaves you with Apply works (which was teh suck when I last used it but that was version 5).

      PS Do you study anything? Student Office is $150.00 for 3 computer pack. I don't know the details of the EULA (not required to know anymore than the obvious) so they may use a finer definition of student, but to me downloading and looking at educational powerpoints is me using Office to study. Therefore I have the educational copy on three computers I use (I do not use it commecially though).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    12. Re:Helping competitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe they are under some kind of IP sharing agreement, which is why AMD can use x86, with sse, etc and Intel can use x86-64 and any new architectures or extensions AMD makes.

    13. Re:Helping competitors by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

      ``Intel have survived having to share their IP with AMD, why can't Microsoft do the same with their competitors''

      I can think of at least one reason:

      Because the cost of duplicating software is infinitesemal, whereas the cost of manufacturing microchips is substantial.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    14. Re:Helping competitors by deaddrunk · · Score: 1

      They licenced the tech in order to avoid anti-trust investigation and the consumer has benefitted a great deal. Microsoft decided to waste their time fighting a battle they couldn't win and the consumer has had to put up with all sorts of malware and bugs until they finally got their act together with XP SP2. Had they licensed Win32 and Office formats we would have all benefitted from the increased competition instead we're still stuck with the incompetent monolith.

      --
      Does a Christian soccer team even need a goalkeeper?
    15. Re:Helping competitors by cakesy · · Score: 1

      How many times do we have to hear this crap. Beta wasn't supperior, you needed to tapes for one movie- each tape held about an hour. How is this technically superior. It stored a few extra scan lines, for very little discernible different from VHS.

    16. Re:Helping competitors by zev1983 · · Score: 1

      I've seen this argument posted all over the place, but this is the first time I've realized that, contrary to this wisdom, VHS was actually the better product... to the VCR manufacturers.

    17. Re:Helping competitors by Generic+Guy · · Score: 1
      One of these was Betamax. Technically, it was superior.

      Ugh, not this historical reconstruction again. This is going to sound like flaimbait, but since I actually lived through the Betamax period here goes the truth:

      Technically, the original Betamax tapes could only record about 60 to 90 minutes. It took more than one tape to record a TV movie or to copy from a commercial tape. Copying was popular because of the incredibly high prices of commercially released tapes. Knowing "the guy" at the video rental really paid off in those days. The high equipment costs meant you often cribbed the videos off the local video-rental dealer (these were the days before Blockbuster, and before Macrovision crap) for the price of a rental + a blank tape, and he had enough equipment laying about to do it. Big movie releases (over 90 minutes) meant more tapes had to be bought and needed more man-handling to copy them. Anyone with a library of tapes in the early 1980's had shelves full of these "homemade" releases, not the commercial tapes.

      VHS, with its bigger cartridge and longer tape, was able to record two full hours which made it much nicer for prime-time TV recording and pirating videos. It was also nicer for rentals, where you didn't need to change tapes in the middle of the movie [a side note, this was also a setback for 12-inch LaserDiscs which required disc-flipping]. Not that it was a huge deal, nor that many movies ran long enough to require Betamax double-tapes, but it was one detail which made BetaMax seem inferior to VHS. It was quite a few years before typical Hollywood releases ran over the two-hour mark that VHS handled easily.

      Sony may have wanted large licensing fees, but Betamax had a big headstart in video releases. And for years every movie had a Betamax and VHS release. I think people just got tired of the double-tape movie releases. And when Betamax finally came out with 2-hour tapes, VHS countered with T-160 tapes. Once again, piracy is what drove the marketplace. I fully believe VHS 'won' more because of the early two-hour capacity than anything else.

      --
      { - Generic Guy - }
  12. bah...do what The Shrub did... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...just slap them on the hand and force them to seed 2 billion dollars into a market they don't dominate...that'll teach em!

    1. Re:bah...do what The Shrub did... by einhverfr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ..just slap them on the hand and force them to seed 2 billion dollars into a market they don't dominate...that'll teach em!

      I know you are trolling but this is so often repeated that it deserves an answer.

      IANAL, but I have followed a number of antitrust cases. Courts are very hesitant to forceably break up a company and rightly so. In general, the emphasis is on long-term corrections rather than creating instability as a result of such a breakup.

      Such a strategy takes time to have an effect, but it is often, I think, more effective than merely breaking up companies. The stifling restrictions that AT&T lived under for decades eventually lead to their divestiture (this was largely voluntary), and the restrictions that IBM lived under cost them their market power. But it doesn't happen immediately.

      The slap on the wrist along with a court finding is actually one of the worst things you can do in an antitrust suit to a company. The reason is something called "collateral estoppel" which basically holds that absent a change in fact, facts which were necessarily decided as part of one case cannot be relitigated in another. So leaving the company intact while finding them to be guilty of Sherman Act violations lowers the bar to everyone else. Ralph Nader point out that it would take an army or lawyers to enforce such action against Microsoft, but he fails to note that in this case, Microsoft is now facing hundreds of antitrust suits, each of which is now far more dangerous simply because of the portions of the finding of fact that were not overturned by the appeals court. So Microsoft is heavily stifled by this judgement. Had they been broken up, they could rightly argue that facts had changed, but now they are in big trouble.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  13. To quote the EU Comission . . . by wsanders · · Score: 1, Funny

    . . . blah blah blah, blah, blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah,blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, blah, blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah.

    [How do you say "blah" in French or German?]

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
    1. Re:To quote the EU Comission . . . by Stevyn · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      le bleh?

    2. Re:To quote the EU Comission . . . by BackOrder · · Score: 1

      bla bla bla - in French

    3. Re:To quote the EU Comission . . . by aurelien · · Score: 2, Funny

      In french we say "bla", which is a clearly superior in terms of signal/noise ratio.

      --
      aurelien
    4. Re:To quote the EU Comission . . . by stud9920 · · Score: 0

      In German vee zay "Schell". Period.

    5. Re:To quote the EU Comission . . . by Pius+II. · · Score: 1

      "blah blah blah" "laber laber" "schnatter" "rhabarber rhabarber"
      in German. Or a mix of the above. Whatever floats your boat.

    6. Re:To quote the EU Comission . . . by Kirth+Gersen · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The French for "blah" is "bling". (There should be an acute accent on the "i" in bling, but this terminal is set up for Asian languages, not European.)

      The German for "blah" is "Blazkowicz".

    7. Re:To quote the EU Comission . . . by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      In Dutch, we use 'bla' as well. It loses something without the Inspector Clouseau/Monty Python [1] accent, though.

      1: French peasant from the Quest for the Holy Grail

    8. Re:To quote the EU Comission . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In french we say "bla", which is a clearly superior in terms of signal/noise ratio

      ...for once.

  14. 5% fine over daily world wide sales by jurt1235 · · Score: 1

    Are they are looking to fill a hole in their budget here?

    --

    My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
    1. Re:5% fine over daily world wide sales by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if they fine MS that much it would be a drop in the ocean if you compare it with the EU's budget...

  15. This would be a good time for a Microserf to..... by 8127972 · · Score: 4, Funny

    .....move the chairs out of Ballmer's office.

    --
    This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
  16. Jumping to conclusions by Daix · · Score: 1

    Looks like if this goes through then Open Source Software and Microsoft will be on a level playing field when it comes to interoperability.

    Could things like the Windows Media format and network API nightmares could be a thing of the past on Linux and FreeBSD?

    Come to think of it, will this mean that Microsoft's evil 'Direct Play' API will become an open spec? If so then this will good news for game porters the world over.

    1. Re:Jumping to conclusions by Rycross · · Score: 1

      How common is Direct Play anyway? I was under the impression that the vast majority rolled their own network code rather than used it. Several of the books on game developement I have read specifically mentioned that you shouldn't use Direct Play even.

      I don't think its officially being supported in DirectX anymore either.

    2. Re:Jumping to conclusions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prepare to be sued for copyright infringement on my "Jump to Conclusions" mat game.

    3. Re:Jumping to conclusions by Daix · · Score: 1

      Yes, I bought Linux Game Programming (by Nurgle, not JRH's unfortunately) and he was adamant on that point, but it'd be nice to have AvP & other old games fully portable.

      If Carmageddon uses Direct Play then I think it's in the best interests for all of us discerning gamers!

      I don't seem to see anyone point out that Mirosoft's License for interoperability (also here and here ) that was created for Open Source access to otherwise DRM'ed information was a sham. They put "Per installation Licensing Fee's" in it!

      This was demanded by the EU on the grounds of Open Source being deliberately disempowered BTW. IMHO they deserve all they get from this (which will be very little no doubt).

      I'm glad to hear that game developers have wised-up and stopped using Direct Play, it seems fairly trivial to build your own network code anyhow.

  17. Re:I've said it once... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Let me know when this happening because I'll happily *QUEUE* outside the gates of Heathrow Airport to volunteer to help Microsoft load their colourful shrinkwrapped boxes onto the next cargo plane back to Redmond...

    Please don't fool yourself - the combined countries of the EU are a much bigger economic power than the US and it's bad laws by foolish Eurocrats that are the only things stopping that unity working as well as it should. Even so, any US company that ignores the EU does so at its own peril.

    Sorry, but if you want to trade in a country or region then you play by its rules, end of story.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  18. Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    European Commission spokesperson, Jonathan Todd

    I hate Microsoft and all, but....never trust a guy with 2 first names.

    1. Re:Hmm... by glitch23 · · Score: 0

      How about a guy with no name?

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
  19. For people not in the EU.. by guruevi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In Europe Microsoft has different contracts with businesses preventing them from using other software.
    For instance: to become some kind a MS-partner you have to have at least 30% of your staff and 50% of your sales people have some kind of MS Certification. The total share of your servers/clients that has to be Windows 70%. Next to that, if a MCS... can convince management to replace a Linux server by a Windows server they can get a bonus from MS up to 1000 Euro/server.

    IF you can or will not comply your company will have to pay all licenses in full until 2 years back

    To the people that don't believe me: I worked in such a company with such a contract. I told one of the customers that Microsoft wasn't his best choice for the technical needs he had (big customer, lots of servers) and I almost got fired because some big shot from Microsoft got to hear about it and demanded my release or they would revoke the license advantages. If you complain to the authorities same Bad Things(tm) will happen

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:For people not in the EU.. by pandrijeczko · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I worked in such a company with such a contract. I told one of the customers that Microsoft wasn't his best choice for the technical needs he had (big customer, lots of servers) and I almost got fired because some big shot from Microsoft got to hear about it and demanded my release or they would revoke the license advantages.

      I wouldn't wait to be fired - I'd just hand in my resignation and walk out, end of story.

      Sorry, but my attitude to employers is that they pay me a salary because employing me generates 2x, 3x, 4x, etc into their coffers - so it's their loss, not mine.

      I'm no socialist & the employee unions in the UK got too powerful and needed to be taken down a few steps. But now the right-wing Conservatives have completely trashed the unions, all the employer bullies can now crawl out of the woodwork & all of us are now just tiny cogs in big machines so it's gone completely the other way.

      Personally, I believe anyone with any IT skills should just go out and work for themselves now - there are plenty of "pickings" for anyone with wide enough skills because so many customers of big corporations are hacked off with the lower quality service their getting due to outsourcing, etc. they're just waiting to pay for more personal and better service from self-employed consultants and small businesses.

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  20. Re:This would be a good time for a Microserf to... by crolix · · Score: 1

    ...and get some business hammocks. I hear there are a few places for that on third.

    --
    Read the rest of this comment...
  21. where is the action? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is great that more people are finally speaking out against the monopolistic and mob-like business practices of Microsoft. The question is: Is the EC finally going to do something about it or are they letting Microsoft bullying and bribing them again.

  22. Impossible!! by rlp · · Score: 1

    The EU is part of the operating system.

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
  23. Notepad? by geekee · · Score: 1

    "Microsoft still bundling? What are they being accused of bundling this time?"

    Notepad?

    --
    Vote for Pedro
  24. EU Computer Driving License ~ 90% Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    copied from the dutch computerrijbewijs.nl
    Module 0 (Office 97 t/m 2003)
    Module 1 (theorie)
    Module 2 (Windows 98 / 2000 / XP)
    Module 3 (Word 97 t/m 2003)
    Module 4 (Excel 97 t/m 2003)
    Module 5 (Access 97 t/m 2003)
    Module 6 (PowerPoint 97 t/m 2003)
    Module 7 (Internet Explorer 5/6)

    The ECDL programme is done by many, many millions, now even outside Europe, as the ICDL.

    This is just awful and needs to be changed rigorously NOW !!

    1. Re:EU Computer Driving License ~ 90% Microsoft by mrRay720 · · Score: 1

      I agree. We need to add a "Module -1 (Notepad)" to ease people into things.

      As long as MS office software is the market leader in numbers, why the heck would you want to use anything else to prepare people for working with computers? Keep your GPL religious bigotry out of it, and realise that it's a way of preparing people for a real job in a real company using computers - and for 90% of people that will mean MS office.

      Train them up on Abiword, lynx, Linux xyz, and whatever 'pure' FOOS software and all you're doing is shafting them out of what they thought they were paying for - knowledge that will help them get on in the current office environment.

    2. Re:EU Computer Driving License ~ 90% Microsoft by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1
      To the level at which 90% of computer owners use office packages, I don't think it matters what they're trained on if it's a corporate budget that's paying for it - if you can write a letter in Word & save it, it's not a lot of difference to do the same in OpenOffice.

      But what I do object to are my taxes filling Microsoft's coffers because the health service, social services, libraries, schools, etc. have not been forced to evaluate and use free software first before spending *my* money on Windows, Office, etc. I'd much rather my taxes paid for, say, a new dialysis machine than 500 copies of Office....

      Added to that, if Microsoft is happy for people to train on their products via government initiatives, then Microsoft should also support & subsidise training on virus detection, spyware removal & Windows fault-finding because those three are equally prevalent to anyone who uses a Microsoft product.

      Or how about someone forces Microsoft to pay me for the time I've spent rebuilding the PCs of friends & family with an operating system that I have absolutely no faith in...

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  25. EC == Pope by Demona · · Score: 1

    "The Pope? How many divisions does he have?"

    --
    Fuck Slashdot
  26. Re:This would be a good time for a Microserf to... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    .....move the chairs out of Ballmer's office.

    I got a better idea. Replace the chairs with these ergonomic, impact-proof models!

  27. Re:I've said it once... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pratt.

  28. Re:I've said it once... by czarangelus · · Score: 1

    I'm sure that's precisely how it went.

    Please stop giving the rest of us Americans a bad name with your drivel.

    --
    When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
  29. Anti-competitive -- restricted interoperabili by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

    FTA: "Ms Kroes [EC Competition Commissioner] has declared herself "determined" that open source developers should have access to the information, and Microsoft appealed to the Court of First Instance recently to get a legal decision on whether it should be required to share communications source code with open source software vendors."

    This is about whether or not MS meets interoperability standards mandated by the EC as part of the last action against MS.

    It seems crystal-clear to me: Either the standards are open, and therefore fully interoperable, or they're not.

    For MS to say that their standards fulfill interoperability requirements, without allowing anyone (especially the Open Source community) to see those standards, is complete hogwash.

    "the two sides still cannot agree on whether interoperability information should be made available to open source software suppliers"

    The two sides? One is a private corporation, the other is a government entity. There is only one side with legal authority, and MS had better be prepared to shape up when their appeal result comes next year.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  30. Re:I've said it once... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must have plenty of time. Maybe you should *QUEUE* outside of your unemployment office with your fellow mates instead. That's what you and the rest of the EU are good at...getting handouts.

  31. Re:I've said it once... by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

    "the combined countries of the EU are a much bigger economic power than the US and it's bad laws by foolish Eurocrats that are the only things stopping that unity working as well as it should."

    Your phrasing is more than a bit off -- how about 'the combined economies of EU member-states, if they operated coherently, would be more powerful than the US economy.'

    Just because something is larger does not make it more powerful -- power is the ability to wield that size.

    Also, the size and power of the European economy has little to do with this issue -- it's the size of the market for a particular product. The market, and the threat of denying access to it, is the only weapon the EC can use to influence MS's activities.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  32. Well I do by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    "Since when does anyone give a crap about MS source code... I thought they just wanted the specifications for these protocols published in a free (beer and speech) manner?"

    I do!

    I could finally write good quality and secure code from the masters.

  33. Re:I've said it once... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 2, Insightful
    For example unemployment rates in France and Germany are through the roof, and no sign of recovery on the horizon.

    I hate to say this, buddy, but there are cities in the US with huge unemployment areas, your education system is suffering & while you have good quality healthcare, no-one on a minimum wage can afford it. So I think we cancel each other out on those bits...

    We need cash, lets rape the Americans; they only gave us electricity, phones, internet, cars, planes.

    Yes, quite possibly. But the longbow (a weapon that, like the aircraft, revolutionised warfare) was a French invention (I believe), the jet engine was British, Airbus will trounce Boeing & you handed over your car industry to the Japanese, just like we did. Oh, and let's not forget that what brought the Internet out of the realm of academics into the eyes of the general public was the World Wide Web, invented by Tim Berners-Lee who was *BRITISH*.

    Oh and gratitude, screw it, who cares that they lost 10,000s, of 10,000s of young men bailing us out of two world wars last century, we don't like Bush now.

    Erm, what about the equal numbers of European young men who died in those same wars??? And Australians, Japanese, etc. etc.??? Or were their sacrifices any less just because they weren't American? I find your statement offensive & ignorant....

    Gratitude, that's not trendy, "evil Americans" is.

    I've nothing against most American people - hell, I was in the US when 9/11 happened & I wept for the dead as much as any of the US citizens around me did. However, whilst most governments are just plain corrupt, the Bush administration is *EVIL* & your politicians are nothing but puppets to the corporate lobbyists. That's why anything that stops your evil corporations in their tracks is a *good* thing for the rest of the world.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  34. Re:I've said it once... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

    How about I queue alongside US farmers because I'll end up getting two handouts? One from US government subsidies so that I can produce "artificially cheap" foodstuffs & the other from the combined efforts of McDonald's & KFC to destroy the face of agriculture purely to make cheaper junk food...

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  35. Re:I've said it once... by hplasm · · Score: 0

    " electricity, phones, internet, cars, planes, etc. etc." Pah. All Indian!

    --
    ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
  36. Re:I've said it once... by Taladar · · Score: 1

    I would say with a 50% larger population compared to the US the market for products that are needed by almost every office worker should be a lot larger than the one in the US even if the companies employing these workers might not generate the same profit as the US.

  37. Specifications worthless by edxwelch · · Score: 1

    According to this artical, the specification is worthless:
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/03/19/why_micros ofts_eu_concession/

    Quote from artical:
    "The source code itself is the specification . The level of detail required to interoperate successfully is simply not documentable - it would produce a stack of paper so high you might as well publish the source code."

    However, they also say:
    "There is information that the Samba developers want to see: the IDL descriptions for remote procedure calls. These underpin tasks such as adding users, and adding quotas and shares, and Samba developers have successfully decoded them over the wire. But it's hard work.

    "These IDL descriptions are *key* for providing interoperability with Microsoft clients," wrote the team in a submission to the EU commissioners earlier this year. "If these IDL descriptions were published, open and equal interoperability with Microsoft products would be greatly enhanced (although still not perfect)."

    Allison says the Samba team has requested the IDL definitions from Microsoft annually, most recently at the 2001 CIFS conference, without success."

  38. Interesting choice by Prof.+Pi · · Score: 1
    Microsoft is not known for having complete and accurate documentation of any of its APIs or file formats. If you want the absolute truth, you go to the source code.

    So either they give up their source code, and endlessly whine about nasty governments "forcing them to give up their crown jewels," or else hand over a buggy spec, and risk having a court find that they failed to comply with a court order.

    No doubt, they would do the latter, and try to argue that buggy specs is standard industry practice, and drag it out forever.

  39. Re:I've said it once... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You realise only ~10 people will get that joke?

  40. Re:I've said it once... by hplasm · · Score: 0

    Probably- and not all Indian either..

    --
    ...and he grinned, like a fox eating shit out of a wire brush.
  41. US to hammer dissidents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    "If Microsoft could again make a super-proprietary format that only they could read, and not having regulation in one form or another stopping them, it would probably make sense, economically."

    Thus the drive by MS to push DRM'd proprietary formats with illegal tying to other proprietary tools, all protected by the DMCA/EUCD, EEA and sw patents. Then the US will enforce MS' will.

  42. Subtle Straw-Man Misrepresentation by Shaper_pmp · · Score: 1

    Indeed. It's a subtle straw-man.

    "They want the barest minimum information on how our products talk to each other so they can ensure interoperability"

    is a lot more reasonable-sounding than

    "They want the actual source code of our products" (implied: so they can rip-off our hard-created intellectual property).

    Frankly nobody I know would want to touch MS source code, apart from possibly virus/worm writers. Everyone else'd rather see the access and comms protocols and write their own implementations. Ones that, y'know, work.

    Unfortunately, this distinction is lost on many non-technical types, and Microsoft and its lawyers have hardly been correcting people when they make the mistakes, since it's to their advantage to have it presented this way.

    --
    Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
  43. Competition commissioner by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

    The EU commissioner for competition, Neelie Kroes, is a very contreversial figure in Europe. She was revieing cases of companies that she was working for only a few months before, has a habit of sticking her nose into everything, and not always complying to behavior codes she accepted when taking on the position.

    Last year she even got a University she used to work for to give Bill Gates an honory doctorate.

    I wouldn't be surprised if the whole process slowed to a halt because of her.

  44. Re:I've said it once... by Logi · · Score: 1
    Oh and gratitude, screw it, who cares that they lost 10,000s, of 10,000s of young men bailing us out of two world wars last century, we don't like Bush now.

    Erm, what about the equal numbers of European young men who died in those same wars??? And Australians, Japanese, etc. etc.??? Or were their sacrifices any less just because they weren't American? I find your statement offensive & ignorant....

    Actually, never mind any of that. The Russians won the war and the Russians suffered the casualties. They lost millions of people, more than all other allies together. 3/4 of the Germans' losses were on the eastern front. Where the hell is the gratitude to the Russians?

    (See the Economist from April or so when the V-Day celebrations were on for the details)

    --
    Logi - I can do anything, but not everything.