South Korea Fines Microsoft $32 Million

laffer1 writes "South Korea has fined Microsoft $32 million and ordered two new versions of Windows be made. The first version will be stripped of Windows Media Player and MSN IM software and the second must include links to competitors."

Comments

Whats the real issue?

[Viol8]

Is it because their IM was tied to windows (tied in what way ,
networking protocol, hidden lockouts for non windows systems or
only ran on windows?) , or because they bundled this and media
player with windows?

Either way I can't help wondering if this is a good thing since
if Suse or Ubunto or some other linux dist suddenly becomes popular
overnight, will they get nailed for bundling 100s of apps with it?
Will a judge know (or care) of the difference between open source
and MS when it comes to bundling freeware in a distribution?

Re:Whats the real issue?

[Spad]

It's highly unlikely as most distros bundle 2 or 3 of any given type of app with their releases. They can hardly accuse someone of monopolistic behaviour because they're including XMMS & Mplayer with their operating system, can they.

Re:Whats the real issue?

[XO]

Yeah, I don't know what the sense in this is. So, now, Microsoft could simply choose to SELL messenger and media player to the people in these places.

  It's on the same vein as forcing them to unbundle notepad from the system, or to unbundle Excel from Word when you buy Office. It's really stupid.

  Force them to provide links to competitors? That's like saying Pepsi must provide coupons for Coke on their packages! wtf?

Re:Whats the real issue?

[Depili]

Keep in mind, that linux distros usually bundle several apps for the same task, and also that the apps are usually made by different people than the distro itself, so in no way is it helping to create a monopoly.

Re:Whats the real issue?

[millahtime]

Ya know.... M$ could remove them from Windows and just give cds with them on it away free at the door. With every purchase. Not bundled this way, just a freebee.

working for corperate america has really taught me how to think like this. to walk the line. Well, time for my coffee and first meeting of the day.

Re:Whats the real issue?

[tpgp]

Yeah, I don't know what the sense in this is. So, now, Microsoft could simply choose to SELL messenger and media player to the people in these places.

Err, yes - and compete with the other players.

It's on the same vein as forcing them to unbundle notepad from the system, or to unbundle Excel from Word when you buy Office. It's really stupid.

Force them to provide links to competitors? That's like saying Pepsi must provide coupons for Coke on their packages! wtf?

Not its not.

Imagine if coke was the sole supplier of fridges as well as being a major drink company.

It would be like saying that coke must allow drinks other then coke to be stocked in coke fridges.

Its about using a monopoly in one market to unfairly compete in another.

Re:Whats the real issue?

[drsquare]

Last I looked, Microsoft didn't stop other media players from running on Windows.

And your analogy fails AGAIN when you realise that Microsoft don't provide all operating systems, but there are competitors, one of them with a FREE product.

A better analogy would be, Coke making most of the fridges, so they should be banned from providing free cans of coke when you buy one. Or they have to allow Rola Cola to advertise inside them.

Unbundling media player helps no-one. It just hurts the user as they have to go out and download a media player rather than having it built in.

If you don't like media player there's nothing stopping you from installing something else so what's the problem?

Re:Whats the real issue?

[tpgp]

A better analogy would be, Coke making most of the fridges, so they should be banned from providing free cans of coke when you buy one. Or they have to allow Rola Cola to advertise inside them. [emphasis mine]

*grins* Your second analogy is exactly what people what microsoft don't allow (or didn't before getting their predatory asses hauled through court) - OEMs having Real / Quicktime / etc media players installed instead of Media Player.

Unbundling media player helps no-one. It just hurts the user as they have to go out and download a media player rather than having it built in.

Nonsense. Unbundling media player helps the market as it allows all the media players to compete on an even basis.

Re:Whats the real issue?

[tpgp]

As far as I know I can install lots of media players on my box. Actually, I *already* have quite a few on it, vlc, mplayer, windows media player, quicktime, a couple of dvd thingies, and possibily other ones.

Yes, yes. You can install other players. Are they competing with WMP on equal terms however?

Besides, is your take on this that everything Linux is bad because, you know, it gives stuff away for free? Lo and behold, the rampant hypocrisy...

Hypocricy? Cute.

I don't think Microsoft should be forced to sell their products. The OEM should be allowed to decide which media player to include on the final O/S. What is your problem with that?

Re:Whats the real issue?

[servo335]

Imay get flamed for this but i see no problem with Micro$oft including their products with Windows. If you dont like them nothing stops you from getting itunes/quick time or realplayer. Nothing stops you from downloading aim or icq or yahoo or google im. This is just a government way of making money offpeoples stupidity.

Re:Whats the real issue?

[CastrTroy]

The problem is that in many cases you can't even fully uninstall these programs. There's no reason why you should be forced to have applications with tons of holes in them (wmp, ie) just to use their operating system. I think it would be advantageous to everyone if you could swap out all the components of windows, and replace the ones you wanted to. That way, you could have a windows machine, without having the terrible browser which is IE, installed on your system.

Re:Whats the real issue?

[johnnyb]

If OSX were a monopoly, it would be a big deal. Since they are not, it's not. In addition, there are no OEM resellers of OSX.

Re:Whats the real issue?

[bigman2003]

I ought to be protected from such a situation

Protected by whom? I assume you are referring to the government.

So, the government should be involved in our lives down to the level where they can determine which text editor we do, or don't, use?

And what about Apple's dominance of the portable music player market. Should the government be doing something about that?

Wouldn't be all this bitching if....

[millahtime]

I don't know if there would be this level of complaining and problems with M$ if they innovated, did right by their customers, and honestly tried to put out a good product. M$ has become the GM of the software world. Sure they are big and have moeny for now but there are a lot of unhappy people with their product just waiting for a true viable alternative at the desktop to come along. So, when the Toyota of the desktop computing world finially is ready to step it up they will slowly be able to nick away at M$ and for similar management thinking as GM.

Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if....

[Drinian]

So, when the Toyota of the desktop computing world finially is ready to step it up they will slowly be able to nick away at M$...

It already has. It's called Apple.

Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if....

[qray]

Value is in the eye of the beholder. For me, value means not having to take my car in for repairs every month. So yes, I'm willing to pay more up front so I don't have to see a repairman on a regular basis.

I once opted for reducing the up front costs one time. I then add edup the amount of time I spent taking the car to the repair shop, being towed, etc. not to mention the out of warranty repairs, I would have been better off with a higher priced car. I'm not talking Ford vs Toyota necessary, this was just my observation of the two brands of cars I've owned.

It's also been interesting to compare my parents time spent at repair shops and stranded compared to mine.

That said I have Window's at home. The price is right, and it has never given me any problems. I've used Apple in the past, but it never impressed me enough to make me want to switch. I wouldn't mind using it. But for home, I have to consider games, and many of the games my children and I play aren't available on the Mac. Hopefully that may change with the move to Intel. I'd honestly consider getting a Mac for my wife, as I think she'd find it easier. The other factors unfortunately override that.
--
Q

Oh god

[ilovegeorgebush]

Jeeze, can't someone do something about this in a more serious manner? I mean come on, how many times are they sued and 'sanctioned' for not complying to anti-competitive laws etc. Its quite obvious suing isnt doing anything (come on, how much do they earn?) Someone do something that'll harm them! And jeeze, someone give the koreans an ubuntu disc or something *rolls eyes

Re:Microsoft's Reply

[moro_666]

starting to think ???

this is just the cheapest campaign that microsoft can get. advertisement is the proper english word for it.

quite millions of people see news about it on cnn and other tv/news channels, pretty many thousand slashdotters read the article, for 32 millions this is a damn bargain.

and if they lose the appealing case too, its addition just another free commercial which be banging on the big bell of news channels.

write: oh we are in court
think: free advertisement & commercials all over the world.

Re:Microsoft's Reply

[Anonymous Coward]

but there are only so many drops in the bucket.

Not when the bucket is placed in a torrential downpour of several billion raindrops per year.

Windows XP N

[Sarthek]

This just sounds like a rehash of the rather pointless European rulings. Can't MS just ship Windows XP N out there and be done with it?

Anyway, it's not like one can't stick alternative bits of software on top of what's already there. Having Windows Media Player installed doesn't stop you from using Winamp any more than having MSN Messenger stops you from using AIM.

Ridiculous

[vectorian798]

Whoever it is, forcing links to be placed to "sites that allow one to download competiting versions of such software" is ridiculous. This is basically forcing a business to advertise for its competitors - it makes no logical sense!

Re:Ridiculous

[mallie_mcg]

Whoever it is, forcing links to be placed to "sites that allow one to download competiting versions of such software" is ridiculous. This is basically forcing a business to advertise for its competitors - it makes no logical sense!

Windows is the defacto operating system for many people. Microsoft placing these pieces of software into the Operating System install (and making them very difficult to remove by end users) gives them an unfair advantage. I am sick of the number of people who use MSN - because it came with windows is invariably the response ditto for WMP (but the use of WMP by people who I want to IM does not affect me, so I care a little less about this) this means that if I want to IM these people and cannot convince them to use a better/different protocol - I too have to use a MSN compatible program etal (sometimes the protocols change and I end up lagging behind, although this has not happened for quite some time). Forcing Microsoft to link to alternatives (for the version that has WMP and MSNIM installed) is certainly not rediculous, the consumer is purchasing an OPERATING SYSTEM not the associated tat that helps microsoft make even more money and build a nice little database about your uses and habits with your computer.

I have no problem if microsoft were to offer these products for free, or even offer them via Windows Update (optional software section) as people would need to make a concious decision about what program or client they wish to use and would be more likely to research, rather than swallow the spoon fed baby food that Microsoft is shoving down their throat.

Comparing a distro like Ubuntu to Microsoft in light of this ruling is just silly. Distro's are not operating systems that you are paying for per-se, they are bundles of software packages that can be found all over the net, and as others have pointed out, you get a lot of choice with most distro's. With Microsoft there is no re-packaging available to other companies so there could not be Soupysoft's Rindows made that for arguments sake packaged mplayer and google talk as its IM, while running the NT kernel and shell. If that were the case I doubt that this type of lawsuit would be as it is today.

Re:Ridiculous

[aussie_a]

This is basically forcing a business to advertise for its competitors - it makes no logical sense!

Actually it does. Microsoft broke the law. As part of Microsoft's punishment, it has to undo some of the harm it's law-breaking caused. Which according to the South Korean government, is that competitors were unfairly competed with, so now Microsoft has to work to undo that damage, by helping them out.

It makes perfect sense, when you take into account Microsoft is being punished here. If you follow the law, you don't have to advertise for your competitors. You break the law, you suffer the consequences.

Re:Ridiculous

[Evil Adrian]

am sick of the number of people who use MSN - because it came with windows is invariably the response ditto for WMP (but the use of WMP by people who I want to IM does not affect me, so I care a little less about this) this means that if I want to IM these people and cannot convince them to use a better/different protocol - I too have to use a MSN compatible program etal (sometimes the protocols change and I end up lagging behind, although this has not happened for quite some time).

"Better" is an opinion, not a fact. Just because you don't like MSN doesn't mean it's worse than whatever you use. I mean... feel free to provide examples of why MSN sucks or whatever.

Forcing Microsoft to link to alternatives (for the version that has WMP and MSNIM installed) is certainly not rediculous, the consumer is purchasing an OPERATING SYSTEM not the associated tat that helps microsoft make even more money and build a nice little database about your uses and habits with your computer.

Hahahaha... OK, tin foil hat man, please show me where Microsoft is building a database about my uses and habits with the computer when I purchased Windows. Seriously.

I never got why people get so pissed if Microsoft throws in USEFUL programs with their operating system. It makes life easier for the user. Why should I have to download 300 programs? Why shouldn't I just install the operating system and have everything work?

Are you telling me that Microsoft not be allowed to have a spell-checker in Word, because other people write spell-checking software, and strictly speaking, I purchased a program to type and print, not check my spelling? Should Word have advertising links to other company's spell-checking software, since theirs is "spoon fed baby food that Microsoft is shoving down their throat"?? Please, explain to me the difference between this argument and the operating system argument.

I mean, we can extend your logic this way -- when I purchase a car from a car company, they have an unfair advantage installing their stereo and speakers in the car. That's just terrible, they should have to advertise for Sony, Blaupunkt, JVC, and all of the other car stereo manufacturers to me when I buy the car.

Does anyone else see how fucking retarded that sounds?

Comparing a distro like Ubuntu to Microsoft in light of this ruling is just silly. Distro's are not operating systems that you are paying for per-se, they are bundles of software packages that can be found all over the net

So why couldn't Windows be called a distro? It's a software package of Microsoft's operating system and useful utilities. What is the fucking difference? GASP because I spent money on it? How does that make *any* difference whatsoever?

With Microsoft there is no re-packaging available to other companies

NO FUCKING SHIT! Because it's MICROSOFT'S PRODUCT! They shouldn't HAVE to make repackaging available to other companies! Johnson and Johnson is not going to let Proctor & Gamble include a sample of THEIR shampoo in "No More Tears", that would be fucking asinine.

As a Windows application developer ...

[LaughingCoder]

This is more bad news. I dread the day when there will be 50 different versions of Windows out there. Some will have MP, some will have IM, some will have IE ... what's a developer to do? We will be forced to bundle all of these service-level applications with our installer. The poor user will end up with 5 different browsers, instant messengers, media players, constantly answering the "Firefox is not your default browser" questions. This type of decision, in my opinion, is very bad for the industry, and especially bad for the end users.

Re:As a Windows application developer ...

[aussie_a]

what's a developer to do?

Not create programs that rely on a particular operating system, but instead create programs that can be run on any OS? Whether it be Windows XP, Windows N, Mac OSX or Mandrake Linux.

[sarcasm]No, no. You're right. Let's allow Microsoft to continue its ethically questionable and illegal activities. I'm sure it's for the best in the long run.[/sarcasm]

Re:As a Windows application developer ...

[arendjr]

I can understand you don't like this situation, but you also have to realize it could've been avoided if Microsoft had at least taken a different approach towards bundling these type of applications. It's true users expect these types of functionality and it is a dream for application developers to be able to rely on a preinstalled component to handle the playing of video's. However, it went wrong because Microsoft just simply preinstalled their own programs, forced OEM's to use their programs and no one else's programs and implicitly forced application developers to come to rely on their programs (I believe this is true for both Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player, and it might become true for MSN Messenger as well). That exactly is how they abused their monopoly. If instead they had defined an open API that they themselves had implemented with Windows Media Player, but for which they had allowed competitors to implement the same API as well. If they had not forced OEM's to install WMP, but would have allowed the installation of other players that implemented the API. Then we would have had a situation where Microsoft could bundle WMP, but where OEM's still had the freedom to install other players, where competitors would be given a fair chance to compete and where users could freely choose without loosing the integration between applications they've become used to. Had Microsoft chosen an open approach towards offering this type of functionality rather than pushing their competitors of the edge, we wouldn't have the mess we have now.

Re:As a Windows application developer ...

[Flyboy Connor]

I dread the day when there will be 50 different versions of Windows out there.

But there ARE 50 different versions of Windows out there. Far more, even. Not only do you have different versions for different years (NT4, NT5, W95, W98, ME, 2000, XP), with different patch levels (XP bare bones, XP SP1, XP SP2), but Microsoft also brings out Windows in many different languages, which, unfortunately, all are subtly different. For different languages, the core functionalities will more or less match, but as soon as something "rare" happens (a device error, for instance), you can run into very weird behaviour. And you should, in general, not try to install English drivers on, for instance, a French system. Yes, it will work most of the time, but when it doesn't, your system will be pretty much screwed.

The most funny language idiocy I encountered with Windows was when it reported to me (translated from the original Dutch): "Undetectable device detected". This was the most amazing thing I ever saw Windows do. Luckily in my fit of laughter I had the presence of mind to make a screenprint, which I still treasure today.

Re:As a Windows application developer ...

[Flyboy Connor]

Of course it was the translation, and, indeed, it was about an unknown device. All error code translations were so inferior, that an unsuspecting user would get totally confused. But this is still a rather innocent language problem. There are problems which are very bad. To give an example from another Microsoft product: I worked at a company where we had to use Word. Half of the people used a Dutch version of Word, the other half an English version. Unfortunately, documents made in the Dutch version would not be correctly readable by the English version, and vice versa. This was because the internal codes used by Microsoft in the document files were language dependent. Ridiculous, isn't it? To be fair, it might be that the current versions of Word are better compatible in this sense, although I would not be surprised if they were not.

Re:As a Windows application developer ...

[fish waffle]

True, I *could* query the system using *open* standards and detect and use a pre-existing player. But, what if there isn't one? To cover that corner case (real developers cover corner cases, unlike OSS where they often blow them off) I would need to also provide a media player with my installer.

Umm. Put on the box under requirements: "Media player capable of playing the following formats ..."?

This still doesn't increase competition

[tannhaus]

The problem was once that these things came bundled with windows. That's not a problem anymore. The problem now is that the average person sees these apps as the primary app for that task. When they think email they don't think Eudora..they think Outlook. That's not going to change even if they unbundle things now and include links to competitors. The customer will simply say "Yeah...that's a link to realplayer, but where's windows media player?"

That battle has been lost. Instead of concentrating on unbundling, these governments should focus on breaking the perception that email means outlook, that web browsing means IE, etc. Bundling was a way to thrust these apps to the forefront and choke the competition. That's been done. Unbundling now will just make the customer go through extra steps to get the same software back again.

Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft!

[OwlWhacker]

Concerning RealPlayer, when it was suggested that Microsoft should add it to Windows, Microsoft said that people could easily download it, so bundling it with Windows was unnecessary and out of the question.

Now that WMP and Messenger are to be removed, suddenly downloading a media player is such a terrible handicap!

When it was suggested that Sun's JRE should be bundled with Windows, Microsoft asked why Sun should get a free ride on Windows, and was against adding third-party software to Windows.

The 'free ride' of bundling obviously does make a big difference. Just because Microsoft owns the operating system, this doesn't mean that it should be allowed to bundle whatever it likes.

What company is going to suffer as Microsoft has to bundle another product with Windows to entice people to upgrade? Maybe a PhotoShop clone is to be bundled with Vista's successor?

Re:The eternal what if......

[aussie_a]

I wonder what these courts would do if Microsoft was to actually produce a version of Windows that contained absolutely no 'bundled' software that had a competitor in the market.

Celebrate?

Imagine an OEM having to supply alternatives to all of these things.

Oh the horror. There would actually be real competition for these products, better products and prices will crop up. It'll be the end of the world as we know it!

Yes, Microsoft's illegal business practices have created an expectation that people have come to rely on. But if they were truly forced to cease these operations, then people would adapt fairly quickly, and we'd have real competition once more in many of the areas that Microsoft currently dominates.

Swapables components

[La Gris]

I wonder what these courts would do if Microsoft was to actually produce a version of Windows that contained absolutely no 'bundled' software that had a competitor in the market. Imagine a version of Windows with no notepad, wordpad, IE, Windows Explorer, Windows Media Player, screensaver, network browser, task manager, disk defragmenter, TCP stack, Instant Messenger, backup tool, cd player, email client, remote desktop, scripting tool, command prompt or shell.

This is not a problem of Microsoft bundling tools that anyone would consider basic fonctions a computer should have out of store.

This is a problem of:
- Many of Microsoft bundled tools can not be replaced/removed.
or
- Microsoft bundled tools are unable to properly operate with other alternate vendors tools by design.

Re:Microsoft's Reply

[kfg]

If Microsoft were fined a mil a day they would run out of money in. . .never.

KFG

Re:Microsoft's Reply

[FooBarWidget]

What campaign? Everybody's already using Windows. What do they possibly have to gain from a marketing campaign?

Re:The eternal what if......

[virtual_mps]

Imagine an OEM having to supply alternatives to all of these things. Buying the replacements from third parties, or including crippled versions of full products, or using opensource alternatives where they exist. Imagine every OEM doing this, and choosing different products. Imagine sitting down infront of a computer and no longer having a guaranteed set of tools to work with - different browser, email client, file explorer etc.

Imaging buying a new car and finding that every manufacturer has slightly different arrangments for the controls. Maybe the radio buttons are different, or the lights, or the windshield wipers. Maybe the window controls are arranged differently, or the cruise control. How would you cope with that? Could consumers figure out how to drive if 90% of the cars on the lot didn't have exactly the same interface?

Re:One version must be stripped of the WMP

[lowe0]

Nor should they. I can see it now: "I clicked on a link that Windows showed me, and the software I downloaded killed my computer!"

If my name is going on the package, I sure as hell wouldn't want something in it that I don't have control over. It's just asking to be blamed for the faults of others.

I demand a new version of windows without...

[Xenious]

I demand a new version of windows without the Start button. The word Start is monopilistic and I won't be forced to use it. They should be required to make an alternate version with a Go button.

If you don't want Windows buy a Mac or install Solaris/Lunix and get over it. Stop the stupid fines and lawsuits. I use quicktime on my Windows box and Media Player doesn't cause me any problems. I use trillian and MSN messenger doesn't cause me any problems. If you don't like the built in products fine install something else.

Re:The eternal what if......

[Anonymous Coward]

It's worth noting that the "inconsistent desktop experience" is one of the most common complaints about Linux. New users get a bewildering array of choices and have absolutely no idea which one to choose. Do they use Thunderbird or Evolution or Sylpheed or KMail or what? Do they want Firefox or Mozilla or Konqueror or Epiphany or Links or Lynx or Galeon or...?

So what do distros do? They pick one, mostly arbitrarily, and make that The Option. You can still download and install other programs, of course: nothing stops you from using Firefox in KDE. You just have to go through the extra step of downloading and installing Firefox, which requires you to know about it first. And uninstalling Konqueror may break some aspects of KDE so you'd better keep it around even if you don't use it for web browsing. Starting to sound kind of like the situation with Windows, yeah?

Tying per se isn't bad at all. It's actually a good thing. When it's bad is when you start preventing stuff from working, which MS does have a history of doing. So they're hardly blameless here. But let's make sure we stay pointed in the right direction.

Re:The eternal what if......

[strider44]

I don't mind Microsoft bundling stuff with their operating system, but is it really too much to ask that they allow users to be able to not install the things they bundle with their operating system?

Ridiculous I tell you

[AviLazar]

I can understand the lawsuits against MS for anti-competative acts such as forcing a computer producer to only use MS products...or to not allow a company access to the necessary data so they can make a competative product for windows. (i.e. a competative browser).

Maybe China should fine MS for bundeling "ipconfig" with windows. Better yet, they should fine MS for bundeling "notepad" with windows. This sueing for bundling crap is retarded. All that will happen is companies selling stripped down software, for the same price as non-stripped software and then the customer has to buy the add-ons. So now if I want notepad with my windows (which I do), I have to pay an additional $49.99

These guys need to stop being stupid. The competitors need to just make a product that is better then the bundeled software.

And 32 million? is the emperor of china trying to get a bigger bonus this year? At how much MS makes in two weeks (last i heard it was 250 million every two weeks) - this is not much of a slap in the face. Can MS fine China for all the hacking that goes on in there?

Re:Ridiculous I tell you

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, I'm saddened to here this type of logic. Not that I endorse the people/companies that sue another company just because the lawsuit is over what is mild change to the defendant, but there is another, to me, more logical way to look at this. I'll take a stripped down version of Windows. I do enjoy the widespread support of its infrastructure. The hardware to software operation is very successful, and best of all you don't have to compile your own kernels and other fun things of this nature.

On the other hand, I like to be in control of my own bells and whistles. Combine that with how lazy I am and you have yourself a recipe for - not getting other software. i.e. MS installs MSN Messenger - I've no need to go get Yahoo! Messenger or AIM, MS installs Disk Defragmenter(worst disk defragmenter I've known of) - I've less motivation to purchase Perfect Diskeeper.

What you seem to be suggesting by, "The competitors need to just make a product that is better than the bundeled software," is that Mozilla or the makers of Perfect Diskeeper need to make an entire operating system comparable to Windows that comes preinstalled with there software. Otherwise, MS is lowering the market capability in all those bundled software's markets.

Most importantly, this is the most humorous quote I've seen in a long time.

  - (i.e. a competative browser)
Internet Explorer... a competitive browser?
Now, that is some of the best, unforeseen irony I've ever seen. Sardonic!

Re:Microsoft's Reply

[Yvanhoe]

Let's stop this nonsense about judgement being 'free ads' and let me make a two-in-one Slashdot Special : MS and GWB bashing.

GWB got a lot of free advertisement in the arab world for the iraq war, strangely, I don't think it qualifies as "free ad campain" for Bush's popularity.

This works the same. A lot of people hear about MS with this in Korea, sure. But MS isn't your typical start-up struggling to be known. 90% of PC owners get a one minute MS add during their computer start up. Their name is known. But now it gets associated with "evil big corporation illegaly using a monopoly". Not the typical message marketing guys want to produce. Plus, it also informs less tech-savy users that alternative IMs and movie players exist and THAT is another thing MS would never put in an ad campain.

Re:M$, here's a biz plan for you....

[b4k3d b34nz]

This definitely sounds like how the W3C (the group that creates standards for the web, for those who don't know) works. At least the part about standards. It seems to be working really well so far too. If IE wasn't bundled with Windows, people would have to choose on their browser based on what they liked about it. People like Firefox because of the extensions, Opera because it's fast and "just works" (Safari for the same reasons), OmniWeb because it's extremely innovative. Granted, this is a gloss-over stereotype, but how many people choose IE? Not very many, if they know about other options.

It's unfortunate that Microsoft is using it's power in an entirely separate market (operating systems) to gain ground in another (web, media players, etc). Obviously the suit for $32 million isn't exactly going to make M$ reconsider their business practices, but it is another step in the process to non-monopolistic competition.

The hardest part about the situation is education--if people are given a chance to try different products, they just might switch to them. Too often, though, people don't know that there ARE alternatives to media player, IE, etc. until those products start making headlines, like Firefox and iTunes have.

Re:Microsoft's Reply

[cbreaker]

I think he just missed out on the years 2001 - 2003.

Re:Microsoft's Reply

[FooBarWidget]

Please explain then, I don't recall that Windows had less market share in 2001-2003. The anti-trust cases in the US didn't even make a dent in Windows's market share.