Slashdot Mirror
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."
Here's $40 million. Keep the change.
Is it because their IM was tied to windows (tied in what way ,
networking protocol, hidden lockouts for non windows systems or
only ran on windows?) , or because they bundled this and media
player with windows?
Either way I can't help wondering if this is a good thing since
if Suse or Ubunto or some other linux dist suddenly becomes popular
overnight, will they get nailed for bundling 100s of apps with it?
Will a judge know (or care) of the difference between open source
and MS when it comes to bundling freeware in a distribution?
I wonder if Microsoft will be able to pay this...
If you say "here goes my karma" I will bite you!!!
Only old people sue Microsoft
I don't know if there would be this level of complaining and problems with M$ 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.
Evolution or ID?
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
ilovegeorgebush
2 Steps to profit and less complaining from the gallery...
1. Come up with completely open standards that are not controlled or licensed by you. Come up with these standards along with your peers in the industry, working together.
2. Build software apps and services to smoke the competition in these areas using these standards.
You have the money. And I would stop complaining cause I would ahve one dope system.
Evolution or ID?
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.
Anyone want to join me in a lawsuit? I own an island off the coast of Tasmania and I am really tired of having to look at Windows Messenger and Media Player every time I turn on my PC. I think I will iniate a lawsuit and win. Just look at it as payment for all the innovation and competition that Microsoft has stifled in the programming world.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
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!
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.
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.
Im not actually sure I like this but where does bundling end? Consumers expect a certain minimum level of capability in a computer these days, but what is acceptable and what isn't?
make MS include optional software, perhaps on a second disk, with more important things like Firefox being the default browser on an out of the box install. CD 2 could have things like OpenOffice, or Free instant messengers.
i wish i was but oh well
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.
The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
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.
If they'd bundled Starcraft instead of Messenger/Media Player there wouldn't be any problem.
http://twitter.com/onion2k
No, it doesn't say links to open source options...it says links to competitors.
If I'm Microsoft, I'm linking to crappy, expensive, third-party apps that look like crap. I'll satisfy the demands of the court and make people think that staying with my (media player/instant messenger/web browser) is by far the way to go.
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?
Linux/Open Source/Anti Microsoft News
I have trouble keeping up with all the various versions of Windows. We don't want more Windows, we want fewer!
Seriously, this Windows XP N edition is a complete waste of time, money (truism?!) and energy. If the organisations which have imposed these rulings on Microsoft want to have any real bite, then they must simply ban Microsoft products.
The key here is (I believe) that they don't want their legislation to have any "bite". They do this to satisfy pressure to be seen to be encouraging open markets and free trade while at the same time bowing to pressure from Microsoft.
And, $40M, what a joke. I bet MS never even has to pay it. They'll simply do a deal to ignore all those illegal copies of Windows + Office in South-Koreas government offices! Expect an announcement of a new multi-million Microsoft purchasing deal in the very near future.
return 0; }
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.
Léa Gris
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 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.
-Xen
The problem isn't caused by what Microsoft do, it's caused by what they stop others from doing. Microsoft can make a version of Windows with MSN Messenger built in, but I can't make a version of Windows with a Jabber client and sell it in stores or online. Forcing Microsoft to produce some token version without MSN Messenger won't have any effect.
The marketplace could be made more competitive while still keeping copyright on software. Microsoft could set a fixed price, say $80, for Windows and you could buy a copy at that price. But any third party would be free to take Windows, add their own features and resell it. Obviously Microsoft would still have to get their $80 so this 'Windows plus' might sell for $100. This would make the software market a bit more like other markets, where it's quite legal to buy a car or a house, modify it and resell it.
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
Over the weekend I parked my car next to a shady-looking minivan at the supermarket. I thought I locked the door, but ever since it's been driving itself around constantly, flyering windshields across the neighborhood with V14GRA ads and DDOS-ing the handicapped spaces...
it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey