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?
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?
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
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?
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
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; }
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.
Do the following really mean anything? SCSA MCP CCSA CCNA
--I'm not actually after an answer!
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.
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.
evil adrian
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