Slashdot Mirror


States Seek More Oversight of Microsoft

taoman1 writes "A group of states led by California said in a court filing Thursday that ending oversight of Microsoft's business practices in November would not allow enough time to consider the antitrust implications of Windows Vista. The states want oversight extended at least through early next year. 'The justice department said in its report that while Microsoft's operating system market share hasn't dropped because of the consent decree, "it would misapprehend the purpose of the Final Judgments to rely on these facts to argue that the Final Judgments have been ineffective. Microsoft was never found to have acquired or increased its monopoly market share unlawfully." In its report, Microsoft directly countered California's claims and said, the "Final Judgments were never designed to reduce Microsoft's share in any putative market."'"

4 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Likely modded into oblivion by catbutt · · Score: 2, Informative

    My broadband isp and phone company (comcast) is already a regulated monopoly. Also, I do have other choices that I could move to in a very short time with very little economic impact (if I get dsl with at&t, for instance....I'd be up and running quickly, and my computer and software would all work just fine).

    I switched to mac a couple years ago, and it made a HUGE impact as I had to get and learn all new software. And I haven't been able to get rid of the PC (in fact, I recently got a new one as my old one was getting too old to be usable), because I am constantly expected to run this or that piece of software because most of the rest of the world runs Windows.

    So yeah, the Windows defacto monopoly affects me every day, while the ISP/phone/oil company issues, less so.

    Still, problems do not need to be addressed one at a time. Why because one issue hasn't been solved to your satisfaction should we do nothing about another issue? The world is able to multitask.

  2. Re:What? by stinerman · · Score: 3, Informative

    If Microsoft is a monopoly by virtue of its market share, why isn't Intel?
    Because, AFAIK, Intel hasn't tried to use it's monopoly in processors (and I doubt that they have one) to get a monopoly in another area, say chipsets.

    Under current law, you can have a monopoly so long as you don't use that monopoly to gain a monopoly to another market. Microsoft used their desktop OS monopoly to get a browser monopoly and then a media player monopoly.
  3. Re:Market Share is unlikely to drop for a long tim by kanweg · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, the industry would have been better off with open standards for file formats, network connectivity etc.

    Bert
    Who runs a company

  4. Re:Oops by Guppy06 · · Score: 3, Informative

    In most states (including California), the attorney general is elected separately.

    Maybe Microsoft's problem is that, like you, they have no idea how their own government works, to the point of bribing the wrong people?

    Really, people, you can't change your government for the better if you don't know how things work as they are.