Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The History of Microsoft's Anti-Competitive Behavior

Posted by Soulskill on from the earning-a-reputation dept.

jabjoe writes "Groklaw is highlighting a new document from the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (PDF) about the history of Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior. Quoting: 'ECIS has written it in support of the EU Commission's recent preliminary findings, on January 15, 2009, that Microsoft violated antitrust law by tying IE to Windows. It is, to the best of my knowledge, the first time that the issue of Microsoft's patent threats against Linux have been framed in a context of anti-competitive conduct.' The report itself contains interesting quotes, like this one from Microsoft's Thomas Reardon: '[W]e should just quietly grow j++ share and assume that people will take more advantage of our classes without ever realizing they are building win32-only java apps.' It also has the Gates 1998 Deposition."

6 of 361 comments (clear)

  1. Brings me back by mc1138 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I remember one of my first computer courses in school where we were taught computer history. I still remember the professor telling us about the early days of Microsoft and how it didn't take long for them to start ripping off ideas, only to then buy the company that was suing them.

    --
    The musings of just another geek and his junk.
    1. Re:Brings me back by aoteoroa · · Score: 4, Informative

      BTW I still stand behind the principle that having IE with Windows is not anti-competative. If that were the case then Red Hat, Apple OS, and others would be anti-competitive. . .car companies are anti-competative because they come bundled with radios,

      You can remove and replace the stock radio from your car and it wont break the car. The problem with IE wasn't just that it was available for free but you could not remove it.

    2. Re:Brings me back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Worse yet, it wasn't all that long ago that Microsoft's contracts with OEMs specified that alternate browsers could not be shipped with the PC (at least in the US.) Clearly this is anticompetitive.

      Also, the grandparent should understand that trying to reduce competition is generally okay as long as you aren't a near-monopoly. The problem with Microsoft is that they're virtually synonymous with computers in the minds of most people these days. There's not much competition at all, and thus when they do something to try to further stifle competition, that's considered bad.

    3. Re:Brings me back by Noren · · Score: 4, Informative

      Which Disney was involved in the passage of the Copyright Act of 1790, which allowed 14 years with an optional extension for a second 14 years if the copyright holder was alive? Or the Copyright Act of 1909, which doubled that to 28 years renewable for a second 28? Blaming everything on Disney is /. trendy but ignores history.

  2. Re:Anyone else notice by jabjoe · · Score: 4, Informative

    Listen-to/watch him on the 1998 Deposition. No amount of charity PR is going to make me think he is a good honest man. He is not someone to admire or even respect. It's not ok to do anything you can get away with to make money. Becoming rich doesn't make everything ok. If I was religious man I would point to old text on camels, the eye of needles and damnation, but I'm not, but what I'll say is society couldn't function if it was filled with people like this.

  3. Re:WOW... this is breaking Shocking News... by recoiledsnake · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think they ARE aware of that. After a while she starts defending the guy, not unlike the pro-MS posters here on Slashdot that you swear must be shills except they're probably not actually getting paid. Seriously, those people just can't understand that Microsoft is not your buddy, when you stick up for Microsoft like a loyal little sycophant it's not like they are capable of appreciating it, they are a mindless faceless corporation without any sort of feeling.

    I think you're confusing MS fanboys with people who like to point out inconvenient facts. Some uninformed people start ranting about some DRM in Vista or other untrue crap and how can you label the people refuting them arguing facts as MS fanboys? There's a lot of stuff to bash MS on, there's no need to make up BS and then call the people who point it out as 'pro-MS posters' or sycophants. Slashdot is losing credibility because of anti-MS zealots. And the mainstream media is catching on too. Just read this article.

    --
    This space for rent.