Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft, EU Reach Antitrust Accord
alphadogg writes "Microsoft appears to have reached an agreement with the European Commission that concludes an antitrust battle that has lasted a decade, Europe's top competition regulator said today. A proposal the company offered in July to address charges of monopoly abuse were dismissed as insufficient by the Commission, as well as by rivals in the software industry. But the latest iteration appears to have mollified the EC's regulator. 'We believe this is an answer,' said competition commissioner Neelie Kroes in a press conference. 'I think this is a trustful deal we are making. There can't be a misunderstanding because it is the final result of a long discussion between Steve Ballmer and me.' The new settlement offer addresses charges that Microsoft distorted competition in its favor in the market for web browsers, by giving its Internet Explorer browser an unfair advantage over rivals."
The Register points out this interesting quote from the materials Microsoft released on the subject: "Microsoft shall ensure that third-party software products can interoperate with Microsoft's Relevant Software Products using the same Interoperability Information on an equal footing as other Microsoft Software Products."
Wonder how many chairs Neelie had to duck before they "reached an agreement".....
If this actually happens, it will be a Very Good Thing for the world in general, as Microsoft will no longer be legally able to keep changing their protocols to break access by non-Microsoft software.
Given their track record, though, I don't believe for a minute that Microsoft will actually make all the information available in a clear and usable format. More likely they'll release some information that looks nice, to show what good boys they're being, then release some more information terribly scrambled, and keep most of the information to themselves, because by that point the EU will be paying less attention to them and they'll have to take them back to court to get them to do anything more.
Same old story.
And yes, I am a terminal cynic. Why do you ask? ;-)
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
I don't know what's worse - the possibility that he could be so naive, or the probability that this is a backroom deal, and we are never going to know the whole story.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
Now that the new competition commissioner is about to be chosen, I am sure that closing the case for all appearances is exactly what they want, for the moment. In particular, lobbying for the choice of an friendly competition commissioner is a lot easier if you don't have any open competition cases pending. Once they have a more agreeable competition commissioner in place their tune will change.
'This proposed measure ensures that PC manufacturers will continue to be able to install any browser on top of Windows and make any browser the default. It also ensures that PC manufacturers and users will be able to turn Internet Explorer on and off '
And with 'search' going to be directly embedded into the applications, the 'choice' of browser is going to become moot.
I don't like what I have seen posted in the headline either. Try this or this instead.
Sorry, but it's not a monopoly as long as I can buy one of these, one of these, or even one of these.
"This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine [...] We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement, as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again." --Neville Chamberlain, September 1938.
Go somewhere random
This only affects the browser market where Microsoft is steadily losing ground anyway. The fact of the matter is that the operating system itself is still untouched and Microsoft still has no penalty for pulling more and more functionality into the OS itself.
The problem has never been just browsers or messaging utilities or office suites or default home pages. It is about how Microsoft uses its monopoly power on the desktop to stifle competitors. This could have been handled years ago except the American judge couldn't stay awake long enough to do anything but parrot the prosecuting attorney's notes.
MS should have been broken into an OS company and an apps company long ago. But it didn't happen, and we're all still the worse off for it. Trying to change anything by half-assed measures like forcing the user to choose a browser is just not going to work.
Microsoft would have to restructure a part of their OS to make that possible but with 'turning IE off' you can effectivly hide IE from the user completely so it's not a bad deal, the average user will never know it's still there.
Dyslexics are teople poo
No really. I think that all legal action against Microsoft should be created using only Linux and open source software. If there are really viable alternatives to Microsoft for the vast majority of home and small business users then there should be no problem for the governments, law firms and every other MS hater to divorce themselves of Microsoft products.
The issue isn't unfair competition. Its the failure to understand that the free market has chosen Microsoft...because no has a more compelling offering for the vast majority of people. Build a better, more compelling "Windows" (availability, compatibility, supportability, pricing) and people will buy it. It hasn't happened yet and beating up Microsoft is like lynching the World Cup champions because not everyone can be that good.
installing Firefox on windows. What is all the fuss about?
Microsoft's ActiveSync is already on 50 million and growing Apple devices, the Palm Pre and Google has licensed it for it's online sync service. IE is old news and MS doesn't seem to care about it anymore. Now MS owns the technology that transfers documents and email over the internet between devices.
This sounds like it could provide strong legal protection for anyone that wants to use Moonlight should Microsoft start to invoke patents on non-Novell users.
I actually don't care about IE anymore. Because it's an old story. Now only if we can get rid of ill-formed OpenXML documents and office format dominance of Microsoft, than we can declare year of Linux on desktop.
There can't be a misunderstanding because it is the final result of a long discussion between Steve Ballmer and me.
. . . as far as I could throw him.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Standards for information interchange have been a critical aspect of computing and computing devices since the very first days. ASCII was the standard for text encoding for many devices that won out over others such as EBCDIC. (Yes, I know EBCDIC still exists) but generally speaking, you could expect that there was support for ASCII for printers and terminals in the earliest pre-web days. Things were better when standards were followed, and more difficult when they weren't. Thankfully there weren't too many problems with too many patents and restricted information in those days when it came to implementing compatibility with standards.
Today it is different.
We still rely on and require standards for information interchange, but adherence to those standards are less common and cause a great many problems. Microsoft's wilful non-compliance with standards combined with wilful inclusion of methods, techniques and technologies that could or would not be duplicated by others for reasons including patents among others caused deep, long lasting, time consuming and expensive damage to an industry that would hope to rely on standards for information interchange. Why is this a problem exactly? It is a problem because the public perception is that "everything but MSIE is broken on the internet."
Some would argue that "Microsoft can write whatever software it wants!" I would argue that they can't and shouldn't be allowed because of the harm it causes the industry in general. Microsoft has used its position as the effective monopoly on the desktop to undermine the standards for information interchange and derailed the the industries that relied on them.
The remedies proposed are insufficient to remedy the problem that exists now and into the near future and does not reverse or compensate for the harm they have caused for all these years. An effective remedy should compensate for the damage caused as well as removing potential for future harm.
Microsoft should be forced to halt any further support for non-standards compliant browsers and should not be allowed to create extensions and addons that could be further used to damage compatibility with W3C standards.
If they wish to create a proprietary client for server applications, they should not be allowed to call it a web browser and should not permit it to run over the public internet and especially not over port 80/443 as it creates confusion as to whether or not standards compliant browsers are "broken" when compared to the Microsoft browser.
Further, Microsoft should be forced to pay claims against the cost of migrating the web sites that were effectively forced to deploy web design and programming based on Microsoft's broken web standards. It is not enough for the government to "fine" Microsoft. The people and entities harmed by Microsoft will never be compensated for the harm they caused which is a very important part of any remedy.
Really. Why MUST Microsoft have that right?
Could equally say I MUST have the right to microsoft's source code.
The law says I can't. That's all.
Gee, too bad that quote didn't come from Apple.
I was told repeatedly, on slashdot and elsewhere, that offering a choice could never work. The script was to complicated, among other things. You can't download anything until the browser is installed, among other things. That Microsoft couldn't offer browsers which they didn't own, among other things.
After all those highly intelligent individuals convinced me that this browser ballot was impossible, I KNOW it has to be fake! Those screenshots are photoshopped, it's all a figment of some demented Euro's imagination!!
NURSE!! I need another pill, please!
Ahh, to hell with the pill. Screw all the astroturfers who spent all their time with wasted arguements.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
This scares me: "There can't be a misunderstanding because it is the final result of a long discussion between Steve Ballmer and me."
Steve Ballmer apparently has little technical knowledge. How can he contribute to a technological company except by deliberately making "misunderstandings". Sometimes sales is just a kind of dishonesty.
Will anyone else be surprised when Microsoft backs out on today's agreement when they take exception to some fuzzy detail?
This is a classic delay tactic. Meanwhile the EU is conditioned to accept their misbehavior thus paving the way for more abuse.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
At least not unless it's still being used on the back end somehow:
Windows Update
Was there something in the OEM licenses that prevented PC vendors from installing 3rd-party browsers? The "settlement" spends a lot of time talking about the ballot screen for selecting browsers. But I'm not sure why another vendor could not have made their own ballot screen if they wanted. Or just install whatever browser they like.
Vista and up use the new control panel while XP still uses IE and the website.
Not an accord.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20091007105147454#comments
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
How many years are we going to hear the whining. Back in the mid-90's, I used Netscape because it was better than IE. Then IE got better and I liked ActiveX and downloading the plug-ins directly from the webpage. Always having to go download a plugin for netscape at a different site and having to close then open then go back to the web page that I wanted to view was a pain in the ass. I know ActiveX turned out to be a curse more than a blessing but it did make life easier to surf the web.
I feel that complaining about a bundled app is stupid. Every NOS has a browser supplied with it. Linux has firefox, Mac has safari, MS has IE. If IE was written to run in linux natively and licensed with GPL, it would not be included with any major linux distro. And not because firefox is better, because browser preference is just that, a preference. You are allowed to install any browser that is available for your OS. I have heard people complain about the FF bugs caused by MS updates making it unfair. I say that the linux kernel is what's keeping my IE from running natively in my Ubuntu, Fedora, Knoppix, Suse and every other version of linux. Why not force Linux kernel dev team to support interoperabilty by modifying the kernel to support IE. Every PC manufacturer in the world seems to want to bundle their systems with apps of their choice. I know MS gave discounts and other tactics to keep netscape off the Out-Of-Box setups but they didn't stop the consumer. The consumer makes the final decision. I'm going to stop now because I am just ranting.
p.s. I was hoping that the whole linux is more secure than MS argument would die down a little bit after that 8 year old kernel bug was found. Oh well, I guess I could be wrong about other things.
This sentence sent the hairs on the back of my neck on edge. How many times have we seen people, companies, legal systems make agreements with Microsoft only to find out that what Microsoft decided the meaning meant was completely different from what the other parties, and common sense, believed the agreement meant? The Novell / Microsoft agreement of recent which was made public the day after the signing of the agreement. Microsoft said it was about patents and Novell said it was about interoperability. To top if off, Novell people said that the patent stuff was thrown in at the 11th hour so you know this bait and switch was planned from the start at One Microsoft Way( FYI, that's the name of the street their headquarters are on ).
Good to see others are feeling the same way about this too. This does go to show yet again that legal systems are not going to protect the public from Microsoft's attack on small startup businesses, new ideas and... wait for it.... innovation. A decade of playing cat and mouse with Microsoft? Even SCO is still around so forget about the legal systems doing a thing to change Microsoft's way of doing business.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Is that how they plan to advance interoperability without hindrance?
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
The regulator is not naive. He knows he's rubberstamping, and giving a lame excuse.
If I were debugging a program and I said:
'I think this is a trustful design change we are making. There can't be a design fault because it is the final result of a long debugging session between the application and me.'
You would probably think I was crocked in the head. Long sessions usually indicate deep faults, not easy design fixes. Long negotiations don't suddenly become "trustful" just because the two parties couldn't get close enough for amicable agreement. This negotiator knows that. He's part of a scam.
In other words, he's not naive, but we would be naive to believe that this agreement is anything but a hoax, or that he's innocent of this hoax.
This agreement is not the usual rubberstamp you are looking for. Move along.
The Browser Ballot screen is really just free advertising for Opera. Opera isn't good enough to generate buzz like the way FireFox does, so they whine to regulators... "we're europeans ...." So now they get free advertising from Microsoft. Must be nice.
This is my sig.
right, that's why Microsoft had to go out and purchase Netscape contracts ISP's had and then pay those ISP's to ship Internet Explorer and when the browser was not purposefully scattered throughout the OS's DLL's, they use threats and coercion to get hardware OEM's to load Internet Explorer instead of Netscape Navigator.
anti-trust laws are to protect businesses from monsters like Microsoft who leverage their position to block other companies from new markets.
And FYI, anti-trust laws to not apply to companies who do not have a monopoly position and therefore do not have the power to stifle competition. So any OS has the right to do what they want as long as they are doing so legally but they don't have to worry about anit-trust laws. Those laws are so competition has a level playing field and the big bad guys can't just keep playing whack-a-mole flattening every new idea and company out there.
So unless Microsoft can actually invent something and get it onto their OS first, when they go off and start throwing other things into their OS, they have to allow other companies with similar products continue to play on that platform. Microsoft hasn't really invented much of anything on Windows and instead follows what others have done and shoves that onto preloaded computers so as long as they continue this and continue their marketshare, they will continue to be held to anti-trust laws.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Christ almighty... when will learn that interoperability between parties, is one feature, among many. If you want interoperability, go ahead and use that thing. I don't -care- about it nearly as much and I don't need people like you trying to make me pay some kind of a tax.
When Netscape sucked, I wrote for IE. When IE took the plunge, I write for Firefox. If users like the content, they can switch browsers. It's not -that- hard.
This is my sig.
Typical European Protectionism
Yeah, because when I'm being protectionist I implement policies that promote four US companies in addition to one european one that isn't a member state of the European Union I work for. I further take care to word the decision such that if that one european competitor slips just a bit in market share they are removed entirely from the solution. Also, just to cover my tracks, spend a decade convicting european companies of antitrust violations on a regular basis and handing out big fines and remedies to them.
"Whereas, Company does not desire to receive any information that could be used to clone or port Microsoft products in whole or in part" I don't see the point, then.
--
Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
How does any kind of choice exist when a monopolist leverages a monopoly to push technologies that only work in it's browser or only work correctly in its browser.
Further more, how is it considered trolling to point this out.
The GP would be correct only under the condition that the monopolist wrote their browser to conform to standards, which is clearly does not.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
"I think this is a trustful deal we are making." Wait a minute, he made a "trustful deal" with "Steve Ballmer" from "Microsoft"??? This guy doesn't seem to be tech savvy otherwise he would have known about some incompatibilities....
Balmer, Trust, Interoperate -- pick at most two
"Run there's a socialist trying to death-panel gramma!"
Hey Jimbob,
I never said Opera didn't start this for their own profit... I just said it's not some sort of governmental conspiracy on their behalf, apparently this contradicts your perspective
I never said there was a conspiracy. The basis of genuine conservative opposition to government is that you don't have to have a conspiracy to buy it. You just have to have political connections. Government interference undermines the idea of a meritocracy and is undemocratic. If you have a problem with corporate power undermining your rights, the answer is to get rid of the tools that give corporations too much power, not to give up the rest of your rights to the government to "protect you". Socialism is militaristic thinking applied to commercial policy and its just stupid.
This is my sig.
"Wrong thinking is punishable. Right thinking will be as quickly rewarded. You will find it an effective combination."
Windows ftp.exe can scripted to download browsers, easy.
If wget is too GPL or something.
The best and most fair solution should be
to include all browsers on the Windows CD and
choose during or just after Windows Install.
There should also be allowed to Install/Uninstall
whatever browser they like at any time.
(Yes including truly Uninstalling IE)
A bigger problem is in what order are these chioces :O
presented. The one on the top-left will get almost all
clicks even if it's Lynx or something