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."
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!
Frankly, yes!
If Microsoft wants to continue using their broken MSIE, they should not be allowed to use and service http. They should use a different protocol identification. There are other applications on the web that begin with things other than "http" in the URL. The same should apply to MSIE as it is not close enough to compliance. As a rule, I don't think MS browsers should be allowed to service http client or server activities unless they score at least 90/100 on the current Acid test.
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.
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.
That's a ridiculous argument. The reason Microsoft's browser is on almost every computer an OEM sells is because it comes with the OS that PEOPLE WANT.
How does that in any way change "MS came to dominates OS's the same way Google came to dominate search - people chose it more than the competition" ?
You state that MS was "convicted" (your expertise is slipping) of leveraging their desktop OS to gain an advantage in the server OS space but you don't provide any evidence that indeed they did. How much market share did competing products lose? Is MS now the market leader in Sever OS's? Have they ever been?
This is about preserving the status quo in the server space, to reduce competition by holding back MS. It's not about increasing competition it's about decreasing it.
The EU has played this game in the past, favoring EU companies by penalizing US companies -- Boeing (during the merger with McDonnell Douglas, favoring Airbus), GE/Honeywell (merger blocked), and Amazon (free shipping declared illegal at the behest of French bookstores) are just a few. These actions are nothing more than thinly-veiled protectionism.
And, of course, the EU has no problems with huge Airbus subsidies, now declared illegal by the WTO. I hope that the US Government will find its gonads and slap EADS with huge tariffs and penalties. Then, maybe, the EU will be a little less eager to meddle with US companies.
I won't hold my breath.
It's Linux, damnit! Pay no attention to renaming attempts by self-aggrandizing blowhards.
I think you may be being a bit deliberately thick here. That's the whole point of the EU ruling. Opera complained that it couldn't get a toe hold in the market because with Microsoft's overwhelming dominance, there wasn't a level playing field.
Firefox's ~30% market share shows that there is a competitive market in browsers. Opera's miniscule 2% share shows it is Opera (or, more correctly, Opera's management) that can't compete, but it sure can get politicians to interfere for its own purposes.
Your attempt to provoke nationalist sentiments to rally Americans against the EU and their ruling against Microsoft is very transparent, and has been attempted on several other occasions here on Slashdot. It won't work. In the case of Microsoft, these actions, rather than being thinly-veiled protectionism, are an essential attempt to balance a market that has been in a stranglehold by the dominate player Microsoft for over a decade. The other complaints you have about the EU are irrelevant to this discussion.
Irrelevant? Each instance I quoted had an EU company that benefited from the obstruction of the EU Government and the penalties imposed on the US company. This is classic rent-seeking by EU companies.
Perhaps you believe that politicians are altruistic saints, making judgments worthy of Solomon. I'm not that naive.
It's Linux, damnit! Pay no attention to renaming attempts by self-aggrandizing blowhards.
Conspiracy cook
You are in idiot if you really think Opera approached the EU for anything other than a paycheck. Just a big old dumbass. You love your government.. what a fool.
This is my sig.
Way to turn a blind eye and re-iterate the obvious. Thanks for completely ignoring the topic and posting your useless drivel!