Slashdot Mirror
Did Google Tip Off EU About Microsoft Browser Ballot?
Dupple writes with a story about the latest in the Google-Microsoft feud. "The tired spat between Google and Microsoft just got a lot more interesting after reports that the search giant tipped off European authorities to antitrust concerns, a tip that will now cost the Windows-maker nearly a billion dollars. When news of the fine levied by the European Union's competition watchdog broke on Wednesday, nobody was too surprised that the European Commission was punishing Microsoft for bullying consumers. But with a recent headline-stealing dispute between the Redmond, Washington company and Google, it's competitor down in Mountain View, California, bloggers got curious. Early Wednesday evening, The Wall Street Journal's Tom Gara wondered, 'Did Google Snitch?' According to a Financial Times report published a few minutes later, the answer is yes."
This story is an obvious troll. There was no need to "tip off" the EU, it was plainly obvious to everyone the browser ballot disappeared and the EU obviously monitors compliance with its rulings.
Furthermore when did â500m before "nearly a billion dollars"? Someone can't do maths.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Microsoft were fined for a reason. Who cares that google complained? They make a browser... this is sooooo non-news.
A competitor violates the rules to ruin a company and if you call the cops you are a snitch?
Are you a gang member or just a moron?
Its too bad slashdot has been reduced to articles like. I applaud google for helping out the individuals rights to choose what software they run on the computer, and find it shocking that the new slashdot owners are posting an article trying to shun google for helping in an anti-trust case. Aren't we supposed to be on the side of those people fighting for things like this? Next up our new slashdot overlords will be poking fun at the EFF.
http://interserver.net/
Sad, sad, sad submitter. Reflects the intellectual poverty of one who has no other idea of this action than "snitching". The very word is negative and implies something is wrong with informing the authorities that Microsoft is breaking the law (again - what a surprise). Where did this even come from? Oh yeah, "snitches get stitches". Who created this meme? Oh yeah, drug dealers who wanted to intimidate the local population into silence. And now the media is going along with it without even thinking of the implications. Good job everyone.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Who is Adam Clark Estes? I'd really like to know, because his "article" reads like it was written like a 5-year-old. "Ooooh, you can't snitch on people; the honour code is not to snitch! They are is not are playing fair! They is are doing what they're s'posed to do! They stoled my donut and lunch money but I didn't snitch! Snitches is are naughty!" Is he still in kindergarten?
His closing words in his "article": "Well, who looks triumphant now?"
Not you, Adam. But you do look like a moron.
So somebody allegedly told the EU something that the EU would have found out if they did a minimum effort to monitor the agreement.
Big deal.
Next on Slahshdot: Where is my ass?
I don't get it (I'm not in the EU), but you might have thought more people would have noticed besides Google that the Browser Ballot was missing for 17-18 months? Seems odd.
It is odd, and most likely not true.
It was Opera software who originally complained, an one would assume they have taken five minutes occasionally to check.
I know for a fact it wasn't only, if at all, Google complaining about the missing ballot screen. I filed a complaint myself. I'd also be surprised if of all competitors Opera didn't file a complaint. The only thing I wonder is, whether my email with the complaint went directly to /dev/null. I've never received a reply.
According to reports, the ballot was out of action for 14 months before the EU noticed. So if Google really did snitch, they most certainly did not do so in a timely manner.
This just seems to be pure speculation, given the length of time the ballot was down, it could be anyone or no one...
Where is Redwood Washington? Is it anywhere near Redmond?
the real shame here is that the EU still considers Microsoft's position to be an unfair advantage over its competitors browsers
It was and still is monopoly abuse. The fact that browsers exist on mobile devices where Microsoft is a laughing stock because its not an entrenched monopoly is just an aside. The reality is perhaps the EU should take a closer look at iOS and Android, to ensure that users are given a choice there, as we have seen the damage that Microsoft did [does] to the internet should not be allowed to move to other devices.
The shame here is it took browsers generation ahead....and a complete paradigm shift in computing habits over a decade to get 50% of the market, and still people defend Microsoft.
If Google told on Microsoft, I have no problem with that. Now, Google should inform on Microsoft on trying to control the entire PC market and squash Operating System competition with "their" hated "Trusted computing" platform http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing ..
Based on Microsoft's track record, how can you a) Trust Microsoft b) Trust ANY company .c) Leave control of your hardware to a corporation that does bidding of governments / media cartel - especially if they are foreign governments.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
I don't think you quite understand.
This was about complying with a past ruling on previous monopoly behaviour, (they are a convicted monopolist after all)
Irrespective of whether other platforms exist using broadly the same technology, NONE of them are convicted monopolists.
Windows still holds a significant proportion of the desktop world to ransom (perhaps > 95%) specifically because they still maintain their monopoly.
Why should the EU let them slide on the consequences of their conviction and punishment.
To my mind that just shows utter contempt for the rule of law in the EU which show Microsoft has not changed its spots.
17-18 months is about the time it takes before you absolutely have to reinstall windows again. :)
Competitors dobbing on each other to regulators. Shock horror.
You seem to regard science as some kind of dodge... or hustle.
You would never say that $734m was "almost half a billion" in English. You might say "over half a billion" but it would be more accurate to say "almost three quarters of a billion" rather than "almost a billion".
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
It's going to cost Microsoft's users something, though, since that fine, if it is even upheld on appeal, will be integrated into the cost of Microsoft products.
"Brussels punished Microsoft for failing to give at least 15m consumers a choice of web browser - a violation of a voluntary antitrust pact that was spotted and raised by Google and Opera, according to several people familiar with the case."
"Opera said it was "happy to see that the Commission is enforcing compliance with the commitment, which is critical to ensuring a genuine choice among web browsers for consumers". Google declined to comment."
Google tip-off leads to Microsoft EU penalty
AccountKiller
If I was looking for nits to pick, I could greater nit than this.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
If I was looking for nits to pick, I could greater nit than this.
How many nits could a nit picker pick, if a nit picker could pick nits?
My business: Farstrider Studios.
Probably lots of people noticed, but you can't imagine the amount of time needed for Brussel's bureaucrats to do something about it.
n you're asserting you know better than Microsoft what should be done to their OS
Who doesn't know better than Microlost? For example, does anyone think Metro was a good idea? Hot corners? Burying "turn off" in Control Pnael, several clicks away from the desktop? One might say that any argument predicated on Microsoft having a clue is suspect.
If a nit picker would pick nits, this was a spot with no nits to pick.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Copyright and Patents are not a human right, or an undeniable/natural right. They are a made up concept, a contract between society and the copyright/patent holder. "We will allow you to restrict usage of this particular work if you continue to make other works like this for the benefit of society". Sure, it doesn't work that way, but that's what's supposed to be anyway. So, since we are giving someone a privilege, society should be able to set the rules, and take back the privilege if the rules are broken. So the contract should be more like "We will allow you to restrict usage of this particular work for a limited period of time, but you must offer this work under reasonable prices and policies, you must respect your users, and you must play nicely with the rest of the market. Also, you have to deposit all of your source code and any other information you used to create your work, and after that period expires, or if you break the contract, they'll be released to the public domain.". That sounds like a much more rational contract. You want the privilege of copyright or patents? Great, we'll give it to you. We'll give you anywhere between 5 and 15 years of copyright or patent protection, how much will depend on the kind of work you are releasing. In exchange, you have to deposit with us all relevant information regarding your work, for example, source code in the case of software, manufacturing procedures and blueprints in the case of hardware, etc. If you breach this contract, you'll lose all protection, and after the the original protection is over, we'll still release all that information. If your breach of contract is bad enough, we'll also release all those secrets early.
This fine is like making the penalty for bank robbery 25% of the money stolen. Everyone will be robbing banks ... it's not a penalty, or a fine, it's a tax. Well, microsoft's benefit from locking down the market far exceeds 731 million dollars, so it's not a fine, it's just tax.
Threaten companies with losing copyright and patent protection, and see how quickly they start to behave.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
And now the media is going along with it without even thinking of the implications.
Anyone who writes a blog for The Wall Street Journal ought to know about the power of words, so perhaps the author just wanted to appeal to the criminal nature of his typical readership.
drug dealers who wanted to intimidate the local population into silence
Drug dealers are on the side of freedom in the war on drugs. If it weren't for drug dealers putting their freedom and lives on the line, we wouldn't be seeing the tide turning away from prohibition.
If someone lives in a neighborhood terrorized by drug dealers, the right thing to do isn't snitch. It's to lobby to end the war on drugs. Change drug dealers from outlaws to businessmen. After all, when was the last time someone died in a turf war between Anheuser Busch and Coors? Philip Morris and PJ Reynolds? Doesn't happen. Make drugs legal and the only person hurt is the user.
Even though some drug dealers do terrible things, they are still better than the tyrants who demand prohibition. They hold the most responsibility for all the deaths in the war on drugs.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Microsoft's been posing shit about Scroogled so its just fair play that Google should tip off the EU that Microsoft isn't respecting their legal responsibilities
Don't you love it when billion dollar corporations act like children?
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
HSBC was collateral damage. The USA was after some of its slaves (citizens) that dared to venture off the plantation. They refused to participate in the USA's global posse comitatus and paid the price.
Have gnu, will travel.
Sorry, but I got hung up on the numbers as well. "not quite 3/4 billion dollars" does not equal "almost a billion dollars". When someone says "almost a billion", I most definitely expect something more than .8 billion. Less than .75 is simply not "almost".
"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
How many nits could a nit picker pick, if a nit picker could pick nits?
This does not take advantage of the homonyms wood and would. You could have used knit, as in How many nits could a nit-knitter nit if a nit knitter could knit nits?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
If the story is true then the real story is that google had a voice when the people didn't.
From my understanding, this is often the case in antitrust cases.
Although antitrust is supposed to protect consumers, it is rarely because of user complaints that this power is wielded.
It should not be surprising, if such legal weapons are made available, the companies will seek to leverage them to club competitors. They just have to find a plausible rationale to give the case a veneer of civility.
These comments are mine; I do not speak for my employer.
Why nobody is demanding a browser ballot for Android? Monopollies are broken not by bueaucrats but by technology advance. Same thing happened to the railway monopolly (Technology brought lorries) But now the EU beaucrats have another billion to waste. If you're happy I am!
It was quite obvious when "Where's the browser ballot in Windows gone?" became a common search on Google.