Hey Neelie Kroes, The 90s Called, It Wants Its Case Against Microsoft Back

from the out-of-time,-out-of-mind dept

Mon, Apr 23rd 2007 11:25pm — Joseph Weisenthal

While some people are starting to feel that Google deserves to be treated the same way Microsoft was during the 90s, in Europe, regulators are still pretty hung up on Microsoft. This has been obvious for quite some time, as, in recent years, the EU has gone after the company on things like security, the bundling of the Windows Media Player and the creation of its own document authoring tools. Now, EU antitrust czar Neelie Kroes is warning the company that it if it doesn't bend to the EU's will, it may be forced to undergo a "structural remedy", which is just a fancy way of threatening to break up the company. With all respect to Kroes, we really wonder what decade she's living in. In the 90s, you could make the argument that Microsoft's desktop monopoly allowed it to squash its competitors (Netscape, most notably) in a way that was harmful to the market. But where's the market failure today? Where are the competitors that Microsoft is systematically locking out of the market? As the rise of Google (and a host of other companies) indicates, the market is working just fine at delivering a dynamic tech industry.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

71 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 12:16am

Word
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
scate, 24 Apr 2007 @ 12:17am

"Where are the competitors that Microsoft is systematically locking out of the market?"

You mean where are the competitors that Microsoft has prevented? That's like asking where are all the witnesses to a mob murder. See? No witnesses. Never happened. That murder was sooooo 90's. How outdated you are for asking about it now.

It isn't that the EU is living in the 90's its that Microsoft never got properly punished for it's abuse of monopoly. The fact that Microsoft has gotten away with it until now is not a vindication.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 12:23am

but bill gates in jail for being a good businessman imo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Wizard Prang, 24 Apr 2007 @ 9:00am
  
  Stay anonymous.
  Good businessman? No. Innovative? Hardly.
  
  MS was in the right place at the right time with the right product. They got where they are today through chicanery, brinkmanship, marketing and luck.
  
  http://www.vcnet.com/bms/features/serendipities.html
  
  Should they have been punished at the time? Yes, but most of their transgressions are a long time past.
  
  Should Bill go to jail? No. Would it achieve anything? Nope.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
glitch, 24 Apr 2007 @ 12:47am

i wrote this somewhere esle, but, ia applies here
What exactly would happen if Microsoft decided to pull out of the EU markets ? Although I doubt it, but, isn't it a possibility that the corporate decision makers within Microsoft could decide that the costs of doing business in the EU sphere is just too costly to continue ?

Now, before I am accused of being a Microsoft "shill" be advised, I am getting the parts for my next system and when I build it, I will be using Kubuntu for an OS and OpenOffice for my main applications.

What exactly could the EU do if corporate m$ decided their rules aren't worth it anymore ???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Humous, 24 Apr 2007 @ 1:34am
  
  Re: i wrote this somewhere esle, but, ia applies h
  If I were running MS, after what's been going on, I would pull out of the EU and wait for us (I'm UK) to come begging.
  
  There is no other OS which could take over the market in time, go for it.
  
  This might be why I'm not a manager.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Smart, 24 Apr 2007 @ 2:28am
  
  Re: i wrote this somewhere esle, but, ia applies h
  "What exactly would happen if Microsoft decided to pull out of the EU markets ?"
  You always hear this argument whenever there's a discussion about M$'s problems with the EU. They'll never ever even think about that option, especially not now. The EU may be on their skin and bugging M$ for the last few years, they still don't mean anything to a company with revenues in the billions. Like they're going to care about having to pay a few million of fines every so many years.
  
  However, think of the consequences if they would pull out of Europe. A few years ago, this would definitely be a problem. MacOS was a direct opponent to windows, but it required (and still does) their own hardware, and it's not really suited for business. However, the last few years, linux has grown enormously, and can now directly compete against windows on many areas. No more windows in the EU definitely means a complete switch to another OS for virtually everyone in the EU, including lots of really big companies. The most likely replacement would be a (commercial) linux version. There would be lots and lots of problems the first years, but after that, both big companies and entire governments will be running Linux. Suddenly, the rest of the world will see the power of that OS, and some of the advantages it has over Windows (I'm not saying it's better, each OS has it's own strength).
  Furthermore, because of the enormous adoption of linux, most of the current problems in linux will be fixed. There will be all sorts of software, there will be games, there will be lots of companies supporting linux.
  Now what would that show the rest of the world? It shows them it's not such a big problem to switch. In fact, it would really be the best option for some companies.
  
  Is this an unrealistic prediction? I don't think so. Is it something Microsoft would want? Hell no. They've been feeding the world FUD for years, trying to discreting Linux and other operating systems. They'd rather pay those few million dollars in fines.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Cixelsid, 24 Apr 2007 @ 2:45am
    
    Re: Re: i wrote this somewhere esle, but, ia appli
    A common misconception people in key positions have is that they are irreplaceable, that without them the company/industry will fail. The fact of the matter is, the world will not end if MS pulled out of EU, something else will take its place and for the first few years it might be touch and go, but the world will continue spinning as if MS never existed. Bill Gates is a good business man, he knows this, if he pulls out of Europe, he'll just allow another OS to gain a foothold.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Nasty Old Geezer, 25 Apr 2007 @ 6:14am
      
      Re: Re: Re: i wrote this somewhere esle, but, ia a
      Agreed -- MS will not pull out of EU any more than they will drop out of China. SO what if they don't sell new copies of Vista/XP/or whatever. THe current copies don't vanish off PC and server hard drives. Individuals and businesses go along as usual while planning the migration to Mac of *NIX on THEIR schedule, not Billy's.
      
      Doesn't mean that MS will play fair (they never have) but will pay the fine and go along with no changes in business practices. The fines will have to exceed their expected profits from everywhere for many years before they feel it. MS knows that they cannot compete on a level technology field without a huge disruption to their corporate life -- as with any monopolist in history.
      
      Their technology is not that bad BTW, most of it is bought or imitatedfrom elsewhere. But on a truly fair basis, there is no compelling reason to pick any MS product 90% of the time over a comparable product.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2007 @ 6:20am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: i wrote this somewhere esle, but,
        The current copies will vanish once MS decides to pull cancel their software licenses, and if they don't comply MS will get to sue.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 5:07am
    
    Re: Re: i wrote this somewhere esle, but, ia appli
    You talk like this "switch" would happen flawlessly,HAHAHA!!!! "There would be lots and lots of problems the first years"....oh hell yes there would be, billion dollar companies that no longer have a supported OS, and have to retrain millions of employees on something they've never seen b4 in their lives, you're talking probably almost an entire collapse of the EU's economic structure, and probably a huge blow to their governments, because we all know how adept to change politicians are and how intelligent government employees(i'm talking about their abliity to grasp new technology.)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 24 Apr 2007 @ 2:47am
  
  Microsoft are a bunch of wimps
  
  What exactly would happen if Microsoft decided to pull out of the EU markets ?
  
  Not a bloody chance. Remember when they threatened to pull out of the Korean market when they were faced with an antitrust action there? They soon shut up about that. And Korea is a much smaller market than the EU. So there's no way they would dare to pull such a stunt in Europe.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 9:42am
  
  Re: i wrote this somewhere esle, but, ia applies h
  The EU would be forced to move to an alternative, most likely some form of LINUX. This would in turn drive a huge amount of (commercial) LINUX development, mostly to fill in usability cracks. As a result, LINUX would become a truly viable alternative to Windows, especially considering what an abortion Vista is shaping up to be. M$ won't allow this to happen, although their response thus far seems to be to stall and dissemble.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 12:17pm
    
    Re: Re: i wrote this somewhere esle, but, ia appli
    "The EU would be forced to move to an alternative, most likely some form of LINUX. This would in turn drive a huge amount of (commercial) LINUX development, mostly to fill in usability cracks. As a result, LINUX would become a truly viable alternative to Windows, especially considering what an abortion Vista is shaping up to be. M$ won't allow this to happen, although their response thus far seems to be to stall and dissemble."
    
    -- Which makes my point... a potential rival would emerge and then the world market would potentially see a competitor. Free market at work.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- SailorRipley, 24 Apr 2007 @ 10:00am
  
  Re: i wrote this somewhere esle, but, ia applies h
  I have worked for an IT company (as a project manager) that had the EU as one of it's biggest clients and so I know a lot of their infrastructure...
  
  the answer to your question (What exactly could the EU do if corporate m$ decided their rules aren't worth it anymore ??) is simple: they'd use Linux for their desktops as well, instead of only for their servers as they do now...
  
  But they wouldn't pull out, no matter how big the hassle: M$ is mortified it would show just how successful a completely Open Source, or at least completely M$-free environment can be
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 12:49am

re: jail
is that what they meant by a "structural remedy"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paul, 24 Apr 2007 @ 12:55am

It's simple. Although some competitors have managed to emerge, real competition on the desktop space hasn't emerged with MS still controlling the vast majority of the market. The damage done in the '90s is still happening - you still find people who don't know they have a choice of web browser or media player for example.

Microsoft are also still leveraging their monopoly to give themselves unfair advantages - witness their opposition to an open document format, combined with patents to attempt to stop reverse engineering of their own format. Unlike the late '90s, there is some competition emerging from open source and online services, but Microsoft still have unfair advantages, gained through abuse, that must be checked.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mr Scott Free, 24 Apr 2007 @ 1:43am

Still waiting for those APIs to be documented
Has it really been that long since Microsoft was required by law to document those server and media APIs?

I think it's been about 3-4 years and they still refuse to comply.

Structural remedies are required at this point. When a company gets bigger than the legal system it's just gotten too big and needs to be broken up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cixelsid, 24 Apr 2007 @ 2:03am

Not quite agreeing
Joe, I'm not quite following your arguments, maybe you could clear it up for us. I guess what your basically saying is that without a market failure, so to speak, there really is no need for governments to take legal action against monopolies?

And that without competitors to squash there is no market failure ergo no need for the EU to get involved?

I think you're wrong about competitors though, there's always been the *nix variants and Mac has been taking potshots at MS for a while now (come on, that guy they use to portray the PC in their ad campaign even looks like ole bill) and every Mac sold is a bite out of MS's market portion.

And how certain can we be that a market failure doesn't exist currently? MS has indicated already that DX10 will only be available on Vista Ultimate, for me as a gamer that means that I'll be forced eventually to shell out 600€ for an OS I don't really need.

Its monopoly status allows it to produce sub-quality software such as its Media Player (after 10 versions its still an unstable piece of shit) and then with its "Trusted Computing" technology (crap I don't even want to call it technology, its actually a step backwards) forces you to use that software.

In these cases the Market failed me, because as a game enthusiast I don't have any other options on the PC market.

That's why I'm holding out for other emerging technologies to sweep in and remove MS's deathgrip on the gaming industry. OpenGL developed games on Linux and Intel's new brute force raycasting engine... all examples of possible competitors for MS to squash here in the first decade of 2000.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 2:35am

Just bought a laptop for one of our people, and HAD to have Vista - couldn't get XP. Now I have to administer 1 Vista with all my other XPs, and I don't need that. Who's running my business, them or me?

And when I'm forced to use an OS because some other software upgrade requires it, that's too much monopoly for me. AutoQuotes, AutoCad, long list.

BTW
Did you know that if you you change the OS on your computer, you void the warranty on it? It's common practice.

For instance,

- you bought a pc with Win95 preinstalled (no choice)
- you buy XP from the same company - telling them you're upgrading the pc
- everything is ok till you call with a problem
- no warranty unless it has the original OS installed

I can understand why THEY might find it useful to do that, but I don't care. It's the hardware that's broken and guaranteed. THEY sold the hardware and the upgrade!

In the computer industry, there are a lot of "customer abuse" policies have taken hold and become "normal". Monoply?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- kap, 24 Apr 2007 @ 6:40am
  
  Re:
  You void the software support warrenty if you change the OS, thats a decision by the vendor you bought the computer from its also their decision on what OS to put on it. Just a few days ago I read the Dell was rolling out XP systems again because of demand for the OS so its the vendors fault if all they could offer you was Vista, not Microsofts. Its really quite logical that a vendor would tell you that you void their support warrenty if you change OS what if you installed some weird open source OS that nobody heard of then demanded that they support it...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Matt, 24 Apr 2007 @ 8:43am
  
  Re:
  I just read an article about Dell going back to XP for some of their laptops...maybe you should have bought it there. :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tintin, 24 Apr 2007 @ 2:36am

What a world??
Why is the whole world anti-Microsoft?? Most of it is, atleast. I've seen people who earn out of Microsoft and yet talk as if it's the next biggest evil after the Atom bomb.
Doesn't the EU have a better way to earn money?? I don't think anyone can encourage competition by stifling the monopolist. If MSFT is a monopoly, it's because of a mixture of very good luck and marketing, and to some extent, innovation.
Well, I don't know about European countries or the USA, but I can tell you that a lot of smaller economies will practically slide into recession if Microsoft encounters a major loss. It may be an exaggeration, but it's not entirely improbable. Think about India and all it's Software Engineers. If the software industry in India goes down, it sure will pull a lot of other industries with it into hell hole as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 3:17am

The whole world is anti Microsoft because it's seen as fashionable to be anti-Microsoft, just as it is becoming fashionable right now NOT to own an iPod and to go for one of the decidedly better portable music players.
While it DOES irritate me to see even the people who have the least amount of knowledge of anything to do with computers argue about the evils of Microsoft (I once heard a guy go on and on about how Microsoft first planned an OS called Longhorn and had to call it off for an OS called Vista lmao), I do agree that in some cases they do have a point.
For example, take Hotmail, or it's rebranded successor, Windows "Live" Mail. It is one of the most un-intuitive, sluggish things I have ever seen - in no way comparable to Gmail. Yet Live Mail doesn't offer any method by which I can forward my emails to another account, a feature which Gmail does have. It is this heavy handedness by any corporation forcing you to do something which makes you change over - whether you preferred the original system or not. Now I have to check my hotmail every once in a while - so in order to avoid the ordeal I have stopped giving people that address. People don't like to have only one option.
I feel that the problem in essence has to do with the size and age of Microsoft. As companies age, they are upstaged by newer garage startups with better ideas and more creativity that start pulling market share. In order to hold on to that market share, they are forced to use other methods. Then they start getting unpopular. It is when that unpopularity becomes "stylish" that everyone starts "bitching" about the corporation and things start to go awry. In my opinion it happens to most if not all companies.
Sony - Walkman, Ford, etc are all examples
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Cixelsid, 24 Apr 2007 @ 3:47am
  
  Re:
  The whole world is anti Microsoft because it's seen as fashionable to be anti-Microsoft
  
  No thats a bit of a hyperbole. Most check-my-mail-do-my-taxes-and-maybe-write-a-doccie people are still predisposed to MS.
  
  And I don't have a problem with that at all. Trying to teach my dad how to use pine is overkill for what he wants to do - although Ubuntu is slowly bridging the ergonomity gap between Windows and Linux.
  
  But if you read the posts here you'll notice most Anti-MS sentiments aren't from the "LOL!!! M$ SUXX YALL!!11" crowd, mostly its from people who find their choices limited and are pissed off about it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just Because, 24 Apr 2007 @ 4:42am

"Up until recently, Google wasn't even competing against Microsoft's core business."

You said this yesterday so I'm not sure using the rise of Google as a reason M$ doesn't have a monopoly is legit.

The question is where does market saturation end and the monopoly begin?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 5:00am

Stick It to the EU
MS should threaten to completely pull all business and support for existing products of of Europe. I bet every single one of the government PCs is MS based, I'm getting tired of reading about the EU pushing MS around all the damn time, sure make sure they're "playing fair" but it's starting to get to the point where their just "picking" on MS. FU to the EU!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Cixelsid, 24 Apr 2007 @ 5:25am
  
  Re: Stick It to the EU
  Dude seriously, take your MS with you, the only reason I have windows on my machine at home is for gaming. My HTPC runs MythTV and my work notebook is equipped with Gentoo. Most of the systems we churn out where I work comes equipped with Redhat or Suse.
  
  And anybody who believes everybody in the Europe has windows installed on their machines is a complete dolt.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Norman, 24 Apr 2007 @ 7:01am
    
    Re: Re: Stick It to the EU
    LOL!!! Are you daft? Windows is on well over 90% of the computers in the world. Give up your Windows if you dislike it so much. Stop using MS products. MythTV eh? LOL!!!! Somehow I doubt I could do everything I need to do on my computer if I switched from XP to whatever non-mainstream OS you have. In fact my productivity would probably tank. Join the rest of us in the real world and admit most of the widely used applications are written for some version of Windows. Looks like you can’t do everything you want to do either. Hence you’re using Windows like the majority of the world.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 10:27am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Stick It to the EU by Norman
      Somehow I doubt I could do everything I need to do on my computer if I switched from XP to whatever non-mainstream OS you have. In fact my productivity would probably tank
      
      you under the delusional impression that you not being able to do everything on a non-mainstream OS somehow automatically reflects on the (lack of) capability of that OS and not yours?
      
      Fact of the matter is, unless it's some proprietary M$ crap (and even then), you can do it on a different OS...and with much less -wares, trojans, viri and all other crappy security issues your adored Windows has to offer...
      
      Why don't you join the real world and realize the only 2 reasons Windows has such a big share of the pie is because the majority of people don't know there are alternatives out there (and they shouldn't be afraid of trying them) and M$'s abuse of their monopoly
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Chronno S. Trigger, 24 Apr 2007 @ 10:52am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It to the EU by Norman
        I just want to say that I've been working with computers for at least 20 years. I have worked with windows since 3.1.
        
        I have on several occasions tried to switch to Linux, especially since this Microsoft validation crap. I can say that I can not do everything I once did on Linux. Linux has a crap file system, everything goes into one of three folders (Doesn't say witch) and there are no folders underneath. The already Linux proficient users are assholes and seem to think that everyone should know what an executable file is called even though there is no way to know. When I'm told that "You're just expected to know", that's when I went back to windows and deemed Linux a failure.
        
        By the way, Vista is not that bad. A little bloated (6G clean install) but not nearly as flawed and clunky as I once predicted. (Look in my past posts to see my opinion before I got Vista)
        
        And remember Windows has the virus and mal-ware (Don't call it wares) because it is 90+% of the market. If Linux became the big dog it will have the same problems. Same with Mac.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 11:00am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It to the EU by Norman
        exactly, all the pro linux jackholes out there forget that your typical secretary or government employee has no idea how to use Linux or anything but MS.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Reed, 24 Apr 2007 @ 11:40am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It to the EU by Norm
        "exactly, all the pro linux jackholes out there forget that your typical secretary or government employee has no idea how to use Linux or anything but MS."
        
        Oh yeah, I gave Open Office out at my office and no-one could use it. It was so hard for them to type up their documents and then print them out, they just couldn't figure it out (severe sarcasm)
        
        The only jackhole here is you. Apparently you believe that people are incapable of learning anything different. I guess we must all be mindless Microsoft flunkies huh?
        
        I for one have no problem with EU taking Microsoft to the wood shed, it is good for them and they deserve it. I only wish the US had the same balls.
        
        To all those "free market" lunatics out there it is time for a reality check. The free market is a great American myth that has never existed. The government has always been heavily involved with both regulating and promoting business. To think otherwise would deny our history. The ideal of a free market or perhaps the ideology of neoconservatism certainly exists but it has no basis in reality.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Chronno S. Trigger, 24 Apr 2007 @ 12:03pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It to the EU by
        I half agree with you. For a user that JUST uses word, Internet and E-Mail, Linux would be a simple switch. I was able to use them in the first few minutes of installing.
        
        Take my mother for example. I could install Linux on her box and, after a short learning curve, she would run it just fine.
        
        Now take me for an opposite example. I can do the simple stuff. But it took me half an hour just to install, find, and run a simple MP3 player and another half hour to find out that AVG just didn't install at all.
        
        You probably can make Linux do just about anything where as I can make windows do just about anything. Just remember "Just about anything" can involve 3 or 4 chained programs to get the desired result. (or several registry edits)
        
        I guess what I'm saying is that I don't have 20 years to learn how to run Linux as well as I can run Windows.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Norman, 24 Apr 2007 @ 2:00pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It to the EU
        "I half agree with you. For a user that JUST uses word, Internet and E-Mail, Linux would be a simple switch. I was able to use them in the first few minutes of installing.
        
        Take my mother for example. I could install Linux on her box and, after a short learning curve, she would run it just fine.
        
        Now take me for an opposite example. I can do the simple stuff. But it took me half an hour just to install, find, and run a simple MP3 player and another half hour to find out that AVG just didn't install at all."
        
        Sounds like you went through the same pains I did when I tried Linux. It's a chore to get the system set up the way you like it but once it's done it's a nice OS. I would never point someone to Linux if they weren't the least bit technical or didn't know someone who was. Of the 2 more popular alternatives I'd send them to OSX first. And that is ONLY if they don't plan on doing much more with their PC beyond email, web browsing, and word processing.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Reed, 24 Apr 2007 @ 2:21pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It to the EU
        "I half agree with you. For a user that JUST uses word, Internet and E-Mail, Linux would be a simple switch. I was able to use them in the first few minutes of installing."
        
        Of course this is the majority of people who use computers.
        
        "Now take me for an opposite example. I can do the simple stuff. But it took me half an hour just to install, find, and run a simple MP3 player and another half hour to find out that AVG just didn't install at all."
        
        I just installed Feisty Fawn a couple of days ago and I cannot agree with your comments. I downloaded a MP3 and clicked on it to have Feisty inform me I needed a codec to play it. Feisty grabbed my codec and in less than thirty seconds I was playing the MP3. Same goes for the AVI I downloaded.
        
        There are also distributions such as Linux Mint that in all ways performs better when it comes to media than Windows itself (No need for codec packs, it just plays everything out of the box)
        
        Everyones mileage will of course vary but trying to say that you can't get almost everything done in Linux that you do in Windows is fast becoming a tired and unsupported statement.
        
        "I guess what I'm saying is that I don't have 20 years to learn how to run Linux as well as I can run Windows. "
        
        Took me about a year of playing around with Ubuntu in my spare time to teach me most of what I needed to know. 20 years seems like a disingenuous stretch of the imagination. Did it take 20 years to learn Windows? With a comparable UI most distributions have actually become more straightforward and easy to use than Windows itself.
        
        The world is no longer black and white when it comes to Linux or Microsoft. Open source and the free software movement won't succeed just because people want it to. It will succeed because it is an inherently better idea than closed source proprietary systems that rely on security by obscurity models. Computers are tools for everyone to use and it is time for people to stop taking for granted that Windows is the only way to use them.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Norman, 25 Apr 2007 @ 4:52am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It to th
        "The world is no longer black and white when it comes to Linux or Microsoft. Open source and the free software movement won't succeed just because people want it to. It will succeed because it is an inherently better idea than closed source proprietary systems that rely on security by obscurity models. Computers are tools for everyone to use and it is time for people to stop taking for granted that Windows is the only way to use them.
        "
        
        You mean like how Beta was a better format than VHS? What happened there? Sorry but your argument doesn't hold water. I have looked at many opensource apps and none have come close to what you buy from software vendors. My company actually did too. We wanted to cut costs and we thought we could fine some open source apps to replace some of the stuff we use. Nothing out there was robust enough to suit our needs. As long as joe Average is unable to install and setup Linux w/o a geek by their side Linux will not make the leap to the mainstream. This couled with the lack of commercial software vender support are killers.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Reed, 25 Apr 2007 @ 11:57am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It t
        "Nothing out there was robust enough to suit our needs. As long as joe Average is unable to install and setup Linux w/o a geek by their side Linux will not make the leap to the mainstream. This couled with the lack of commercial software vender support are killers."
        
        What wasn't robust enough? And could of it been altered to add those features or is your company unable to hire/lease a programmer?
        
        Lack of commercial support seems a tenuous argument considering how much commercial support there is for Linux nowadays. Are you talking specific application support?
        
        You Beta analogy isn't very realistic because the use of beta did not incorporate ideology or the best solution for the market. It was just a solution that never caught on. This is not the case with open source which is growing exponentially.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2007 @ 12:07pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick
        so you're suggesting that everytime Linux won't do something that is needed "Joe Public" needs to hire a software programmer?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 25 Apr 2007 @ 12:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: St
        "so you're suggesting that everytime Linux won't do something that is needed "Joe Public" needs to hire a software programmer?"
        
        That is the essence of open source. You have programmers on demand to create the code you need and then that is re-distributed to everyone else once the code is created. It is a elegant way of getting exactly what you need and at the same time giving back to the community. It is catching on with the majority of software development labs (over 60 percent now use open source models according to many articles I have read)
        
        And how is this different than the proprietary model? Well it isn't the only difference is the code is open source and so as it is added too everyone benefits instead of just one company.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Chronno S. Trigger, 25 Apr 2007 @ 7:39am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It to th
        This is in response to #61.
        
        "Of course this is the majority of people who use computers."
        
        No it isn't. Games are what most computers are used for. I work in tech services and see that almost every computer I work on (9/10) have games downloaded from the Internet (We tell them not to but they do anyways) and these are business computers home computers are worse. Have you ever had to explain to someone that they can't use the program they just purchased because its for windows and not Linux? I've had to explain the exact opposite to people before (the program was for Linux but they had windows.) they just don't get it.
        
        "I just installed Feisty Fawn"
        
        First, Whats Feisty Fawn? Never heard of it. Second, when you say "just installed" you already passed my argument. I was complaining about the installation process.
        
        "No need for codec packs, it just plays everything out of the box"
        
        BULLSHITT. Flat out Bullshit. You obviously don't work with videos too often. When I have a media center that has a list of 20 extensions for just video and at least 100 different codecs for just AVI and new ones are coming out every day, nothing can play everything out of the box.
        
        "Did it take 20 years to learn Windows?"
        
        That comment right there is why I don't listen to Linux people. They have no idea what can be done with windows. When I'm saying 20 years I'm not saying to learn Linux, I'm saying to learn Linux as well as I know windows. I'm talking about digging into the system directories and manually tarring apart dll and cab files. I know what processes run most of the time and how much horse power is involved regularly.
        
        "it is an inherently better idea than closed source proprietary systems that rely on security by obscurity models"
        
        and once again I point to the fact that Linux is one of the obscurity models. There are no huge security breaches because no one wants to aim at 5% of the market. If you want your Linux to stay as secure as it is you should try to deter people from using it and keeping the target out of sight. And when the hell is Windows obscure?
        
        I think that disproves just about your entire argument
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        reed, 25 Apr 2007 @ 12:05pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It t
        "First, Whats Feisty Fawn? Never heard of it. Second, when you say "just installed" you already passed my argument. I was complaining about the installation process."
        
        Try Googling it next time wise ass. BTW the installation proccess was faster than XP and of course MUCH faster than Vista. It was also far easy to configure and install because it was a live-cd that could test the whole operating system before it is even installed.
        
        "BULLSHITT. Flat out Bullshit. You obviously don't work with videos too often."
        
        Try installing it yourself and proving me wrong. It does play everything I have (About 600 DVDs with many different videos on them). Your attitude about this whole discussion is only highlighting how closed minded you are. I have used computers heavily since DOS and I am not blowing smoke up your butt.
        
        "That comment right there is why I don't listen to Linux people. They have no idea what can be done with windows. When I'm saying 20 years I'm not saying to learn Linux, I'm saying to learn Linux as well as I know windows."
        
        I am not a Linux person I use Windows too jackass. Nice backtrack only it still makes you look like a MS flunky.
        
        "I think that disproves just about your entire argument"
        
        The only thing you proved is you have the mentality of a 12 year old. Congratulations!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 9:41pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It to the EU by
        What OS does your company use? i bet i know the answer.......
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Norman, 24 Apr 2007 @ 11:14am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Stick It to the EU by Norman
        Oh really? Hmmmm.... Let's see my applications and the OS choices available. I use Maya, 3ds max, and Adobe Creative Studio to do my animation and other CG freelance work. All of which are industry standards. Maya is available for Mac OS, Windows, and Linux. 3ds max is only available on Windows. If you know of any MAINSTREAM 3D animation packages I can turn to please let me know. :-) The Adobe suite I use is pretty much Mac and Windows only. Now let's see what else I do. I play video games. Mac OS's offering of games is lacking. Linux is also pretty slim. I do photo editing as well. I have yet to find an open source non windows alternative comparable to Adobe Photoshop. GIMP and Pain.NET are ok but they lack much of the functionality I get from Photoshop. I bring work home from my primary job and the applications we use at work do not have comparable non-windows alternatives. If you only do email, web browsing, and word processing then ANY OS would work fine for you. If you need to do more then your OS options start to drop. This is in no way the fault of MS. If you are looking for someone to blame look at the software vendors.
        
        Let's be honest here. The ONLY reason MS is dominant in the market is the software support. It is not because their products are superior in any way. If software vendors were to release non-windows version of the same stuff they release for Windows THEN we'd see people seriously considering an alternative OS. Linux is getting better but it is still the domain of the technophiles. Mac OS lacks the software support and it's tied to one hardware profile. Not sure of what other non-mainstream OS's there are other than those two.
        
        People are well aware of Mac OS and more people are becoming aware of Linux. Microsoft has no control over who software vendors write for. The vendors are in this to make money. Who are they going to write apps for? An OS with 10% or less market share or the 90% market share OS? Which OS would offer them a bigger return on their product? No brainer there. If we are talking about OPTION, which OS offers it's users more software OPTIONS? Again a no brainer.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 9:53am
  
  Re: Stick It to the EU
  Since when did M$ start offering support? I work in IT, and I watch our M$ admins. They get no support whatsoever. As far as the EU suddenly crashing, only an Ugly American would even think such a thing. *If* that were true, it's all the more reason for the EU to crack down on M$. Talk about monopoly power...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Norman, 24 Apr 2007 @ 9:58am
    
    Re: Re: Stick It to the EU
    Are you serious? I'm a netwrok admin and when we have issues with MS software we can call them and they actually help us. Imagine that! It's part of our licensing agreement with them. I'm sure your company has somehting similar. If it doesn't well, you should blame whoever negotiated whatever deal you have with them.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
rahrens (profile), 24 Apr 2007 @ 5:31am

oh boy
Now I've heard everything. Let M$ pull out of the EU and governments will collapse...

Crap.

What, will Windows suddenly stop working? No. Will Office stop letting you save docs? No.

Any business can run on current software (if they haven't fallen too far behind) for a year or two, and even for large businesses, a two to three year replacement cycle is standard. Same for governments.

Training? No worse going from Winblows to either Mac or Linux than from XP to Vista. Several large cities in the EU have recently switched from Winblows to Linux.

I haven't heard of any civic crises yet...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 5:55am
  
  Re: oh boy
  No more security patches or updates? revoked licenses? lawsuits for violations? hmmmm......
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 5:56am
  
  Re: oh boy
  uh oh....the doc formats aren't compatible!!! i can't view the contract i was just sent, company x can't view docs sent from company y.......
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Kap, 24 Apr 2007 @ 6:44am
  
  Re: oh boy
  "Several large cities in the EU have recently switched from Winblows to Linux. "
  
  Odd that sounds like competiton in the marketplace with Microsoft how can that been when they have a monopoly...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
BTR1701, 24 Apr 2007 @ 5:47am

By what authority?
Where does the EU think it gets the power or legal authority to break up an American company? If it came down to it, Microsoft could just divest itself of its European assets and cease doing business there and the EU would have no further power over it. Certainly not to the point where it could issue an order for the company to break itself into smaller units.

They can't break up Microsoft any more than the USA could issue an order to break up BMW or Lufthansa.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast, 24 Apr 2007 @ 6:05am

If Windows is such an issue in the 'EU' - why don't they just ban it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast, 24 Apr 2007 @ 6:06am

Oh, maybe because politicians are too fuckin' stupid to use Linux??

Not Microsoft's fault is it??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
vlodnak, 24 Apr 2007 @ 6:25am

I rarely comment...
But this one is JUST TOO MUCH!

The EU is doing exactly what the EU does best... practice socialism.

Microsoft is competing in a free market, globally. If the "people" of the EU are so upset about this, then THEY SHOULD STOP BUYING THE PRODUCTS. In a free market economy, the PEOPLE, the CONSUMERS, control who is the 'big dog'.

Extra regulation and laws on how a business creates, packages, and markets their products do NOT solve problems. They CREATE problems. Unless Microsoft is literally violently physically attacking its competitors, and is just being "aggressive" in business, then I say "MORE POWER TO THEM"!

WE--all of us in the IT industry and end users--created Microsoft and it's so-called "monopoly" of the desktop. WE can stop it if we are so inclined.

The fact is, if their products weren't doing the job to our satisfaction, then WE would be able to force a change. Yes, at this point it would take YEARS to topple them in the market... but it took nearly three DECADES for them to get to where they are. And as someone who is a senior IT person in a multinational organization and who studies the market and how it works, I can comfortably say that while MS is very aggressive in its practices, thus far it has worked to make my life and my business better 99% of the time.

So I won't be jumping on the bandwagon to topple them, via free market. And to do so via "government regulation" is just STUPID and goes against how a free market is supposed to work.

The EU is increasingly taking on the image of what their neighbors, the former Soviet Union, used to do when it comes to business; as well as a lot of other things.

I know several people in the UK who are DREADING the day when their 'integration' into the EU is completed... because it will shatter the British economy (as socialism always does to an economy) and they will begin to homogenize into the EU 'society'.

Personally, I think that if the EU gives MS too much sh*t, then MS should say, "fine", take their toys, and go home... in other words, pull out of the EU completely, block their websites and products from being sold and used from any EU member--including continued support beyond current commitments--and wait for the EU to come crawling back. And THEN, when the EU decides to let them conduct their PRIVATE BUSINESS as they see fit, without any restrictions beyond what they endure elsewhere, they can consider coming back.

Ok... that was supposed to be a short rant... I'll get off my soapbox now...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Norman, 24 Apr 2007 @ 6:54am
  
  Re: I rarely comment...
  Well said. I couldn't agree with you more.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 6:56am
  
  Re: I rarely comment...
  seriously do some research,
  M$ already used it's monopoly to kill competitors....
  "there's nothing beside Windows that do the job"
  Well gotta have stopped them from killing BeOS then?
  "that was 10 years ago"
  If you kill a company, even 10 years after it's still dead...
  Did you ever wonder why you only had the choice of Windows?
  Also the liability is clearly to the vendor, but since the vendor has a deal with M$ to actually only make W$ available >.>
  
  Also the M$ can't pay the fines forever (it's an efty sum per DAYS I heard) so they'll have to comply....
  or as they did in the US, just "buy" the government...
  Luckyly for them, there's an election in France just now, and the poll leader happen to be a M$ lover, also France will get direction of the Eu very soon, so maybe he'll be elected and help them out.
  Isn't democracy a wonderful thing?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
the linux fanboys, 24 Apr 2007 @ 6:27am

Not Surprised
Write an article about MS and all the Linux crybabies come out of the wood work. So predictable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Norman, 24 Apr 2007 @ 6:48am

Oh gawd...
Here we go again. It's appears that being mega successful is a crime. If you make a better product for a reasonable price people will buy it. Why should MS not be able to package it's products as it sees fit? I hear lots of companies who put out sub par products screaming "IT'S NOT FAIR!!!" when they should be working on putting out a better product at a competitive price. It sickens me to see those who managed to become top in their industry suddenly go from most loved to most hated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- same anonymous coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 7:02am
  
  Re: Oh gawd...
  "Here we go again. It's appears that being mega successful is a crime. If you make a better product for a reasonable price people will buy it. Why should MS not be able to package it's products as it sees fit? I hear lots of companies who put out sub par products screaming "IT'S NOT FAIR!!!""
  
  where the hell did you see competitors screaming "IT'S NOT FAIR"?
  most of the time they're bought/killed before they know what the hell happened
  
  "when they should be working on putting out a better product at a competitive price. It sickens me to see those who managed to become top in their industry suddenly go from most loved to most hated."
  In what bizarro world did you live in which M$ was loved for it's product?
  ever heard of Win98/ME/2000, that's them. And they were hated since that time (even before as it is).
  Heck half of their product are half done as it is (the recent problems encountered with Vista and the ecosystems around showed this)
  
  Sometimes I wonder if people blindly supporting a company are not shareholders?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Norman, 24 Apr 2007 @ 7:17am
    
    Re: Re: Oh gawd...
    How is buying a company out bad? LOL!!! Dude if you are anti free market then just come out and say that. Last I checked most tech companies go into business with this goal in mind. I know more than a few start ups who have plan A and B. A is to succeed and become a dominant force in their industry and B is to be bought out by a bigger fish and become wealthy in the process. B happens much more often than A does. And the last time we saw companies screaming "IT'S NOT FAIR" was when MS decided to lock people out of the kernel. Remember Symantec and others bitching? How DARE MS change their own OS w/o consulting some of these companies who based their whole existence on a feature in Windows which was never guaranteed to stay? In reality people have expected MS to lock down the kernel for a long time. Sorry but the most loved to most hated was not targeted to one specific company. Today we see this happening with Google. It was happening with Walmart not too long ago. I'm already hearing people bad talking Google. Why? Because they have become too successful. Just because YOU have MS on the brain doesn't mean I do. LOL!!!! I support the right of any company to package and market their products as they see fit. Let the market decide if they will succeed or not. It's pretty simple really. Even someone as simple as YOU should be able to see that.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - same anonymous coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 7:23am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Oh gawd...
      "How is buying a company out bad? LOL!!! Dude if you are anti free market then just come out and say that. Last I checked most tech companies go into business with this goal in mind. I know more than a few start ups who have plan A and B. A is to succeed and become a dominant force in their industry and B is to be bought out by a bigger fish and become wealthy in the process. B happens much more often than A does. And the last time we saw companies screaming "IT'S NOT FAIR" was when MS decided to lock people out of the kernel. Remember Symantec and others bitching? How DARE MS change their own OS w/o consulting some of these companies who based their whole existence on a feature in Windows which was never guaranteed to stay? In reality people have expected MS to lock down the kernel for a long time. Sorry but the most loved to most hated was not targeted to one specific company. Today we see this happening with Google. It was happening with Walmart not too long ago. I'm already hearing people bad talking Google. Why? Because they have become too successful. Just because YOU have MS on the brain doesn't mean I do. LOL!!!! I support the right of any company to package and market their products as they see fit. Let the market decide if they will succeed or not. It's pretty simple really. Even someone as simple as YOU should be able to see that."
      
      1rst,
      one word : paragraph
      
      2nd,
      Today the EU will fine M$ because you can't buy a computer without Windows on it (Why would anyone do that? Because they have another license they want to use, hell put linux?)
      
      3rd,
      M$ effectively killed BeOS by threatenning the client of BeOS, so they wouldn't buy BeOS product.
      That is something the mafia do, not a company
      Google is another case, but "MY" problem with M$ is their tendancy to use their monopoly to push another product so as to have another monopoly (read Netscape vs IE)
      
      If you can't understand that, don't tell me you understand capitalism, you just understand company-based communism
      
      and that will be all
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 10:09am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh gawd...
        Beos...
        
        Funny I thought Apple killed BeOS when they wouldnt release architectural information about its G3 line of computers.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matt Bennett, 24 Apr 2007 @ 7:39am

So why does the EU think it can break up Microsfot, an American company? Screw 'em.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Norman, 24 Apr 2007 @ 7:47am
  
  Re:
  Becauue they suffer from the same misconception as the US government. They seem to think they can dictate what happens in a non-memebr nation's backyard. I will love to see them try to force a break up.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
UniBoy, 24 Apr 2007 @ 8:09am

Two points...
1) From what I have read recently, Microsoft still strong arms PC vendors into shipping their machines only with Windows. A PC vendor who goes out of their way to offer other OS choices places themselves in peril because anti-competitive Microsoft will punish them price-wise on Windows licenses. Can anyone dispute that this does not still occur?

2) I think there are serveral business segments within Microsoft that would actually benefit from being spun-off and free of their exclusive ties to the Windows platform. The sum of the new parts would be better than today's whole.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Norman, 24 Apr 2007 @ 8:26am
  
  Re: Two points...
  Dell offers PC with Linux installed.
  
  http://www.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/precn_n?c=us&cs=04&l=en& ;s=bsd
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - same anonymous coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 8:28am
    
    Re: Re: Two points...
    And for those that don't leave in the US?
    your link is for USA small biz...
    Hardly relevant for EU centric debate :-/
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Norman, 24 Apr 2007 @ 9:23am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Two points...
      Since you seem too challeneged to do your own searching on a european Dell site here is a UK Dell site:
      
      Operating System
      "The Dell Precision 390n supports the Red Hat™ Enterprise Linux Operating System. Please speak to your Dell Representative for further details"
      Dell recommends Genuine Windows® XP Professional.
      
      http://configure.euro.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=uk&cs=ukdhs1&kc=305&l=en&am p;oc=W04390xp&s=dhs&sbc=precn_390
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 24 Apr 2007 @ 9:26am
  
  Re: Two points...
  "1) From what I have read recently, Microsoft still strong arms PC vendors into shipping their machines only with Windows. A PC vendor who goes out of their way to offer other OS choices places themselves in peril because anti-competitive Microsoft will punish them price-wise on Windows licenses. Can anyone dispute that this does not still occur?
  
  2) I think there are serveral business segments within Microsoft that would actually benefit from being spun-off and free of their exclusive ties to the Windows platform. The sum of the new parts would be better than today's whole."
  
  1) Welcome to a FREE MARKET. Just as reseller X has a right to sell another product, manufacturer Y has a right to charge whatever they damned well please and put whatever conditions they want on it. If reseller X doesn't like it, then reseller X can refuse to sign the contract and not use manufacturer Y's product. It's simple economics.
  
  2) That is not something for YOU, ME, or any government to decide. It is up to MS and their stockholders.
  
  You cannot REGULATE the world into being what you want it to be. The more you regulate it the further from liberty you get. Legislation is the opposite of liberty... some seem to have forgotten this in the past 230 or so years in the US.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - SailorRipley, 24 Apr 2007 @ 11:15am
    
    Re: Re: Two points...
    geez, some people just really step back and re-evaluate what they're saying/thinking
    
    1) I don't think anybody here (regardless of them being for or against M$ in this regard) is against the free market.
    
    2) the concept of a free market is: plenty of manufacturers offer their "version" of a product to the consumers, thus guaranteeing a fair price (not too low or manufacturers wouldn't make the product, not too high because then consumers would buy it from a competitor) and quality (brand x is crappy -> consumers will buy non crappy brand y's version). Sure, it's a little more complicated than that, but the best we can do to keep it short
    
    3) when a monopoly is involved, there is no free market. As by the example you are replying to: M$ abuses its monopoly to strong arm resellers in selling windows with computers and not offer any other OS. Where is MY (consumer's) free (market) choice...? exactly.
    
    The correct reply is not "Welcome to a FREE MARKET" but "Welcome to a(n abuse of) MONOPOLY": in a free market, M$ would be punished ruthlessly by the free market. Because resellers would say: go f*ck yourself, you don't get to tell me what I can or can't sell, nor do you get to punish me for it. Because M$ has a monopoly they can't. And as said, when a monopoly is involved, all free market bets are off.
    
    Yelling "free market!" is one thing, and most, if not all people here, will agree with you, free market is good/acceptable. But you should only yell it when it IS a free market
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nasty Old Geezer, 25 Apr 2007 @ 6:35am
  
  Re: Two points...
  I agree with both your comments. TO expand on 1) -- MS not only threatened PC vendors about shipping any non-Windows OS, they also threatend price retailiation over including non-MS software on the desktop, especially browsers and media software.
  
  This is the textbook definition of monopoly power. ANyone who does not understand that should run -- not walk -- to the nearest college and sign up for Economics 101.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]