Author Topic: EU Plans Fine, Remedies for Microsoft 'Abuses' (Read 582 times)

NUKE · « **on:** August 06, 2003, 09:11:15 AM »

http://money.excite.com/ht/nw/bus/20030806/hle_bus-n06322894.html

Quote

The Commission said Microsoft would have two alternatives to facilitate fairer competition in media players, which run music and video on computers.

It could either untie Windows Media Player from its ubiquitous Windows operating system by being required to offer a version of Windows without Media Player, or it could agree to include competing media players with Windows.

"Both solutions seek to ensure that consumers have a fair choice as regards media players," the Commission said.

Including media player with Windows doesn't take away a fair choice for consumers...anyone knows that you can get any media player freely. In fact, if you try to view most media types on the net, you are more often than not supplied with an link for the D/L of required player. So it's not like MS is preventing anyone from getting whatever media player they want.

MS should be able to include whatever it wants in it's products. Why shouldn't MS be able make an operating system and include their own media player?

Maybe the other media players could make their own operating system and include their media players with it so we can have a fair choice of operating systems when we get a media player.

Car manufacterers shouldn't be able to integrate their own stereo systems ..... that is unfair to consumers.

If I were Bill Gates, I'd consider shutting down MS ( After I cashed out) ...... then we would see how happy consumers would be with their new choices.

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #1 on:** August 06, 2003, 09:17:24 AM »

Microsoft only got to where they are today by their abusive anti-competitive practices of the past. I see no harm in forcing them to unbundle a product within the OS.

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #2 on:** August 06, 2003, 12:28:32 PM »

what now are the europeans gonna tell the riaa copyrights cant last 12,000 years? it just crazy.

riaa should stop music playing in europe see how they like it all quiet and stuff.

Gadfly · « **Reply #3 on:** August 06, 2003, 12:31:24 PM »

I have never understood how getting something for free is "restraint of trade", or making a superior product is "monopolistic".

Swoop · « **Reply #4 on:** August 06, 2003, 12:31:52 PM »

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #5 on:** August 06, 2003, 01:10:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gadfly
I have never understood how getting something for free is "restraint of trade", or making a superior product is "monopolistic".

Most States have laws restricting "loss leader" pricing practices where you sell a particular product at a loss with the aim of driving out your competitors. US pharmacies (and Wal Mart) frequently violate these laws.

Microsoft "gave away" it's Internet Explorer browser to eliminate the competition. Had they been forced to unbundle it from the OS, this may not have happened. They tried unsuccessfully to do the same thing with MSN before AOL won a lawsuit to stop it. They are now trying to do the same thing with its media player.

Because MS had a monopoly in the OS market, they were able to force PC OEMs to pay for a Windows license even if they sold a PC that didn't have Windows loaded on it. They did this for many, many years before the government stepped in and made them stop.

Gadfly · « **Reply #6 on:** August 06, 2003, 01:37:07 PM »

"Loss leadering" is not illegal, while tying is. That is to say, if you said you could only get Explorer IF you bought Windows, that would be illegal. If I say, "buy this OS and I will throw in the browser", I do not understand how it can be illegal. As for MS requiring PC manufacturers to pay for the license, for non-windows equipped PC's I have no knowledge of that. Do you have a reference?

Hooligan · « **Reply #7 on:** August 06, 2003, 02:26:54 PM »

MS never forced anybody to buy anything, but they did give them attractive choices, such as:

You can pay $40 for every copy of windows you buy from us, or you can agree to buy one copy for every system you make and pay us $20 each. Nobody was forced to choose the latter, but that choice was usually the best one. Try to buy both a Pepsi and a Coke at your favorite restaurant if you think this kind of marketing is restricted to a single company or industry.

As far adding stuff to the OS goes. MS operates just like every other manufacturer. Microsoft wants you to buy Windows 2005 and Windows 2007, etc. etc... The best way to get this to happen is to add stuff to Windows that people want. Things, like disk compression tools, backup tools, CD-writing software, browsers etc... that people seem to be willing to pay a small amount for are obvious additions to something like Windows. Also, Ford puts stereos in their cars, and people who want to sell you an add-on stereo need to produce one that is of sufficiently better quality that you are willing to spend money for it. The same holds true for software products, if somebody wants to sell you something (say Windows or Netscape) that you can get for free elsewhere (like Linux or IE), they need to make it attractive enough that you are willing to spend the money.

Windows has added tons of features added in the last 8 years (see list above) that were only available as add-on products previously. Giving free stuff to consumers does not harm them.

Hooligan

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #8 on:** August 12, 2003, 08:41:32 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hooligan
Windows has added tons of features added in the last 8 years (see list above) that were only available as add-on products previously. Giving free stuff to consumers does not harm them.

Hooligan

http://www.nationalpost.com/financialpost/story.html?id=AFFE582B-3DEC-45FC-B291-5FB3F1B29AF8

No, but it does harm the industry when it gives away stuff that it does not have the right to give away.

As a result of the 1995 DOJ decree, Microsoft was ordered to stop forcing OEMs to pay for a Windows license even if they sold a PC that didn't have Windows loaded on it. Anyone ever try to buy a PC from Gateway, Dell or Micron in the 90's with OS/2 or no operating system loaded? You couldn't. Because Microsoft forced the OEMs to load Windows on every PC they sold or they told the OEM that they wouldn't sell them Windows licenses for ANY of their PCs.

Do a Google search for "1995 decree per-system licensing".

You can pay $40 for every copy of windows you buy from us, or you can agree to buy one copy for every system you make and pay us $20 each.

It's the other way around. "If you refuse to load Windows on every PC that you sell, we will charge you $40 for each Windows license instead of $20."

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 12, 2003, 08:49:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gadfly
"Loss leadering" is not illegal, while tying is. That is to say, if you said you could only get Explorer IF you bought Windows, that would be illegal. If I say, "buy this OS and I will throw in the browser", I do not understand how it can be illegal.

That's not loss leading. Loss leading is when you sell (or give away) a product in order to dominate the market, then you raise prices. If Wal-Mart sells bicycles way below cost for a period of time in order to drive out the mom-and-pop bike store down the street, it is anti-competitive and illegal in most states.

Microsoft recently announced that it was no longer going to sell MSOffice for the Mac OS. So in reality, you will only be able to get MSOffice if you buy Windows. You are saying that that is illegal?

Rude · « **Reply #10 on:** August 12, 2003, 10:57:14 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mickey1992
Microsoft only got to where they are today by their abusive anti-competitive practices of the past. I see no harm in forcing them to unbundle a product within the OS.

Unbelievable

blue1 · « **Reply #11 on:** August 12, 2003, 02:15:55 PM »

What I find astonishing about this thread is the number of people prepared to defend Microsoft in spite of their history of producing second rate, buggy, insecure products and pursuing predatory competition against other AMERICAN companies. Could it be the fact that it was the EU doing this brought out the usual blind patriots.

If you don't see why giving away stuff is harmful to consumers in the long run then let me explain it. If a company eliminates or neuters the opposition in any market. Then they charge what they like for anything they produce good or bad. What's good about that for the consumer?

Do you honestly think, Windows, Media player and explorer are the best they would be if someone out there could compete with Microsoft on a level playing field? As they say there's a sucker born every minute.

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 12, 2003, 02:29:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rude
Unbelievable

Why? What happens if/when MS bundles MSOffice into Windows? What do you think that will do to competition?

MS is using their ill-gained monopoly in the OS market to force out competitors of other software products so that they can control what is on your PC.

Does no one remember Internet Explorer Smart Tags that was in the WinXP beta? Microsoft could take ANY piece of text in ANY web site and turn it into a URL of their choosing. This is where MS is headed.

Rooster · « **Reply #13 on:** August 12, 2003, 02:39:25 PM »

So you are using Red Hat and Star Office? If so great.

You hate the Microsoft buisness model, don't buy their products. There are choices. The rest sounds like the bleating of the sheep.

blue1 · « **Reply #14 on:** August 12, 2003, 03:06:12 PM »

Quote

You hate the Microsoft buisness model, don't buy their products. There are choices. The rest sounds like the bleating of the sheep.

Don't you get it Rooster???????????? Don't you understand?????????Already there is practically no choice. That is what the Microsoft business model is about. It's like Ford selling the windshield and giving away the rest of the car until all the other car companies go out of business. Then everybody drives a Ford at a price of their choosing. If Ford had done that at the beginning of the century we would all be driving derivative of the model T because Ford would have no incentive to improve their cars.
Windows is the Microsoft equivalent of the Mode T.

Author Topic: EU Plans Fine, Remedies for Microsoft 'Abuses' (Read 582 times)

blue1

blue1