RSSEU Threatens Microsoft With New $446 Million Fine
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published November 15, 2006, 11:56 AM
In what was probably an inevitable ultimatum, the only question surrounding which may have been when it would come, the European Commission today publicly issued a warning that Microsoft must turn over what it describes as the “complete documentation” regarding interoperability protocols for Windows, or else face a fine retroactive to last July totaling €348 million (USD$445.7 million), plus €3 million per day thereafter for continued non-compliance.
The EC’s statement today did not say anything in particular was missing from the documentation turned over thus far by Microsoft, which the EC did acknowledge it had already received. Working under an agreement with the EC’s appointed monitoring trustee, Dr. Neil Barrett, Microsoft turned over documents in seven stages, the final one having been received on July 19.
But in a puzzling maneuver last summer, the EC hastily convened a meeting on July 12 –- one week before the final deadline to which Dr. Barrett had already agreed –- to state that the actual final deadline was that day, and that Microsoft was already late. For that reason, the EC imposed yet another €280.5 million fine retroactive to the previous December, when the Commission ruled the company stood in non-compliance.
All sides had previously acknowledged that Microsoft complied with the previously understood July 19 deadline, though this morning’s EC statement claims the company missed that date. In so stating, the EC acknowledged the final date was July 19, thus calling into question why the company was found to have missed that date the week before.
“As of today, the Commission has not received the complete documentation regarding all relevant protocols that is required to comply with its March 2004 Decision,” the EC statement this morning reads.
“This being said, progress has been made towards turning the information supplied by Microsoft to date into specifications to be made available to potential licensees for testing. The Commission expects the remaining omissions and deficiencies in the technical documentation to be remedied by 23rd November so that by the end of November the entire set of technical documentation will be available for potential licensees to review.”
In an interview with the British newspaper The Guardian today, EC Commissioner for Competitiveness Neelie Kroes said, “I don't have eternal life...I am not impressed if someone says 90 percent of the information is already there when we need 100 percent. It's a jigsaw and some parts are missing...In my opinion, this information should have been here a couple of months ago.”
It isn’t clear what’s missing – whether, for instance, there were specific papers that Microsoft was supposed to have filed but failed to (although previous indications from the EC were that it did receive at least all its anticipated deliverables), or whether what the EC did receive was simply 90% complete rather than 100%. Microsoft has yet to issue a statement on the EC’s latest request, though BetaNews will provide that statement when it does.
Seriously, you could do wonders with couple of hundred million dollars, or euros, and Linux.
Score: 0
|Microsoft should bail out of Europe all-together, because it does not seem like it's worth the stay. MS is probably losing money in Europe right now because of these suits. MS should let them suffer with Linux systems and high-cost Apples instead and see if they beg Windows to come back.
Score: 0
|Microsoft will recover. Nothing can stop such a powerful U.S. market, and a market that effects that much of Europe.
If this really happens, Microsoft can just raise prices of various products, via Vista and such. Nothing will really effect Microsoft that they cannot recover from.
P.S Get a life EC, learn 2 make money ;)
P.s.s *Quote from kronix2* "OEMs would have to sell PCs in the EU which don't have Windows pre-installed, either through Microsoft's own choice or the EU's retaliatory legislation. Besides, why would Microsoft remove their retail products from sale within the EU and retain the OEM products' distribution?"
:Very true. I completely agree. And if anyone wants to go use the Mac OS X, let them. And have almost every application they use...Just die.
GF EC.
Score: 0
|For those who say "Microsoft should stop selling stuff in the EU":
The population of the EU stands at 450 million as of 2006. Would any corporation really be stupid enough to cease trading in a territory which is home to half a billion relatively affluent people? I for one would welcome an EU boycott from Microsoft; it'd force government and business to switch operating systems to something which isn't such a strain on the public purse.
Score: 0
|I vouch for that. Really, imagine how much cash Microsoft earns from Europe alone? I me en really: is 450M really that much to a company worth over 50B?
And again, if Microsoft was to lose this law suit, they might lower trade between them and the EU, costing the EU quite a bit of money and computer problems.
Score: 0
|You're really stupid. Just because the entire continent of Europe has the population total of 450 million DOES NOT (and I repeat, DOES NOT) mean that all of the 450 million people will buy ANYTHING from MS. Not to forget that there are still millions there that do not own a computer nor has the income to purchase one. And, don't forget that there are people there (too) that downloads pirated versions of MS products (much like people in the US).
So, your statement is false!
Score: 0
|It seems that every visit to this site has a new version of this endless and pointless discussion. What you and I think has no bearing on what Microsoft or the EU Commission are going to do.
The vast majority of computer users neither know nor care what OS they're using. If they were suddenly switched to BeOS, and it had a usable interface, they would use it. How many people do you know who have any knowledge of the inner workings of Windows XP?
Most of the software purchased for XP duplicates capabilities which are already in the OS. You are pissing in the ocean to make it salty.
Score: 0
|I agree with some of the statements below about Microsoft should just pull out Because the majority will not switch OSes they will instead go to places like Dell or HP and order online causing local buisnesses to put pressure on the EC to rethink their position.
A bit of a strong arm tactic but needs to be done because Microsoft made the OS and should deserve a bit of an advantage with the software they created.
For all those people crying monopoly answer me this what is Microsoft doing to prevent developers from creating better software than what Microsoft is bundling with the OS nothing look at Firefox Google Yahoo Stardock and many others if people feel other programs are superior Microsoft does nothing to prevent them from installing them on their computers hell for the more popular programs Microsoft even tries(not always but most of the time)when they make patches not to break competing programs.
Score: 0
|I'm sorry but your post is too intelligent or full of common sense...some don't like that here and in some parts of the world
:D
To me it's unusual that when Microsoft is called a monopoly, those who call them that...don't want them to stop what they are doing but want them to hand over code.
A bit of role play...
Anti MS - Hey Microsoft, you're a monopoly.
MS - you want us to stop?
Anti MS - No, that's ok, we just want your code, information, ie., the RD you spent developing your products...we want that for free.
MS - Uggh, ok? Not!
hehe (that part is me)
Score: 0
|You obviously don't understand the implications of Microsoft refusing to sell its products in the EU. OEMs would NOT be offering Windows pre-installed on their machines. They'd bundle something like Mandriva and save at least £50 in the process. Those who actually want Vista will just download it.
As for your point about monopolies and software development, try reading up on "anti-competitive practices". I'm guessing you were born after Netscape was crushed into the dust through Microsoft's tried and tested "embrace, extended and extinguish" business model.
Score: 0
|You think people would switch to Linux if Microsoft stoped selling loacaly i don't a few perhaps but not many people love the need to know next to nothing point and click idiot proof ease of use of windows like i said they will simply quit buying localy and order from places like HP and Dell.
As for Netscape that arguement is to old the way microsoft operates nowadays the arguement should be IE vs Firefox and competition is alive and thriving in fact computer manufacturers even bundle Microsofts competitions software with new computers bought a new one a couple months ago it came with Google tool bar norton security center even Netscape and a ton of other garbage that i had to uninstall.
Score: 0
|"You think people would switch to Linux if Microsoft stoped selling loacaly"
The EU houses 450 million citizens, with tens of millions more to join over the next decade. How is the boycott of the largest economic bloc in the world a "local" issue?
"they will simply quit buying localy and order from places like HP and Dell."
OEMs would have to sell PCs in the EU which don't have Windows pre-installed, either through Microsoft's own choice or the EU's retaliatory legislation. Besides, why would Microsoft remove their retail products from sale within the EU and retain the OEM products' distribution?
The EU is doing what the US DOJ couldn't - holding Microsoft to account for their established anti-competitive practices, which they've already been convicted of in the US yet received pitifully little punishment.
You know, I'd have thought most Americans would be happy the EU is holding Microsoft to account for their established anti-competitive practices, especially since the US DOJ spectacularly failed to levy any worthwhile punishment on Microsoft after they were *convicted* of abusing their monopoly position. Perhaps there's a little bit of envy that the EU, a bureaucratic behemoth choking in red tape, is taking on Microsoft when the US Department of Justice tried and failed? When that case was in process, I don't remember Europeans saying "AMERICA SUCKS!!!OMG BILL GATES IS JESUS!!!!!!".
Score: 0
|I am overjoyed that the Europeans will have to pay more for Windows to cover the cost of the fines, and also the cost of alternative versions that omit Windows Media Player. Why they want to pay more for versions that omit the extras we get for free in the U.S. is beyond me though. Maybe you like full employment for EC commissioners who couldn't otherwise find a job?
Score: 0
|Note to EU - quit the constant CRYING. Get out of your ivory towers and cut back on that 12 week summer vacation. If it's not whining about ICANN it's crying about mean old Microsoft. Geeze, fat AND lazy.
Score: 0
|If I was the CEO of Microsoft, I would market new products only in the US, Asia, Australia, and South America. EU would be left on whatever they have and without future tech support. Let them eat Linux and OO if they want. Sounds like that's really what they want anyway. Let them be happy. I realize however, that shareholders might be upset at that suggestion. I'd probably be fired in less than an hour. :)
Score: 0
|I swear, I would be so mad at the EU I do think it would would be cool if MS just 100% pulled out of the Operating System market in the EU.
Just flat out stopped selling Windows in the EU totally.
That would SOOOOO Rock!
Score: 0
|Not for shareholders.
Face it, the EU is a huge part of Microsoft's market, and as frustrating and downright stupid as all of this seems, for MS to pull out of the EU would be political suicide. They need to be willing and prepared to do so, then threaten the EU about it, but even if the EU ignores that, MS should pull out only as a last resort.
Funny--I draw many parallels with those statements regarding Microsoft in the EU and Americans in Iraq--something to ponder...
Score: 0
|It would be very cool - in no time at all Linux and/or Apple would have a MASSIVE share of the OS market in the EU, and thus, worldwide.
Brilliant plan if Microsoft wants to destroy it's own monopoly. :)
Score: 0
|EU would probably just fine something to b**** about Apple or a Linux Distro..
Score: 0
|I would love to see Microsoft tell the E.C. that they are not paying the fines.... then in the next statement announce they are ceasing all business in the E.U. There would be a mass panic in the business sectors.
One can dream....
Score: 0
|I was thinking the same thing. If I read Microsoft was going to do that I'd fall out of my chair.
Score: 0
|I doubt their shareholders would even allow that as an option.
Besides, I'm sure there are more than a few programmers in the EU. It would only be a short term issue. A few years down the line, and Windows would become a legacy system. Ms doesn't want the eyes of the world seeing anything like that!
All that money saved on Windows licences would go a long way towards joint governmental / corporate programs to replace the Microsoft products.
And think of the record profits as all that computer spending went into the pockets of other big software companies, that all just happen to be *competitors* of Microsoft. MS would never make such insane business choices - They have many flaws, but stupidity isn't one of them.
Score: 0
|*laughs*
Government software...
Yeah, that stuffs *real* good.
...for a few laughs, anyway.
Their standards are unimpeachable. Their usability and efficiency are atrocious.
Score: 0
|Remember the govt push to adopt Ada back in the 80's?
Score: 0
|If they pull out of Europe totally we can at last use windows free of charge legally ;)
Score: 0
|Yes. Yes I do.
Nice language. Size of a house though, which is what you get when software is designed by a committee with different interests.
Score: 0
|Ugh not this again. i still dont understand why they havee to give the information to begin with. it's nobody but microsoft's business anyway.
Score: 0
|It's clear you don't understand.
If Microsoft hide developmental information about Windows protocols then they have an unfair advantage in writing software to integrate with their operating system.
This becomes an issue *specifically* because they hold the monopoly on operating systems. If they didn't have a monopoly it wouldn'tbe as much of an issue, but they do, so it is...
This is for the benefit of consumers. I really cannot understand why anyone at non-board level at Microsoft would have any objections to having more and better written software available to use.
Score: 0
|Is this really for the benefit of consumers? Or it is really for the benefit of less efficient mega corporations out there? I am not saying MS's products are the best out there, but they do take blame (regardless if it's their issue or not) and stand behind them. Unlike some other companies out there that blame everyone else for their problems.
Score: 0
|If Microsoft hide developmental information about Windows protocols then they have an unfair advantage in writing software to integrate with their operating system.
Imagine that, a company having an advantage writing software for their own software. Who would've thought that was even possible.
This becomes an issue *specifically* because they hold the monopoly on operating systems.
They do? Without using the phrase "because a court said so", please tell me how popularity = monopoly.
Score: 0
|they hold the monopoly on operating systems.
Right. No-one uses MacOS. There aren't any servers out there on the net running Linux...or BSD...
The argument that MS holds an OS monopoly is becoming more and more of a joke every day...
Score: 0
|Just to bring you up to speed: We are in the year 2006 and Microsoft does indeed hold a monopoly on Operating Systems.
That is a fact. Don't try to fool yourself or anyone else.
Whether they lose .2 percent in one fiscal year does not overshadow Microsoft's dominance. Apple is close to making a move, but Microsoft still holds a commanding market share lead in the OS and software market.
It's not that people don't use Max, Linux or BSD. But until they find a way to bring business, gaming and the massive third party support that Microsoft garners from other developers, it's difficult to put together a strong case for what is nearly a requirement for consumers to have these days.
Score: 0
|Yeah, that whopping 4% of the market Apple owns clearly shows Microsoft doesn't have monopoly control on the OS market. :P
Score: 0
|90% of PCs run Windows.
That do it for ya?
Score: 0
|Logically, since the prefix "mono" means ONE, a.k.a. none other, then Microsoft is not a monopoly. Apple could have 4 computers available to the same market audience as microsoft and that would mean technically Microsoft does not have a monopoly.
Legally, however, it comes down to percentages, and there you are mostly correct that MS has a monopoly. I personally disagree with the US laws (that dam anti-Sherman Act) and also many international laws regarding "illegal monopolies", but since law is law, yup, PC_Tool is wrong on this one. When the SC of the US says Microsoft is a monopoly, they are legally a monopoly. This does not make them illegal, it only adds special rules that others wouldn't have to follow.
Score: 0
|There is NO MONOPOLY here. Cable companies, utilities, they have monopolies. MS holds a "majority market share". Yes. Technically and Legally it is VERY different. You have choice of operating systems. NOBODY MAKES YOU BUY MICROSOFT PRODUCTS. If you are in a situation where you have NO choice, you are either (a) not working in a civilized country, or (b) you have a crappy job.
Microsoft holds a majority market share because people CHOSE to buy their products over alternative products. PERIOD. It has nothing to do with scheming or even superior technology. The floors of computer technology history are littered with the remains of superior technology that was marketed poorly.
Score: 0
|At first: a monopoly isn't the only magic word here, market-dominance does also the trick.
Secondly, how much choice do you really have when choosing OS' with the vast majority of programs only being written for windows. We have a vicious circle here. The market-dominance of windows is almost self-persistend.
It isn't that i have problems with the dominance of windows here, it's well deserved. The vicious cirkel itself makes me more worried. It means less choice/competition and inherritely lesser products. MS itself admitted to only have waken up about IE until FF came along.
The EU commission concern is that MS abuses its marketdominance. While windows is the leading OS it isn't hard to figure out what providing "free" extra's to it will do to these product. At least they dey a decent head start. Everybody pays for these extra's because the costs are included in windows. With real competition it should be possible to release windows without all these extra's for a lesser price.
edit: some dutch words instead of englisch ones
Score: 0
|This is for the benefit of consumers. I really cannot understand why anyone at non-board level at Microsoft would have any objections to having more and better written software available to use.
Perhaps its because they paid billions to develop it, and so are a little reticent about handing it over for free.
Score: 0
|Look, it's very, very simple; you switch the monopoly argument depending on the situation.
If I say "MS has command marketshare, it is unlikely that anyone make a dent in it."
Then you say:
"Wrong. is gaining traction every day. By next year, it will have eaten half MS' user base!"
But if I say:
"Jeez, what is it with the EU?"
Then you say:
"Oi! Without the EU, no-one will ever be able to make a dent in the Microsoft monopoly"
Score: 0
|Let me just re-iterate what Dictionary.com has as there generic definition for "monopoly":
1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices.
Does MS have exclusive control over OS's? Hmmm...
Tenoq-
You keep throwing the M-word around like there is no tomorrow...
What do you call someone who doesn't like the taste of apples? a racist?
Score: 0
|I agree with some of your comments. However, I've yet to see a business that CANNOT operate on something other than Windows. Certainly the big-corp apps (Oracle, SAP, etc.) can run on other platforms. We could divide by servers/clients of course, but the argument could be posed equally.
Score: 0
|Microsoft never should have been charged the first fine from the EU considering they never did anything wrong to begin with.
Score: 0
|The American justice system would disagree with you on that score.
It's just a shame the American government wimped out of actually doing anything, or the EU wouldn't have to take these measures.
Score: 0
|American Justice System? What an oxymoron
Score: 0
|Thank you for ignoring my advice from before. Prepare to be bombarded with replies by those who disagree with your far-out views of the world...
Score: 0
|Wow, what a clever and funny thing to say. You're smart and stuff.
Score: 0
|:D
Objective posts on BN also come close to that one.
Score: 0
|There will come a point when MS will have to bail out of the EU--and I think the EC is trying to find that point and "then" retract their latest fine.
That's my theory anyway--EU will promise things, break their promises, and leech as much money from MS they can without losing them. I think MS may want to consider this theory at least as a remote possibility, maybe they can threaten to leave prematurely and force EU's hand before losing ALL of their money.
Score: 0
|Any company, including Microsoft, has to comply with the laws of the countries it wants to do business in.
And whilst the EU's fines seem high, they aren't really, given MS's gargantuan profits. They only really serve to try and get its attention. After all, the EU actually does have some money of its own you know. You know - the money we use to buy Windows with...
If Microsoft pay attention to anything else but a hit in the pocket, I haven't seen much evidence of it yet.
Score: 0
|"Any company, including Microsoft, has to comply with the laws of the countries it wants to do business in."
Absolutely. I have yet to see the law that they are breaking by including Windows Media Player in Windows, or what law they break by not haviing an open-source operating system. So--what law did they break again?
Score: 0
|they did they created windows xp - n without the media player...what you never heard of it...yeah because it was a massive failure that people returned it saying "it doesnt come with a media player why?" microsoft didnt become so big because they didnt listen to the common consumer...same as AOL and other companies of that nature. You may hate the extended "bloat" as some call it but the majority want it and since you are only a small minority the fact is your opinion really doesn't matter because NO company can please everyone because if they could we wouldn't need competition
Score: 0
|How many PCs came with OEM installations of WinXP-N?
That's the reason why it was a failure.
Score: 0
|"How many PCs came with OEM installations of WinXP-N?
That's the reason why it was a failure."
Right, because the OEM's weren't morons and they realised that selling PC's with features removed would do nothing but hurt them. Most consumers understand this, but the 7% (at best) that seem to think that big business is ALWAYS = 100% pure evil are the one's who rule the world, sadley. I'm refering to the mass media, and then those who believe their willfull ignorance of the truth, A.K.A. people such as yourself (just FYI...)
Score: 0
|The EU-comission made the mistake not to include a passage in the verdict which says that the N-version has to be cheaper. If there was real competition in the segment of OS' than a version with less functionallity should cost less!
Score: 0
|For the 1001th-time: Microsoft abuses its marketdominance. Marketdominance in itself isn't wrong but to use this in other sectors of bussiness is against the law in most countries.
You don't think Bill is giving you WMP or IE for free are you? He can develop these with the knowledge about the "dominating OS" windows that others don't have and include the costs into the price of windows.
Score: 0
|I'm sorry, but what is stopping me from installing another music player or browser on my Windows box?
Score: 0
|"abuses its marketdominance"--so what specific law are they violating which "abuses" the market dominance? Specific anti-trust law clause would be nice...
Score: 0
|http://ec.europa.eu/comm...eaties/ec/art82_en.html
There are more but let's start with this one
Score: 0
|Okay, the URL provides me with Europa Article 82 of the EC Treaty (http://ec.europa.eu/comm...eaties/ec/art82_en.html), which says:
"Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the common market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the common market insofar as it may affect trade between Member States.
Such abuse may, in particular, consist in:
(a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices or other unfair trading conditions;
(b) limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers;
(c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;
(d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts."
First of all, I must say that I am deepley concerned for the EU--I knew they were pretty socialistic, but had no idea it was so severe as it is. I am seriously and genuinely concerned for you guys, as it is becoming more blatent and open as to your hate of democracy.
The article above is clearly designed to give full power of judgement to the E.C. and thereby take away any and all rights of businesses and consumers alike. Read through it--couldn't ANY company with any interpretation of "dominance" fall into this category? Apple has done this by selling their I-Pods, Sony is doing this by "forcefully" advertising Blu-Ray as "the" new hi definition video, the EU itself is the only organisation doing what they are out of dominance, and is CLEARLY "limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers"--
--I need say nothing more.
Score: 0
|"First of all, I must say that I am deepley concerned for the EU--I knew they were pretty socialistic, but had no idea it was so severe as it is. I am seriously and genuinely concerned for you guys, as it is becoming more blatent and open as to your hate of democracy."
Socialism here hasn't anything to do with democracy here. I also can state here that the EU is (far) more democratic than the US. Not bad for an (and i quote wikipedia on this) supranational and intergovernmental union of 25 independent, democratic member states that only is around for 14 years. That there still is a lot to be changed is clear but i'm not worried. I only see hurdles.
That socialism is a more accepted economic system over here in Europe is a fact. It's still a dirty word in the US isn't it?
The rules and regulations over here in the EU don't differ al that much with the ones in the US. You already mentioned the Sherman Act in this topic before. The biggest difference between legislation in the US an EU is that the US focuses more about how the monopoly/market dominance has been obtained and the EU more on the abuse of it.
Maybe that this article that works in conjuction with the one i posted yesterday is a bit less socialistic in your eyes. I should have posted it yesterday but i was in a hurry.
http://ec.europa.eu/comm...eaties/ec/art81_en.html
Score: 0
|Translation, "We want more money."
Score: 0
|The EU already has more GDP than the USA. Looks like they're doing fine.
It's just that if we're using *our* money to buy Windows, then as consumers we want our say-so in what we buy. We want to buy an OS that has features and functionality that we, the consumer, wants. Not what Microsoft decides we want.
Given the US national debt though - http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ - I'd say you have bigger problems than MS getting a slap on the wrist.
Score: 0
|Nor did Microsoft decide that you needed to buy their products. What is your point?
Score: 0
|We want to buy an OS that has features and functionality that we, the consumer, wants. Not what Microsoft decides we want.
*laughs*
Um, dude....
IE got put in because *gasp* the customers were begging for it. WMP? Same reason.
Sheep don't want choice. They want it to work out of the box. MS Windows is made for sheep.
...and amazingly, left left us techies able to use other programs if we so choose.
Score: 0
|So don't buy it...or at least say what it is you want to buy.
The EC’s statement today did not say anything in particular was missing from the documentation turned over thus far by Microsoft, which the EC did acknowledge it had already received.
Oh, and the EU may be doing fine, but isn't the EC having a hard time finding regular, reliable funding?
Score: 0
|Keep up your anti-USA push--I'm sure that that will give us Americans all the more reason not to believe a word you say :)
If consumers don't like Microsoft's OS features and functionality, they won't buy their products, thereby MS will listen or kill themselves. The EU is taking away your right to choose what products you want by "speaking on behalf of consumers". No speaking is necessary--quit buying Microsoft products and Microsoft will start listening or they will die. But the EU thinks they know better than you, and want to prevent microsoft from releasing a "bad" product rather than letting them burn their own money. Logic prevails over opinion here, methinks. Let Microsoft screw up rather than fining them over nothingness.
"It's just that if we're using *our* money to buy Windows, then as consumers we want our say-so in what we buy."
THEN QUIT PAYING FOR MICROSOFT IF YOU DON'T WANT IT!!!
Score: 0
|1) The GDP per capita of the U.S. exceeds that of every EU country, except Luxembourg. Obviously, the total GDP of the entire continent of Europe plus part of Asia exceeds the GDP of just the U.S.
Source: http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/
A study by the Swedish Research Institute of Trade
2) So, 'consumers' a.k.a. a governmental organizaion should decide what a company does, rather than the board of directors of that company? And all these years I thought we had a free market economy. Why didn't someone tell me we changed to a communist government? Last time I checked, Microsoft has every right to make its own business decisions, just like every other company and individual in a free market economy. Obviously, it has incentive to include the features that customers want. That incentive is the money that the customers pay to use their software. If the customers don't like it, they don't buy it. You, as a consumer in a free market economy, have every right to use a different OS, if you don't like MS Windows, but don't go crying to MS when all of the Windows stuff doesn't work in your other OS.
3) Public debt, as a percentage of GDP:
Rank Country Percent
7 Italy 108.8%
28 Germany 67.3%
29 France 66.2%
32 Austria 65.1%
34 U.S.A. 64.7%
45 Switzerland 52.0%
63 U.K. 43.1%
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/...ountries_by_public_debt
Looks like you should be more concerned about the public debt of France, Germany, Austria, and, especially, Italy.
Score: 0
|That's just the point - WE HAVE NO CHOICE, IT'S A MONOPOLY.
And since it's a monopoly (Windows), the EU is taking these steps to try and allow for more consumer options in add-ons to the Windows OS. I can't see why you don't understand what they're trying to do, and how it's a GOOD thing for consumers.
Score: 0
|"WE HAVE NO CHOICE, IT'S A MONOPOLY"
What a croc. I could NOT buy Microsoft Windows every day of my life. After all, this world has survived without Windows forever before 1987--but apparently there's a Microsoft Mind Control Agency that brainwashes the people and forces you to go to the store and buy Microsoft products.
Are you a frikin cyborg? The ability to use logic and reason needs to be a requirement for people in these forums, I believe--
Score: 0
|Yes you do. Get Linux. It's cheaper, easier to use and has loads of apps.
Or so people keep telling me.
Or buy a Mac. They're cheaper, easier to use and have loads of apps.
Which people also keep telling me.
So where's the problem?
Sorry, but just because the EU bureaucrats feel they're not spending enough time in the Bahamas, I don't see why we have to pay for them to do it.
And yes, it will be us Europeans who will end up paying for this exhortion racket the EU seems to be running.
Half a billion euros? Do me a favour!
And what are they doing with this money? As an MS user, why can't I send in the the package tab from my MS software box and get my share? After all, it's me who is apparently being ripped off.
Score: 0
|"WE HAVE NO CHOICE, IT'S A MONOPOLY"
-wow... you pretty much wrote yourself off as an idiot there.
Score: 0
|