Nothing new here M$ are doing to consumers in europe what Sony is doing to the HD scene...

Guess what Niro, you are quite right, I forgot about the 'designed for windows'. I did mean to put words to that effect. I forgot also to mention the fact that I am from a country not in this universe. I will not buy a console as they do not have the flexibility of a PC as I do so much more than play games.

"I forgot also to mention the fact that I am from a country not in this universe"

Ha :)

In the UK there is not the choices of OS as there may be in the US. If you walk into a High Street store here and select a PC then you are stuck with a Microsoft OS. Try asking for an alternative and you will be informed that there is none. Ask them for a price of a PC without an OS at all and it cannot be done. As for the PC only retailers, well at least for the most part you can have a custom built machine with no OS.

I currently run an MS OS and have no choice in the matter. That is if I want to play games I don't. Linux tries and is getting there. I would prefer a Linux operating system but until there is a time that current releases are made for Linux or any other OS I am stuck with MS. Lets face it, the industry in general is not going to support anything other than Windows until something cataclysmic happens to Microsoft.

As for the fine, well Microsoft saw it coming as has been stated here many time already and nobody forces Microsoft to trade in the EU. I do not understand why they can't at least trust the user to choose what applications they want to use during the installation of the Operating System like they used to. That way if I do not want to use WMP I do not even have to have it on my PC at all.

"I currently run an MS OS and have no choice in the matter. That is if I want to play games I don't"

Huh...so can I sue sony because I have to have a PS3 in order to play fall of man or ratchet??

Actually the more I think about that comment the more insane it's sounding to me. You think MS needs to be punished because you have to have windows to play games? Maybe...you need windows for games that are "designed for windows", but last I checked, you can play games on a wii, an xbox, a PS3, linux or a mac....but, you're saying you have no choice you're forced to use windows to play games. What country are you in again?? Can't be a country that is on the planet earth.

I think the EU is way out of line!
the more power the EU gets the more they abuse it!
I say give the EU the finger!

Give them a handfull, holding a big fat cheque for $1,350,000,000 !!.

Its not as if the EU forced them to do business in the EU.

Actually consumers don't have a choice as MS Windows is preinstalled on the majority of pc's.

Rock on EU! kick Microsoft's ass!

"Actually consumers don't have a choice as MS Windows is preinstalled on the majority of pc's."

So MAC's and Dell pc's with ubuntu pre-installed don't exist? Hm...I don't know what planet you're consuming on...but me, as a consumer on the planet earth, it sounds like I do have a choice.

Actually ... The EU is telling manufactures to install every computer with an OS. This is of course the reason why we got a batch of NEC's all with FreeDOS.

I could buy a Mac if I wanted to. Is that not a choice?

Apple does not allow OS X to be installed on other PCs except their own (similar case to the iPhone). This is one factor why the choices seem limited.

With this kind of attitude the EU makes it impossible for anyone to do business in Europe. Consumers have a choice and the majority are choosing Microsoft Windows. People have the option to buy a new computer with a different operating system. I'm sure there are just as many local computer shops in Europe as the USA that custom build computers to the customer's specifications.

With this kind of attitude the EU makes it impossible for anyone to do business in Europe.

How do you figure that? People can do business anywhere they want as long as they follow the laws governing that area.

Consumers have a choice and the majority are choosing Microsoft Windows.

They have no real chose, they go to buy a computer and see 99% of their choices at the store come with windows. the other 1% are Mac's and even some of those are showing windows, so the average person (contrary to popular belief - the average person is STILL computer illiterate) think that is their choice.

People have the option to buy a new computer with a different operating system.

Go to Best buy, Staples, or CompUSA, do they tell you when buying the computer what your options for other operating systems are? do they display systems running other operating systems? no. So unless you are already knowledgeable on such things you don't know.

I'm sure there are just as many local computer shops in Europe as the USA that custom build computers to the customer's specifications.

Having worked for years at such mom and pop operations, you sell what people know. they look to the mom and pop places to offer the same computers they see at the natyional chains for cheaper. so they buy a computer that's fast, has this nice monitor and has windows as thats all they have ever seen.

Go to Best buy, Staples, or CompUSA, do they tell you when buying the computer what your options for other operating systems are? do they display systems running other operating systems?

This is pure BS.

You imply this is due to Microsoft's lock-in, or forcing others out of the market.

You'd actually have to be a full-blown idiot to believe that. They want to display product that will actually *move*. That's it.

they look to the mom and pop places to offer the same computers they see at the natyional chains for cheaper.

Again, why are you implying this is Microsoft's fault? Are they forcing these consumers to not look elsewhere? Are they forcing Apple to not advertise their alternative?

It _is_ because of M$'s illegal practices. It has been shown in court how M$ deals with the pc manufacturers. basically the price a Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc... pays for M$ software goes up if they choose to not put M$ Windows on all their machines.

With the razor thin margins on beige boxes, said manufacturers can not afford to pay higher licensing fees to M$ for each copy of Windows and Office.

This is but one way M$ squeezes the channel. I hope you work for M$ because i really do not see how someone with half a brain does not see how anti-competitive M$'s behaviors are.

I was going to refute your argument, but decided that I refuse to spend my efforts arguing with anyone who is too lazy and immature to spell out Microsoft's name.

Just go thinking the way you think. Not like my efforts would ever convince you otherwise anyway.

Pitdimwit strikes again...

basically the price a Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc... pays for M$ software goes up if they choose to not put M$ Windows on all their machines

Bulls***. These deals went out with Windows 95. If you have any proof to the contrary, I am sure the FTC and DoJ would be very interested.

Since the rest of your comment is based on that incredibly asinine accusation, I'll leave it at that.

Try posting arguments relevant to *this* decade, eh?

*Anxiously awaits Pitdingo2's reply*...

It takes a certain type of person to take news and truths from 12+ years ago and apply it in the now as if it happens today, that's all I'll say about that.

Yea Pit is def. that type of person...he's been posting those exact same comments on every MS article he sees...and he STILL cannot spell MS properly.

He's been taking lessons from zridling.

His trolls have lately been hit n' runs. He won't follow up.

...at least he's no longer trying to defend his BS. He just pops in, throws his crap like a retarded monkey and flees.

Microsoft fully complied with the EU throughout the whole antitrust investigation yet the EU still decided to fine them. If this is how the EU treats large businesses then yes their attitude does make it impossible to do business in Europe. Just because commissioner Neelie Kroes doesn't like Microsoft doesn't mean the EU has the right to fine them.

like someone else said but i too have wondered the difference.. what is the difference between microsoft including internet explorer and media player with windows and ford putting stock cd players and tires on their automobiles? i'm sure there are many after market cd player manufacturers that would love to stop ford from including them in their cars and trucks. i just don't understand how one can be right and the other wrong.

The difference is that (referring to the radios), car companies allow 3rd party subcontractors BID on the right to be used in their cars... microsoft says, this is what we made, it is good (ignore that their is competitors that may or may not be just as good or better, they are unimportant, as we are microsoft and we are always better even when we arent" and force you to use what they tell you to.

"force you to use what they tell you to."

That's strange...how come the MS police isn't at my door for using Winamp? I mean...aren't they supposed to FORCE me to use WMP? According to you I should be behind bars...

Microsoft doesn't disallow the installation of 3rd party windows software. In fact, anyone can install the windows media player, browser, whatever of their choice and NOT use the tools provided by Microsoft. The whole EU claim is pathetic.

One other thing to mention, microsoft could never comply if they chose to. I mean, if they slap them with a 1 billion dollar fine once a month, its still not going to hurt them. Granted they won't be making the profit they do, but they would still have 10's of billions in cash on hand.

Microsoft CAN quite simply do whatever they want. They are so filthy rich this fine is like charging someone with hundreds of dollars in their pocket 1 dollar. It's laughable, so short of taking something away, like you would a 2 year old, they are not going to care or change in any way shape or form.

That may seem harsh, but in reality, if the US court system wasn't so corrupt, we would currently have two os companies and an application company instead of this thing we call Microsoft today. 1.35 billion is what Microsoft makes in profit IN A MONTH!

Microsoft has a huge responsibility. When you are the number one os, basically 9 out of 10 computers sold runs windows, its going to put you in a difficult position.

While a lot of people say hey, its their os they can do what they want. In a lot of ways that should be true. But laws were created to prevent one domininent or monopoly area to FORCE and shove other things down consumers throats. That is where Microsoft is making mistakes. That is why they are being fined. The media player and browser has pretty much zero reason to be bolted to the os like it is. That is exactly what they should not be doing. It really is quite simply an unfair advantage. No one has a chance really.

Do you think firefox will ever get a market share greater then IE? No, never. There are two types of Internet users out there. One's who don't know or care, and those who are using firefox. They are going to stick with what the os gives them, there is no choice in their eyes. Even if that alternative is better in every way.

Back in the day Netscape and real player were the dominent companies. Microsoft tied those things to the os that 90 percent of consumers use. Now those companies don't exist or are a shadow of their former selves. This is exactly why monopoly laws were created.

At&t in the United States was broken up for this reason. There was no competition, they could basically do whatever they wanted to do and charge what they wanted as well. Sound famiilar?

Microsoft can do whatever they want with no Windows compatible alternative. If you use certain apps that are windows only, your only option is to find the alternative, linux or mac and hope they have something that works. Oh yeah few people know or have the time to figure out how to do this.

So, things will continue such as it is. Too bad they weren't broken up into a couple os companies and an applications company.

Microsoft is in such a powerful position it really is sickening. The world runs on computers now days. Majority of companies, schools and even home users use computers on a regular basis. Scary stuff, they need some serious competition, NOW.

"we would currently have two os companies and an application company instead of this thing we call Microsoft today"

Why? How about breaking apple into two seperate companies? How about breaking up google into seperate companies, one for search, one for mail, one for maps?

"1.35 billion is what Microsoft makes in profit IN A MONTH!"

That would be a slow month for them.

"FORCE and shove other things down consumers throats."

Didn't Blu-ray get forced down our throats? Where is the lawsuit against Sony? I'm not FORCED to use anything microsoft...I can buy a mac, or I can use ubuntu or any of the dozens of flavors of linux out there.

"The media player and browser has pretty much zero reason to be bolted to the os like it is"

Why? I expect to have the capability to play mp3's/movies and browse the internet right out of the box in a desktop OS. Oh BTW...mac OSX includes a media player and a browser too...that's ok though?

"No one has a chance really."

Winamp has been around for a long time, so has real (talk about a piece of garbage). There are many media players out there, and I know many people that use them.

"
Do you think firefox will ever get a market share greater then IE? No, never"

Are you kidding me...do you know how big of a market share firefox has right now? I think they are VERY happy with their position.

"Now those companies don't exist or are a shadow of their former selves"

Have you USED netscape right around the time it started dying off? It was CRAP! THAT'S why netscape started to bomb...not because they made a superior product and lost to IE.

"At&t in the United States was broken up for this reason"

They basically back together now...

"There was no competition, they could basically do whatever they wanted to do and charge what they wanted as well. Sound famiilar?"

Not really...

MAC OSX
MANY different flavors of linux (Ubuntu being the desktop of choice right now)

back then, with at&t, you actually had NO CHOICE...

"Microsoft can do whatever they want with no Windows compatible alternative. If you use certain apps that are windows only, your only option is to find the alternative, linux or mac and hope they have something that works. Oh yeah few people know or have the time to figure out how to do this."

Should I sue apple because I like to use aperture but I don't like OSX, so I want aperture to work on Windows? I mean..I want the CHOICE of what to run Aperture on!

"Scary stuff, they need some serious competition, NOW."

Isn't apple gaining a huge amount of market share? Aren't all the apple fanboys bragging about that? Aren't linux fans bragging about how fast Dell ubuntu pc's are selling?

Isn't apple gaining a huge amount of market share?

Not to hurt your arguments, since I basically agree with you, but no, they aren't...at least, not "by huge amounts" and definitely not in the PC market, and the music device market is already flooded, so growth is slowing there as well...

Dont forget to remove all the applications from OSx and linux too.

"There are two types of Internet users out there. One's who don't know or care, and those who are using firefox."

Well, actually three.. advanced users use Opera.

Easy fix. Stop selling all Microsoft Products to anywhere in the EU. There is no law saying they have to. No products for them, no lawsuits. Eventually they will have to weigh is it really worth all they spend in defending these outlandish lawsuits vs profit. I bet every lawsuit like this would soon disappear if they were announcing at the end of the year product sales over there would end.

Like MS would walk away from a market more than DOUBLE the size of the US

now that would be stupid.

"a market more than DOUBLE the size of the US"

Really? how so?

He's probably assuming population.

almost 800 million people, most of which are better off financially than the average american.

gee, I wonder.

I am SHOCKED that a company can create a product and get fined because nobody else thought of it before them.

If I designed and made a new type of automobile and sold it in Europe, would I not be able to install the tires? Could I sell it with windshield wipers or a fuel tank or would the EU fine me for selling something that is offered by another company.

The European Union should not expect Microsoft to pay their costs to operate.

Guess not.

But if they included their own tyres, and maybe told the dealers & Customers that if ever the car has other tyres on they would lose their warranty & insurance then that wouldnt be nice.

Maybe tell them that they will have to pay more for the car if the dealer used another firms types for all cars they sell then you could say that would be bad and anticompetitive for the tyre industry.

Not a good comparison, and im not saying the EU isnt making an example of MS, but they have dragged their heels on this issue and are now paying the price.

If I was bill I would give all my european workers a nice early retirement pakage and close everything that I owned there and whatever country tried to sue me after that would either think twice or be prepared for the same fate

Have a nice day EU

What do you think Europe would use instead? Oh yeah Linux or os x. It would cost Microsoft a lot more then 1 Billion dollars if that happened.

For most companies that kind of fine would derail them and put them to death. For Microsoft however, its a drop in the bucket, 1 months profit.

Personally I think companies should be fined a percentage of their worth. That way 1 million a year companies don't go out of business because they were fined 250k, while companies that make multi billions walk away laughing.

"One will look into whether Microsoft Internet Explorer is illegally bundled into Windows,"

Wow...Ok for everyone out there that's not using IE. How did you go and download an alternative browser? I am guessing you used IE to go and download it. Ok take away IE....How are you going to get it now?

That is true, however how do most people get their computers? From a oem right? So, most likely there would be competition for WHO gets to put their browser on. See this is what we call choice. Instead of choice, you get IE.

The point here is, bolting the browser to the os. Why do they have to do that? See I would Love! to download firefox, then click uninstall to IE. But yeah, can't do that.

There have been some oems bundle Windows on their PCs but remove IE and replace it with Netscape. This is something OEMs can do and it is not a Microsoft issue.

They probably used the uninstall feature in Windows XP which just removes the IE icons from the desktop, quick launch and start menu. Besides, simply having IE sitting on a computer unused is not going to cause any problems of any kind with any software application.

God Dammit!

Sorry, I just felt like saying that. I'll go away now.

Dell shipped systems with Firefox before IE7 was released.

Point being the OEMS can install damn near whatever they want. AOL shipped with many of them for *ages*.

Again, this isn't MSFT's doing, this is the OEMs deciding how to sell *their* product.

They still have the right to decide what they want to sell and *how* they want to sell it, right, or do you want to take that away too?

Yah and what about the rest of us who build our pcs?

You went out and bought your copy of windows, or did you download it ? Perhaps you got it free on a disk ? Did a friend lend you a copy ?

Perhaps if you you had to, there would be currently more choice dont you think ?

Now look what you made me do !! I spelt it out to you.

Microsoft has nothing to worry about. There are so many morons paying through the nose for barely functioning crap like Vista while still passionately defending convicted monopoly abuser's right to continue abusing it's monopoly. These retards hate the very idea of free market (one without monopolies and cartels) and they hate the very idea of competition. With such clientèle Microsoft has absolutely nothing to worry about.

I expected a billion, this is quite a bit more than I imagined. To be honest MS saw it coming, they have been doing a reasonable job at opening things up as of late, but they have been kicking their heels for too long, and I think underestimated initially the intent of the EU.

This will be dark news for Intel, and the case with AMD. Its common knowledge about its business practices in restricting AMD's and other competitors in competing.

While I can somwhat feel for them, having to allow competitors into a market they feel they effectivly created. But the laws are there for a reason, and non complaince is going to be costly.

I was equally impressed at the difference beween the Euro and $, seams the Euro is just getting stronger and stronger.

Microsoft is no stranger to the receiving end of anti-competitive allegations. And, their accusers are often quietly dismissed via some form of: small payments/incentives, clever deal brokering, (pseudo)partnerships, or even more aggressive behavior. Well, not this time.... Crosstalk: http://dataland.wordpres...osoft-fined-135-billion/

And, their accusers are often quietly dismissed via some form of: small payments/incentives, clever deal brokering, (pseudo)partnerships, or even more aggressive behavior.

Examples?

Didn't think so...

If we could give examples, then they wouldn't be quiet, would they? :p

How about we talk about something that we can actually look at, rather than speculation based on unsubstantiated arguments? Must this be a political debate?

If Microsoft wanted to avoid these fines they could have done so, but they didnt. So whats the problem again? Ignorance (or is it stupidity?) isnt exactly good enough excuse when Microsoft knew what was in stake.

If Microsoft wanted to avoid these fines they could have done so, but they didnt.

That's your opinion, anyway.

Not doing something does not imply ignorance.

It could be a delay tactic (as with the Novell Deal), or any number of things.

Not the least of which is pure, unabashed contempt of this crap.

Only a moron would think they couldn't avoid the fines.

I guess by your standards I'm a moron then.

I could honestly care less about that, though.

Microsoft did everything the EU requested and then some yet the EU still fined them. You should think twice about who you call a moron.

Personally I dont believe that Microsoft will pay even 10% of this fees. Just greedy EU idiots!

On another hand in Germany we have SAP AG - is it not monopoly? Does they open ANYTHING ? EVER ? SHARE the CODE ? Help poor Oracle to integrate with JDE ? Answer is no no no and no.... So its quite clear that EU want some sort of bribe. Yep, give 200-300 mil $$$ and they will shut up.

Depends on how you define monopoly and how long you want to drag it out.

LoL.

While everyone's saying the EU is "gay" can one of you actually tell me why this is bad for the consumer?

This can only help the interaction between application and OS.

Yes, I agree, it's pretty damned harsh and they haven't done it to any of the other hundreds of companies who do this sort of thing, but hot damn, why are you complaining if you're not employed by or own shares in Microsoft?

(A) NOBODY can say with a straight face that they were forced to buy Microsoft products. Ever.

(B) Punishing someone for selling more products and resulting in a market majority is not helping those that bought those said products. It simply adds more costs to their ongoing support while handing the so-called competition an artificial hand-out opportunity. That is not progress. That's welfare.

While everyone's saying the EU is "gay" can one of you actually tell me why this is bad for the consumer?

Windows Vienna Basic = $300.

This can only help the interaction between application and OS.

Thus creating more level competition with MSFT, which neither MSFT or their shareholders want. While I can see the benefits to the consumer, as a business owner, the Gov forcing a company, *any* company to open it's IP grates like hell. Forcing them to add or remove functionality is fine..stupid, but fine. Forcing them to basically give up their IP is ludicrous.

why are you complaining if you're not employed by or own shares in Microsoft?

Because even if it doesn't affect us directly now, it will in the future.

Why complain about the killing of millions in Darfur if you don't live there, after all?

It simply adds more costs to their ongoing support while handing the so-called competition an artificial hand-out opportunity. That is not progress. That's welfare.

++
QFT

A. Didn't say anything about that.

B. Yes, it does. This is pocket change to Microsoft. Plus, this means it'll cost less in R&D for software companies as they'll have the information to hand and result in either cheaper of better software.

No, it won't affect the cost of Vienna Basic.
It's going to be dirt cheap bundled with your computer as usual.

"Thus creating more level competition with MSFT, which neither MSFT or their shareholders want."

This is what I said. It helps the consumer, so shut up unless you're part of the business or own some of it (and if I'm being really picky it should be "MSFT nor their sharesholders want").

This is good for consumers, but bad for Microsoft.

"Why complain about the killing of millions in Darfur if you don't live there, after all?"

Because it was bad for everyone involved (some realise it now, some realise it later).

It's going to be dirt cheap bundled with your computer as usual.

Vista Ultimate cost me $190. Tell me how it was "dirt cheap" and "came bundled with my PC" again?

This is what I said. It helps the consumer, so shut up unless you're part of the business or own some of it.

This is good for consumers, but bad for Microsoft.

"Why complain about the killing of millions in Darfur if you don't live there, after all?"

Because it was bad for everyone involved (some realise it now, some realise it later).

Wow. That's ... pathetic.

As I mentioned, as a business owner, it affects me greatly. But because it doesn't affect *you* it's no big deal? A bit self-centered, are we?

My point is that this is bad for *any* business that wants a large portion of any market. By extension, it is also bad for the consumer, raising prices, limiting supply, and defining the options you can and cannot include.

The EU has set precedent on going after *anyone* they feel isn't playing
"fair". How do they define that? By most liberal definitions, gaining more than 50% of the market just isn't "fair".

So other businesses get to profit and market off of MSFT's R&D while MSFT is forced to give it to them, effectively killing their ability to make money off of their own R&D?

How cute. How is *any* company supposed to make money off of their own R&D then? When another company can just whine to the EU, forcing you to give it up? They won't. They can't. Talk about killing any chance of innovation...

You must be a Socialist. You equate having more money with a requirement to give it up also. What relevance does "pocket change" have to the justification of punishment? So if they were poor you wouldn't see this the same way?

Funny, a good friend of mine just bought a Dell with Ubuntu preloaded. I guess that's a sure sign the EU will need to go after Ubuntu (Canonical) now.

Typical RobinHood syndrome: Stealing is OK, as long as you give it to the poor.

Please, don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for this fine, I'm saying we shouldn't moan about it either.

"As I mentioned, as a business owner, it affects me greatly. But because it doesn't affect *you* it's no big deal? A bit self-centered, are we?"

No. No. No.

I'm saying nothing for this fine at all. I disagree with it.

However, I do not think consumers should be moaning about it.

Hmm...

Higher prices, limited functionality...

Yeah, no reason at all. :)

Sorry I misunderstood your earlier post.

It's more than a market majority, it is a monopoly. And you can be forced to buy Microsoft products if you want access to certain other products. Ie, MONOPOLY. Now the monopoly in and of itself is not illegal - but abusing monopolistic power is. And that is where Microsoft is crossing the line: they're using their market power to destroy the competition and artificially set prices.

Nobody can say with a straight face that a company abusing monopoly power is a good thing.

You must be a capitalist. You equate having money with having power. More money, more power. When Microsoft can buy your life for a dollar I hope you are still thinking that pure market capitalism is a good thing. :p

God, it's surprising how much the Cold War hurt American minds when it comes to their fellow man.

MSFT's R&D?
I had the impression that all their application (including DOS) were acquisitions and that such practice had not changed.

I was wondering when one of you tools would bring up Americans.

And you can be forced to buy Microsoft products if you want access to certain other products. Ie, MONOPOLY

Example?

And that is where Microsoft is crossing the line: they're using their market power to destroy the competition and artificially set prices.

That *may* have been true back in '95. You say it as though they are doing it *today*. Examples?

Haha...

Funny...

/sarcasm

If you think it will help the consumer you are a moron as well.

We do need to moan about it because it is not right.

Hey look, another totally idiotic statement by PC Troll.

"The EU has set precedent on going after *anyone* they feel isn't playing
"fair". How do they define that? By most liberal definitions, gaining more than 50% of the market just isn't "fair"."

M$ has been found to have a monopoly by the EU courts. They have been proven to have anti-competitive practices in violation of the law.

And now they are being investigated for bribery and other under-handed tactics in getting their closed, proprietary, patent encombered, M$OOXML format crammed down the throat of ISO.

What a great company....

"Nobody can say with a straight face that a company abusing monopoly power is a good thing."

There sure is....and he/she already replied to your post

You didn't actually argue my point. The EU has made a habit of this. Who's next to be labeled a "monopoly".

It's funny to me that you can just blindly sit here and defend something you know nothing about.

It's apparently you don't even *know* what a monopoly is from your past comments regarding MSFT.

It's like you're still stuck in 1995...

MSFT has competition. Quite a bit of it. In every market in which they operate. Welcome to 2008.

Yes, the damned fool who thinks it's still 1995 thinks MSFT is still a monopoly.

...go figure.

Where did I equate those two together? I don't see it anywhere. Go ahead and start the infantile bashing of Americans, while we continue to dole out more aid funding and support than any other nation on Earth. Sure, we screw up, but we do it with style. :)

The consequence of MS's dominance is the stifling of innovation in the long run. At least someone is willing to spank the giant. Just a small example of why free markets are a total illusion. If my favourite applications worked on Linux, I'd be gone in a flash.

Free markets are an illusion? How in the world do you rationalize that statement? Who exactly MADE anyone buy Microsoft products?

If you can't see any innovation in any of the markets of which MSFT is a part, it is due to your own blindness or addiction to crack, not an actual lack of innovation.

I already am gone.

If you go look, most everything has a free equivalent for linux. You just have to go do it.

M$ is just really annoying to me because they have too much of the market and they make bad and EXPENSIVE products. As someone or another commented on windows piracy, why is it even WORTH stealing?

On the other hand, M$ being the big guy makes it the big target for viruses and things, effectively absorbing them all so you don't even need an anti-virus in linux.

Equivalent != the application. He wants Win apps to work in Linux, naively.

At least, that's what I got from his post. (He wants Linux to be Windows...)

Look up Wine then. It's a app that lets windows programs run in linux.

Because any time politicians here in the US talk about 'free markets' it's code for privatizing profits and socializing the cost/risk. Free markets are some imaginary wet dream of yours where lobbyists don't own lawmakers while politicians and business aren't in bed together.

It's a app that lets *SOME* windows programs run in linux.

Fixed that for ya. Some programs run well (even better), some run decently, some run poorly, and many do not run at all.

Good for gamblers, to be sure, but not for the average user. :)

But the ones it runs do tend to be the ones that most people would WANT to run.

... what has Microsoft released lately that was not already there by someone else (and they ended up buying out)?

Innovation does not mean first to market.

Office 2003?

*lots* of hacking.

WoW? *lots* of hacking...runs decently, but nowhere *near* what it could do on the same system in Windows.

there's 2 extremely popular apps right there.

**the latest version of WiNE, which is even now just hitting the repo's, *may* solve some of these issues. No guarantees...and that's the whole point.

I'll give an example using Google:

Picasa was a small company that made an *amazing* photo application. It integrated web support, blog support, and had some new and very interesting UI abilities.

The problem was that they were small and no-one new of them.

Google bought them, re-branded Picasa, spurred development, and it is, by far, one of the best free -photo applications out there.

...and people know about it. (It's part of the Google-pack)

Innovation can be as simple as bringing an innovative idea or product to a larger market.

I partly agree with you. I don't share that illusion about lobbyists though. However, in the context of Microsoft being called a Monopoly, that's near impossible to qualify given the fact that NO government seems to like them, so how could they promote them? Also, again, I reiterate: Nobody MADE anyone buy Microsoft products. They evolved into a dominant market force by virtue of people (customers) buying their products.

So if we all pay to see a movie and it becomes the top box office draw, this conventional wisdom would hold the producers at fault for monopolizing the movie market. The logic is flawed and stupid.

but getting better all the time.

If it weren't for the fines levied by EU against American businesses, they wouldn't have a budget to spend.

- The EC fined 11 groups of companies a total of € 750,712,500 for participating in a cartel for gas-insulated switchgear (GIS) projects. The companies were ABB, Alstom, Areva, Fuji Electric, Hitachi Japan AE Power Systems, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Schneider, Siemens, Toshiba and VA Tech.

- The EC fined the Otis, KONE, Schindler and ThyssenKrupp groups € 992 million for operating cartels for the installation and maintenance of lifts and escalators in Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.

- The EC fined Dutch brewers Heineken, Grolsch and Bavaria a total of € 273,783,000 for operating a cartel on the beer market in the Netherlands.

Grow up, and stop acting like this is some anti-US move on the part of the EU.

A lot of you are anti-US. Can you really blame him for thinking otherwise?

Granted, Microsoft hasn't gone out of their way to be friendly with the EU, so the angst they're feeling is not unexpected. My comment was a bit harsh and narrow, and you are correct on the larger context of the matter(s). However, it does seem that many of the posts here by EU citizenry tend to be anti-American in flavor. Maybe that's a generalization I shouldn't make, but I am human. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to work on quitting my nose picking habit.

If we all sat down and looked at it, I suspect most people who seem anti-US are actually anti-US government or anti-abusive corporations rather than having anything against the average bloke in the street.

Then again, from what I read it seems the majority of the US population don't care too much for their government either these days!

I think as long as we can all keep our heads and discuss *opinions* in a rational manner we can actually settle some of these arguments, even if a lot of the time we'll probably end up "agreeing to disagree". ;-)

Soon, Microsoft may be facing all new troubles as the EU plans to investigate two recent complaints. One will look into whether Microsoft Internet Explorer is illegally bundled into Windows, while another will see whether the company's interoperability in other programs is sufficient.

Wow, revisiting the IE integration debate?

Microsoft needs to change their strategy. They have truley bent over backwards in trying to work with the EU, conceded to unprecedented demands that no other company in the world has ever had to comply with, and pay fines that are only as large as they are because they have more money than any other company.

I haven't a clue as to the best way to deal with this, but threatening to pull away from the EU is an impossible option that is almost looking possible at this point. How many euros does microsoft sacrifice in 6 weeks in europe? A 6 week vacation might give EU something to think about, but I fear it is exactly what they want Microsoft to do.

If MSFT pulled out of the EU, the EU would not hesitate to declare MSFT copyrights null and void.

Ignoring what effect this would have on MSFT's stockholders, this would create a *huge* rift between the EU and the US and set some incredibly bad precedents.

I would imagine the EU would like SAP AG's copyrights to remain in effect.... (as an example of possible US counter-plays)

I won't go so far as to say they won't *ever* pull out of the EU (Considering Apple going Intel), but the likelyhood is so small that in contrast, Apple going to Intel would have looked like a sure thing.

I can only agree with this.

Plus, $1.35B is still quite a pitiful amount of money for Microsoft.

I would like to see the EU declare MSFT copyrights null and void. How does a government do that, I wonder?

I would like to see the EU declare MSFT copyrights null and void.

Not one to ever consider the consequences of one's actions, are you?

I could just see it now...going to war over something like that...

I highly doubt it would cause a war, or at the very least be the sole reasoning behind one.

That's a bit overboard...

Didn't Microsoft just announce they were opening up all of their APIs or something. Seems every thing they do to please them, the EU then demands something more.

Those are unrelated to this matter, which has been going on this entire decade in some form. And Microsoft's OSP is fraught with legal loopholes that allows Microsoft to sue whom they please for what they please. Not really open if you have to spend your life fending off Microsoft's lawyers.

And Microsoft's OSP is fraught with legal loopholes that allows Microsoft to sue whom they please for what they please

Shovel BS much?

Sue whom they please for what they please?

Examples?

Coming from someone who lives in the UK - Christ I hate the EU, they're pathetic.

So, everytime somebody stands up for our rights, they're pathetic? Are the americans crossing the pond and leave their brains at home?

I think they should fine the UK for still going on about Diana. How much tax money has this idiocity of chasing ghosts cost so far?

How are *your* rights involved in this?

It's ok, once Mohamed Al-Fayed is found to be a nut case he'll have to pay it back himself.

I'm so tired of this anti-American BS. Any chance you fools get, you put Americans down. I have to read/listen to your propaganda in forums, in comments, online video games, etc. Are you people really that full of yourselves? I can honestly admit that many Americans are pretty stupid for the most part. But guess what? So are you. Stupidity is not limited to America. The world is full of idiots with big mouths and Small d*** Syndrome, whom think their opinion actually matters. Why contribute to that? The more you put Americans down, the more you're just the same.

Screw EU... don't offer your products to 'em until they beg to get you back...

A little exercise for you:
1 - Look at the exchange rates you can derive from the article above
2 - Try to find rates from 1-2y
3 - Reconsider who has the tail between their legs

*laughing*

You don't actually think exchange rates amount to the sum total of global economic impact, do you?

Not sure what to respond... Despite disagreeing with you on many issues you actually seem to be a clever guy... sometimes. BUT you should check where those cookies are coming from...

Ya got the quote qrong:

"We don't want compliance. We want money."

T,FTFY.

please god, shut your hole. your idiotic ramblings are the perfect representation of Microsoft's criminal behavior. These are issues from 2004 that Microsoft never addressed. They'll keep breaking the law and they'll keep handing over your money to the EU. Pretty soon, the more the horrid USDollar that the republicans have destroyed tanks (now down to 50 cents on the Euro), the higher your next Microsoft purchase will cost you. So you'll not only be paying a Microsoft Tax, but an EU tax on Microsoft criminal behavior.

Microsoft's problem isn't technical or financial or a matter of skill. It's one of attitude.

LMAO..

Zridling blames it on Republicans.

How incredibly predictable...

If their problem is one of attitude, why can't EU sue 90% of the betanews posters for all they own? There's some horrible attitudes that come through here...

You really are a moron and have become obsessed with pc_tool, ANYTIME he posts you are right there spewing nonsense that is wholely untrue and incorrect.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=USDEUR=X

Its 66 cents to the euro as of today. try again...

What you fail to understand is if EU gets away with this they can do it to ANY company that dares become bigger, I predict they will come after google next. This is bigger then just MS.

I predict they will come after google next.

They are already familiar with Google, though not in the same way. They already sought to block the Google DoubleClick merger.

Before Google they would take a long hard look at Apple. I am surprised they didn't crack it yet.

I wonder if Billary will blame her negative press on a vast *left-wing* conspiracy?

If by "left-wing conspiracy", you mean Bush, then, yes...

Haha!!!! that was gay.
Your wrong.

They are allready closing in on Intel. Intel will be the next giant to explain their business practice's and how they are breaking the law.

They will get fined some ... the us mob will shoot themselves in the foot (their own for a change), complain yet again how they are being screwd by the EU.

Standing up to Microsoft is not easy Kroes has cahones.

He's a coward.
The EU is gay.

I'd have to agree. The EU is just sucking money out of american companies, and they are just looking for ways to do so. Every major american technology company now has suits in the EU.

They are global companies based in the US. The laws of the respective countries they operate in must be adhered to.

I may not agree with their motives or decisions, but it's their country^WUnion. They are free to make a laughingstock of it just as we have over here in the US.

Just leave the EU then... don't sell to them if they are the bad guy in the movie.

Wrong. Standing up to Microsoft is easy when you are in the EU, they have more power than Microsoft does.

While that's true it seems to me that the EU is making up the rules as they go along. Can you name an Operating System these days that don't have a media player included? I can't. The EU is picking on Microsoft because they know they can get away with it.

I do have one question though. Who gets the money and what are they going to use it for?

In the US, they were convicted of Anti-Trust after the IE/95 fiasco.

This makes it possible for them to have these limitations other OSes do not have in the US (Until next November).

It changed the rules for Microsoft since they had been found guilty of using their position ion one market to dominate others.

While that explains the recent cruft from Cali regarding the US vs. MSFT case, the EU seems to handle things a bit differently.

It's claims for MSFT to supply interop just doesn't fit with that "using one market to dominate another" bit.

As for media players and such, we could really force MSFT to do the same in the US, but we see the pointlessness of it. Every OS ships with media players, browsers, and hell, lately even Office suites, and competition abounds in all of them.

I agree it's pointless to pursue that, but not for the same reasons.

How many people sit back and say, Hey! Apple or so and so included this or that feature in their OS, why is MS so far behind? Then as soon as they do... BAM! EU fines them for including too much.

I want the best product Microsoft can deliver. So for those saying this doesn't affect the consumer, they are wrong. Because every time MS has to strip something to comply. They are taking away a choice for the consumer.

I'm a business owner, and obviously a consumer. And even as an underdog in the business world, I don't want any help or advantage. I want to compete. That way I have a sense of slaying Goliath. See google... they came from no where... now look at them, they are the giants. It's called competition. Don't be afraid of it.

As far as the EU... Go jump in your "pond"

Thats what happens if you grow up in an autocratic censored society.

If you are interested in the subject go and review the long history of US embargoes against EU companies. It is for example virtually impossible to break into the very lucrative US healthcare market if you are not a multi-national. Very sad for patients and innovative high-tech inventors....

"This makes it possible for them to have these limitations other OSes do not have in the US (Until next November)."

And thats just pathetic.

Apple sells products. Microsoft is one of many vendors that cooperate in the standard PC market. When you buy a PC you get to pick from the best products Microsoft, Sun, Adobe, Intuit, Symantic, Mozilla, Intel, ATI, Nvidia, Dell, HP, Lenovo, and thousands of other companies that compete in the standard PC market.

If Microsoft wanted to be like Apple and sell a complete system, and handle all the retail, support, and repair issues like Apple does, that would be different.

Microsoft chooses to do just software and it has a monopoly on one essential component of the PC standard. Using that monopoly to force other products onto customers PCs is not called competition, it's called illegal anti-competitive behavior. They should compete just like everyone else does, and cooperate on interoperability standards just like everyone else does.

Microsoft chooses to do just software and it has a monopoly on one essential component of the PC standard.

MAC OS run on PCs now, mate.