Too bad even the EU can't agree on what they require from Microsoft in order for them to be "in compliance".

Really--why is it that nobody can give me consistent answer as to what the EU requires specifically that Microsoft has not provided? Nobody can!

Even the EU can't agree with themselves about it. To review--why does the EU get to decide? What EU law has Microsoft broken? An extremely vague law, with an even more vague accusation--but dammit the penalty has every jot and tittle described in extreme detail...sounds like they are focused on the punishment and care nothing about the crime.

The paper said that much of the non-compliance judgement deals with an order by the EU to provide "complete and accurate" data on the Windows operating system internals, so third parties may write software that can take advantage of these features.

Now can someone answer me this because MS made the OS why are they not allowed to have and advantage and before you answer think first since many accuse MS of killing inovation what do you think this is allowing the competition to just copy MS instead of coming up with their own stuff and before you claim a level playing field the OS is not locked down companies as free to come up with their own stuff and if it is better nothing is stoping people from buying it and installing it.

hehe its our turn to raid the MS coffer's. If only we can sustain it on a yearly basis, hit them the same for vista and then the UK wont have to subsidize the EU !

This fine means nothing for the EU moneywise.. they already get over 1% of the European GDP resulting in like $160 billion. (it's an intergovernmental union after all)

The EU doesn't need to dream of linux (though i woudnt mind it if they went that way) and could just revoke the copyright, IP etc on M$ software. Now that would be a laugh.

M$ can pull out.. but i seriously doubt they will do that. Stock will drop to mutch. Not to mention even more negative PR.

They're breaking the law (again). The US convicted them. Now the EU did so as well. If you break the law you need to be punished. period.

M$ is _not_ asked to show or open up source code. They are asked to properly document some of their stuff. They failed to do so judged by someone _they_ appointed.

"They're breaking the law (again). The US convicted them. Now the EU did so as well. If you break the law you need to be punished. period."

Agree about punishing companies for breaking the law. Funny how you keep refering to MS losing in the USA when they had all of the major fines against them dropped over the IE and Windows 98 thing. Ever hear about appeals?

Anyway, the EU is fining Microsoft for something completely 100% different than any issue in the US, so drop that argument please. Oh, and the "monopoly" issue? Monopolies are treated differently in the US than the EU, so drop that one too.

"They are asked to properly document some of their stuff. They failed to do so judged by someone _they_ appointed. "

Really? Microsoft appointed him? Well--so doesn't the EU make the decision though? They can decide what they want regardless of the guy you claim Microsoft appointed (not agreeing they did, but I'm not arguing about it--it is irrelevant), so it is not as black and white as you suggest. Give specifics as to what MS was supposed to have done that they have not.

Can't give them? That's because NOBODY KNOWS exactly what the EU ruling means! The EU decides that, and that is my whole point. The whole thing is stupid IMO.

So...besides the headline...where/who indicated that the EU is "close" to fining Microsoft? What am I missing?

"From there, Neellie Kroes, the EU's competition commissioner, would deliver the ruling on July 12. Kroes will likely not see any resistance in implementing the decision from other members of the regulating body, as rulings are rarely overturned at this stage."

I guess you overlooked that part :)

--deleted, read all the reports. It looks like MS may be fined after all--though betanews didn't give any reason as to how they came to that conclusion.

Damned!!! Here we go again. I almost forgot about this stupid EU issue with Microsoft. But nooooo.... it rears its ugly head again. -=sighs=-

"Commenting on the report, the Americans for Technology Leadership, a consumer group of 40,000 members, ..."

Ha.

Microsoft made the mistake to hire unsound lobbying guys from the US. Astroturfs. This did not create good impressions at the EU level. Microsoft also knew that they infringe antitrust obligations and they started to get noisy and arogant in their press releases. Don't do that in Europe.

US Analysts conclude that MS got noisy because they see no chance to win the CFI decision.

Anyway, the communication policy and lobbying infrastructure of MS in Brussels is a mess. I see no options for MS to regain ground with their current "team". I know the scene in brussels quite well and watch a bull in a china shop.

Btw: ATL has affialiations with DCI. Why does a company like MS hire DCI?

In August 2001 the Los Angeles Times reported that a ATL was behind a "carefully orchestrated nationwide campaign to create the impression of a surging grass-roots movement" behind Microsoft. "The campaign, orchestrated by a group partly funded by Microsoft, goes to great lengths so that the letters appear to be spontaneous expressions from ordinary citizens. Letters sent in the last month are printed on personalized stationery using different wording, color and typefaces--details that distinguish those efforts from common lobbying tactics that go on in politics every day. Experts said there's little precedent for such an effort supported by a company defending itself against government accusations of illegal behavior."

According to the Times, the campaign was discovered when Utah's Attorney General at the time Mark Shurtleff received letters "purportedly written by at least two dead people ... imploring him to go easy on Microsoft Corp. for its conduct as a monopoly."

Until something gigantic happens as far as re-structuring, I refuse to even begin to understand or attempt to understand the LA Times and NY Times. 2001, eh? My god, are you for real? Why/how do you expect me or any of us to believe something just because a newspaper printed it anyway? Or even betanews for that matter?

That's really beside the point, but as far as the ATL is concerned, you're right--that actually hurts MS more than it helps in the EU. Some Americans are arrogant pricks, so therefore, in the EU, we are ALL selfish pricks. Why would the EU believe MS just because there are (playing devil's advocate here) 40,000 so-called "pricks" backing them?Still, EU needs to put themselves in our shoes here as well. I guess that would be inconceivable...

I wonder if they are using a list of dead people *AGAIN* this time.

LOL

This probably explains a few posts I've read here.

The job of astroturfing BetaNews with Microsoft's talking points would be exhausting. I am sure I would also reach the point where all I could type would be a specific fact or two padded with inflamed and passionate allusion. It must be spreading thinner every day.

Amazing denial in that first paragraph. LAT wasn't the only paper to report the story, but maybe you could call the Utah Attorney General and ask?

A dying civilization demands what from one of the world's most dynamic organizations?

Didn't the whole things start because MS gave consumers a free meida player and a free browser? Real and the once mighty Netscape lost their s***s. Tough. How would forcing consumers to pay for Netscape (yep they charged quite a bit) and Real Player be beneficial to consumers?

Call their bluff MS. There are much bigger markets in China and India.

The EU would be like Pepe LePew in a matter of months. "Bill, my darling, you are so lovely, you are the best and the brightest. Please come back."

Not a far reach for them to play a different cartoon character after all.

A dying civilization ? That makes me laugh...

Yes India and China are bigger market and they switching to linux. Europe to.

US stays with M$ with Bush and without jobs. Please ignore what every other country says... as you ignored in the past...just go ahead after Roman civilization. :)

LAMO!!!

In thoses days Netscape was slow as hell a lot slower the IE and as Real it use be good but it turn in major bloatware and was crash pron and in lot of case the user system so badly run after install and can't get it to unsinstall rigth they had no chosse but format the drive and re-install windows.

you are so funny. i know a lot of people in china, and and they are Windows user. If you ever talk to chinese living in chinese, all their computers instead 2 apps, QQ and skype, and guess what, both of them only work in Windows. I see how much market shares Linux has in china.

India and China are bigger market and they switching to linux
Switching? I am pretty sure those countries supposedly "switching" to linux have the lowest computer-person ratios, and/or cannot, in large volumes, afford anything but linux.

US stays with MS with (yeah a stupid president) and without (J)obs (except for hyped mp3 players).
Funny, I thought the Roman civilization was the one that united almost all of Europe.

Typo funnier than comment being responded to. LOL

lol

"one of the world's most dynamic organizations"

Uhh, how? Huh? What?!

Internet: Missed that one.
Desktop candy: DOH, missed that one too.
Search: Wow, we are in trouble now.

Yep, DYNAMIC! LOL!

How many of those installations are legit?

'nuff said.

The point here is not there are legit or not. The point is that his agreement was the chinese are switching to linux, and that's not the case. Most people in Chinese only know how to point and click in a Windows environment. If system crash for whatever reason, they can simply reset the computer and it works again. With Linux, I donno, it too complicated for someone like me, it will be complicates for the majority on chinese users in China.

Jesus Christo give the company a break. These prickly EU people have something rather large lodged up their asses.

they should just do what they say, have another couple versions one with the bundled software, and one without, and sell the one without for twice as much

...

Even if it means losing 30% of it's market,
Microsoft has to balance the risk against
"staggering" fines.

The business climate in Western Europe
is protectionist. American corporations will
have to decide whether trade secrets are
more valuable than doing business there.

...

The Computer Rodent

...

It's just over 900 Million a year in fines. MS brings in roughly 40 Billion a year.

I'm not saying they would consider it, but it wouldn't hurt them in the least.

No comment here as to how I feel about the judgement, but the EU threatened the same thing in 2004, and never backed it up...

"I'm not saying they would consider it, but it wouldn't hurt them in the least."

Try telling that to their shareholders, who will see less returns from their investments ;)

$9000 Million is still a huge sum to be wasted on fines.

I think you meant $900 million.

And I think the point PC_Tool was trying to make is that $900 million is considerably less than 30% of Microsoft's market.

Fat fingers again.... indeed $900 million.

Sure that is less than their 30% market share, but those fines will go up aslong MS doesn't play by the rules.
At the end of the day, it's their shareholders who will see a drop of $900 million in returns.

I guess it will turn out to be a game to see who can keep this up the longest, the EU or MS.

Isn't it already? This has been going on since before 2004.

It's not even that. If EU get their way and get 900 millions a year from MS, I guess other countries will follow suit. So how much can MS give?

"trade secrets"

Phuttt! Those protocols are not secret because they are useful. They are useful because they are secret. They duplicate function that was generally avaliable for years before they were created, but now Microsoft has it's own incompatible, secret, version, you're not even allowed to look at.

Interesting posit.

So, if every country latches on to this and finds MS *guilty* and fines them, how long before Bill simply disables all installations, pulls up stakes, and moves to the caymans to watch the ensuing chaos?

I don't know about you, but he's got to be one of the most patient men in the world. If I had his money, and *any* upstart country tries to tell me how to do business, I'd give 'em the bird, shut everything down, and enjoy the rest of my life.

I can't believe some of the crap he puts up with.

"They duplicate function that was generally avaliable for years before they were created, but now Microsoft has it's own incompatible, secret, version, you're not even allowed to look at."

Still really doesn't say why MS should have to make their protocols "open". I want my microwave to talk to my toaster. If it doesn't, then that doesn't mean I or the microwave manufacturer get to sue the toaster maker, does it?

"Still really doesn't say why .."

Because It's been years since the guilty verdict. Try to keep up.

The monopoly abuse, the crimes, the victims, the trial, the verdict, the punishment, the appeal, the refusal to comply with the punishment, the extra fines, these are all old stories. Which is it, are you unwilling to accept the judgment of the EC or did you just hear about this story for the first time today?

Yep, I wonder if the EC will be charging interest over the fines that haven't been paid yet ;)

are you unwilling to accept the judgment of the EC

Pretty much sums it up, right there.

In this aspect, MS and I are in the same boat. The EC can go fsck itself.

Grazer, the way the EU thinks, it's possible.

"I can't believe some of the crap he puts up with."

You mean the law? Yeah, screw that.

I mean who needs it right?

LOL

:-P

Let'em close, more power too them. They are positioning themselves well with WGA, I mean with the click of a mouse an entire country could "expire".

Imagine the legal ramifications of that happening. Bill wouldn't be rich for long.

heh

Which is why they should just fine them.

MS broke the law

EU said fix it

MS said FU EU

EU now says ok, pay up biotch.

The law....

Yes.

Exactly.

Perhaps forcing the EU to stop using Windows is the only way to get that law either changed or aplied correctly.

This whole MS = Monopoly crap is BS. I really don't care if you agree with me or not, but with OSX, Linux, Unix, BSD out there, there's plenty of optins when people *care* enough to look. The fact that the majority do *not* is not Microsoft's problem.

The same goes for bundling apps with their OS.

Yeah, go ahead and claim underhanded business tactics. Rebates, price-cuts, and exclusionary deals are not illegal. The *only* reason they were able make them illegal for MS was to claim they were a Monopoly. Which, IMO, as stated above, is BS.

Argue all you want. Anti-Trust laws are fine, but they were applied incorrectly and for reasons not intended by those who drafted it. They are not helping the consumer, they are helping themselves. This was *not* how it was meant to be applied.

...or not.

unwilling to accept the judgment

...or so.

we dont need to legaly buy the windows
if MS is not alow to sell a thing...

internet copys FTW :PPPP

none will stop using windows guys no mater what...

Next up, the EU sues Dodge for not documenting how to attach a VW axle to its newest RAM pickup's drivetrain.

ds0934 they loose about 30% of there sale if they do.
That not what all about your miss major point of all this, it about consumers control not the other way around.
In Windows2000 and up your have no option to CHOICE not to install WMP, IE on a clean install just name a few thing and at lease in Linux you can uncheck thoses option.
Have you ever look at XP Home Edition N and XP Starter Edition they are so crippled it an't funny and I can unstand why the European Commission is so mad at MS.

Because it's MS, they have a different set of rule apply to them.

I mean, what's the big deal. If there are better product, customer will go to it. Using WMP as an example, their "competitor" Real and Apple's media players are POS.

If they going to remove all those bundle that come with Windows, they should enforce the law to forbidden to bundle any 3rd parties as well. Using a new Dell PC as an example, it bundled with AOL, Norton/McAfee AV, Google desktop, and other craps. Isn't preinstall this give those companies advantage too? Isn't the same argument can apply for this situation. Actually, it cannot, because there is a different set of rule apply to MS, just like a different set of rule in the NBA for Kobe.

Why do you need a choice to not install WMP or IE on a clean install? Just because it's there doesn't mean you have to use it. Also, simply having these programs sitting unused on your hard disk presents no security risk whatsoever.

smarterthanyou yes we should have a choice after all there are min people out there that do want all that kind of stuff remove to free up as much system processes as possable like thoses that build gaming system only or Video Editing system, PVR Media system just name a few thing to get the best performance out there system with out bunch monitoring tool run in background and some people don't need or want all that come with windows any way which eat up space may god have you look at Vista beta 2 which up to 500MB+ of system memory and that with otu any of the other features enable like MCE, BitLocker and etc which is at lease 6x more then my 2000Pro system and hell lot more space then 2000Pro and it maybe cool and all but it sure is a major pig.

SHS thats easy for those that wishing to free as many processes as posible all you have to do is go into services and disable any thing you don't need as far as the disk space the things you don't want takes up hard drives are cheap and large capacity so i feel no pity for those complaining about that.

Are the shortcuts to IE and WMP that are sitting on your start menu really using that many resources (if any at all)?

As for Vista, I am currently running Beta 2 of Windows Vista on a Dell Inspiron 5150 laptop (complete specs listed below) with 512MB memory. The laptop doesn't support the Aero interface, but Vista is significantly faster that Windows XP. Also, under Vista I haven't had a single application crash. Outlook 2007 Beta (to name one program) crashes constantly in Windows XP SP 2.

Here's the system configuration I have on my laptop:

Intel Mobile Pentium 4 3.06 GHz CPU
Intel 852PM Chipset
512MB DDR PC2700 SDRAM
nVidia GeForce Go 5200FX AGP graphics w/32MB video memory
Hitachi 40GB 5400rpm hard disk

yes, they should sue MS again to remove the time/date display in the right down corner, so that they can have even more system resource.

i also want to sue firefox because i never use the firefox help, but firefox does not allow me to remove it to have a clean firefox.

or maybe its microsofts product so they can decide how to market it? last time i checked you couldnt buy a car without power windows and ac anymore unless you count work vans, should we all be able to choose that? and hey you know what? i want to buy a house without steps in it, why dont i get that option? or maybe a coke without sugar? yeah lets sue cause we cant do all that.

Yeah, sure. The EU fining Microsoft.. that's a joke. The EU is among the most burocratic zones in the world. Things just don't work as they should there, everything is so much burocratic there that other countries' burocracy seems heaven.

You can only wonder if this fine is an endless serie of "gifts" to EU burocrats that Mr.Gates has to pay in order to continue doing what it does best, cheating as the DoJ Vs Microsoft trial case demonstrated.

>Pull the plug on the EU...

Ok, let's see what would happen in this case.

1) Microsoft immediately loses half or even more of its sales - EU is economically equal to US and there is a rapid computerization in weaker EU states. Add Russia to this too - and I am absolutely sure that MS will come back on its knees begging for EU to buy Windows again. US is not the biggest market anymore.

2) Do you REALLY think all europeans will stop using Windows just because MS won't sell the copies anymore? Come on... Windows XP is a good OS and can be used for at least 1-2 more years. And EU Commision would surely assign neccessary funds to create an equivalent operating system as soon as possible. During that time, Windows XP copies could be made available for free and for everybody who wants - and what are you going to do, Microsoft?

3) Finally, remember, that US Government needs a lot of support outside the US. In a case of conflict between Microsoft and EU, the Congress or whatever you've got there, will probably support EU, not Microsoft. Yes, US is a powerful state, but it needs support from Europeans - and Microsoft cannot expect help from the US government.

Haven't got any other ideas for now...

ad 1) some European states speak loud and clear about replacing Ms Windows by Linux, most probably by Novell SLED 10. BTW, the same will be done by Indiana and I hear no choir of protest.
And about the computerisation of the weaker states. Bill Gates, for example, visited Warsaw twice, right before the EU accession. The government of Miller signed up the agreement that Windows and Office will be used in the administration at least till 2010 (I am not sure the exact date). Some kind of programs, like "Platnik" (a program used in the social security program) is available for Windows only and there is no way to change it. The example should not be limited to Poland, the same things were done in the Czech Rep. and Hungary. It is like the methods of Chiquita in Latin America in the past, so called "free trade". I used to work in Poland so I was the witness how it works. Without bribes most Polish offices would adopt Linux. Spontaneously because why to pay if you can have something for free?

I think that at least a half of the "defenders of Microsoft" does not have the fainthiest idea about the "marketing methods" of the company. I do wonder if they were in Europe, because I have an impression that their knowledge about the world is very limited.

The consumer market of new European states is different, it is clearly pro-Microsoft. No one forces anyone to use any operating system. The OS of choice of around 90% users is Windows. A half of the copies are illegal, but it is an another story.

Hee!
Thanks for the laugh. Been a hard day and your "EU Commision would surely assign neccessary funds to create an equivalent operating system as soon as possible" made beer come out my nose.

I think your last line should be all that is needed. Leave the "for now" off though...

First off, let me say that I'm not against nor for Microsoft. That said...

1) MS immediately losing half or more of its sales is nothing more than an assumption. As for the EU's economy being equal to the US, that's hardly a fair assessment and it sounds to me that you're throwing the UK, Germany, Italy, France, etc., all in the same basket, when that's not how these lists work. According to Australian Financial Review (afr.com), in 2003, as far as gross domestic product goes, the US was first with 10,208 (GDP $US billions), Japan in second with 4,149, and Germany in third with 1,847. The UK scored 1,424 in the fourth spot, France in fifth with 1,307 and Italy in seventh with 1,089. Four European countries in the top 10 and they still didn't match the US. According to IPS (ips-dc.org), in 2000, 82 of the 200 listed nations/corporations were US companies in their study on global corporal power. Are you telling me that in the last 3 years, the UE has topped the US and Japan? I really think not. Especially since the list hasn't changed much between 2000 and 2003. Show me your sources and I'll stand corrected.

2) UE is biting the hand that feeds them as far as operating systems are concerned. The fines are ridiculous.

3) The US Government needs a lot of outside support? Funny statement considering you guys couldn't remove Hitler yourselves. It isn't limited to just the US Government, my friend.

The probelm with number 1 is people like windows and Microsoft will not loose as many sales as you think people will simply import it hurting local retailers instead just because Microsoft wouldn't officialy sell in the EU they would not be stuipid enough to stop making and supporting localized versions of windows and if the EU even tried to block windows update the would not servive the next election.

Number 2 i doubt that even the courts in the EU would allow the governemnt to pirate windows and give it away for free just because they don't sell directly to the EU and as far as creating an equivelant OS thanks for the laugh the government creating an OS plus creating programs to run on it that are compatable with the rest of the world(buiseness software)

As for number 3 if the EU was to impose an unreasonable import tax on windows the US would stand behind Microsoft plus MS has many employees in the EU if they pull out those jobs have to go somewhere offering those jobs to a country in exchange for support will influence some governments.

Linux is a great OS so please don't flame me for this but even a free OS can not even come close to overtaking Microsoft so i think if they did pull out of the EU and continued support and localized versions as well as making stategic deals with importers to ensure that windows is easy to get they might loose 5-10% market share but as soon as they start actualy pulling out the EU commision would most likely cave in.

Ya i know i sound like a Microsoft fanboy but i think this case is bull they made the OS and deserve a little advantage over the competition it's not like they locked the OS down and the competition is free to make whatever software they want and if people like it better they are free to switch and use it instead i know there aren't many examples so i'll just say look at Google search and MSN search Googles beating them and that proves the point make something better and people will switch.

Another thing to look at is the reason patches take so long it is inpart(now adays not in the earlier years)is because Microsoft tries to make sure the patches don't break software including the competitions thou it propaly can't always be helped.

1) The 15 (of 25) economically strongest EU member states easily top the US gross domestic product. When looking per capita the US wins but this doesn't matter here.

2) The fines are microsofts own fault. Please get your information from more sources and not the one-sided from BN.

3) Isn't worth commenting on. As you also should have done.

oh yes indeed add russia, last time i checked they didnt stand behind the eu or even belong to it.

i notice you failed to give sources for your figures....

My source is my economics prof but let's see what google can do for us...

http://ocde.p4.siteinter...files/012005061T004.xls

.xls warning!

This is not how we prolong innovations.
This is not how we stop monopolies.

The EU is wanting a piece of American cheese cake. By looking at the amount of this fine, I think Microsoft just should fxxk them and leave.

MS can't just leave as you stated. Their shareholders would pop a vein if they were to try that.
And since MS depends on it's shareholders I'd reckon that the most likely scenario is that MS will just cough up the money for the fines.

As for the EU wanting a piece of American cheese cake, that's a load of bull.
The EU imposed a fine because MS were caught abusing their position.

"As for the EU wanting a piece of American cheese cake, that's a load of bull.
The EU imposed a fine because MS were caught abusing their position. "

Ah yea....the EU regulators are angels sent from heaven...not a drop of greed in those guys...sure.

LOL I never said that they were angels sent from heaven. All I stated was they took action when it was called for. Mind you, those fines will help to pay for the EU's monthly moving costs.
Perhaps as an EU citizen I should be happy for that, it will save me some money :p

But let's get back to reality, MS were caught abusing their position and as a rusult of that fines were issued. I have no problem with that, if you're caught breaking the rules, you just have to pay the price for it. I don't expect MS to be treated different than you or me.

If you develop your own propietary OS it's completely up to you as the developer to decide if and how much of the propietary OS you open up to other businesses or developers regardless of how many people use the OS. The developer that created the OS has complete control over all aspects of the propietary OS.

The EU and other governments have no business telling software companies they are required to open source some or all of an OS.

"The EU and other governments have no business telling software companies they are required to open source some or all of an OS."

Oh but they do, ever heard of trade laws? I'm sure the US has them aswell. If I were to export lets say a food product to the US, the US authorities will demand a list of all the ingredients, a list of where these ingredients came from, health documents etc. Not to mention that they would probably require certain specs to the boxing of the product to make it in compliant to the US market. If I wouldn't comply I could expect to be fined or in worst case to be banned from the US market. So why should this be different for MS in the EU?

"If I were to export lets say a food product to the US, the US authorities will demand a list of all the ingredients, a list of where these ingredients came from, health documents etc. Not to mention that they would probably require certain specs to the boxing of the product to make it in compliant to the US market"

If you ship a food product here that poses a risk to the health of american people it could cause deaths....Nobody will die if MS doesn't open up their source code.

If the EU decides to go through with this they better fine EVERY company who doesn't follow the SAME EXACT procedures.

No, this is just an antitrust case, no national involved. This was only put forward a few month ago by Ms PR guys as MS did not comply.

A cheap trick.

Europe will elect no Bush who will corrupt antitrust policy. I remind you, US antitrust institions wanted to split Microsoft. The EU just wants documentation of server protocols.

ok, the food product was a bad example.

But any company whether they're EU based, US based or otherwise based can't just break the law and expect to get away with it. The EU hasn't only fined MS but also other companies within the EU.

Nobody besides Microsoft has any legal claim to see any part of the source code for Windows. Maybe the EU should be going after Apple instead. Apple has done a far worse job than Microsoft about providing source code for their propietary Mac OS X and earlier operating systems.

Microsoft also has the right to bundle their own apps with Windows as well, just like Apple has the right to bundle their own Safari web browser and Quicktime media player with Mac OS X if they choose to.

The EU is suing Microsoft because they are desperate for money, not because Microsoft has broken the law.

i would just like t o see how many of the eu countries will REALLY stand up behind the eu on this one.

I say fu*k 'em. Pull the plug on the EU. Let them try and run everything under linux.

That was a riddiculous comment. The EU (though I do not like them) will lower management costs and improve services under a Linux based system. I dont care all this TCO stuff. HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT WINDOWS SERVER COSTS LESS WHEN YOU PAY ABOUT £3000 + CAL?

Ditch MS EU before it is too late.

Initial purchase cost is a very small component of the, errr..., TCO. Probably only about 1 month's salary of a system engineer.

Anyway, it would be interesting to see the whole of EU trying to survive without Windows.

" The EU (though I do not like them) will lower management costs and improve services under a Linux based system"

Hm...how will they do that, exactly?? Management costs suddenly lower without windows...and services suddenly improve?

Linux engineers and support generally cost alot more their windows counterparts....and a poor implementation of linux will worsen services...not better.

"HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT WINDOWS SERVER COSTS LESS WHEN YOU PAY ABOUT £3000 + CAL?"

I don't know where you got that 3000 euro figure....windows enterprise costs about $2k...which is almost 1600 euro's...standard server is about 1/3 of that. Easier support and cheaper engineers brings your TCO way down.

I wish MS would just pull out of EU and let them orgasm over their Linux dreams. Who cares. Really. Does anyone care? The only people that seem to care about this are those that hate MS.

Interesting argument. I wonder how much the EU market is really worth to MS.

Btw, can anyone enlighten me on examples of significant Windows features that the EU accuses MS of not disclosing in a "complete and accurate" manner? As a programmer, I sometimes add additional functions to my programs that I may use from time to time. These functions are never intended to be used by others. My customers seem ok with it even if they are aware of the existence of these "undocumented features" as long as these features do not perform anything insidious.

Why does EU require MS to disclose every single feature in Windows beyond what is advertised?

Interesting argument. I wonder how much the EU market is really worth to MS.

Probably more than the fines.

Btw, can anyone enlighten me on examples of significant Windows features that the EU accuses MS of not disclosing in a "complete and accurate" manner?

I believe MS asked that question, and got threatened with further fines or a comtempt of court charge.

Why does EU require MS to disclose every single feature in Windows beyond what is advertised?

Because they know it is impossible, and they need the money.

"Why does EU require MS to disclose every single feature in Windows beyond what is advertised?"

They don't.

Moved...

how much of an effect will it really have if ms disclosed the source code anyway? i mean almost all mainstream program companies are us based and, who really is going to benefit from this crap?

probably European startups based off of open source code :)