View Full Version : EU biting at Microsoft once again
Everyone for sure knows the deal why people living in the EU are now getting screwed with Win7 - so now we either need to have a browser ready on USB-stick/CD or download one via FTP (assuming taking IE off Windows doesn't remove Explorers FTP support at the same time) to get online.
But EUs greed knows no limits when they see a piggybank they can rob, this time they're going after Microsoft for Word and Excel
Bloomberg sources say that the EU is investigating complaints that Microsoft doesn’t provide formatting and other information to allow rival products to work with Microsoft Office software but neither Microsoft nor the EU would comment on the report.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Microsoft-EU-Antitrust-Excel-Word,8208.html
It is Microsoft's decision to not bundle IE, don't blame the EU. However, it looks like EU customers will be getting full Win7 at upgrade prices so its citizens may actually end up benefitting considerably.
As for the Word/Excel proprietary formats, this was a much more serious issue before XML-based formats, but considering that Office 2007 is not entirely compliant with Microsoft's formal specification of OOXML, there is room for interoperability improvement.
And robbing piggybanks? Heh, that doesn't seem really appropriate for the symbolic slap on the wrist that Microsoft has been given so far.
It is Microsoft's decision to not bundle IE, don't blame the EU. However, it looks like EU customers will be getting full Win7 at upgrade prices so its citizens may actually end up benefitting considerably.
Yeah, the full for upgrade price is nice of course, but you can't do upgrade installations either, since all the previous Windows versions had IE in them.
The decision was either to bundle IE and competing browsers, or nothing at all, they chose the only sensible option for them as a company.
Who do you think customers would be calling if their bundled Firefox/Chrome/Opera/Safari/Insert-Random-Competing-Browser-Here wouldn't be working properly? Exactly - Microsoft.
So yes, EU can be blamed for it.
Not to mention that based on the latest statistics, IE isn't even the most popular browser anymore so I honestly don't understand what kinda basis they had on the whole thing that it had to be removed or competition included in their OS.
As for the Word/Excel proprietary formats, this was a much more serious issue before XML-based formats, but considering that Office 2007 is not entirely compliant with Microsoft's formal specification of OOXML, there is room for interoperability improvement.
Last time I checked, OpenOffice claims compatibility with MS Office, so I fail to see the problem with "not providing enough information"
And robbing piggybanks? Heh, that doesn't seem really appropriate for the symbolic slap on the wrist that Microsoft has been given so far.
Yeah, sure, over $2 billion fines are just a slap on the wrist? :???:
(And the current sum might be even higher, that's from 2008)
Yeah, the full for upgrade price is nice of course, but you can't do upgrade installations either, since all the previous Windows versions had IE in them.
The decision was either to bundle IE and competing browsers, or nothing at all, they chose the only sensible option for them as a company.
Actually, the recommendation was to provide a choice of browsers. Removing it altogether was just an unexpected knee-jerk response by Microsoft.
Who do you think customers would be calling if their bundled Firefox/Chrome/Opera/Safari/Insert-Random-Competing-Browser-Here wouldn't be working properly? Exactly - Microsoft.
Considering that the largest group of consumer Windows installations by far is OEM licensed, it is actually their hardware vendors which are responsible for support. And as we all know those already have considerable experience with shipping third-party software on default installations. Hello Norton crapware trial, DVD players and other try and buy stuff.
So yes, EU can be blamed for it.
Not to mention that based on the latest statistics, IE isn't even the most popular browser anymore so I honestly don't understand what kinda basis they had on the whole thing that it had to be removed or competition included in their OS.
Which statistics? Last I read IE is still at 60%+. But of course the actual issue is that it is included on 100% of Windows installations.
Last time I checked, OpenOffice claims compatibility with MS Office, so I fail to see the problem with "not providing enough information"
There is still considerable effort wasted having to reverse engineer MS Office file formats, and the compatibility is still not 100%.
Yeah, sure, over $2 billion fines are just a slap on the wrist? :???:
(And the current sum might be even higher, that's from 2008)
It's only a minor share of their 2008 profit, a paper cut at best. Frankly, at this rate it is still more profitable for them to simply continue operating in breach of antitrust regulations.
These statistics: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
Different IE-versions (6, 7 & 8) make up for 40.7% of browsers, Firefox having 47.3% share
Yeah, the full for upgrade price is nice of course, but you can't do upgrade installations either, since all the previous Windows versions had IE in them.
Of course you can. Just upgrade, and at the end of the upgrade process you offer the same browser installation options (or lack thereof) as you would for the clean install.
The decision was either to bundle IE and competing browsers, or nothing at all, they chose the only sensible option for them as a company.
There are more options. You can offer an optional install fairly easily.
Not to mention that based on the latest statistics, IE isn't even the most popular browser anymore
Ehm. Cite?
Last time I checked, OpenOffice claims compatibility with MS Office, so I fail to see the problem with "not providing enough information"
Claims ... try it. Sure it (and that is OpenOffice 3) opens everything, but the layout ...
Yeah, sure, over $2 billion fines are just a slap on the wrist? :???:
(And the current sum might be even higher, that's from 2008)
They deserve it.
willardjuice
14-Jul-2009, 14:01
Of course you can. Just upgrade, and at the end of the upgrade process you offer the same browser installation options (or lack thereof) as you would for the clean install.
It's not about whether it can or cannot be done. The European versions will not come with an "upgrade install" option.
These statistics: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
Different IE-versions (6, 7 & 8) make up for 40.7% of browsers, Firefox having 47.3% share
Ok well I have some statistics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_explorer) too which put it at 68.8%. Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle, but I have a really hard time believing that Firefox is overall the dominant browser. Maybe on a web conscious developer site like w3schools.com.
Either way, it doesn't change the fact that Internet Explorer has a clear advantage because it is supplied with Windows.
These statistics: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
Different IE-versions (6, 7 & 8) make up for 40.7% of browsers, Firefox having 47.3% share
Ehm, from that same page:
W3Schools is a website for people with an interest for web technologies. These people are more interested in using alternative browsers than the average user. The average user tends to use Internet Explorer, since it comes preinstalled with Windows. Most do not seek out other browsers.
These facts indicate that the browser figures above are not 100% realistic. Other web sites have statistics showing that Internet Explorer is used by at least 80% of the users.
Anyway, our data, collected from W3Schools' log-files, over a five year period, clearly shows the long and medium-term trends.
willardjuice
14-Jul-2009, 15:23
Does facebook break down its market share? I would be interested in seeing those numbers.
Do macs come with a browser? They should be sued as well then if the only requirement to being sued is
Either way, it doesn't change the fact that Internet Explorer [Safari] has a clear advantage because it is supplied with [an OS]
obonicus
14-Jul-2009, 17:51
Do macs come with a browser? They should be sued as well then if the only requirement to being sued is
You know that that's not the only requirement. If Apple ever gains enough marketshare to be looked at for anti-competitive behavior I'm not even sure that Safari being part of OS X is the first thing they should examine.
That wasn't what was asserted. Does safari have an unfair advantage over firefox since it is bundled in an OS? The answer must be yes if you are getting upset that IE is in windows. According to Florin's argument Apple should be in trouble. According to your argument neither Apple or Microsoft should be in trouble if Apple gains "enough marketshare to be looked at for anti-competitive behavior". As then MS and apple will be splitting it, or is it mutually exclusive? Can only Apple or MS separately be in that position according to you? (One has to have lions share of market in other words) Either way it is ridiculous. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
willardjuice
14-Jul-2009, 18:21
You know that that's not the only requirement. If Apple ever gains enough marketshare to be looked at for anti-competitive behavior I'm not even sure that Safari being part of OS X is the first thing they should examine.
That wasn't what was asserted. Does safari have an unfair advantage over firefox since it is bundled in an OS? The answer must be yes if you are getting upset that IE is in windows. According to Florin's argument Apple should be in trouble. According to your argument neither Apple or Microsoft should be in trouble if Apple gains "enough marketshare to be looked at for anti-competitive behavior". As then MS and apple will be splitting it, or is it mutually exclusive? Can only Apple or MS separately be in that position according to you? (One has to have lions share of market in other words) Either way it is ridiculous. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
I agree with Sxotty. Anticompetitive behavior is independent of market share (although only usually effective when paired with a large market share).
You know that that's not the only requirement. If Apple ever gains enough marketshare to be looked at for anti-competitive behavior I'm not even sure that Safari being part of OS X is the first thing they should examine.
They have 100% marketshare, they've made perfectly clear that Mac is not a PC, and thus marketshares over the PC world shouldn't be counted in, and they've also sued (succesfully, too) every single company that has ever tried making their own Macs.
Do macs come with a browser? They should be sued as well then if the only requirement to being sued is
Of course they do, and of course they should not. Apple isn't leveraging a monopoly to get ahead in other areas, so this is a flawed comparison.
nutball
14-Jul-2009, 19:32
Of course they do, and of course they should not.
Why not? What other basic and assumed functions of a desktop/laptop should a Mac not ship with these days?
Apple isn't leveraging a monopoly to get ahead in other areas, so this is a flawed comparison.
*cough* iTunes *cough*
Why are people so hung up on browsers these days? This is an argument from a decade ago. The world has moved on and if you carry on focusing on IE versus whatever you'll miss the next show, which has already started but it seems you can't see it.
obonicus
14-Jul-2009, 19:42
They have 100% marketshare, they've made perfectly clear that Mac is not a PC, and thus marketshares over the PC world shouldn't be counted in, and they've also sued (succesfully, too) every single company that has ever tried making their own Macs.
Oh, I won't dispute that Apple is shady as hell. But the question was: is the only criteria to be sued that you include a browser in your OS? I'm sure Sxotty doesn't believe that. Like willardjuice said, anti-competitive behavior isn't really an issue while you're a niche. But actually, wasn't Microsoft trying to get the EU to look at IBM for their effective monopoly in the mainframe market? Maybe they'll aim for Apple next.
obonicus
14-Jul-2009, 19:50
*cough* iTunes *cough*
Doesn't this run on Windows? Or are you saying that they're pushing iTunes via OSX? Because I thought they were doing it via iPhones and iPods. I mean, don't get me wrong; I'd much rather live in a world were Microsoft is the Evil Overlord than one where Apple is. But I'm not sure we need to live under an Evil Overlord.
I would call suing anyone else trying to do a Mac (and being succesfull at it, too) anti-competitive behavior.
Why not? What other basic and assumed functions of a desktop/laptop should a Mac not ship with these days?
I did not say they should not ship a browser. I said they should not be sued.
*cough* iTunes *cough*
If things continue as they are, that might well be within the scope of an upcoming EU investigation.
Why are people so hung up on browsers these days? This is an argument from a decade ago. The world has moved on and if you carry on focusing on IE versus whatever you'll miss the next show, which has already started but it seems you can't see it.
No need to let past misdoings slide just because they initially got away with it. But sure, Media Player, the Outlook/Exchange combination and Hyper-V should probably be up next.
nutball
14-Jul-2009, 20:02
Doesn't this run on Windows? Or are you saying that they're pushing iTunes via OSX?
No, I'm saying that Apple is trying to use a market-dominant position with iTunes to "get ahead in other areas".
nutball
14-Jul-2009, 20:04
No need to let past misdoings slide just because they initially got away with it. But sure, Media Player, the Outlook/Exchange combination and Hyper-V should probably be up next.
OK, so that's five years ago, you're doing well
Search? Cloud? Mean anything?
So Florin you think those things are only bad at a given market share and you reject Kaotiks point that Apple has 100% market share on macs? What is the magic level at which these things become evil?
obonicus
14-Jul-2009, 20:49
So Florin you think those things are only bad at a given market share and you reject Kaotiks point that Apple has 100% market share on macs? What is the magic level at which these things become evil?
They do have 100% marketshare on macs. Coca Cola has 100% marketshare on Coca Cola. Neither has a monopoly on the market as a whole.
Suing Psystar for what seems to mount to EULA violation is shitty (and certainly something to look at in the future), no doubt, but you besides a vague reference to 'iTunes' it's not clear how Apple is leveraging this advantage to do more than expand their marketshare. They have a near-monopoly on media-players, but this has very little to do with OSX/Macs. If they had continued to make the iPod work only on OSX (while mainting the same share of the market) then you'd have a strong point. But iTunes runs on Windows!
And nutball, if you have a point to make, make it.
This is strangely parallel to the Chrome OS thread.
OK, so that's five years ago, you're doing well
Search? Cloud? Mean anything?
If you're saying that Google should be watched closely, sure.
Cloud? So far it's a lot of noise and not a lot of business being done. But if Microsoft or Google start crushing some up and coming player by given away stuff that they can only afford to give away because of their dominant positions in their respective markets, sure. Bring it on.
That doesn't mean that the desktop, office suite, server and application space is a past station, though. They may not be sexy anymore to you but that's where the money is being made.
What is the magic level at which these things become evil?
When it's not a company you're a fanboy of ?
So Florin you think those things are only bad at a given market share and you reject Kaotiks point that Apple has 100% market share on macs? What is the magic level at which these things become evil?
Sadly the EU, contrary to some of its member states, specifically does not forbid joint sales, so the Mac hardware/OSX combination is not by itself illegitimate, and there are plenty of other choices of hardware.
I'd say that if Apple gets to the point that they've been given and ignored repeated warnings and then been given and ignored repeated convictions (and that on several continents, I might add) like Microsoft has, the fines should probably start going higher.
nutball
14-Jul-2009, 20:58
And nutball, if you have a point to make, make it.
I've made my point. Sorry if it doesn't translate into your English.
This is strangely parallel to the Chrome OS thread.
Yes, and for good reason, because it's dealing with the same subject.
I've made my point. Sorry if it doesn't translate into your English.
I didn't get it either, I guess. Your point was that Microsoft should be able to continue to profit from their past and current transgressions, because they're not yet the dominant player in search and cloud?
Obonicus do you have two accounts? One under the name florin and one not? If not perhaps you could let florin answer the question I asked him, or you could answer the question I asked you and him. The only question I asked you.
Obonicus do you have two accounts? One under the name florin and one not? If not perhaps you could let florin answer the question I asked him, or you could answer the question I asked you and him. The only question I asked you.
This is getting a bit low. You're welcome to mail me if you don't want others to participate in a forum discussion
obonicus
14-Jul-2009, 21:37
Sxotty, take it to PMs if you don't want to have a discussion on a messageboard. I did reply to you, three times in fact. It's not much of an unfair advantage -- because there's little measurable advantage, not because it's not unfair.
Otherwise, what Florin said.
Richard
14-Jul-2009, 21:38
This must be one of the fastest derailments ever.
Since you guys don't want to discuss the Word/Excel format pickle and are instead only interested in furthering the pro/con Microsoft I'm going to close this.
EDIT: And Kaotik, if you're trying to start a discussion of subject A don't start your post with a completely debatable premise X as other people will challenge it, lose sight of the original topic and end up with a closed thread.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.