After losing the appeal and suffering daily penalty payments for years, Microsoft has finally conceded to the European commission.
A victory for the socialist eurocrats who love their over-regulated markets and getting in the way of free enterprise, this decision is nothing short of highway robbery Robin Hood style by European governments because inferior companies with inferior products are crying poor. If a company develops or patents something they should be entitled to just recompense if other people want to use their patent and they should be able to charge whatever they wish, not have the government work in collusion with its competitors to basically force a company to give away billions of dollars worth of R&D at an unviable cost all in the name of 'fairness'. A prime example of why half of Europe is in economic stagnation because of poor policy that hurts successful businesses and rewards the ones that deserve to die
Of course we could also say that it is an attempt by the EU to make the competitive environment a little fairer. Whilst MS has been allowed to overprice its products it has spent those revenues on bribes, anti competitive practices and attempting to influence things like the recent ISO open document standard votes. Microsoft have siomply been asked to allow other companies to integrate with their software, so that they can perhaps come up with alternatives to Outlook, or other 'peripheral' MS packages, and at the same time, to price this functionality at a rate which allows those companies to compete effectively. Microsoft is still in business, and still charges its monopoly pricing, but now other businesses can come along and perhaps bring some new innovation to our desktops, rather than the Microsoft version of innovation. I hardly think you should criticise the economy in Europe, given the cluster we could call the US property market and the subsequent crash in the value of the dollar. Its not smart :o)
Yes because before there was no innovation right? Because of microsoft there was 0 innovation?
I stated that we might get some 'new' innovation, rather than Microsoft's version. You did read that bit didn't you WilliamRLBaker? Of course Microsoft has innovated, most successful businesses do. The issue is that taking MS core product aside, ie Windows, the other products it sells which integrate with the OS do so on an unfair level compared to would be competitors. What would you want to do? Would you want to allow MS to make billions of profits and at the same time abuse their position with bribes and patent threats etc., or do you try and allow other companies to compete without damaging Microsofts ability to compete with them? Perhaps you will understand a bit more if you ever decide to stop working at Burger King and start your own business :o)
Some people including william should chill with this 'ms cant do no wrong and ms the victim' angle. All organisations do sh*t including sony william b4 you start. What this ruling shows is that the EU wont let ms eradicate elements or avenues of competition. Whats wrong with that?
No one is saying that Microsoft is not innovative because they are. But competition brings new ideas and developments. Take the consoles wars, do you thing consoles would be where there are today if the competition between Sega and Nintendo had never happened? Or look at xbl, wii channel and psn do you think online gaming would be what it is today if there was no competition. What works for some may not work for others, for example, for some people paying for xbox live is valid, but for others the psn and wii channel services their needs because it free. But my point is competition is a most.
nice posts mate, have a bubble...
This article is crap. It leaves out a huge, huge, huge, huge detail. MS still has to pay a humongous fine. Over $1 billion in fines. "In July 2006, Microsoft was fined €497 million ($710 million USD).....Two days later, Microsoft was fined an additional $375.4 million USD....' (source: see link below) That's a massive, massive fine MS still has to pay (they haven't paid it yet). Here's a link to a much better article: http://www.dailytech.com/Mi... EDIT: other links on the fine MS has to pay http://www.theregister.co.u... http://money.cnn.com/news/n...
Good answer, Andy.
Microsoft are getting what they deserve for opperating their buisness in a brazenly anti competitive way. To try and pretend this is about europe is showing total ignorance. Microsoft have also been on the losing end of anti trust legislation in the US and also in Korea. This has nothing to do with any governments agenda, and everything to do with how this corporation abuses its position in the market place... Shame they make a good console, or I'd have nothing to do with them! :)
I kind of agree with the first poster here even though I do understand all the other posts as well. Here is how I see it though... it seems to be getting harder and harder for Microsoft to sell its OS's which are a big cash cow for Microsoft and the xbox and zune line are still taking losses. There has been plenty of innovation coming out of Microsoft and I've been able to purchase their stuff cheap. $79 for Microsoft Office and free Windows Vista business (with school pricing). Just because a product is highly successful does not mean that a country where the product is not even based should regulate the product to such a high degree. Microsoft is not a complete monopoly. Apple is achieving higher and higher success rates with its outstanding OS. They are about to come out with their new OS called Safari or something like that. This is all at a time that Google has been tossing around the idea of building an OS and more. So... I think the EU should have fucosed on the future cuz then they might see that this monopoly market condition would have righted itself. Now... if they do want to regulate... maybe they should look at AMD/Intel or Nvidia versus AMD/ATI. I have seen innovation almost completely stop with Nvidia as AMD/ATI fail to put out a high end part. Nvidia=lack of innovation when unrivaled... yes, high prices... yes. Now... on the AMD/Intel side of things we see Intel continue to innovate despite their increasing lead over AMD and low prices to boot. The problem in this case is that AMD has just took a loss of about $185 million and their is no quick fix. Their are rumors of great CPUs out of AMD but with Intel using 45nm as well as new fast switching gates... AMD has a lot of catching up to do. The fact though is... even if you do not regulate these industries... the market will correct itself. As for dissing the US economy because you have a strong dollar and do not have a tumbling housing market. I'm sure everyone knows which one has a higher GDP and GNP. I'm sure you know that our markets are much larger. As for a strong/weak dollar. There are many things that go into that. The state of the market does not necassarily directly equal the value of a dollar. In a time like these a weak dollar can have some great affects. Tumbing house market and credit=good. It means that the baby boomers will be able to afford cheaper houses and be able to put more money back into the economy. All in all... I respect and like the EU and the US. I just get offended when someone makes fun of the US economy when it is doing great. I wouldn't make fun of it too much because some of our trading boards are connected with yours so... if the US has a pull back then other nations will be pulled into it. Bottom line though: Regardless of what I said above... this ruling could actually be very good for the consumer and unlike the dooms day image of Microsoft I proposed above... Microsoft will not go under as a result of this ruling.
new it was coming it will cost them billions its nice to have more market share monopolys are bad news for consumers
Do you guys understand what the "antitrust ruling" was about right? Rival software developers (including open-source) can now access and use Microsoft interoperability information Royalties for this information will be reduced to a one-off payment of €10,000 / $14,000 Royalties for a world-wide license to use Microsoft's product and patents will be reduced from 5.95% to just 0.4% This is how it works.. Let's say that you come up with a cool technology or platform that allows you to create other products. Example, an email server that allows big comporation to manage their emails, etc. Now, lots of companies start buying your software... you start making money and things are all good... Then another company create a software similar to yours but for some reason not everyone adopts it... instead they use your software... so this company goes Open source.. and give the software for free and make money off support... but even then they can't compete with you and people are still buying your software... Then this company tries to sue you because they can't compete with you and the goverment interfere and demand that you open your propietary code and give "access and use [your] interoperability information" or how application works.. so they can built their application to integrate with yours... this include companies that can create applications for free. Now your company is forced to license your techonogy to other companies at the price that they want to. (yes.. you don't have the rigth to price your own products) Fair? Nope... notice we are talking about technologies that you designed... technologies that you own pattens on that the very same government granted. Now they are telling you that you don't own your pattents that you paid so much money on, but that you have to just give it away at the price they say and to everyone including your competitors... fair? nope... This will only be fair if these rules or requirements would apply to all companies. but this rules are only in place against microsoft. It would be fair if: Rival software developers (including open-source) can now access and use [enter company here] interoperability information Royalties for [any software verdor] information will be one-off $14,000 Royalties for a world-wide license to use [enter company]'s product and patents will be just 0.4% That would be fair...
Sorry but I can't makup your name... I like the Idea of which you speak... but isn't that what Linux is? Free... and many argue that is better? all that you describe is what people say linux is. It's ironic.. but lots of people still don't buy a copy of windows... the computer they buy usually comes bundle with it.. or people use an ilegal copy. I don't mind Open Source programs.. but here is an example of what happends when an OS is open source... http://www.frozentech.com/c... look at how many version of linux in that list... why? because everyone wants to make their own version.. there is no consistancy or non one to blame when something goes wrong... hell.. microsoft is always on top of their software if something goes wrong... viruses... etc... who do you rely for your linux patches? how much do you pay for support? Do yo have any idea how much it would cost a regular user to get some linux support? and no.. they are not only talking about Windows OS.. they are also asking microsoft to open many of their pattents like a book.
Lift the TCP/IP stack from BSD and put it in Windows - without giving anything back. Take Kerboros, make it incompatible with the original, give nothing back. The list is long if you want to get into it. MS don't innovate. They embrace, extend, extinguish. Take the open protocol, add extensions to make it incompatible in the second generation, and extinguish the competition by breaking compatibility by leveraging the client with the server OS and excluding the source of where they got the code from. They need to be punished. Good going.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.