| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft continues abuse, EU official says | |
|
||
| Time: 08:30 EST/13:30 GMT | News Source: News.com | Posted By: Jonathan Tigner | ||
|
The European Union's top antitrust official, Neelie Kroes, told the European Parliament on Thursday that Microsoft continues to gain market share through "abusive behavior." The European Commission, the EU's antitrust watchdog, found three years ago that Microsoft had illegally abused the dominance of its Windows operating system in the workgroup server market. It slapped on a record fine and demanded that the company change its business practices. "Microsoft is constantly gaining market share and that is what is worrying me in the workgroup server operating market," she said, referring to office servers used to print, share files and allow people to sign in. The Commission said Microsoft had a 35 percent 40 percent share of the workgroup server market in 1999 when the EU executive began its investigation. Between 2001 and 2003 that grew to 60 percent, and now Microsoft has 70 to 75 percent of the market. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 172 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:26:27 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 53078 (72.252.10.248) at 3/22/2007 9:13:43 AM |
|
Give me a fricking break, they make the changes that are requested of them, it has 0 effect because no consumers cared in the first place, and the EU is still pissed?
Perhaps they should look at the big picture, its not "bad practices" its bad competititon, its not microsofts fault that the competitors arent offering as compelling packages and products. Give me a frigging break. Microsoft makes changes to try to comply hurting development timelines for future products, and they still gain market share... stop bitching is what i say |
| #2 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 3/22/2007 2:33:59 PM |
|
This is classic MS. Illegally abuse your monopoly to limit competition. When you get caught, deny. When you get punished, drag your feet and complain loudly and publicly about how you're getting screwed by the nasty EU. Play by the local rules MS, or go home (or buy your way out of trouble but that won't work this time).
It never ceases to amaze me how a lot of people on this forum are prepared to give MS a pass on everything it does, no matter how detrimental it is to consumers worldwide. |
| #3 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 3/22/2007 2:52:15 PM |
|
"Microsoft is constantly gaining market share and that is what is worrying me in the workgroup server operating market,"
Nice admission that all the EU wants to do is kill off Microsoft. "the Commission found Microsoft products work far more smoothly than the servers of competitors" Of course. Microsoft makes better server software. Novell screwed up and effectively threw away the market. "The edge exists only because Microsoft refuses to share information with competitors, the Commission has held." An unsubstantiated assertion without any factual basis. There is no legitmate reason why Microsoft has to give away its hard earned IP. |
| #4 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 3/22/2007 3:18:31 PM |
|
#3: Your interpretation of the facts is incredible and, as usual, out of context.
"Nice admission that all the EU wants to do is kill off Microsoft." Please point out this admission. What I read was that, even after applying remedies to prevent MS from illegally abusing their monopoly, they're still gaining marketshare with their old dirty tricks. "Of course. Microsoft makes better server software." Of course MS products work best with MS products, since MS is very reluctant to share interoperability information to allow competitors to make their own products work better without silliness like reverse engineering. This is how MS illegally abuses their monopoly to limit competition. "An unsubstantiated assertion without any factual basis. There is no legitmate reason why Microsoft has to give away its hard earned IP." For the 1,205,105,667,445th time (I doubt you will ever come to understand this) when you are a monopoly then the rules apply to you slightly differently. Those rules are called antitrust laws and they are there because a monopoly that illegally abuses its position is bad for everyone (except the monopoly of course). And MS has publicly asserted more than once that they are in favour of competition and interoperability, so why the foot-dragging? They talk about competition and interop, but for some funny reason they don't seem to believe their own words. Could it be they were lying? No, perish the thought. |
| #5 By 32132 (142.32.208.231) at 3/22/2007 5:56:34 PM |
|
The EU never said Microsoft was a monopoly. They used the term "near monopoly" because they knew it was a lie to claim Microsoft was a monopoly.
You do like to lie a lot. They like to steal IP and money from Microsoft. http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/05/1215&format=HTML&aged=1&language=EN&guiLanguage=en "The Commission decided in March 2004 that Microsoft Corporation broke the EC Treaty’s ban on abuse of monopoly power (Article 82) by leveraging its near monopoly in the market for PC operating systems onto the markets for work group server operating systems and for media players." The EU Competition Commision is not a court. It is a star chamber that has abused its powers. |
| #6 By 47914 (24.225.231.107) at 3/23/2007 5:48:58 AM |
|
#4 "they're still gaining marketshare with their old dirty tricks."
And where are those "tricks" specifically stated that microsoft is PRESENTLY using?? Um.......I guess it's called making a good product and blowing away the competition by doing so. What's stopping MS's competitors from making better products to compete?? Instead of wasting time constantly bashing MS with your 900+ posts, you could have been helping the OSS community by contributing to their development of better operating systems that COMPETE with those of MS. This post was edited by mirt on Friday, March 23, 2007 at 05:51. |
| #7 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 3/23/2007 8:06:12 AM |
|
Wow, the EU is really getting up the nose of the apologist set here. Funny how you all gloat when MS illegally abuses its monopoly to crush competitors, but when the smackdown comes you're crying for poor, poor Microsoft and how it's being done to by the nasty, nasty EU. Wahhhhhh! Wahhhhhh!
|
| #8 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 3/23/2007 10:41:50 AM |
|
Near Monopoly. Nearly pregnant. Almost scored.
Yup. Its now a criminal act to outperform your competition by producing a better product in the EU. |
| #9 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 3/23/2007 10:57:12 AM |
|
#7, Latch, Not Parker, as much as many folks will hate to admit it, is crushing your position with facts, logic and common sense.
On the other hand, you have resorted to name calling and making wild assertions - if we do not agree with you, you imply or state we are apologists at best, and racist bigots at our worst. None of these characterizations are true, fair, or welcome - but keep on, like any liberal, the more you speak, write and assert, the more clearly the lunacy of your positions becomes. #8, NotParker, "Keep kick'in that ass" Yup, it's now a criminal act to outperform your competition by producing a better product in the EU. "Brilliantly stated!" |
| #10 By 37047 (216.191.227.68) at 3/23/2007 12:28:09 PM |
|
#8, #9:
So, I guess you are stating that it is okay for Microsoft to bundle Outlook Express with Windows, for example, becuase you believe that Outlook Express is better than any other email / newsreader program available from anyone else, and therefore bundling it as part of the OS is okay because of that? That is a weak argument for you to make. There are any number of better email programs, such as Eudora, Thunderbird, Pegasus, etc. But you go right on thinking that OE is better than everything else, because Microsoft makes it. #7: They are actually being consistent, as your statement actually implies. Anything Microsoft does to others is good, and anything anyone does to Microsoft is bad. Microsoft good, EU / DOJ bad. The apologists here have been fairly consistent on that. |
| #11 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 3/23/2007 1:20:42 PM |
|
#9: LOL of course you would say that since you and Parkkker are birds of a feather. All of you MS sycophants can whine all you want about the evil DoJ, the evil EU, how everyone is out to get poor Microsoft. It's funny watching you get all upset with my comments and accuse me of doing pretty much the same thing as everyone else here -- yourself included. Your slam about liberals also paints you. Now I know you're some nutbar right-winger, just like Parkkker.
I know that Parkkker hasn't the cranial capacity to understand the problems with monopoly abuse and how antitrust law are supposed to curtail those abuses, but I didn't expect you to be just as deliberately obtuse. btw, do you have a style guide to help read "your posts" with random injections of "quotes" and italics for no discernible reason? |
| #12 By 23275 (172.16.10.31) at 3/23/2007 2:12:45 PM |
|
#10, I've used Outlook versions opposite Exchange since the free Outlook 98 was distributed just ahead of Office 2000 - so I can't comment on other email clients [aside from OL 2001 and Entourage for MAC OS9/OSX] - like my customers, which have also largely ignored any email client shipping with any OS. [evidence that including an email client in the OS isn't necessarily a driver behind a purchasing decision]. Same is true of Public IM clients - while I have one, I use it much less frequently than I do Office Communicator and that has been so since LCS first shipped - again, tracking what clients want to use [a secure corporate IM client vice a free one].
#11, You're consistent - I'll give you that. I disagree with you about my being a nutbar right-winger - I am actually in favor of about as little government as possible - a libertarian to the core - I don't want a liberal government, or a conservative one, I want one that is really small and very limited in its power over anything and anyone. As that touches software, I don't think the government, or its courts are qualified to decide what constitutes a monopoly, much less an illegal one. |
| #13 By 32132 (142.32.208.231) at 3/23/2007 2:29:29 PM |
|
#10 "So, I guess you are stating that it is okay for Microsoft to bundle Outlook Express with Windows"
Name an OS that doesn't come with a mail reader? I've been using VMS since the 1980's. Was it a crime for them to bundle VMS Mail? Of course not. I'm just assuming you wish to artificially cripple Windows by forbidding them to "bundle" some artifical list of features that makes Windows a great experience for users. #11 You should take your meds on schedule. The EU said Microsoft was a "near monopoly", not a monopoly. They have no right to artifically hobble Microsoft. The courts will eventually overturn their idiotic decisions. This post was edited by NotParker on Friday, March 23, 2007 at 14:34. |
| #14 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 3/23/2007 2:46:41 PM |
|
#12: Well well, we agree on something. For a second, I thought you were a crazy Bushie like Parkkker.
#13: Stop being a semantic knob. Technically, there is no such thing as a total monopoly. But there are virtual monopolies or 'near' monopolies. I know you will play on that forever since that's you, but those with some logic will realize it's valid. |
| #15 By 37047 (216.191.227.68) at 3/23/2007 3:06:52 PM |
| #14: You should know by now that Parkkker always becomes a semantic knob when he has nothing to argue logically with. Semantics and distraction are his best weapons when he starts to lose an arguement. |
| #16 By 32132 (142.32.208.231) at 3/23/2007 3:40:50 PM |
|
#14 & 15 Call me names all you want. Its the usual style of the Microsoft haters when confronted by simple questions like:
"Name an OS that doesn't come with a mail reader?" or "Why does the EU want to punish Microsoft for bundling a media player with an OS?" |
| #17 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 3/23/2007 3:55:08 PM |
| #16: Sigh. I'm not involved in the mail thread, but the answer to your second question just might possibly be that they don't because MS has already shipped OSes without a media player. Or had oyu forgotten how long & hard you whined about the N version? |
| #18 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 3/23/2007 7:00:38 PM |
|
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070323-eu-commissioner-says-microsoft-continues-its-market-abuses.html
"As a consequence of your abusive behavior you are getting positive results for the company—that's not acceptable in my opinion." I stand by my statement that the EU wants to destory Microsoft. "Although the EC has held that Microsoft's product edge exists because the company is unwilling to share information with its competitors, the direct line between cause and effect isn't nearly as simple or clear-cut. Based on Kroes' rhetoric, the EC appears to be on the verge of stating that Microsoft has only gained market share as a result of illegal, abusive behavior. That would be a strong statement, especially when dealing with a company as large and complex as Microsoft. There's a fine line between preventing abuse of monopolistic power and implying that Microsoft has only been "dealt with" appropriately when the company ceases to grow its market share, or even loses share to a competitor's products. " |
| #19 By 15406 (74.104.251.89) at 3/23/2007 7:30:26 PM |
|
#18: I agree with the article that there isn't direct causality between their illegal behaviour and market share gains. It's irrelevant to the issue of MS not complying with the EU antitrust directive. However, it is galling that their share increased while they were flouting the EU. Their market share increase may have happened regardless, but that's not really the point. For example, say a guy makes 1 million doing stock pump & dumps. He gets caught and is fined $500,000. In the end, he still made $500,000 through his illegal actions. However, he may just as easily have made that money trading stock fairly but that is irrelevant to the fact that he was acting illegally. If the penalty doesn't exceed the gain, there is no incentive to stop the illegal behaviour.
|
| #20 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 3/23/2007 8:21:14 PM |
|
What illegal behavior? Not giving away their IP? Bundling a mail client? Bundling a media player?
The "crime" has never been specified. Microsoft has been labelled a criminal by a bunch of corrupt politico's. |
| #21 By 15406 (74.104.251.89) at 3/24/2007 10:15:20 AM |
| #20: Who do you mean specifically, the EU or the US? Both have issues with MS illegally abusing its monopoly to harm competition in the market. |
| #22 By 22467 (66.98.2.85) at 3/24/2007 11:23:01 PM |
| #20: Since the time of the Roman Empire, politicians worldwide have known well how to harvest the low hanging fruit: The vote and sympathy of those who will prefer a nice bloody circus to a much boring serious attempt to satisfy real people needs. |
| #23 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 3/25/2007 12:09:02 AM |
|
"Microsoft had illegally abused the dominance of its Windows operating system in the workgroup server market"
"The Commission said Microsoft had a 35 percent 40 percent share of the workgroup server market in 1999 when the EU executive began its investigation" How can you abuse a "near monopoly" when you only have 35% of the market? |
| #24 By 37047 (216.191.227.68) at 3/26/2007 11:17:35 AM |
|
Leave it to Parkkker to take a comment out of its obvious context, and argue a strawman.
Parkkker said: "Yup. Its now a criminal act to outperform your competition by producing a better product in the EU." I was simply arguing against this statement that all software that Microsoft bundles with Windows is of "better" quality than other products built by other people and companies. Clearly, as in the case of Outlook Express, as one example of many possible ones, this is not true. Therefore, Parkkker's statement is false. QED. |
| #25 By 32132 (142.32.208.231) at 3/26/2007 3:06:12 PM |
|
"I was simply arguing against this statement that all software that Microsoft bundles with Windows is of "better" quality than other products built by other people and companies."
I never said any such thing. The bundle (Windows) is better. Its kind of like buying a car. You buy the model you like. If the car radio is ok for you because you don't really care about owning a high end audio system, you keep and use the radio. If you want a better sound system, you buy one. There is nothing in Windows preventing upgrading individual compenents. But its great that the bundle offers all you need. You can then CHOOSE to spend your money or time or effort on upgrades if you want. There is no valid reason for preventing bundling of components. Thats why Windows N was a disaster. It empitomized the lack of CHOICE the EU wanted to foist on consumers. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 172 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:26:27 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
