| 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 |
 |
EU hands Microsoft its stiffest challenge | |
|
||
| Time: 11:09 EST/16:09 GMT | News Source: E-Mail | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Microsoft was handed its greatest legal defeat to date Wednesday when the European Commission not only declared the software company an abusive monopolist, as the U.S. government did in 2000, but levied penalties designed to prevent similar abuses in the future. The ruling, anticipated for more than a week, orders Microsoft to sell two versions of its Windows operating system to manufacturers of personal computers such as Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Toshiba and Fujitsu Siemens. One of those versions must be sold without | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 311 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:46:40 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 16797 (65.48.182.22) at 3/24/2004 3:23:19 PM |
| No, it won't and it would be wrong to do so. Let computer makers decide which player goes with Windows. That is called competition and it is good. |
| #2 By 9264 (69.176.33.110) at 3/24/2004 3:32:24 PM |
| Instead of trying to put out two versions and confusing people wouldn't it have been easier for Microsoft to just make Media Player an optional component during installation? It used to be this way, until they started seeing how much they could get away with. This way one could choose if they want Media Player installed from the very beginning. It should also be listed in Add/Remove programs so a person could choose to install or uninstall it later. Same goes for Movie Maker, the compressed folders feature, etc. |
| #3 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 3/24/2004 4:25:10 PM |
|
"Computer makers can do this already."
No, they can't. They can't remove WMP. |
| #4 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 3/24/2004 7:34:09 PM |
|
And if an OEM tried that baarod, they'd be sued by microsoft and have their licenses revoked.
OEMs cannot remove WMP today. |
| #5 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 3/24/2004 7:39:33 PM |
|
#3 No because WMP is a "core component" according to Microsoft (Hey it's their OS, they'd know!). Meaning that if you were to ever remove WMP for whatever reason you would be unable to use your computer! It would be rendered completely and utterly un-usable once this core component is removed!
Hopefully the EU won't be bought like the US DOJ, but there's many years of appeals ahead of us. The fine itself may not be a huge issue for Microsoft but this is: "The ruling also orders the company to divulge within 120 days previously proprietary information about the way Windows works, to allow rivals to make software suitable for Windows users." So we'll see what happens, we'll see whether or not Microsoft can "lobby" the right people in the EU. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3563697.stm "Microsoft claims that it should not be fined at all because it did not know its behaviour would breach EU law." Microsoft should have the fine doubled for ignorance and then trying to use that ignorance as an excuse! If they didn't know, then tell them to replace their army of lawyers with another army of lawyers that can read. This post was edited by chris_kabuki on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 at 19:45. |
| #6 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 3/24/2004 8:44:19 PM |
|
"They key thing to notice is that the EU claimed Microsoft abused its position as a "near monopoly"."
The key thing to notice is their behavior is still ILLEGAL. No matter what you call it. And the EU didn't "claim" anything, the EC "RULED" it was so. |
| #7 By 135 (208.186.90.168) at 3/24/2004 9:58:42 PM |
|
kabuki - "Hopefully the EU won't be bought like the US DOJ"
Yeah, that was unfortunate. I guess it's a good thing we have an appeals court to overturn the decision and put forth a structured remedy which satisfies the demands of the actual law. |
| #8 By 9264 (69.176.33.225) at 3/25/2004 6:08:59 AM |
|
"Meaning that if you were to ever remove WMP for whatever reason you would be unable to use your computer! It would be rendered completely and utterly un-usable once this core component is removed!"
I hope you're kidding about that. You can remove Windows Media Player with XP-Lite and the OS does not stop working, explode, or anything else. |
| #9 By 12071 (203.217.77.193) at 3/25/2004 7:37:29 AM |
|
#9 Corruption = GOOD if Microsoft do it
Corruption = BAD if Microsoft's competitors do it Gotcha! #12 Yeah it's a good thing Mr. Bush (the selected one - not to be confused with Mr Bush the elected) came in and suddenly all that "lobbying" that Microsoft did paid off. Another victory for justice in the US of A! #13 I figured that it was fairly obvious that I was being sarcastic about WMP being a "core component"! After all, if it's a "core component" then the OS can hardly run without it. Proof (yet again) the Microsoft is illegally leveraging it's Monopoly (in the US) and it's near-Monopoly (in the EU) to push WMP. |
| #10 By 12071 (203.217.77.193) at 3/25/2004 8:03:55 AM |
|
Speaking of Microsoft's fair competitive nature:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/24/technology/24soft.html?ex=1080709200&en=81be83eda9c09dad&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE Other evidence presented by the plaintiffs' lawyers at trial yesterday gave an account of how Microsoft violated a signed secrecy agreement with Go and showed that Microsoft possessed technical documents from Go that it should not have had access to. All of Microsoft's conduct was designed to acquire and hang on to their monopoly,'' said Eugene Crew, a lawyer at Townsend, Townsend & Crew, based in San Francisco. "Consumers were harmed by being deprived of choice. The greatest harm out of the Go story was the suppression of innovation and new technology by Microsoft." The plaintiffs contend the new documents show that Microsoft violated nondisclosure agreements with Go, and then used that information to build PenWindows, a competitor to Go's PenPoint operating system. The documents included Microsoft's internal e-mail messages showing that it had detailed knowledge of Go's product plans. The documents also suggest that Microsoft sought to pressure Intel to cancel its plans to invest in Go. On June 28, 1990, Mr. Gates wrote a letter to Mr. Grove trying to convince the Intel executive that he should back a version of Windows for portable computers, then code-named Windows-H, rather than Go's PenPoint software. "I guess I've made it very clear that we view an Intel investment in Go as an anti-Microsoft move, both because Go competes with our systems software and because we think it will weaken the 386 PC standard," Mr. Gates wrote. Shortly after the letter was written, according to Mr. Kaplan, Intel reduced its planned investment in Go from $10 million to $2 million, and stipulated the investment be kept a secret. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 311 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:46:40 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
