Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Verge] EU fines Microsoft over $730 million for failing to include browser ballot in Windows 7 SP1
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Verge] EU fines Microsoft over $730 million for failing to include browser ballot in Windows 7 SP1 - Page 17  

post #161 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubers View Post

The absolute is that anti-competitive practices are wrong.

I'm sure Mother Nature and Charles Darwin disagree with you on that. rolleyes.gif

Remember "wrong" is a relative term. It should never be used in a sentence where you are talking about absolutes.
post #162 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanyChris View Post

But to them it is, you don't mess with productive companies at all…

You don't understand the American right, which is why you don't understand your "adversaries".

I agree with you, I think MS should have been broken up we as a society lost to much with the MS onslaught of 1981 through 2007..MS killed to many small upstarts by swinging their big stick around PC OEM's..

Much the sam as Intel does now..

The part that kills me is Apple is the MS of 1996 yet people don't see it or care with exceptions..

The idea that the computer is for the free thinker is gone we're to partisan now I won't own MS stuff because of these cases. Folks here won't own an iToy because it's Apple..It's actually kinda sad..

I want Apple to make Mac's and MS to make Windows, I want to see a thriving GNU/Linux, I want to see the re-emergence of Amiga, Commodore et. al.

I want options, but until WE decide thats important to us it'll continue to be us vs. them..

The biggest reason I'm here is because echo chamber are BAD I can balance a little Mac with a Little PC and maybe remind folks that not all Apple folks line up for a week to buy a stupid phone and think that everything Apple does is "amazing" or "revolutionary"


I absolutely understand the Libertarian viewpoint... which is why I'm vehemently opposed to that kind of talk happening in our world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead View Post

I'm sure Mother Nature and Charles Darwin disagree with you on that. rolleyes.gif

Remember "wrong" is a relative term. It should never be used in a sentence where you are talking about absolutes.

Nature might've favoured Darwinism, but society doesn't

wink.gif
The Riginator
(20 items)
 
 
Wife's Rig
(5 items)
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Qualcomm Snapdragon S600 Adreno 330 2GB LPDDR3 NAND Storage 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Samsung 32GB MicroSD Android 4.4.2 KitKat 5 inch (441ppi) 1080x1920 Super AMOLED SwiftKey 
Power
2600mAh Battery 
  hide details  
The Riginator
(20 items)
 
 
Wife's Rig
(5 items)
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Qualcomm Snapdragon S600 Adreno 330 2GB LPDDR3 NAND Storage 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Samsung 32GB MicroSD Android 4.4.2 KitKat 5 inch (441ppi) 1080x1920 Super AMOLED SwiftKey 
Power
2600mAh Battery 
  hide details  
post #163 of 300
Well, here comes the trouble
Normandy
(19 items)
 
Secondary rig
(7 items)
 
Galaxy S5
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4690K Gigabyte Z97 D3H XFX 290X DD Kingston HyperX Fury 1866 MHz (1X8) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
Samsung EVO 850 500gb WD Caviar Green 2TB 2x 500GB WD Caviar Black/Blue Windows 10 Pro (64-Bit) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
QNIX QX2710 27" 1440P Razer Blackwidow Ultimate Cooler Master GX-750W Bitfenix Colossus 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Deathadder Razer Goliathus Control Edition Soundblaster Audigy RX 7.1 Denon AVR 1507 7.1 Surround System 
AudioAudio
Fiio E17 ALPEN DAC/AMP Sennheiser HD 558 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
C2Q Q8300 @3.0 GHz MSI P45-Neo2 HD 5450 Samsung 2x 2 
Hard DriveOSCase
Samsung 160gb Win 8.1 Pro 64-bit Brandless Mid-Tower 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
2.50GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 Adreno 330 2GB 16GB Internal Storage 
OSMonitorPower
Adroid KitKat 4.4.2 5.10" - 1080x1920 2800 mAh 
  hide details  
Normandy
(19 items)
 
Secondary rig
(7 items)
 
Galaxy S5
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4690K Gigabyte Z97 D3H XFX 290X DD Kingston HyperX Fury 1866 MHz (1X8) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
Samsung EVO 850 500gb WD Caviar Green 2TB 2x 500GB WD Caviar Black/Blue Windows 10 Pro (64-Bit) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
QNIX QX2710 27" 1440P Razer Blackwidow Ultimate Cooler Master GX-750W Bitfenix Colossus 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Deathadder Razer Goliathus Control Edition Soundblaster Audigy RX 7.1 Denon AVR 1507 7.1 Surround System 
AudioAudio
Fiio E17 ALPEN DAC/AMP Sennheiser HD 558 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
C2Q Q8300 @3.0 GHz MSI P45-Neo2 HD 5450 Samsung 2x 2 
Hard DriveOSCase
Samsung 160gb Win 8.1 Pro 64-bit Brandless Mid-Tower 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
2.50GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 Adreno 330 2GB 16GB Internal Storage 
OSMonitorPower
Adroid KitKat 4.4.2 5.10" - 1080x1920 2800 mAh 
  hide details  
post #164 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by ejb222 View Post

Ok...so I think this is where we disagree. I dont think MS has any legal obligation to allow any program to run on Windows. If so, I would think Apple wold too. In fact I believe people prefer Windows over OSX because software runs on one over the other. But there is no legal obligation for Apple of MS to allow these programs to run on these systems. Instead MS and Apple allow them to run because it makes them money.
Here's the thing:

If my software meets all established requirements to run within an OS.... why are you not allowing my software to run? Is it because you have a competing product? If so, is there another OSes that I could run my software and be successful... or is your OS marketshare so large that I cannot? If I cannot run my software successfully anywhere else and the only reason you blocked my software is because I am a competitor.... then you are breaking the law.

Get it? Anti-trust.



Quote:
Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead View Post

So exactly what browser doesn't Microsoft allow to be run on Windows? Oh yeah, there isn't one.

rolleyes.gif Today. There isn't a browser that MS wouldn't allow to run in Windows TODAY.

This case is the EXACT reason it is true. You just proved the entire point of the case!!!!!!!!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead View Post

The crux of the whole argument is just how much Microsoft "owes" other companies (which is, in my opinion, nothing) and their web browsers to be FORCED to be installed on their OS right out of the box ... and the OEM's and system builders, who get massive price discounts for following Microsoft's rules about installing only Microsoft products on the PC. If the OEM and system builders don't like it, they can buy a copy of Windows at FULL PRICE and install it and put Chrome, Opera, or what ever else they want. But as long as they are getting a MASSIVE PRICE BREAK, they have follow the rules of their contract. If anything, the companies that Microsoft is FORCED to put on THEIR operating systems should have to pay Microsoft for all the "free advertising" and "product placement" that they will get by having their browser being installed on Windows.
MS is using their size to compete... not the merits of their product. This is wrong. Intel did the same thing and lost multiple times (AMD in US, EU.... and NVIDIA).

Quote:
Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead View Post

As far as the end user having a choice of browsers, THEY DO. They always did, and STILL DO.
No, they didn't.... not in the early 90s.

OEMs could not even install other browsers even thoug there was a demand.

Again, MS was using their marketshare to distort the market... not good.
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
post #165 of 300
Not a monopoly, doesn't restrict users from installing a different browser, and most of those browsers have a smaller marketshare then Apple does. The original lawsuit sucked and was pointless, and it's not fair to make a company bundle someone else's software.
post #166 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasp1js View Post

Microsoft is not obliged to help support or even provide all the data(?) for others to develop software for their OS(but it IS in their best interests)

Microsoft is not allowed to cripple other software( that has been developed using means MS allowed, thus not breaking any rules MS put on their OS and they have every right to put restrictions on their OS) just because they don't want them to compete( and win) with their software. Being anti-competitive is a crime, MS was accused of it, proven guilty, they even admitted it, they were punished, now MS no longer complies with the punishment
>>> They get FINED. As simple as that.

Those car analogies really don't work...


The case against MS has already ended in the US, for how long the ruling is still in effect in the EU?

There is way too much love for big corporations in this thread weirdsmiley.gif not like they care about me and you....

I agree...it's such a backwards way to handle all this. They shold have had MS just pay settlements to all the companies they gimped. But instead they gimped MS. I'm not a monopoly fan or a discretely MS fan. Just a fan or fairness. I hope things like this dont happen in the future. Both the unethical business practices and the business sanction that is basically forced conflict of interest. But hey...it could be worse, they could be making online save only games with pay to win DLC in the name of DRM and over charging for them.
Home PC
(12 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 - 4770k MSI Z87 Mpower Max AMD R9 290x G.Skill Trident X Series 16GB (4 x 4GB) DDR3-2400 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB 3.5" 5900RPM Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB 3.5" 5900RPM LG WH14NS40 Blu-Ray/DVD/CD Writer NZXT Kraken x60 
MonitorPower
Asus PB278Q 27.0" Monitor Rosewill Capstone 750 modular 
  hide details  
Home PC
(12 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 - 4770k MSI Z87 Mpower Max AMD R9 290x G.Skill Trident X Series 16GB (4 x 4GB) DDR3-2400 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB 3.5" 5900RPM Seagate Desktop HDD 4TB 3.5" 5900RPM LG WH14NS40 Blu-Ray/DVD/CD Writer NZXT Kraken x60 
MonitorPower
Asus PB278Q 27.0" Monitor Rosewill Capstone 750 modular 
  hide details  
post #167 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabis View Post

Not a monopoly, doesn't restrict users from installing a different browser, and most of those browsers have a smaller marketshare then Apple does. The original lawsuit sucked and was pointless, and it's not fair to make a company bundle someone else's software.

Apart from being entirely wrong... MS aren't forced to bundle any other browsers thumb.gif
The Riginator
(20 items)
 
 
Wife's Rig
(5 items)
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Qualcomm Snapdragon S600 Adreno 330 2GB LPDDR3 NAND Storage 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Samsung 32GB MicroSD Android 4.4.2 KitKat 5 inch (441ppi) 1080x1920 Super AMOLED SwiftKey 
Power
2600mAh Battery 
  hide details  
The Riginator
(20 items)
 
 
Wife's Rig
(5 items)
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Qualcomm Snapdragon S600 Adreno 330 2GB LPDDR3 NAND Storage 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Samsung 32GB MicroSD Android 4.4.2 KitKat 5 inch (441ppi) 1080x1920 Super AMOLED SwiftKey 
Power
2600mAh Battery 
  hide details  
post #168 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post

rolleyes.gif Today. There isn't a browser that MS wouldn't allow to run in Windows TODAY.

Today or 10 years ago, or even 17 years ago when I registered my first domain name, it doesn't matter. You had CHOICES in installing a web browser on your machine. I know, I was there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post

MS is using their size to compete... not the merits of their product. This is wrong.

... In YOUR opinion. I bet you think it's wrong to take a job just because you have a college degree and someone else who is applying for the same job doesn't. I bet you also think it is wrong for a hot looking woman to not date fat and ugly men as opposed to a rich guy who looks like Brad Pitt. Welcome to the world of EVERYONE uses every advantage they have to achieve what they want.
Edited by 47 Knucklehead - 3/6/13 at 10:55am
post #169 of 300
^ You still focus on this choice thing. Still haven't read the rulings and the case information presented to you by DuckieHo, so you're still making the same assertions based on erroneous ideas!
The Riginator
(20 items)
 
 
Wife's Rig
(5 items)
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Qualcomm Snapdragon S600 Adreno 330 2GB LPDDR3 NAND Storage 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Samsung 32GB MicroSD Android 4.4.2 KitKat 5 inch (441ppi) 1080x1920 Super AMOLED SwiftKey 
Power
2600mAh Battery 
  hide details  
The Riginator
(20 items)
 
 
Wife's Rig
(5 items)
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Qualcomm Snapdragon S600 Adreno 330 2GB LPDDR3 NAND Storage 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Samsung 32GB MicroSD Android 4.4.2 KitKat 5 inch (441ppi) 1080x1920 Super AMOLED SwiftKey 
Power
2600mAh Battery 
  hide details  
post #170 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubers View Post

Wrong, wrong and wrong.

MS have to include a choice of competitors software as a punishment under the agreement they signed for being found guilty of anti-trust/anti-competitiveness.

You don't need to pay MS anything to write a game for Windows. You don't need to pay or reverse engineer anything to write software for Windows... because of the results of such suits, both in the US and EU. If those cases found Microsoft not guilty, say goodbye to 90% of the software you use today.

Wouldn't MS need to get a license agreement from every browser manufacture in order to distribute it with their OS? The EU can't force those companies to grant said license either.
Central Dogma
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4770K Z97X-Gaming 5 Vision Tek AMD Radeon (TM) R9 390 Series Corsair  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung EVO 850 Toshiba  Seagate corsair h80I 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
windows 10 ViewSonic XG2701 Razer Blackwidow 10 keyless CS750M 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Phanteks Eclipse Series P400 g502 Some cool one with a custom anime picture. 
  hide details  
Central Dogma
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 4770K Z97X-Gaming 5 Vision Tek AMD Radeon (TM) R9 390 Series Corsair  
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung EVO 850 Toshiba  Seagate corsair h80I 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
windows 10 ViewSonic XG2701 Razer Blackwidow 10 keyless CS750M 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Phanteks Eclipse Series P400 g502 Some cool one with a custom anime picture. 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Software News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Software News › [Verge] EU fines Microsoft over $730 million for failing to include browser ballot in Windows 7 SP1