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 9  

post #81 of 300
I honestly don't see why they were fined. Microsoft can't guarantee that their operating system will work the way it's supposed to with a browser that isn't theirs. So why should they have to offer 3rd party applications. Do they then have to provide support for these 3rd party applications that they are being forced into adding into their operating system just to ensure and guarantee the quality and experience people are supposed to have?

Those who know of other browsers will download and use them.
post #82 of 300
I take it all three quarters of a billion dollars are going to be put into measures to fight anti-trust cases rolleyes.gif
It's-a tu maaach
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 750 @ 4GHz (1.2 vcore) Asus P7P55D EVO Powercolor 5850 4x 2GB of Corsair XMS 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorKeyboard
2x 250GB (Raid 0) XSPC Raystorm CPU block + EK 360 rad + XSPC Dua... Samsung UE37C6000  Corsair K90 + Logitech G13 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Jeantech 1000W Corsair Obsidian 800D Corsair M90 Edirol UA-25 > pair of Pioneer S-DJ08  
  hide details  
It's-a tu maaach
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 750 @ 4GHz (1.2 vcore) Asus P7P55D EVO Powercolor 5850 4x 2GB of Corsair XMS 
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorKeyboard
2x 250GB (Raid 0) XSPC Raystorm CPU block + EK 360 rad + XSPC Dua... Samsung UE37C6000  Corsair K90 + Logitech G13 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Jeantech 1000W Corsair Obsidian 800D Corsair M90 Edirol UA-25 > pair of Pioneer S-DJ08  
  hide details  
post #83 of 300
Blatant cash grab plain and simple.
post #84 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrak View Post

I honestly don't see why they were fined. Microsoft can't guarantee that their operating system will work the way it's supposed to with a browser that isn't theirs. So why should they have to offer 3rd party applications. Do they then have to provide support for these 3rd party applications that they are being forced into adding into their operating system just to ensure and guarantee the quality and experience people are supposed to have?

Those who know of other browsers will download and use them.

Microsoft was fined because Microsoft agreed to a settlement and failed to follow through. They agreed to present an interface to allow users to choose a browser. They then failed to provide this interface for the legally required time frame which again I reiterate.... THEY SIGNED.

The issue was that the interface was working for sometime but then got disabled.

If you want to discuss the orignal case, please go back and read up to educate yourself on the matter. I have repeated it multiple times.... MS was doing things like telling OEMs not to install Netscape or else they could not sell Windows. They told Intel not to support Java. They would not provide API information when it is customary to do so for an OS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital Dreams View Post

Blatant cash grab plain and simple.
Post based on assumptions without any knowledge... plain and simple. wink.gif
Edited by DuckieHo - 3/6/13 at 8:33am
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 #85 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by 47 Knucklehead View Post

Ah, so your argument basically boils down to "Microsoft is wrong because the law says they are, regardless of what is right and wrong." Gotcha.
It only doesn't fit because you lack the ability to see the point ... or are simply ignoring that they are so similar that to acknowledge it would force you to rethink your stance.

That's a distortion, isn't it?

Microsoft were wrong because being anti-competitive is wrong. They were found guilty and admitted wrong doing it ends there. It's not an opinion any more. It's a fact. especially when they admitted it.

And no, they're just flat out irrelevant. A car is a car. A OS is an OS.


Intel were also doing the exact same thing. They've been caught gimping performance on compilers for AMD chips. They were bribing OEM's. They were being anti-competitive, they were acting against the law and were entirely wrong. The EC came down heavily on them, too.... But I supposed Intel should be allowed to abuse their position as market leader and dominate and do what they want with their compilers too, eh? I mean, it's their money, they should be able to bribe who they want with it, right? That dang gubbermint ought not to be interfering in peoples lives like this. It's only taken AMD 10 years plus to get back on their feet after it all.
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 #86 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post

You miss the point of the analogy.

Note my anology specifically stated:
1) 90% of marketshare = price leader = monolopy
2) They installed a chip that has no technical merit

Besides, your extension of the anology is incorrect as it misses the main point. Why can you install another companies parts into a Ford? Because there are standards and/or you can take measurements. Otherwise, how would another company know how to make a compatible part? With software, if there are no published documentation.... you can't easily take "measurements". You are poking a black box and attempting to figure inputs and outputs. To futher add.... car companies actually are including properitary software diagnostic interfaces into their cars. Because of this, some future car service will only be able to be done by a dealership. An independent mechanic can purchase the tools but they would have to by one for each make of car. Luckily, the US government has already regulated that some data must follow a certain standard for open use.



Chrome works in the Windows OS today because MS has since published the necessary API calls. Imagine trying to understand how HTTP works in Windows without this documentation in 1999:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa384080(v=vs.85).aspx

Actually there is no set standard to auto design. That's why parts from auto manufactures are no directly replacable. In Fact you will find that even 2 cars built on the same design platform often have incompatible parts. Often these companies that produce third party parts have to reverse engineer these parts. No different in PCs. MS makes the OS. Makes the parts for it. Should have every legal right to exclude any third party software if they want at release through coding. If a game developer wants to eirte a game that will work on Windows, they pay for it or reverse engineer the system to figure it out. If Google wants to right a browser...no different. By no means should MS be liable to include competitor software unless under licensing agreement.
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 #87 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubers View Post

That's a distortion, isn't it?

Microsoft were wrong because being anti-competitive is wrong. They were found guilty and admitted wrong doing it ends there. It's not an opinion any more. It's a fact. especially when they admitted it.

And no, they're just flat out irrelevant. A car is a car. A OS is an OS.


Intel were also doing the exact same thing. They've been caught gimping performance on compilers for AMD chips. They were bribing OEM's. They were being anti-competitive, they were acting against the law and were entirely wrong. The EC came down heavily on them, too.... But I supposed Intel should be allowed to abuse their position as market leader and dominate and do what they want with their compilers too, eh? I mean, it's their money, they should be able to bribe who they want with it, right? That dang gubbermint ought not to be interfering in peoples lives like this. It's only taken AMD 10 years plus to get back on their feet after it all.

If someone has a new product, let the products compete on their own merits.

It is not legal to use your size, marketshare, etc to force your product to win. This is the point of anti-monolopy laws. It is no longer a free market as a company is using external forces that have been deemed unfair to push their product.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ejb222 View Post

Actually there is no set standard to auto design. That's why parts from auto manufactures are no directly replacable. In Fact you will find that even 2 cars built on the same design platform often have incompatible parts. Often these companies that produce third party parts have to reverse engineer these parts. No different in PCs. MS makes the OS. Makes the parts for it. Should have every legal right to exclude any third party software if they want at release through coding. If a game developer wants to eirte a game that will work on Windows, they pay for it or reverse engineer the system to figure it out. If Google wants to right a browser...no different. By no means should MS be liable to include competitor software unless under licensing agreement.
Again... you are MISSING THE POINT!

MS makes an OS. Other programs run within the OS. MS did not set up explicit rules of what is not allowed to run in their OS (unlike Apple's iOS). So when someone has a competing product, MS cannot arbitarily block that program without merit. MS can not willfully redesign OS APIs for the main purpose of stopping competition of software.

Again..... you are wrong. Hundreds of lawyers and judges have gone through this. Cases have already been settled.
Edited by DuckieHo - 3/6/13 at 8:41am
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 #88 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubers View Post

That's a distortion, isn't it?

Microsoft were wrong because being anti-competitive is wrong. They were found guilty and admitted wrong doing it ends there. It's not an opinion any more. It's a fact. especially when they admitted it.

And no, they're just flat out irrelevant. A car is a car. A OS is an OS.


Intel were also doing the exact same thing. They've been caught gimping performance on compilers for AMD chips. They were bribing OEM's. They were being anti-competitive, they were acting against the law and were entirely wrong. The EC came down heavily on them, too.... But I supposed Intel should be allowed to abuse their position as market leader and dominate and do what they want with their compilers too, eh? I mean, it's their money, they should be able to bribe who they want with it, right? That dang gubbermint ought not to be interfering in peoples lives like this. It's only taken AMD 10 years plus to get back on their feet after it all.

No one is saying bribing is legal. I don't see anyone saying that. And yes a car is a car and an os is an os. But business practice transends markets. Why can't you just answer why it is wrong for MS to create and OS that uses MS only software? What is immoral about that?
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 #89 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by ejb222 View Post

Actually there is no set standard to auto design. That's why parts from auto manufactures are no directly replacable. In Fact you will find that even 2 cars built on the same design platform often have incompatible parts. Often these companies that produce third party parts have to reverse engineer these parts. No different in PCs. MS makes the OS. Makes the parts for it. Should have every legal right to exclude any third party software if they want at release through coding. If a game developer wants to eirte a game that will work on Windows, they pay for it or reverse engineer the system to figure it out. If Google wants to right a browser...no different. By no means should MS be liable to include competitor software unless under licensing agreement.

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.
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 #90 of 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post

If someone has a new product, let the products compete on their own merits.

It is not legal to use your size, marketshare, etc to force your product to win. This is the point of anti-monolopy laws. It is no longer a free market as a company is using external forces that have been deemed unfair to push their product.
Again... you are MISSING THE POINT!

MS makes an OS. Other programs run within the OS. MS did not set up explicit rules of what is not allowed to run in their OS (unlike Apple's iOS). So when someone has a competing product, MS cannot arbitarily block that program without merit.

Again..... you are wrong. Hundreds of lawyers and judges have gone through this. Cases have already been settled.

If MS had 10% if the market share when all this went down, you are saying that no one would have cared? No problem with IE exclusive Windows?
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  
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