- Status
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
EU - You are being anti-competative
MS - No we're not
EU - Actually we dont give a shit, we just want bucketloads of cash
MS - You're a dick, OK, let's fuck the product up just to make you happy
EU - Thanks! Oh, hang on, we still dont have any cash
MS - No but we wasted lots on this useless exercise anyway
EU - Never fear, we'll get you when you bring out Windows 8 instead
MS - No we're not
EU - Actually we dont give a shit, we just want bucketloads of cash
MS - You're a dick, OK, let's fuck the product up just to make you happy
EU - Thanks! Oh, hang on, we still dont have any cash
MS - No but we wasted lots on this useless exercise anyway
EU - Never fear, we'll get you when you bring out Windows 8 instead
mitch074
Splendid
- Mar 17, 2006
- 2,984
- 555
- 22,040
my goodness - such a load of stupidity.
I mean the comments.
The problem is not with MS 'selling' IE with Windows, it's not with bundling a browser with its OS, it is (please read slowly, because it seems many comment authors didn't follow the whole thing) using its monopolistic status on the OS market to force a product on consumers: namely, the web browser.
Main interest: by doing so, once IE reached 95% market share, they cut ALL DEVELOPMENT FUNDS to it for 5 years. This meant, and please consider this closely...
Five years of nothing but IE 6. With no popup blocker (before 2004 and SP2), no tabbed browsing, no protection against phishing, no protection against ActiveX virii/worms/trojans, no progress whatsoever in browser capabilities (static DOM, lousy event model, slow as hell Javascript), no possibility to set another browser as default (you couldn't ask Windows utilities to open text/html resources with Firefox, it would use IE even if you had set Firefox as default), and no way to remove IE (it meant that if a program managed to load IE, it could use IE's bugs to infect the system; consider that in IE, ActiveX controls originally had SYSTEM privileges).
Other browsers did propose these improvements much sooner; however, Web designers couldn't rely upon said improvements, because the 'common' browser could not, and would not, support them.
this meant:
- browser market: gone.
- web development market: stalled.
- web business (relying upon the web as a platform): stalled.
- web apps (relying upon the browser as a software development environment): stalled.
You may notice that stuff like Google Docs and Gmail run like sh!t on IE 6, but run almost as if they were a local application on Firefox or Opera, Chrome, Safari etc.
In short: by abusing its status as a monopoly, Microsoft froze the web market for five years, preventing entry to competitors and the emergence of alternative, potentially competitive markets (web apps VS heavy clients).
Had Microsoft kept developing IE after 6, while following W3C standards, there would probably have been no case.
If you want to make a comparison with the car market, it would mean that the only car maker in your country would build cars that would come with a 3-cylinder engine coupled with a 3-speed automatic gearbox. This car would do 15 MPG, and run only on leaded gas costing 15 bucks per gallon. Gas stations would sell only this special leaded gas, so other car makers, even though they can make engines that run on potato alcohol with a 70 MPG autonomy and costing half a buck per gallon, wouldn't be able to gain a foot hold on the market.
The monopolist's car would also come with a radio that would be pre-tuned to some radio stations, and that you wouldn't be able to adjust.
This is anticompetitive, and even the US of A have laws against anticompetitive behavior from monopolies. That the US judges don't care, or can be bought (see: public transportation systems and Detroit car makers in 1950's, MS in 1999: convicted, but not punished) is too bad; it seems like the EC does what it exists to do, though.
To answer the question on web development: developing an app under 2001's Mozilla suite 1.0rc2 makes it work under Mozilla Firefox 3.5, Apple Safari and Chrome with little to no trouble; developing an app under Google Chrome, without using browser specific extensions, will work without a hitch under Firefox 3.x, Opera and Safari; it may even work with Mozilla 1.4. IE 6 will crash hard on it, though.
Developing an app under IE 6.0 will need fixes for IE 7 and 8, developing for IE 8 will crash IE 6, and in all cases will require heavy refactoring to work in other browsers. Developing so as to use IE 8's most standard mode and no IE-specific extensions may allow you to do interesting stuff in all browsers, but if my experience is any indication, you'll need to program your GUI code twice:
- once for IE's event model (which dates back to IE 4 and hasn't been improved since then)
- once for all other browsers (which, interestingly, all agreed on adding useful stuff like the DOMContentLoaded event)
And then, you'll need to add fallbacks, hacks etc. to support IE 6.0 and 7.0.
By allowing uneducated users (those that think that the blue 'e' is the internet loaded on their machine) to choose a browser, it should help other browsers to appear more prominently.
How the ballot screen works: the five most represented browsers on 3 big Web stats websites are arrayed on top in a random order; 7 other browsers (market share must be around 2%) will be displayed under them.
I mean the comments.
The problem is not with MS 'selling' IE with Windows, it's not with bundling a browser with its OS, it is (please read slowly, because it seems many comment authors didn't follow the whole thing) using its monopolistic status on the OS market to force a product on consumers: namely, the web browser.
Main interest: by doing so, once IE reached 95% market share, they cut ALL DEVELOPMENT FUNDS to it for 5 years. This meant, and please consider this closely...
Five years of nothing but IE 6. With no popup blocker (before 2004 and SP2), no tabbed browsing, no protection against phishing, no protection against ActiveX virii/worms/trojans, no progress whatsoever in browser capabilities (static DOM, lousy event model, slow as hell Javascript), no possibility to set another browser as default (you couldn't ask Windows utilities to open text/html resources with Firefox, it would use IE even if you had set Firefox as default), and no way to remove IE (it meant that if a program managed to load IE, it could use IE's bugs to infect the system; consider that in IE, ActiveX controls originally had SYSTEM privileges).
Other browsers did propose these improvements much sooner; however, Web designers couldn't rely upon said improvements, because the 'common' browser could not, and would not, support them.
this meant:
- browser market: gone.
- web development market: stalled.
- web business (relying upon the web as a platform): stalled.
- web apps (relying upon the browser as a software development environment): stalled.
You may notice that stuff like Google Docs and Gmail run like sh!t on IE 6, but run almost as if they were a local application on Firefox or Opera, Chrome, Safari etc.
In short: by abusing its status as a monopoly, Microsoft froze the web market for five years, preventing entry to competitors and the emergence of alternative, potentially competitive markets (web apps VS heavy clients).
Had Microsoft kept developing IE after 6, while following W3C standards, there would probably have been no case.
If you want to make a comparison with the car market, it would mean that the only car maker in your country would build cars that would come with a 3-cylinder engine coupled with a 3-speed automatic gearbox. This car would do 15 MPG, and run only on leaded gas costing 15 bucks per gallon. Gas stations would sell only this special leaded gas, so other car makers, even though they can make engines that run on potato alcohol with a 70 MPG autonomy and costing half a buck per gallon, wouldn't be able to gain a foot hold on the market.
The monopolist's car would also come with a radio that would be pre-tuned to some radio stations, and that you wouldn't be able to adjust.
This is anticompetitive, and even the US of A have laws against anticompetitive behavior from monopolies. That the US judges don't care, or can be bought (see: public transportation systems and Detroit car makers in 1950's, MS in 1999: convicted, but not punished) is too bad; it seems like the EC does what it exists to do, though.
To answer the question on web development: developing an app under 2001's Mozilla suite 1.0rc2 makes it work under Mozilla Firefox 3.5, Apple Safari and Chrome with little to no trouble; developing an app under Google Chrome, without using browser specific extensions, will work without a hitch under Firefox 3.x, Opera and Safari; it may even work with Mozilla 1.4. IE 6 will crash hard on it, though.
Developing an app under IE 6.0 will need fixes for IE 7 and 8, developing for IE 8 will crash IE 6, and in all cases will require heavy refactoring to work in other browsers. Developing so as to use IE 8's most standard mode and no IE-specific extensions may allow you to do interesting stuff in all browsers, but if my experience is any indication, you'll need to program your GUI code twice:
- once for IE's event model (which dates back to IE 4 and hasn't been improved since then)
- once for all other browsers (which, interestingly, all agreed on adding useful stuff like the DOMContentLoaded event)
And then, you'll need to add fallbacks, hacks etc. to support IE 6.0 and 7.0.
By allowing uneducated users (those that think that the blue 'e' is the internet loaded on their machine) to choose a browser, it should help other browsers to appear more prominently.
How the ballot screen works: the five most represented browsers on 3 big Web stats websites are arrayed on top in a random order; 7 other browsers (market share must be around 2%) will be displayed under them.
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
Mozilla Firefox has more market share than Apples Safari, which is bundled with every iTunes download and pre-loaded on every Mac.
It did this despite having no hardware platform, no MP3 player to act as a gateway and no shop salesmen. Firefox doesn't need legislation to enforce it's distribution as it got where it is by being a good piece of software. Anyone who doesn't understand this either works for the EU or is a fucking retard.
It did this despite having no hardware platform, no MP3 player to act as a gateway and no shop salesmen. Firefox doesn't need legislation to enforce it's distribution as it got where it is by being a good piece of software. Anyone who doesn't understand this either works for the EU or is a fucking retard.
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
Thanks for explaining it to me. I really thought that by giving someone stupid enough not to know how to pick another browser the option of having 12, 11 of which aren't supported by the people who make the OS, would make things so much simpler for them.
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
I have just finished writing my own Defrag tool, it took me about 2 hours and is a bit crap but it's open source and free.
What I intend to do now is approach lots of companies and ask them to provide me with money everytime someone uses my tool.
It's a bit hard doing this so I will employ a large number of workers to adminster this, relying solely on the money they beg for to pay their wages.
I have now got a company that is reliant on this thing that is free and people just aren't using it as much as the one that comes with Windows.
I think i'll complain to the EU that Microsoft is being anti-competative. They have a Defrag tool in Windows that has been there since before my company was founded.
Maybe they will see things my way and force them to include my Defrag tool in their next operating system, that way I won't have to pay for advertising and it will be distributed freely without me having to do anything.
I'll just sit back and wait for the sponsor money to roll in.
What I intend to do now is approach lots of companies and ask them to provide me with money everytime someone uses my tool.
It's a bit hard doing this so I will employ a large number of workers to adminster this, relying solely on the money they beg for to pay their wages.
I have now got a company that is reliant on this thing that is free and people just aren't using it as much as the one that comes with Windows.
I think i'll complain to the EU that Microsoft is being anti-competative. They have a Defrag tool in Windows that has been there since before my company was founded.
Maybe they will see things my way and force them to include my Defrag tool in their next operating system, that way I won't have to pay for advertising and it will be distributed freely without me having to do anything.
I'll just sit back and wait for the sponsor money to roll in.
bunz_of_steel
Distinguished
- Dec 10, 2008
- 294
- 0
- 18,780
How stupid are you people you think that IE is the only choice you need! Micro$uk claims major browser market share because you have no choice but to use that stupid IE. Granted savvy user's can change but your never going to uninstall it, NEVER. DEvelopers code their websites to work with IE only and Updates only thru IE so now we are FORCED to use it. How's that provide any fair competition to other browsers??? hmmm u DA'ss /;(
enforcer22
Distinguished
- Sep 10, 2006
- 1,692
- 0
- 19,790
" where Windows users will be able to pick between Opera, Chrome, Safari, Firefox, AOL, Maxthon, K-Meleon, Flock, Avant Browser, Sleipnir, Slim Browser and Internet Explorer."
so nothing changes other then you get annoyed by yet another install window during a windows install. O and for the first time that im aware of someone has to add someone elses product in with thier own and not get paid to do so. i dont normaly like using this term but EU = Epic Fail. congrats on making ms "support" others work for free and giving everyone the choices they had before. you guys rock!
so nothing changes other then you get annoyed by yet another install window during a windows install. O and for the first time that im aware of someone has to add someone elses product in with thier own and not get paid to do so. i dont normaly like using this term but EU = Epic Fail. congrats on making ms "support" others work for free and giving everyone the choices they had before. you guys rock!
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
It's not about uninstalling it, It's about companies like:-
K-Meleon, first release in August 21, 2000
IE4 was released in September 1997 and bundled with Windows 98
IE was integrated into Windows 3 years before K-Meleon was a twitch in it's daddys nutsack. To then create a program that copies it knowing it it already now integrated is just fishing. Why should a web browser have any other special consideration over, say, solitaire, or the Windows Explorer? There are alternatives to the Windows Explorer freely available to download and use instead of the default one, so why isn't that also being targetted?
Doing this to IE is setting a precedent that can only be followed. I may have joked about my Derfag tool, but it just goes to show that if someone makes a copy of something that MS already does they can have it included. The next thing will be email clients.
enforcer22
Distinguished
- Sep 10, 2006
- 1,692
- 0
- 19,790
[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom]my goodness - such a load of stupidity.I mean the comments.The problem is not with MS 'selling' IE with Windows, it's not with bundling a browser with its OS, it is (please read slowly, because it seems many comment authors didn't follow the whole thing) using its monopolistic status on the OS market to force a product on consumers: namely, the web browser.Main interest: by doing so, once IE reached 95% market share, they cut ALL DEVELOPMENT FUNDS to it for 5 years. This meant, and please consider this closely...Five years of nothing but IE 6. With no popup blocker (before 2004 and SP2), no tabbed browsing, no protection against phishing, no protection against ActiveX virii/worms/trojans, no progress whatsoever in browser capabilities (static DOM, lousy event model, slow as hell Javascript), no possibility to set another browser as default (you couldn't ask Windows utilities to open text/html resources with Firefox, it would use IE even if you had set Firefox as default), and no way to remove IE (it meant that if a program managed to load IE, it could use IE's bugs to infect the system; consider that in IE, ActiveX controls originally had SYSTEM privileges).Other browsers did propose these improvements much sooner; however, Web designers couldn't rely upon said improvements, because the 'common' browser could not, and would not, support them.this meant:- browser market: gone.- web development market: stalled.- web business (relying upon the web as a platform): stalled.- web apps (relying upon the browser as a software development environment): stalled.You may notice that stuff like Google Docs and Gmail run like sh!t on IE 6, but run almost as if they were a local application on Firefox or Opera, Chrome, Safari etc.In short: by abusing its status as a monopoly, Microsoft froze the web market for five years, preventing entry to competitors and the emergence of alternative, potentially competitive markets (web apps VS heavy clients).Had Microsoft kept developing IE after 6, while following W3C standards, there would probably have been no case.If you want to make a comparison with the car market, it would mean that the only car maker in your country would build cars that would come with a 3-cylinder engine coupled with a 3-speed automatic gearbox. This car would do 15 MPG, and run only on leaded gas costing 15 bucks per gallon. Gas stations would sell only this special leaded gas, so other car makers, even though they can make engines that run on potato alcohol with a 70 MPG autonomy and costing half a buck per gallon, wouldn't be able to gain a foot hold on the market.The monopolist's car would also come with a radio that would be pre-tuned to some radio stations, and that you wouldn't be able to adjust.This is anticompetitive, and even the US of A have laws against anticompetitive behavior from monopolies. That the US judges don't care, or can be bought (see: public transportation systems and Detroit car makers in 1950's, MS in 1999: convicted, but not punished) is too bad; it seems like the EC does what it exists to do, though.To answer the question on web development: developing an app under 2001's Mozilla suite 1.0rc2 makes it work under Mozilla Firefox 3.5, Apple Safari and Chrome with little to no trouble; developing an app under Google Chrome, without using browser specific extensions, will work without a hitch under Firefox 3.x, Opera and Safari; it may even work with Mozilla 1.4. IE 6 will crash hard on it, though.Developing an app under IE 6.0 will need fixes for IE 7 and 8, developing for IE 8 will crash IE 6, and in all cases will require heavy refactoring to work in other browsers. Developing so as to use IE 8's most standard mode and no IE-specific extensions may allow you to do interesting stuff in all browsers, but if my experience is any indication, you'll need to program your GUI code twice:- once for IE's event model (which dates back to IE 4 and hasn't been improved since then)- once for all other browsers (which, interestingly, all agreed on adding useful stuff like the DOMContentLoaded event)And then, you'll need to add fallbacks, hacks etc. to support IE 6.0 and 7.0.By allowing uneducated users (those that think that the blue 'e' is the internet loaded on their machine) to choose a browser, it should help other browsers to appear more prominently.How the ballot screen works: the five most represented browsers on 3 big Web stats websites are arrayed on top in a random order; 7 other browsers (market share must be around 2%) will be displayed under them.[/citation]
oooook ill reply to your load of stupidity. the problem isnt MS putting IE with windows its not with it bundling its own browser with its own OS (wait didnt i or youalready say that?) wait i did follow the whole thing how nice of you to assume we didnt though but if im correct here people have the right to force thier own products on you normaly via advertisments or those annoying perfume snipers in the malls.
ok down to the rest. hey i used IE 6 it did have tabbed browseing and a popup blocker wtf IE did you use? maybe not standard built in but it was capable. Two things at the time and i still hate tabs today actualy. I actualy used other browsers at that time and i only found alot of broswers that loaded pages wrong, slowly, or not at all so i dont know what your talking about. As far as java script being slow. Ever since sun forced MS to stop putting thier own java machine in i have had to deal with insanly slow java compaired to the good old days when MS was allowed to use thier java machine. (why should i be forced to use others crap that hardly works because you people bash on ms simply because you believe them to be this giant monster). Actualy you could set others to default though i kept telling them i wanted IE as default. BTW anything that uses teh same API's as IE to view pages is as "faulty" as IE so i could really care less if its integrated in the OS.
Now i know alot of people complain all the time about IE and windows but i have been using them since the 95 plug and pray years and honestly other then some incompatable hardware slow to make drivers from venders and a couple bugs here and there.. i have had NO issues with my windows or IE installs.
but hell im sure alot of stuff made today runs like shit on software or hardware made years ago god point there.
MS froze the web market? really they told people to not make browsers? i mean serisouly if i told you to not eat till you died would you? from what i remember not only are you so fulll of it its coming out of your ears but during that time i remember all kinds of crap browsers i wouldnt have wipped my ass with (perhaps thats why people chose IE over them cuz they werent worth the bandwidth to download!!! nooo it must be MS telling people to not do it thats right !!!
im going to ignore your comprison because its just simply to say retarded and really the worst comparasin i have ever seen.
Why you keep reffering to IE 6 is beyond me i know your trying to make some point about that erra but your comparing it to things that werent even out then so really i dont see your point at all. most of what your saying just seems to be mindless MS bashing for the sake of doing so.
well its a good thing we dont and havent used IE 6 in a long time eh? i mean developing for a browser that hasnt been around for some time would be a great use of time wouldnt it? Not sure what hacks your talking about or special coding.. but i have made websites for te past 10 years and i have never had to change anything as i went from IE 4 to IE 8 to make the sites work.
thank you for pointing out the fact that well while you might have had some valid points a few years ago with IE 6 that your just a damn retard now. I cant see it now at teh MS office.. your browser doesnt work. ok well internet explorer....... NO your firefox isnt working.. well thats not our browser (angry customer well its in your os!!) well thats because the idiotic EU and people that actualy think they have a point think if we add others software with our OS that its going to help people use other software that if they needed they could have done by them selves.
personaly if you back up the EU on this i question everything you say from now on ..... on anything ...
The only thing this is going to do is pointlessly waste money for MS pointlessly add a bunch of browsers to the OS that others should be trying to make worth downloading in the first place. amd cause so much damn confusion that ill bet later on this will be over turned as a big mistake.. (100% hind sight) only it really takes a dumb ass to think this is actualy doing anything usefull for anyone.
oooook ill reply to your load of stupidity. the problem isnt MS putting IE with windows its not with it bundling its own browser with its own OS (wait didnt i or youalready say that?) wait i did follow the whole thing how nice of you to assume we didnt though but if im correct here people have the right to force thier own products on you normaly via advertisments or those annoying perfume snipers in the malls.
ok down to the rest. hey i used IE 6 it did have tabbed browseing and a popup blocker wtf IE did you use? maybe not standard built in but it was capable. Two things at the time and i still hate tabs today actualy. I actualy used other browsers at that time and i only found alot of broswers that loaded pages wrong, slowly, or not at all so i dont know what your talking about. As far as java script being slow. Ever since sun forced MS to stop putting thier own java machine in i have had to deal with insanly slow java compaired to the good old days when MS was allowed to use thier java machine. (why should i be forced to use others crap that hardly works because you people bash on ms simply because you believe them to be this giant monster). Actualy you could set others to default though i kept telling them i wanted IE as default. BTW anything that uses teh same API's as IE to view pages is as "faulty" as IE so i could really care less if its integrated in the OS.
Now i know alot of people complain all the time about IE and windows but i have been using them since the 95 plug and pray years and honestly other then some incompatable hardware slow to make drivers from venders and a couple bugs here and there.. i have had NO issues with my windows or IE installs.
but hell im sure alot of stuff made today runs like shit on software or hardware made years ago god point there.
MS froze the web market? really they told people to not make browsers? i mean serisouly if i told you to not eat till you died would you? from what i remember not only are you so fulll of it its coming out of your ears but during that time i remember all kinds of crap browsers i wouldnt have wipped my ass with (perhaps thats why people chose IE over them cuz they werent worth the bandwidth to download!!! nooo it must be MS telling people to not do it thats right !!!
im going to ignore your comprison because its just simply to say retarded and really the worst comparasin i have ever seen.
Why you keep reffering to IE 6 is beyond me i know your trying to make some point about that erra but your comparing it to things that werent even out then so really i dont see your point at all. most of what your saying just seems to be mindless MS bashing for the sake of doing so.
well its a good thing we dont and havent used IE 6 in a long time eh? i mean developing for a browser that hasnt been around for some time would be a great use of time wouldnt it? Not sure what hacks your talking about or special coding.. but i have made websites for te past 10 years and i have never had to change anything as i went from IE 4 to IE 8 to make the sites work.
thank you for pointing out the fact that well while you might have had some valid points a few years ago with IE 6 that your just a damn retard now. I cant see it now at teh MS office.. your browser doesnt work. ok well internet explorer....... NO your firefox isnt working.. well thats not our browser (angry customer well its in your os!!) well thats because the idiotic EU and people that actualy think they have a point think if we add others software with our OS that its going to help people use other software that if they needed they could have done by them selves.
personaly if you back up the EU on this i question everything you say from now on ..... on anything ...
The only thing this is going to do is pointlessly waste money for MS pointlessly add a bunch of browsers to the OS that others should be trying to make worth downloading in the first place. amd cause so much damn confusion that ill bet later on this will be over turned as a big mistake.. (100% hind sight) only it really takes a dumb ass to think this is actualy doing anything usefull for anyone.
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
Final rant before this post disappears under the weight of all the bullshit. This time a bit of common sense though.
MS has had this decision imposed due to its monopoly, meaning it has 90% of the market. If Apple had 90% would they have the same ruling against them with the Safari browser? If not is it because they are a closed system of hardware and software combined?
Does this mean that MS is being ruled as a monopoly because their OS can be installed on anyones PC? Aren't they helping to create an anti-monopoly in the hardware arena?
If MS decided to take hardware in-house, creating a total monopoly, would they enjoy the same immunity afforded to Apple?
MS has had this decision imposed due to its monopoly, meaning it has 90% of the market. If Apple had 90% would they have the same ruling against them with the Safari browser? If not is it because they are a closed system of hardware and software combined?
Does this mean that MS is being ruled as a monopoly because their OS can be installed on anyones PC? Aren't they helping to create an anti-monopoly in the hardware arena?
If MS decided to take hardware in-house, creating a total monopoly, would they enjoy the same immunity afforded to Apple?
blackthorne
Distinguished
- Apr 29, 2009
- 30
- 0
- 18,530
changkong78
Distinguished
- Sep 8, 2009
- 6
- 0
- 18,510
Already 3 pages of comments, but here goes.
back_by_demand, only in your last post do you make any sense. And yes, if Apple have 90% of the PC market, they will be subjected to the same ruling.
However, MS is considered a monopoly because of >90% marketshare, not because of open-platform and whatnot. It doesn't matter if Windows or OSX can only be installed on particular closed hardware, or open and can be installed on any hardware, MONOPOLY STATUS are achieved when you are too dominant, like 90%. I don't know what % constitutes a monopoly. That maybe up to the law or presiding judges.
Please note here that MS is considered a monopoly in the OS market, which MS then ABUSE that MONOPOLY position to stiffle competitions in the BROWSER market.
Analogy to cars a stupid and only completely stupid idiots with chicken brain use them. That is because car manufacturers DON'T HAVE monopolies, same as Apple and Linux, so you cannot force them to do anything.
Imagine, if 90% of cars on the road are made by GM. Then the analogy becomes valid. Then lets say they make their own radio that is shitty and charge you for it. Oooh, it may seems free but the cost are already included. Then would you really want that radio if you can exclude them with less price?
So then you are thinking, "GM should include choice of Ford or Honda engines as well as GM engines." No they are not, because engine, chassis, windscreen, tyres, are all PART OF A CAR, and GM is selling a car, not car parts.
Maybe when browsers are LEGALLY considered part of an OS, then IE competitors cannot use the monopolistic ABUSE argument anymore.
Now, browsers are free. Which is why people here cannot comprehend what this is all about. Actually, browsers are not free at all. It's just that SOMEONE ELSE are paying for it. Google pays Mozilla on how much searches are through Firefox that uses the built-in default Google search. Google makes money through ads. See how it goes? MS wants some of that ads revenue, so it makes it's own free search engine where they can sell ads space, and then develop IE for free to use that search engine by default. Of course consumers have options to change them, but the default setting is a powerful position to be in.
In this case, MS tried the no-browser included approach, and they will be in the right. However, the EU Commission, being the one in power in the EU (much like the President is in power in the US), decided that the no-browser solution are too costly to their citizens (the Europeans) and does not accept. EU Commission then strong-armed MS to find other solution or face higher fine/tax/whatever to continue TO DO BUSINESS in Europe. MS could of course retract from European market, but from PROFIT point of view, the ballot/choice screen would be the least costly. So they chose that instead.
back_by_demand, only in your last post do you make any sense. And yes, if Apple have 90% of the PC market, they will be subjected to the same ruling.
However, MS is considered a monopoly because of >90% marketshare, not because of open-platform and whatnot. It doesn't matter if Windows or OSX can only be installed on particular closed hardware, or open and can be installed on any hardware, MONOPOLY STATUS are achieved when you are too dominant, like 90%. I don't know what % constitutes a monopoly. That maybe up to the law or presiding judges.
Please note here that MS is considered a monopoly in the OS market, which MS then ABUSE that MONOPOLY position to stiffle competitions in the BROWSER market.
Analogy to cars a stupid and only completely stupid idiots with chicken brain use them. That is because car manufacturers DON'T HAVE monopolies, same as Apple and Linux, so you cannot force them to do anything.
Imagine, if 90% of cars on the road are made by GM. Then the analogy becomes valid. Then lets say they make their own radio that is shitty and charge you for it. Oooh, it may seems free but the cost are already included. Then would you really want that radio if you can exclude them with less price?
So then you are thinking, "GM should include choice of Ford or Honda engines as well as GM engines." No they are not, because engine, chassis, windscreen, tyres, are all PART OF A CAR, and GM is selling a car, not car parts.
Maybe when browsers are LEGALLY considered part of an OS, then IE competitors cannot use the monopolistic ABUSE argument anymore.
Now, browsers are free. Which is why people here cannot comprehend what this is all about. Actually, browsers are not free at all. It's just that SOMEONE ELSE are paying for it. Google pays Mozilla on how much searches are through Firefox that uses the built-in default Google search. Google makes money through ads. See how it goes? MS wants some of that ads revenue, so it makes it's own free search engine where they can sell ads space, and then develop IE for free to use that search engine by default. Of course consumers have options to change them, but the default setting is a powerful position to be in.
In this case, MS tried the no-browser included approach, and they will be in the right. However, the EU Commission, being the one in power in the EU (much like the President is in power in the US), decided that the no-browser solution are too costly to their citizens (the Europeans) and does not accept. EU Commission then strong-armed MS to find other solution or face higher fine/tax/whatever to continue TO DO BUSINESS in Europe. MS could of course retract from European market, but from PROFIT point of view, the ballot/choice screen would be the least costly. So they chose that instead.
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
I agree that the car references are a bit daft. But who sets the line of the monopoly? Is it over 90% or would 80% do it? Lets take a look at Intel for a moment, they hover around 80% in the CPU market.
Does this mean that if they get even more market share they will have to start advertising for AMD, ARM, IBM, VIA, TI, Transmeta, etc?
Will they have to put on the side of packaging, similar to smoking health warnings, that this products is not the only CPU and should you so desire, there are a range of other CPU's from these other people that will also help run a computer.
Google has enjoyed over 90% of the browser market until recently and now hoveres at 65%, when it was over 90% where was the EU law to force Google to advertise on it's homepage that there Bing, Yahoo, AltaVista, Ask, AOLSearch and Hotbot as well?
No matter how you try to explain it, using the monopoly laws to shoehorn a rival product into the MS operating system, for free and more importantly FOREVER, is a gigantic miscarriage of justice and the only reason it has been done is not to be fair, but the EU flexing it muscles to try and prove it can go toe-to-toe with the USA. The US Government needs to step in and tell the EU to back off.
Does this mean that if they get even more market share they will have to start advertising for AMD, ARM, IBM, VIA, TI, Transmeta, etc?
Will they have to put on the side of packaging, similar to smoking health warnings, that this products is not the only CPU and should you so desire, there are a range of other CPU's from these other people that will also help run a computer.
Google has enjoyed over 90% of the browser market until recently and now hoveres at 65%, when it was over 90% where was the EU law to force Google to advertise on it's homepage that there Bing, Yahoo, AltaVista, Ask, AOLSearch and Hotbot as well?
No matter how you try to explain it, using the monopoly laws to shoehorn a rival product into the MS operating system, for free and more importantly FOREVER, is a gigantic miscarriage of justice and the only reason it has been done is not to be fair, but the EU flexing it muscles to try and prove it can go toe-to-toe with the USA. The US Government needs to step in and tell the EU to back off.
most post from americans display their lack of understanding of what this is all about with some very dumb analogies like the auto industry one(seems everything to americans has to be related to big gas guzzlers). the idea is ms has 90% of the os market and some of their software bundled like a browser or media player does not help competition..this does not apply on mac or linux based machines because they have a very little market share and as far as linux distors, almost all provide the option to download and install browsers.
for the comment by the lesser-informed used who apparently refers to himself as a geek yet has never heard of those browsers and have called them shitty sub-standards which is strange..if you did not hear of them before or obviously used them before..how did you know they are substandard?
the other browsers were included to the "choice screen" according to browsers' statistics and EU users requests. the EU obviously does not care what a daft redneck think he knows about browsers. it's all about choice..slim, avant and maxthon are all trident(ie) based browsers that offer an array of features that are not available to ie. flock is targeted towards social-network users. k-meleon is a very known browser..one of the very first gecko based browsers(actually precedes firefox by more than 4 years). k-meleon uses windows os api(native widgets) as opposed to xul/html markup language normally used with mozilla products..hence it's very responsive, fast and much more resource-friendly and as a matter of fact it's quite popular in europe. k-meleon is a windows-only browser and as a matter of fact makes more sense to be offered than firefox which suffers from memory leaks due to its flawed platform-independent programming.
as for the more-ignorant comment by the person who sez windows will now comes on 4 bluray discs since providing all software the EU claims should be included.. obviosuly you have never installed an os like ubantu or knoppix or freebsd. those oses for example offer you hundreds of software from a list..they are not included within the os package..it's simply a referer to the download link..if you do select a software from that list, it will connect you online to the download site.
the choice screen works in a similar way...non of the browsers are actually bundled with the os..except ofcourse for the ie trident engine which is going to be installed anyhow whether you choose ie or not, simply because a lot of ms applications and the os itself relies on the trident libraries..selecting ie installe the launching binary "iexplorer.exe" but the engine is already installed by default.
in the end it's all about what European users want and the commission as representative to its citizens provided what they have always been asking for.
if ms doesn't like the conditions..they can take their business else where because that's what the eu customers want.
in a better analogy that the yanks can better understand:
if ford was offering their cars in sweden without let's say.. a heater..no one will buy it or want to buy it. if ford does not wish to install that heater then it should not be marketing its cars in sweden...
for the comment by the lesser-informed used who apparently refers to himself as a geek yet has never heard of those browsers and have called them shitty sub-standards which is strange..if you did not hear of them before or obviously used them before..how did you know they are substandard?
the other browsers were included to the "choice screen" according to browsers' statistics and EU users requests. the EU obviously does not care what a daft redneck think he knows about browsers. it's all about choice..slim, avant and maxthon are all trident(ie) based browsers that offer an array of features that are not available to ie. flock is targeted towards social-network users. k-meleon is a very known browser..one of the very first gecko based browsers(actually precedes firefox by more than 4 years). k-meleon uses windows os api(native widgets) as opposed to xul/html markup language normally used with mozilla products..hence it's very responsive, fast and much more resource-friendly and as a matter of fact it's quite popular in europe. k-meleon is a windows-only browser and as a matter of fact makes more sense to be offered than firefox which suffers from memory leaks due to its flawed platform-independent programming.
as for the more-ignorant comment by the person who sez windows will now comes on 4 bluray discs since providing all software the EU claims should be included.. obviosuly you have never installed an os like ubantu or knoppix or freebsd. those oses for example offer you hundreds of software from a list..they are not included within the os package..it's simply a referer to the download link..if you do select a software from that list, it will connect you online to the download site.
the choice screen works in a similar way...non of the browsers are actually bundled with the os..except ofcourse for the ie trident engine which is going to be installed anyhow whether you choose ie or not, simply because a lot of ms applications and the os itself relies on the trident libraries..selecting ie installe the launching binary "iexplorer.exe" but the engine is already installed by default.
in the end it's all about what European users want and the commission as representative to its citizens provided what they have always been asking for.
if ms doesn't like the conditions..they can take their business else where because that's what the eu customers want.
in a better analogy that the yanks can better understand:
if ford was offering their cars in sweden without let's say.. a heater..no one will buy it or want to buy it. if ford does not wish to install that heater then it should not be marketing its cars in sweden...
for the "geek" who has never heard of said-browsers. maybe because you have never tried browsers other than the ones with the heavy campaigns behind them.. (what kind of a geek is that?)
http://vista.blorge.com/2009/12/18/windows-internet-browsers-the-best-of-the-rest/
http://vista.blorge.com/2009/12/18/windows-internet-browsers-the-best-of-the-rest/
er..what reasoning do you prefer..ok, let's compare with the auto-industry again.. yanks! (no wonder they voted from dubya..TWICE!)
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
Well bully for fucking Linux, isn't it wonderful to be so fucking perfect. In a business environment Windows needs to able to be installed whilst isolated from the internet. If you worked in IT you would know that.
So tell me, does the new Choice Screen lead to a download or is it included in the install disk?
Thank you, now sit on the naughty step and leave the discussion to the grown ups.
enforcer22
Distinguished
- Sep 10, 2006
- 1,692
- 0
- 19,790
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]I agree that the car references are a bit daft. But who sets the line of the monopoly? Is it over 90% or would 80% do it? Lets take a look at Intel for a moment, they hover around 80% in the CPU market.Does this mean that if they get even more market share they will have to start advertising for AMD, ARM, IBM, VIA, TI, Transmeta, etc?Will they have to put on the side of packaging, similar to smoking health warnings, that this products is not the only CPU and should you so desire, there are a range of other CPU's from these other people that will also help run a computer.Google has enjoyed over 90% of the browser market until recently and now hoveres at 65%, when it was over 90% where was the EU law to force Google to advertise on it's homepage that there Bing, Yahoo, AltaVista, Ask, AOLSearch and Hotbot as well?No matter how you try to explain it, using the monopoly laws to shoehorn a rival product into the MS operating system, for free and more importantly FOREVER, is a gigantic miscarriage of justice and the only reason it has been done is not to be fair, but the EU flexing it muscles to try and prove it can go toe-to-toe with the USA. The US Government needs to step in and tell the EU to back off.[/citation]
Exactly why isnt intel putting a amd chip in every box right now giving thier customer a choice?
and to justapasserby speaking of rednecks and total lack of understanding of the real underlined subject. what rock did you come out from under. You have to be kidding me. Hell i have an idea to go along with your insane logi why not just sell the windows disk but wait. when it loads it says would you like windows linux mac os or something else? i mean really is this where its going to end? everyone tries to get on top and MS gets thier first and they are all the sudden the bad guys?! (rip off of anti trust) but seruously they have done some bad things i mean what big company hasnt but this is the most ass hatted way of "paying back MS" for driving the computer industry everyone else at the time thought was a dead end business model. O wait MS is pretty much the industry now becuase they are the only ones that tried to make it something other then say apple. sure there were other players but only those two really wanted to make a computer personal. Now all these guys are playing catch up and screeming foul when hey MS is big they have influance lets try and rip that off. Well now your just as bad as the company your trying to punish for seing into the future.
You cant say americans are ignorant then rant off about how al our cars are gass gluzzlers tell us we are retarded for voting for bush (even though thats not actualy true) and how we just dont understand why companys should have to sell others products for free becuse your a bunch of anti MS retards that apperantly are void of all free will.
btw your car analagy makes no sense at all you should stick to more ignorant comments like "if ms doesn't like the conditions..they can take their business else where because that's what the eu customers want." really i wish they would sometimes. dont for a minute think that f ms said fine no more OS for you that it wouldnt cripple the EU in almost every area possible for a vary long time. Which wouldnt happen becuase they would if they were smart eventual beg MS to come back and losen up thier restrictions. However that would cost MS alot of money in the long run. So they are going to keep playing the EU's games until its just not worth it. and i reffer to them as games becuase thier mandates have changed NOTHING AT ALL for the consumer. They waste your money like ours was wasted on a war in iraq and your all for it yet laugh at us wating money on something just as pointless.
Im waiting for the bliss part.....................
Exactly why isnt intel putting a amd chip in every box right now giving thier customer a choice?
and to justapasserby speaking of rednecks and total lack of understanding of the real underlined subject. what rock did you come out from under. You have to be kidding me. Hell i have an idea to go along with your insane logi why not just sell the windows disk but wait. when it loads it says would you like windows linux mac os or something else? i mean really is this where its going to end? everyone tries to get on top and MS gets thier first and they are all the sudden the bad guys?! (rip off of anti trust) but seruously they have done some bad things i mean what big company hasnt but this is the most ass hatted way of "paying back MS" for driving the computer industry everyone else at the time thought was a dead end business model. O wait MS is pretty much the industry now becuase they are the only ones that tried to make it something other then say apple. sure there were other players but only those two really wanted to make a computer personal. Now all these guys are playing catch up and screeming foul when hey MS is big they have influance lets try and rip that off. Well now your just as bad as the company your trying to punish for seing into the future.
You cant say americans are ignorant then rant off about how al our cars are gass gluzzlers tell us we are retarded for voting for bush (even though thats not actualy true) and how we just dont understand why companys should have to sell others products for free becuse your a bunch of anti MS retards that apperantly are void of all free will.
btw your car analagy makes no sense at all you should stick to more ignorant comments like "if ms doesn't like the conditions..they can take their business else where because that's what the eu customers want." really i wish they would sometimes. dont for a minute think that f ms said fine no more OS for you that it wouldnt cripple the EU in almost every area possible for a vary long time. Which wouldnt happen becuase they would if they were smart eventual beg MS to come back and losen up thier restrictions. However that would cost MS alot of money in the long run. So they are going to keep playing the EU's games until its just not worth it. and i reffer to them as games becuase thier mandates have changed NOTHING AT ALL for the consumer. They waste your money like ours was wasted on a war in iraq and your all for it yet laugh at us wating money on something just as pointless.
Im waiting for the bliss part.....................
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
There is no bliss, the ruling does not come from a stand point of fairness. As an EU citizen I have been disenfranchised, they have been self-appointed and they do not represent me.
MS - "No we didn't, we did everything you asked for"
EU - "Who cares? We don't have to prove it"
The way round this for MS is easy. The EU cannot tell OEMs what to do, only MS, so all OEMs can be IE pre-installed and stick the Choice Screen up the EUs ass. All non-OEM Windows are refered to download link in the USA with card or paypal payment options, as online transactions are not covered either. Reduce the number of Choice Screen versions of Windows 7 on physical media for sale in the EU to, say, none.
EU wins, they get the physical media version changed, but is no longer available.
MS wins, they dont have to play the EU's game, save money not having to print DVDs, stick 2 fingers up to the EU as they cannot own the internet.
EU - "You broke the rules, give us a billion dollars"
MS - "No we didn't, we did everything you asked for"
EU - "Who cares? We don't have to prove it"
The way round this for MS is easy. The EU cannot tell OEMs what to do, only MS, so all OEMs can be IE pre-installed and stick the Choice Screen up the EUs ass. All non-OEM Windows are refered to download link in the USA with card or paypal payment options, as online transactions are not covered either. Reduce the number of Choice Screen versions of Windows 7 on physical media for sale in the EU to, say, none.
EU wins, they get the physical media version changed, but is no longer available.
MS wins, they dont have to play the EU's game, save money not having to print DVDs, stick 2 fingers up to the EU as they cannot own the internet.
enforcer22
Distinguished
- Sep 10, 2006
- 1,692
- 0
- 19,790
Just for the record i have used these browsers (this one is going to get me alot of thumbs down.
IE really only random problems here and there over years of use my personal favorite
Oprah I really liked this browser lacking active x so i really dont use it anymore but its defanitly something i would use.
firefox rendered pages horribly and the memory leek ( i mean built in enhnacements to return to pages quickly) was annoying and its tabbed interface is nothing special considering it was done years before them by oprah
AOL Explorer aka netscape was a nice browser when it was netscape but didnt really do anything IE didnt already do other then some pop 3 and other options i didnt and still dont care about.
Safari likely the worst broswer i have ever used did everything wrong. Assuming it would even load a page for me it was almost never right.
Maxathon nice when i used it but really buggy but then again that was years ago.
there were a couple more but i have long forgot thier names and didnt care for them anyways.
Im always whilling to use other software MS didnt make Im not a fan of live messenger but i use it however through trillian which is IMO the best messenger made.
I personaly like thier browser thier media player and thier OS but damn it i wish i could get a choice of calculator in the form of a install windows asking me which one i would want to use!!!! ( sorry added sarcasm :/ )
here is the kicker. I didnt need the EU to show me a screen i didnt even know much about the internet then as when this was going on it was relativly a new thing. Users dont need thier hand held. Want them to use other broswers? let them know about them! its not MS's job dont these people have a advertisment department? firefox is posted all over all the webpages i goto. i can see why people have been using thier browser but where are these other people. Admitedly some of these browsers they have added i have never even heard of. Why? its not because MS was slacking in thier obligations to pramote others work but its because they a slacking in thier ability to pramote thier own work. People flock to whats familier and a name they hear over and over. well get off your lazy ass's and pramote your freaking work and dont make MS do it MS isnt stopping you they never were if you think they were your all just kidding your selves they never stopped me from loading any browser any media player any messenger or any other OS as a multi boot or even running inside of windows as a VM MS have never told me what i can put on my computer EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! if they did i WOULD NOT USE WINDOWS EVER!!!!!!!! which is one reason i NEVER EVER buy a apple product. they want my money and then tell me how i can use it and what i can put on it. EU should be focusing on apple not MS since apple does exactly what EU clames MS does.
Microsoft has the right to bundle its work with well its work. As anyone should be. As long as they dont come to your house and unplug you or stall your OS beacuse you loaded iTunes on your comp or firefox or winamp then they are doing nothing wrong. All you people that think MS should pramote others work or at least let you now about it. Shove it up your colective arse's and if any of you actualy own a business or have made a product thats populer and sold in stores. BTW i have some stuff i want you to bundle with it and you better goddamn do it cuz the EU says you have to since they now set that presadent. If you dont i WILL SUE YOU.
IE really only random problems here and there over years of use my personal favorite
Oprah I really liked this browser lacking active x so i really dont use it anymore but its defanitly something i would use.
firefox rendered pages horribly and the memory leek ( i mean built in enhnacements to return to pages quickly) was annoying and its tabbed interface is nothing special considering it was done years before them by oprah
AOL Explorer aka netscape was a nice browser when it was netscape but didnt really do anything IE didnt already do other then some pop 3 and other options i didnt and still dont care about.
Safari likely the worst broswer i have ever used did everything wrong. Assuming it would even load a page for me it was almost never right.
Maxathon nice when i used it but really buggy but then again that was years ago.
there were a couple more but i have long forgot thier names and didnt care for them anyways.
Im always whilling to use other software MS didnt make Im not a fan of live messenger but i use it however through trillian which is IMO the best messenger made.
I personaly like thier browser thier media player and thier OS but damn it i wish i could get a choice of calculator in the form of a install windows asking me which one i would want to use!!!! ( sorry added sarcasm :/ )
here is the kicker. I didnt need the EU to show me a screen i didnt even know much about the internet then as when this was going on it was relativly a new thing. Users dont need thier hand held. Want them to use other broswers? let them know about them! its not MS's job dont these people have a advertisment department? firefox is posted all over all the webpages i goto. i can see why people have been using thier browser but where are these other people. Admitedly some of these browsers they have added i have never even heard of. Why? its not because MS was slacking in thier obligations to pramote others work but its because they a slacking in thier ability to pramote thier own work. People flock to whats familier and a name they hear over and over. well get off your lazy ass's and pramote your freaking work and dont make MS do it MS isnt stopping you they never were if you think they were your all just kidding your selves they never stopped me from loading any browser any media player any messenger or any other OS as a multi boot or even running inside of windows as a VM MS have never told me what i can put on my computer EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! if they did i WOULD NOT USE WINDOWS EVER!!!!!!!! which is one reason i NEVER EVER buy a apple product. they want my money and then tell me how i can use it and what i can put on it. EU should be focusing on apple not MS since apple does exactly what EU clames MS does.
Microsoft has the right to bundle its work with well its work. As anyone should be. As long as they dont come to your house and unplug you or stall your OS beacuse you loaded iTunes on your comp or firefox or winamp then they are doing nothing wrong. All you people that think MS should pramote others work or at least let you now about it. Shove it up your colective arse's and if any of you actualy own a business or have made a product thats populer and sold in stores. BTW i have some stuff i want you to bundle with it and you better goddamn do it cuz the EU says you have to since they now set that presadent. If you dont i WILL SUE YOU.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
News Some RTX 5090s are shipping with missing ROP units, leading to less gaming performance: Report- Started by Admin
- Replies: 78
-
-
Review Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070 Ti review: A proper high-end GPU
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 80
-
News Meta defends using pirated material, claims it's legal if you don't seed content
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 44
-
News Nvidia explains the missing ROPs — defective silicon in 0.5% of RTX 5090 and 5070 Ti GPUs
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 21
-
News Leaked AMD RX 9070 XT benchmarks see it match Nvidia's RTX 4070 in synthetic tests
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 36
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram