Microsoft loses anti-trust appeal

[din]

Source - BBC

Microsoft has lost its appeal against a record 497m euro (£343m; $690m) fine imposed by the European Commission in a long-running competition dispute.

The European Court of First Instance upheld the ruling that Microsoft had abused its dominant market position.

A probe concluded in 2004 that Microsoft was guilty of freezing out rivals in server software and products such as media players.

Microsoft has two months to appeal at the European Court of Justice.

"The Court of First Instance essentially upholds the Commission's decision finding that Microsoft abused its dominant position," the court's statement said.

Microsoft's top lawyer said it was important now for the company to comply with EU competition law, but that it had not yet decided on its next legal steps.

[Help~Is~Here]

This news is a proof in the face for those who still mock us when we say "Microsoft from time to time does unethical business"

[din]

Microsoft has lost its long-running competition court case against the European Commission on all key points. But what's the impact of the ruling?

Why did Microsoft lose, and what is it all about?

More at - Q&A: Microsoft anti-trust verdict

[gxsaurav]

Originally Posted by Help~Is~Here

This news is a proof in the face for those who still mock us when we say "Microsoft from time to time does unethical business"

So, bundling a Media Player with there own OS is unethical

Bundling PDF Viewer in the OS itself is unethical

Securing the kernel from outside intrusion for better virus protection is unethical

Working with Novell to bring Silverlight & .Net in form of Mono & moonlight is unethical....

well...yeah, MS is soooo evil

[din]

Originally Posted by gx_saurav

So, bundling a Media Player with there own OS is unethical

From the news

The European Commission's competition watchdog had accused Microsoft of shutting out rivals from its Windows operating system to gain a larger share of the lucrative market for web servers.

and

A second dispute was about media players. Microsoft suddenly bundled its own media player with its Windows operating system, effectively giving it away for free. That undermined the business of rivals like Apple and Real Networks.

Of course these are un-ethical

And remember the Browser case ? I think MS didn't change at all

And other points GX mntioned (securing kernel and all), I have no clue how they are related to the topic subject !!

Please enlighten us ...

For dummies like - din

The technology that Microsoft doesn't want to share with its competitors is secret computer code with the less than catchy name of "server interoperability protocols". These are vital in any modern office, where computers need to talk to each other and share files or printers.

Microsoft's rivals say that without these protocols, computers running rival server operating systems are not able to communicate properly with Windows.

[praka123]

The court, however, faulted the European Commission's ruling that had established an independent monitoring trustee to supervise Microsoft's conduct, in imposing on Microsoft that it allow the monitoring trustee, independent of the Commission, to access its information, documents, premises and employees and also to the source code of its relevant products.
Microsoft has now been ordered to pay 80 per cent of the Commission's legal costs, while the Commission has to carry a part of Microsoft's costs.
http://www.domain-b.com/companies/co...17_windows.htm

[gxsaurav]

The European Commission's competition watchdog had accused Microsoft of shutting out rivals from its Windows operating system to gain a larger share of the lucrative market for web servers.

Tell me, does Apache lets u use Quicktime or VLC server as Media server solutions?

But, you can use them in Windows Server 2000/2003 to host as a media server. So whats the problem?

A second dispute was about media players. Microsoft suddenly bundled its own media player with its Windows operating system, effectively giving it away for free. That undermined the business of rivals like Apple and Real Networks.

Windows is the OS of Microsoft & Microsoft bundles a Media Player with there own OS so that people don't have to install things to play content, so that they can have a better out of the box experience. Is microsoft stopping anyone from installing these on there computers? Microsoft released Windows XP N for Europe & it was the least purchased OEM edition of Windows cos OEM & customers wanted a media player out of the box.

Apple bundles Quicktime & iTunes with Mac OS X, & iTunes has the largest share of online market share. So why isn't Apple wrong?

[casanova]

Stop GX. When people need some utility that is not bundled with Windows, they will say Shye, MS can't even provide this and when they provide and some1 sues them, they start the anti-trust thingy. Richest company MS is the poorest.

[goobimama]

This is really sad. MS wants to provide a Media player, let them do it. Its not like they are not allowing other software/players to be installed on the systems. These are softwares which make the OS experience better out of the box. If the competitors want their software to be used, make it better than what is offered.

And if that case is true, gx, where Symantec and Mcafee didn't allow MS to block out the registry only cause they need to run an antivirus, then it is truly a sad world. These americans are really sad.

[Help~Is~Here]

Originally Posted by gx_saurav

Windows is the OS of Microsoft & Microsoft bundles a Media Player with there own OS so that people don't have to install things to play content, so that they can have a better out of the box experience. Is microsoft stopping anyone from installing these on there computers? Microsoft released Windows XP N for Europe & it was the least purchased OEM edition of Windows cos OEM & customers wanted a media player out of the box.

Isn't this what microsoft has been saying and for which the court ruled this point as invalid? On what basis are you trying to bring up the same argument again @gx, when the court has said, it's wrong? Are you saying that the court is wrong now?

BTW, can some one enlighten me on how to uninstall Windows Media player through a straight through uninstallation? So much so for a so called bundled software that doesn't have a straightforward uninstall!! Now what does that tell me? Yeah, it tells me that MS doesn't want you to uninstall Media player! So much so for your argument about bundled cr@p

[goobimama]

Are you saying that the court is wrong now?

Why not? Since when has the court been infallible?

[Help~Is~Here]

Originally Posted by goobimama

Why not? Since when has the court been infallible?

The court is right till it's proven wrong.. so as of now.. the court is right

[stonecold8]

EU is one of the most corrupt organisations... They just don't want any US companies in europe and they just want their own monopoly there.... it will be gr8 for microsoft to stop selling its products there till these EU guys come back to them... If they r so worried then y don't they make their own OS ...

[Help~Is~Here]

Originally Posted by stonecold8

EU is one of the most corrupt organisations... They just don't want any US companies in europe and they just want their own monopoly there.... it will be gr8 for microsoft to stop selling its products there till these EU guys come back to them... If they r so worried then y don't they make their own OS ...

When you sell stuff in my market, you sell according to my rules! simple as that! when you go and live in the US, you live according to the rules in the US, not according to Indian rules! Now do you understand?

[infra_red_dude]

as of now i don't haf any problem wid Windows and the bundled components. but i did haf until MS intro'd Set program access defaults. that did ease the job of removing some crap (like IE) and making other deserving software the default app.

however, i think WMP is a mature product and there shoudn't be any dispute regarding this. MS should provide an uninstall utiltiy as they did wid MSN/Messnger etc. everyone know real play is the crappiest media player!

[gxsaurav]

Originally Posted by Help~Is~Here

Isn't this what microsoft has been saying and for which the court ruled this point as invalid? On what basis are you trying to bring up the same argument again @gx, when the court has said, it's wrong? Are you saying that the court is wrong now?

Yes the court is wrong, & this is what I say. If tomorrow GNome sues Mandriva for bundling KDE with Mandriva Linux & court rules out that Mandriva should come wthout any Window Manager & should ask the user while installing that which Windows Manager to use, will it give the same out of the box experience or will this be good & justified?

Maruti makes a car, they sale it in Europe. They install there own seat cover in the car made in India no the one made in italy to cut costs & give proper out of the shop experience. Do u expect maruti to ship a car without seat cover & tell the customer "Due to EU rules we cannot install seat cover, you are requested to go to the nearest seat cover market & install whatever u want. same with tires, & body paint & AC & Radio....". What do u think the customer will say then?

In that thread u & mediator were bashing that why MS can't give proper experience out of the box like an office suite or PDF reader, this is the reason. They are not even allowed to secure the OS or bundle a Media Player, what do u expect that they will be allowed to bundle something else at all?

BTW, can some one enlighten me on how to uninstall Windows Media player through a straight through uninstallation?

Add/Remove Program -> Add remove Windows Component -> WMP

it tells me that MS doesn't want you to uninstall Media player!

To give proper out of the box experience MS bundles there own WMP engine & player in Windows. Removing this can severely hamper the performance of Windows.

Apple bundles Quicktime with Mac OS. Removing this will severely hamper the working of OS X.

Linux Distro like ubuntu come with gstreamer also out of the box. Zenwalk core comes without anything, so...does Zenwalk core provides a good out of the box experience?

When you sell stuff in my market, you sell according to my rules! simple as that! when you go and live in the US, you live according to the rules in the US, not according to Indian rules! Now do you understand?

Does MS stops u from changing the rules on which Windows is based upon

[stonecold8]

Originally Posted by Help~Is~Here

When you sell stuff in my market, you sell according to my rules! simple as that! when you go and live in the US, you live according to the rules in the US, not according to Indian rules! Now do you understand?

This don't make any sense... Will u ask a govt to share their defence secrets ???? So how can u ask a software company to share software information with rivals ... This is totally ridiculous of EU... This will hurt EU more than MS ...

[din]

1. How many of the seniors here remember the simlar case - Browser one that was filed against MS ?

That was in USA and not EU. Don't you think MS is playing the same trick here ? And why blame EU for that ? Just have a look at the BBC page link I posted, you can see how many countries are against the un-ethical, monopoly style business of MS.

Originally Posted by gx_saurav

To give proper out of the box experience MS bundles there own WMP engine & player in Windows. Removing this can severely hamper the performance of Windows.

WOW. Never knew that. for your kind information, MS ship Windows without media player in EU before itself. That is a small percentage though. So, MS ships something that is very insecure ? ? ?

Originally Posted by stonecold8

This don't make any sense... Will u ask a govt to share their defence secrets ???? So how can u ask a software company to share software information with rivals ... This is totally ridiculous of EU... This will hurt EU more than MS ...

The court didn't ask MS to reveal everything, like how they are making windows or they should give the source code to all people in the world, nothing like that.

Posting the same thing again ...

The technology that Microsoft doesn't want to share with its competitors is secret computer code with the less than catchy name of "server interoperability protocols". These are vital in any modern office, where computers need to talk to each other and share files or printers.

Microsoft's rivals say that without these protocols, computers running rival server operating systems are not able to communicate properly with Windows.

2. Rules - Yes they matter

You just saw Gmail is giving you lot of space, and you want people to know about it, in which section you will post it ? In Q & A ? Or in opensource ? Or the tech news ?

There are rules and regulations everywhere, not just in the case of softwares. Every country has its own rules. Do you dare to eat in public (at day time) during Ramdan in very strict countries like Saudi Arabia just coz you belongs to some other religion ? (just as an example). When you are in a different country, you have to obey their rules. It is very simple isn't it ?

Originally Posted by gx_saurav

Maruti makes a car, they sale it in Europe. They install there own seat cover in the car made in India no the one made in italy to cut costs & give proper out of the shop experience. Do u expect maruti to ship a car without seat cover & tell the customer "Due to EU rules we cannot install seat cover

Exactly. Maruti can't do it if the rule does not allow them to. Whats so confusing in that ? Cut cost or "help" customers is not the point. Rules are rules. If FORD want to sell their car in India, there are certain conditions. They just can't do everything they want.

I think gx very nicely explained this in the autopatcher thread !! That is if you want to use MS products, use their updates directly, use it as per their directions. Yes, this is exactly teh same. If you want to sell something in EU, go as per their directions.

3. Monopoly - Never a good thing.

How many of you read news other than tech ones ? In how many states people are against "Reliance Fresh stores" ? If you are from metros / live in a big city / apartment / never worked in the field of agriculture, you will sure think what the hell, why people are against these stores etc. Coz it is very convinient for the consumers, as they can go super market, get all types of good quality vegetables under one roof, no need to go to local market etc. But think of the normal vegetable sellers, think of farmers, they will get affected and some may have to close down for ever.

How many of you remember the power outage in Mumbai where Reliance manage the power, how many of you remember the hike in the price of onion in Delhi - This is all due to monopoly and not following the business rules. I know you think its like diverting the thread, but these are examples may be from different fields.

Originally Posted by gx_saurav

Yes the court is wrong, & this is what I say. If tomorrow GNome sues Mandriva for bundling KDE with Mandriva Linux

LOL, Media player belongs to MS but KDE does not belongs to Mandriva !!! When giving examples, please give similar ones Or it will confuse the poor readers (like Din) a d lot

And Maruti do not make their own tires or their own stereo system. They are not supposed to do that. But delivering Maruti with tyres and stereo is a different thing as they add the price for it and they are not the manufacturers of both.

[sandeepk]

^^ They did remove the media player but kept the WMP engine I think. That engine is really the integral part of windows.

[praka123]

@din:nice explanation!infact many members here feels microsoft is always right and others are wrong.inside their minds may be they where against monopolies.but when fanboyism closed their eyes,they cant think much more.
infact now EU,before M$ vs US gov for anti-trust-search!

[gxsaurav]

Originally Posted by din

WOW. Never knew that. for your kind information, MS ship Windows without media player in EU before itself. That is a small percentage though. So, MS ships something that is very insecure ? ? ?

Windows XP N, an utter OEM failure.

If you talk about rule, then MS should just bundle the kernel in a DVD. Well, is that a good out of the box experience?

[infra_red_dude]

see, it simple. either don't allow 3rd party vendors to write software for ur OS (in which case everything will be provided by the company, vaguely like apple) or jus code the OS and leave the software part to the 3rd party vendor.

MS did not bundle any browser prior to ie4.0 with windows 98. till then the development of netscape was significant. when they started bundling ie4.0 wid win98 (and also as a free download) it killed netscape. so either take the responsibility of developing things first place or don't venture out in the field. jus like MS everyone out there is to do business. everyone needs to survive. for MS it mite be a small issue to make WMP free but for real networks it is not! its their main business. imho this is where MS is wrong.

but i think it was really stupid for the ruling to go against MS when they wanted to lock the kernel. i mean, the case against MS was fought by the world worst AV product companies!! MS shudn't haf given in. its a loss to MS as well as Windows users.

[goobimama]

They may be EU's rules. But they suck pretty bad is all I got to say...

[NucleusKore]

@gx_saurav
I have nothing against what Microsoft is doing EXCEPT that its all so tightly integrated into the OS with no way of removing it- ie, wmp, etc. How I would have loved to chuck ie and wmp out COMPLETELY

[din]

Originally Posted by gx_saurav

If you talk about rule, then MS should just bundle the kernel in a DVD. Well, is that a good out of the box experience?

That is same as Maruti start selling only the engine

No, of course it is not good.

So maruti make the car, add the components which they are supposed to add, get tires from other people, add it, get stereo from other people add it etc and finally we get the car.

Now with the 'car making' license, when Maruti make stereo set and tyres and gives them "FREE" with the car ( ) then they are doing something which they are not supposed to do.

Nobody asked MS to deliver only the kernel. But there are things which they are not supposed to do. Reducing cost or helping users - are not justifications for something thats wrong in business.

[Edit]

Regarding the antitrust, that was about server software isn't it ? And the companies against MS were - Oracle, Sun Microsystems, Nokia and IBM. They didn't demand the entire source code or something, and no way related to Intellectual property thing.