Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post - Microsoft-EU showdown draws to a close

shamrock_uk · 04-26-2006, 10:07 AM

I think that's more a case of discriminatory pricing (to maximise profits) rather than an attempt to comply with the EU.

I can't remember the story exactly, but a couple of weeks ago MS were set back by a US judge that basically told them to cooperate with the EU.

It's an interesting case, largely because they're guilty as hell. The list of Microsofts' anti-competitive behaviour is long, distinguished and fairly uncontroversial - finding a suitable sanction is very difficult and really quite an interesting challenge.

We can't (and shouldn't!) force Microsoft to release its source code in my opinion. It should be every software companies right to keep its source closed if it wishes.

Rather than insist that Media Player is stripped out in some versions**, I feel it would be better to insist that they adopt open formats (and by that I mean properly open, not officexml) and use open APIs where necessary. These could either be developed in cooperation with other big players or simply released by MS. There's no need to strip Windows bare - simply stop them from blocking other competitors from competing.

What must be addressed is the previous MS tactic of simply 'waiting out' the lawsuits for anti-competitiveness, stalling and delaying with its mountain of lawyers then making a settlement two or three years after the fact. Of course, by this time the competitor has been largely forced from the market. If the EU does anything concrete and constructive to punish MS, I think this should definitely be near the top of the list.

For those unfamiliar, I find this site to be a pretty decent and level-headed account of Microsofts failings. It also has a specific section on business practices.

** Incidentally, MS are rather cunningly using the lack of demand for this version as evidence in this trial - they say that as there have been hardly any sales of WinXP sans Media Player that they can't have behaved improperly - failing to supply a product which nobody wants cannot amount to anticompetitiveness. This is one of the reasons that I think the EU is barking up the wrong tree in their approach to this (although I think they should be commended for tackling the issues).

[ 04-26-2006, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

04-26-2006, 10:07 AM	#3
shamrock_uk Dracolich Join Date: January 24, 2004 Location: UK Age: 42 Posts: 3,092	I think that's more a case of discriminatory pricing (to maximise profits) rather than an attempt to comply with the EU. I can't remember the story exactly, but a couple of weeks ago MS were set back by a US judge that basically told them to cooperate with the EU. It's an interesting case, largely because they're guilty as hell. The list of Microsofts' anti-competitive behaviour is long, distinguished and fairly uncontroversial - finding a suitable sanction is very difficult and really quite an interesting challenge. We can't (and shouldn't!) force Microsoft to release its source code in my opinion. It should be every software companies right to keep its source closed if it wishes. Rather than insist that Media Player is stripped out in some versions, I feel it would be better to insist that they adopt open formats (and by that I mean properly open, not officexml) and use open APIs where necessary. These could either be developed in cooperation with other big players or simply released by MS. There's no need to strip Windows bare - simply stop them from blocking other competitors from competing. What must be addressed is the previous MS tactic of simply 'waiting out' the lawsuits for anti-competitiveness, stalling and delaying with its mountain of lawyers then making a settlement two or three years after the fact. Of course, by this time the competitor has been largely forced from the market. If the EU does anything concrete and constructive to punish MS, I think this should definitely be near the top of the list. For those unfamiliar, I find this site to be a pretty decent and level-headed account of Microsofts failings. It also has a specific section on business practices. Incidentally, MS are rather cunningly using the lack of demand for this version as evidence in this trial - they say that as there have been hardly any sales of WinXP sans Media Player that they can't have behaved improperly - failing to supply a product which nobody wants cannot amount to anticompetitiveness. This is one of the reasons that I think the EU is barking up the wrong tree in their approach to this (although I think they should be commended for tackling the issues). [ 04-26-2006, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]