Windows Vista may not ship in the European Union at the same time that it is released in the United States as a result of possible issues with European competition law, Microsoft acknowledged on Sept. 7. The problem from Microsoft’s perspective is that the EU has been slow in letting the software giant know exactly what it needs in order for Windows Vista to ship in Europe.
It may not ship at all, after all these years.
Yeah, i won’t miss it too much either:)
isn’t the Windows desktop market share relative to MacOSX, for example, in the EU bigger than in the US?
i’ve always thought that Windows was more successful in europe than in the states…
perhaps it’s a way to justify their delay on the sly…
Difool: I think it’s more that OSX is less successful in Europe. A single percentage of market share is almost insignificant to Microsoft, but huge to Apple.
That’s probably the case, but a lot of has to do with the following two factors:
(a) Apple hardware has traditionally been more expensive in Europe than in the States; whilst that may also be true of other PC makers, the fact that Apple kit is also more expensive than PCs to start with (and once you factor in the PC and software bundles plus the price of Apple kit + extra software, yes it is) makes a potentially bad situation worse.
(b) Europe also traditionally had a stronger “independent” computer industry than the US (composed mainly of the Amiga, with the Acorn Archimedes and Atari ST probably jostling for second place, especially in the UK, where Acorn were based); a lot of computer owners from that time either still run their Amigas/Ataris/Archimedes, either on a professional or hobby basis, or (like myself) assimilated with various degrees of grumbling to the PC or Mac (and promptly jumped ship when Linux reached a level of ease-of-use they were comfortable with).
Having said that, at least in the UK, Apples are strongest in those areas (graphic design, for example) in which they also established a strong foothold in the States.
Edited 2006-09-08 00:36
I think it’s a political slap at the EC. Sort of like when a child says “you ruined my life, I hate you!” because you wouldn’t let them go to the party.
Microsoft really should fire their PR department. They’re lucky that 99% of people (in the US) consider technology politics to be geeky and therefore uncool to read about.
By the time the EU figures out the kind of dance it wants MS to do, the first service pack will be ready.
The EU has responded rather sharply to this FUD by saying it is not up to the EU to ensure that Vista complies with the law, it is up to Microsoft. Which has had plenty fo time to get its act together. Sigh.
From one POV, this is the old bait and switch: string out a legal dispute over one set of software, then try to bulldoze proceedings by bringing on the new set of software.
It makes me wonder if there is a degree of ‘punishment’ here from Microsoft to the EU because of the processes the EU has been pushing Microsoft through.
Possibly not, but it wouldn’t suprise me.
MS: Are we doing anything wrong here?
EU: Go check the law and find out for yourself!
MS: We did, and we see nothing wrong.
EU: Comply or we’ll fine you even more!
MS: But in what way do we not comply?
EU: Go check the law and find out for yourself!
This is in effect what is going on.
If the EU wants to act Judge, Jury and Executioner, they better be able to tell the accused what the problem is as well.
Its not round and round, Its more simple than that. The EU is there to enforce the rules. Its not an employee of Microsoft.
The EU is there to enforce the rules. Its not an employee of Microsoft.
So the EU should enforce the rules without saying what rules were actually broken? Great!
“So the EU should enforce the rules without saying what rules were actually broken? Great!”
No
1) I’m outright saying its a legal trick.
MS: what are we doing wrong?
EU: XYZ?
EU: Your doing AB wrong?
MS: I’m sorry you said I was only doing XYZ wrong?
2) Microsoft really really big company?
Do Microsoft really not know the rules inside out. I’d be astonished if they don’t, as their business is built on breaking or bending the rules, and knowing when to do so.
3) The EU(paid from taxpayer money), should *only* ever get involved when they break the rules.
The problem is that the EU has already involved itself by raising concerns. That means MS is obligated to talks with EU about what, if anything, to change in Vista.
The other problem is that EU seems to be dragging it out unnecessarily long.
It’s not really anything different from that MS has to talk to DoJ regulators in the US to make sure they stay compliant with old rulings there.
Or well, the difference is that the US DoJ don’t seem to drag their feet about it.
I’d be astonished if ANYONE knew the rules inside out and how they should be applied, as they are too open to interpretation. If it was as simple as A AND B THEREFORE C, it would be a whole different matter.
The antitrust laws are there for Microsoft’s lawyers to read. If they chose to break the law, as they’ve done in the past (in Europe, and in the USA, and in South Korea, and possibly elsewhere …) that’s their choice. You should understand that this preemptive whining is not going to help them much. Frankly, it sounds hollow and childish to me.
rehdon
The difference being that the US DOJ has vetted Vista (MS is working within the oversight regulations that MS and the DOJ settled on, regulations that have actual guidelines and compliance judges and compliance officers), while the EU refuses to say what they don’t like about Vista, if anything (the EC has provided no guidelines, and instead is using what is known as “ad-hoc law”, which judicial scholars ageee is a horrible system, and isn’t “law” at all). They want MS to ship Vista, THEN raise their concerns (which will be quite arbitary) so they can levy fines.
MS has provided EU with many briefings and builds of Vista over the course of its development, and EU has the opportunity to voice its concerns BEFORE RTM, so MS can deal with them. Anyone, regardless of whether they think MS is the worst company in history, should be able to admit that that is the most reasonable course of action. The way it is now, MS has to guess what the EU’s concerns might be, if any, and second-guess themselves as to what to do. Oh, and it’s the EU that opened this can of worms by saying, “we have concerns”, but not telling MS what the concerns are. It’s called, “prosecuting someone without disclosing the charges”. Ever read Kafka’s “The Trial”? Kafka was European, and he knew that Euro’s judicial system sucked to say the least. Hell, just look at France’s “Reign of Terror” to see Europe has had a history of screwed up law systems.
Were I runing MS, I’d not ship Vista until the EU provides some guidelines. Or, I’d strip all applets out of Vista (not just WMP, and messenger, but Movie Maker, DVD Maker, notepad, caluclator, paint, WordPad, Solitaire, etc … ALL applets), and strip the Windows Firewall (we must protect the third party firewall market, right), and Explorer (don’t want to disrupt the file manager market, do we?), and ship that as Vista. (If I really wanted to make my point, I might even strip NTFS, the memory manager, and the task scheduler, as there used to be third party markets for each of those areas.) Oh, and I’d ship that version of Vista to Europe at the *same* price that I ship the full version to everyone else (and it’s justified; you’re making me do more work by stripping things out and maintaining a separate distro, since you refuse to provide guidelines). And then I’d charge 50 euros for an expansion pack that has all those things.
Don’t like it? Then give me some damn guidelines as to what I can ship!! Otherwise, I strip everything, and you deal with it.
But of course, I’m not MS, so I doubt they’ll do the above. I’d like to see them do that though; I’m very sick of the EU’s bull on this issue.
P.S.
You guys keep saying “MS broke the law!!!!” like MS is the epitome of evil and villainy. Why don’t you admit that the antitrust laws (which are civil, BTW, not criminal laws) are open to wide interpretation. Bundling a browser is not the worst thing that any corp ever did. You want real “evil” companies? Try Enron, polluters, abusers of child labor, companies taht use sweatshops. Hell, try Europe’s own IG Farben, probably the most dispicable company in history. MS isn’t in any of those company’s league when it comes to “evil”, so stop acting like MS is run by Satan (that is, if you value your own credibility).
Edited 2006-09-08 21:47
For some reason, I can’t edit my above comment, but I wanted to add this:
The EU is saying, “Just comply with the law”. But antitrust law has no strict guidlines written into it. It’s not like saying “just comply with the speeding law” and you *know* that it means to not go above 60 MPH in a 60 MPH zone.
So, what does “Just comply with the law” mean when it comes to antitrust law? Does it mean, “Your OS has been determined to enjoy monopoly status in a particular market, so don’t bundle anything that might harm third party applicatins and functions”? In which case MS would indeed have to strip all applets, the firewall, Explorer, etc, in order to make sure they “just comply with the law”? Or is that too broad a definition of “just comply with the law?” Above, someone even raised the possibility that including DX10 is illegal. So should MS strip that out of the EU version of Vista? If so, why? And if not, why not? Antitrust law is too vague, for a company on its own to judge what is within the law and what isn’t. The only way to “just comply with the law” is to play it safe and basically not ship any new features or applets at all (and charge for those things separately, which would be more expensive to the consumer). Is that what you EU backers are really damanding? (Most of you use Linux anyway, so I don’t know why you care, really.)
The EC got into the business of OS design, so it’s up to the EC to provide some guidelines as to what constitutes “just comply with the law” because the antitrust law itself has no strict guidelines. Either that, or face the fact that one way to “just comply with the law” is to withold shipment from EU altogether (until the EU gets its own act together).
Edited 2006-09-08 22:13
It’s been brought up several times here by now: Using your current monopoly to move into new markets is illegal.
I know, it’s a hard concept: Especially because it means that anything Microsoft bundles into Windows and becomes successful with is illegal.
Maybe that law is unfair? Maybe I’m mistaken and using a monopoly to move into a new market isn’t illegal in Europe (I don’t live there, afterall)?
Fair or not though, if it’s the law, it’s the law. Microsoft is in a rough position, but so is every desktop user in the world who is impacted by them in some way or another. They’re a major power player, and they have to be watched closely…
It’s a funny part of free markets. Compete (try to win), but never win. That’s basically the idea, assuming winning is gaining monopoly power. But hey, no one ever said capitalism was an entirely perfect idea, except maybe Adam Smith.
So is Microsoft paying a price for winning? Yes they are. Because, unfortunately for them, free markets don’t exist for rich businessmen, they exist for the benefit of us all (in theory). If they win, and we all lose, then the courts step in and fix the problem.
Um, no. As with most modern industrialized countries and their courts, the EU told Microsoft what it was charged with. It then proceeded to provide them guidelines on how to remedy it. Microsoft attempted, and an expert chosen by Microsoft from an EU prepared list said Microsoft’s efforts were not good enough.
Microsoft than chose to try and make a big political deal out of this case of law. Unfortunately for them, courts of law are not supposed to be political and usually only fall to politics in minor ways (the political leanings of the judge, but not the polls).
Oversimplifying it to a comedic level is fine, but please don’t try and reason from your metaphors. And PS, the EU is judge jury and executioner, that seems to be how the Europeans have set them up for dealing with anti-trust issues. If you see this as a problem I recommend you don’t do business in Europe
.
” As with most modern industrialized countries and their courts, the EU told Microsoft what it was charged with.”
They were charged with bundling a media player with their OS.
No such law exists in the EU.
No they were not. They were charged with anti-trust practices. I believe the charge was something more along the lines of “bundling a media player and thereby stopping media playing competition, including real and any other incompatible streaming formats.”
A media player isn’t just a little standards compliant piece of software that people make a quick choice on… It’s a multi-million dollar streaming data business where the users client determines the outcomes. Maybe Real priced themselves out of the market, or maybe Microsoft shoved their way in via bundling?
If they’d sued over Notepad I’d understand the surprise.
It doesn’t make sense that Microsoft would do that, since it is the European users that are punished, not the EU*. Also, it’s lost revenue for Microsoft.
* If you can consider the prospect of being denied Vista as ‘punishment’:-)
What I don’t understand is why there’s talk of it only being delayed *in Europe*. Are European users more likely to spot flaws?
DUH! Reread the summary. The EU is right, it is up to MS to comply with the law, not the EU to comply with MS.
Edited 2006-09-07 22:37
Well indeed it could be viewed as a blessing, but I just wonder what other follow-on effects not shipping it there could be.
The EU is a large population, and perhaps increased computer sales and operating system sales to both home and enterprises (if in the unlikely event, they dare) would be missed, contributing to less jobs, lower cash turnover/flow, less tax and of coarse less of a chance for the EU to take more legal action against Microsoft.
Again this is just back of the mind thoughts here and not based on anything but guesses.
Delay equals…. Vista will be shipped in Europe with Service Pack 1!
This is a shame, I was running bets on who would be out first, Vista / PS3 or Duke Nukem Forever. With Vista delayed, Duke Nukem Forever could beat them to market.
I’m waiting for an announcement of a delay to DNF to even out the odds again.
Sounds like the EC is trying to set up another shakedown scenario. The EC has the opportunity (and duty, IMO, since they decided to get in the business of regulating software design) to raise any concerns it has NOW before RTM, since MS has given them multiple briefings during Vista’s development regarding the features included with Vista.
But the EC doesn’t want to do that. They want MS to ship Vista, THEN come down with heavy fines for any problems that they have with it (not so much for the money itself (although that’s nice gravy) but to flex their muscles again and show how “tough” they are).
MS shouldn’t fall into that trap. They shouldn’t release Vista to Europe until the EC OKs Vista or tells MS what needs to be taken out in order to satisfy them. Until then, MS should continue to ship XP to Europe, and those Europeans that want Vista can import it.
Suicide scenario. No Vista in the EU would mean that European citizens get the chance to ponder alternatives, instead of accepting any piece of old software MS deems fit to be put on new PC’s through their anti-competitive preloading deals with OEM’s.
Even if MS delays Vista in the EU, why should I care? Edgy Eft is coming nicely together.
Suicide scenario. No Vista in the EU would mean that European citizens get the chance to ponder alternatives, instead of accepting any piece of old software MS deems fit to be put on new PC’s through their anti-competitive preloading deals with OEM’s.
First, if you believe the EC, there is no alternative. MS supposedly has a monopoly which prevents adoption of alternative.
Second, if Vista doesn’t ship on time, so what? OEMs will continue to ship XP — and people will continue to buy it. The real consequence of delaying Vista isn’t that MS won’t have a product on the market; it’s that its partners and OEMs will gradually lose faith in MS’s ability to deliver.
Really the EU should fall for this.
“The EC has the opportunity (and duty, IMO, since they decided to get in the business of regulating software design) to raise any concerns”
Molly Molly Molly.
This is a lawyer trick, and having read your posts. I know you know this.
Vista has more potential violations than ever before. It comes with everything. They absolutely want the EC to green light there monopolistic abuses. Look at whats included to Vista.
Virus Checker
Media Center
Spware Remover
DirectX 10
Thats ignoring the extentionsdefaults etc they have now included for their current abuses.
Video/Music Player
Internet browser
All these things should not be part of the OS and yet are bundled in. Vista is going to see an awful lot of lawsuits.
All these things should not be part of the OS and yet are bundled in. Vista is going to see an awful lot of lawsuits.
Ah yes, but all competitors are allowed to include the same stuff with THEIR OS offerings.
Why don’t you complain that THEY include multimedia players, browsers, etc.? Is it because you’re just another MS hater?
And why do you include DirectX 10 in the bunch of stuff you complain about? You DO know that DX 10 is not an APPLICATION I hope.
And you forget that EU has been informed over and over again during the development of Vista, so they have been able to say “no, you can’t include antivirus and antispyware” or “no, you can’t include a media center” for a long time… And yet, they do nothing.
The grandparent post for this thread has it perfectly right. The EU doesn’t WANT to say anything until Vista is released.
I am not a Microsoft hater quite the reverse. I in fact like the New Microsoft more and more.
I believe Microsoft is a business, and is out to make money. Microsoft has saturated its market with its OS, and is simply trying to get into new markets.
Monopolistic Law says that, using One monopoly to dominate another is not allowed.
I personally have nothing wrong with Microsoft producing a whole host of applications. I just want to replace most of them.
I included DX 10 for a very good reason. The same reason Microsoft had to pay out for Wordperfect. Control of the API’s. Microsoft is a *Game* company now is case you have not noticed. In the game market establishing a franchise is important. Imagine if say the next Halo could use *undocumented” physics API’s on there new game, or even have a head start on implementing features on DX 11. You have to remember that Game companies don’t just sell games they license engines.
And I’ve not even become to talk about the fact that competing API’s exist or how microsoft has a little thing called XBOX, or how there is a current battle for the living room, “Center of your digital world”. I could go on.
Its also a pretty good example of why the EU should say you know what the rules are don’t abuse it.
Edited 2006-09-08 05:54
I think DX10 brings up a good case where you can’t tell by what they’re doing now if it’s going to be legal. If DX10 is just their for game companies to use, and for their own composited desktop then that’s one thing, it’s strengthening the platform.
If it’s their because they’re planning an onslaught of PC games to try and take the PC game market then it’s another issue. The EU would have no way to tell, and it’d really be the later onslaught of games taking advantage of internal API’s and such that’d be the illegal part.
What you tell sounds like speculation.
Testing the software for compliance or violations seems to be a long time taking task. They needed years for their XP ruling. It would be stupid for Microsoft to hold off its products until this is done.
On the other side, MS has to consider itself what could be against the laws and what not, as everybody else has to do. If they get it wrong (again, and up till now never by accident!) the EU could rule again, but this would be years after Vista was released and MS got a lot of money out of it yet.
So what’s the deal?
Poor Microsoft, why do they all hate them so much? Oh wait, the broke the law! again, and again, and again …
Ah, those evil EC guys devising all sort of evil traps to milk the best known innovators of the IT world! Doesn’t make you sort of sad? Why all those laws, anyway? Long live the innovators!!!
rehdon
Indeed, we, european customers don’t like to be beta-testers fo over-priced softwares, so yes to me it’s a very good news.
No serious companies planned to migrate to Vista anyway, so please Microsoft, keep Vista out of reach of Europe as long as you want… We simply don’t care.
because they think *anything* that comes from microsoft must be TEH WOWZERS … but personally I don’t care that much for Vista anymore.
I’ve been following the progress, but it all looks confusing to me. Although I do think I easily fulfill the hardware requirements. But I’m *not* amused with Vista’s 20GB system partition tough, I have a 80GB hard disk and about 5GB is reserved for the Windows XP system partition… what’s it doing with that 20 Gig??
Vista looks confusing, sounds boring… the only thing I hope for is that I’m not forced to upgrade because certain applications will only run in Vista and no longer in, well, ‘pre-Vista’… I’ll be nicely running WinXP and SuSe side by side for a little longer. And maybe a Mac will join the family next year…
“No serious companies planned to migrate to Vista anyway, so please Microsoft, keep Vista out of reach of Europe as long as you want… We simply don’t care.”
Funny you should say that… our company only finished the migration to Windows XP a couple of months ago… I doubt they’re very anxious to get started on Vista now…
The EUC should not be allowed to live let alone given any power. They are a worthless bunch of liberal thieves.
So much for freedom in Europe. I am in the USA and honestly that is where I plan to stay.
Good. We don’t necessarily need rightwingers over here.
Since you are not a citizen of the EU, butt out of our politics, will ya?
Good. We don’t necessarily need rightwingers over here.
Since you are not a citizen of the EU, butt out of our politics, will ya?
Didn’t hear you talking like that when you had Hitler and Stalin all over your butt. Or, more recently, Balkans.
(Yeah, mod me down, but that kind of speech deserves answer like this.)
Edited 2006-09-08 03:43
Off-topic but necessary (to prevent distortions of historical facts):
* Hitler was not beaten by the US, but by Russians, English, Poles, Canadians, Moroccons, and, yes, Americans. And by his own incompetence in war. But compare the number of Russians dying in the war to the number of Americans. Anyway, politicians never die in wars, so keep this out of politics, please.
* The Soviet Union, let alone Stalin, was not beaten by the US as the neocons would like to have us believe, but by its internal weaknesses.
* The US wasn’t even interested in fighting the war until Pearl Harbor, and the Allies never even bothered doing something about the trains going to Auschwitz. About which they knew. They didn’t want all the refugees, you see.
Off-topic but necessary (to prevent distortions of historical facts):
Let’s see..:)
Hitler was not beaten by the US, but by Russians, English, Poles, Canadians, Moroccons, and, yes, Americans. And by his own incompetence in war. But compare the number of Russians dying in the war to the number of Americans. Anyway, politicians never die in wars, so keep this out of politics, please.
Nobody said US alone defeated Hitler. Who and where said that?
Number of people dying..??? Do you know how many Russians was killed by Stalin, in the years that followed? Russian army was simply not well equipped but *Stalin* did not care. How many of them dided defending Stalingrad (Sankt Petersburg) — was it really neccessary?
However, on that list of the countries, I don’t see many European countries, you know, those that form EU today. How’s that?
Besides, who won the war in Northern Africa? Who defeated Mussolini in Italy? Or are those victories not something big, because not 20 million US soldiers died? WTF?
The Soviet Union, let alone Stalin, was not beaten by the US as the neocons would like to have us believe, but by its internal weaknesses.
Yes, and? You’re talking about 90’s, while I was referring to WW2 (1939-1945). Stalin was not even alive in 90’s, you know.
However, we DID stop Stalin in 1945. We did save Western Europe from being occupied by Red Army. Or did you miss that? Did you miss West Berlin? Did you miss Kennedy’s speech in West Berlin, later?
Somebody here said that Russia is mostly in Asia. Well, yes, but Eastern Europe is not. And Red Army went west, not east. You guys need compass and world map.
The US wasn’t even interested in fighting the war until Pearl Harbor, and the Allies never even bothered doing something about the trains going to Auschwitz. About which they knew. They didn’t want all the refugees, you see.
And when did Russia enter the WW2? ONLY after Hitler attacked them, you see.
However, we both did enter the war.
But, tell me, when did, for example, Belgium enter the war? Holland? France?
Or did they just surrender, after they delivered Czech Republic to Hitler on a plate?
You know what they say: a war can not be classified as World War until France surrenders.
Since you are not a citizen of the EU, butt out of our politics, will ya?
Oh that’s ironic. Of course there’s a very good chance you had nothing to do with this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1326033,00…. , so it’s cool.
Anyway, Microsoft ought to wait until they feel they know what is required (if they honestly don’t yet). It might lose them a few points of market share, but people are very set in their ways. Hardly anyone will abandon Windows if the very newest version isn’t available yet. They’ll get Windows bundled with their new machines as always, they’ll just get XP instead of Vista for a while longer.
You have a very warped idea of freedom. How about I exercise my freedom to come over there and kill you? This is not what freedom is about. In Europe, I have the freedom to live, and bring up children, in a safe environment, free from those who confuse their rights with their freedoms.
Edited 2006-09-08 00:02
I agree. Such a shame. The Americans were smart enough to figure it out by themselves.
The EUC should not be allowed to live let alone given any power. They are a worthless bunch of liberal thieves.
So much for freedom in Europe. I am in the USA and honestly that is where I plan to stay.
You, sir, are an idiot.
“* If you can consider the prospect of being denied Vista as ‘punishment’:-) ”
I was going to say that :p
To be fair, you can’t know what Vista is going to be like. But it doesn’t seem as promising as microsoft made it out to be at first.
To be fair, you can’t know what Vista is going to be like. But it doesn’t seem as promising as microsoft made it out to be at first.
Technically, you can have a pretty good idea by giving a try to the pre-release versions… Actually, it’s quite sad that a number of people here are judging products without trying them. It screws up the SnR ratio in these “forums”.
I have to agree that Microsoft hyped the upcoming Vista to a point where it became impossible to meet the expectations. They have tried to do waaaaaaaay to much in a single release. Perhaps they should have followed Apple’s slow-but-steady model.
Still, hype is a great enemy of software releases. Take Ubuntu Dapper. I’m using it on my laptop since Flight 4 and while it’s decent, it’s not really different from the other distros around, let alone be THE ultimate OS like many reviewers are praising. Hey, I’m doing my part by filing bugs when necessary, but it managed to annoy me quite a few times… Many of these annoyances would probably disappoint newcomers who had incredible expectations. Thus, hype is bad!
As for Microsoft saga with the EU… They are just a company like others. Thus, they have to comply with the local laws. It’s really their loss if they cannot get their act together before the release of Vista. Perhaps the EU is harsh and unfair, but it’s their land, after all.
What happened to documentation which Microsoft submitted to EU recently? Did EC accept it as valid and did it fullfill requirements? Will it be (or when) released to public?
IIRC, the only requirement as far as releasing it to the outside world that the EU stipulated was for it to be complete, and made available to other companies. The last I heard on the subject of documentation that MS HAD made available was that independent reviewers had judged it to be copious, but incomprehensible and more or less unfit for purpose. The allegation was that the documentation released had been made purposely deficient in order to spite the EU.
It will be interesting to see if the EU caves like the US did.
Microsoft should follow the law:
You know … THE law
“American Software Companies known to be the anti-christ must never, ever bundle a media player with their OS. Every other OS maker can bundle 4,000,000 applications with their distro, and 487 can be media players, but the company whose enemies spell the EVIL ONE’s name with a $ sign can’t bundle a media player.”
This law isn’t actually written down, and you need ESP to figure which other imaginary laws the EU plans to charge you with breaking.
That was before the EU. Besides, we didn’t enter either World War until we got attacked ourselves. We were saving our own skins.
Oh, and Russia is mostly in Asia. :3
I don’t understand how Microsoft has been abusing their monopoly, besides with the OS itself. WMP, IE, Wordpad, and MSN do not have monopolies.
Looks to me like each side is trying to show the other how big and scary they are. Wonder who will blink first?
I guess the real question would be: who would this hurt more, the EU or Microsoft? I would think that Microsoft would lose more, but with their cash reserves and ~1,000,000,000 a month in net profits they can afford to take a hit every now and then to win a political battle (or wait for W. to get into the White House).
On a side note, I do find the amount of knee-jerk anti-US and anti-EU sentiment in this thread a bit disturbing. Not everyone in the US agrees with its policy and the same goes for the EU; in any case, I wouldn’t think that this forum would be the proper place to air these types of grievances.
Microsoft should follow the law:
You know … THE law
“American Software Companies known to be the anti-christ must never, ever bundle a media player with their OS. Every other OS maker can bundle 4,000,000 applications with their distro, and 487 can be media players, but the company whose enemies spell the EVIL ONE’s name with a $ sign can’t bundle a media player.”
This law isn’t actually written down, and you need ESP to figure which other imaginary laws the EU plans to charge you with breaking.
First of all – Microsoft has to respect the law in every country it wants to work in. The EU has asked time and time again to open up their protocols etc. so other company’s can write software that works with Windows. They just want fair competition – thats all…
Now Microsoft is dragging heels and trying to get fair competition off the table with every trick possible. The EU is not buying this behaviour and gave them a fine and a warning to stop this unfair practices…
Microsoft is angry and dont want to comply to the law. They want a special law for themselfes – saying they are a special case. Of course they are wrong here. Every company big or small has to respect the law of the country they are in, and Microsoft sould be no exception.
Now Microsoft cant get it the way they want it, so they try to mobilise the costumers, hoping to break the EU law under sheer strength of costumers grief.
Microsoft is misbehaving again and again, and this behaviour should not go unpunished. Everyone saying Microsoft is threated unfair is actually saying Microsoft sould be above the law and shuld be not be critisised, hold back or punished by anything or anyone..
To delay Vista is just another trick in a long row of tricks and misbehaviours in their quest to stand above any law in any country…
Sorry for my bad english – its not my native language. I hope I made my point clear tough…
“The EU has asked time and time again to open up their protocols etc. so other company’s can write software that works with Windows.”
Which law is that? The law against Intellectual Property? Why is stealing a companies IP allowed?
There is no law forcing companies to open up their private protocols! It doesn’t exist.
The EU Anti-Competition Commision has a history of commisioners being forced to resign for corruption.
As time goes on we’ll find out who bribed them.
The US should BAN all software from the EU in retaliation for this underhanded corrupt attack on Microsoft.