Microsoft to face a record fine in the EU

[General Zod]

there's also plenty of open source alternatives that can be used in place of microsoft operating systems. which would drastically reduce the cost of machines if they were packaged with them.

Yes, they can be. You still have the problems of chaging over. Can you imagine the horror of thousands of computer illiterate secretary's trying to use Linux? What if you rely on some specialist software that doesn't have a version on other platforms?
If the EU was to foolishly ban MS from selling their products here, then it's the consumers that would lose out most.

most major companies already don't use windows as an operating platform. alot of developers and technical giants rely upon Unix based operating systems, or Solaris.

[Sharp-kun]

there's also plenty of open source alternatives that can be used in place of microsoft operating systems. which would drastically reduce the cost of machines if they were packaged with them.

Yes, they can be. You still have the problems of chaging over. Can you imagine the horror of thousands of computer illiterate secretary's trying to use Linux? What if you rely on some specialist software that doesn't have a version on other platforms?
If the EU was to foolishly ban MS from selling their products here, then it's the consumers that would lose out most.

most major companies already don't use windows as an operating platform. alot of developers and technical giants rely upon Unix based operating systems, or Solaris.

Do major companies make up the majority of computer users? I don't think so. What about Universities? While we have Unix labs, the majority of the machines run Windows, for the simple reason that Linux is nowhere near friendly enough for the "average" user. A similar argument can be applyed to home users. While I run Linux on one of my machines, I know very well that it's not something the majority of people want to use.
Windows is not something that can be got rid of easily.

[phongn]

most major companies already don't use windows as an operating platform. alot of developers and technical giants rely upon Unix based operating systems, or Solaris.

On the desktop, Microsoft Windows still rules the roost even if backends run other operating systems. Furthermore, you still need to purchase Windows servers if only for ActiveDirectory alone.

[Xon]

You know, if Sharp-Kun was actually right in his beleifs that Microsoft is immune to reprisal, presumably Microsoft would know this and not bother with a 12 year+ court battle that's costing alot of money. Hmmm. Hmmm.

The problem is the political backlash.

The fines are nothing here, its the EU's attempt to control and direct were Microsoft is heading with their business.

And so far exactly what the EU is trying to force MS todo with their server side stuff is the really vage part.

Removing WMP(the application) is trivial. Trying to remove all the plumbing would break the OS.

[SirNitram]

You know, if Sharp-Kun was actually right in his beleifs that Microsoft is immune to reprisal, presumably Microsoft would know this and not bother with a 12 year+ court battle that's costing alot of money. Hmmm. Hmmm.

The problem is the political backlash.

The fines are nothing here, its the EU's attempt to control and direct were Microsoft is heading with their business.

Yea, governments trying to prevent illegal monopolies would be directing a business' direction if they were dependent on that monopoly for their previous direction.

And so far exactly what the EU is trying to force MS todo with their server side stuff is the really vage part.

Removing WMP(the application) is trivial. Trying to remove all the plumbing would break the OS.

Then it's worse made than I thought. Code can be rewritten to comply with laws. Why shouldn't it? Because it hurts Microsoft's bottom line?

[Sharp-kun]

You know, if Sharp-Kun was actually right in his beleifs that Microsoft is immune to reprisal, presumably Microsoft would know this and not bother with a 12 year+ court battle that's costing alot of money. Hmmm. Hmmm.

I never said MS were immune from reprisal. I said that the EU could not realistically block MS sales.

[SirNitram]

You know, if Sharp-Kun was actually right in his beleifs that Microsoft is immune to reprisal, presumably Microsoft would know this and not bother with a 12 year+ court battle that's costing alot of money. Hmmm. Hmmm.

I never said MS were immune from reprisal. I said that the EU could not realistically block MS sales.

Not forever. A week's block would send a strong message and probably be the equivalent of a groin-stab with a rusty knife, when one factors in the effects.

[Sharp-kun]

You know, if Sharp-Kun was actually right in his beleifs that Microsoft is immune to reprisal, presumably Microsoft would know this and not bother with a 12 year+ court battle that's costing alot of money. Hmmm. Hmmm.

I never said MS were immune from reprisal. I said that the EU could not realistically block MS sales.

Not forever. A week's block would send a strong message and probably be the equivalent of a groin-stab with a rusty knife, when one factors in the effects.

What's a week going to do to MS? They can easily withstand the effects of that. Bad publicity, probably, but they get enough of that.
If the EU had to take action, it would have to be prolonged in order to really hurt MS. A prolonged block is not realistic, as it would damage consumers.

[SirNitram]

I never said MS were immune from reprisal. I said that the EU could not realistically block MS sales.

Not forever. A week's block would send a strong message and probably be the equivalent of a groin-stab with a rusty knife, when one factors in the effects.

What's a week going to do to MS? They can easily withstand the effects of that. Bad publicity, probably, but they get enough of that.
If the EU had to take action, it would have to be prolonged in order to really hurt MS. A prolonged block is not realistic, as it would damage consumers.

You are making alot of assumptions here, and I don't see much foundation. For instance, a week without sales in the EU should add up to nearly the fine, hundreds of millions of dollars(Based off their last revenue projections and time-averaging). And that's not from the warchest.. That's from revenue. Investors won't like that.

[Stravo]

One of Microsoft's obvious defenses that they're currently floating is that those bad old Europeans are out to get us. However I read a statement where Microsoft complained that they were being punished for bsuiness practices that were fine in the US. Microsoft and its attorneys should know better: ignorance of the law is no defense and more pragmatically, you can't make billion dollar business in a market and NOT know what the regulatory laws and atmosphere is like there. Its laughable for Microsoft to essentially say "But thats not how its done in the US."

As for my own personal opinion, I could care less about whether Microsoft bundles the media player with Windows. Frankly I find it convenient to have it all in one place and that is the crux of the argyument isn't it? But if there are better players out there people would seek them out. If the consumer wants the player bundled with the already expensive OS why should the company not respond to that?

I wonder what the response would be if asked "Would you be willing to pay an extra $40 for windows if it contained the Windows media player that was previously included for free?"

[Admiral Valdemar]

One of Microsoft's obvious defenses that they're currently floating is that those bad old Europeans are out to get us. However I read a statement where Microsoft complained that they were being punished for bsuiness practices that were fine in the US. Microsoft and its attorneys should know better: ignorance of the law is no defense and more pragmatically, you can't make billion dollar business in a market and NOT know what the regulatory laws and atmosphere is like there. Its laughable for Microsoft to essentially say "But thats not how its done in the US."

As for my own personal opinion, I could care less about whether Microsoft bundles the media player with Windows. Frankly I find it convenient to have it all in one place and that is the crux of the argyument isn't it? But if there are better players out there people would seek them out. If the consumer wants the player bundled with the already expensive OS why should the company not respond to that?

I wonder what the response would be if asked "Would you be willing to pay an extra $40 for windows if it contained the Windows media player that was previously included for free?"

They should just reply "In case you haven't been keeping up on current events, we're in Europe now."

Then fine them a hell of a lot more and have the fair trade agents watch them like hawks.

[Glocksman]

One of Microsoft's obvious defenses that they're currently floating is that those bad old Europeans are out to get us. However I read a statement where Microsoft complained that they were being punished for bsuiness practices that were fine in the US. Microsoft and its attorneys should know better: ignorance of the law is no defense and more pragmatically, you can't make billion dollar business in a market and NOT know what the regulatory laws and atmosphere is like there. Its laughable for Microsoft to essentially say "But thats not how its done in the US."

As for my own personal opinion, I could care less about whether Microsoft bundles the media player with Windows. Frankly I find it convenient to have it all in one place and that is the crux of the argyument isn't it? But if there are better players out there people would seek them out. If the consumer wants the player bundled with the already expensive OS why should the company not respond to that?

I wonder what the response would be if asked "Would you be willing to pay an extra $40 for windows if it contained the Windows media player that was previously included for free?"

The problem is that most of the alternatives to WMP suck ass. Quicktime is the best of the lot, and it's user interface isn't very friendly to say the least, but at least its not spyware laden, crash prone, and buggy like Real Player is.

This case strikes me as much ado over nothing as far as the media player battle goes. If Real Networks wants more people to use their player, for God's sake get the bugs and spyware out of it. The MS player works, and that's why I use it in preference to RP or Quicktime. Even if I had to download it separately, I would do so.

[phongn]

Apple really should work on the QuickTime Player for Windows ... it's pretty bad

[salm]

Apple really should work on the QuickTime Player for Windows ... it's pretty bad

you think so? i´m not sure how many different types of files it can play since i only use it for quicktime movies. but i like the simple user interface and the lack of shit like visualisation.

[Sharp-kun]

The problem is that most of the alternatives to WMP suck ass. Quicktime is the best of the lot, and it's user interface isn't very friendly to say the least, but at least its not spyware laden, crash prone, and buggy like Real Player is.

Thats my main problem with this. I'm happy that the EU are cracking down on MS, but I wish they'd found a better reason. WMP is dominant because it kicks Realplayer and Quicktime's asses. Other superior players have no problem in the market, Winamp is an example of that.

[phongn]

QTP is poorly coded -- and on my machine it has the disturbing tendancy to lose audio-video sync. Its performance is absolutely unacceptable.

On the Mac, things are not much better!

[Xon]

Yea, governments trying to prevent illegal monopolies would be directing a business' direction if they were dependent on that monopoly for their previous direction.

This statement doesnt really parse well at all.

And software tends to be a natural monopoly. Various governments need to understand that, instead of trying to force it into something it isnt.

Then it's worse made than I thought. Code can be rewritten to comply with laws. Why shouldn't it? Because it hurts Microsoft's bottom line?

The problem is they(the EU) are talking about removing all of WMP, including the plumbing. Which as stated would break the OS.

It really will be a 'wait and see' to determine what type of hoops they want MS to jump through.

[Sharp-kun]

The problem is they(the EU) are talking about removing all of WMP, including the plumbing. Which as stated would break the OS.

It really will be a 'wait and see' to determine what type of hoops they want MS to jump through.

It could probably be done without breaking the OS, though I can forsee various 3rd party apps having problems if they try to access some shared components.

[Xon]

The problem is they(the EU) are talking about removing all of WMP, including the plumbing. Which as stated would break the OS.

It really will be a 'wait and see' to determine what type of hoops they want MS to jump through.

It could probably be done without breaking the OS, though I can forsee various 3rd party apps having problems if they try to access some shared components.

You could probable get something which boots, but dont excpect anything which talks the the sound layer to work properly(if at all).

WMP's music/movie playing functionaility is just a very thin wrapper around DirectSound & DirectShow. Those have been integrated into the OS for a long time. The codec hosting system is also an integral part of WMP, and the OS.

Removing the WMP application isnt an issue, all of the actual functionaility is hosted in dlls which are used by everything and its dog. The WMP exe just provides an enviroment to load the dlls.

Just like there is very little difference between explorer.exe & iexplorer.exe. They both provide platforms to load the DLLs which actually implement the functionaility.

But the WMP issue is trivial. Its what they want MS todo with the server side suff thats the problem.

[Edi]

This thing about the removal of WMP breaking Windows is nothing but pure horseshit, exactly the same as were MS claims that removing IE from Windows 98 would have broken that.

WMP is a separate application with no intrinsic value in and of itself where core operating system perfromance is concerned, but MS has been doing the same as it did with Windows 98 and IE, spreading bits of the WMP code randomly around the system so that on the surface it seems "integrated" and just plain trying to strangle the competition.

The response that would solve all of this is if MS provided fully documented APIs to ensure that third-party software was interoperable, but that is exactly what they are raising a hue and cry about, claiming it will "amount to forced IP theft and prevent innovation ("innovation" MS style)".

In my opinion, for what it has done, MS deserves to get fucked up the arse every way that is legally possible, and this is just a small but important start.

Edi

[Xon]

This thing about the removal of WMP breaking Windows is nothing but pure horseshit, exactly the same as were MS claims that removing IE from Windows 98 would have broken that.

Read what I wrote! I said WMP the application can easily be removed. But you can not remove all the plumbing else you would break practically anything which touches 'sound' in anyway shape or form!

How Windows implements Codec management, registration is a vital part of the sound layer. Yet its an integral part of having a functioning media player on windows with out implementing it all yourself.

WMP is a separate application with no intrinsic value in and of itself where core operating system perfromance is concerned

WMP is a wrapper around the functionality which is biult into the Windows OS. And the 'core operating system perfromance' isnt altered a bit by it being in there. Onyl when its being used would you notice a difference, but there is nothing such as a free lunch, so if you are using it then you need to pay the cost of using it (trivial % of the CPU).

but MS has been doing the same as it did with Windows 98 and IE, spreading bits of the WMP code randomly around the system so that on the surface it seems "integrated" and just plain trying to strangle the competition.

Its called 'code resuse', the software industry has been aftre that goul for a long long time. If you cant understand why 'code resuse' is a good thing, then I doubt you capability to understand many design decisions Microsoft and many other software companies have made.

The response that would solve all of this is if MS provided fully documented APIs to ensure that third-party software was interoperable, but that is exactly what they are raising a hue and cry about, claiming it will "amount to forced IP theft and prevent innovation ("innovation" MS style)".

You realise that this would just force the stuff to be integrated futhur into the core shell than it already is? The thing you just spent 2 paragraphs ranting about?

And sound layer, which WMP is basicly a wrapper, around is fully documented. WMP aready offers APIs to allow you to programmically access the content that WMP normally manages.

And these APIs are documented!

In my opinion, for what it has done, MS deserves to get fucked up the arse every way that is legally possible, and this is just a small but important start.

So do you actually have something to contribute to this discussion? Or is it just a rant with no grounding in reality based on poor knowlage of how the current Windows OS works?

[BoredShirtless]

This thing about the removal of WMP breaking Windows is nothing but pure horseshit, exactly the same as were MS claims that removing IE from Windows 98 would have broken that.

Read what I wrote! I said WMP the application can easily be removed. But you can not remove all the plumbing else you would break practically anything which touches 'sound' in anyway shape or form!

Relax, the EU verdict says nothing about removing the modules WMP interacts with. But if those modules are not called but integrated in the WMP module, then Microsoft just has to admit that there developers are shit because they coded unrelated use cases through WMP, then they can simply remove the WMP front end.

Either way, easy.

[phongn]

This thing about the removal of WMP breaking Windows is nothing but pure horseshit, exactly the same as were MS claims that removing IE from Windows 98 would have broken that.

A somewhat different case here, as ggs has noted, but removing MSHTML.DLL from Windows would, frankly, break not a few things that rely on it. Back in the W98 days it wasn't so much an issue but it is more of one now

[Edi]

I know what code reuse is and why it's a beneficial thing, that's what they taught us rather early on in programming classes. Doesn't change a damn thing about the fact that MS has done a shitty job of coding their operating system, and it seems this incompetence has been purposeful with the aim of causing exactly this effect.

They could have coded those things more modularly so that modules could be easily taken out and modified when required, which is another elementary tenet of programming. But when their goal is screwing over everyone else and ensuring that nobody can remove what they want to shove down everybody's throat, they have absolutely no right to complain.

They made this mess, and if fixing it is going to cost them billions and fuck the whole company six ways from Sunday, then let it cost billions and fuck MS up six ways from Sunday, and I will still call that a good thing. MS has banked for far too long on the fact that the US regulatory authorities are not going to hold it to any promise made or exact any punishment for any kind of behaviour, no matter how egregious, but fortunately the EU regulators aren't as chickenshit about doing their jobs properly.

Edi

[Dooey Jo]

Wait a second, does the EU want to fine MS because they're shipping the Media Player with Windows? Was that the best reason they could come up with? When I first saw the headlines in the news I thought it was more of the usual monopoly they always get in trouble for, but it turns out it is because of WMP?

One of the things I actually like about Windows is that I get one of the best (of not the best) media players with it for free. But now the EU wants to take that away from me? Then, they can at least give some money to my phone company and let me have that damned ADSL so I can download WMP. The only player that really is small enough for me to download is RealPlayer, and I hate that fucking thing; the spywares and ads and all that crap.

By doing this, the EU forces us that can't get anything better than a 56-k connection to use RP and therefor getting a shitload of spam and other such shit! I thought the EU was to pass a law against spam...