|
|
|
Microsoft hit with $730 million fine in EU over default browser choice screen
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 6 March, 2013
The European Commission has once again fined software giant Microsoft over failing to comply with its commitment to give users a chance to choose their default browser when purchasing a new PC.
Microsoft has been hit with the 561 million euro ($730 million) fine for what it has called a "technical error" within its Windows 7 OS.
In 2009, the company agreed to present a web browser ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
10. March 2013 @ 14:08 |
Link to this message
|
Contesting the amount = contesting the fine. Relax. Syntax is often unclear like that.
While M$ doesn't specifically state such here, they certainly do clearly say so in their press releases re: this very subject, hence the reference to Google (there's a LOT of hits). M$ very directly states they are not interested in any further litigation on this matter. Appealing the fine (whether the fine's existence itself or its amount) = litigation; there's no other mechanism that can affect the fine but an appeal in court.
In the Apple vs. Samsung case, neither party has ever declined ? either in statement or in action ? to litigate the matter. I don't see the contradiction.
Edit ?> I actually believe M$ on this one. I think that leaving out the "browser choice screen" in Win7 SP1 was a legitimate oversight, and bureaucratic inertia let it snowball into this fine. Knowing this, M$ is trying its best to not further offend a court that has already shown distinct hostility toward the company in the past. The EU is simply too large and rich a market for M$ to risk rocking the boat too much.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. March 2013 @ 14:20
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
10. March 2013 @ 15:28 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DVDBack23:
Originally posted by bobiroc:
Ugh! The European Commission are such big babies. Why do they not make Apple do the same with browser choice? Or any other OS for that matter. I wonder if they complain that no one really downloads Opera... They probably blame Microsoft for that too.
Windows: 92% market share
Mac: 7%
Others: 1%
That's why.
It seems some people need to sit down & think about the whole 'anti competitive practice' thing.
Market share is fundamental to the ability of a company to abuse it's dominant position.
Hence the reason why bringing up Apple is utterly irrelevant & a ridiculous distraction in this matter.
The fact is, whether you like it or not, Microsoft had agreed to comply anyway.
Then they er, forgot, to continue doing it.
This isn't anti non-EU companies either.
You have to ignorant of these rulings in the past to try to say that.
EU companies have to comply also.
Telefonica has been found guilty & fined for instance, Deutsche Telecom likewise, when screen makers were fined Philips was also fined as part of the group caught out.
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
10. March 2013 @ 15:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
10. March 2013 @ 16:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
Exactly, Interestx. M$ wants this whole embarrassing matter to just go away ^^' .
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. March 2013 @ 16:13
|
Senior Member
|
10. March 2013 @ 23:00 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Bozobub:
Contesting the amount = contesting the fine.
No it doesn't... I come from a family of lawyers.
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
11. March 2013 @ 02:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes it does; we weren't speaking in a legal context (in other words, while about a subject of law, not IN legal language), which uses very specific meanings and grammar for that's very distinct from common speech; having a family of lawyers will do you no good in this case. So there =) .
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. March 2013 @ 02:59
|
Senior Member
|
11. March 2013 @ 05:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
Whatever LOL
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
|
Senior Member
|
11. March 2013 @ 08:22 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
Originally posted by DVDBack23:
Originally posted by bobiroc:
Ugh! The European Commission are such big babies. Why do they not make Apple do the same with browser choice? Or any other OS for that matter. I wonder if they complain that no one really downloads Opera... They probably blame Microsoft for that too.
Windows: 92% market share
Mac: 7%
Others: 1%
That's why.
It seems some people need to sit down & think about the whole 'anti competitive practice' thing.
Market share is fundamental to the ability of a company to abuse it's dominant position.
Hence the reason why bringing up Apple is utterly irrelevant & a ridiculous distraction in this matter.
The fact is, whether you like it or not, Microsoft had agreed to comply anyway.
Then they er, forgot, to continue doing it.
This isn't anti non-EU companies either.
You have to ignorant of these rulings in the past to try to say that.
EU companies have to comply also.
Telefonica has been found guilty & fined for instance, Deutsche Telecom likewise, when screen makers were fined Philips was also fined as part of the group caught out.
But if this is all about the Browser then it is apparent that people are making a choice as Chrome is pretty much neck and neck with IE. Either that or people are getting preyed upon being forced to install Google Chrome and Google's awful toolbar when they install other softwares because of the automatic opt in on such things.
Windows has a high Market share because that is what OEMs choose to put on their systems and they choose that because that is what most software developers choose to write software for and it is what most people want. Many OEMs offered some form of Linux and nobody wanted it and MacOS can only be used if you buy an Apple branded computers.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
11. March 2013 @ 12:00 |
Link to this message
|
@ boboiroc
You're trying to argue on the basis of different (current) data.
Things were even worse before this ruling was made and secondly Chrome is not "neck & neck with IE", it has way over 50% of the market alone.
Chrome has less than 20%
(Afterdawn report 3rd Feb 2013)
Arguing about why Windows OS has a high market share is also completely besides the point.
Still, at least it looks like (from your reply) you've given up that ridiculous & dreadfully ill-informed stance that this is somehow anti non-EU & pro-EU country stuff.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. March 2013 @ 12:05
|
Senior Member
|
11. March 2013 @ 12:06 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
@ boboiroc
You're trying to argue on the basis of different (current) data.
Things were even worse before this ruling was made and secondly Chrome is not "neck & neck with IE", it has way over 50% of the market alone.
Chrome has less than 20%
(Afterdawn report 3rd Feb 2013)
Arguing about why Windows OS has a high market share is also completely besides the point.
I did a quick search for the top browsers and came up with this
http://gs.statcounter.com/
I also think the "why" is very important because much of the marketshare has to do with choice that people make and the facts on what the software works with. Maybe the EU should demand that software vendors publish the software titles to other Operating Systems too.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
11. March 2013 @ 12:24 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by bobiroc:
I did a quick search for the top browsers and came up with this
http://gs.statcounter.com/
Well, couple of things, firstly I'll take Afterdawn over anything randomly pulled off of the net and secondly does this relate to the EU?
The EU are only interested in an abuse of market dominance within the EU, if anyone else is happy to put up with it that's their look out.
Originally posted by bobiroc:
I also think the "why" is very important
Well we all have opinions.
Sadly in this instance it is simply not relevant.
The issue is one of abuse of market dominance and they were found to be abusing their position.
The fact that they had a huge market share is, ultimately, irrelevant - contrary to what some supporters of Microsoft would have people believe.
It is a distraction, the EU is not anti successful companies, either within or without the EU.
What they will not get away with is killing off the competitive market within the EU as that is - as far as we in the EU are concerned - anti the consumer's best intersts.
Anyone else attaining such a share & behaving similarly would face the same action.
Originally posted by bobiroc:
Maybe the EU should demand that software vendors publish the software titles to other Operating Systems too.
Again, this is just irrelent & pointless.
The whole point about Microsoft's behaviour with IE in this was the way IE was incorporated into Windows in a way other browsers could never be.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. March 2013 @ 12:26
|
Senior Member
|
11. March 2013 @ 12:30 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
Originally posted by bobiroc:
I did a quick search for the top browsers and came up with this
http://gs.statcounter.com/
Well, couple of things, firstly I'll take Afterdawn over anything randomly pulled off of the net and secondly does this relate to the EU?
The EU are only interested in an abuse of market dominance within the EU, if anyone else is happy to put up with it that's their look out.
Originally posted by bobiroc:
I also think the "why" is very important
Well we all have opinions.
Sadly in this instance it is simply not relevant.
The issue is one of abuse of market dominance and they were found to be abusing their position.
The fact that they had a huge market share is irrelevant - contrary to what some supporters of Microsoft would have people believe.
It is a distraction, the EU is not anti successful companies, either within or without the EU.
What they will not get away with is killing off the competitive market within the EU as that is - as far as we in the EU are concerned - anti the consumer's best intersts.
Originally posted by bobiroc:
Maybe the EU should demand that software vendors publish the software titles to other Operating Systems too.
Again, this is just irrelent & pointless.
The whole point about Microsoft's behaviour with IE in this was the way IE was incorporated into Windows in a way other browsers could never be.
I am sorry you see it as pointless but I fail to see how people are expected to use an operating system that does not work with the software or hardware they want or need to use. That directly affects the marketshare which the EU seems upset about.
Lastly Statcounter gets their data from computers connected to the net from many various sources. Just shows how data can vary from site to site I suppose.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
11. March 2013 @ 12:43 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by bobiroc:
I am sorry you see it as pointless but I fail to see how people are expected to use an operating system that does not work with the software or hardware they want or need to use. That directly affects the marketshare which the EU seems upset about.
You really are chasing a red herring here.
Market share is relevant only to the point where a company may begin to abuse their market dominance.
The fact that they have that share is not the issue.
The EU are not and never have been "upset" about Microsoft's market share.
They did get "upset" about the way Microsoft incorporated its IE browser into Windows in a way nobody else's product could be thus giving IE (and Microsoft) an advantage which nobody else could have.
That's it right there and it is incontestable, hence Microsoft lost the case & were fined.
What I am sorry about is that so many Americans seem to ignore this & have decided - against the facts - that this is anti non-EU companies and that they seem incapable of understanding the anti-competitive edge Microsoft gave itself by incorporating IE into Windows in the manner it did.
The truth is Microsoft could have had 100% market share & the EU would not have cared - so long as they do not try to give themselves unfair advantages like this.
Originally posted by bobiroc:
Lastly Statcounter gets their data from computers connected to the net from many various sources. Just shows how data can vary from site to site I suppose.
Indeed.
The internet can often be used to 'prove' conflicting views.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. March 2013 @ 12:48
|
|
Bozobub
Senior Member
|
11. March 2013 @ 13:02 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
The internet can often be used to 'prove' conflicting views.
So can most statistics, especially if you abuse (intentionally or not) statistical laws. Perfect example: Both sides of the global warming debate.
Again, I have to ask anyone who thinks this fine is unjustified, what they think a US court would do if a foreign company "forgot" to comply with a ruling like M$ did here? Do you really think it would all be happy fun and games..?!
Whether or not you agree with the first court ruling vs. M$ is immaterial; M$ is quite obviously in legal jeopardy because they neglected to fully comply with a court order, and they are going to pay for it one way or the other. This would be the case in ANY country where the rule of law still exists; the fine is not some kind of "out of the blue" attack.
In the matter of the initial ruling, M$ pretty much shot themselves right in the collective foot when they claimed IE was "impossible" to remove from Windows. If true, this meant IE, by definition, enjoyed extra integration with the OS, one of the primary arguments against M$. And it was even shown to be untrue, later! So their argument not only handily shot down their own legal case, it wasn't even true >.<' . Brilliant!
There's more than one reason M$ is simply paying the fine, and wishes this case would just go away. They didn't handle this well at all.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. March 2013 @ 13:05
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
11. March 2013 @ 13:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
Right, 3/4 of a billion lol.
Its a lot easier being righteous than right.
DSE VZ300-
Zilog Z80 CPU, 32KB RAM (16K+16K cartridge), video processor 6847, 2KB video RAM, 16 colours (text mode), 5.25" FDD
|
|
