EU knocks Microsoft for $357 million

$357 million

OMG !!!! es demasiado dinero, que bueno que no lo tengo en mis manos

Must be more threatening than international terrorism, bird flu, nuclear weapons, unemployment, and a faltering euro.

It's a bored little group.

If I were Microsoft, I'd be telling the EU to go and get...well you know....and pull out of Europe altogether. The twits who came up with this ridiculous idea would soon see the error of their ways and be begging MS to return, simply because European consumer/user backlash would scare the imbeciles into it.

The EU has gotten way too big for its britches and needs bringing down a peg or two ....hopefully Microsoft will do that by telling the effwits to go suck a sav cos they ain't payin' up.....and no, I'm no MS fanboy. It just makes me angry that effwit politicians and pencil pushing bureaucrats can hold companies to ransom and affect the market, consumer choice without due consideration of the consequences, particularly to the buying public.

Microsoft share its technologies with competitiors? Fuck it, why should they, if these whiny arsed, lobbying competitors can't cut it, stand the heat in the software kitchen, then they should get the heck out of it and look for more useful employment elsewhere. Word has it street sweepers are needed in them thar parts.

A free market in a democratic society? Hell no, this crap is reminiscent of Stalin's collectivization in a socialist dictatorship.

If you're reading this, Bill Gates, tell 'em to go and get stuffed...they'll soon come crawling back...from under the rock they've been using to hide from all the insensed consumers who've had their noses put out of joint by dickhead politicians

i quote cnet news...

"While the fine is steep, Microsoft would have no trouble paying it. For the first three months of 2006, the company pocketed profits of nearly $3 billion on sales of $11 billion, meaning the proposed fine amounts to about 10 days' worth of profits."

software is big buisness, very big buisness..!

a number of buisnesses worldwide, not just european also american, have been complaining about microsoft's de facto monopoly for a long time and there way of doing buisness... and microsoft has been in the courts in america as well, not just europe, for similar reasons... if i remember rightly there was even talk in the american courts at the time of spliting microsoft up into smaller companies..!!!

personally, i think it's good that microsoft has got it's fingers rapped today, as in my opinion a monopoly slows down innovation... where would the automobile industry be today if ford had managed to gain a monopoly back in early 20th century - would we all still be driving some form of a "model-t"..?

it's in the nature of buisness to expand and there even comes a point, especially by large companies, whereby if you don't expand you die... it's then that companies start making bad decisions and eventually slip from the marketplace... when one thinks of computers today it's microsoft, 30 years ago it was ibm...

anyway, whatever... i think microsoft should concentrate itself on that what it started out doing and what it does best - and that is operating systems and maybe office and stop trying to do everything and be everywhere at once...

firstly, i seriously wonder how much impact this court decision will have and secondly i wonder to what purpose the money from this fine will be put..?

as in my opinion a monopoly slows down innovation

What slows down innovation is being punished for innovating.

The problem I have with this ruling is that what they are asking is ridiculous.

Skinning the non-client OS is a non-trivial thing without source code. But Stardock does it.  What exactly is the excuse of Microsoft's competitors for needing MS's source code to interoperate when other ISVs are able to do that without source code all the time?

This kind of action would have been justified in the Internet Explorer 4 era when they were ruthlessly wiping out Netscape or better yet when Microsoft was doing blatantly uncompetitive things to thwart IBM's OS/2. 

But things like not bundling a media player with the OS? My god are these guys out of touch.

Skinning the non-client OS is a non-trivial thing without source code. But Stardock does it. What exactly is the excuse of Microsoft's competitors for needing MS's source code to interoperate when other ISVs are able to do that without source code all the time?

Exactly my point, Brad, if various ISV's are able to do it, and MS allows for 3rd party apps to be freely installed in Windows, then MS is not being anti-competitiive, nor is it violating anti-trust laws by not sharing its codes with all and sundry. I could understand the anti-trust sentiment if MS prevented 3rd party apps running: ie, Windows updates contained disabling codes, etc, but that clearly is not the case here.

If a software developers cannot create products based on their own knowledge/abilities, then they have no business being in the business....much less be demanding the right to MS' intellectual property to get a leg up, then to have political powers fine/sue MS when they don't get their way.

But things like not bundling a media player with the OS? My god are these guys out of touch.

Out of touch doesn't come close. These effwits have their heads so far up their own self-importance (rectums), they never see the light of day...what's right or best for ALL concerned. The people they harm the most, the buying public, the majority who elected them to office. Why is it that politicians believe their election is automatic mandate to do as they please, in opposition to what the masses want or need?? Worse still, the antics of the EU will spread like a virus to other corners of the globe, the precedent harming not only MS but consumers world-wide, hence my anger.

personally, i think it's good that microsoft has got it's fingers rapped today,

Okay, antivista, you have the largest, most successful car dealership in town, and I'm after a percentage of your profits because you won't give me special considerations, such as those given to gov't and fleet buyers (all those 'buddy' extras ordinary buyers do not get, and competitors cannot offer such deals because your monopoly has closed them out). So, how'd ya like them apples...I'm after YOUR money? Okay, you can afford to pay me a few mil out of your 60 mil annual profit, but then, why should you have to, it's your company to run as you see fit...and what if you had earmarked that couple of mil to something greater than just lining my pockets?

firstly, i seriously wonder how much impact this court decision will have and secondly i wonder to what purpose the money from this fine will be put..?

Firstly, the greater impact will be on the consumer, through diminished freedom of choice, possibly higher European prices for MS and PC products. Secondly, it certainly won't be used to reimburse consumers/small developers for loss of choice/opportunity. No, the monies will be put into coffers to help consolidate their power base, the stranglehold they now have over manufacturers and consumers alike. To think this is right is dead wrong.

People don't mind big, intrusive government so long as it doesn't affect them. Or at least creates the illusion it doesn't affect them. When politicians keep their hands off business, and business keeps their money out of politicians' pockets, we have an environment for innovation as well as a fair government.

When politicians keep their hands off business, and business keeps their money out of politicians' pockets, we have an environment for innovation as well as a fair government.

More like when politicians are honest, taking office to genuinely work for the common good. Until that day dawns we will have.....actually, that day will never dawn as political power, no matter who you vote for, goes hand in hand with greed and corruption, major cock-ups in the first degree....as evidenced by the EU's actions agains MS

and my comment to the EU is "thats fine , we'll do that and by the way we think you(the EU ) should pay the US for the billions of dollars granted to europe in WW2 with about 60 years of interest, ,,thank you

This kind of action would have been justified in the Internet Explorer 4 era when they were ruthlessly wiping out Netscape or better yet when Microsoft was doing blatantly uncompetitive things to thwart IBM's OS/2.

Brad...the legal system as it is...this probably all started back then.....but by the time it was in effect it's now meaningless and/or nonsensical...

Lets bear in mind that at least the EU has managed to give a ruling and stick to it alot more than the US ever managed.

Well Dug you should check your history books the US stayed out of WW2 and happily sold weapons,ships and planes to both sides(Allied and Nazi). Sold weapons for cash, gold and most of the British, French and Dutch global strategic military bases, so where did all that cash that rebuilt Europe come from ?? and you seem to be forgeting all the US military bases all over Europe for the last 60 years. Its a typical uninformed american opinion (we saved your asses in WW2) and funnily enough it has no bearing on Microsoft's anti-competitive activities in Europe ! handing over source code is a silly request but it wouldn't have been made if Microsoft hadn't abused its monoply position to block competitors. This isn't America Vs Europe people the US justice dept. has been trying to get Microsoft for anti-competive activities for years and were recently quoted as saying that would be adopting a european strategy in future.

I'm amazed at the fan boy element here, I like microsoft software and happliy defend Windows XP to customers everyday but when it comes to business practice I don't think anyone can defend them just ask BlueMountain, Sun, IBM and Netscape to name but a few.

RE: #13: I'd like you know what history book you've been reading. The US stayed OUT of WW2, the EU saved OUR asses? Does your book not mention Pearl Harbor, D-Day, and the fact that the US was fighting on not one but TWO fronts (EU and the Pacific)? So much for "uninformed Amercian opinion."

Might not have much to do with the topic but both my grandfather and great uncle fought in that war and they'd probably be rolling in their graves after hearing that comment.

I didnt mention "the EU saving your asses" And my Grandfather and both his brothers died at D-day so no american troops "saved their asses" eh? and quite what that has to do with an EU fine against Microsoft I'll never know
1. 1939 November 4 - In the USA, Congress amends the 1937 Neutrality Act to permit European states to buy American arms for cash if they provide the transport.
2. 1940 September 3 - the Anglo-american lease agreement is signed, in exchange for old war ships the UK leases numerous military bases worldwide to the USA
3. 1941 December 8 - Congress declares War on Japan/Germany after Pearl Harbour bombing

Straight out of a history book, bear in mind the UK was fighting against invasion and D-day liberated France not the UK (where I'm from) and the UK is a member of the EU so uninformed American opinion still stands

Bear in mind Bebi that was a reply to a particularly crass comment by dug_98304 and not a general dig at all my american cousins. As if the EU shouldn't fine Microsoft because the US "saved our asses in WW2" I didn't realise that Microsoft has ran the USA since 1939.
If any US citizen doesn't think that the EU has been repaying war time depts to the US for the last 60 years with interest they don't have a very good grasp on politics or economics.

I wasn't sure what the comparison was either but after reading it several times it still didn't make much sense.

As for the topic, from what I've grasped of it, I don't understand why Microsoft should have to shell out source code to help their competetors compete against them. Seems pretty weak, if you can't make your own product on your own merit without the corporation you're competing against holding your hand the whole way, what's the point? Stardock seems to be doing pretty well without it, as mentioned.

As for the topic, from what I've grasped of it, I don't understand why Microsoft should have to shell out source code to help their competetors compete against them. Seems pretty weak, if you can't make your own product on your own merit without the corporation you're competing against holding your hand the whole way, what's the point? Stardock seems to be doing pretty well without it, as mentioned.

That pretty-well covers it.

I think 'who won WW2?' should have its own thread...you know....like 'relevance'....