News EU hands another fine to Microsoft

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/07/12/EU_hands_another_fine_to_Microsoft/

 

unlucky MS, what will the EU wast that money on. its not like MS carnt aford to pay but could thay keep paying?

 

I think its a bit unfair... They are forcing MS to give their source code... It's like telling a musician he has to release his tablatures... Windows isn't open source and shouldn't be handled that way...

 

I totaly agree with Glider, its not like Apple have to do all this stuff as well, so why does MS? Stupid Open Source fanatics trying to cripple MS .. shame.

 

Its the EU .... lets call it what it is ... legal kickback to the EuroMob.

 

That EU organisation is just stupid and annoying. Just back-off of Microsoft! You're only ruining it for everybody else, as it means less investment from Microsoft in technology for us. Someone has got to put a stop to them . But hopefully (and most likely), this isn't affecting their financial status at all.

 

Microsoft shares have dropped in price as a result - *I think* it's a 1% reduction in the total value of the Big one...

So if you've got the cash to buy the biggest company in the world - now's the time! 1% off sale anyone?

 

I actually think this is a good initiative. Although MS is not a charity, someone needs to step in and stop its monopoly from developing further. DirectX for linux, anyone?

-ed out

 

Who is stopping you to develop a similar standard for Linux? I'm a linux fanboy, but the Open Source and the MS worlds are very different. If you buy a MS product you don't buy the source codes. If you get Open Source Software you are entitled to the source codes.

But think about Microsoft's so called monopoly... It's a natural one... They have the best product for the average costumer. It's not like MS took over all the competing software companies just to get into their position (I know they had "hostile takeovers" but not to the extend of the current Steel producents or InBev and stuff...).

I love Open Source Software, my whole system is Opensource (the one I use most), but the European Union shouldn't force the Open Source system upon companies that aren't Open Source. What's next? Forcing car manufacturers to ditribute their building plans? Forcing Coca Cola to reveal their secret ingredient? Force McDonalds to tell the real composition of their meat? J/K

If the European Union wants to combat something, combat OPEC. They set the oil prices that high, just for their own profit. If they think they need more money, they rase the price (or cut the distribution). If yet another bomb explodes in the Middle East, they reduce the supply... When have you seen Microsoft raise the price on Windows? I've never seen that happen. The price of XP remained the same since XP was released. Now who's greedy? OPEC (for example) deserves to pay fines more then Microsoft.

I wouldn't be surprised if this is a cheap trick from the European Union to "make up" lost taxes or something... (someone has to pay for the rediculous things that happen at the European top... [IIRC]like the 6mothly movement from Brussels to Stassbourg)

 

Spellcheckers for the general public maybe?

To the EU? Are you crazy? The EU is starting to do some of the best things done in recent times in Europe. They're starting to stand up to big business and for our rights. If it weren't for the EU every time you fly your details would be going stateside, the CIA would still be yanking whoever they felt like out of Europe and sticking 'em in guantanamo, and we'd have to suffer monopolies the US couldn't manage to crush(and they tried). Microsoft not being a monopoly will benefit everybody, you wanna see innovation and invention, we all do. But you can't trust that to a single big business when 90% of the people are going to buy their product anyway. When theres no reason to fight the competition, there's no reason to innovate and invent.

 

How come the EU gets away with sueing Apple and Microsoft (AND WINNING) while we in the US get screwed over and the monopoly goes unchecked? I am so confused.

 

I think that has something to do with the (IMO crappy) way the US court system works... If we here in Belgium sue someone because he left his bag in the middle of the corridor and I tripped (or I've put my cat in the microwave and the beast died), I think we would be scentenced because we mock the court...

 

$357M USD holly fu*** s*it!!!

the EU did not say to MS to release their source code, they were sued because of services like activeX and stuff like that that make MS behave like a monopolistic company.

 

Giving documentation about the structure ~ giving source codes... That scentence says it all... They force MS to give their intelectual property to competing companies... Don't you find that wrong in a way?

 

It's not about what's wrong for microsoft Glider, it's about what's right for the citizens of the European Union.

 

It IS about what's wrong for Microsoft... Microsoft is the one that's being charged, they have equal rights to a fair trial, and this wasn't one... Does the European Union do their citizens any good by making Microsoft pay fines for their own intelectual property...This opens the door to a hell lot of dumb (US like) court cases...

I can anticipate your argument now "but it serves the competition and inovation" Well, that's a load of crap... It will stimulate innovation, but the average john doe, PC illiterate that uses XP for browsing and word processing won't notice a thing... And like it or not, that's 90% of the pc users... Microsoft has their own partners, on which Microsoft enforce a standard and a level of quality.

There isn't a thing that can't be done on a Windows server 2003 server that can be done on an other system (I'm not talking about the ease or the quality of the implementation)

[rant]Why is everything ok as long as it is anti MS? I'm sure that if the EU would force a car manufacturer to release their plans, everyone would question the use. But when they say that MS has to release their source codes, people tend to agree, because MS makes enough money and has a (natural) monopoly... Well, john doe, without MS's monopoly you wouldn't be using the PC now, because the chances are great that you would have to punch in a load of codes to get the system started... MS introduced standardisation, a uniform structure, ease of use for PC illiterates,... MS made home computing to what it is now... But yet, MS allways get's pissed upon...[/rant]

 

$3 million/day ?!? That sounds huge to me, so I find myself wondering just how much money MS makes off the EU market each day.

So:
Based on my quick google search, there are not quite 500 million people in the EU. If we assume an average household of 5, that's 100 million households. If we say each household buys 2 pieces of software every 5 years, then that comes out to 40 million pieces of software sold per year...just over 100,000 pieces of software sold per day. (yes i realize I'm neglecting businesses, schools, and libraries, and different sized households...but I'm dealing in orders of magnitude...and if the EU is anything like the US, there's tons of people that don't have any contact with MS computers at home or work)

So, divide $3 million/day by 100,000 pieces of software per day, and it looks like Microsoft has to make $30 in profit per piece of software just to break even with the fines.

That seems pretty steep to me, since an OEM version of XP Home can be had for well under $100, and student versions of Office can be had for $50 (3 licenses for $150 is the price I've seen). Further that with the fact that most people don't buy software themselves, but order it pre-installed on a machine from Dell, HP, etc...and those companies likely pay the super cheap bulk-OEM rate which must be way under $100 per copy.

My math could be off...but it seems like a sizeable chunk of MS's profits are going toward this fine. Add that to the cost of keeping those extra 300 folks employed (which is probably less, in the 10's of thousands of dollars per day), and the cost of legal fees, and the cost that comes in having to combat the bad publicity that all of this probably generates in the EU, and one starts to wonder if it wouldn't be better for MS to just suddenly stop selling their product to the EU to prove a point (I assume the EU can't keep charging fines if MS pulls out of their market). I'm pretty sure that when every computer company in the EU suddenly had no real way to sell their product, and families and businesses had to suddenly adapt to the need to move to Linux and Mac/Apple stuff (which, you must admit, most people just could not do without some serious training or help from the nerd down the street), the EU would have to become more friendly to MS and quit with the huge fines.

 

Now that I call a good idea...

My vote goes for this!

 

Hmm... how about if MS plays hardball? Stops selling it's product in those markets? Other than open source (which only a relatively small number of people will be able to handle) what is the alternative?

In theory MS could effectively shutdown the computer industry/business in the EU and blame it on the EU. Would it happen? Doubt it. However it is interesting to consider the impact that a company of this size can have if they were to do something like this.

 

Bribery doesn't work as well over there. "Free software for ya if you make this one go away" works a whole lot better stateside.

Anyways, good. Aren't they up to almost $2B in fines now or something?