Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 808 posts

Re: Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

#301

Post by naikrovek »

wvenable wrote: post #205
phito wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do Windows users try so hard to keep defending their OS's shitty behaviors? It's always "you can disable it" (but it might come back automatically after an update), and when you can't disable it (one drive), it's "just don't use it".

I think it's a bit overblown. I don't have OneDrive enabled or Teams on my personal device and it was easy and mostly forgettable. I haven't any issues with it coming back after an update or anything. Edge isn't my default browser either. I feel like people want Windows to be evil so they oversell the issues. That's not to say that Microsoft should be forgiven for their obvious over-promotion of internal products. Th…

> people want Windows to be evil so they oversell the issues.

This, is it exactly.

Microsoft makes some very bad decisions, do not get me wrong. I agree with you and I think this is the core of why people complain so vehemently about Microsoft.

Re: Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

#302

Post by BoredPositron »

jad wrote: post #297
adam_arthur wrote: post #281

Government should just require open communication protocols/file formats, if a competitor is willing to host the same data at cost. Client applications should compete on their individual merits, not coast on protocol lock-in. Would WhatsApp or YouTube have as many users if others could build clients for the same data? (PII etc notwithstanding) Protocols compete on the merits of the protocol, clients compete on the me…

Companies can iterate on their products much faster if they're not required to publish all of their functionality as public APIs. Once the APIs have been published, it's much harder for them to be changed. Doing this also puts them at the mercy of whether or not client applications are willing to support their new functionality. Maybe YouTube wants clients to adopt some feature, but a powerful client application does…

Some guy at Google who worked on like 14 chat apps over the last two decades might just welcome it...

Re: Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

#303

Post by Auracle »

sunaookami wrote: post #283
EasyMark wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t these “actions”usually include separating the products out the way the EU wants them?aka don’t include Teams in EU installs of MS office or don’t even include office at all? Otherwise a fine is useless.

Doesn't matter if everyone already uses Teams and the damage is done. Look at Netscape vs IE.

Yet we’d absolutely balk at a computer or phone not coming with a browser by default nowadays. I don’t really think that ruling was on the right side of history.

Re: Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

#304

Post by bongodongobob »

talldayo wrote: post #296
bongodongobob wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is one, you can add all sorts of third party add-ons to Teams.

But can your app be integrated into Windows with equal footing as Teams?

I don't even know what that means.

Re: Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

#305

Post by WheatMillington »

sunaookami wrote: post #73

I already know how this will be solved: Microsoft will pay a (small) fine and file it under "the cost of doing business" while the damage is already done. Teams is one of the absolutely worst products ever programmed, it's hiliarious how bad it is. It only reached its market share because Microsoft gave it away "for free" with Office 365 or MS 365 or whatever it's called now.

I use Teams every day for work, I'm not sure why it's considered so bad? It seems user friendly and useful, to me. Non-tech worker (finance).

Re: Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

#306

Post by jodrellblank »

adam_arthur wrote: post #281

Government should just require open communication protocols/file formats, if a competitor is willing to host the same data at cost. Client applications should compete on their individual merits, not coast on protocol lock-in. Would WhatsApp or YouTube have as many users if others could build clients for the same data? (PII etc notwithstanding) Protocols compete on the merits of the protocol, clients compete on the me…

> Government should just require open communication protocols/file formats

They did, Microsoft made Office support some open XML thing, and what changed?

Re: Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

#307

Post by Sakos »

RankingMember wrote: post #241
Neil44 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha, that's another thing that grinds my gears. Teams, Teams (Personal) Teams (new)... WTF people you're supposed to know what you're doing here.

The "Teams (new)" is absurd. Have we not learned not to name things this way by now? I say this as someone as guilty as anyone of having created an iterative series of files with "Final_1.txt", "Final_2.txt", "Final_1-new.txt" suffixes in times of mental sketch-padding. I would never release a product into the wild with any of those in the title, though.

Tbh, I prefer the Teams (new) and Teams (classic) naming. It's infinitely better than the naming they were doing before, which is they were named the exact same in the menu, but were entirely different versions.

Re: Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

#308

Post by tolciho »

pompino wrote: post #236
phito wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do Windows users try so hard to keep defending their OS's shitty behaviors? It's always "you can disable it" (but it might come back automatically after an update), and when you can't disable it (one drive), it's "just don't use it".

Why are you so upset that people derive a lot of value from Windows? Enough that they want to keep using it, and defend it because they don't agree with the "everything is broken" meme.

Because even if you don't touch Windows (or whatever mediocre malware Microsoft presently peddles) those folks come to you and say stuff like "skype won't start" and lo! it does not start, though after much clicking around and rebooting and trying the obvious things you discover that if you right-click and try "open with skype" on the skype icon then skype will start. That problem at some point disappeared as mysteriously as it appeared. Eh, who knows, it's Windows, and there's more science to reading tea leaves or goose entrails.

Then after za'o decades of stories like the above (it is merely the most recent of many) one might wonder how does Microsoft with so many programmers and so much money produce such kusogeware? That continues to waste my time?

Re: Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

#309

Post by elevatedastalt »

talldayo wrote: post #210
crowcroft wrote: post #190

What's the difference between anti-competitive bundling, and developing seamless integrated experiences? If this is anti-competitive, is it anti-competitive for Apple to bundle music features/up-sell into the iOS UI, or provide an interface for headphones that no other manufacturer can integrate with?

> What's the difference between anti-competitive bundling, and developing seamless integrated experiences? The availability of APIs for third-party developers to create a similar competing experience.

What API exists for third-party developers to create experiences similar to first party Apple apps?

Re: Microsoft breached antitrust rules by bundling Teams and Office, EU says

#310

Post by matwood »

Neil44 wrote: post #26

They don't just bundle it, they make it auto-start on screen on Windows machines whether you've got an account or not.

Teams is a dumpster fire that no one would pay for. But, now that's it's been free and rolled out everywhere, it's a little late for the government to step in.
Post reply on HN