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

Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 32 posts

Re: Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives

#11

Post by mtgx »

jfoutz wrote: post #10
arturadib wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do know IE is still by far #1 right?

Really? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

Everyone is counting Chrome at 30% or higher. Net Applications is the only one that counts it at under 20% and IE having the most market share. What he hell kind of stats are they taking there? For some reason Ars Technica keeps using theirs stats over others, too, even though I'm sure their own website's stats are a lot more similar to the others than to Net Apps' numbers.

Re: Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives

#12

Post by justinschuh »

For those not actually reading the article, this goes back to the multi-billion dollar EU ruling from 2004. Microsoft appealed it for years and eventually reached a settlement in 2009, which reduced their fine to a fraction of the original ruling. However, one of the key requirements of that settlement was the browser ballot, which Microsoft has been violating (as they admitted, but stated the noncompliance was unintentional). Since Microsoft breached the terms of the settlement, they're now potentially on the hook for the original fine plus whatever else applies.

Re: Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives

#13

Post by pooriaazimi »

Question: I think if you disagree with (software) patents, you must also disagree with these anti-monopoly laws. Everyone must be equal and free to compete, even companies with trillions of dollars in bank.

It's 3 AM here so I can't make a good case why I feel that way (so I rather not to, in case I'm misunderstood and people waste their time arguing about what I don't mean), but I want to know what others think about it. Most people hate IE and to a degree, MS. But it shouldn't matter whether we like them or not. They must be allowed to do whatever they want even if it hurts the industry.

Re: Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives

#14

Post by [deleted] »

arturadib wrote: post #6
jiggy2011 wrote: post #2

This might have made some sense back in ~2002 when all other browsers were DOA. Seems almost cruel to watch the EU stomp a dying browser further into the pavement. Surely it would be more fitting for the EU to look into UEFI or Windows 8 RT which IIRC will not allow other browsers at all.

You do know IE is still by far #1 right?

[deleted]

Re: Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives

#15

Post by squidsoup »

pooriaazimi wrote: post #13

Question: I think if you disagree with (software) patents, you must also disagree with these anti-monopoly laws. Everyone must be equal and free to compete, even companies with trillions of dollars in bank. It's 3 AM here so I can't make a good case why I feel that way (so I rather not to, in case I'm misunderstood and people waste their time arguing about what I don't mean), but I want to know what others think abou…

"They must be allowed to do whatever they want even if it hurts the industry."

Isn't this the kind of thinking that led to the banking crisis?

Re: Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives

#16

Post by SEMW »

pooriaazimi wrote: post #13

Question: I think if you disagree with (software) patents, you must also disagree with these anti-monopoly laws. Everyone must be equal and free to compete, even companies with trillions of dollars in bank. It's 3 AM here so I can't make a good case why I feel that way (so I rather not to, in case I'm misunderstood and people waste their time arguing about what I don't mean), but I want to know what others think abou…

> I think if you disagree with (software) patents, you must also disagree with these anti-monopoly laws.

...Do you have a reason for thinking that? The connection isn't obvious.

If your reason for disagreeing with software patents is an aversion to government intervention then, ok, sure, that reason would also extend to disliking competition law. But if your reason for disagreeing with software patents is, say, because you don't like that they grant the patent-holder a monopoly on the subject of the patent and you don't like monopolies, that's pretty compatible with having a high regard for competition law. And if your reason for disagree with software patents is something else entirely, that might not point to any particular position on competition law at all.

Re: Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives

#18

Post by thirdtruck »

kabdib wrote: post #17

Time for the EU to go back to the Microsoft piggybank. Ka-ching!

Microsoft continues to commit the corporate equivalent of a parole violation.

The EU cannot "go back" to the piggybank, given that Microsoft has still left its pre-existing obligations unfulfilled.

Re: Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives

#19

Post by nmat »

jiggy2011 wrote: post #2

This might have made some sense back in ~2002 when all other browsers were DOA. Seems almost cruel to watch the EU stomp a dying browser further into the pavement. Surely it would be more fitting for the EU to look into UEFI or Windows 8 RT which IIRC will not allow other browsers at all.

The XKCD: http://xkcd.com/1118

Re: Europe Closer to Fining Microsoft Billions Over Failure To Offer IE Alternatives

#20

Post by cageface »

pooriaazimi wrote: post #13

Question: I think if you disagree with (software) patents, you must also disagree with these anti-monopoly laws. Everyone must be equal and free to compete, even companies with trillions of dollars in bank. It's 3 AM here so I can't make a good case why I feel that way (so I rather not to, in case I'm misunderstood and people waste their time arguing about what I don't mean), but I want to know what others think abou…

Like most legal issues I don't think this one is so black & white.

I'm still not sure if government intervention was the right answer in Microsoft's case but the fact that some kind of government involvement (patents) is clearly bad for the software industry doesn't necessarily mean that any government involvement is bad.

Post reply on HN