No IE in Windows 7 in Europe!!!

[angry_geek]

Then why were you so upset about the the starving kids line? Forget it. I'm an idiot; you're a genius. The EU is great; the US is the only corrupt entity. You're a rich computer genius; I'm just a poor American working stiff.

I really don't care how much money you have, how much your house cost, or how much you spent in Florida. I'm not going to stoop to your level by insulting your intelligence. Let's just agree to end this as I tried to do in my last post before it goes completely down the rabbit hole.

I'm not disputing the fact that MS violated EU law. I'm disputing the law itself, as well as some here in the US. The US "never managed to make an anti-trust case really stick against MS, ever". Huh? It's been going on for nearly 2 decades now. One after another. The difference is reasonable settlements are made with all involved parties instead of blanket rulings that only benefit the competing companies and allow politicians to say to the voter "see what we did".

My "mafia" comment was based on this

It is a body for economic and social co-operation. Every member state has a full veto on every law that's enacted and retains full sovereignty. Any member state that wishes can pull out whenever they want. It would be economic suicide to do so but it could be done.

This is the same argument made by every organized crime group for the past 100 years. It's one of the reasons for the RICO act.

Back to the OP and discussion . . .

 

[seedubya]

Then why were you so upset about the the starving kids line?

Do a little reading, figure it out. Actually, ask your aunt. I'll bet you the tour guide told her. For real.

I really don't care how much money you have, how much your house cost, or how much you spent in Florida. I'm not going to stoop to your level by insulting your intelligence. Let's just agree to end this as I tried to do in my last post before it goes completely down the rabbit hole.

Then perhaps you should think or find out the facts before you post offensive stuff about my home and make silly comments about our economy. Also, when did I insult your intelligence? I called your knowledge into question. That's all. Not knowing something doesn't make you stupid. Pretending to might, but not knowing definitely doesn't.

I'm not disputing the fact that MS violated EU law. I'm disputing the law itself, as well as some here in the US. The US "never managed to make an anti-trust case really stick against MS, ever". Huh? It's been going on for nearly 2 decades now. One after another. The difference is reasonable settlements are made with all involved parties instead of blanket rulings that only benefit the competing companies and allow politicians to say to the voter "see what we did".

What you call reasonable settlements, many others would call slaps on the wrist. Which still, BTW, allow the politicians to say "see what we did". I'm more in favour of my law makers having some teeth. Do you think there shouldn't be any competition laws. Why?

My "mafia" comment was based on this This is the same argument made by every organized crime group for the past 100 years. It's one of the reasons for the RICO act.

Still doesn't make any sense to me. How can you compare 27 independent countries co-operating on economic and social matters to an organised crime organisation?

Back to the OP and discussion . . .

I am the OP.

 

[camp.cool007]

I'm moving to Europe!

 

[angry_geek]

What you call reasonable settlements, many others would call slaps on the wrist. Which still, BTW, allow the politicians to say "see what we did". I'm more in favour of my law makers having some teeth. Do you think there shouldn't be any competition laws. Why?

Still doesn't make any sense to me. How can you compare 27 independent countries co-operating on economic and social matters to an organised crime organisation?

Due to these reasonable settlements, MS was forced to end it's bullying of Novell and other companies including AOL and Netscape. This all happened in the '90s when the whole country went crazy over suing MS. Now it seems the EU is doing just what we did more than 10 years ago. It's the same story with different plaintiffs. The difference is the EU is obviously taking sides with the plaintiffs and complainants instead of remaining neutral. I do think there should be antitrust legislation to protect the integrity of the business world. However, I believe all governments and social/economic consortiums should stay as far away as possible from telling businesses and consumers how they should operate. They should only step in when absolutely necessary. A good example is with the US government stepping in with the finance and auto industries. All they've managed to do is make a bad situation worse and keep two failing companies afloat (GM and Chrysler) when a fair market would have seen those companies die and someone else take their place. The business world abhors a vacuum just as nature does.

The mafia comment was an obviously exaggerated parallel. The various mobsters to stand trial have all claimed to be business owners and members of social clubs designed to help each other grow economically and help the various communities they hail from.

 

[tasaholic]

Except that MS won't do this, despite having been ordered to do so on previous occasions. So there is a need for lawsuits.

@tasholic

FFS least get your facts straight before you go mouthing off. This is not about the EC forcing MS to put a "European" browser on Windows 7. For starters Norway, the home of Opera is not in the EU. Secondly, both Google and Mozilla were party to the complaint, after the fact - both US companies. Thirdly, the original complaint was about MS threatening OEMs to prevent them from installing alternative browsers at the factory or even providing links i.e. abusing their market position.

And here you all are defending Microsoft, one of the most monopoly-abusive companies that ever existed. A company that has time and time again showed it's utter disdain for users, competitors and the laws any country in which it operates.

Finally, Australians in glasshouses shouldn't throw firewalls, sorry I mean stones.

I am curious to know why so many posts that are designed to promote some friendly debate or a sharing of different perspectives amongst the TN members usually end up in a slanging match. I believe most people on here do have a life and most techs do have a business to run which includes some level of public relations. If the level of PR shown in some posts is indicative of a general level of acceptance of another's opinion then ,sad to say, it does not bode well for a friendly environment. For all our faults,I am proud that I am an Aussie with a healthy ability to laugh at myself and enjoy some humour from others. The day I get all wound up in nonsensical arguments about who's opinion is right and who's is wrong will be the day I give up and crawl off to the sook's corner! It does seem as though even a factual report on any subject which has been mentioned in a news report is even the excuse for a vitriolic reply by some. Perhaps it's a sign of immaturity or just plain ignorance /bad manners...but definitely not an attractive look! I would really hate this brilliant site to be hijacked by nastiness as so many other sites have - leading to their eventual collapse. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and last time I checked freedom of thought was an essential human right. The debate over who wants to control what on a global scale is worrying enough without the majority of members being chastised into following the edicts of the minority ..particularly over events not controlled by anyone on this site. I'm sure many will agree the atmosphere on some forums is not a happy one,let's not allow this one to sink to that level as it is not as though someone's different view on any subject really affects the life of another in this forum.

 

[angry_geek]

@tas

100% agreed! BTW, I've been laughing since page 2.

 

[tasaholic]

Let's all face the fact...without Microsoft,how much work would we all have?? I do not mean as far as reliability or lack thereof of the OS...but the sheer weight of numbers of users? To denigrate what has been ,IMHO, the greatest driver of progress ever seen, is downright dumb. Without the overwhelming uptake of Windows I doubt there would be nearly as much achieved by competing systems as the advances of one spur on development of others. Good,bad or indifferent...these systems exist and it is our job to maintain and repair them so let's not cut our nose off to spite our face...as ugly as that may appear in the mirror.

 

[JRDtechnet]

I haven't kept up with this thread but I'm with MHCG here. Apple OSX has 100% of the macintosh market yet no one is giving them flack them for including Safari.

Also where does it end, media player, internet explorer...whats next movie/dvd maker? Outlook Express/Windows Mail, Windows Backup? Messenger? Remote Desktop? Photo Gallery? All those mentioned have 3rd party equivalence just like IE or Media player. Hell there are 3rd party shells, why not "sue" to keep explorer.exe out of the next version???

What Microsoft does do that's illegal is threatening to pull OEM licenses or discounts to manufacturers(dell, hp, acer, etc) if they install 3rd party applications and make it default. This is where the anti-trust lawsuit should focus on, not forcing a Microsoft to strip down Windows. IMO No one should have the right to tell a company what they can and cannot include in their product nor should they have to promote a competitors product by giving them a choice of what browser to install as the EU wants.

If Opera or Mozilla wants to be installed on a Windows machine they should make deals with manufacturers

 

[abe]

If Opera or Mozilla wants to be installed on a Windows machine they should make deals with manufacturers

do you think the average user would want anything but IE, i would be pretty angry if i bought a new pc only to have to go through 10 pages of "using ie will give you better experiance while using citi.com"

 

[gunslinger]

@JRDtechnet

One of the best comments so far.

What all this stupidity is doing is making it easier for others to bring more stupid lawsuits to court.

 

[JRDtechnet]

do you think the average user would want anything but IE, i would be pretty angry if i bought a new pc only to have to go through 10 pages of "using ie will give you better experiance while using citi.com"

Not sure I'm following you? If Mozilla made a deal to install Firefox by default on all Dell Inspiron computers why would they have to go through 10-pages about IE?

 

[angry_geek]

@JRDtechnet

One of the best comments so far.

What all this stupidity is doing is making it easier for others to bring more stupid lawsuits to court.

I second that. JRD summed it up pretty well.

 

[seedubya]

I haven't kept up with this thread but I'm with MHCG here. Apple OSX has 100% of the macintosh market yet no one is giving them flack them for including Safari.

Also where does it end, media player, internet explorer...whats next movie/dvd maker? Outlook Express/Windows Mail, Windows Backup? Messenger? Remote Desktop? Photo Gallery? All those mentioned have 3rd party equivalence just like IE or Media player. Hell there are 3rd party shells, why not "sue" to keep explorer.exe out of the next version???

What Microsoft does do that's illegal is threatening to pull OEM licenses or discounts to manufacturers(dell, hp, acer, etc) if they install 3rd party applications and make it default. This is where the anti-trust lawsuit should focus on, not forcing a Microsoft to strip down Windows. IMO No one should have the right to tell a company what they can and cannot include in their product nor should they have to promote a competitors product by giving them a choice of what browser to install as the EU wants.

If Opera or Mozilla wants to be installed on a Windows machine they should make deals with manufacturers

Everyone is lauding your comment, JRDTechnet, as one of the most wonderful so far. What's really funny about that is what you're saying should happen is what's actually happening. Which you'd know if you done any reading instead of just posting.

People, a bit of common sense. Don't make comments about stuff until you've read up on it and don't base your opinions on what you "think". Actually find out first. And finally, when you're wrong and you find out don't be afraid to back down. Honestly, it's like debating with teenagers.

What you all seem to be saying is "Let MS do whatever they like, whenever they like, however they like, without any intervention or oversight". Well good luck with that.

 

[JRDtechnet]

Everyone is lauding your comment, JRDTechnet, as one of the most wonderful so far. What's really funny about that is what you're saying should happen is what's actually happening. Which you'd know if you done any reading instead of just posting.

The EU wants Microsoft to include competitors versions on the windows disc (see quote below) and when they install windows they can choose which browser they want to install. I think this is wrong, as I said Microsoft should be able to include what they want in their product and shouldn't be forced to include a competitors product.

Now if a manufacturer wants to uninstall IE and install Opera or Firefox they should be able to do that without worrying about Microsoft pulling their licenses.

On Friday, the European Union said it "notes with interest" Microsoft's latest move, but repeated an earlier recommendation that the company provide a choice of browsers with Windows to offer "genuine consumer choice."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/microsoft/2009333799_microsoft13.html

 

[seedubya]

The EU wants Microsoft to include competitors versions on the windows disc (see quote below) and when they install windows they can choose which browser they want to install.

Sorry, not familiar with this information. Can you tell me where it's from? If it's accurate then it paints a slightly different picture.

Now if a manufacturer wants to uninstall IE and install Opera or Firefox they should be able to do that without worrying about Microsoft pulling their licenses.

At least we agree on this much.

Enough time wasted on this.

 

[JRDtechnet]

Sorry, not familiar with this information. Can you tell me where it's from? If it's accurate then it paints a slightly different picture.



At least we agree on this much.

Enough time wasted on this.

The hyperlink under the quote I posted. Here http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/microsoft/2009333799_microsoft13.html

 

[Blues]

You know everytime I see this thread posted in I keep thinking "LET IT DIE!"

 

[gunslinger]

@seedubya


This statment made by JRDtechnet is what it all comes down to:

Also where does it end, media player, Internet explorer...whats next movie/dvd maker? Outlook Express/Windows Mail, Windows Backup? Messenger? Remote Desktop? Photo Gallery? All those mentioned have 3rd party equivalence just like IE or Media player. Hell there are 3rd party shells, why not "sue" to keep explorer.exe out of the next version???

No one ever said let Microsoft do what ever the want when ever they want. I'm not sure how you got that out of what was said. What I hear is that they should be kept in check and not allowed to do anything thats already illegal. We should not be making new "special" laws just for them to have to follow because they are a big company.

 

[abe]

@seedubya


This statement made by JRDtechnet is what it all comes down to:



No one ever said let Microsoft do what ever the want when ever they want. I'm not sure how you got that out of what was said. What I hear is that they should be kept in check and not allowed to do anything thats already illegal. We should not be making new "special" laws just for them to have to follow because they are a big company.

what I see as pathetic is not so much the "special laws" made for M$ but that the government bullies didn't think of it from the consumers point of view and how they are going to be seriously screwed.

just imagine a guy deciding OK so I'm gonna try FF and then two days later he freaks out because his bank site doesn't work well with FF, I still don't understand why M$ can't just leave the browser on the OS and whoever wants can use a different one, why did those stupid EU idiots have them remove it, do you use paint.exe your not forced to so by trying to hurt M$ and go that extra step and outlaw them from having it on the OS the end users are now screwed.

For reasons such as this I'm happy I don't live in the EU anymore

 

[seedubya]

@JRDTechnet - thanks for the clarification. I didn't take that in when I first read the article. It seems the EC is saying that MS not including a browser at all in retail copies is reducing choice. A good compromise might be to leave retail copies alone and allow the OEMs full choice on what to include. After all the consumer is making an active choice in buying an OS off the shelf whereas OEM PC buyers are buying a PC that happens to come with Windows and about which they have very little perceived choice.

@gunslinger - As I said earlier, this is not really about software. It's more like a duel between MS and the EU with browsers in place of pistols. It could just as easily have been solitaire in place of rapiers. As for making new laws, the EU isn't. Under existing anti-trust legislation, a number of different complaints were made about MS's alleged abuse of market position. Those complaints just happened to be, first, from Opera, then Mozilla and Google. The complaints have not been yet adjudicated upon. However, MS is taking pre-emptive action in removing IE8 having been previously found guilty of similar actions following complaints made by RealPlayer (I think) in 2004. It is this previous case to which the v. large fines apply.

@Blues - good idea. This is my last post on the issue.