EU regulators don't read what they ask for from MS
-
Could be a Soapbox post, but its all very radical in there. This is a bit of tech news. Having asked for good techincal documentation, sounds like they have not even bothered to read what was sent before saying it was not good enough. A bit cheeky I think. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/02/23/microsoft_ec_objections/[^] Must be a very boring read, and they wanted to go home for the holidays, but they did ask for them.
This all seems to be a way for politicians to pander to their electorate more than anything else. It's protectionism on a scale almost approaching that of the U.S. If any country ever decides to truly embrace capitalism I'll be shocked. I'm glad companies like Microsoft with deep pockets are having to wage these ridiculous battles. The EU continually comes across as radically socialist from this side of the Atlantic and we all know how well that worked out before.
-
I find all this a bit disconcerting. Why should Microsoft have to give up it's trade secrets? If the competition can't compete then they deserve to fall by the way side. Cajoling the EU into prising open the inner workings of a competitors product so that they can compete is just plain wrong. I can't think of another industry where this could or would happen. (Yes, go ahead, prove me wrong). <RANT>over</RANT> www.merrens.com
www.bkmrx.comI don't want the whole world to be tesco, walmart and microsoft, there is a difference between not being able to compete and a monoply moving the goal posts on you. Think of my local bookshop, tesco's bought over the supermarket and start price gouging the price of books and cd. Tesco's is enormous so they can afford to lose money on books, the bookshop can't really, so Tesco's eats into their market. Now the bookshop can try being value added, doing something different, but its still not going to detract from the fact that Tesco's is selling books at half the price. Personally I think the world would be a less rich place without the little guy, competions ok, so long as its fair, tesco's, walmart, microsoft, starbucks want the whole world. I fought for years against a monopolist telco bleeding a martket dry, so no-one knows better that I what one player owning a market does. Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire" Blogging @ Keratoconus Watch
-
I don't want the whole world to be tesco, walmart and microsoft, there is a difference between not being able to compete and a monoply moving the goal posts on you. Think of my local bookshop, tesco's bought over the supermarket and start price gouging the price of books and cd. Tesco's is enormous so they can afford to lose money on books, the bookshop can't really, so Tesco's eats into their market. Now the bookshop can try being value added, doing something different, but its still not going to detract from the fact that Tesco's is selling books at half the price. Personally I think the world would be a less rich place without the little guy, competions ok, so long as its fair, tesco's, walmart, microsoft, starbucks want the whole world. I fought for years against a monopolist telco bleeding a martket dry, so no-one knows better that I what one player owning a market does. Regards Ray "Je Suis Mort De Rire" Blogging @ Keratoconus Watch
I was pondering the idea of a company that makes little companies big. Basically the problem with little companies has to do with scalability because it's much less efficient to duplicate processes 100 times rather than have a single process cover 100 subsidiary stores. Well what if little companies can pool together resources to tak advantage of scalability. Kind of like a co-op or something. For example: -Provide an accounting house and pool together accounting (without merging money or disclosing income). -Schedule bulk purchases to get discounts. -Purchase advertising together in bulk Or something along those lines. I wonder if that's possible.
-
I find all this a bit disconcerting. Why should Microsoft have to give up it's trade secrets? If the competition can't compete then they deserve to fall by the way side. Cajoling the EU into prising open the inner workings of a competitors product so that they can compete is just plain wrong. I can't think of another industry where this could or would happen. (Yes, go ahead, prove me wrong). <RANT>over</RANT> www.merrens.com
www.bkmrx.comYou are completely besides your shoes. The problem with MS is that they are so fucking rich they kill competition. It is getting close to be everywhere each day, to a point that they may be the only software provider in the world someday (don't think I am crazy, we used to have Netscape, they killed it, as a simple example). When that day comes, they control the world, because we are so dependant on computers now. We have to do something, and the US won't move a finger to stop that, in the name of the sacro-saint "Free Market". If they have to become the only software provider, they have to open their source code. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson
-
This all seems to be a way for politicians to pander to their electorate more than anything else. It's protectionism on a scale almost approaching that of the U.S. If any country ever decides to truly embrace capitalism I'll be shocked. I'm glad companies like Microsoft with deep pockets are having to wage these ridiculous battles. The EU continually comes across as radically socialist from this side of the Atlantic and we all know how well that worked out before.
John Cardinal wrote:
It's protectionism on a scale almost approaching that of the U.S.
:laugh: Ask any American service technician/engineer whose ever tried to go into Canada to work on a machine about protectionism! Canadians take 1st prize in that regard. Compare prices on Japanese vs. American built cars in the US vs. Japan. The Japanese have taken protectionism to entirely new levels. I have no doubt that the US government does its fair share of protectionism, but in my experience we're hardly the worst offenders. Better to live one day as a lion than a hundred years as a sheep.
-
John Cardinal wrote:
It's protectionism on a scale almost approaching that of the U.S.
:laugh: Ask any American service technician/engineer whose ever tried to go into Canada to work on a machine about protectionism! Canadians take 1st prize in that regard. Compare prices on Japanese vs. American built cars in the US vs. Japan. The Japanese have taken protectionism to entirely new levels. I have no doubt that the US government does its fair share of protectionism, but in my experience we're hardly the worst offenders. Better to live one day as a lion than a hundred years as a sheep.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
but in my experience we're hardly the worst offenders.
Oh man, come off it. There isn't a single item of trade that the U.S. hasn't been all over with protectionism. NAFTA is a joke, the U.S. slaps illegal duties against every Canadian industry that has any lobby pull with U.S. senators. They lose repeatedly at arbitration and continue to stall and delay. Don't make me pull out references or this is going to go all soapbox pretty quick. ;)
-
You are completely besides your shoes. The problem with MS is that they are so fucking rich they kill competition. It is getting close to be everywhere each day, to a point that they may be the only software provider in the world someday (don't think I am crazy, we used to have Netscape, they killed it, as a simple example). When that day comes, they control the world, because we are so dependant on computers now. We have to do something, and the US won't move a finger to stop that, in the name of the sacro-saint "Free Market". If they have to become the only software provider, they have to open their source code. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson
Michel Prévost wrote:
The problem with MS is that they are so f***ing rich they kill competition.
wow. accusing others of being rich? what are they supposed to do, give more stuff away for free? so even more companies go out of business :rolleyes: As for netscape, have you used the old version from way back then? Not suprising it came to be the less popular one... though then ms left ie to rot ;P At least they are putting some money back into ie now ;P might take (a little) money away from all the other projects ;P
Michel Prévost wrote:
When that day comes, they control the world, because we are so dependant on computers now. We have to do something, and the US won't move a finger to stop that, in the name of the sacro-saint "Free Market".
There are special regulations for monopolies ;)
Michel Prévost wrote:
If they have to become the only software provider, they have to open their source code.
In other words... YOU'RE TOO SUCCESSFUL!!! I DEMAND THAT YOU SHARE YOUR SECRET!!! (don't bother asking for ours... we just want yours ;P)
-
You are completely besides your shoes. The problem with MS is that they are so fucking rich they kill competition. It is getting close to be everywhere each day, to a point that they may be the only software provider in the world someday (don't think I am crazy, we used to have Netscape, they killed it, as a simple example). When that day comes, they control the world, because we are so dependant on computers now. We have to do something, and the US won't move a finger to stop that, in the name of the sacro-saint "Free Market". If they have to become the only software provider, they have to open their source code. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson
I don't think they are killing competition. Linux seems to be doing better and better every year. So much so, its give traditional Unix versions a kicking. They keep going on about these protocols, and yet, I find Samba, actually works better than MS's implementations becuase you don't need CAL's and you don't keep getting disconnected. And the profits have leveled out. They can't just double the price of Windows as people will question it and look for alternatives, which is good for consumers.
"Je pense, donc je mange." - Rene Descartes 1689 - Just before his mother put his tea on the table. Shameless Plug - Distributed Database Transactions in .NET using COM+
-
You are completely besides your shoes. The problem with MS is that they are so fucking rich they kill competition. It is getting close to be everywhere each day, to a point that they may be the only software provider in the world someday (don't think I am crazy, we used to have Netscape, they killed it, as a simple example). When that day comes, they control the world, because we are so dependant on computers now. We have to do something, and the US won't move a finger to stop that, in the name of the sacro-saint "Free Market". If they have to become the only software provider, they have to open their source code. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson
> ... sacro-saint ... ??? :laugh: sacrosanct[^] :doh: Don't forget we also have (or used to!) separation of church and state. ;P Matt Gerrans
-
> ... sacro-saint ... ??? :laugh: sacrosanct[^] :doh: Don't forget we also have (or used to!) separation of church and state. ;P Matt Gerrans
What is your point? Pointing out poster's language mistakes? Pointless. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson
-
Michel Prévost wrote:
The problem with MS is that they are so f***ing rich they kill competition.
wow. accusing others of being rich? what are they supposed to do, give more stuff away for free? so even more companies go out of business :rolleyes: As for netscape, have you used the old version from way back then? Not suprising it came to be the less popular one... though then ms left ie to rot ;P At least they are putting some money back into ie now ;P might take (a little) money away from all the other projects ;P
Michel Prévost wrote:
When that day comes, they control the world, because we are so dependant on computers now. We have to do something, and the US won't move a finger to stop that, in the name of the sacro-saint "Free Market".
There are special regulations for monopolies ;)
Michel Prévost wrote:
If they have to become the only software provider, they have to open their source code.
In other words... YOU'RE TOO SUCCESSFUL!!! I DEMAND THAT YOU SHARE YOUR SECRET!!! (don't bother asking for ours... we just want yours ;P)
You are completely missing the point. And people like you encourage this type of behavior from huge corporations. You will never convince me that this will make the world a better place. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson
-
You are completely missing the point. And people like you encourage this type of behavior from huge corporations. You will never convince me that this will make the world a better place. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson
Nothing much complicated about it... Stuff is available for a price, people complain its not available for free, if its available for free people complain its driving others out of business (of course open source clones are exempt :rolleyes: ) So either way people complain :suss: Then again, you could think grander... make something better to outdo something else... then the original one has to be improved, etc... its called competition :cool: Think about it... improvements are made more willingly/quickly if theres competition ;) Granted, knocking off the peak can be somewhat harder... but all the more reason to make it better ;) Anyway, ms doesn't make everything, and ms isn't the best at all of what they do (whatever your definition may be of "best") - there are often free alternatives to much of the software that is available for a price, yet not much is said about it unless its by say, microsoft. Who says that it applies to all platforms though ;P not like ms is going to make all that much stuff for linux any time soon :rolleyes: and considering the general public using linux, no suprise ;P As for them having it available for free... some people use the argument that its not available for free (how odd... the same argument used for both sides :omg: ) It does need a platform to run on after all... and typically the platform (windows) isn't too cheap ;P I suppose you could run it under other platforms (such as linux using wine) but how many people are really going to do that? Overpriced os + (some) "underpriced" software? maybe it helps even it out *some*? People are always going to be anti-ms... no matter how good or how stupid some of the stuff is that they make :rolleyes: Now where would linux be if it weren't for microsoft anyway :rolleyes: at some level or other it benefits both sides... whether you like it or not.