7 ms·
In 2001, just 16 years ago, Microsoft was almost broken up because Internet Explorer was shipped with Windows. Think about that for a second, I'll wait. Seems
by maltalex 9y ago
In 2001, just 16 years ago, Microsoft was almost broken up because Internet Explorer was shipped with Windows. Think about that for a second, I'll wait.
Seems like small potatoes today, doesn't it?
When was the last time you've heard of anti trust litigation because iPhones come with Safari or a whole bunch of Apple services? What about Google and its software on any and all Android phones? And why can Amazon tie Kindle to its book store and not get sued by competitors?
We are allowing these companies to integrate vertically to the point of insanity.
- joering2 9y ago> What about Google and its software on any and all Android phones? And the biggest of all of them -- Google Chrome browser advertised on the Google Search FRONT page with link directly under the search box; a spot seen by billions of people that neither you nor your small business or even a corp with billions in revenue have access to! It still blows my mind they never got in trouble for that.
- Nomentatus 9y agoEurope is bringing them to book for this.
- joering2 9y agoReally?? I can't find anything and I don't lack Google ninja search skills. Any links to sources would be appreciated!
- Nomentatus 9y agoIt's weird that search so often requires a "secret word" that you likely wouldn't or didn't guess would apply, or would be needed, in order to discard all the irrelevant results. Here, the word seems to be "sue." Rather than "charge," say. Happens to me all the time. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=EU+sue+Google+Android&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=EU+sue+Google+Android&ia=web
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- dcwca 9y agoYes but none of Amazon, Apple nor Google have a monopoly on general computing the way Microsoft did in the 90s. They’re vertically integrated but the customer has options.
- jenscow 9y agoMicrosoft where a monopoly, and abused their position.
- dreamfactored 9y agoHow about Facebook or Twitter?
- jenscow 9y agoJust as sleazy.
- maltalex 9y agoor Google? Anyone used Bing lately?
- ggg9990 9y agoThe book "Chickenshit" describes how the DOJ has become incapable and unwilling to prosecute white collar crime.
- karmelapple 9y agoLooks like a good book – thanks for the recommendation! I’m curious - does it suggest ways for citizens to change this?
- mikestew 9y agoSeems like small potatoes today, doesn't it? When one takes at face value the extremely simplistic way you stated it, yes, it seems small. But that's not what happened. Microsoft was convicted of using their monopoly position in operating systems to extend their reach into web browsers. Practically speaking, the only consumer operating systems at the time ran on personal computers, either desktops or laptops, and in that market Microsoft held an overwhelming market share. There were no mass market smartphones (there was WinCE, but few I knew had them), Palm Pilots held the PDA market for a short while, but all a drop in the bucket compared to full-blown OSs. When was the last time you've heard of anti trust litigation because iPhones come with Safari or a whole bunch of Apple services? Go buy a turnkey Android phone if you don't like it. What about Google and its software on any and all Android phones? Go buy an iPhone if you don't like that. And why can Amazon tie Kindle to its book store and not get sued by competitors? Apple's iBooks has about everything you'll find on Amazon. Haven't used it, but I'd be surprised if Google Books wasn't close enough. What were you going to buy computer-wise in 2001? A desktop or laptop that came with Microsoft Windows whether you wanted it or not. That was your practical choice, and the courts found that though it was fine for Microsoft to own the OS market, it was not fine to leverage that into driving Netscape out of business.
- hungerstrike 9y agoYou can't build a mobile app business and not release iOS versions of your apps. Sounds like enough of a monopoly to me.
- mikestew 9y agoIt might sound like it, it might be the way you wish things to be, but that does not define a monopoly even by the loosest definition.
- Fnoord 9y ago> Go buy an iPhone if you don't like that. Or use LineageOS + microG [1] > What were you going to buy computer-wise in 2001? A desktop or laptop that came with Microsoft Windows whether you wanted it or not. That was your practical choice, and the courts found that though it was fine for Microsoft to own the OS market, it was not fine to leverage that into driving Netscape out of business. Yep, not only that, Microsoft insisted a computer should come preinstalled with an OS (an anti-piracy argument IIRC). So eventually, some vendors included FreeDOS. Also, if you wanted to run something else like Linux on a computer it would cost you serious work. An example is "winmodem", an onboard software modem instead of a traditional dedicated 'hardware' modem. Or WiFi drivers which wouldn't work because the drivers were closed source. The main alternative was building your own computer. That's not feasible with a laptop though. Also I recommend people not just look at only SCO but the whole Halloween documents (and do realise even those are a summary). For example, have a peak at one of the earlier Halloween documents which described how Netscape was driven out of business. [1] https://lineage.microg.org/ https://lineage.microg.org/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents
- spiderfarmer 9y agoMicrosoft had 97% market share in desktop PC's in 2000. If the iPhone had 97% market share, I bet you'd hear about a lot of anti trust cases against Apple.
- WalterBright 9y agoMore like 90%.
- mjw1007 9y agoBundled Internet Explorer was particularly troubling because they were promoting ActiveX as the way to provide interactive content and otherwise extend the browser, and ActiveX was very closely tied to the Windows API (so that it would be impractical to make arbitrary ActiveX controls work on other operating systems). I didn't follow the court case and I don't know if that was a central part of it, but if it wasn't it should have been. It's easy to think, now that JavaScript has won, that ActiveX in browsers was never going to take off, but I think there was a real risk (and as I understand it in South Korea it did reach critical mass and effectively force everyone to have access to Internet Explorer for a decade and a half). I don't think Google have done anything similar to that with Chrome.
- styfle 9y agoGoogle has produced APIs that only shipped in Chrome...SPDY, NaCl, WebSQL, chrome extension APIs. I think the difference is Google wants other browsers to implement those APIs by providing a path to standardization. SPDY was replaced with HTTP2. NaCl was replaced with Web Assembly. WebSQL was replaced with IndexedDB. Chrome extensions kind of became Web Extensions.
- mjw1007 9y agoI agree, that's what makes the difference. Not just that standardised forms appear, but that Chrome does switch to them. Contrast CSS, where Microsoft participated in the design (while Netscape tried to push their own different thing) and signed off on the standard, but chose not to update their implementation to match what the final standard said.
- matthewmacleod 9y agoThat’s not the full story - I think you’re understating quite how much of a monopoly on operating systems Microsoft had. It was nearly broken up because of a consistent and recurrent abuse of its that position, which culminated in the Internet Explorer case. With the exception of Google in the search market, None of the examples you cite are in monopoly market positions. Nobody will force Apple to allow other browsers on the iPhone, for example, because there are other mobile phones users can purchase if they require that feature. Google (in the search market) is of course currently being examined by Europe for its possibly-anti-competitive practices. But these things take time.
- debaserab2 9y agoYour own examples demonstrate how much competition there is in the market today. That was not the case in 2001.
- yuhong 9y agoI was just mentioning Browsium on Twitter recently with the former CTO which was a former IE team member: https://twitter.com/variables/status/925792972372922369 https://twitter.com/variables/status/925792972372922369
- ringaroundthetx 9y agothe key word being "ALMOST" every time the government actually does something like this, it is merely an instruction manual to every other massive corporation on the planet on how to technically do the same thing but more effectively.
- wdr1 9y agoI remember those times. You're missing a key element on how different the world was then. 90%+ of people used a Windows machine exclusively. By making IE the default & forcing OEMs to install it, they were using that that monopoly to crush Netscape. Today's world is significantly more fragmented. People typically use at least two devices (a mobile device, in addition to a desktop or laptop). No single company controls the browser market the same way MS/IE did. Chrome has 54%[1], whereas IE had peaked at 95%[2]. [1] http://gs.statcounter.com/ http://gs.statcounter.com/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers#TheCounter.com_.282000_to_2009.29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers#Th...