4 ms·

I don't understand the argument. It's Microsoft's operating system, if they want to pre-install certain apps, why not? Google's heading in the same direction a

by nickb 18y ago

I don't understand the argument. It's Microsoft's operating system, if they want to pre-install certain apps, why not? Google's heading in the same direction as MS. They'll probably end up in the same court room in Washington DC few years from now.

neilc 18y ago
It's Microsoft's operating system, if they want to pre-install certain apps, why not? There's nothing fundamentally wrong with Microsoft pre-installing apps, just like there is nothing wrong with Apple pre-installing apps on OSX, or Sun on Solaris.
- vaksel 18y ago
  if it wasn't, they wouldn't have lost all those anti-trust suits
  - akd 18y ago
    The courts do not always assess right and wrong -- they are concerned with legal and illegal, which isn't the same thing.
- agotterer 18y ago
  but it is wrong that Apple forces safari downloads on windows! grrr!
aditya 18y ago
That comparison does not work. Microsoft pre-installing their applications, or tweaking their OS such that their applications provide a better experience is anti-competitive because it lets Microsoft utilize their monopoly to prevent competition. Google is not preventing any other search engines from gaining popularity. People go to google to find the most relevant answer to a particular thing, when the top result is consistently a spam knol, people won't go there to search anymore.
- alex_c 18y ago
  You're getting the two mixed up. The concern with Microsoft wasn't that they used their OS monopoly to unfairly compete with other operating systems, it was that they used their OS monopoly to unfairly compete with other applications (eg. IE vs. Netscape). The concern with Google isn't that they might be using their search near-monopoly to unfairly compete with other search engines, it is that they might be using their search near-monopoly to unfairly compete with other websites (eg. Knol vs. Wikipedia).

by nickb 18y ago

neilc 18y ago

It's Microsoft's operating system, if they want to pre-install certain apps, why not? There's nothing fundamentally wrong with Microsoft pre-installing apps, just like there is nothing wrong with Apple pre-installing apps on OSX, or Sun on Solaris.

vaksel 18y ago
if it wasn't, they wouldn't have lost all those anti-trust suits
- akd 18y ago
  The courts do not always assess right and wrong -- they are concerned with legal and illegal, which isn't the same thing.
agotterer 18y ago
but it is wrong that Apple forces safari downloads on windows! grrr!

aditya 18y ago

That comparison does not work. Microsoft pre-installing their applications, or tweaking their OS such that their applications provide a better experience is anti-competitive because it lets Microsoft utilize their monopoly to prevent competition. Google is not preventing any other search engines from gaining popularity. People go to google to find the most relevant answer to a particular thing, when the top result is consistently a spam knol, people won't go there to search anymore.

alex_c 18y ago
You're getting the two mixed up. The concern with Microsoft wasn't that they used their OS monopoly to unfairly compete with other operating systems, it was that they used their OS monopoly to unfairly compete with other applications (eg. IE vs. Netscape). The concern with Google isn't that they might be using their search near-monopoly to unfairly compete with other search engines, it is that they might be using their search near-monopoly to unfairly compete with other websites (eg. Knol vs. Wikipedia).