5 ms·
Microsoft in furious attack on UK as major gaming deal blocked
- tpoacher 4y agoI would love to see this kind of thing backfire for MS etc. I had an odd sense of pride when I found out the UK gov promotes open document standards on their websites. Whenever someone gives me flak I can now say I'm conforming to national accessibility guidelines.
- christmm 4y ago[dead]
- iflp 4y agoContent aside, this is terrible editing on BBC’s part: > However, the regulator hit back, saying: "It is the CMA's job to do what is best for the people, businesses and economy of the UK, not merging firms with commercial interests." > But the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said its job was not to serve the interests of merging firms.
- red_trumpet 4y agoThe first sentence even appears again further down.
- ChrisMarshallNY 4y agoI think that was a quote from Brad Smith. That often happens, when they parse a quote for the lede, then expand upon it later. I don’t have any opinions on the merits (or demerits) of the issue at hand.
- lastangryman 4y agoYep also: > Mr Smith said the CMA's decision market "probably the darkest day in our four decades in Britain". I assume they meant to say "marked" rather than "market". The editorial standards are frankly a disgrace at the BBC these days, these errors are common.
- ta1243 4y agoThat's what happens when output increases massively, budgets drop by 50%, and there's a constant pressure to be first
- b800h 4y agoPretty disgusting and low attack, given the form of words used. Another reason not to buy their services, IMO. Plenty of people with budgetary authority will take note.
- alibarber 4y agoI was also very surprised by the language here - diplomacy seems to have gone completely out of the window and I don’t really understand what they’re trying to achieve by disparaging an entire country! This is far worse than you’d read from a Ryanair press release - the CEO of which isn’t exactly afraid to make his true feelings known, and doesn’t have a lot of love for the UK government. I don’t play games and don’t really have knowledge of what’s going on here, but this seems to have convinced me that the CMAs choice was correct.
- prmoustache 4y agoIt is blackmail, plain and simple.
- moritonal 4y agoThis is likely a good thing. If a company is annoyed by a regulator it either means the regulator accidentally held back passionate progress the populous begged for, or that Microsoft was set to make a load of money off it. And there's a general lack of articles lamenting this.
- Circuitstorm513 4y ago"Furious attack" - Just goes to show that it was the right decision by the UK. EU should have done the same. I personally don't want all my games to be linked to a Microsoft account in a few years. There's already too many monopolies. It's bad enough they want to force you to use an online account for the operating system.
- rvba 4y agoI dont want a microsoft account on my private computer
- hulitu 4y ago> I dont want a microsoft account on my private computer It is not _your_ private computer. You only bought a _right to use it_ in exchange for your data. Big brother will be very upset if you don't comply.
- blibble 4y ago> EU should have done the same. there's reasonable odds that they will the UK was simply first to reveal its decision I wonder what the petulant child Brad Smith will say then
- RoryH 4y ago> Just goes to show that it was the right decision by the UK. Bingo!
- Negitivefrags 4y agoIf Microsoft being angry shows that it was the right decision, what would it look like if an actually unjust decision was made?
- AntoniusBlock 4y agoStopping the process of monopolisation is bad for business? Since when?
- sekh60 4y agoBad for _their_ business.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- johneth 4y agoIf there's one thing that'll get people on your side, it's antagonising them.
- ndsipa_pomu 4y agoAlso an article in The Gurandia: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/27/microsoft-says-eu-better-place-for-post-brexit-business-after-uk-blocks-activision-deal https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/27/microsoft-s...
- Woodi 4y agoMS is blackmailing a gov. UK in that case. Proofs MS is way too big - should be a lot smaller, 5-6 times ? Thank you UK ! Edit: Wait, I wasn't thinking there. 5-6 times ?? Let's count: os, cloud, aps, games and games hardwere - that 4 - 5 without improving competition in any of that domains ! 8 - 15 is resonable number then ;) But, for sure, cloud, os and apps should be separated.
- hulitu 4y ago> MS is blackmailing a gov. UK in that case. Standard practice for MS. And if this does not work there is always lobbying and corruption as a plan B.
- throwawaylinux 4y agoVulgar display of entitlement there, they clearly aren't used to hearing the word "no" from legislators or regulators. They have quite some interesting virtue signaling material online too. > "We have a collective opportunity and responsibility to create a more inclusive, equitable, sustainable, and trusted future. " > "We are committed to support inclusive economic growth, protect fundamental rights, create a sustainable future, and earn trust." > "We believe technology companies have a responsibility to help protect democratic processes and institutions." It's all so predictable and tiresome.
- lbj 4y agoI can definitely see their point. Asking the government to gain and mantain such a deep insight into market dynamics is bound to fail time and time again. Private monopolies never persist for very long, any attempt to fix that non-problem via governmental interference is bound to produce opposite results.
- mrob 4y agoThis isn't a free market, though. Microsoft grew as big as it is by exploiting government-granted monopolies (copyright, patent). It seems entirely reasonable to me that governments should be able to rein it back in.
- Moissanite 4y agoWe need to go beyond stopping mergers. Any company which sees itself as large or powerful enough to make unveiled threats against a national economy needs to be broken up. For ultra-large companies (e.g. any company with a market cap over $100B at the moment), default-deny should be the position for any mergers from this point - the burden of proof should be on them to show why the merge would not only be non-harmful, but actually benefit the wider economy.
- bell-cot 4y agoTrue in the abstract. But between also-ran countries which get obsessed with creating their own "national champion" mega-companies, and the stable of mega-donors which you need to have a meaningful political career these days, and the win-at-any-cost culture wars...
- ndsipa_pomu 4y agoSome kind of progressively increasing tax could possibly provide a disincentive. If it's based on turnover/sales rather than profit (to avoid creative accounting), then a merger would increase the tax burden compared to keeping two companies separate. It would also penalise the very biggest players, but maybe that would benefit the smaller companies and encourage greater market choice.
- BulgarianIdiot 4y agoFirst you need to prove to me the average company is less competent and aligned with people than the average government.
- MagnumOpus 4y agoNo he doesn't have prove anything to you. What kind of non-sequitur is that? Mergers can reduce competitiveness, and governments can be incompetent - both can be true at the same time.
- BulgarianIdiot 4y agoIt's very simple. Their argument is that no company should ever challenge a government, that if this happens, the company is too powerful and should be broken apart. Just to make this clear, in a normal democracy, anyone can challenge a government or institution, even separate individuals, as long as they have merit, legal or moral, to their claim and they can demonstrate it. The user proposes that by default all claims of a corporation to a country are illegal and harmful and they should be punished and split apart for it. So... if that's a valid argument, it suggests an unchecked government, with no comparable size organization to challenge it is better somehow. Governments are better. But are they? Prove it.
- stephc_int13 4y agoI am not in favour of monopolies and large acquisitions, as I think those are ultimately detrimental to the economy. Regulators should take a closer look at Tencent, they have been on an acquisition spree during the last few years, with little resistance, including in the UK. I am not sure the UK is making the best move here, strategically.
- tailspin2019 4y agoGood. The attitude on display here only goes to reinforce that this self-entitled organisation needs reigning in further. They barely bother to hide their distain towards their own customers at this point. (See Windows 11) The team behind the .NET ecosystem is the only part of Microsoft that I have any remaining respect for.
- saybrexitagain 4y agoLiterally everything is about brexit. Inflation? Brexit Living standards? Brexit Activision merger? Brexit 1 million immigrants per year? Brexit The cheap scapegoat for those looking to divert the attention
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 4y agoI applaud the CMA for taking a leadership role and standing up to Microsoft. Well done! The post-decision commentary by Microsoft is uncalled for and shows how truly evil and manipulative this company has become. Sore loser.
- Tommstein 4y ago> . . . has become. Are you new or something?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- throw_a_grenade 4y agoI mean, I'm not exactly a fan of brexit, but my God, playing on EU vs UK sentiments is worse than bad taste. It's exactly what is wrong with society: fuels hate for commercial reasons.
- alibarber 4y agoCouldn’t agree more. And I think they may have misread the room on this anyway. The impression I get from (living in) the EU is that they would rather take the more ‘pro-consumer’ side, or at least be seen to. So ‘banned in the UK’ is a low bar.
- sylware 4y agoWell, if msft wants to restore confidence: day one, ALL games from ALL their studios with top notch elf/linux builds (not a few games here and there, day 42389, hardly working and supported). Well, this is exactly the same for Sony though. Hard truth: what sells to the people the need of current powerful hardware is nearly only video games... Namely, if you want sell powerful hardware "en masse", you want beautiful 3D games. Roughly speaking, most people not playing video games will be fine with a risc-v mini-computer. Ok, maybe with some vector instruction or video decoding hardware.
- snvzz 4y agoMost likely, these games would suddenly needlessly require Windows 11, and to be logged into a non-local account.
- sylware 4y agoOr their builds for non-msft platforms would be just trash... or slowly but surely become trash. There is only one way out of this toxic environment: minimal, ultra-stable in time OS to run beautiful 3D game binaries (basically, the only thing selling powerful hw to people). Current elf/linux would not even fit since there is no static ABI stability (for instance a game executable linked with a glibc 2.34 won't run on system with any previous glibc). So if elf/linux, it has to be without the glibc (or game binaries must be pure ELF64 binaries, not elf C runtime binaries). That said, the runtime part of elf is actually the core of the issue... we need a wayland/json of a "runtime elf" which will slash away some expensive features then will require significant work on many software components (static TLS will go away). I wrote such specs (they are excrutiating simple)but my experience tells me to actually make it work with a "real" system first, because in such complex system we always fail to see something important, _always_.
- gumballindie 4y agoWhoa this is pathetic coming from microsoft. Needs breaking into smaller pieces. Right along with amazon and google.
- suddenclarity 4y agoFurious? Did I watch a different interview than everyone else?
- ben_w 4y agoAs usual, the headline does match the content; I see disappointment but no fury.
- drumhead 4y agoCry moar MS. If they think the EU is a more business friendly area than the UK, then feel free to move over there. I think they'll find that the EU is less tolerant of Their monopolistic behaviour than the UK would be.