3 ms·

> Microsoft already has a majority of the market. You didn't address the point of parent comment, which is, it's not really a market. It's trying to become a m

> Microsoft already has a majority of the market. You didn't address the point of parent comment, which is, it's not really a market. It's trying to become a market, but so far is just a small niche where companies lose money.

capableweb 4y ago
If you as a consumer can purchase a service without any special insider agreements with the provider, it's a market already, no matter how small or big it is. And since Microsoft already has a estimated 60-70% market share of this existing market, making them have a bigger hold over the market will make it harder to others to enter it, and they'll potentially abuse their position.
- Aunche 4y ago
  Of course the size of the market matters. Just because you have a 100% monopoly on Uber for haircuts doesn't mean you have a particularly dangerous monopoly. People can continue to game on consoles and PC just fine.
  - capableweb 4y ago
    Yeah, obviously it does matter if there is literally no competitors, but that's not the case here. There are competitors in the space already. One major difference between how the US and Europe views monopolies is that most of Europe tries to prevent even the formation of them (exceptions apply), while the US tries to prevent "dangerous" monopolies, while allowing monopolies themselves. It could be useful to shift the perspective if you're used to the US one, when looking at decisions made by European agencies like the CMA.
    - Aunche 4y ago
      >It could be useful to shift the perspective if you're used to the US one, when looking at decisions made by European agencies like the CMA. Sure. On the other hand, it could be useful to listen to Microsoft's perspective on being obstructive to business rather than accusing them of "whining" given that Europe lags behind in technological innovation despite being similarly well educated.
      - forty 4y ago
        What do you mean by "Europe lags behind in technological innovation"? Do you have any data to back that up? US Big Tech is going well thanks to near monopoly on online advertising, and as a result can afford spending ridiculous amount of money on anything, but I'm not sure I'd call that technological innovation.
      - capableweb 4y ago
        > given that Europe lags behind in technological innovation True in some sense, like cool innovations like Ubers for X and social media. False in some sense that there been innovation coming from Europe as well, small things like the web, GSM, CRISPR, LHC, renewables and other almost irrelevant things. I think technological innovations comes from all continents and I don't think you can surely say that one lags behind another when considering innovation with big impact, everyone is contributing in their way and some in some fields while lagging in others.
        Aunche 4y ago
        Obviously, the LHC isn't going to blocked by antitrust. I'm specifically talking about disruptive technology-related businesses. When is the last time Europe has produced a company like Moderna, Tesla, or OpenAI?
        capableweb 4y ago
        Since your argument was "Europe lags behind in technological innovation", which is not related to companies per-se, wouldn't it be more interesting for you to find out what kind of technological advances Europe has been leading? But since I already shared that with you, here are some companies doing interesting "disruptive" stuff, which seems more interesting to you: - Vertical farming -> Infarm (Germany), Agricool (France) - Electric mobility -> Northvolt (Sweden) - Quantum computing -> IQM (Finland), Pasqal (France) - Biotechnology and synthetic biology -> Oxford Nanopore Technologies (UK), Synthace (UK) - Renewable energy -> Vestas (Denmark), Oxford PV (UK) While writing all of this out, I'm starting to think that maybe you're just trolling, as obviously there is technological innovation coming from all continents and someone can't be so thick to think it all comes from the US, right?
Hamuko 4y ago
What is it then if it's not a market?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

capableweb 4y ago

If you as a consumer can purchase a service without any special insider agreements with the provider, it's a market already, no matter how small or big it is. And since Microsoft already has a estimated 60-70% market share of this existing market, making them have a bigger hold over the market will make it harder to others to enter it, and they'll potentially abuse their position.

Aunche 4y ago
Of course the size of the market matters. Just because you have a 100% monopoly on Uber for haircuts doesn't mean you have a particularly dangerous monopoly. People can continue to game on consoles and PC just fine.
- capableweb 4y ago
  Yeah, obviously it does matter if there is literally no competitors, but that's not the case here. There are competitors in the space already. One major difference between how the US and Europe views monopolies is that most of Europe tries to prevent even the formation of them (exceptions apply), while the US tries to prevent "dangerous" monopolies, while allowing monopolies themselves. It could be useful to shift the perspective if you're used to the US one, when looking at decisions made by European agencies like the CMA.
  - Aunche 4y ago
    >It could be useful to shift the perspective if you're used to the US one, when looking at decisions made by European agencies like the CMA. Sure. On the other hand, it could be useful to listen to Microsoft's perspective on being obstructive to business rather than accusing them of "whining" given that Europe lags behind in technological innovation despite being similarly well educated.
    - forty 4y ago
      What do you mean by "Europe lags behind in technological innovation"? Do you have any data to back that up? US Big Tech is going well thanks to near monopoly on online advertising, and as a result can afford spending ridiculous amount of money on anything, but I'm not sure I'd call that technological innovation.
    - capableweb 4y ago
      > given that Europe lags behind in technological innovation True in some sense, like cool innovations like Ubers for X and social media. False in some sense that there been innovation coming from Europe as well, small things like the web, GSM, CRISPR, LHC, renewables and other almost irrelevant things. I think technological innovations comes from all continents and I don't think you can surely say that one lags behind another when considering innovation with big impact, everyone is contributing in their way and some in some fields while lagging in others.
      - Aunche 4y ago
        Obviously, the LHC isn't going to blocked by antitrust. I'm specifically talking about disruptive technology-related businesses. When is the last time Europe has produced a company like Moderna, Tesla, or OpenAI?
        capableweb 4y ago
        Since your argument was "Europe lags behind in technological innovation", which is not related to companies per-se, wouldn't it be more interesting for you to find out what kind of technological advances Europe has been leading? But since I already shared that with you, here are some companies doing interesting "disruptive" stuff, which seems more interesting to you: - Vertical farming -> Infarm (Germany), Agricool (France) - Electric mobility -> Northvolt (Sweden) - Quantum computing -> IQM (Finland), Pasqal (France) - Biotechnology and synthetic biology -> Oxford Nanopore Technologies (UK), Synthace (UK) - Renewable energy -> Vestas (Denmark), Oxford PV (UK) While writing all of this out, I'm starting to think that maybe you're just trolling, as obviously there is technological innovation coming from all continents and someone can't be so thick to think it all comes from the US, right?

Hamuko 4y ago

What is it then if it's not a market?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]