4 ms·
This seems to be a popular opinion, but I believe they probably do it because it's good for their bottom line. The MS case was very different. The only relevant
by bachmeier 3y ago
This seems to be a popular opinion, but I believe they probably do it because it's good for their bottom line. The MS case was very different. The only relevant market was desktop computing, they had a monopoly on the desktop OS market, they baked the browser into the OS for no good reason, and they were taking actions to make OS competition impossible. Having a high desktop browser market share number honestly isn't a problem.
- Aeolun 3y agoIt’s also hard to argue they don’t allow competition when literally anyone can pull the source at any time.
- Zambyte 3y agoI don't think that's relevant to the argument about competition. Being able to pull (most) of their source code doesn't make it easy to write a competing browser engine. Why do you think writing a browser engine is an impossibly daunting task nowadays? Who made the web this way?
- cptskippy 3y agoEvery major tech company has used the outcome of the MS Monopoly Trial as a playbook of dos and don'ts to avoid getting sued.