3 ms·

Isn't this Microsoft abusing their quasi-monopoly as a consumer PC OS vendor? If it weren't for the current administration, I'd say it's time for regulatory ac

Isn't this Microsoft abusing their quasi-monopoly as a consumer PC OS vendor? If it weren't for the current administration, I'd say it's time for regulatory action.

riskable 6mo ago
The time for regulatory action against Microsoft was thirty years ago and the need for it has only grown since then. The FTC wasn't doing their job between 1980-2020 because of their ridiculous standard of, "if it doesn't raise consumer prices, it must be allowed." This lead to massive consolidation in many industries which of course ended up raising prices and hurting consumers anyway. Recently they've had some wins but overall they're still failing to do their job.
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
- genewitch 6mo ago
  > "if it doesn't raise consumer prices, it must be allowed." are there any books or good articles with good sources about this? I'm very interested in what happened in the 80s through the mid 90s.
- pogue 6mo ago
  Lina Khan was right - after allowing the Activation merger, Game Pass prices skyrocketed to $30 a month for their most expensive tier.
newsoftheday 6mo ago
> If it weren't for the current administration Because the Democrats were better at keeping them on a leash? No. Clinton was in charge 30 years ago and blew it.
- tremon 6mo ago
  It was the Clinton administration that started regulatory proceedings against Microsoft, but it was GW Bush that was president during the conclusion of the case. And, true to form: > The Department of Justice, now under Bush administration attorney general John Ashcroft, announced on September 6, 2001, that it was no longer seeking to break up Microsoft and would instead seek a lesser antitrust penalty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#Settlement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor...
account42 6mo ago
Because the previous administration(s) regulated MS so much that they aren't too big to fail now?

Isn't this Microsoft abusing their quasi-monopoly as a consumer PC OS vendor? If it weren't for the current administration, I'd say it's time for regulatory action.

riskable 6mo ago

The time for regulatory action against Microsoft was thirty years ago and the need for it has only grown since then. The FTC wasn't doing their job between 1980-2020 because of their ridiculous standard of, "if it doesn't raise consumer prices, it must be allowed." This lead to massive consolidation in many industries which of course ended up raising prices and hurting consumers anyway. Recently they've had some wins but overall they're still failing to do their job.

deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
genewitch 6mo ago
> "if it doesn't raise consumer prices, it must be allowed." are there any books or good articles with good sources about this? I'm very interested in what happened in the 80s through the mid 90s.
pogue 6mo ago
Lina Khan was right - after allowing the Activation merger, Game Pass prices skyrocketed to $30 a month for their most expensive tier.

newsoftheday 6mo ago

> If it weren't for the current administration Because the Democrats were better at keeping them on a leash? No. Clinton was in charge 30 years ago and blew it.

tremon 6mo ago
It was the Clinton administration that started regulatory proceedings against Microsoft, but it was GW Bush that was president during the conclusion of the case. And, true to form: > The Department of Justice, now under Bush administration attorney general John Ashcroft, announced on September 6, 2001, that it was no longer seeking to break up Microsoft and would instead seek a lesser antitrust penalty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#Settlement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor...

account42 6mo ago

Because the previous administration(s) regulated MS so much that they aren't too big to fail now?