4 ms·

It's completely crazy. We've accepted browsers are part of the OS for a long time, what's next fining Apple for not promoting Mozilla or Chrome on iOS?

robin_reala 14y ago
This fine is the outcome of repeated failures on MS’s part to properly implement court-ordered reparations, rather than a direct fine required by the original judgement.
- youngtaff 14y ago
  Yes but the original judgement was wrong too - politically motivated you might say
  - sgift 14y ago
    Yeah, it had the political motivation to uphold the European laws regarding abuses of a monopoly. Evil ...
    - youngtaff 14y ago
      No politically motivated as in a small European browser maker that't always had the smallest market share on Windows decided to make a complaint over something completely ridiculous i.e. MS bundling a browser with the OS
    - powertower 14y ago
      Got to protect those people who can't figure out how to open IE and download the browser that they really want.
      - rtpg 14y ago
        As has been said N times elsewhere, this is about the fact that MS stopped OEMs from bundling other browsers, even though they were allowed to bundle other software.
masklinn 14y ago
> It's completely crazy. There's nothing crazy about it. > We've accepted browsers are part of the OS for a long time We've accepted that browsers are necessary, the EU seems to have not accepted an OS natural monopoly can be leveraged into a browser monopoly. Sounds perfectly sane, and a good thing. > what's next fining Apple for not promoting Mozilla or Chrome on iOS? Apple does not have a monopoly marketshare, which lead to the original decision which Microsoft then broke: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_competition_case http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_compet...
- qntmfred 14y ago
  they did on iOS (for a while). Safari is bundled with iOS
  - ricw 14y ago
    Apple never had a monopoly in either the tablet or phone market. And it doesn't look like it will.
  - masklinn 14y ago
    > they did on iOS (for a while). No. Apple never had a super-majority (or even a majority) of the smartphone marketshare, let alone in the EU where Symbian and BB historically held strong marketshares during iOS's tenure. iOS's best has been 30~40% in some european country (not even EU-wide). Although it does capture the vast majority of profits, but that's not really relevant to antitrust-type cases. I believe Samsung currently has a bigger share of the EU market than iOS. There never was a case of monopolistic abuse from apple in the EU, because they never came close to a monopoly.
    - toyg 14y ago
      One has to wonder whether the whole "elitist" strategy from Apple isn't, in fact, a way to avoid the sort of responsibilities Microsoft took on, both towards developers, the "enterprise" community and the wider population.
- 14y ago
mtgx 14y ago
I would certainly like to see Apple and Microsoft fined for not allowing other browsers on iOS and Windows RT/WP8, and also for not allowing them to be set as default.
kawsper 14y ago
When Apple have a monopoly, they will be part of these rules as well. As soon as you enters monopoly status in the EU, there is certain rules and regulations that you need to comply with.
- masklinn 14y ago
  > As soon as you enters monopoly status in the EU, there is certain rules and regulations that you need to comply with. So is it in the US as well.
pessimizer 14y ago
>We've accepted browsers are part of the OS for a long time Where? You're making that up.
- youngtaff 14y ago
  IE has been bundled in Windows since XP (Win2K even?), Safari has been part of OSX since 2003 Every phone has a browser, and many did before the iPhone launched in 2007 (even if all they had were crappy WAP browsers)

robin_reala 14y ago

This fine is the outcome of repeated failures on MS’s part to properly implement court-ordered reparations, rather than a direct fine required by the original judgement.

youngtaff 14y ago
Yes but the original judgement was wrong too - politically motivated you might say
- sgift 14y ago
  Yeah, it had the political motivation to uphold the European laws regarding abuses of a monopoly. Evil ...
  - youngtaff 14y ago
    No politically motivated as in a small European browser maker that't always had the smallest market share on Windows decided to make a complaint over something completely ridiculous i.e. MS bundling a browser with the OS
  - powertower 14y ago
    Got to protect those people who can't figure out how to open IE and download the browser that they really want.
    - rtpg 14y ago
      As has been said N times elsewhere, this is about the fact that MS stopped OEMs from bundling other browsers, even though they were allowed to bundle other software.

masklinn 14y ago

> It's completely crazy. There's nothing crazy about it. > We've accepted browsers are part of the OS for a long time We've accepted that browsers are necessary, the EU seems to have not accepted an OS natural monopoly can be leveraged into a browser monopoly. Sounds perfectly sane, and a good thing. > what's next fining Apple for not promoting Mozilla or Chrome on iOS? Apple does not have a monopoly marketshare, which lead to the original decision which Microsoft then broke: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_competition_case http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Microsoft_compet...

qntmfred 14y ago
they did on iOS (for a while). Safari is bundled with iOS
- ricw 14y ago
  Apple never had a monopoly in either the tablet or phone market. And it doesn't look like it will.
- masklinn 14y ago
  > they did on iOS (for a while). No. Apple never had a super-majority (or even a majority) of the smartphone marketshare, let alone in the EU where Symbian and BB historically held strong marketshares during iOS's tenure. iOS's best has been 30~40% in some european country (not even EU-wide). Although it does capture the vast majority of profits, but that's not really relevant to antitrust-type cases. I believe Samsung currently has a bigger share of the EU market than iOS. There never was a case of monopolistic abuse from apple in the EU, because they never came close to a monopoly.
  - toyg 14y ago
    One has to wonder whether the whole "elitist" strategy from Apple isn't, in fact, a way to avoid the sort of responsibilities Microsoft took on, both towards developers, the "enterprise" community and the wider population.
14y ago

mtgx 14y ago

I would certainly like to see Apple and Microsoft fined for not allowing other browsers on iOS and Windows RT/WP8, and also for not allowing them to be set as default.

kawsper 14y ago

When Apple have a monopoly, they will be part of these rules as well. As soon as you enters monopoly status in the EU, there is certain rules and regulations that you need to comply with.

masklinn 14y ago
> As soon as you enters monopoly status in the EU, there is certain rules and regulations that you need to comply with. So is it in the US as well.

pessimizer 14y ago

>We've accepted browsers are part of the OS for a long time Where? You're making that up.

youngtaff 14y ago
IE has been bundled in Windows since XP (Win2K even?), Safari has been part of OSX since 2003 Every phone has a browser, and many did before the iPhone launched in 2007 (even if all they had were crappy WAP browsers)