4 ms·

Microsoft has a long history of not playing fair. If it were to have 33% of the market, it isn’t unthinkable that it will try all possible dirty tricks in the b

Microsoft has a long history of not playing fair. If it were to have 33% of the market, it isn’t unthinkable that it will try all possible dirty tricks in the book to gain the upper hand. Right now, Windows Phone’s market share is negligible, Microsoft has zero leverage so it has to play by the book.

mynameisvlad 13y ago
Microsoft is also a completely different company now than it was dozens of years ago when this was an issue. They're more safe now, less risky.
- Samuel_Michon 13y ago
  “Microsoft executives have proved, time and time again, to be inaccurate, misleading, evasive, and transparently false. ... Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect. It is also a company whose senior management is not averse to offering specious testimony to support spurious defenses to claims of its wrongdoing.” –Judge Thomas Jackson, 2001, United States v. Microsoft In the last decade, Microsoft has been investigated and fined by several governments, and investigations by several are still ongoing.
  - mynameisvlad 13y ago
    That's a dozen years ago. So while you may think it's relevant now, it's not. Since then, most of the leadership has changed, and, really because of that lawsuit, Microsoft became more serious, precautious company.
    - Samuel_Michon 13y ago
      Last year, Microsoft was ordered by the EU to pay Euro 860 million, for breaking promises it made after the 2004 antitrust case. In March of this year, Microsoft was fined another Euro 561 million. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
      - freehunter 13y ago
        A ruling that is very controversial. The browser ballot was enforced based on the idea that Microsoft had a dominant share of the market, which this very thread goes out of its way to disprove. The EU decision was a cash grab, nothing more. Microsoft has no market dominance, and other more dominant players aren't forced to live by the same rules. If Android has 80% market share, why isn't Google forced to present a choice of default browser at first start up (simply allowing alternative browsers in the ecosystem was not enough for Microsoft in this case)?
        Samuel_Michon 13y ago
        Microsoft has been convicted multiple times for abusing its market position. As a repeat offender, different rules apply for it. That’s why Microsoft isn’t allowed to live anywhere near a school or playground.
        freehunter 13y ago
        Apple has been convicted of patent infringement multiple times and was recently convicted of abusing their market position to commit unfair trade practices. Yet no one breathes Apple and anti-trust in the same sentence.
  - madeofpalk 13y ago
    > Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect Funny, replace Microsoft with Apple in this pull and it would still make sense (but not with the rest of the quote)

mynameisvlad 13y ago

Microsoft is also a completely different company now than it was dozens of years ago when this was an issue. They're more safe now, less risky.

Samuel_Michon 13y ago
“Microsoft executives have proved, time and time again, to be inaccurate, misleading, evasive, and transparently false. ... Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect. It is also a company whose senior management is not averse to offering specious testimony to support spurious defenses to claims of its wrongdoing.” –Judge Thomas Jackson, 2001, United States v. Microsoft In the last decade, Microsoft has been investigated and fined by several governments, and investigations by several are still ongoing.
- mynameisvlad 13y ago
  That's a dozen years ago. So while you may think it's relevant now, it's not. Since then, most of the leadership has changed, and, really because of that lawsuit, Microsoft became more serious, precautious company.
  - Samuel_Michon 13y ago
    Last year, Microsoft was ordered by the EU to pay Euro 860 million, for breaking promises it made after the 2004 antitrust case. In March of this year, Microsoft was fined another Euro 561 million. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
    - freehunter 13y ago
      A ruling that is very controversial. The browser ballot was enforced based on the idea that Microsoft had a dominant share of the market, which this very thread goes out of its way to disprove. The EU decision was a cash grab, nothing more. Microsoft has no market dominance, and other more dominant players aren't forced to live by the same rules. If Android has 80% market share, why isn't Google forced to present a choice of default browser at first start up (simply allowing alternative browsers in the ecosystem was not enough for Microsoft in this case)?
      - Samuel_Michon 13y ago
        Microsoft has been convicted multiple times for abusing its market position. As a repeat offender, different rules apply for it. That’s why Microsoft isn’t allowed to live anywhere near a school or playground.
        freehunter 13y ago
        Apple has been convicted of patent infringement multiple times and was recently convicted of abusing their market position to commit unfair trade practices. Yet no one breathes Apple and anti-trust in the same sentence.
- madeofpalk 13y ago
  > Microsoft is a company with an institutional disdain for both the truth and for rules of law that lesser entities must respect Funny, replace Microsoft with Apple in this pull and it would still make sense (but not with the rest of the quote)