3 ms·

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 lawsu

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.