4 ms·
>Don't you think that Microsoft should have been reprimanded over their abuse of the OS market to gain control of the browser market? Absolutely not!
by alexeisadeski3 13y ago
>Don't you think that Microsoft should have been reprimanded over their abuse of the OS market to gain control of the browser market?
Absolutely not!
- sbuk 13y agoWhy?
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoIt's their OS, they can do as they please. As history showed, there wasn't even an MS monopoly in existence. OSX became viable in the early oughts, Linux was always around, and now people write of the death of the PC. Regardless, abuse of market dominance (note I don't use the overused 'M' word) increases incentives for competitors to enter the marketplace.
- sbuk 13y agoIt's got nothing to do with monopoly!!! Apple or Linux have nothing to do with it; the ruling being for behaviour in the period that preceded 2000. Microsoft were in a dominant position in one market and leveraged this dominace to gain dominance in another. This is anti-competative. for the final time; a monopoly is not illeagal in and of itself, neither is it antitrust.
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoLooks like someone didn't read my post :)
- sbuk 13y agoLooks like someone isn't reading anything!
- scholia 13y agoThere's actually no evidence that your claim about leverage is true. Microsoft simply built a better browser and marketed it better than Netscape. It's also a fact that the DoJ lost the browser case: it was overturned 2-1 on appeal.