Microsoft told a European Union court on Monday that regulators had completely misunderstood thriving competition in the software market in issuing a landmark antitrust ruling against the giant U.S. company. But an internal Microsoft memo presented by a coalition of critical companies suggested founder Bill Gates was told that a strategy used to crush the rival Netscape browser could also take down the leader in streaming media, RealNetworks' RealPlayer.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-12
> However if apple get/have a monopol or a near-monopol on the music-store market, they can be prosecuted if they misuse it.
and that's the part I don't get... how is MS misusing it? By producing a product that's more accessable and less of an annoyance? (mind you, WMP 9&10 are actually reaching quicktime level annoyance).
In streaming it really makes no sense, since all three 'major' players are available and work on all post '98 windows versions. If they were blocking access to the others, THEN it would be abuse... and I'd be right alongside everyone else shooting at them...
Is it Microsofts fault that the major two alternatives (quicktime and real) are invasive nagware that damn near hijacks any PC you install them on? There's a REASON the 'illegal' stripped down versions like RealAlternative and QuickTimeAlternative even exist - because people don't want to have to put up with the BULLSHIT from those two crappy players. If real and apple want to compete, they should make a product that can ACTUALLY COMPETE.
Oh wait, Apple already did, it's called iTunes and it's made great inroads... To the point it could very quickly rival WMP even on the PC without any legal aid. While Quicktime player (and the crappy corresponding browser plugins) needs to DIE.
Again, you want to compete, make a competative product - don't go crying to the government because of your own ineptitude.
Member since:2005-07-02
Member since:
2005-07-06
>> Meanwhile you have RealNetworks, who Microsoft
>> could have crushed simply by HAVING a product...
>> which they already did in the form of media player
>> - it's a functionality expansion over the win 3.1
>> version - little more.
You know MS didn't sell media-streaming back then, they were not pushing their own closed format.
That the old media player also was bundle does not excuse that WMP is, because it's not the same. If MS didn't sell their own media-streaming solutions or use their own closed format, there wouldn't be a problem.
And no not by simply having a product, by having a product that almost all PC users would have access to, because of MS' monopoly on the desktop.
I've had talks to the public service channel in my country about their use of WMV for streaming, their reason for choosing it were that everyone (acording to them) could watch WMV since support came with Windows. That's WMVs greatest sells points, "everyone" can use it. It may be nice for the ordinary user not having to worry about installing a player, but it harms competion and that's what EU is trying to stop.
I don't like real player eigher but that doesn't matter, that's not what this is about.
>> As to the EU, why aren't half the linux
>> distributors out there under prosecution for
>> bundling totem or XMMS, or apple up before you for
>> giving away the itunes software for free and
>> bundling it up with their OS? Because they aren't
>> the leading vendor?
As stated by many others, no linux-distrobution have a monopoly, which makes it hard for them to misuse it. Also no linux-distrobution is selling media-streaming using their own closed format that no other can use.
Apple doesn't have a monopoly on the desktop so they can't be prosected for misusing it. However if apple get/have a monopol or a near-monopol on the music-store market, they can be prosecuted if they misuse it.
And like it or not, monopolies that obuse their position (it is not illegal just to have a monopoly) harms the free market and therefor the company with it can be punished for misusing it.
>> If this was cops on the street we were talking
>> about, it's called 'selective enforcement' -
>> usually goes hand-in-hand with bribes and dirty cops.
I fail to see how. If another company uses it's monopoly to harm the competition including Microsoft, Microsoft can complain, just like everyone else, to EU about it and if true the other company will be punished, just like Microsoft.