Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 12th Jun 2007 19:46 UTC, submitted by Dale Smoker
Legal Internet search leader Google is trying to convince federal and state authorities that Microsoft's Vista operating system is stifling competition as the high-tech heavyweights wrestle for the allegiance of personal computer users. In a 49-page document filed April 18 with the U.S. Justice Department and state attorneys general, Google alleged that the latest version of Microsoft's Windows operating system impairs the performance of 'desktop search' programs that find data stored on a computer's hard drive. Besides bogging down competing programs, Google alleged Microsoft had made it too complicated to turn off the desktop search feature built into Vista.
Thread beginning with comment 247334
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: hmmm
by archiesteel on Tue 12th Jun 2007 21:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: hmmm"
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

Man, you should learn to use proper punctuation...

Anyway, the thing is that MS is in a near-monopoly position, and that means that they *can't* do anything they please.

With the amount of literature available on the subject, this notion should be self-evident by now...

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: hmmm
by prymitive on Tue 12th Jun 2007 21:13 in reply to "RE[3]: hmmm"
prymitive Member since:
2006-11-20

So if You are small company You can do software they way You want, but if You will succeed and most of users will run it the rules changes? Why? Because You are a bad guy now? Who judges that?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: hmmm
by archiesteel on Tue 12th Jun 2007 21:26 in reply to "RE[4]: hmmm"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

The rules *do* change when you find yourself in a near-monopoly siutation. Read up on the Serman Antitrust Act for more details.

In any case, you don't need 90% of the market to "succeed." You just need to be profitable. That's what defines success in a market economy, *not* achieving monopoly. Monopolies are actually bad for free markets, because they skew the "level playing field" which is at the base of a market economy.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: hmmm
by Tyr. on Wed 13th Jun 2007 07:03 in reply to "RE[4]: hmmm"
Tyr. Member since:
2005-07-06

So if You are small company You can do software they way You want, but if You will succeed and most of users will run it the rules changes? Why? Because You are a bad guy now? Who judges that?


Yes, because intentionally or otherwise the big monopolist stifles the market and erects barriers to entry which is ultimately a bad thing for everyone.

Think rabbits. Cute, cuddly and harmless, right ? Except when they have a monopoly position in their niche and become a major pest and a hazard completely destroying a viabable ecology : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbits_in_Australia

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: hmmm
by gilboa on Thu 14th Jun 2007 14:23 in reply to "RE[4]: hmmm"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes.

I'd suggest you do some reading on anti-monopoly rules.

- Gilboa

Edited 2007-06-14 14:23

Reply Parent Score: 2