Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 8th Jun 2010 22:07 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 429010
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by Praxis
by jgagnon on Tue 8th Jun 2010 22:42
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Praxis"
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-09-17
ya but here is the messed up part. Remember the EU (using most recent examples) making forcing MS to provide choices?
Apple's still not quite big enough to be considered a monopoly yet, and underhanded business practices aren't illegal so long as your not a monopoly, there're just underhanded. If enough competition can form against Apple then they may be forced to back off a bit without the government doing anything. And until Apple does something illegal then the government shouldn't do anything.