Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Jun 2012 08:50 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 523814
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 shmerl
by tomcat on Tue 26th Jun 2012 03:36
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
I don't see this in practice. Microsoft was never explicitly prohibited from bundling practice with OEMs. Thus the ridiculous Windows tax issue is present until this day.
Of course not. Antitrust law is intended to restore competition in a given market, not kill it outright. Google and others were permitted to incentivize OEMs to include additional software. So, it made sense that MS was allowed to compete w/o tying incentives to the license cost of the OS.




Member since:
2010-06-08
I don't see this in practice. Microsoft was never explicitly prohibited from bundling practice with OEMs. Thus the ridiculous Windows tax issue is present until this day.