Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×
Microsoft Government Businesses Politics

EU Official Labels Microsoft's Behavior Unacceptable 290

InfoWorldMike writes "EU commissioner Neelie Kroes has lashed out at Microsoft in comments to European parliamentarians Thursday, saying it is 'unacceptable' that the company continues to gain market share using tactics that were outlawed in the Commission's 2004 antitrust ruling against the software vendor. 'Three years later Microsoft still hasn't complied with the main demand imposed by the European antitrust ruling: that the company share interoperability information inside Windows at a reasonable price to allow rival makers of workgroup servers to build products that work properly with PCs running Windows.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU Official Labels Microsoft's Behavior Unacceptable

Comments Filter:
  • Yes... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Thursday March 22, 2007 @03:58PM (#18448699) Homepage Journal
    ...and until someone actually gets serious and imposes a penalty against them that will actually induce them to change their behavior, like preventing them from selling their products until they comply, this is what's going to continue to happen.
    • I have to laugh (Score:5, Insightful)

      by WindBourne ( 631190 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:26PM (#18449151) Journal
      Bill has correctly figured it out that it is better to cheat,steal, and lie, pay a hefty fine later and OWN the market than it is to play fair. The longer that a gov. takes to play these games with MS is only to MS's advantage. If EU really wanted to stop this, they would tell MS if you have 1 month and then we charge you 5 x all of the EU sales/month each month. Only when it is not in Bill Gates best advantage will he comply.

      Since it has been 3 years and MS has not complied, it is obvious to me that EU will not really be cracking down.

      I may not like BG but you have to admire him. He knows how to run circles around govs.
      • by suv4x4 ( 956391 )
        The longer that a gov. takes to play these games with MS is only to MS's advantage. If EU really wanted to stop this, they would tell MS if you have 1 month and then we charge you 5 x all of the EU sales/month each month. Only when it is not in Bill Gates best advantage will he comply.

        Why bother charging them 5 times the sales, let's just charge them 5 quantapentillion! Is this a real number? No. Does it matter? No.
        • Re:I have to laugh (Score:4, Insightful)

          by WindBourne ( 631190 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:52PM (#18449601) Journal
          Assume that you charge them JUST or below the amount that MS makes in the EU sales. Then MS has a strong incentive to continue with the sale. Why? because it is slowly draining their competitors. Once MS owns the market, then they can comply (or do a USA thing and buy the politician). OTH, if you charge them 5 to 10 x the EU sales, they have a strong incentive to become lawful. In addition, even if you charge MS 10 the EU sales it would still be less than what MS loses on their hardware systems.
    • by swschrad ( 312009 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:29PM (#18449193) Homepage Journal
      impound microsoft products at the port of entry, and no sales at all in the EU.

      nothing else will get their attention.

      old joke revisited... steve jobs dies and is waiting at the pearly gates. long line. suddenly, with a rush of clouds and chorus of angelic voices, a chair goes skidding across the horizon, and A Power rushes by and through the gates without slowing down.

      "hey, what's the big idea?" says jobs.

      "Oh, that's God," says St. Peter. "Every once in a while, he thinks he's steve ballmer of microsoft."
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Danathar ( 267989 )
      The EU sees they can get a payoff from Microsoft, you can bet they will push it until MS says uncle...then there will be some settlement.
    • by doti ( 966971 )

      until someone actually gets serious and imposes a penalty against them
      Or, better yet, stop buying it's software now, and use the money to train people to use Linux, or whatever alternative suits better.
    • That would be good, but at least the EU is currently fining the pants off them, which is a start. No company can continually take half a billion dollar fines year after year without seeing shareholders getting pretty angry.
      • Re:Yes... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:48PM (#18449523) Homepage Journal

        That would be good, but at least the EU is currently fining the pants off them, which is a start. No company can continually take half a billion dollar fines year after year without seeing shareholders getting pretty angry.

        They can if it enables them to make two billion dollars (or whatever) that they otherwise would not be able to make. Microsoft's entire business model depends on vendor lock-in, and keeping these formats private and secret is part of that.

        If you could flawlessly migrate all of your Microsoft Office documents to OO.o formats today, then huge numbers of people would leave microsoft office tomorrow; they'd be leaving Windows shortly thereafter. The vast majority of people working with computers use office, a web browser, and an email client, and very little else. It would be cheaper in every way to put them on Linux with OO.o; TCO is probably approximately the same, though somewhat higher for Windows due to cleaning up malware (which in an organization with any significant number of computers requires quite a bit of time) but is vastly cheaper up-front. Priced Vista+Office lately?

    • One of the big problems here is the sheer length of time it takes to get anything done legally. How many times does MS get to appeal the EU's decision? According the article a ruling on the appeal of the 2004 decision won't be made until near the end of the year. Each time this happens MS has yet more months and years in which to continue its illegal practices and gain marketshare. Given enough layers of appeals MS will win this fight by default as no one will be left to compete with them in the "workgr
  • Sigh. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Khaed ( 544779 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @03:58PM (#18448703)
    Why is it that only Europe is standing up to them?
    • Because they do not vote in US elections and therefore don't really count.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by ms1234 ( 211056 )
      They havent figured out how to buy 25+ memberstates at once yet
    • Because they have the French.
      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by ijakings ( 982830 )
        ((I will imagine I will get modded down for flaimbait for this... but im going ahead anyway as its a traditional British joke.))

        Indeed, the French provide a valuable service. They let us know when is the best time to surrender..... This would be great, except for they ALWAYS tell us to surrender.

    • by suv4x4 ( 956391 )
      Why is it that only Europe is standing up to them?

      Real Networks has a strong lobby there. They tried in US, but US finally ruled in favor of Microsoft. Real Networks is who started the whole deal in EU. I for side with Microsoft regarding the Windows Media case.

      It's not as if Real Networks will produce anything worthwhile never mind what information they have access to.
      • Re:Sigh. (Score:4, Informative)

        by NoOneInParticular ( 221808 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @06:00PM (#18450585)
        The day that Real Networks has a big lobby in the EU is the day that monkeys will be flying out of my ass. No American company has a more significant lobby in the EU than Microsoft, save for IBM. Microsoft has been breaching all boundaries that exist for companies, and Real Networks is simply a reason to get these pirates under control again.
    • by hxnwix ( 652290 )
      Because the Federal Office of Stratergery fires any prosecutor, no matter how well respected, striving and impartial for any infraction against the party. The party, in this case, includes Microsoft as they are huge donors to the party.

      This has been another round of surprising answers to obvious questions. Thanks for reading.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Sorry to ruin your point with facts, but Microsoft donates to both parties. And as it happens, since 2002, MS has actually given quite a bit more to the Democrats than it has to the Republicans: http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.asp?ID=D00 0000115&Name=Microsoft+Corp [opensecrets.org]
    • ...and why isn't Europe actually standing up to them? It's all well and good to say, "Your behavior is unacceptable!" but what is going to happen when Microsoft asks, "What are you going to do about it?"

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by dajak ( 662256 )
        The maximum fines for antitrust law violations have recently been increased very considerably by European Parliament. The next fine will probably be an order of magnitude bigger than the last two, and will hurt even Microsoft.
    • The EU is 'standing up' to Microsoft the way the UN 'stands up' to the problems in the middle east and Africa.
      Which is to say: they've issued several strongly worded complaints.

      Calling the bully a bully and saying that you're going to stand up to him is great and all.
      But that's not quite the same as actually standing up.

      If all you're looking for is strongly worded complaints and empty fines which effect no change, then the US has done its part.
    • by Dion ( 10186 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:57PM (#18449669) Homepage
      The US government is a completely gutless pet of the plutocracy that really rules the country, so unless there is dramatic change of regime nothing will happen there.

      The rest of the world, except the EU (it seems) doesn't really care because they are too primitive to to realize that being dependent on a single US company is a problem.

      The funny thing is that the EU has a very simple solution to the MS problem; simply fine MS 10000 EUR / day / undocumented protocol identified and use the resulting money hire 10-20 hackers pr. protocol to reverse engineer it and publish the docs.

      Anyone should be allowed to submit protocols, if MS has implemented both a server and a client then it needs to be documented.

      Ideally this principle should extend to other areas as well, there are tons of secret protocols that do nothing more than serve as a weapon of vendor lockin.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Mordaximus ( 566304 )
        The rest of the world, except the EU (it seems) doesn't really care because they are too primitive to to realize that being dependent on a single US company is a problem.

        Either primitive doesn't mean what you think it means, the EU is smaller than you think it is, or your world view is smaller than a typical American. You think Australia is primitive? Japan? Canada?

    • by RyoShin ( 610051 )
      Microsoft has yet to figure out how to send suitcases of money to various politicians without one politician getting jealous of the other. The other uses a currency that requires more bills to get the same amount US$ than the first, so everyone will complain about suitcase size, even if it's the same amount of money.

      (Microsoft tends to lag in standards, so I'm sure they're blowing off the Euro as "wasteful fluff" for the time being)
  • So what? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Gerzel ( 240421 ) * <brollyferret.gmail@com> on Thursday March 22, 2007 @03:58PM (#18448715) Journal
    Looking through the article I don't really see the EU taking any more action against MS that will actually make them comply. This seems to just be a single guy saying MS is abusing its power, a standard course of action.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by tsa ( 15680 )
      Neelie Kroea is a woman. Or should I say, and iron lady?
  • Market Share (Score:2, Interesting)

    Microsoft goes from a 30-40% share of the market to 60-75% share, and the EU concludes that this is completely due to its "unfair" practices? And yet, Europeans continue to purchase more and more MS products... This just harkens back to the ruling the EU made that MS had to remove Internet Explorer because it was anti-competitive to give away software... boggles the mind. Let the marketplace decide... MS gets lazy with IE, and the next thing you know the hottest browser on the market is Firefox. Why can'
    • Re:Market Share (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:12PM (#18448911)
      > Let the marketplace decide...

      Firstly you need a competitive market for that to work, that's why we have competition laws. Secondly, this idea that free markets are some democratizing force is total bullshit.

      HTH.
    • Re:Market Share (Score:4, Insightful)

      by tsa ( 15680 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:18PM (#18449007) Homepage
      The Americans also ruled that MS used unfair practices, and they also kept buying their stuff. So what are you implying?
      • The Americans also ruled that MS used unfair practices...

        The US ruled Microsoft was "mean" to Netscape by giving away their browser to compete with Netscape's browser -- that Netscape also gave away. Never mind that the Netscape browser was a horrible piece of trash.

        Meanwhile, no one in the modern world thinks a modern computer shouldn't have a browser, and it's a recognized standard part of any operating system -- and Microsoft was right all along.

        • Re:Market Share (Score:4, Informative)

          by geekoid ( 135745 ) <dadinportland@[ ]oo.com ['yah' in gap]> on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:38PM (#18449347) Homepage Journal
          MS starting giving away their browser to compete for Netscapes, whose browser was NOT FREE.
          It became free as an attempt to compete with MS's illegal monopoly practices.

          Both browsers were a piece of crap then, but the is irrelevant to the discussion.

          Using you monopoly power to destroy a competitor is illegal. The reason it is illegal is that it gives no chance of competition for the consumer to take advantage of. The fact that the consumer has no real option is why the consumer keeps buying the product. Hell, a consumer may not know that a company is abusing it's onopoly and that's why there is no, or very little competition. in other words, they don't know enough to not buy the product.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            MS starting giving away their browser to compete for Netscapes, whose browser was NOT FREE.

            I think you are misremembering (not a criticism, thinks were fast and furious back then). Netscape would allow you to give them money if you really wanted to, but it was also a free download, and was also bundled everywhere. Netscape was definitely using the "give away the product and make up the difference in volume" Internet model.

            Both browsers were a piece of crap then, but the is irrelevant to the discussio

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by westlake ( 615356 )
        The Americans also ruled that MS used unfair practices, and they also kept buying their stuff. So what are you implying?

        That trying to legislate a market for Microsoft's competitors is a waste of time?

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by hxnwix ( 652290 )
      Microsoft is breaking the law.
      Microsoft is breaking the law.
      Microsoft is breaking the law.
      Microsoft is breaking the law.
      Microsoft is breaking the law.

      Why is this so hard for certain people to understand?
      • I think the thing that is hard to understand is that the law in this case is almost perversely refusing to say what it is that they *actually* want Microsoft to do, and continually just telling Microsoft: "That's not good enough".
        • Re:Market Share (Score:5, Informative)

          by arevos ( 659374 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @06:42PM (#18451155) Homepage

          I think the thing that is hard to understand is that the law in this case is almost perversely refusing to say what it is that they *actually* want Microsoft to do, and continually just telling Microsoft: "That's not good enough".
          The EU has never refused to say what they want Microsoft to do. They've been crystal clear from the first. Allow me to quote from the court orders [europa.eu]:

          The first type of abusive conduct by Microsoft, described at recitals 546 to 791 to the Decision, consists in Microsoft's refusal to provide its competitors with 'interoperability information' and to allow its use for the purpose of developing and distributing products competing with Microsoft's own products on the work group server operating system market from October 1998 until the date of the Decision (Article 2(a) of the Decision). For the purpose of the Decision, 'interoperability information' means 'the complete and accurate specifications for all the Protocols implemented in Windows Work Group Server Operating Systems and ... used by Windows Work Group Servers to deliver file and print services and group and user administration services, including the Windows Domain Controller services, Active Directory services and Group Policy services, to Windows Work Group Networks' (Article 1(1) of the Decision). 'Protocols' are defined as 'a set of rules of interconnection and interaction between various instances of Windows Work Group Server Operating Systems and Windows Client PC Operating Systems running on different computers in a Windows Work Group Network' (Article 1(2) of the Decision).
          Microsoft has yet to provide anything close to complete and accurate specifications. This isn't just the opinion of EU lawyers not understanding technical documentation, it's the opinion of prominent developers, like Andrew Tridgell, the creator of the Samba project.

          What's more, Microsoft has had 2 years to document it's protocols, and it claims it has 300 engineers are working "day and night" on the problem, but despite that, little documentation has been forthcoming, and what there has been, has been smothered under a layer of restrictive licenses and NDAs.

          It seems to me that a company as large as Microsoft should have at least some idea of how its network protocols work, and if not, is capable of finding out. You'd have thought that a company that prides itself on technical innovation and "Developers developers developers" would know how to write technical documentation. So either Microsoft is entirely incompetent, or it's flaunting the law. Whilst the former is tempting to believe, Microsoft didn't get where it is today by being staffed by morons, and so one has to conclude that they're deliberately disobeying the law. Hence the fine. It's that simple.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Tom ( 822 )

        Why is this so hard for certain people to understand?
        Because for some people, especially on the low end of the evolutionary scale, the only way they can survive with them being down there and others being up there is to assume a world-view that those on top are there because they are right. MS is on top right now, so they must be right.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by nine-times ( 778537 )

      Why can't Sun do the same thing with servers on its own without government interference???

      ...well I'm not sure I agree with this argument. In the larger context of what happened, it seems to me you're argument goes something like:

      Microsoft tried to do bad things before, and the government interfered a little because people were predicting Microsoft's bad behavior would have many negative ramifications. Microsoft was still allowed to continue with their bad behavior, and the predicted negative consequenc

    • by Phil246 ( 803464 )
      letting the market decide only works when the market is not apathetic to change.
  • by paladinwannabe2 ( 889776 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:08PM (#18448841)
    Help competitors build products that work properly with PCs running Windows? Even Microsoft can't do that!
  • Heh (Score:2, Offtopic)

    by tsotha ( 720379 )
    Maybe Microsoft is expecting the same kind of treatment Iran is getting over its nuclear program. Lots of diplomatic gas, no action.
  • Not taking sides... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by GrayCalx ( 597428 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:11PM (#18448883)
    But I would like to see what would happen if Microsoft just said "We're not changing our practices, so we won't sell our products in Europe." Would computer users revolt against the EU? Would they be angry at MS instead? Meh, it'll never happen but sometimes just to watch the debacle of it all, I wish it would.
    • by WaZiX ( 766733 )
      But I would like to see what would happen if Microsoft just said "We're not changing our practices, so we won't sell our products in Europe."

      Something among the lines of "Microsoft Goes Bankrupt"?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by lawpoop ( 604919 )
      The problem is that European regulators can't introduce competition into the marketplace by throwing out MS. There is nobody who can step up and replace them. All of the software that runs on Windows depends on Windows, and there is no competitor that runs windows software without a hitch. If the EU said, "OK Microsoft, no more sales in Europe for you!" then all of the European computer users would hate the EU for taking away their software, and there would have no replacement.

      In order for siome company
      • by WaZiX ( 766733 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:43PM (#18449447)
        You do realize Europe is consists of over half a billion people right? Computers have become ordinary products, leaving such a market would be corporate suicide... Now one of the Main goals of the EU is to defend the customer, all the EU are doing is what they were appointed to do. Such antitrust lawsuits are common places, be it a US company or not. Believe it or not it's not the task of the EU to ruin Microsoft, their task is to defend competition amongst companies inside the European market. Hell this would benefit many American companies as well and that's a good thing. The whole point is to allow customers to have the best solution for the best price, where that solution comes from is of absolute no importance.
      • SUddenly all of EU would need to turn to illegal distributors. Lets see how fast THAT gets MS to change there ways.

        Plus, even though the users would complainghn, that is lost revenue.

        OTOH, a 20,000,000,000 dollar fine might get them to change their ways to.
        I mean they gat a lot of cash, a measly 4 or 5 billion dollar fine will get them to argueabout it, and then pay it, and...not change a thing.

      • by Tom ( 822 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @06:54PM (#18451283) Homepage Journal

        If the EU said, "OK Microsoft, no more sales in Europe for you!"
        Don't be stupid. The EU is a government. It doesn't tell you what to do. It tells you what not to do and if you still do it, they'll take away your cookies. Half a billion at a time when you're the size of MS.

        And believe it or not, if it actually were game over for MS in the EU, all that precious windos-only software would be ported to OSX, Linux, etc. in record time. The EU market is huge, larger than the US market. Any company producing software would make sure it's available in that market, windos or no windos.
    • by hxnwix ( 652290 )
      I for one agree that Microsoft should take their ball and go home.
    • The EU could declare that Microsoft's licenses were unenforceable by Microsoft or the BSA (or their EU counter-parts) in the EU. Then Microsoft would not make any profit in the EU because they wouldn't be able to sell their products there, and the EU businesses wouldn't revolt because they know they still need MS products.

      Essentially it would be legal to pirate MS products, and the only thing that MS could do in retaliation is drop their European support services. An EU-friendly corporation would immediatel
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by LinuxDon ( 925232 )
      Quote: "But I would like to see what would happen if Microsoft just said "We're not changing our practices, so we won't sell our products in Europe." Would computer users revolt against the EU? Would they be angry at MS instead?"

      What would happen is that MS copyrights would be invalidated, life would just continue and everyone would start porting their apps to another operating system. You'd be surprised how fast drop-in solutions would drop from the sky in notime. Two years later, most of the migration wo
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Tom ( 822 )

      But I would like to see what would happen if Microsoft just said "We're not changing our practices, so we won't sell our products in Europe."
      Immediate recall of the entire board of directors by MS shareholders.

      You US trolls still don't get it that the EU is the largest common market, bigger than the US market, do you? Walking away from a market that size is a suicide move for a company that relies on monopoly and lock-in for survival.
  • I mean, who do the EU think they are, forcing an Ireland-based company like Microsoft to comply with EU laws!

    Next thing you know they'll fine them - again - for beaucoup Euros ...
  • Impossible? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by jawahar ( 541989 )
    I think it is impossible to comply unless MS opens source code to share.
    • I think it is impossible to comply unless MS opens source code to share.

      Perhaps that is thr MS tactic. It might want to force the EU to drastic measures to get them to comply and then they can complain about how drastic the measures were. In practice it should be easy to comply. All they want is for MS to release protocols and APIs so that others can compete. Unfortunately if MS released them, it might spell then end of their servers as people find cheaper/more reliable/more secure alternatives to the

  • by unity100 ( 970058 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:16PM (#18448959) Homepage Journal
    first, "EU Weighs Copyright Law" in benefit of end users,

    then "RIAA Caught in Tough Legal Situation",

    after that "Judge Strikes Down COPA, 1998 Online Porn Law"

    then "RIAA Balks At Complying With Document Order" and judge is not happy with it

    then the story about nebraska university wanting reparations from riaa for wasting their time,

    after that, nbc embraces internet revolution in "NBC, News Corp Join to Create YouTube Clone"

    then as of now, "EU Official Labels Microsoft's Behavior Unacceptable"

    if things and stories in slashdot goes like that im gonna quit sex and just read slashdot.
  • Doesn't matter (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Thaelon ( 250687 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:27PM (#18449167)
    The only way to "beat" Microsoft is to come out with something better. No amount of fines will really matter as long as they still hold the dominant market share.

    The reason is that people creating software for computers have the greatest number of opportunities if they make them windows compatible. And since making something cross-platform is a bitch, it's much easier to get 90% of the market by doing windows alone. And so that's what people and companies will do.

    So we can either do one of two things
    1) Force people to develop cross platform software and hardware (yeah right)
    2) Create an operating system so much better that the majority adopts it (extremely unlikely, but better than "yeah right")

    The only other thing I can think of is FORCE companies like Dell, HP, Toshiba, Sony, IBM, Lenovo, Gateway etc to stop forcing Windows down our throats on computers we buy from them and sell the bare machine at a REDUCED price. I'm sure Microsoft is strong-arming some of them to some degree, but if we just flat out make it illegal to force-preload then they have little choice.
    • But a machien without Windows would likely cost *more*.

      All the big OEMs have marketing deals with Microsoft. And Network Associates (McAfee). And Google. And Symantec. And Adobe. Or did you think all of that crap they install was just to annoy you? No. The OEMs get paid for every piece of third-party "trial" software they install. That reduces the price of the machines, or at least increases their profits. The OEMs would lose money if they didn't ship Windows and all that crapware with every machine sold.
  • JUDGE - Mr. Gates, let vendors see the InterOp code at a reasonable price.
    BILL G - Of course. Here's the code for Windows 98
    JUDGE - Something more recent, perhaps?
    BILL G - Windows 2000?
    JUDGE - More recent, Mr. Gates
    BILL G - Okay, okay. Windows XP, but that was the last OS covered under your judgement.
    JUDGE - Sigh. Fair enough.
  • Interesting (Score:4, Interesting)

    by LilWolf ( 847434 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @04:45PM (#18449465)
    It's interesting how every time there's a news story of EU slapping Microsoft for breaking EU laws, the slashdotters suddenly come out siding with Microsoft.

    Never mind that they were bashing Microsoft just one news story below and complaining how monopolistic and evil Microsoft is :)
    • by King_TJ ( 85913 )
      Mmm... yes. Just as interesting as the idea of "Slashdotters" all having a common mindset.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by jb.hl.com ( 782137 )
      Devils advocate: At least people have a choice to buy Microsoft products or not. They don't have the choice to not be subject to the EU or its laws. They won't even have the first choice if the EU stops Microsoft selling its products in Europe.
  • Entropy & the Borg (Score:2, Interesting)

    by treval ( 89829 )
    Isn't it about time we updated the /. icon for Microsoft? Bill Gates has aged a *lot* since the current one was made. I suggest using something like OLD MAN [miragestudio7.com] as a base.
  • .. feel free to throw some rotton eggs at him. One thing though, when he is in Europe he doesnt dance about like a monkey spreading his BO of death, he actually is calm and business like. While he is here he will be "leveraging" his demands to various government officials and using the businesses he has aquired there as a bargining chip like he has done over software patents. Do as I want or I close shop and you have to pay unemployment, and lose the tax, and so on. Thats how he does business. He also
  • by dynamo ( 6127 ) on Thursday March 22, 2007 @08:46PM (#18452649) Journal
    Where is the punishment already? Stop whining and get an injunction to ban all microsoft product imports and sales until they comply with the rulings of the court.

Real Users find the one combination of bizarre input values that shuts down the system for days.

Working...