PDA

View Full Version : Internet Explorer being sued



tech_support
12-15-2007, 10:45 AM
Microsoft has once more come under fire for allegedly anti-competitive behaviour - this time from software rival Opera. The Norwegian company, which makes an internet browser of the same name, has filed a complaint with European Union officials accusing Microsoft of stifling competition. Opera, which has around 12 million users worldwide, said today that Microsoft had been acting anti-competitively by bundling its Internet Explorer program with the Windows operating system. “We are filing this complaint on behalf of all consumers who are tired of having a monopolist make choices for them,” said Jon von Tetzchner, the chief executive of Opera. “We cannot rest until we’ve brought fair and equitable options to consumers worldwide.”

The company said it was looking for a series of measures from European officials, including forcing Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer or allowing rival products to be preinstalled in Windows, and compelling Microsoft to follow design guidelines issued by web standards groups. “Computer users have complete freedom of choice to use and set as default any browser they wish,” the company said in a statement. Last year the EU fined Microsoft a record €280m in a similar antitrust battle over its Windows Media Player software. Opera’s claims are closely modeled on the high-profile case against Microsoft pursued by the US government in a six-year battle over the integration of Internet Explorer into the Windows operating system. I’m slowly getting tired of all these “best browser” debates and counteractions of competitive companies…

Go Opera.. Go Opera... Go Go... Go Opera! :D

insanemonkey
12-15-2007, 11:01 AM
I think this is so funny becuase opera is sueing them just cuase they put IE on there software, why does opera not make there own operating machine, why isnt firefox sueing them?

also I mean users can if they do not want to use IE they are allowed to goto another site and just download a different browser, I so think they are going to lose... please if opera wins then this means so many cases would be in court and this would be just rediculous....

I mean like I dont care using IE cuase i have never problems, I just want to say website look like crap in other browsers compared to IE, I think this is just outragously stupid, sueing over putting a browser on a system made by microsoft, who cares!!!

i mean you keep sueing microsoft they are just going to find another way around this... if people want a certain browser on there pc then go download it... Its just more space thats going to take up on there pc's opera is stupid..

jscheuer1
12-15-2007, 11:14 AM
You pretty much have to have a browser. What browser should MS bundle? I think the fairest method would be to - when you first boot up a new system, give the user the choice of all available browsers for that OS. But, this might not be all that feasible, then again, why not? As long as the browsers are free and the companies that offer them make available mirrors for their on demand download and installation via the net, it could work for users already online, with an option to decide later, once you are online.

However, I think this isn't exactly what the Opera suit is about, though I'd love to think it is. I think this is Opera looking for a way to make a few bucks - more than a few bucks.

I say this though as an avid Opera user, and I wish them well.

BLiZZaRD
12-15-2007, 02:51 PM
I think the whole thing is ridiculous. When you have it people come after it. That is basically what MS is dealing with. They have it (be it dollars or people using their stuff, etc.) and everyone else wants it. I thought the media player one was stupid as well. This one is even worse.

Microsoft makes more than an operating system, and their OS is placed on a lot of computers, by choice. It would make sense that their other software is included in the OS.

I have a website. DD has a website. DD's website is far more popular than mine. But I can't sue DD because my content is not on his website.

And MS does not own a monopoly. I don't care how you spin it, there is competition, and other makers out there. That is not a monopoly. A majority, sure, not a monopoly.

You want a monopoly? Look at your local bills. You electric bill, cable bill, phone... do you have a choice in electric provider? Is there another phone company that can give you a land line? Or another cable company to offer cable tv? (no satellite doesn't count). Most likely not, you move to an area and such and such company owns that area, you must use their services or go without.

If Opera gains anything from this frivolous lawsuit, perhaps they can make it so MS can allow the end user to UNinstall IE or media player, but beyond that I hope they get nothing. It is a waste of time, and I am tired of seeing crybaby players in a no crying game.

djr33
12-15-2007, 02:59 PM
Well, it's a dirty game (business), and I wouldn't mind the most troublesome competitor (M$) losing in this case, regardless of how logical your above argument is.

If you cheat to stop a cheater and you win, isn't that basically fair?

//shrug

BLiZZaRD
12-15-2007, 03:20 PM
No, it just puts another cheater at my table.

It is all about money and who has it and who wants it. Microsoft didn't always have the $$ it does now, and they started from somewhere too. Opera can do they same thing, but instead would rather take the money from Microsoft instead of earning it.

Proof? Okay, forget $$. Everything about MS was exactly the same as it is right now, everything, the number of users, the components, bundling IE and WMP with the OS, etc etc. The ONLY difference is Microsoft was open source.

Would they still be getting sued?

Twey
12-15-2007, 03:21 PM
What browser should MS bundle? I think the fairest method would be to - when you first boot up a new system, give the user the choice of all available browsers for that OS. But, this might not be all that feasible, then again, why not?Why not indeed? Most Linux distros do this.
I think the whole thing is ridiculous. When you have it people come after it. That is basically what MS is dealing with. They have it (be it dollars or people using their stuff, etc.) and everyone else wants it. I thought the media player one was stupid as well. This one is even worse.Not quite. Windows has a majority share of the desktop, yes (and whether it got there entirely fairly is under dispute; practices like offering computer stores license discounts if they only sell machines running Windows might be considered unfair by some). However, the problem here is that it's using that majority share of the desktop to push its other products. You can say:

also I mean users can if they do not want to use IE they are allowed to goto another site and just download a different browser... but the truth of the matter is that most users don't download new software. Whatever's installed by default is what they'll use, and this gives IE a huge advantage over competing products. I'm constantly amazed that Firefox is doing as well as it is, but while IE is shipped by default with Windows the chances of it (or anything else) ever gaining a majority share is low. This use of one product to promote another is illegal by both American and European anti-trust laws, and Microsoft have faced this claim before. Last time, they got out of it by saying that IE was an inextricably linked part of Windows, and then altering their software to make this plausible (although it really isn't, as evidenced by hacked "lite" versions of Windows that run perfectly well without IE).
Proof? Okay, forget $$. Everything about MS was exactly the same as it is right now, everything, the number of users, the components, bundling IE and WMP with the OS, etc etc. The ONLY difference is Microsoft was open source.

Would they still be getting sued?If they were still a commercial product, yes.

djr33
12-15-2007, 03:33 PM
Twey brings up an interesting point that it's surprising FF is as popular as it is.

Imagine if IE did adhere to strict standards-- that would really be a monopoly. Heh. Perhaps this is all a legal maneuver-- the non-standards-compliance is entirely intentional. Ha.

BLiZZaRD
12-15-2007, 04:01 PM
So what? MS pickets for Quirks? LOL

molendijk
12-16-2007, 02:05 AM
Come on, guys! Hasn't history shown us that fanatism, prejudice, firm convictions about who or what is right or wrong etc. leads to STUPID WAR! I don't see the difference between religious zelots fighting for their GOD while killing the 'unfaithful', and browser believers (Opera-believers or FF-believers vs IE-believers, and vice versa). If computer-fanatism is going to replace religious fanatism, then I'll gladly go back to the times of wooden toys.

The problem? Too much testosteron! Apes have lots of it.

Arie M.

jscheuer1
12-16-2007, 04:26 AM
The problem? Too much testosteron! Apes have lots of it.

That's testosterone. Hormones make the world go round. But you have a point. I similarly have had it with extremism of every stripe. I really don't think (as I mentioned before) that Opera is doing this primarily to promote fairness, but I'm all for it, simply because I like the browser. I would never do anything to directly promote the Opera browser though, other than truthfully state my satisfaction with it. And, as good as it is, it isn't perfect. No browser is.

I think folks often overlook the facts of the matter. The internet is a hodgepodge of markup, etc. The various browsers try to make sense of it all. Standards exist, but the aren't always followed. If you try to treat the internet as though it were a private controlled medium, you will be disappointed, or are deluded, or both.

Trinithis
12-16-2007, 06:53 AM
A week ago, my econ teacher talked a little about this for purposes of bundling and exclusive dealings.

In any case, I think this matter at its roots is a gimic, but I don't disagree with it. The only reason why I root for Opera isn't because I like the browser or necessarily dislike MS; I just loathe Internet Explorer. MS needs to get some repercussions for releasing such a crappy browser. Come on . . . attachEvent? Just go with the flow and accept addEventListener and everything else.

Btw, how do browsers even make money for companies? What market is there?

djr33
12-16-2007, 07:03 AM
Advertising and perhaps investors, I'd think.

jscheuer1
12-16-2007, 12:34 PM
There could be other avenues for financial gain in browsers I'm not thinking of at the moment. For MS, one is the market dominance. If you start using other browser software, you may begin to question the need to use MS software at all. MS also uses IE to funnel folks to MS owned sites.

For Opera, it might possibly be - make a decent browser and profit by suing MS. But Opera also has commercial software, if you use their free browser, you might be more inclined to purchase one or more of their commercial products. You certainly would be more aware of them as a 'player' in the software world.

djr33
12-16-2007, 12:37 PM
MS also uses IE to funnel folks to MS owned sites.
Not just that, but without IE, Windows itself would stop functioning as designed-- automatic updates, "Genuine Advantage", "Live" messenger, and other such "features" would not work without ActiveX and extreme control over the machine.

davidjmorin
12-16-2007, 12:49 PM
Ha ha after my ordeal with IE in the past few days here this is the stuff that i like to read. .....i can i become part of this lawsuit lmao......Maybe Microsoft should put out a better browser without so many bugs!!! But that would be asking alot i know!

molendijk
12-16-2007, 02:13 PM
That's testosterone[/B].

I see. Well, in Dutch, it's 'testosteron'. The final 'e' in Engl. 'testosterone' and French 'testostérone' shouldn't be there, at least, if the origin is something like 'testostero - testosteronem'.
But that's not what this thread is about.

Arie M.

jscheuer1
12-16-2007, 05:02 PM
[/B].

I see. Well, in Dutch, it's 'testosteron'. The final 'e' in Engl. 'testosterone' and French 'testostérone' shouldn't be there, at least, if the origin is something like 'testostero - testosteronem'.
But that's not what this thread is about.

Arie M.

Are you sure? Anyways, why not write your entire post in Dutch then? :p

BLiZZaRD
12-16-2007, 05:50 PM
Would it help ease your mind if I said I don't use IE except to test and that I ONLY use firefox and Konq? I, as are many many others here, are NOT fanatical about one OS/browser/other item of computer usage but there are great debates to be had, and maybe a couple of points of view to see with fresh eyes.

Opera vs. IE is NOT comparable to Christianity vs. Determinism vs. religious freedom.

But I see no point in attacking the huge force that is Windows because a small company wants a bigger piece of the pie.

The reason I am not surprised that FireFox has done so well, is because people that understand their browsers have been starving for a good browser, while settling for mediocre ones. IE, Opera, Safari, Konq, all mediocre. FireFox came along and gave everyone what they wanted, and those that know, made the switch.

But just because I support FireFox doesn't mean I have to bash IE. I like ALL browsers and OS, they all have pros and cons.

I will tell you though, the thing MS did was make computers easy for people, and through the years have stuck to that. Most people can't install Linux and make all those choices during set up because they don't know what half that crap is.

MS took those choices away and gave people what they need, a Desktop GUI, a web browser, a messenger service, and al those other "features" that someone who doesn't understand computers fully can get on, check email, chat with a friend and look at ebay.

Why wouldn't MS use their own software for this purpose? I know I would.

Twey
12-16-2007, 05:56 PM
But just because I support FireFox doesn't mean I have to bash IE. I like ALL browsers and OS, they all have pros and cons.Name one for IE :p
The reason I am not surprised that FireFox has done so well, is because people that understand their browsers have been starving for a good browser, while settling for mediocre ones. IE, Opera, Safari, Konq, all mediocre. FireFox came along and gave everyone what they wanted, and those that know, made the switch.I disagree -- most of the features in Fx exist in Opera, Safari and Konq.

BLiZZaRD
12-16-2007, 06:01 PM
Name one for IE :pI

Already installed, easy to use, has great adaptation for poorly designed websites. Easy on the eyes and a fair amount of features. To a programmer or web designer IE is the pits, but to a grandmother who didn't know what a computer was last week to check her hotmail account for pics of the grandkids, it is great.



disagree -- most of the features in Fx exist in Opera, Safari and Konq.

Sure they did, do, will. Based off the same premise, Netscape was the bomb when the internet opened up. Of course that's all there was...

One good idea improved upon makes a better idea. Start with a good base (Opera, Safari, Konq) improve it, make it better and give it away as easy and efficiently as you can and you have a great idea (firefox).

molendijk
12-16-2007, 09:36 PM
Are you sure? Anyways, why not write your entire post in Dutch then? :p

Omdat heel weinig mensen mijn berichten zouden kunnen lezen als ze in het Nederlands gesteld zouden zijn.
John, graag een reactie op dit bericht als ik het hier mis heb.

Arie M.

By the wayS, JohnS, I thinkS that 'anywayS' is colloquial. Should be 'anyway'.

BYK
12-16-2007, 10:10 PM
molendijk is right I think :) (in the testosterone based post ofcourse, because I did not understand one word of the above post :D)

But I, as a user who do not want to keep programs which do the same thing on his computer, want my right to uninstall IE. I, as a web developer, also want IE to respect the standards not to make me add some unnecessary codes to my pages to make them work correctly in both IE&others.

BUT, I think Opera is not that innocent about this suing thing ;)

insanemonkey
12-17-2007, 04:17 AM
I have a question, if MS is getting sued for putting IE on there OS,

Then Why isnt Macintosh or Apple getting sued for putting there browser on there machines..?

Macs are staring to get popular, and for Opera to press charges or whatever, its going to have a effect on all OS products which will be bad for the market,

This is just stupid and this claim will be declined i am sure of it..

I use IE cuase of its graphics and CSS but I only use opera and FF for regular stuff like email,
also FF does not mean FireFox anymore I think they changed the name cuase FF means Final Fantasy (http://www.google.com/search?q=FF&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1) ...


Omdat heel weinig mensen mijn berichten zouden kunnen lezen als ze in het Nederlands gesteld zouden zijn.
John, graag een reactie op dit bericht als ik het hier mis heb.

It means::
Because very few people read could my bulletins if them be put in Dutch. John, gladly reported if I miss it here have a response to this.
::

Twey
12-17-2007, 04:40 AM
Then Why isnt Macintosh or Apple getting sued for putting there browser on there machines..?Probably simply because Macs aren't popular enough. No-one's losing any serious revenue from them. Also, I think Safari is open-source.
also FF does not mean FireFox anymoreIt's always been officially abbreviated "Fx." People still use "FF" though.
I think they changed the name cuase FF means Final Fantasy ...Unlikely.

Trinithis
12-17-2007, 05:07 AM
I use IE cuase of its graphics and CSS
IE has s***ty (uberly fragmented and buggy) css support. It also has issues with png to say the least. (Probably other file types like tif as well.)

jscheuer1
12-17-2007, 05:53 AM
IE 7 is actually pretty darn good with css, and very good with png. It even has a little trouble with IE proprietary filters, the sign of a 'good' browser in the opinion of many folks around here. My main problem with IE though is that it is a target. I'd rather surf with something that doesn't have a big red bullseye painted on it.

tech_support
12-17-2007, 05:57 AM
Damn Right.

Trinithis
12-17-2007, 06:09 AM
Oh, I didn't realize that IE7 somewhat fixed its act with CSS and all. I have IE6, and there's no stuff like

div > span {display:table;}

Still, it needs to clean up its JavaScript (ahem . . . JScript) support for me to even consider it a decent browser.

But I'm probably not likely to upgrade soon because I still want to be able to test for v6.

insanemonkey
12-17-2007, 07:07 AM
IE 7 is actually pretty darn good with css, and very good with png. It even has a little trouble with IE proprietary filters, the sign of a 'good' browser in the opinion of many folks around here. My main problem with IE though is that it is a target. I'd rather surf with something that doesn't have a big red bullseye painted on it.

YES i do agree, it has change alot from the other versions, and I have never had problems with the css.

I hate it is when I have to see when css works in both browsers and the coding. if opera and "Fx" want to become more popular, they should add as much features as IE has, this is why i dont use opera or fx

Twey
12-17-2007, 07:19 AM
IE 7 is actually pretty darn good with cssIt's a big step up from IE6, but it still doesn't come close to Opera's and Fx' support.
and very good with png.Except for that it applies gamma correction differently from other browsers. In fairness, it is following the PNG spec still; it's just awkward that it decides to implement a vague portion of it differently from everything else, especially since it's a web browser and the way everything else does it makes much more sense for the web.
I hate it is when I have to see when css works in both browsers and the coding."Both" browsers? There are a lot more than two browsers out there :) Generally this sort of compatibility issue takes the form of "one way for IE, one way for everything else," and stems from IE's lack of standards support.
if opera and "Fx" want to become more popular, they should add as much features as IE hasThey have pretty much all the "features" IE has, even some rather nasty ones like innerHTML. About all they're missing is some of the more pointless non-standard eye-candy like page transitions. Instead, they have one heck of a lot of features that actually are both standard and useful, like XHTML, SVG, and XPath.

TimFA
12-22-2007, 08:12 PM
Ie has no more than Opera or FireFox, what are you referring to?? And plus if FireFox lacks something there is this REALLY convenient thing called "Add-ons" :p Opera has them to, with Add-ons FireFox and Opera can have MUCH more functionality than IE could dream of having. Reasons? FireFox and Operas are developed by people on a need-it basis, IE has none, but if it did MS would make it so that only they could develop them, or atleast they would try. MS has never been big on the whole "yours and ours" thing, even their OS's license agreements say you are just "renting" their software (from XP up I believe). I know some people who think MS will try and disable XP through the "Validation" system, as that would be perfectly legal. I don't necessarily think they would, but its a thought.

BLiZZaRD
12-22-2007, 08:19 PM
A lot of people have those views about MS. Personally I see the need for wording like that. It isn't set up for them to DO anything TO an end user, but it is more a CYA type of thing if/when the time (read: lawsuits) come.

TimFA
12-22-2007, 08:25 PM
Yes, and the views branch from the fact that "hey I paid for this, now let me use it the way I want!" is the view of many people, I feel that way to, but I do not scream about it. I've heard the theory that they will disable XP to force you into buying Vista, the probable excuse? "XP is out-dated" and they will pull it off shelves. Once again, just a possibility.

BLiZZaRD
12-22-2007, 08:29 PM
Yes, but that rumor came out after MS announced they would continue to build upon and update XP for the next 7 years.

XP is also back on the shelves at stores and pre-installed on machines through most major computer distributors, like Dell and HP.

XP won't go anywhere, not for a while.

djr33
12-22-2007, 08:30 PM
They can't disable XP, but they will try to make it outdated. No support, no updates, and no software that is compatible. Yet they just updated with SP3. I wonder if that's some scam.

TimFA
12-22-2007, 08:32 PM
Hehe, I prefer XP. I'm running 2000 Pro, but XP runs more stable on this PC. Also not to say I hate IE, some people would see what MS is doing as a service by providing a ready browser in the installation, and why not their own? I do not feel Opera should get anything out of this, but I don't necessarily think what MS does is fair.

edit: and why couldn't they?? they can use the validation service, until it's gone, which is never, as it has the power to do such things. If you are talking matters of can't do it because of the media/publicity/lay-suits they could get, just blame it on a deadly virus, that a) did it. b) forced them to do it, because of how fast it was spreading, or some similar excuse.

BLiZZaRD
12-23-2007, 02:36 PM
Of course, if they do, I have a handy dandy copy of Windows 98SE in my desk drawer, ready to go. :p

TimFA
12-23-2007, 06:21 PM
I have 95, 98 SE, 2000 Pro, and XP. Lol, I use 2000, because I screwed up my XP installation.

djr33
12-23-2007, 06:54 PM
I think 2000 was a very nice version of windows. I switched to XP a long time after most, but then again, that was a few years ago, now.

jscheuer1
12-23-2007, 07:18 PM
3.1 was good for its day. I never liked 98. NT suited me very well at the time, and XP is like an updated, expanded, slightly dumbed down NT, so I like XP just fine. I never used 2000 or ME. Vista has always struck me as overly ambitious, to put it kindly, perhaps some day . . . But I think Vista's troubles may be so endemic that it will be an Edsel. What's next? I'm sure MS will come up with something sooner or later, IMHO a 'nix type kernel with a 'for dummies' overlay.

TimFA
12-23-2007, 08:13 PM
First time I had XP? About 2 years ago, I'm horrible with my installations, soon this ones gonna need dumped, but my computers dieing to, I backup my site, I believe its my HD going out. Plus this sys just sucks....

I liked XP's interface, I like fancy and cool looking stuff, I'm not with the whole "harder to use" stuff, I fail at Linux.

jscheuer1
12-23-2007, 08:30 PM
I'm not with the whole "harder to use" stuff, I fail at Linux.

You may of misunderstood me. I didn't mean that MS would come out with a 'nix OS like most of the ones currently available, rather that they would probably come out with an OS based on a 'nix type kernel. I think that they are about to the point of tiring of reinventing the wheel, if so this would be the way to go. However, this wouldn't change their 'commitment' to a relatively simple GUI for those who like that. Hopefully though, this would make the OS much more versatile for those wishing to 'get under the hood'.

But, I may have misunderstood you, if you meant that XP is harder to use, I would have to disagree. It's just a little different than some of the previous Windows OS's, no easier, no harder to use. It's main advantage is that on a machine that matches its sys req, it is very stable.

TimFA
12-23-2007, 10:22 PM
No, no I understood what you mean't, I was saying that I like most of the MS OSs because its usually easy to use. Lol, I should have clarified.

This went somewhat off-topic, from IE being sued to praising MS OSs...

Twey
12-24-2007, 12:10 AM
I like most of the MS OSs because its usually easy to use -- so long as you don't do anything Microsoft didn't intend you to do, like, say, develop, or fix a bug. Then it rapidly becomes a nightmare.

TimFA
12-24-2007, 12:17 AM
Hehe, I don't do those things, I just fix what I can. Man, I never realized Dynamic Drive forums got so slow sometimes...for the longest time I didn't ever stay, I asked my question and left.

edit:
Twey
Modtoreador

LoL

Jesdisciple
12-24-2007, 01:10 AM
I despise Microsoft, but here are the points I consider in judging them:

1. A browser(s) must be bundled with the computer, because not everyone that buys a computer has Internet access.

2. Many users never download anything, but this wouldn't matter so much if we had a variety of pre-installed operating systems.

3. More browsers mean less free space on the computer, although this isn't a problem for most users.

4. A not-so-savvy user might be confused by a prompt upon the first startup.

5. The same not-so-savvy user probably wouldn't ever find any browsers but the first known, at least for a while.

6. Microsoft doesn't have to bundle the browser(s); the computer store could do it.

Considering the above, I don't know that Microsoft commits a crime by bundling IE with Windows, unless they should bundle no browsers and leave that up to the (hopefully impartial) computer stores. (I do agree that IE should be uninstallable, but that isn't the issue.)

I think their main crime is their operating system monopoly - a technological monopoly obtained and retained by contracts with computer manufacturers. They should be taken to court (again, as the last time didn't help much) over this, not over bundling IE with Windows. Now, I don't know that Opera would be allowed to charge them with this because they don't compete, but this is the real issue for me.

BLiZZaRD
12-24-2007, 05:06 AM
I think their main crime is their operating system monopoly - a technological monopoly obtained and retained by contracts with computer manufacturers


This is not true. A store that sells Macs doesn't sell MS computers. Likewise Dell, HP, Acer, E-Machine, etc. all sell MS computers and "no-operating system computers" Dell has partnered with Ubuntu as well as MS and sells computers pre-installed with both, as well as a "clean" system that comes with a disk to install free-dos but otherwise has nothing on it.

There is a choice, which in effect, disables any "monopoly".

Hell there are stores online that sell computers with everything EXCEPT MicroSoft.

Twey
12-24-2007, 03:33 PM
Likewise Dell, HP, Acer, E-Machine, etc. all sell MS computers and "no-operating system computers"But have you ever tried to buy one? They're not listed as options for most systems.
Hell there are stores online that sell computers with everything EXCEPT MicroSoft.Only small ones. Most users want Windows -- the semi-monopoly propagates itself.
3. More browsers mean less free space on the computer, although this isn't a problem for most users.Bundling a browser with the install medium doesn't mean it will be installed. There's certainly enough space for another browser or three on the install DVDs.
4. A not-so-savvy user might be confused by a prompt upon the first startup.A user who's confused by a simple prompt in non-technical language is incapable of operating a computer. Besides, we're talking install time here, and there are lots of other prompts.
6. Microsoft doesn't have to bundle the browser(s); the computer store could do it.Some do bundle Fx. However, while IE is uninstallable there's redundancy in installing another browser as well, as you pointed out.
I think their main crime is their operating system monopoly - a technological monopoly obtained and retained by contracts with computer manufacturers. They should be taken to court (again, as the last time didn't help much) over thisAt the worst they'd just be forced to split into two companies.

jscheuer1
12-24-2007, 10:22 PM
That is one of the most cogent multi-quote-and-response posts I have ever seen!

BLiZZaRD
12-24-2007, 11:02 PM
But have you ever tried to buy one? They're not listed as options for most systems.


I have both 4 in the last 4 months alone, 3 for work and 1 for home. 3 from Dell, and 1 from HP. Each was easily found on their site as an option.



Only small ones. Most users want Windows -- the semi-monopoly propagates itself.


But the fact remains, and the choices are out there. Because a person wants something more, and the option is there, it is not, by definition a monopoly. If someone wanted to buy a non MS computer and couldn't, then you would have a case.

Trinithis
12-25-2007, 02:46 AM
Not to press the point, but monopolies do not need 100% of the market; they just need a large majority. Given enough data, one could argue that MS is a monopoly despite there being competetors.

jscheuer1
12-25-2007, 08:56 AM
Maybe we could get together a class action lawsuit here in the forum against MS and their IE browsers, which over the years have constituted 'cruel and unusual punishment' for serious coders. We could seek damages (lost revenue due to hours wasted coding specifically for their sub-standard software), and more importantly, 'pain and suffering'.

BYK
12-25-2007, 03:01 PM
I and a friend of mine had a project named "dIE" in our minds. A place where developers would share their "horrible" memories about Internet Explorer, and we would mention whether IE should be erased from existence completly or it should renew itself to be compatible with the standards. Anyone in? :D

jscheuer1
12-25-2007, 06:24 PM
I and a friend of mine had a project named "dIE" in our minds. A place where developers would share their "horrible" memories about Internet Explorer, and we would mention whether IE should be erased from existence completly or it should renew itself to be compatible with the standards. Anyone in? :D

I'm beginning to understand another reason why IE is such a target.

BLiZZaRD
12-25-2007, 06:26 PM
Not to press the point, but monopolies do not need 100% of the market; they just need a large majority. Given enough data, one could argue that MS is a monopoly despite there being competetors.

By shear definition:

Monopoly (Economics):



In economics, a monopoly (from the Latin word monopolium - Greek language monos, one + polein, to sell) is defined as a persistent market situation where there is only one provider of a product or service.




# (economics) a market in which there are many buyers but only one seller; "a monopoly on silver"; "when you have a monopoly you can ask any price ...
# exclusive control or possession of something; "They have no monopoly on intelligence"




The sole seller of a good or service in a market.




A market structure characterized by a single seller of a well-defined commodity for which there are no good substitutes and by high barriers to the entry of other firms into the market for that commodity.


Over and over.. CHOICE is the determining factor in economics. Does the buyer have a choice? Do competition sellers have a choice to enter the market?

MS is not a monopoly, they do have monopolistic tendencies, but who in business doesn't want to rule the world?

jscheuer1
12-25-2007, 07:01 PM
By shear definition:MS is not a monopoly, they do have monopolistic tendencies, but who in business doesn't want to rule the world?

Linux, FF, Opera, to name a few relevant to this discussion. One part of one of your definitions:



high barriers to the entry of other firms

seems particularly apropos. I know you cover this by redefining MS as having 'monopolistic tendencies', as opposed to being an outright monopoly. I'm not certain about the laws governing commerce though. The historic and current monopolies were either eventually broken and/or sanctioned by law at various times (Ma Bell, Major League Baseball, Standard Oil). Collusion in pursuit of a monopoly may also be a legal issue I believe. If so, MS is hot and thick (if not in fact violating the letter of the law) in this area.

BLiZZaRD
12-25-2007, 07:13 PM
True, but from the white papers I have seen of the contracts with Dell and HP, MS isn't disallowing other software vendors from being preinstalled.

The same can be said of other companies in a more-so effect today. High schools being "Nike only" or "Coke only."

Or cable and phone companies that will service only a certain area and no other company has rights to that area. Those are bigger monopolies than MS can ever hope to be. There is no choice for persons/ end users in some of those situations.

Twey
12-25-2007, 09:41 PM
That is one of the most cogent multi-quote-and-response posts I have ever seen!I'm glad you liked it. :)
I have both 4 in the last 4 months alone, 3 for work and 1 for home. 3 from Dell, and 1 from HP. Each was easily found on their site as an option.OK, let's pretend I'm a somewhat savvy but not entirely IT-oriented customer. I fancy a new PC to play Half Life 7 Episode 4 SP6 Gold Edition, so I fire up dell.co.uk in my favourite web browser. Hm... desktops, home. I fancy pretending I'm rich (hey, let me dream) so I hit the XPS series, choose the top-of-the-range XPS720H2C, and hit customise. My choices for operating system are:Genuine Windows® XP Media Center Edition 2005 - English add £0.00 Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium - English [Included in Price] Genuine Windows® XP Professional - English [add £50.00 or £1/month] Genuine Windows Vista® Ultimate - English [add £70.00 or £2/month]
With Genuine Windows Vista® Ultimate: The best of all worlds, including business, mobility, networking and home entertainment features.It doesn't even list "no OS," much less any other OS. Even if I want XP Pro I have to pay extra, and the cheapest ones are included in the price. Where's the choice there?
Maybe we could get together a class action lawsuit here in the forum against MS and their IE browsers, which over the years have constituted 'cruel and unusual punishment' for serious coders. We could seek damages (lost revenue due to hours wasted coding specifically for their sub-standard software), and more importantly, 'pain and suffering'.I'm not sure about the "pain and suffering" part, but you might have a serious case on the lost revenue front. Any lawyers in the audience? :)
By shear definition:Indeed, thus my reference to it as a "semi-monopoly." It's a case of using business practices that are both unfair to competitors and bad for the computer industry as a whole (since their products tend to stray from the standard in negative ways) to make the entrance barrier as high as possible rather than an actual monopoly per se.

BLiZZaRD
12-25-2007, 09:59 PM
OK, let's pretend I'm a somewhat savvy but not entirely IT-oriented customer.


I would suggest you look at all the options and see the link on the left under "Essential" for the link to "Open Source PCs" :)

And if you know what you want, you know how to find it. You are not going to want a Mac and go to a PC shop, if you want a PC the options and choices are there. By default as a business, If I sold computers I would put MS enabled computers up front as well. Complete build systems are going to be sold as 98% (or more) with MS anyway. Those that don't run Linux or other Open OSes, and don't want a Mac, will want MS. If you know you want a Mac, you get one of those.

The point being that put what sells up front. But the link to the left isn't hidden, either. If you were savvy as you say, I would expect you to do a little bit or reading before clicking the add-to-cart button anyway ;)



It's a case of using business practices that are both unfair to competitors...
...to make the entrance barrier as high as possible...


Ahh.. but part of that is to limit the competition by raising those barriers, and part of that is in dollars and cents. PCs are selling far far cheaper than their competition, and not to bring down their competition. Mac chooses the cost of their machines, and could bing the price down if they so choose, but they don't. By that nature the competition for business is out, and all that is left is the actual product.

Still not a monopoly.

Twey
12-26-2007, 08:57 PM
I would suggest you look at all the options and see the link on the left under "Essential" for the link to "Open Source PCs"But that's not what I wanted. I wanted a top-of-the-range XPS with no OS, not that one PC with Ubuntu. Also, they have
Dell recommends Windows Vista® Home Premium.in bold at the top of the page.

BLiZZaRD
12-26-2007, 09:03 PM
Yes the do, but they don't suggest it, just recommends it :p

Twey
12-26-2007, 09:34 PM
Synonyms (Moby Thesaurus).

recommend
v 1: push for something; "The travel agent recommended strongly
that we not travel on Thanksgiving Day"
2: express a good opinion of [syn: commend]
3: make attractive or acceptable; "Honesty recommends any
person"

BYK
12-26-2007, 09:52 PM
I just recommend ending this argument, it is obvious that Twey has more points than you BliZZaRD :D

jscheuer1
12-26-2007, 11:11 PM
Oh, keep up the discussion, it's comic relief.

Really though, we are all just dancing around the fact that MS has a market dominance that isn't necessarily in the best interests of computer users. However, what would replace it? Would it be any better? Worse?

Remember, most folks who own and/or use them, don't know and don't want to know that much about computers. Like most drivers don't want to know that much about cars.

tech_support
12-27-2007, 12:37 AM
If there was no IE, it'd save designers/coders a hell of a lot of time. And time is money. No more "making this IE compatible" or "this doesn't work in IE" etc.

And on slightly related news, IE8 passes the Acid2 test (http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2007/12/19/internet-explorer-8-and-acid2-a-milestone.aspx)! :D

Trinithis
12-27-2007, 12:50 AM
I'll be darned. I can only hope IE8 supports real DOM code.

jscheuer1
12-27-2007, 02:17 AM
Perhaps IE 8 will mean the end of IE H8.

Trinithis
12-27-2007, 02:50 AM
John, you have e1337 rhyming skills.

jscheuer1
12-27-2007, 03:38 AM
John, you have e1337 rhyming skills.

It's a gift, sometimes a curse, thanks. Really a lot like certain coding skills - the ability to recognize and/or remember relevant combinations in context. Or the inability not to.

boogyman
12-27-2007, 05:53 PM
IE 7 is actually pretty darn good with css
It's a big step up from IE6, but it still doesn't come close to Opera's and Fx' support.


IE8 passed the Acid 2 Test
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2007/12/19/internet-explorer-8-and-acid2-a-milestone.aspx

glad to see someone over there is becoming smart :)

djr33
12-27-2007, 06:51 PM
But...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IkeC7HpsHxo


Yes, off topic. But you will laugh.

Twey
12-27-2007, 08:24 PM
It was off-topic. I laughed.

jscheuer1
12-27-2007, 08:48 PM
It was off-topic. I laughed.

Ditto, and I cried, and I bought the T-shirt.

MS has their own video - for nerds only:

http://channel9.msdn.com/Showpost.aspx?postid=367207

I believe it may require Media Player.

BLiZZaRD
12-29-2007, 05:50 PM
But...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IkeC7HpsHxo


Yes, off topic. But you will laugh.

HAHAHAHA... I laughed too. That was funny.

FreePHPTemplate
12-30-2007, 09:34 PM
Opera is playing cheap short to gain some market gain. I like opera and being using it from long time. but not all sites work on opera. It used to cost money so Opera and all other who are anti-microsoft should stop these cheap tactics and start building really good browsers like Firefox and people will start using them.

djr33
12-30-2007, 11:03 PM
I find some of that reasoning faulty, also contradictory. But I won't get into it at the moment.

jscheuer1
12-31-2007, 05:27 AM
There is no perfect browser.

Sharon32
01-12-2008, 04:41 AM
FireFox is the best than anyother.

BLiZZaRD
01-12-2008, 05:01 AM
Too bad it doesn't help with grammar.

There really is only one correct answer to this loaded question, and that is that the best browser out there, is the best browser for you.

If you are comfortable with the add ons and quirks and know how to use a specific browser then that is the one for you. Just like an OS or any other program, if you like it and you can use it comfortably, then it is the best.

"Best" is an opinion, always will be. And if your idea of a certain browser is "best" then it is, to you.

Twey
01-12-2008, 02:30 PM
If you are comfortable with the add ons and quirks and know how to use a specific browser then that is the one for you.Maybe from a user's point of view. From a developer's point of view, the best browser is the one that supports the standards best.

BLiZZaRD
01-12-2008, 02:39 PM
True, but again, there is that "opinion" thing. I know persons whom prefer to code for IE over all others. It won't end.

Twey
01-12-2008, 03:55 PM
But that doesn't make it a better browser, because coding to IE is less advantageous than coding to standards.

BLiZZaRD
01-12-2008, 04:01 PM
It is if you ask them.

Twey
01-12-2008, 04:08 PM
There are some people who believe that the moon is made of green cheese. That doesn't mean it's true :)

Somewhat off-topic, but this reminded me of this interesting video (http://www.jcnot4me.com/Videos/Kissing_Hanks_Ass-video.mov) (warnings: 18MB QuickTime movie, inappropriate mentions of wieners, sauerkraut and condiments, may offend).

jscheuer1
01-12-2008, 06:49 PM
Pretty funny. Kafka-esque. A little O. Henry type twist at the end too.

benslayton
01-12-2008, 11:40 PM
Seems kinda ridiculious. Msoft should have the right to to bundle their own software on their own OS. Butr actually yes come to think of it it would be nice for the install to ask which browser we prefer. But still microsoft own's the OS so they should be able to bundle their software with it. I dont think i would call that a monopoly. Unless of course you had to have IE to view microsoft.com like it used to be.

Sharon32
01-14-2008, 04:28 AM
I agree man.:cool: