Microsoft’s Competitors whining again
You probably remember the Anti-Trust lawsuit against Microsoft about 5 years ago. Well, their competitors are at it again. The Linux companies are whining to the socialist regulatory agencies in Europe about supposedly unfair practices involving Microsoft’s Windows Vista product. For some background, a few years ago, these stupid commies found that Microsoft
“used its dominance to muscle out RealNetworks and other makers of audio and video streaming software and that it made its desktop Windows deliberately incompatible with rivals’ server software.”
Have you ever used RealPlayer? It was this crappy Windows Media Player-like program. Consumers chose Windows Media because it was far superior, which is the dominance they speak of. The other claim, that Windows was incompatible with their server software may well have been true, but it isn’t too difficult to make your program compatible with the operating system. If I make a word processor for Windows, do I have the right to sue Apple because it doesn’t work on a Mac? According to these morons, I would have that right. Well, now let’s consider the new claims.
“The group, which includes IBM, Nokia, Sun Microsystems, Adobe, Oracle and Red Hat, said its complaints made last year are yet to be addressed just days before Vista is due for release.”
Let’s examine some of these companies. IBM is a computer manufacturer, Nokia is a cell phone company, Sun is a maker of Windows rival Linux, Adobe is one of Microsoft’s competitors in the graphics/photography/publishing software industries, Oracle is a competitor of Microsoft’s in the webserver industry, and Red Hat is a Linux maker. These are basically Microsoft’s competitors. However, notice the most notable name not on the list. Apple, makers of the Mac computers, isn’t making such a claim.
“”Microsoft has clearly chosen to ignore the fundamental principles of the Commission’s March 2004 decision,” said Simon Awde, chairman of the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS).”
Now what are those? I didn’t see any “fundamental principles” in that decision. Microsoft wasn’t engaged in organized crime activities. Who is this Simon Awde anyway? It says he’s a chairman of a “European Committee for Interoperable Systems.” I don’t know what that is, but it sounds like a Marxist agency. Now what are they claiming Microsoft is doing?
“Vista is the first step of Microsoft’s strategy to extend its market dominance to the Internet”
OK, so Microsoft is trying to expand its market dominance to the Internet. Isn’t that what a business is supposed to do? How is Microsoft going to achieve this perfectly normal and acceptable goal?
“(ECIS) said Microsoft’s XAML markup language was “positioned to replace HTML,” the industry standard for publishing documents on the Internet. XAML would be dependent on Windows, and discriminatory against systems such as
Linux, the group said.”
So Microsoft wants to replace the HTML language that is underneath all websites with a new language, XAML? Good for them. If the market decides that this XAML is better than HTML that’s a good thing for consumers. The claim that it will be dependent on Windows is crazy, because all they’d have to do is update their web browsers to read XAML. Well, what other crap are these Marxists claiming?
“It said a so-called “open XML” platform file format, known as OOXML, is designed to run seamlessly only on the Microsoft Office platform. It governs the way a document is formatted and stored.”
Is that so? This OOXML will only run seamlessly on Microsoft Office. Microsoft’s competitors can easily adopt this format for their own programs if consumers choose it. Currently, Word Processors use some format that is highly protected so that it can’t be easily translated. XML is a programming language that is easy to translate for other programs. This OOXML is actually an improvement.
“The end result will be the continued absence of any real consumer choice, years of waiting for Microsoft to improve — or even debug — its monopoly products and of course high prices.”
OK, so Microsoft has a monopoly on computer software and charges high prices. That sure explains the switch en mass from Internet Explorer to Mozilla Firefox and other alternative web browsers when Microsoft didn’t improve or debug Internet Explorer for years. If Microsoft’s products are not adequately improved, consumers will switch or stick with what they have. If Microsoft put the current Microsoft Word in a new box and changed the name, that doesn’t mean that people who already have the current version of Word would buy it. In fact, just the opposite is true. People would realize that it isn’t improved and not buy it. As for claims of high prices, that’s the pot calling the kettle black, when you’ve got Adobe making that claim against Microsoft. Adobe products are priced at hundreds of dollars while the Microsoft products tend to be much more reasonably priced.
“Other complainants in the group include Corel, RealNetworks , Linspire and Opera.”
So the other complainants include the maker of a competing word processor, the maker of a competing music player, a Linux Distributor who previously violated Microsoft’s trademark rights and a competitor in the web browser market. This is sounding more and more like a lynch mobbing.
“On some fronts, however, complaints were resolved. Microsoft announced earlier this month concerns raised by security companies such as Symantec and McAfee had been dealt with.”
So Microsoft resolved concerns of antivirus makers Symantec and McAfee. What were these concerns?
“Those companies had said Vista would deny them access to the heart of the operating system, which they needed to protect it from certain kinds of malicious software. After negotiations, Microsoft said it would provide information the firms needed.”
These companies actually had reasonable concerns, as they do need access to the heart of the operating system for antivirus software. This goes to show you that Microsoft is willing to meet reasonable demands.
“Microsoft has challenged the Commission’s 2004 decision, which included a record fine of nearly 500 million euros ($649.4 million) and orders to change its business practices. It awaits a decision by the EU’s Court of First Instance.”
As well they should. This being a European court case, I have doubts that Microsoft will get justice in this case. Even though there is absolutely no case against them, the lynch mob isn’t going to give up that easy.
