 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Country Specific / UK Mac Group / February 2008Microsoft fined by EU (again) for anti-trust rulling non-complience
That'll be £680M please... <http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/feb/27/microsoft.europe> Speaking about Microsoft's announcement about supporting open formats, the EU spokesperson said: But Kroes, reiterating that she was investigating two further complaints against the group regarding inter-operability, warned that she could impose further penalties unless the company underwent a genuine change in behaviour. A press release, she said, did not necessarily indicate a change in business practice. "I'm not naive," she said. "I'm not in the mood when someone is talking about inter-operability to accept this as change. First show me. Talk is cheap; flouting the rules is expensive so let's wait and find the reality in this context. If you flout the rules you will be caught and it will cost you dear." Ian  SignatureIan Robinson, Belfast, UK <http://www.canicula.com/wp/> > That'll be £680M please... > > <http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/feb/27/microsoft.europe> Many of the reader comments on the BBC article about this show a typical ignorance of the issues, with such idiotic statements as "Microsoft have every right to compete the way they want" and "Why are we punishing a company for being good?" or "the EU is going after Microsoft because its a good American business". Oh, right. <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7266629.stm> SignaturePd > Many of the reader comments on the BBC article about this show a typical > ignorance of the issues, with such idiotic statements as "Microsoft have > every right to compete the way they want" and "Why are we punishing a > company for being good?" or "the EU is going after Microsoft because its > a good American business". Oh, right. I had a conversation like that with a colleague last week. He just couldn't grasp that a monopoly position means that you have to do things differently. Ian SignatureIan Robinson, Belfast, UK <http://www.canicula.com/wp/> > > Many of the reader comments on the BBC article about this show a typical > > ignorance of the issues, with such idiotic statements as "Microsoft have [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I had a conversation like that with a colleague last week. He just couldn't > grasp that a monopoly position means that you have to do things differently. Only if you don't want to be seen as abusing your position. That's why such things as Monopoly Commissions were invented, because corporations won't play nice of their own accord. Another dork comment was that the EU has a monopoly themselves, like with money, you know, the Euro. Sometimes I wish the internet had some kind of stupidity filter. SignaturePd > Another dork comment was that the EU has a monopoly themselves, like > with money, you know, the Euro. Sometimes I wish the internet had some > kind of stupidity filter. Would there be anything left? At least there would be no need for Google to search all of three pages. > > That'll be £680M please... > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7266629.stm> This whole Web 2.0 "user generated content" thing has proven only one thing; the users are stupid. -zoara- SignatureNo 3G. Fewer megapixels than an N95. Lame. >> > That'll be £680M please... >> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > This whole Web 2.0 "user generated content" thing has proven only one > thing; the users are stupid. Did that need proving? Signature"Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain and presumptuous desire for a second one." [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk] > >> > That'll be £680M please... > >> > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Did that need proving? I think it needed proving to the people that proclaimed that user-generated content would mean a massive step forward for the web. -z- SignatureNo 3G. Fewer megapixels than an N95. Lame. >> >> > That'll be £680M please... >> >> > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > I think it needed proving to the people that proclaimed that > user-generated content would mean a massive step forward for the web. Yeah, but most of them are strangely bespectacled, spikey haired bozo "web designers" with too much metal embedded in their faces and no clothes in any colour other than black. Signature"Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain and presumptuous desire for a second one." [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk] > [...] and no clothes in any colour other than black. Ooh-h-h, what you said! Dude, there's all kinds of black. Eg, Black, Basic Black, Very Black, Fashionably Black, Blacker Than Black, Midnight Black, Total Black, Black To Dye For... Not to mention this new fabric someone's dreamed up, so black they may not yet have a darkly cool name for it. ;-) SignatureAndrew Stephenson > This whole Web 2.0 "user generated content" thing has proven only one > thing; the users are stupid. What's uk.comp.sys.mac if not user-generated content then? Cheers, Ian > > This whole Web 2.0 "user generated content" thing has proven only one > > thing; the users are stupid. > > What's uk.comp.sys.mac if not user-generated content then? It's usenet, which is not Web 2.0 - compare to just about any web forum. And I know you knew. SignaturePd > > This whole Web 2.0 "user generated content" thing has proven only one > > thing; the users are stupid. > > What's uk.comp.sys.mac if not user-generated content then? It's not got a logo with a reflection, so it's not REAL web 2.0 -z- SignatureNo 3G. Fewer megapixels than an N95. Lame. zoara <me18@privacy.net>: >> > This whole Web 2.0 "user generated content" thing has proven only one >> > thing; the users are stupid. >> >> What's uk.comp.sys.mac if not user-generated content then? > > It's not got a logo with a reflection, so it's not REAL web 2.0 <URL:http://rialto.bas.me.uk/~bas/things/usenet.png> HTH, b. Signature<bas@bas.me.uk> <URL:http://bas.me.uk/> Stick and stones may break my bones, ma posso mangiare il vetro e non mi fa male. > zoara <me18@privacy.net>: > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > <URL:http://rialto.bas.me.uk/~bas/things/usenet.png> Ordinarily, I'm a great fan of colour, but... o my god. Is that seriously how you read newsgroups? SignaturePd Pd <peterd.news@gmail.invalid>: >> zoara <me18@privacy.net>: >> >> > This whole Web 2.0 "user generated content" thing has proven only one [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Ordinarily, I'm a great fan of colour, but... o my god. > Is that seriously how you read newsgroups? Absolutely. I've been using those colours for the quotation levels for, oh, all of this century at least. b. Signature<bas@bas.me.uk> <URL:http://bas.me.uk/> `The machinations of ambiguity are among the very roots of poetry.' -- William Empson, _Seven Types Of Ambiguity_ > Ordinarily, I'm a great fan of colour You don't say? Andrew Signature--- Andrew Collier ---- To reply by email, please use: ---- http://www.intensity.org.uk/ --- 'andrew {at} intensity.org.uk' -- >> zoara <me18@privacy.net>: >> > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Ordinarily, I'm a great fan of colour, but... o my god. > Is that seriously how you read newsgroups? Me too. That is, I read newsgroups like that, too. Signature"Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain and presumptuous desire for a second one." [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk] [snip] > Many of the reader comments on the BBC article about this show a typical > ignorance of the issues, with such idiotic statements as "Microsoft have [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7266629.stm> The two that got me where: "I find it amazing that we have such ridiculous laws!! Why are we punishing a company for being good?? It's not Microsoft's fault that no-one else has come up with products that can compete..." and "I think it is a bad ruling because Microsoft is being charged for not sharing their OWN code they wrote. Microsoft has every right not to share what they wrote. There's many other platforms out there for companies to write code for. There are many alternatives to web browsers and media players to download off the internet to begin with, so I don't see how this is a problem." Both of these comments completely ignore the problems with Microsoft's lack of interoperability. SignatureAndy. > Both of these comments completely ignore the problems with Microsoft's > lack of interoperability. Probably because the bone heads who wrote them are completely unaware. SignatureDavid Kennedy http://www.anindianinexile.com David Kennedy <davidkennedy@nospamtodaythanksverymuchforthekindofferyoubastard.invalid > wrote: > > Both of these comments completely ignore the problems with Microsoft's > > lack of interoperability. > > Probably because the bone heads who wrote them are completely unaware. Exactly. They shouldn't even be commenting on the story if they know nothing about it. SignatureAndy. > David Kennedy > <davidkennedy@nospamtodaythanksverymuchforthekindofferyoubastard.invalid [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Exactly. They shouldn't even be commenting on the story if they know > nothing about it. What story ? SignatureDavid Kennedy http://www.anindianinexile.com > David Kennedy > <davidkennedy@nospamtodaythanksverymuchforthekindofferyoubastard.invalid [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Exactly. They shouldn't even be commenting on the story if they know > nothing about it. As a regular Engadget reader, I'm still frequently astonished by how often people will comment on a story having either read just the headline or just looked at the picture. How do I know? Because quite often the question they are asking is answered by either the picture or the headline, and if it isn't then it's in the (brief) article summary text. Of course, even more stuff is answered in the articles that the Engadget summaries link to, but I don't think any of these web 2.0 kiddies have the patience to click through, never mind actually read more than a paragraph of text. -z- SignatureNo 3G. Fewer megapixels than an N95. Lame. > > David Kennedy > > <davidkennedy@nospamtodaythanksverymuchforthekindofferyoubastard.invalid [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > often people will comment on a story having either read just the > headline or just looked at the picture. How do you know that they haven't read the whole article? Do you think many people just can't be bothered to read any more than a few lines of text? Cheers, Luke SignatureRed Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk> > > As a regular Engadget reader, I'm still frequently astonished by how > > often people will comment on a story having either read just the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > many people just can't be bothered to read any more than a few lines of > text? Oh, very good. SignaturePd > > > David Kennedy > > > <davidkennedy@nospamtodaythanksverymuchforthekindofferyoubastard.invalid [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > many people just can't be bothered to read any more than a few lines of > text? Very clever. You nearly got me, too. -z- SignatureNo 3G. Fewer megapixels than an N95. Lame. > > How do you know that they haven't read the whole article? Do you think > > many people just can't be bothered to read any more than a few lines of > > text? > > Very clever. You nearly got me, too. Luke got me completely. I was shouting at the screen "Oh the irony, you idiot! Don't you realise!?!? I can't belieeeeve.... oh. Um. Oh." SignaturePd |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.