The EU and MSFT

What the heck, I'll jump in. Reading from Keith Warren and Frans Bouma, I think the two go to extremes in describing what they see as the issues surrounding the Microsoft and EU case. The reality is probably somewhere more in the middle.

Yes, Microsoft is a convicted monopolist. They used their position to shut out or (allegedly) reduce the effectiveness of their competitors. I don't entirely get how the US arrived at that conclusion with Web browsers, seeing as how no one has ever paid for a browser (or at least they shouldn't have). Over the years I bounced between IE and Netscape, and never paid for either one, and my use of these browsers did not benefit either company.

The EU case is weird because it wants to decouple the Windows Media Player. I admit, I don't have any research, but has this tactic affected the success of QuickTime or Real? I can't speak for the masses, but I don't use Real because the player sucks and is bloated with ad nonsense. I do use QuickTime exclusively for my video needs, in part because it's the basis for pro video tools like Avid (which I use), and I can make the cleanest and most pretty video files encoding with Sorenson. The point is, startling as it might be, that if these other formats aren't as successful, it might be the quality of the product, not Bill Gates.

Flip that case even to the server side. Yes, my Win2k3 server has Windows Media Server. I use it for some purposes, but the preferred format for me is still QuickTime via simple HTTP streaming. Works like a champ.

What's troubling about this EU decision is that it dictates business decisions. I like that MS bundles a browser and a media player. Has anyone bothered to ask consumers if they like this arrangement? Does anyone care that the biggest complaintants in these cases are competitors that want to litigate their success (or compensate for failures)? Has anyone considered that the Windows Media formats have been submitted to standards bodies? What actual affect does bundling have on consumers that causes the big evil empire to thrive? I'm still looking for those answers.

And look at what Apple bundles with OS X now. I would argue that there's more there than in Windows (and much of it is better quality). Why not bust Apple? Because they don't have a majority market share? If that's the case, then the EU (and our own DOJ) are beating up on Microsoft because they're number one, and that's wrong.

I say let market forces determine the outcome, not government. If it weren't for the many shortcomings of Windows, Linux wouldn't be gaining in popularity, and Apple wouldn't see people buying into the switch campaign.

6 Comments

  • Ding Ding Ding - We have a winner :)

  • A fair and open fight between Linux and Microsoft sure would be nice to see, but I doubt it'll ever happen given Microsoft's relunctance to leave anything to chance. You never know, they might not win ;)

  • CC - define fair and open. The definition of business strategy is putting yourself into a position where the competition is tilted in your favor. You cannot use illegal means to do it, though. What the EU seems to be doing is trying to make business strategy irrelevant. That will only hurt consumers in the end.



    There's a reason that capitalism works, kind of like there's a reason that the theory of relativity works. They're both grounded on how things (in business or in nature) actually work. The EU might try to fight it, but eventually capitalism will prevail. Just look at Soviet Russia's downfall for the biggest example.

  • G'day Jeff- thanks for the view you've put forward. I like your point about Apple and what they bundle. Why aren't people complaining there?



    There are other viewpoints/reactions/rants around, I reckon yours is pretty balanced and I personally agree with what you're saying (Frans does makes a good point about integrating vs "shipping with"/can be removed by OEM).



    Thanks for clearly articulating it like this!

  • "I say let market forces determine the outcome, not government. If it weren't for the many shortcomings of Windows, Linux wouldn't be gaining in popularity, and Apple wouldn't see people buying into the switch campaign."

    This is nice in theory, but in practise it will not work if a monopoly power is in place. You can't deny that MS has 90+% of the desktops and is the no.1. choice when you buy an OS with a computer (or better: when you buy a computer, almost all people expect windows with it).



    Like 100% government regulation doesn't work (communism), 100% market regulation without any law doesn't work either (USA '10-'40). The EU has laws but not that restrictive that business isn't possible. Still the laws are there, as simple as that. I can assure you, companies have more freedom in the EU than muslims have in the US.

  • It's not a theory, it works. We have natural monopolies like cable companies and phone companies, where it's cost prohibitive to duplicate the same systems they own and compete. But you know what? Those monopolies found competition in the form of satellite and wireless, respectively. The monopolies have been forced to adjust, and consumers win with choice.



    Your Muslim comment is offensive and inappropriate.

Comments have been disabled for this content.