Forum Discussion
We're Listening!
HotCakeX Yes as it was a part of the OS.
Then, in 2009, the EU stipulated that this wasn't allowed anymore and MS had to offer a choice.
Not doing so resulted in a fine of 730 million dollars (2013).
Way back in 2004 MS was already fined for close to 500 million, because of the integrated Windows Media Player
On top they were fined for 1.35 billion for using high prices (2008)
Yes, the EU likes fines, so it seems.
Personally I had no problems with the integrated IE and/or Media Player. They seamlessly worked together. If users nonetheless wished to use another browser, fine, go ahead and install Firefox, Chrome or whatever. I used Firefox, tweaking settings and so on.
However, for newbies or elderly people or the ones that simply aren't interested in 3rd party software, well, the built in stuff usually was okay.
Until the EU felt it wasn't okay...
Ah well, anyway ... just my 2cts
Mike999 HotCakeX I have to speak up, here. What y'all are saying is 100% true. I was a die-hard IBM OS/2 user in the 1980s, and really had no use for Microsoft. Fast forward to the 21st Century. Modern Today, Windows is a very robust operating system. I think it really came into its own with Vista (I never had any problems with that), but especially with 7. Win 10 is even better!
So, how about this situation with the EU? All these fines, etc. are what happens when socialism is embraced. You'll notice that none of these fines come from the USA. I hesitated to go there, because it can be construed as political. However, it seems that several of you are on the same sheet of music as I.
At the end of the day, Microsoft has not, in the past decades, prevented users from embracing software not installed by them. You can even install other operating systems alongside theirs, and both play reasonably well with each other. In the end, it's choice. If I want Microsoft's browser, I use it. If I want Firefox or Chrome, I can use those, also. If I want to run Linux on the same machine, that's possible. I can use Windows Media Player (which sometimes I prefer to its replacement), or I can install someone else's and make it Windows's default. (I still miss Windows Movie Maker!)
Well, that's my $0.04 (somewhat more than 2 cents)! Thank you for letting me climb on my soapbox.
--Dan
One more thing with the EU. Before they fine you, they give you all the chances and time for you to comply with the law. The process takes at least 5 years often much more. Google problems with there search are going on for almost a decade now. They finally have to start paying up. You can't tell me that Google and Microsoft coders are so inept that they could not have changed a bit of code in that timeframe. For me, it is nothing more than the arrogance of some of the USA companies not willing to comply with the law in countries they do business in. Microsoft, Apple, and others have changed in that regard, Google clearly hasn't yet. If they have to pay every year up to 10% of their total earnings to learn that lesson then so be it. It is there own choice.
- Spoiler
Dan_AI4GK wrote:Mike999 HotCakeX I have to speak up, here. What y'all are saying is 100% true. I was a die-hard IBM OS/2 user in the 1980s, and really had no use for Microsoft. Fast forward to the 21st Century. Modern Today, Windows is a very robust operating system. I think it really came into its own with Vista (I never had any problems with that), but especially with 7. Win 10 is even better!
So, how about this situation with the EU? All these fines, etc. are what happens when socialism is embraced. You'll notice that none of these fines come from the USA. I hesitated to go there, because it can be construed as political. However, it seems that several of you are on the same sheet of music as I.
At the end of the day, Microsoft has not, in the past decades, prevented users from embracing software not installed by them. You can even install other operating systems alongside theirs, and both play reasonably well with each other. In the end, it's choice. If I want Microsoft's browser, I use it. If I want Firefox or Chrome, I can use those, also. If I want to run Linux on the same machine, that's possible. I can use Windows Media Player (which sometimes I prefer to its replacement), or I can install someone else's and make it Windows's default. (I still miss Windows Movie Maker!)
Well, that's my $0.04 (somewhat more than 2 cents)! Thank you for letting me climb on my soapbox.
--Dan
True,
Windows, when installed on a computer, has NO control over the other installed OSes, Windows can't know what other operation systems are installed because on the modern computers, only one OS at a time can be running, the other one stays dead on the hard disk.
those few people that say Windows and Linux can't be installed, they don't have the necessary knowledge how to modify the bootloader.
obviously Windows and Linux don't use the same bootloader so one needs to have the necessary knowledge. Linux is not like Windows, it's not made for the average users.
you need to be so tech savvy and need to know how to use with codes and commands in the Linux terminal if you really wanna use Linux the way you use Windows.
The reason Microsoft got find was they were abusing the monopoly power they had over the browsers at the time. Yes, you could install whatever you wanted. But most people had no clue what was out there and we're too lazy to educate themself. The difference between the EU and the USA is not that the monopoly laws are much different, they aren't. But the EU enforce them, while the USA falls on their knees to please the big companies. Don't forget Google has now the same problems as Microsft had earlier on with the EU, with their search and promoting their own businesses above all others in Google search. Microsoft is one of the companies complaining to the EU about it.
I think the browsers have become much better because of the EU rulings to force better competition
If you look at IE at that time it was not that great, and not much was done to improve it.
- What if Microsoft and Google cut their services and leave EU for good? they will come begging and won't be acting tough anymore.
Mike999 wrote:HotCakeX Yes as it was a part of the OS.
Then, in 2009, the EU stipulated that this wasn't allowed anymore and MS had to offer a choice.
Not doing so resulted in a fine of 730 million dollars (2013).
Way back in 2004 MS was already fined for close to 500 million, because of the integrated Windows Media Player
On top they were fined for 1.35 billion for using high prices (2008)
Yes, the EU likes fines, so it seems.
Personally I had no problems with the integrated IE and/or Media Player. They seamlessly worked together. If users nonetheless wished to use another browser, fine, go ahead and install Firefox, Chrome or whatever. I used Firefox, tweaking settings and so on.
However, for newbies or elderly people or the ones that simply aren't interested in 3rd party software, well, the built in stuff usually was okay.
Until the EU felt it wasn't okay...
Ah well, anyway ... just my 2cts
That is So TRUE.
EU is like a whining kid, they can't make anything and when someone else makes something, they fine them and make that company regret for ever stepping foot in EU and providing them services.
I'm sure many Europeans don't agree with those silly rules either.
Microsoft put Windows media player and Internet explorer in the Windows to provide at least something so in case of emergency and no Internet connection, they could be used by people.
Microsoft never blocked and prevented other programs from installing.
That's Not your 2 cents, that's the Truth right there. 👏
- The EU is a scam, that's why the UK is bailing. MS never said you can't use another browser or media player.
