States Claim There is No Match for Microsoft 533
Bergkamp10 writes "State antitrust regulators have dismissed companies such as Google and Mozilla Corp, and software technologies such as AJAX and SaaS as "piddling players that pose no threat to Microsoft's monopoly in the operating system and browser markets".
According to the report ten US states, including California, New York and the District of Columbia have called for an extension of monitoring of Microsoft's business practices until November 2012.
They claim that little has changed in the OS and browser spaces since the 2002 antitrust case ruled against Microsoft. In their most recent brief, the states countered Microsoft's contention that Web-based companies — Google, Salesforce.com, Yahoo, eBay and others — and new Web-centric technologies constitute what Microsoft dubbed a "competitive alternative to Windows."
Not even close, said the states, claiming that while these companies' products provide functionality for users they still rely on Operating Systems and browsers — the two spaces where Microsoft dominates.
Experts were apparently even more damning, claiming competition in the market has not been restored since 2002 and that the collective powers of Google, Firefox and Web 2.0 are about as effective as a one legged man in a butt-kicking contest when it comes to unsettling Microsoft's monopoly of the market."
Money! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Money! (Score:5, Insightful)
But according to the states (Score:4, Insightful)
there are no viable alternatives.
The thing is is there are viable alternatives however MS lobbyist keep using FUD to scare states from using these, including open source, alternatives. I'm typing this in Firefox running in Tiger, no I didn't upgrade to Leopard even though I have the dvd, on a MacBook Pro. For my office suite I use NeoOffice, the Mac centric version of Open Office. With it I can open and save documents in MS Office 2007's .docx format.
FalconRe: (Score:3, Insightful)
What they're talking about is viable alternatives for the government department with thousands of documents, dozens of databases and systems which interact with each other and the outside world which have been built up over the course of many years.
Yes, there are alternatives. But the sheer quantity of work involved in rolling them out is immense. I suspect many of these states want a drop-in alternative where they can h
Re:But according to the states (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:But according to the states (Score:4, Interesting)
Wouldn't it sound terribly fascist if your public administration got a parking lot manufactured by Smart which accomodates only the measures of Smart vehicles, thereby forcing all employees and visitors to get a smart? yet we accept similar stunts in software.
Isn't it right to devote resources to make public property accessible to people with disabilities? Didn't we rightfully devote resources to ensure equal opportunities regardless the gender? So I want equal opportunity for operating systems and applications, provided they try to adhere to open standards. I'm helping even people who prefer to stay locked in, as I'm forcing MS to fight and have better pricing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You've just stated why Microsoft is so obsessed with making sure that schools run nothing but MS software. They're willing to do anything, including donating free computers with free software, on the condition that the schools don't use non-MS software. They understand that most people think like you do, and if linux is allowed in a school system,
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Market Capitalization tells another story (Score:5, Insightful)
I think their point is that Microsoft doesn't have significant competitors in the two areas in which they feel Microsoft had a monopoly: operating systems and browsers. Google produce neither (directly), and most of GOOG's value is in the search space, where Microsoft were never accused of having a monopoly in the first place.
Or in other words, the fact that General Electric has a market value around 340 billion dollars is irrelevant to the case against Microsoft. You could argue that Google has some relevance because all of their services are accessed via a web browser running on an OS.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If all it comes down to is operating systems and browsers then there are alternative operating systems and alternative browsers that "do it (support standards) better than Microsoft does." I think that real crux of the complaint against Microsoft is that despite all of the Web 2.0 and other nonsense that is coming out, there still isn't a c
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The crux of the complaint against Microsoft is that they have a monopoly on operating systems and browsers, regardless of the reasons for that. It has nothing to do with whether or not other people provide standards-based technologies. The states are saying is that since the market situation hasn't changed, neither should the oversight -- that, essentially, until such time as the market diminishes their monopoly through whatever means, they
Re:Market Capitalization tells another story (Score:4, Insightful)
Also network effects.
I do think you are right about the monopoly in the mind of the consumers. Everyone I know of who has been persuaded to try Linux or MacOS prefers them: but it remains hard to persuade people to try anything new (presumable because they think the learning curve is as steep as that of Windows).
Re:Market Capitalization tells another story (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Market Capitalization tells another story (Score:5, Insightful)
To destroy Microsoft, all one would need to do is;
1) Disallow Volume Discounts to OEMS. A standard price for Windows for all.
2) Disallow "Exclusivity" clauses in OEM contracts. OEMS should be allowed to sell whatever OS they care to without penalty.
3) Stop hiding the cost of Windows in the price of the PC. The PC hardware should be offered at $X and the purchaser then offered a selection of OS and support options to choose from.
4) Force MS to adopted accepted industry standards and disallow the use of proprietary protocols and formatswhich are designed solely as a means to lock in users to the Microsoft platform.
Do these things and Microsoft's "monopoly" would disappear within a couple of years.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
2. Even better. 3. Offering other OSs should still be the choice of the OEMs. 4. Disallowing proprietary formats could be going too far. Force compatibility with ODF, sure. But people will stop using
Re:Market Capitalization tells another story (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, it exists in data formats, communication protocols and application lockin.
When we have communication protocols, document and other data formats that are open and implementable by anyone, and when we have applications that are portable across operating systems, then there'll be no monopoly.
Neither will happen while Microsoft is running the show.
Re:Market Capitalization tells another story (Score:5, Interesting)
Exchange exists as it does not because it's the best email/calendaring server, because it's not, but because it offered a better environment than Notes and met the X.500 requirements the government set out, well, sort of, they're actually not compliant, but that's a different story, something to do with case sensitivity....
There's far better email servers out there, and far better clients than Outlook, and far better calendaring servers. There's just not a client that ties them together as well yet, and that's a shame.
And just to bring it back on topic - the states are right - nothing has yet changed in the desktop space - MS is still the dominant by far player, the OS has yet to be replaced. (Hints of what might come after Vista are presaged by the wonders of the likes of cio.com, if you believe them. IE, by sole virtue of being "part" of the OS, is the dominant browser, but its market share appears to be rapidly falling over the past year or so, and may (hopefully) show the future trend of the OS. If you've tried the latest release of OOo, then you'll know that OOo is a viable replacement for Office, and a welcome one considering the pain that O2007 is causing some of us at least that are forced to use it.
I will predict that in the next 3-4 years, the landscape will change radically. MS will still be a powerhouse, but will just be the 400 pound gorilla, being much chastised and otherwise reduced from its former 800 pound size. ODF will probably become the standard, whether MS wants it to or not, and Office will fall rather rapidly from its perch. Look for this to happen within 12 months of 02003 being EOL'd and unsupported. Look for Apple to make further inroads in market share, as more and more people buy their laptops. Watch Dell implode as it loses the top spot. Watch Linux, probably in the form of Ubuntu, finally make inroads in marketshare, and possibly even into the business workspace. All this by the end of 2010.
Rather than mod me down - care to make your own predictions?
Mod you down? (Score:4, Funny)
Are you new here or what? You just went on a tirade against Microsoft, said how Linux and Apple were trending to take market share from them and sang the praises of OpenOffice.org. Then you invite people on Slashdot to mod you down. For what? You're preaching smack in the middle of a HUGE choir.
I'm surprised you're not +10 Godlike by now.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Market Capitalization tells another story (Score:4, Informative)
The win32 API is a train wreck in some areas, and overall windows is probably more complex than it should be, but there's nothing particularly wrong with the kernel.
Google's business is primarily advertising... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We will know when... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Judge Jackson specifically said they weren't. Think about the implications of this. It says that people really have no choice. And yet there are plenty of people reading this thread who have chosen to use these products instead of Windows. I don't see why this
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine that your the CIO of a fortune 500 company... could you standardize on either product and get business done effectively? Not likely, without a least a few windows machines around to handle proprietary software, to handle document compatibility issues, etc.
I think that the day is very near... essentially there are only a few areas where MS products are so dominate in the marketplace that
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most companies rely on a significant amount of software which is only available for Windows. The competition for these pieces of software on non-MS platforms is not noteworthy.
Consider graphic design... Adobe (and similar) products aren't available on Linux (but are for Mac). Don't even try to argue for Linux-based alternatives.
Consider engineering/architecture... 3D design packages and PCB design packages are all Wind
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
There is no Linux alternative to Illustrator, InDesign and GoLive, especially when Bridge is considered. I would hate to have to think about trying to composite a book on Linux, and implementing a decent RIP with color management on Linux? Hiring a developer makes the $20,000USD Xerox or Heidelberg would charge for a decent system seem like nothing.
As for 3D design: Vectorworks does OK, but it's no AutoCAD. And I have been wanting a high-end Mac PCB package with a decent pSp
Re: (Score:2)
Love it or hate it, the brilliance of Microsoft was embracing and coddling the developer.
Re: (Score:3)
Fact is, many, if not the majority of, gamers don't care about Windows' and Linux' conflicting ideologies. To them, Windows will be free because it either came with their computer or was handed to them from some friend (this includes BitT
Re: (Score:3)
If Ubuntu were capable of running directx games without an emulator
You can drop the 'without an emulator' here. No one sensible cares if their games run with an emulator or not, they care whether they run fast. WINE is not exactly an emulator any more than Windows is an emulator; they both implement the same APIs and translate them into calls that the underlying hardware understands. The thing that matters with WINE is how easy it is to install and run the game, and how well and fast it runs. For some games, WINE runs faster than Windows, but the installation is still
Re: (Score:3)
There's a difference between being effective competition (on a marketwide level) and being a viable alternative (on an individual level).
Judge Jackson was not evaluating Linux or the Mac OS on their technical merits. He was simply stating the fact that neither competes directly in the primarily OEM market for consumer and
Just to clarify something... (Score:2)
Is Microsoft a monopoly because no one can compete with it, or can no one compete with Microsoft because it is a monopoly?
Re: (Score:2)
At various times in the past decades, each has been the case more than the other. Both factors reinforce the other, as well, which is the whole point of placing restrictions on how monopolies may compete.
Re:We will know when... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
On the other hand, an app written with Gtk/Qt, using backend APIs like SDL and OpenGL might even be compilable on di
Re:We will know when... (Score:5, Interesting)
Note, this doesn't mean I think Microsoft's monopoly is good. It's very bad for the industry. Just pointing out that when you break up a monopoly (and I believe market forces broke up IBMs) then you do have a chance for improvement.
TW
Re: (Score:2)
It used to be, but as hardware prices have fallen and Windows prices have risen, that has changed. Now the OS is often the single most expensive component of a computer.
Re: (Score:2)
We won't know that there is competition in the marketplace until another monopoly has replaced Microsoft's monopoly.
We will know there's competition when we have choices as to what apps, OSes, and other software we use and still be able to create, view, and share documents whether word processing docs, spread sheets, or webpages.
FalconRe: (Score:2)
XP-15% Vista-3% Windows 7-15%
No OS competition? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Pondering that quote, I really don't want the world of computing to go back to the way things were back in the early 1980s. There were so many types of computer systems and operating systems to choose from. Shall I buy a TRS-80? IBM PC? Amiga? Apple Macintosh? Atari ST? It was really annoying. Right now, we're realistically down
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:No OS competition? (Score:5, Insightful)
Part of the problem back in those days, particular from the late 1970s through the mid-1980s was that sharing of information was quite difficult between platforms. Create a file on a Commodore 64 and you'd probably have a bitch of a time transferring it to someone running an Apple 2 or a TRS-80 Model IV. Yes, we had some widely used operating systems like CP/M, but they tended to run on more expensive hardware than the home computers of that period. Even if you had a modem, it was probably 150 or 300baud, which made non-trivial file transfers a rather excruciating experience.
By the end of the 1980s and into the early 1990s, we had faster 2400bps and 14.4k modems, LAN hardware had come down in price quite a bit allowing heterogenerous networks, and the need for interoperability in the small and mid-sized business markets pretty much weeded the systems that didn't play well together, not to mention platforms that didn't have decent business and/or desktop publishing software. Good systems like the Amiga died a slow death, leaving us with Microsoft's dominant position and Apple in an extremely distant second.
However, the fact is that we have a platform-independent networking system in TCP/IP and its various child protocols like HTTP, the need for document interoperability has dispensed with a lot of the weird ASCII dialects that had plagued earlier generations of computer users. We are at a point where we could probably do reasonably well with a large number of platforms, providing that they adhere to some basic standards. Does it matter now whether you compose a document in ODF in OpenOffice.org, open and modify it in KOffice, and then send it off to Bob using some other ODF-compliant wordprocessor? It shouldn't, but Microsoft has pursued a consistent policy of undermining any attempt at open standards, right down to silly little ones like messing up bottom posting of email.
A healthy market, with open standards and basic compliance to them, could support any number of hardware platforms and operating systems. An extremely large number of hardware platforms have been using *nix and enjoying this for decades, but Microsoft has stunted the PC, and everyone ends up having to reverse engineer their protocols and formats, and playing a constant game of catch-up. That's not the way it should be. Systems should compete on their merits, not on how effectively the companies that create them can create lock-in.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We are at a point where we could probably do reasonably well with a large number of platforms, providing that they adhere to some basic standards.
I think this is especially the case considering that most of the platforms these days have settled on doing things in a pretty unix-y kind of way. Many file formats are the same, there are a lot of similarities in directory structures, and even a lot of programs and tools can by shared across different operating systems. I can run OpenOffice in Gnome on Solari
Re: (Score:2)
On the server, as far as "Intel-based" is concerned, we have -
1) OS X Server
2) *BSD
3) *LINUX
4) Solaris
5) OpenVMS
On the desktop we have -
1) OS X
2) Linux desktops
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You had IBM (and clones) in the workplace, Apple in desktop publishing, Atari ST with musicians, Amiga with gamers. There were tons of small software houses making various software for all the machines. The only people paying more than 50 bucks for their word processors were IBM PC users.( I utterly loathe what the Microsoft/Intel dominance did for softwar
Apple stocks owned by Microsoft (Score:3, Informative)
ms has only a nonvoting portion of the stock. of course, this stock is worth several hundred million...
I heard about MS buying the non-voting Apple stock when it was announced in 1997, but after reading your post I was wondering what happened to the stock so I Googled and found this From Apple's 2003 SEC filing: [metafilter.com]:
"In August 1997, the Company and Microsoft Corporation (Microsoft) entered into patent cross license and technology agreements. In addition, Microsoft purchased 150,000 shares of Apple Series A
I agree (Score:5, Interesting)
Unfortunately, however, no matter how much people monitor and complain, the corperate-friendly USA will just give them a slap on the wrist and say, "Bad Microsoft! Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to get back ot using internet Explorer and Windows Messenger, and bombing those damn terrorists!"
Re: (Score:2)
Own worst enemy. (Score:5, Insightful)
My personal opinion is that by the time consumers are truly "forced" into another Microsoft upgrade cycle, viable and attractive product alternatives produced by Google and others will already be gaining significant ground. Even in the face of what many consider corrupt business practices on the part of Microsoft, the market is deciding the best route, albeit slowly. It just so happens that the market is finally starting to feel the evolutionary push of technology moving in leaps, rather than a slow progression.
Re: (Score:2)
That might be true, but my guess is that there are only slightly fewer that are running stories about the inevitable adoption of Vista in time. "We" (as a society) have no practical other choice. This is the entire point of trust-busting. To put it bluntly, we're paying a lot for shoddy crud products and we have no
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Now, I am forced to use Win32 apps at work, but I'm in the military, an organization that takes a long time to change anything once it's implemented. If I were still a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll have whatever it is you are smoking (Score:5, Informative)
Popular news and media outlets are routinely running stories about the slow adoption of Vista by major corporations and small businesses alike. New sales of Office are apparently lagging, too.
Microsoft had a spectacular first quarter.
Tremendous strength in Windows, Office, and Server products. Revenues in each division up 20%. Microsoft Q1 2008 By The Numbers [microsoft-watch.com]
Office 2007 at retail "sells like gangbusters."
Office commands 17.4 percent of all PC software dollar volume, including PC games. When people go to the store to buy software, there's a good chance they'll end up buying Microsoft Office." PC Software's Great Year [microsoft-watch.com] [October 20]
The October OS Platform Stats [w3schools.com] from w3Schools are suggestive;
Vista at 6%. Up 4% from March 07.
Linux at 3%. Up 1% from March 03.
OSX at 4%. Up 2% from March 03.
Re:I'll have whatever it is you are smoking (Score:4, Interesting)
FOSS software, despite the best hallucinations of the slashdot crowd, isn't making a dent in MS where it counts: the Bottom Line. We need to wake up, people! We are not doing enough to break this monopoly. And it will have to be the geeks that do it, because the government won't. I realize I'm ranting, but I just get so frustrated by this smug sense of inevitability that is so often on display here. Do you think MS will go down without a fight? Do you think that a company with almost limitless cash is going to be threatened by anything less than all-out war from the FOSS community?
Here are the facts:
- No one is going to do anything about MS's monopoly.
- The monopoly will get worse.
- The only people who have a chance to break it are the geeks.
- Even then it would take a united effort from all of us.
-
I defy anyone to disprove any of my facts. Go ahead and mod me down. MS wins again.
I'm confused (Score:4, Insightful)
Isn't that... bad?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But kicking contest (Score:5, Funny)
There's a one legged guy in the town where I live, he lost his leg in a motorcycle accident. He's a nice guy, friendly and all. I've seen him kick a piñata to pieces with a single roundhouse kick. He landed awkwardly, but it had the desired result.
The moral is: never underestimate the one-legged guy!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Enough 'Monitoring' already (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Enough 'Monitoring' already (Score:4, Interesting)
Did they bother to find out why Vista needs so much hardware resources and makes existing hardware obsolete?
I think the regulators must force Microsoft to open source Windows 2000 and Office 2000 - the entire source code. Anyone should be free to modify Win2K and O2K and make a good desktop OS that needs just 128MB RAM to run - without breaking every known hardware and software - like Vista does.
In a year, we will see lots of genuine competition.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you really honestly believe an operating system and a document editor need more than 64MB of RAM to run? What Microsoft has managed to do in the absence of competition is to continue to spread the myth of "Upgrade and you shall be liberated".
Even the EU remedy has been only to release the specs for some protocols, not the source code itself. If Microsoft is forced to release the exact source code ALONG WITH the documented protocols, under an 'Ope
Don't know if this opinion is reasonable: (Score:3, Interesting)
Suggestions even 5 years ago that Xbox would beat or rival Sony and Nintendo in the console market was unheard of, the point being, that Microsoft has a 'monopoly' on a large and diverse business and consumer userbase. Apple comes out with the iPod. There was already a 'healthy' competition with MP3 players but when MS saw the numbers the iPod was making Apple, I think it saw a great opportunity. Ditto, I think the iPhone, the Blackberry and other PDAs, etc.
If the government can somehow restrict it from going into new markets and letting some healthy competition grow, I don't see this as being a bad idea. The threat isn't MS entering other areas of business in itself. The problem is its huge cash reserves. The money and technology component, I see, remain exclusive to MS. IBM have a ton of cash too - but IBM has changed its core businesses instead of trying to gobble up small and major competitions in a wide array of industries. (yes, the irony IBM is making the chip for the XBox 360
So ... a failure? (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
In other words... (Score:2)
Usual Crap... (Score:4, Funny)
So simply shut your eyes and ears when "experts" say some thing. Ten years from now they would be saying: Well, there is nothing that can displace Linux from the desktops. OS "XYZ" (some futuristic OS not Microsoft) is not remotely capable of offering a competition to Linux's monopoly and blah blah blah.
Alternate Reality Check!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't you think that Apple will continue its marketing scheme? What if we lived in an alternate reality where Apple was 95% of the market? Don't you think they would be accused of the same thing but even more so? Stop your envy of market share Apple!!! You're no better in the way you do business.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Hey! Don't underestimate that one leg! (Score:2)
I mean that both literally AND metaphorically.
What about word processors? (Score:5, Insightful)
Internet Explorer is not free... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The KEY to breaking Microsoft's monopoly.... (Score:5, Interesting)
You need to break the monopoly of financial and other business institutions relying on Excel and Microsoft Office. Don't tell me about Pages or Keynote or whatever other software there is. Sure, it's easy to use, very pretty... but Office is a product that Microsoft doesn't fuck around with, and produces (and I'm waiting for my hateful comments) -- AWESOMELY. It's the best software that Microsoft makes. Office 2007 is a great step forward in usability, stability, intelligence, and workflow. You can't interoperate your Pages information with your Keynote information, or vice versa. But in Excel, highlight some cells, copy, and dump it into a fully editable Word document. Then take a Visio diagram and dump it into the same Word Doc -- still editable. Collaborate easily on Sharepoint (now also part of Office). With Groove, you collaborate even further at the same time. And it's all stable, clean, and simple to use software with a powerful macro language (though I'm sure it's not the best) that allows you to automate and get information from different APIs (just walk into any financial institution and you'll see HUGE spreadsheets that download information out of Reuters and Bloomberg, email folks about updates, send updates to Blackberries formatted properly, etc).
Break THAT monopoly, and Windows won't even matter.
And don't mention Open Office. It's a joke compared to MS Office right now.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
AT&T and the BEIC were *coercive* monopolists (they had access to government coercion to run out competitors). Standard Oil's a tired example that was on its way to being competed out of existence when the Sherman Act was run through Congress. Like Microsoft in the early days, they were a monopoly of infancy (the entire oil business was less than 1% of the American GDP at Standard's height), born out of the simple fact that one big company in an unproven market can gain capital more easily than a polygl
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most evil corp? (Score:2, Offtopic)
I agree. I used to get really exercised about M$, but then I started reading about Monsanto. M$ is greedy and unethical, but their behavior doesn't usually kill or maim people. Monsanto is another story.
Re:States just want more money for budget deficits (Score:4, Insightful)
Year of the Linux desktop (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So help me understand.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This makes about as much sense as idiots who claim Apple has a "monopoly" on the Ipod. It's just stupid on every level. A mo
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps this exampe will cause understanding: Microsoft Windows Vista. If they can produce a product which is universally known for being terrible in multiple ways and still make bank, you should be able to see this is a hint that something is wrong. In other words, bad or even just _mediocre_ products usually have negative financial implications for businesses in
Re: (Score:2)
Second - The Xbox 360 is doing just fine. So I'm not sure what y
Re: (Score:2)
Apple for example doesn't even compete in the low end PC market. There is no $500 Mac laptop or $500 Mac PC (I'm talking about bundles with monitor and printer
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Linux is not a valid alternative because it is free.
Things that cost less have less value for the simple reason that they cost less. Things that are free are worth nothing. It has nothing to do with quality, it's about the perceptions of idiots.
You try to buy a new notebook and they all have windows on them, or at least something at the top of the page on the website saying "Dull recommends Windows Fista Pleb Edition" and it's included in the price of the laptop, or at least it appears to be.
So captain i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Both MS and the government are aware that OSes and browsers as we know them today will eventually pass and be replaced by something else. The whole point of the regulatory oversight is to ensure that "something else" gets to be developed through market competition rather than coercive contracts.
Re: (Score:2)