It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Microsoft are at it again(29 posts)(29 posts)
(29 posts)
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Posted March 31, 2011
Look I know its Yahoo "news" but have a look at THIS SHIT


Shouldnt someone file one of these against Microsoft due to almost EVERY prebuilt computer in the world coming with thier software installed.

Lets face it, more people buy prebuilts than build thier own.
Posted March 31, 2011
avatar
reaver894: Look I know its Yahoo "news" but have a look at THIS SHIT


Shouldnt someone file one of these against Microsoft due to almost EVERY prebuilt computer in the world coming with thier software installed.

Lets face it, more people buy prebuilts than build thier own.
MS has had these filed against them over the years, and honestly they've paid the piper in some of these cases. All they're saying here is "fair is fair, apply the same rules to Google." If you look at it that way it doesn't seem so insane.
Post edited March 31, 2011 by orcishgamer
Posted March 31, 2011
What's the strange thing here?

Google's "Sorry for STEALING your private data" doesn't work anymore.

A rule is a rule! It should be for everybody. I'm sure Apple will be next. :p
Posted March 31, 2011
avatar
reaver894: Look I know its Yahoo "news" but have a look at THIS SHIT


Shouldnt someone file one of these against Microsoft due to almost EVERY prebuilt computer in the world coming with thier software installed.

Lets face it, more people buy prebuilts than build thier own.
avatar
orcishgamer: MS has had these filed against them over the years, and honestly they've paid the piper in some of these cases. All they're saying here is "fair is fair, apply the same rules to Google." If you look at it that way it doesn't seem so insane.
Agreed. As the article says, Microsoft has learned the hard way that antitrust complaints can be really disruptive to a business. They've paid through the nose for many of their practices.
It's only fair that the same happens to Google, who holds a similar market share as Microsoft used to.
Posted March 31, 2011
avatar
reaver894: Look I know its Yahoo "news" but have a look at THIS SHIT


Shouldnt someone file one of these against Microsoft due to almost EVERY prebuilt computer in the world coming with thier software installed.

Lets face it, more people buy prebuilts than build thier own.
avatar
orcishgamer: MS has had these filed against them over the years, and honestly they've paid the piper in some of these cases. All they're saying here is "fair is fair, apply the same rules to Google." If you look at it that way it doesn't seem so insane.
I hope Google "pay the piper" aswell then, just as a big fuck you to MS.

Although having said that MS did get beaten over the IE thing didnt they, one of the updates allowed you to choose another browser. (I guess it was for people who didnt know others existed.)
Posted March 31, 2011
Microsoft abusing the legal system isn't anything new. Just look at their patents. What I'm surprised by is that nobody's taken to royally destroying Intel.
Posted March 31, 2011
"The complaint charges that Google hurts competition by "walling off" content on its YouTube site, so other search engines cannot display accurate results"

This is true, though. The whole YouTube "experience" is crippled on WP if you don't want to break YouTube's TOS.
avatar
Navagon: Microsoft abusing the legal system isn't anything new. Just look at their patents. What I'm surprised by is that nobody's taken to royally destroying Intel.
Intel got their piece of the cake too. I think they were charged a few billion EUR.
Post edited March 31, 2011 by KavazovAngel
Posted March 31, 2011
avatar
orcishgamer: MS has had these filed against them over the years, and honestly they've paid the piper in some of these cases. All they're saying here is "fair is fair, apply the same rules to Google." If you look at it that way it doesn't seem so insane.
avatar
mystral: Agreed. As the article says, Microsoft has learned the hard way that antitrust complaints can be really disruptive to a business. They've paid through the nose for many of their practices.
It's only fair that the same happens to Google, who holds a similar market share as Microsoft used to.
True, but this couldn't be a more accurate example of "the pot calling the kettle black". The entire thing is kind of ironically funny, if you think about it.
Posted March 31, 2011
avatar
KavazovAngel: Intel got their piece of the cake too. I think they were charged a few billion EUR.
They did? Good.
Posted March 31, 2011
avatar
mystral: Agreed. As the article says, Microsoft has learned the hard way that antitrust complaints can be really disruptive to a business. They've paid through the nose for many of their practices.
It's only fair that the same happens to Google, who holds a similar market share as Microsoft used to.
avatar
cogadh: True, but this couldn't be a more accurate example of "the pot calling the kettle black". The entire thing is kind of ironically funny, if you think about it.
It IS funny, I won't deny that, but it's also both true and a good business move from Microsoft. I don't particularly like them (though I've mellowed on them since they've begun making actually good OS with XP and 7), but in this particular case they're in the right imo.
Posted March 31, 2011
avatar
KavazovAngel: Intel got their piece of the cake too. I think they were charged a few billion EUR.
avatar
Navagon: They did? Good.
I believe so. Apparently, they were paying major retailers not to recommend / sell AMD products, or something like that. Sorry if I'm mistaking with this one, but I'm 95% sure that was the case.

Yea, here is the thing: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30717099/
Post edited March 31, 2011 by KavazovAngel
Posted March 31, 2011
avatar
Navagon: They did? Good.
avatar
KavazovAngel: I believe so. Apparently, they were paying major retailers not to recommend / sell AMD products, or something like that. Sorry if I'm mistaking with this one, but I'm 95% sure that was the case.
Make it 100%, they did do that and they did have to pay a fine for it (not sure on the amount) as did the OEMs who took the "bribes" from Intel.
Posted March 31, 2011
avatar
mystral: Agreed. As the article says, Microsoft has learned the hard way that antitrust complaints can be really disruptive to a business. They've paid through the nose for many of their practices.
It's only fair that the same happens to Google, who holds a similar market share as Microsoft used to.
Yes, they added a browser selection option after/with SP3 for XP...and TBH, I still have IE as the default. It's faster than any other browser I've used - probably because it's half-built into the OS to begin with, but aside from that, NEVER had any troubles with using it. Chrome's a PoS. Safari's all but useless. So IE and FF for me....and FF only because I can use scripts and addons to get it half-way functional, the way I want....and my keyscrambler utility only works in/for FF and IE :P (encrypts all keystrokes at the kernel level, so keyloggers (if any) can't read your logins and passwords when you type them.)
Posted March 31, 2011
avatar
KavazovAngel: Yea, here is the thing: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30717099/
Eeeexcellent. I somehow completely missed the fact that anything was done about that.

Let's hope the US follows suit.
Posted March 31, 2011
This is a bit of tangent (so sorry about that), but it seems that Google is not backpedaling, but moving in a slight rearward direction on it's stance on openness (in relation to OEMS anyway). Probably had to happen eventually and reduced fragmentation will be good for the consumer. Though some OEMs are not happy about the increased policing.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_15/b4223041200216.htm
Over the past few months, according to several people familiar with the matter, Google has been demanding that Android licensees abide by "non-fragmentation clauses" that give Google the final say on how they can tweak the Android code—to make new interfaces and add services—and in some cases whom they can partner with. Google's Rubin says that such clauses have always been part of the Android license, but people interviewed for this story say that Google has recently tightened its policies. Facebook, for example, has been working to fashion its own variant of Android for smartphones. Executives at the social network are unhappy that Google gets to review Facebook's tweaks to Android, say two people who weren't comfortable being named talking about the business. Google has also tried to hold up the release of Verizon (VZ) Android devices that make use of Microsoft's (MSFT) rival Bing search engine, according to two people familiar with the discussions.

It's these types of actions that have prompted the gripes to the Justice Dept., says a person with knowledge of the matter. Google spokeswoman Shari Yoder Doherty declined to comment on Google and its partners or any complaints to the government.
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Microsoft are at it again(29 posts)(29 posts)
(29 posts)