Cringely: Ms Can't Lose
<div class="IPBDescription">or, compliance costs more than violation</div> In <a href='http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20040401.html' target='_blank'>this</a> article Cringely asserts that Microsoft continues to violate anti-trust laws and the terms of its own settlements because, well, its just plain cheaper than playing fair.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Take this example of the European Union fining Microsoft. It looks tough, but Microsoft gets to appeal, remember, and this particular part of the EU bureaucracy has been reversed on appeal two out of the last three times. So whatever the fine, Microsoft has two-to-one odds of not having to pay it, or at least of having it substantially reduced. And while the fine looks like a lot of money, to Microsoft it isn't. That $600 million is the amount by which Microsoft increases its cash hoard in TWO WEEKS. Even if the EU had hit Microsoft with its maximum allowable fine of 10 percent of gross global turnover or about $3 billion, it wouldn't have mattered. Paying a $3 billion fine to keep moving a $10 billion annual European cash machine that yields $7 billion in annual profits is a no-brainer. Would you pay $3 billion knowing that doing so would bring in a net profit of $4 billion PER YEAR, especially given the likelihood that the final judgement would be reduced or eliminated entirely? OF COURSE you'd pay the $3 billion, anyone in that position would. And nobody in that position, having paid the $3 billion (or $600 million) would put much effort into real compliance, since THAT's the thing that threatens profits, not paying artificially-capped fines.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Take this example of the European Union fining Microsoft. It looks tough, but Microsoft gets to appeal, remember, and this particular part of the EU bureaucracy has been reversed on appeal two out of the last three times. So whatever the fine, Microsoft has two-to-one odds of not having to pay it, or at least of having it substantially reduced. And while the fine looks like a lot of money, to Microsoft it isn't. That $600 million is the amount by which Microsoft increases its cash hoard in TWO WEEKS. Even if the EU had hit Microsoft with its maximum allowable fine of 10 percent of gross global turnover or about $3 billion, it wouldn't have mattered. Paying a $3 billion fine to keep moving a $10 billion annual European cash machine that yields $7 billion in annual profits is a no-brainer. Would you pay $3 billion knowing that doing so would bring in a net profit of $4 billion PER YEAR, especially given the likelihood that the final judgement would be reduced or eliminated entirely? OF COURSE you'd pay the $3 billion, anyone in that position would. And nobody in that position, having paid the $3 billion (or $600 million) would put much effort into real compliance, since THAT's the thing that threatens profits, not paying artificially-capped fines.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Comments
Yeah, hell is freezing over...
I wish a judge would step up and make Mirco$oft pay enough as so that they HAVE break-even for three years otherwise go bankrupt. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Yeah, hell is freezing over... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Expect to see MS abandoning the alliance having not produced anything (at least nothing of value to SUN) in the near future. This is how all partnerships (that I know of) with MS end.
I wish a judge would step up and make Mirco$oft pay enough as so that they HAVE break-even for three years otherwise go bankrupt. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
money is not an issue for microsoft
they need legal limitations
like being forced to bring out the source code, that was a good one <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Uh no it isn't.
That would probably kill off the whole PC Market. Or make everyone switch to a Mac.
Seriously though why do loads of you hate Microsoft so much? I believe most of the time you do it just because it's "cool" to hate Microsoft. Seriously if it wasn't for MS we probably would be all sitting on Mac's or Still with Command-Line interfaces trying vainly to run this program or having so many compatibility problems it would make our heads sore.
OK So MS use kinda nazi business tactics, BUT THEY ARE A BUSINESS THEY ARE OUT TO MAKE MONEY (OMG TOPICAL!)
I will firmly stand by Microsoft by the fact that their products are quality. Windows XP is by far the best OS I've ever used and things like Direct X make it easy for developers to introduce flashy effects into their game engines.
Seriously if you hate Microsoft THAT MUCH, you should get rid of everything MS and run Linux and then also new emulate anything that has anything to do with MS, you know like Half-Life because its for a Microsoft system. Plus emulating anything annoys me, if your going to emulate something do it on the proper platform just don't play Half-Life on Linux just because you hate MS or you want to increase you E-Pen**. Thats just like saying "I hate you but I'm still going to borrow your car"
People who loathe microsoft because its 'cool'.
People who loathe people who loathe microsoft, because its "jumping off the bandwagon, and jumping onto the OTHER bandwagon attacking the FIRST bandwagon". and,
People who actually know what they're talking about.
I dont like microsoft because their products are crappy. Here's a link for you, if you say its 'business tactics': <a href='http://opensource.org/halloween/' target='_blank'>http://opensource.org/halloween/</a> but then again, it probably won't change your mind, because bandwagons are built upon 'faith'... hello.
I WOULD move to linux, and in fact i have on another machine and am learning it now, and so far apart from the learning curve, i would seriously reccomend it to anyone and prefer it. It allows me to customise my computer way more than microsoft products do.
Only reason i use microsoft windows xp on this machine [and right now im using mozilla] is because i have 260 gigs of NTFS harddrives.
Venmoch, try and figure out which group i've got you pinned down in. Uhuh.
Edit: An edit because i didnt want to make a new post. There are quite a few things that people use microsoft for, simply because Microsoft has a monopoly [yes, you know! monopoly!] and there is simply nothing else out there. So for every time microsoft gets rid of something else, we are being denied technological advancements, just so Microsoft can add another billion to its yearly profit. And i sincerely doubt that your hypothetical 'future without microsoft' scenario is very accurate. Call it a gut feeling, but i doubt microsoft is aiming for 'the next big thing', unless another company has got 'the next big thing', and microsoft is aiming with a shotgun.
Other companies were already building Mac clone GUIs when MS introduced Windows (in fact, Apple once made a version of its OS for x86! The project was called "Star Trek" and was canceled due to internal Apple polotics, naturally, so its doubtfull that x86 users would still be stuck on command line interfaces. And hell, without the Windows monopoly who knows what kind of OSs could have sprung forth?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->OK So MS use kinda nazi business tactics, BUT THEY ARE A BUSINESS THEY ARE OUT TO MAKE MONEY (OMG TOPICAL!)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So? Doesn't mean I can't hate them for freaking with the market, maintianing an ILLEGAL monopoly, trying their damnedest to crush open standards in the name of The One Microsoft Way, ect.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I will firmly stand by Microsoft by the fact that their products are quality. Windows XP is by far the best OS I've ever used and things like Direct X make it easy for developers to introduce flashy effects into their game engines.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While the quality of their produts is a matter of opinion, your comments about DirectX are misleading. OpenGL and other forms of graphics acceleration existed before Direct3D, and indeed for a good deal of D3D's life it was pretty bad (see John Carmack's old rant on it if you don't believe me). What does attracts developers to DirectX is the more or less seamless integration between its various components (DirectSound, DirectInput, ect), flashy effects can be had just about anywhere.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Seriously if you hate Microsoft THAT MUCH, you should get rid of everything MS and run Linux and then also new emulate anything that has anything to do with MS<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If I assume that by 'new emulate' you meant 'not emulate' thered still be a good portion of computer users that do exactly that. You can throw a stone and hit 30 of them on slashdot.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Plus emulating anything annoys me, if your going to emulate something do it on the proper platform<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That would be a waste of time, I mean, I can run an instance of Windows inside Bochs on a Windows box, but what would be the point? But somehow I don't think thats what you meant, what you probably meant was: don't emulate. Well, I'm afraid that just isn't always an option, take a look at the doomsday project (i think that was the one...), which needs emulation to work nowadays (IIRC). Then theres the NES games, I mean christ I can only stand to fix the NES so many times...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->just don't play Half-Life on Linux just because you hate MS or you want to increase you E-Pen**. Thats just like saying "I hate you but I'm still going to borrow your car"<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not at all. See, by buying Half-Life, your supporting Valve, a game company. And by running it on Linux you are denying Microsoft a monopoly on that game. Of course, one could argue that by supporting Valve when it writes a Windows only game you are supporting MS... Anyways, gaming on 'alternative' OSs is kind of a chicken-egg problem, few gamers will switch to Linux because it doesn't have alot of games, and few developers will port to linux because it doesn't have a lot of gamers. Implimenting the Win32 API on linux in order to run games made for Windows is one way Linux advocates are attempting to overcome this.
If you are a Linux user than I apologise for the rather scatter-shot comments earlier but its something I've always wanted to say.
The problem with Linux is that it hasn't made much advances in the "Ease-Of-Use" factor, from many people what I've heard is yes, Linux is great it probably works really well <b>BUT</b> it is a pain to install (Unless you go for a Distro like Mandrake or Red Hat) and configuring it to work well is a major problem. Unless Linux gets a little more user friendly people will not use it. Practically in a business they don't want a System that will take an age to impliment and then the other problems that arise. They want a System that works and works now. Which is why many of them use Windows.
The Mac has the same problem. Sure the PC's may be faster, sure the OS may be less prone to crashing and yes they may look nice. But until they break their "Pretty PC for Pretty Job" image they will always have a problem getting market penetration.
Sure the market may be much more "free" if MS was to take a smaller share of market penetration while it was Apple that started the whole "Lets Make A PC easy to use" ideal Microsoft improved on it and provided it to the consumer. That and many OS producers sat firmly in their "Its my PC so it'll use MY OS"
Oh and finally....
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
So? Doesn't mean I can't hate them for freaking with the market, maintianing an ILLEGAL monopoly, trying their damnedest to crush open standards in the name of The One Microsoft Way, ect.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Surely that the whole point of any Business? I'm sure any business would want other businesses and other alternatives squashed out if it challenges them? Welcome to the wonderfully unfair world of Capitalism <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
So? Doesn't mean I can't hate them for freaking with the market, maintianing an ILLEGAL monopoly, trying their damnedest to crush open standards in the name of The One Microsoft Way, ect.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Surely that the whole point of any Business? I'm sure any business would want other businesses and other alternatives squashed out if it challenges them? Welcome to the wonderfully unfair world of Capitalism <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Alright, lets extend your argument to the Mob. Now, the point of the Mob is the exact same as that of a corporate entity, to make money. Mobs sometimes commit acts that are illegal to further this agenda, welcom to the wonderfully unfair world of Capitalism. Get it now? Microsoft's purpose may be to make money, but it is doing it through illegal methods that ultimately hurt the consumer, and much like the Mob, they're buying their way out of punishment. If that isn't a good enough basis for hatred then what is?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The problem with Linux is that it hasn't made much advances in the "Ease-Of-Use" factor, from many people what I've heard is yes, Linux is great it probably works really well <b>BUT</b> it is a pain to install (Unless you go for a Distro like Mandrake or Red Hat) and configuring it to work well is a major problem. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In general, though it has made significant advances in dumbing down everything, I find this to be an accurate statement. I know I say this almost every time linux comes up, but it just does some things in a way that will NEVER be as simple as the way some other OSs do it. I've come up with a solution to I feel is adaquate to alievate alot of the problems I have with it, but I'm not going to post it here, look for it in the discussion forums sometime when I get around to it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The Mac has the same problem. Sure the PC's may be faster, sure the OS may be less prone to crashing and yes they may look nice. But until they break their "Pretty PC for Pretty Job" image they will always have a problem getting market penetration.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Personally I always felt it was the cost of hardware that was getting them. Mac users tend to emphasize that the cost difference isn't as bad as it appears (mostly due to hardware quality), and this is generally true. But I still think Apple would benefit greatly from trying to undercut their Windows-box selling equivelents for a while.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->while it was Apple that started the whole "Lets Make A PC easy to use" ideal Microsoft improved on it and provided it to the consumer.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would have to disagree. Frankly I think Apple lost some usability in its more recent OSs to compete with MS on the prettiness front. You can find out why <a href='http://www.asktog.com/columns/022DesignedToGiveFitts.html' target='_blank'>here</a>. Its in the form of a quiz but it is a good introduction to the problem.