On Nov 4, 7:38 am, anonym...@remailer.hastio.org wrote:
> The European Commission will soon decide whether computer operating systems, such as Microsoft's Windows, will have to be sold seperately with each computer, thereby fostering competition and development of an 'indigenous' operating system based on Linux.

Perhaps a better solution is mandatory INCLUSION of at least one other
operating system, or setting quotas for Microsoft, or setting terrifs
on PCs sold with Windows.

Clearly simple behavioral remedies imposed on Microsoft have not
worked. Microsoft has circumvented all of the measures imposed over
the last 20 years (the US began imposing santions as early as 1987),
and in many cases, Microsoft has continued to the very acts that were
ruled to be illegal in the first place, because Microsoft wrote the
settlement in a manner that was so misleading and confusing that the
regulating party thought it would lead to compliance. Microsoft knew
that there were loopholes, usually added at the last minute, that
would nullify any attempt to regulate them. In addition, the
settlements granted Microsoft executives immunity from prosecution,
and prevented double-jeopardy.

> The decision, expected within three months, will most likely seriously affect the shareprice of Microsoft (MSFT) as it is expected that numerous Linux vendors will undercut the price of Windows. There's even a small chance that Apple will offer its OS X operating system for generic Intel machines in the EU only.

This could be offset by a decision by Judge Kollar-Kotelly in the US
to NOT continue the enforcement of the settlement. The problem for
the Judge is that the settlement achieved NONE of it's intended goals,
Microsoft STILL uses it's monopoly power to blockade competition in
the OEM distribution channel, and Microsoft has EXTENDED it's
predatory behavior into other areas.

It seems that taxes, tarrifs, and quotas may be the only means
remaining to force the OEMs into shipping PCs featuring Linux into all
available markets. Quotas should be set for retail, corporate, and
online sales and shipments. Tarriffs or luxury taxes on PCs with
Windows preinstalled would also increase the public coffers as well as
provide incentives for OEMs to ship Linux PCs.

Keep in mind that Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, and other top Microsoft
stock-holders now get tax-free income because they funnel their
dividends into tax-free foundations. The problem is that the tax code
allows them to claim the equivalent portion of their salaries as the
tax deductable donation and then claim the dividend as tax-free.

As a result, Bill, Steve, and many others end up getting tax free
income by continuing business practices which have already been ruled
to be illegal.

Rex Ballard

Rex Ballard wrote:

> On Nov 4, 7:38 am, anonym...@remailer.hastio.org wrote:
>> The European Commission will soon decide whether computer operating
>> systems, such as Microsoft's Windows, will have to be sold seperately
>> with each computer, thereby fostering competition and development of an
>> 'indigenous' operating system based on Linux.
>
> Perhaps a better solution is mandatory INCLUSION of at least one other
> operating system, or setting quotas for Microsoft, or setting terrifs
> on PCs sold with Windows.

That I think is not fully productive because it implies that
somehow you can write into a supply contract that you
are filling your mandatory inclusion supply rule some monopoly
supply agreement at the expense of all other fair trade rules.

It should be that PCs should be sold separately with an OS
and the buyer of the PC is then given a choice based on
cost and impartial advise about what they should purchase
and why.

Its a big boon to open source and jobs for the EU if this is done
because it will be a mad scamble to fill the productivity
space with all kinds of tools that operate across different
OSes and data formats.

Something thats being held back at the moment by the tune
of at least 20 billion Euros per year.

On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:38:00 +0000, anonymous wrote:

> The European Commission will soon decide whether computer operating
> systems, such as Microsoft's Windows, will have to be sold seperately
> with each computer, thereby fostering competition and development of an
> 'indigenous' operating system based on Linux.

IMO, something as simple as being able to buy a computer WITHOUT msft OS
would make a huge difference. It's one less reason for those on the
fence to not make the switch to Linux because you still have to buy msft
windows even if you have no plan to use it. The ms-shill reply to this
is always some bs about how there are some PC offerings without windows,
but until the day comes when a person can go to Dell's web-site and order
*ANY* computer from their entire selection WITHOUT ms-windows and get a
price reduction to reflect that it does not include any ms-windows
overhead cost then this problem has still not been solved.




> The decision, expected
> within three months, will most likely seriously affect the shareprice of
> Microsoft (MSFT) as it is expected that numerous Linux vendors will
> undercut the price of Windows. There's even a small chance that Apple
> will offer its OS X operating system for generic Intel machines in the
> EU only.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
> The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header is
> unverified.

On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 05:46:40 -0800, Rex Ballard wrote:

> On Nov 4, 7:38 am, anonym...@remailer.hastio.org wrote:
>> The European Commission will soon decide whether computer operating
>> systems, such as Microsoft's Windows, will have to be sold seperately
>> with each computer, thereby fostering competition and development of an
>> 'indigenous' operating system based on Linux.
>
> Perhaps a better solution is mandatory INCLUSION of at least one other
> operating system, or setting quotas for Microsoft, or setting terrifs on
> PCs sold with Windows.
>
> Clearly simple behavioral remedies imposed on Microsoft have not worked.
> Microsoft has circumvented all of the measures imposed over the last 20
> years (the US began imposing santions as early as 1987), and in many
> cases, Microsoft has continued to the very acts that were ruled to be
> illegal in the first place, because Microsoft wrote the settlement in a
> manner that was so misleading and confusing that the regulating party
> thought it would lead to compliance. Microsoft knew that there were
> loopholes, usually added at the last minute, that would nullify any
> attempt to regulate them. In addition, the settlements granted
> Microsoft executives immunity from prosecution, and prevented
> double-jeopardy.
>

Great description! My opinion is that the gov't simply doesn't care
about enforcing antitrust because having long since been bought off by
corporate interest of big oil, telecom, etc, the groundwork has all been
laid and msft just came along at the right time and is, as usual,
exploiting the work of others (in this case, decades of greasing
political palms).


>> The decision, expected within three months, will most likely seriously
>> affect the shareprice of Microsoft (MSFT) as it is expected that
>> numerous Linux vendors will undercut the price of Windows. There's even
>> a small chance that Apple will offer its OS X operating system for
>> generic Intel machines in the EU only.
>
> This could be offset by a decision by Judge Kollar-Kotelly in the US to
> NOT continue the enforcement of the settlement. The problem for the
> Judge is that the settlement achieved NONE of it's intended goals,
> Microsoft STILL uses it's monopoly power to blockade competition in the
> OEM distribution channel, and Microsoft has EXTENDED it's predatory
> behavior into other areas.
>
> It seems that taxes, tarrifs, and quotas may be the only means remaining
> to force the OEMs into shipping PCs featuring Linux into all available
> markets. Quotas should be set for retail, corporate, and online sales
> and shipments. Tarriffs or luxury taxes on PCs with Windows
> preinstalled would also increase the public coffers as well as provide
> incentives for OEMs to ship Linux PCs.
>
> Keep in mind that Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, and other top Microsoft
> stock-holders now get tax-free income because they funnel their
> dividends into tax-free foundations. The problem is that the tax code
> allows them to claim the equivalent portion of their salaries as the tax
> deductable donation and then claim the dividend as tax-free.
>
> As a result, Bill, Steve, and many others end up getting tax free income
> by continuing business practices which have already been ruled to be
> illegal.
>
> Rex Ballard