The EU appeared to gain the upper hand in the phenomenal five-year antitrust investigation into Microsoft's media player bundling today when it announced talks over a mutual settlement had collapsed.
The stage is now set for Competition Commissioner Mario Monti to deliver the fine, which could run into hundreds of millions of pounds, and the antitrust legal ruling that will force Microsoft to reveal Windows source code to its rivals and offer a version of the operating system without its Windows Media Player bundled in.
But the devil could still very much be in the detail and the final ruling may not be such a bad result for Microsoft after all.
Analyst firm Gartner points out that being forced to offer two versions of its operating system will in reality mean that the bundled and stripped-down version will be offered at the same price. And here's the twist - who is going to pay the same amount of money for a package that offers less functionality and features?
The fine will also have been budgeted for well in advance and, as far as Microsoft is concerned, is likely to be infinitely more preferable to being forced to change its practices wholesale, which is what the EU demanded if a settlement was to be reached.
The other question that has to be asked here is whether this investigation, which has taken five years and goodness knows how many millions of euros, was even justified.
Windows may come bundled with Media Player, but ask any regular PC user what audiovisual player software they use and most will probably reply that they use a mixture of all the main ones out in the market including Real Networks and Apple's QuickTime.
There will be plenty of discussion and analysis around the judgement when it is finally delivered next week but on closer inspection the decision could end up being a hollow victory for the EU.
Comments
There are 11 comments. Join the discussion
1. Simon
I disagree, it might have very little effect directly on the media player market, but it sure sets a precedent - actually two :
1) That bundling software is anti-competitive
2) That Windows CAN be split !
Given all the effort that Microsoft have put into persuading everyone that Windows is a "whole", not a collection of parts that can be disassembled, suddenly finding that a part can be removed, on top of their admission that certain far east countries will get a "stripped down" version rather dilutes their argument somewhat.
2. Dave
What right does any government have to tell a company what features to sell with a product.
Let the competitors find a way to have
the consumer purchase their product.
Personally, I use both WM & RP
3. anonymous
The truth of the matter is that the initial argument (media player) has been used by default. The issue is that MS bundling, coercitive and full monopoly oriented strategy is showing the limit of consumer protection (and government(s) action). The point is that now MS is too big and too entrenched as a monopoly to be displaced. We are now condemned to live and use computers, the internet and telephones the way MS believe we should. It is like water, air and foods ressources ownership and use was decided by a single company. Too bad, too late!
4. Gerard
I agree with Dave on this issue, the EU had no right to even bring this case, people choose what to use and what not to use, Media Player is free, how can a fine of hundreds of millions be justified.
5. Bobby K
I also think dave has a good point, but lets look a little further into technology... I am strickly against software bundles that do not give one the choice of complete deinstallation... 2 items come to mind, the IE6 and Media Player....
How many times I have had the honor of fixing faulty OSes after an installation of RP, Winamp etc. I believe firmly in the customer having the choice of what he wants to use, and as a tech with many years experience, I want my systems and servers to scale in the direction and size that best suits my needs.... For the normal home user, maybe he will choose MP or IE6, but now he has a choice. Here we see a prime example of cons to the phrase more for less money....
6. Bobby K
I also think dave has a good point, but lets look a little further into technology... I am strickly against software bundles that do not give one the choice of complete deinstallation... 2 items come to mind, the IE6 and Media Player....
How many times I have had the honor of fixing faulty OSes after an installation of RP, Winamp etc. I believe firmly in the customer having the choice of what he wants to use, and as a tech with many years experience, I want my systems and servers to scale in the direction and size that best suits my needs.... For the normal home user, maybe he will choose MP or IE6, but now he has a choice. Here we see a prime example of cons to the phrase more for less money....
7. Oliver Wilson
I hope Dave & Gerard extend their principals of free commerce to the companies which provide their food, cars, power, etc...
Enjoy your bright crimson Chicken Tikka boys, but don't expect to choose which chutney to put on it!
8. Oliver Wilson
I hope Dave & Gerard extend their principals of free commerce to the companies which provide their food, cars, power, etc...
Enjoy your bright crimson Chicken Tikka boys, but don't expect to choose which chutney to put on it!
9. anonymous
When will the bureaucrats realise that the real costs of ICT ownership are operational not the original purchase. By unbundling elements of the system, it just becomes more difficult to fix when “blogg’s” latest media widget doesn’t work properly with patch SR-x21b! At least if the widget is designed to be part of the original system there’s some chance that the thing may work - now or in a future release! Let’s have the whole shooting match supplied by MS (operating system, productivity s/w the lot) and maybe the reliability of the average PC will pass the ‘my Mum test’ ie be useable by ordinary folks…
10. anonymous
The issue here is that where a monoply exists consumers cannot create a market, and it is markets that give us choice and stimulates innovation. We end up only with what MS can think up : they may be good but they are not as good as the whole world.
11. James
Dave brings up a good point, let the competition work it out, dont let the government step in and run our business relationships and dealings as well. Perhaps an alternative would be to supply the end user the software on a disk so that they may install it or download a 3rd party program such as real media (which personally i think is not a quality product due to advertising) and/or offer the end user complete uninstallation of the "core" components such as IE and WMP so that they are not "bullying" the competition with their one shop stop for an OS.