Microsoft Says Proposed EU Settlement Would Have Been Better

Advertisement (Why?)

Microsoft Corp. today stated that its proposals to settle the European Commission investigation would have provided more choices for European consumers and more opportunity for software companies than the official decision announced today in Brussels, Belgium, by the European Commission. "We worked hard to reach an agreement that would address the European Commission's concerns and still allow us to innovate and improve our products for consumers," said Steve Ballmer, chief executive officer of Microsoft. "We respect the Commission's authority, but we believe that our settlement offer from last week would have offered far more choices and benefits to consumers."

The company will seek legal review of the Commission's decision in the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg, according to Brad Smith, senior vice president and general counsel of Microsoft. During months of discussion and settlement negotiations leading up to today's decision, Microsoft offered wide-ranging proposals to address issues regarding interoperability and the integration of media player functionality into Windows®. The company proposed to provide competitors with unprecedented access to its technology. In addition, under Microsoft's proposed settlement, any personal computer sold with the Windows operating system also would have carried three non- Microsoft media players, leading to the distribution of more than 1 billion competing media players over the next three years. At the Commission's insistence, many of the provisions offered in Microsoft's proposed settlement were worldwide in scope.

View: The full press release

A security issue has been identified that could allow an attacker to compromise a computer running Windows and gain control over it. You can help protect your computer by installing this update from Microsoft. After you install this item, you may have to restart your computer.

Download: Security Update for Windows XP | XP 64 Bit Edition

Download: Security Update for Windows 2000

Download: Security Update for Windows NT4.0

View: Knowledge Base Article

A security issue has been identified that could allow an attacker to compromise a computer running Windows and gain control over it. You can help protect your computer by installing this update from Microsoft. After you install this item, you may have to restart your computer.

Download: Security Update for Server 2003 64 Bit Edition and XP 64 Bit Edition Version 2003

Download: Security Update for Windows Server 2003

Download: Security Update for Windows XP

Download: Security Update for Windows 2000

Download: Security Update for Windows NT Server 4.0 | Windows NT Workstation 4.0

View: Security Bulletin

Multiple security issues have been identified that could allow an attacker to compromise a computer running Windows and gain complete control over it. You can help protect your computer by installing this update from Microsoft. After you install this item, you may have to restart your computer.

Download: Security Update for Windows Server 2003

Download: Security Update for Windows XP | XP 64 Bit Edition

Download: Security Update for Windows 2000

Download: Security Update for Windows NT Server 4.0 | Windows NT Workstation 4.0

View: Security Bulletin

Microsoft has released a patch for Microsoft® Windows NT4 Option Pack that will eliminate a vulnerability that exists because a malicious user could issue a specially formatted, non-RFC compliant SMTP command that will result in a Denial of Service attack. This would be carried out more typically through a custom application where the malformed data would cause the SMTP service to fail. Download now to prevent a possible Denial of Service Attack.

Download: Security Update for Windows NT4 Option Pack

View: More Information About This Download

A security issue has been identified that could allow an attacker to run programs and access data on a computer running Microsoft® Exchange Server 5.0. You can help protect your computer by installing this update from Microsoft.

Download: Security Update for Exchange 5.0

View: More Information About This Download

#1 Danrarbc641 on 14 Apr 2004 - 15:53

Just proof the EU was after money instead of fixing the 'problem' IMO.

It sounds like that proposal is exactly what media player developers *cough*real*cough* were begging for, and instead they're stuck with what they have now.

#2 Slugbait on 14 Apr 2004 - 17:30

There were several other issues beyond media players, and MS supposedly worked hard to address all of them by way of compromise and concession. So I would have to assume the EU was actually more interested in punishing MS to embarrass the DOJ. Of course, greed might also have played a significant role.

I just feel sorry for computer users in Europe...they're the only real losers in this case.

(10 replies) #3 dp123 on 14 Apr 2004 - 18:06

Please...!!!

"any personal computer sold with the Windows operating system also would have carried three non- Microsoft media players"

MS loves to conveniently leave out they are only talking about putting it on CDs.

90% of the people I know who have bought OEM PCs have NEVER touched any of the accompanying discs.

When the EU said, "Okay, let's have them installed on every OEM system, not just on dics," Microsoft balked... and cried like a little baby.

#3.1 Slugbait on 14 Apr 2004 - 18:56

QUOTE

MS loves to conveniently leave out they are only talking about putting it on CDs.

Actually, VP Brad Smith specified the competing players would be released on a CD (singular), but not the way you think...he said, "Microsoft offered to immediately release worldwide a version of Windows " that included three media players.". He was also quoted saying that Microsoft had offered to modify Windows to place copies of competing media player software on PC hard drives during the installation.

Note that Smith was not quoted as saying "supplemental discs". This world-wide version of Windows CDs would go to OEMs. But the EU specifically demanded that MS release a version of Windows without ANY multimedia program in addition to a version that contains WMP. And the EU also demanded that MS cannot offer a better deal to OEMs to install the WMP-edition over the stripped down version.

If I am incorrect, please provide a link or two to substantiate your claim. Thanks.

#3.2 dp123 on 14 Apr 2004 - 19:27

Actually, none of your links are inconsistent with what I said. They are cleverly worded to avoid the obvious implications.

For example, "during install" as I said: this is the install CD shipped with PCs, not the OEM install.

I don't get the quibbling about "supplemental" or multiple CDs... I nver made a point about that... I said "CDs" because most PCs come with many. I was aware that the other media players would be shipped on branded MS install CD(s).

I will try to find a link. I am aware that the EC was pretty insistent about it being stripped out... But there was also a phase in which MS balked at the idea of having them installed on the box and not simply packaged with CDs. AS I said, I'll try to find a link

I think it's pretty clear (from your links) that MS is definitely not offering to have the players installed on the PC in all cases... only if the OEMs enter an agreement with the rivals and on the install CDs.

#3.3 Slugbait on 14 Apr 2004 - 22:23

They are cleverly worded to avoid the obvious implications.

Of course, you understand that most other people will consider this purely personal opinion and conjecture on your part, with no basis in fact.

For example, "during install" as I said: this is the install CD shipped with PCs, not the OEM install.

Except that since the mid-to-late 90's, most OEMs stopped supplying an install CD...they instead switched to providing a "recovery CD" that does a complete wipe and returns the box to its original OEM image.

I don't get the quibbling about "supplemental" or multiple CDs

It's because you didn't make yourself clear...re-reading your previous comment, it still can be mistakenly assumed that this is what you meant.

I think it's pretty clear (from your links) that MS is definitely not offering to have the players installed on the PC in all cases... only if the OEMs enter an agreement with the rivals and on the install CDs.

I don't think that point is clear at all, nothing on those pages even aludes to that theory. In fact, I'm rather certain that if the EU had agreed to a Windows version that would install those players, and then MS would use the old tactic of strong-arming the OEMs not to install the other players (actually, uninstall after OS install), the EU would hold MS in contempt, and begin an entirely new lawsuit that would result in far more severe penalties.

#3.4 dp123 on 14 Apr 2004 - 23:55

Your latest comments make no sense at all...

I could care less if you don't understand what I'm saying... Your comment about "restore CDs" is meaningless--my point was: MS is only putting it on a disc, not on the box... Whatever installation that restore CD creates is irrelvent to my point about only providing the installations on a disc and not on the box...

Your final comment is completely bizarre. I told you that the EU wasn't happy with the idea but they tested the waters with it and MS rejected it. You interpret this to the EC proposing it... and then for some reason, MS would have accepted it but flagrantly have violated the settlement... That's simply a retarded theory.

#3.5 Slugbait on 15 Apr 2004 - 01:20

Your latest comments make no sense at all...

Sorry about that. I was just trying to point out that you were making statements without any basis in fact for making them, that's all. Granted, it was a bit lengthy due to challenging several things you stated, but I thought the essential idea would be understood.

I told you that the EU wasn't happy with the idea but they tested the waters with it and MS rejected it.

Yes, you did say that, without providing a single shred of evidence. I stated that MS proposed bundling competing media players with the OS, and provided links to respected sites reporting on it.

You interpret this to the EC proposing it...

I did no such thing. See above comment, that was you.

and then for some reason, MS would have accepted it but flagrantly have violated the settlement... That's simply a retarded theory.

Your final comment is completely bizarre. The issue I had: IF the EU accepted MS' proposal, and then MS strong-armed OEMs to circumvent any such agreement later (which, if you don't realize, would be illegal), then the EU would have a legal issue for which they could take MS right back to court again. It was a theory based mostly on documented Microsoft history. I'm not saying they would have done this, I'm saying they've done similar things in the past...but because the proposal was rejected by the EU, we'll never know.

Your comment about "restore CDs" is meaningless--my point was: MS is only putting it on a disc, not on the box... Whatever installation that restore CD creates is irrelvent to my point about only providing the installations on a disc and not on the box

MS doesn't put anything on the box...they don't make computers. They simply put it on the CD. You obviously have never done a Windows install: for every successive release, MS has tried to make install simpler for the average user. With XP, there's like one or two things you have to do (like the registry key), and then you don't have to touch the keyboard again until it's time to sign in...this is a vast departure of all the options the OS setup used to push during install. One-touch install was a primary goal for MS...it's highly doubtful they're going to completely redo the setup process that causes it to stop part-way and allows you to uncheck all the other media players, that would be a step backwards.

Anyway, that CD which would have automatically installed the competing players goes to the OEM. The OEM installs the OS, plus a handsome package of additional software that they advertise as "A $600 Value, FREE!" Then the OEM uses SysPrep (or some other tool) to create a master drive, and use that to clone target drives that get installed in indentical boxes. With the same image on all boxes, they can create a restore disc, and that's what they ship with the boxes...only a few OEMs will ship an original install CD.

I could care less if you don't understand what I'm saying

You obviously don't understand anything I said, you won't back up any of the bogus statements you make with any kind of proof, and you attempt to use confusion and redirection to make yourself appear as the more educated or more well-informed person.

#3.6 dp123 on 15 Apr 2004 - 01:41

Your an idiot... I can't even begin to address the idiocy you are posting now.

#3.7 Slugbait on 15 Apr 2004 - 02:01

What...you're not smart enough to even BEGIN?

You spew forth your wizdom from the crack of your buttocks. Of course, after reading other posts you've made in other threads, I'm sure you alone keep some lucky toilet paper manufacturer from going out of business.

#3.8 dp123 on 15 Apr 2004 - 02:08

Your rebuttal to my comment was: if that had happened, Microsoft would have jumped at it, and then violated the settlement? And you think that is a sensible theory? You, feel because you think that theory is sound, when it is in fact downright retarded, that that theory actually constitutes a rebuttal of that ever happenign?

Forget it, you are a moron. I should have known sooner. But, in general, I try not to talk to morons.

#3.9 Slugbait on 15 Apr 2004 - 02:17

I see now...you misunderstood. Quote: In fact, I'm rather certain that IF...

Moron.

#3.10 dp123 on 16 Apr 2004 - 01:14

even if you said if which I did notice, that is a retarded theory... It wouldn't happen. Microsoft knows that it can't agree to anything and then violate the agreement now. It can push limits, but an out and out violation is going to cause them serious pain.

#4 werejag on 14 Apr 2004 - 19:35

boo hoo poor Microsoft when will they stop attacking this poor company, they done all the reinventing that they can do and still people attack them arrrg

lets make a new constitutional amendment that fully protects this fragile gem, laws seem be in the way of the continued success of this once great company

lets unite and protect them

#5 SpyCatcher on 15 Apr 2004 - 01:29

If an competing company creates a better media player I will buy it...but it is my choice to purchase it. Until that day comes I will accept what MS gives to me included with the OS I purchased.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Neowin.net