Nickname: abbi

Review: The marketplace and technology has changed and Microsoft is trying to remain competitive with its products and strategy, just like any other company would want to do. Actions such as those of the EU are reflected in the company's share price remaining flat for the past few years.

Date reviewed: Jul 2, 2006 2:20 AM

Nickname: Mrrm

Review: Nobody is trying to justify existences. The comissioner is attending a complaint. Microsoft is playing dumb and dragging its feet. The case is in a court of law, not in a soccer field. I only can say that if Sir Tim Berners-Lee behaved the same way we would not have web pages. And that if Doug Engalbart (inventor of windows) did not give away protocols, we would have neither the Internet nor the PC. Microsoft made a standard, and a poor one for that matter, full of unnecessary special effects. The problem is that if anyone chooses another operating system, it runs across a mountain of obstacle. You buy a modem and there is no Linux installation support. You buy a computer and there is no guarantee from vendors if you want to run anything but MS. I hope the court decides our way, in favour of invention, innovation and fair price competition. Either way, it's a court, and I will respect its decisions. MS doesn't. And I leave the Melinda/Bill Foundation out from this issue.

Date reviewed: Jun 29, 2006 12:42 PM

Nickname: rrjackson

Review: Some small form of justice somewhere. America has proven incapable of protecting the public trust from monopolies, because almost everyone has a price, supposedly in charge of oversight. Microsoft has grossly abused public trust, and used early financial success to squash challenges to its unethical business practices that would burn legitimately competing companies. America's free enterprise system is riddled with such greedy self-serving practices at corporate levels. Microsoft was built by obtaining, legitimately or otherwise, original thinking, with a stated goal of world domination of computer processing systems. If not for its monopolistic practices, the company would have been a minor player in operating systems by 2000, for the lousy products they have turned out since 95, in a "one company fits all or none" of the world's needs, as a deliberate business strategy.

Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 9:24 PM

Nickname: heath

Review: A schoolyard bully? Against Microsoft? That's a bit funny. Maybe more like two bulls locking horns. business.smush.co.uk

Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 5:28 PM

Nickname: ralphrides

Review: This couldn't happen to a nicer company ;) They deserve it, they hurt IBM and Apple and destroyed the software tech boom by strong arming hardware vendors in bundling their crap with new PCs forcing out all the small companies and destroying innovation. I have no sympathy for them. This is a repeat of history where the big oil/steel/railroads of the US early 1900s took huge profits pushing up costs and knocking out competition and than felt guilty and set up charity funds to give some of it back, Bill and Melinda fund anyone.

Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 3:36 PM

Nickname: Gyoga

Review: Where were these guys when Bill was working hard to bring the company up and like everyone tries to keep the company in first place. It is only publicity for EU.

Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 3:18 PM

Nickname: KeelieNroes

Review: Neelie Kroes and her gang at the EU is nothing but the school yard bully. She is just trying to justify her existance.

Date reviewed: Jun 28, 2006 1:20 PM