Nickname: Anthony

Review: The reason Microsoft is actually in this situation is because their products have become a worldwide standard in business. Use Microsoft or don't compete is the choice businesses are left with. Microsoft is not stupid; they act in this way (bullying through litigation, releasing bug-ridden software) because they can. They forced business that wants to compete in a global market into using their product.

Date reviewed: Feb 28, 2007 4:52 PM

Nickname: Analyst

Review: Maybe the EU wants to wait and ambush Microsoft after it releases Vista. It does not want to approve Vista before being released. Maybe Europe should not get Vista.

Date reviewed: Oct 11, 2006 11:40 PM

Nickname: dany_brilliant

Review: How many times have we been sold the same lumps of code from Microsoft? Here come the new jungles and wallpapers everybody! Whoo-hoo!

Date reviewed: Sep 20, 2006 5:02 PM

Nickname: justme

Review: C'mon...the bug list of Vista is almost complete...so it's time to release it. Microsoft is tired of fixing XP, so it's on its way to retirement. My Windows 2000 machine runs fine ! :) and my NT 4.0 runs even faster. If Vista gets "delayed" in Europe...that means Europe lucked out and wont't have to deal with the nightmares until after "we" over here discover what they are first.

Date reviewed: Sep 18, 2006 10:09 PM

Nickname: Spikey_Mike

Review: The reason Microsoft is in this position is: A) Microsoft has a history of making insecure products. The reasons vary, but are generally based on greed (my opinion). B) Microsoft has been declared a monopoly in the desktop OS market by the EU, USA, Japan, and South Korea. C) Because of B, Microsoft *may not* leverage its monopoly power in the desktop OS market to enter the new market (desktop security). D) Because of A, users *need* security products. And because of A, it is a conflict of interest if the vendor charges to make an insecure product secure. Both C and D are correct. So, really, it is a Catch-22. This is the bed that Microsoft made for itself due to its greed and disdain for the very market it helped create. FYI - The DOJ hasn't made any noise - yet.

Date reviewed: Sep 18, 2006 6:16 PM

Nickname: TanNg

Review: In this case, the EU is clearly a risk factor for business. The EU has Vista and its features in their hands. If they think that Vista is not compliant, why not tell MS concretly? I think MS has the right to paint itself as an underdog attacked by an unyielding bureaucracy, because that is exactly what the EU is doing now. Why do analysts think that MS doesn't have the right to tell the truth?

Date reviewed: Sep 16, 2006 6:04 AM

Nickname: Bill

Review: Beating on Microsoft for copying innovation is just wrong. The entire industry operates in this manner. A previous comment pointed out that Microsoft had copied the Mac OS... What about Mac copying Xerox's X Windows?

Date reviewed: Sep 15, 2006 2:06 AM

Nickname: Duchess

Review: This is really about the traditional method by which Europe "competes." Europe has long used regulation to protect its own businesses from foreign competition, all under the guise of competition or safety. The E.U.is simply attempting to take Microsoft's intellectual property in a very sophisticated way. The fact IBM and the rest support the EU's extortion is nothing more than seeking to line their own pockets. No one forces consumers to buy Microssoft products. People choose them when they consider them better than other products. What the EU is terribly afraid of is the marketplace itself, something beyond their control which is terrifying to those who have depended on non-market forces to protect themselves and their friends for centuries. If this wasn't so serious it would be simply entertaining to watch the pathetic attempts of the Eurocrats trying to shore up more of their non-competitive friends, a la Airbus.

Date reviewed: Sep 15, 2006 1:30 AM

Nickname: Katlss

Review: Microsoft already has taken over Netscape's Explorer function with their Internet Explorer copy, the PC market with their Apple OS look and feel copy, trying AOL replacement with MSN, Google replacement with their own search engine, Symantec/McAffee replacement with Microsoft OneCare, and the list goes on and on. When will we understand that they are really good (successful) at copying innovation, they have alot of $ to do so and protect themselves from copyright lawsuits, and we should just expect them to boldly go where others have already gone before?

Date reviewed: Sep 14, 2006 4:16 PM

Nickname: Mike

Review: How much will companies who use OpenSource (if can not use OSS with Windows) lose in security, etc. But of course in this FUD smaller selling companies are important ... "But the impact on smaller companies who make their living from selling and servicing Windows installations could be far greater. European PC makers, retailers, and systems integrators who had been planning for an early 2007 uptick in business could see that business delayed. Consultancy Ovum in London figures the total cost to industry could top $1 billion in deferred revenues over 12 to 18 months."

Date reviewed: Sep 14, 2006 2:50 PM