• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Browser Makers Demand Screen Time

I've got a hundred dollars that says as soon as they make the icons and text smaller to fit inside the window without scrolling, someone else will bitch saying the text is too small to read.:rolleyes:
 
So my question, how come OSX doesn't have the same requirements that Microsoft does?? I mean if OS operating systems cannot force someone to use their standard browser in the EU, then doesn't that mean that OSX and all other OS installs must also give me a choice at install on what browser to use.

Like i said before If I would have been Ballmer or Gates, I would have left out IE period. Then let the poor EU folks figure out how to use the web to go find out where to download the browsers that they needed to view the web... you know to download other browsers... that would have been fun..

Basically it would have forced Opera and Mozilla to print millions of CD's to have stores give away with every computer and Windows BOX sold... I think that would have been the more fair option, rather than have RIVAL products on my Windows CD. Thats like making sure that on U2's next greatest hits CD that they provide me with every remake of every song of every other band that covered it so that I had my choice on which version to listen too... Bahhh I hate U2 rendition of Streets have no name... i will listen to so and so's....

Just a bunch of BULLSHIT
 
Zellio2010 said:
Good job UK. Now either Windows will come with 17 gigs of crapware or they'll be paying for browsers like we did in the late 90s.
Click to expand...

That would be the European Union, not just UK :rolleyes: And a ballot screen is only loaded when an attemp is made to connect to a webpage for the first time or a first time bootup I believe and has no decision on what crap ware is loaded on a machine from the store. That is up to Dell, HP, etc who actually subsize the machines' price. Come on man, think before you type.
 
ProfessorKaos64 said:
That would be the European Union, not just UK :rolleyes: And a ballot screen is only loaded when an attemp is made to connect to a webpage for the first time or a first time bootup I believe and has no decision on what crap ware is loaded on a machine from the store. That is up to Dell, HP, etc who actually subsize the machines' price. Come on man, think before you type.
Click to expand...

*facepalm*

Read the ensuing two pages after his post where someone corrected him and he admitted his mistake. :eek:
 
MS should just tell the EU "Fuck it. All you get is DOS 1.0. Deal with it!"
 
eeyrjmr said:
wtf did I say otherwise? I fucking know what the UK is I am fucking british !
Click to expand...

When you replied to the guy saying UK by saying that it had nothing to do with Britain, unfairly leaving out Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

That's as bad as leaving unheard of browsers off a list.

Also, has anyone wondered if the reason that Opera is getting so many hits is because it's the first one on the left-to-right read list? People aren't making a choice, they're clicking the first thing their eye sees, probably assuming that its position on the list means it's the best choice.
 
On the plus side, this resulted in the "N" version of Windows which gave like 40 more keys from Technet.....its win for me!
 
seamonkey79 said:
When you replied to the guy saying UK by saying that it had nothing to do with Britain, unfairly leaving out Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

That's as bad as leaving unheard of browsers off a list.

Also, has anyone wondered if the reason that Opera is getting so many hits is because it's the first one on the left-to-right read list? People aren't making a choice, they're clicking the first thing their eye sees, probably assuming that its position on the list means it's the best choice.
Click to expand...

Seriously? The order is randomized.

Also Opera is the best option so I don't blame people for picking it.
 
Opera is by far the best browser, it has a small code base it has functionality beyond just the browser. Mail, News, IRC, Torrent.

If MS ever says to the EU screw you they are going to see their EU market collapse in about 3 to 5 years. Now i know some of you think that you can rule over people because you have more money but how wise is that as a business decision ?

In other words shouting fuck you EU will cost them money lots of money now is IE that good to say goodbye to a good chunk of change ?
 
Well aren't the other browsers little more than skins for IE and Firefox anyway?

Also I'm going to invent a new browser called Firef*cks. It's going to look exactly like Firefox but the back button will be pink. I demand it be placed on the browser selection screen!

Seriously this is just free advertising for the browser companies. They want to make the most of it.
 
JimmiG said:
Well aren't the other browsers little more than skins for IE and Firefox anyway?

Also I'm going to invent a new browser called Firef*cks. It's going to look exactly like Firefox but the back button will be pink. I demand it be placed on the browser selection screen!

Seriously this is just free advertising for the browser companies. They want to make the most of it.
Click to expand...

Exactly!
The vast majority of ppl are not going to go an install something they have not heard of (the vast majority of those additional "browsers" I aint ever heard of).
That is why *IF* a ballot screen was needed then top 5 made sense.
 
JimmiG said:
Well aren't the other browsers little more than skins for IE and Firefox anyway?
Click to expand...
Have you ever used any other browser?

FFS. Chrome, Safari, and Opera are no where near close to IE or FireFox.

About the only thing most have in common is the defacto controls (forward, back, refresh, etc.) and tabbed browsing. How the browsers go about doing that is a whole other story.

I have used all 5 of them. The only ones I can't stand are IE and Safari. IE8 has gotten a little better than IE7...but Safari continues to piss me off.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
Have you ever used any other browser?

FFS. Chrome, Safari, and Opera are no where near close to IE or FireFox.

About the only thing most have in common is the defacto controls (forward, back, refresh, etc.) and tabbed browsing. How the browsers go about doing that is a whole other story.

I have used all 5 of them. The only ones I can't stand are IE and Safari. IE8 has gotten a little better than IE7...but Safari continues to piss me off.
Click to expand...

How about some reading comprehension
This thread is about the browsers that made the ballot BUT not in the top 5.
JimmiG statement was
Well aren't the other browsers little more than skins for IE and Firefox anyway?
Click to expand...
AND he is right! Avant, Flock, Maxthon, Slim, Sleipnir and Green browsers are just frontends to either IE's or FF render engine WHILE those in the top spots have their own

Please learn to follow the thread
Well aren't the other browsers little more than skins for IE and Firefox anyway?[/
 
eeyrjmr said:
AND he is right! Avant, Flock, Maxthon, Slim, Sleipnir and Green browsers are just frontends to either IE's or FF render engine WHILE those in the top spots have their own
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I meant.

Actually Chrome and Safari both use Webkit, which in itself is based on KHTML used by Konqueror under the K environment in Linux.

Those browsers are different enough in terms of functionality and UI's to be considered as separate products though.

The ironic thing is that if Microsoft was to completely *remove* IE from the OS, instead of just blocking it, I'm not sure some of those browsers would work at all since they're just extensions of IE.
 
oh yer I forgot safari & chrome use webkit...

*IF* IE was really removed then yer those IE-based browsers wouldn't work which brings on the ironic stance that they want to be on the list to replace IE BUT rely on its existence to be an option
 
Man, if I were Bill I'd definitely pull an Ann Rand and disappear, along with my WindewZ. Haha, that would be funny.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
If MS ever says to the EU screw you they are going to see their EU market collapse in about 3 to 5 years. Now i know some of you think that you can rule over people because you have more money but how wise is that as a business decision ?

In other words shouting fuck you EU will cost them money lots of money now is IE that good to say goodbye to a good chunk of change ?
Click to expand...


Ok not giving the EU a choice of browsers will not cause the EU to stop buying Windows. I work tech support for a large corporation. When we converted from GroupWise to Outlook as our primary email client that was weeks of headache and still is over a year later. Converting and entire country's (or in this case multiple countries) business infrastructure to another OS is not going to happen. Especially over a stupid browser conflict. Moving to a new version of Windows is hard enough let along Linux or OSX. Plus none of their software would work anymore and they would have to find alternative crappy versions or be forced to write their own. Corporations will keep buying Windows period. Even if Microsoft stopped making Windows businesses would keep using Windows for a very long time.

Take Vista for instance. A few businesses purchased licenses for Vista and quickly moved back to XP. My corporation as well as every other one I've ever seen stayed on XP all the way through Vista and is just now preparing to move forward with a new image of 7. That's like 7 or 8 years of Windows XP. We're happy to move forward with a better OS but could have easily stayed with XP for years to come.

Its just the government being stupid and the people don't care. Anybody from the EU? Any of you care? Well I know you don't care, but how about some of your friends? Are they even going to know what to do when that stupid screen comes up or are they just going to click the first thing and wonder why the internet looks different?
 
Awesomedude said:
Seriously? The order is randomized.

Also Opera is the best option so I don't blame people for picking it.
Click to expand...


No, Opera is not the best option. Toms Hardware did a comprehensive test of the big 5 browsers and Chrome won... It tied Opera on 1st place results and Chrome had more second place test results than Opera.. there was also a test that they let Opera win that when they tested Opera showed errors and won by a huge margin the testers called it very odd result, but they didn't have time to dig into it so they gave Opera the win in that test and in hindsight they said they probably shouldn't have give it the win.

Chrome is right now, the best browser you can use...

Read for yourself:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/firefox-chrome-opera,2558.html
 
Azhar said:
law != always right.
Click to expand...

This is true, but given that you are aware of the law, it's dishonest to suggest that the "courts seem to conveniently ignore that fact" (that other OSes ship with browsers installed). They aren't ignoring anything, they're enforcing the law which has specific provisions for who it is applicable to.

It's one thing to disagree with a law, but that doesn't mean the courts are being ignorant by enforcing it correctly.
 
Do the citizens of the EU think this is as ridiculous as Americans would feel? I mean at some point this DOES have to stop its simply becoming to complex to deal with.
 
Microsoft should tell the EU to stuff it. Then put out a PC with Windows and all their goodies on it, by default. Then they be like Apple and get away with it.
 
EU = Communist

Microsoft should pull out of Europe entirely. I'm sure EU and people in Europe would come back begging Microsoft to come back.

But nooo, it's all about the money, so Microsoft wouldn't ever consider an idea like this. o_o
 
Cerulean said:
EU = Communist

Microsoft should pull out of Europe entirely. I'm sure EU and people in Europe would come back begging Microsoft to come back.

But nooo, it's all about the money, so Microsoft wouldn't ever consider an idea like this. o_o
Click to expand...

I think the word you're looking for is socialist, not communist. Socialism implies government controlled economy. The government isn't telling people how to live, just businesses how to operate.
 
What government doesn't tell ppl how to live? I can't run around town naked, shooting endangered animals, with assault rifles that use armor piercing rounds. I mean, what kind of society do we live in nowadays?
 
Dekoth said:
I would love to see them try. What are they going to do? Force all of Europe on to Linux/OSX? Don't make me laugh.
Click to expand...

Yeah, in this game MS is the one holding the ball. They just need to realize it.
They should tell the EU to rightly shut the fuck up. Tell them all contracts for service with an EU based company are null and void and they are on their own. Block all European traffic from reaching MS servers and let them stew for a bit.
 
Lebowski said:
Yeah, in this game MS is the one holding the ball. They just need to realize it.
They should tell the EU to rightly shut the fuck up. Tell them all contracts for service with an EU based company are null and void and they are on their own. Block all European traffic from reaching MS servers and let them stew for a bit.
Click to expand...

yer cause that is quite likely to happen... and MS are /really/ that stupid to show they will hold a country/continent to economic ransom. Do you have any idea how fast the US gov'n would jump on MS and break them up - if MS would do it to EU what would stop them doing the same to the US to protect their financial interests.

Seriously all you americans calling for MS to pull out of Europe actually stop and think for a moment AND then also read up on US gov'n stance on what the EU is doing

Likewise just a small thing I should post again it seems

EC antitrust rules? blame the US...

Us companies like Microsoft, Intel, Qualcomm and Rambus may moan about EC
investigation into their business practices, but they only have the US to blame
for then EC antitrust rules

The EC drew heavily on America's 1890 Sherman Act, which encapsulated US
competition law, when it drew up Artical 81 of the Treaty to establish the
European Community which was signed in 1957
"The influence of US antitrust law was profound during the early years of the
development of competition policy in Europe" according to Mario Monti, a former
Competition Commissioner at the EC. "Today, after 50 years of application and
development of antitrust rules in Europe, we share the same goals, and pursue
the same results, on both sides of the Atlantic."

Back in 1890, the Americans were seemingly, very keen to stamp out
anti-competitive practices. "In the 1950s the Americans taught us antitrust, now
we're teaching them back." Kurt Biedenkopf, former Prime Minister of the German
State of Saxony and a distringuished practitioner of competition law, told me.
"If you form a quasi-monopoly or a duopoly in the US, it will influence the
European market, and we will not agree to a combination that will produce a
dominant position," said Biedenkopf.

In fact it is not the dominant position per se which is illegal under EU/US
competition law, but the means used to either create or to sustain a monopoly.
A monopoly achieved by sheer prowess is not illegal. But if other means then
merit are used to create or sustain a monopoly then it can be judged illegal.
As one of the authors of the Sherman Act, Senator George Hoar of
Masachussetts, said, a company which won the business bacause "nobody could do
it as well as he could" would not be in violation of the act


ElectroncisWeekly: 18-24 June 2008




For a company to be considered dominant, it must have market power.
A company generally gains market power by having a large market share.

A company that has a market share of 50% or more is typically considered a dominant firm.
A market share of less than 30% isn't generally enough to make a company a dominant firm.
The area between 30% and 50% is a gray zone.
Competition authorities will look at a number of factors to decide if a company in the gray zone is a
dominant firm—such as the number of competitors in the market and how great the gap is between the market share of the potentially
dominant company and those of its closest competitors.
However, these numbers aren't fixed in stone and may vary depending on the jurisdiction and the industry.

Market share is only one indicator of dominance. Competition authorities will also look at whether new competitors can easily enter the market and whether the company under investigation has any technical advantages that enable it to lead the market.

For example, a company might have patents on a technology that shield it from competition. Or a company might have market power if it has been in business for a long time and has well-established brands.

It's important to note that becoming a dominant company by being the best and most efficient in the market isn't illegal. It's only when a firm abuses its market power to suppress competition that competition law becomes involved.



Types of market-power abuse

Here are some examples of behavior that would be considered an abuse of market power:

* Exclusivity agreements, in which a dominant supplier makes its customers agree to buy all or most of their products from that supplier
* Tying, which requires a customer to buy an additional product that has no connection with the product it already agreed to purchase

Other examples of market-power abuse include the following:

* Long-term contracts, in which a dominant company makes its customer sign contracts with lengthy terms and restricts the customer's right to terminate the contract.
* Refusal to supply, which involves cutting off supply to a customer without objective justification. Justifiable reasons include when a buyer is a poor credit risk or requests an order size below the supplier's reasonable minimum.

Other types of behavior abuse market power. These tactics violate most systems of competition law. Consult your law department to get the specifics about your jurisdiction.

Predatory pricing is one such tactic. This occurs when a dominant company sells
Click to expand...
EU antitrust is just American + the balls to actually punish a company (helps when the US definition of lobbying is the EU definition of bribery)

And lulz at the American's calling EU communist (when they actually meant socialist). You do realise America is quite a bit socialist don't you? wtf do you think your police force comes from? or your sewage system..
Yes the EU does stick its fingers into companies a bit too much BUT the thing is the US use to as well until lawers found way around the shaman act


you americans do make me laugh sometimes
 
eeyrjmr said:
yer cause that is quite likely to happen... and MS are /really/ that stupid to show they will hold a country/continent to economic ransom. Do you have any idea how fast the US gov'n would jump on MS and break them up - if MS would do it to EU what would stop them doing the same to the US to protect their financial interests.

Seriously all you americans calling for MS to pull out of Europe actually stop and think for a moment AND then also read up on US gov'n stance on what the EU is doing

Likewise just a small thing I should post again it seems

EU antitrust is just American + the balls to actually punish a company (helps when the US definition of lobbying is the EU definition of bribery)

And lulz at the American's calling EU communist (when they actually meant socialist). You do realise America is quite a bit socialist don't you? wtf do you think your police force comes from? or your sewage system..
Yes the EU does stick its fingers into companies a bit too much BUT the thing is the US use to as well until lawers found way around the shaman act


you americans do make me laugh sometimes
Click to expand...

So go find a British forum to entertain yourself in.
 
eeyrjmr said:
yer cause that is quite likely to happen... and MS are /really/ that stupid to show they will hold a country/continent to economic ransom. Do you have any idea how fast the US gov'n would jump on MS and break them up - if MS would do it to EU what would stop them doing the same to the US to protect their financial interests.

Seriously all you americans calling for MS to pull out of Europe actually stop and think for a moment AND then also read up on US gov'n stance on what the EU is doing

Likewise just a small thing I should post again it seems

EU antitrust is just American + the balls to actually punish a company (helps when the US definition of lobbying is the EU definition of bribery)

And lulz at the American's calling EU communist (when they actually meant socialist). You do realise America is quite a bit socialist don't you? wtf do you think your police force comes from? or your sewage system..
Yes the EU does stick its fingers into companies a bit too much BUT the thing is the US use to as well until lawers found way around the shaman act


you americans do make me laugh sometimes
Click to expand...
So, how is Google not a monopoly? Why haven't they gotten a taste of antitrust splitting>
 
Isn't Google considering to pull out of China altogether because of the retarded demands of China? How is this any different from Microsoft hypothetically pulling out of Europe? HMM?
 
Cerulean said:
Isn't Google considering to pull out of China altogether because of the retarded demands of China? How is this any different from Microsoft hypothetically pulling out of Europe? HMM?
Click to expand...

There are things MS can do to reduce their presence and perhaps liability as well in the EU, but they make too much money there to outright leave. Besides, every Euro the EU squeezes out of MS in fines comes from the pockets of EU citizens that use MS products anyway. Suing MS or Intel is like taxing their own citizens in the end. Neither has enough competition to be worried over a small price increase here and there to make up the cost of the fines. It is merely annoying.
 
I don't think companies generally raise prices because of fines.

If higher prices would make them more money, why wouldn't they raise them anyway before the fine? They're going to charge what the market can bear.
 
jimmyb said:
I don't think companies generally raise prices because of fines.

If higher prices would make them more money, why wouldn't they raise them anyway before the fine? They're going to charge what the market can bear.
Click to expand...
I agree -- although I should raise a "point to ponder" as well:

Take doctors and subscriptions for example. Increased prices might very well be as a result of stupid Americans suing the doctors all the time.

I think that's a legitimate point, although I don't know if this applies to Google/Microsoft ... or if it does, by what degree and extent. Your point, jimmyb, I do think is an accurate factor too. :eek: Just so many possible factors in the situation it's [h]ard to really know...

In the past few years, I've seen nothing but the fulfilling of "money is the root of all evil." They all really just do it for the money. You have Google wanting to experiment with gigabit fiber Internet to residents (1 Gigabit = 125 MB/s), but Verizon already offers FiOS in Texas...yet the downstream and upstream Verizon offers for their FiOS isn't that much different than your common cable company's offerings and prices (difference being is that it's simply on a different technology -- fiber vs cable). Probably goes to show that ISPs would have no problem offering "more" and "better" really easily, but they do what they currently do mainly so that they have more than enough cards to play on people so that they'll always be making $$$.

I wish America wasn't so legalistic/capitalist/bureaucratic. :(
 
jimmyb said:
I don't think companies generally raise prices because of fines.

If higher prices would make them more money, why wouldn't they raise them anyway before the fine? They're going to charge what the market can bear.
Click to expand...

I think the same with fines. Now if it were a tax, I can see them raising the prices and pass the tax along to consumers.
 
krotch said:
I think the same with fines. Now if it were a tax, I can see them raising the prices and pass the tax along to consumers.
Click to expand...

For products like this with a negligible marginal cost of production, they're going to charge what they think will maximize PRICE * SALES; that will make them the most money. Charging any other amount would make them less money.

As you can see this is neither a function of taxation or fines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top