Microsoft Says That if Apple Isn't Stopped Now, Its Antitrust Behavior Will Just Get Worse (appleinsider.com) 153
joshuark writes: Microsoft has filed an amicus brief supporting Epic Games in its appeal against Apple, and argues that, "the potential antitrust issues stretch far beyond gaming." As Epic Games continues to file its appeal against the 2021 ruling that chiefly favored Apple, interested parties have been contributing supporting filings to the court. Notably, those have included US attorneys general, but now Microsoft has also joined in on the side of Epic Games. Microsoft's amicus filing included below, sets out what it describes as its own "unique -- and balanced -- perspective to the legal, economic, and technological issues this case implicates." As a firm which, like Apple, sells both hardware and software, Microsoft says it "has an interest" in supporting antitrust law. Describing what it calls Apple's "extraordinary gatekeeper power," Microsoft joins Epic Games in criticizing alleged errors in the original trial judge's conclusions. "Online commerce and interpersonal connection funnels significantly, and sometimes predominantly, through iOS devices," says Microsoft. "Few companies, perhaps none since AT&T... at the height of its telephone monopoly, have controlled the pipe through which such an enormous range of economic activity flows." To support its claim that the Epic Games vs Apple ruling has "potential antitrust issues [that] stretch far beyond gaming," Microsoft describes what else it sees as this "enormous range of economic activity." "Beyond app distribution and in-app payment solutions - the adjacent markets directly at issue in this case," says Microsoft's filing, "Apple offers mobile payments, music, movies and television, advertising, games, health tracking, web browsing, messaging, video chat, news, cloud storage, e-books, smart-home devices, wearables, and more besides."
If anyone knows about anti-trust behavior... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: If anyone knows about anti-trust behavior... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A ruling against Apple only benefits Microsoft
Yeah! Instead of iOS people will just use Windows Mobile!
Oh, what's that? There is no Windows Mobile? It would benefit Google if anyone?
That can't be right, this is Slashdot and everything is Microsoft's fault and/or them being evil.
Re: (Score:2)
If they wanted to really hurt Apple / Google, they would have to prove cartel based collusion to keep prices up. They would not find any.
It's interesting how corporations have figured out that they don't need cartel based collusion when they implement basic game theory.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the Supreme Court has already ruled [wikipedia.org] that there's evidence that Apple is in violation of anti-trust law [cornell.edu], and I assume they're not naive or ignorant.
You know Apple has literally already had to settle a case for colluding with Google [theguardian.com], so that's
Re: (Score:2)
Of course Apple's no stranger to the Sherman Antitrust Act having already been found guilty of violating it [wikipedia.org] back in 2012. That case was about the iBooks Store which, at the time, was significantly smaller than the Amazon's Kindle Book Store. So obviously c
Re: If anyone knows about anti-trust behavior... (Score:5, Interesting)
How stupid do you have to be to say there is no collusion going on here?
You misunderstand what collusion is. It requires coordination between multiple companies to set prices. With regards to the app store, Apple first set a price of 30% and then Google just matched it. Nothing is preventing Google from dropping their rate as they have no agreement with Apple for a fixed price. This is sort of like how all fuel stations sell gas for the same price.
If Android never supported third party stores then this could border on collusion as there are only two players and they can coordinate without formally meeting. But this is not the case - Google still has to compete with third party app stores. With the presence of third party app stores in Google, the price Google charges should be competitive. But they still charge the same as Apple because that is what they think the market will tolerate.
But this is all really irrelevant because there is no market for app stores on Apple devices. The app store is part of the Apple product and given that Apple does not have a monopoly - this is not a problem. It would be a different story if consumers could only purchase smart phones from Apple. This would be like how consumers were forced to purchase Windows if they wanted a computer.
It is actually Google that could have problems in this scenario. There is a market for app stores on Android devices but if Google is found to be using their hold on the OS to fix people into using the Google app store - not good. Google opens themselves up to possible anti-trust by purposely allowing for third party app stores. It is an Android selling point and one of the ways they compete with Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
I should note that when Apple prevents developers from selling their products elsewhere for less -- that is potentially illegal. I believe their book store was found to be guilty for doing this. So Apple is not perfect and can definitely run foul of the law. But not with regards to only allowing apps from their own app store.
Apple's big mistake, not a monopoly (Score:2)
Imagine if Apple had licensed IOS in the early days. Probably a cut down version, with lots of licensing restrictions.
Android would not exist today. Apple would have the same monopoly that Microsoft used to have. It would be Apple propping up minor competitors to avoid anti-monopoly laws, just like Microsoft did for Apple.
But companies do not change their culture. We note that Newspapers considered themselves a paper company, and not one of them embraced the internet, which should have been gold for the
Re: Apple's big mistake, not a monopoly (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting dates. But when did Android phones take off?
I think it is fair to say that if IOS could have been purchased by other manufacturers at a reasonable price Android would be far less successful than it is.
Re: Apple's big mistake, not a monopoly (Score:2)
Maybe. But I think you're mis-remembering how primitive the original iPhones were.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you are misremembering how primitive the phones before the iPhone were. I still have some pre-iPhone smartphones in the drawer to remind me of the pain.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure they don't have an agreement? Wouldn't it take a court-case to find out? After all, Google and Apple had an agreement they never talked about to keep Google the default search engine on Safar [nytimes.com]
Re: If anyone knows about anti-trust behavior... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Came here for this comment. Was not disappointed. 5/5 would mod up if I had points.
Re: (Score:3)
Right, this is fucking hilarious coming from Microsoft. Payback is a bitch huh?
Re:If anyone knows about anti-trust behavior... (Score:4, Funny)
I think my irony meter just imploded. The concentration of irony is so high here that it has passed the Schwarzschild Radius...
Re:If anyone knows about anti-trust behavior... (Score:5, Informative)
Always accuse your enemies of what you’re guilty of.
Re: (Score:2)
yup, pot calling the kettle black, here.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
... I'd say it is Microsoft.
There is no-one so zealously anti-cigarette as an ex-smoker.
Microsoft, like IBM, has shown major reform since their monopolistic days. And their motives are irrelevant. What matters is that Microsoft has largely reformed.
Apple has not, so of course Microsoft is annoyed. It is not hypocrisy.
Of course Apple has improved a lot with interoperability. e.g. back in the day, they deliberately modified their floppy-drive hardware so a Mac could not read PC floppies, or vice versa.
Microsoft has largely reformed. (Score:2)
> Microsoft has largely reformed.
citation needed.
Re: (Score:2)
> Microsoft has largely reformed.
citation needed.
https://au.finance.yahoo.com/n... [yahoo.com]
Also, I use Linux, and Microsoft has excellent product support and interoperability with Linux users these days.
Re: If anyone knows about anti-trust behavior... (Score:2)
Most of those people are gone.
And Microsoft should know. (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
So if Apple gets slapped for Anti-Trust, they will delay any payment or actions, and use the money and resources to lobby for a government to be easier on them after the next election.
Re: And Microsoft should know. (Score:5, Informative)
You can't talk about election fraud without getting bitch slapped because even Republicans can't find any. They sponsored and even staffed multiple audits, literally all of which found only a minuscule amount of vote fraud, the vast majority of which was perpetrated by Republicans. Every one found that Biden actually got even more votes than previously counted, and none of them found enough fraud to come anywhere near changing the results of the election.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a lie pushed by the fake news media. If you actually read the AZ audit report, through to the end (not just the initial portion), you can see that they found tens of thousands of questionable ballots.
You, sir, are the one who believes lies pushed by fake news media. As usual, that is cuckservative media. Your claim is trivially debunked [12news.com]. e.g. "Cyber Ninjas came up with the list of people they claimed moved houses by comparing the addresses of mail-in ballots to a commercial address list known as Melissa [which] ties people to multiple addresses for many reasons that may have nothing to do with where they actually live" — I personally have gone through this kind of confusion with credit reporting a
Re: (Score:3)
Oh please... This is the government they want to have these rulings going down under right now.
You seem to have forgotten that it was under Clinton that the original Microsoft law suite and conviction occurred. Then Microsoft stalled until Bush jr. got into office and his DoJ ensured that MS only revived a slap on the wrist and a few stern words as punishment.
They already used their money and resources to help steal the last election.
Credible citation please.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump-loving conservatives or just trolls can get modpoints too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: And Microsoft should know. (Score:3)
Microsoft never lost its de facto Monopoly position over the desktop. Apple continues to enjoy only a tiny slice of the desktop market, and everyone else has far less. This is because Bush's pet John Ashcroft stated that it would not be in America's best interest to hold them responsible for their actions. Then Microsoft rewarded the federal government by making Windows the most insidious spyware of all time, which is desirable to the feds because Microsoft is part of PRISM. Of course, these days, so is App
Re: (Score:2)
LOL. You do realize that CSS was something Microsoft invented and put into Internet Explorer to try to obsolete Netscape right? Embrace, extend, extinguish.
Except for the embrace, extend, extinguish part, none of this is true. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Believe (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll believe them when they allow third party game stores on the XBox.
Re: (Score:3)
Okay, well then you might want to look into EA Play on Xbox.
Re: Believe (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not that familiar with what Microsoft allows on xbox, but pretty sure they *do* allow what Epic wants Apple to allow.
Third-party app store isn't really the issue for Epic. They are fine publishing through Apple's app store, it's the demand that the app published can't do so many things, like process its own payments, that is the issue.
Dismissing them just because they don't go as far as you want sort of feels like letting perfect be the enemy of good, missing the forest for the trees, or some third thin
Re: (Score:2)
It's really wild coming to /. and seeing people run interference on Apple's behalf with whataboutism style arguments.
Saying Microsoft is wrong isn't the same thing as saying Apple is right.
But yea sure let's compare a videogame console for which there are no custom games at all with a personal pocket computer that happens to have an Apple logo on it.
I don't know what that means. What is a custom game?
For the record your so called "closed" eco system does not make you more secure.
I'm not sure why that is relevant here.
Android is far more secure in reality because there are way more people poking holes and apps are actually siloed off from each other.
You're right, the stock Google Android is probably more secure than iOS if you only allow apps from trusted sources.
But, I doubt the hoarked-up custom Android builds that most carriers dump on their phones is more secure than what Google or Apple put out.
What kind of weak-knee pussyism is this? (Score:3)
800 pound gorilla doesn't like it when another 800 pound gorilla muscles in.
Pound sand, Microsoft. You, of all companies, don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to anti-competitive behavior.
Are companies so weak today that they need to litigate instead of innovate?
*sigh* this is MS we're talking about. Litigate away, it'll just make you look even more petty.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that the analogy of two 800 pound gorillas is an apt one here, but wouldn't the smart thing be to let the two of them fight it out, in the hope that one will take out the other or (better yet) they will both take each other out?
Because after all, any precedents set regarding Apple's anti-competitive behavior will also surely be applied to Microsoft. Apple will make sure of it!
Theoretically this could result in a win-win for consumers. Or it could be one of those cases where the only real winners a
Re: What kind of weak-knee pussyism is this? (Score:2)
No, if one of them takes out the other then they become more powerful, and thus more problematic.
Holy hell. (Score:5, Funny)
Read headline and did a spit-take. WTF? Microsoft calling out another company for Antitrust? Next thing you know Bezos will be saying we need to stop Walmart!
Re: (Score:3)
Been reading /. since the 1990's. 25 years ago, this headline would have been April Fools material. How things have changed.
Oh, that's rich. (Score:5, Insightful)
Coming from Microsoft? And after they *just* repeated their Bungie/Connectix/Obsidian/etc. shenanigans with both Bethesda and Blizzard? They are the last ones who have any business criticizing anyone else for "anticompetitive behavior". They're the damned poster child for that shit.
Company rename (Score:2)
Projectionsoft
There can only be ONE! (Score:2)
Appsoftmetazon
How is Apple a monopoly? (Score:3)
Sure they are big and amoral, but that doesn't make them a monopoly.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a lawsuit that's about Apple's App Store and the iOS/iPadOS/tvOS app ecosystem which Apple maintains an iron grip over.
Re:How is Apple a monopoly? (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a lawsuit that's about Apple's App Store and the iOS/iPadOS/tvOS app ecosystem which Apple maintains an iron grip over.
And the only court case of which to date has declared it *not* a monopoly. Until another court rules otherwise it remains as such.
No surprise either, you can't be accused of being a monopoly in your own vertically integrated ecosystem. Your own product isn't magically a market just because it's popular, and the actual market Apple is operating in, it doesn't actually even have a majority market share.
Re: How is Apple a monopoly? (Score:2)
"you can't be accused of being a monopoly in your own vertically integrated ecosystem."
[citation needed]
Re: (Score:2)
"you can't be accused of being a monopoly in your own vertically integrated ecosystem."
[citation needed]
Again it's self evident: It's not a market. Your own vertically integrated ecosystem is simply your own product (almost universally in some other market). The iPhone isn't a market. The phone market is a market and there the App Store not only doesn't have a monopoly, it doesn't actually even have a controlling market share.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a market because millions of independent third parties sell iPhone software.
You're confusing market (the place traders go to sell) and market (a demand for products services or goods). You can't be a monopoly in the former, you can only be the market platform.
It's a monopoly because Apple prevents by deliberate technical means any other competing stores from selling and distributing iPhone software.
Absolutely nothing at all to do with the word monopoly. What you're trying to describe is antitrust and anticompetitive practices. Both may exist with or without a monopoly.
Companies are free to create closed ecosystems of software they write or contract to have written on their behalf. What they ought not to be free to do is create a marketplace and then hold it captive.
There is no captivity. It is their ecosystem, you can chose to play or not. No one is holding a gun to your head saying "code in objective C for iOS muther
Re: (Score:2)
Re: How is Apple a monopoly? (Score:3)
What's weird is I have bought and used apps on phones and set top boxes without an help from Apple. It's been about 12 years since I last purchased a device from Apple. Because, big surprise, there is a massive market outside of the iOS/macOS ecosystem.
If I bought a Bissell vacuum cleaner and then complained that the parts and bags are only available from the original manufacture, then I have only two options. Sue them for anticompetive practices, or caveat emptor and get on with my life.
Re: How is Apple a monopoly? (Score:2)
That is a stupid comparison because the vacuum in your scenario has no DRM preventing you from using another bag. Apple's digital restrictions management is what makes their behavior anticompetitive.
Re: (Score:2)
Other bags don't fit and patent law makes it difficult to duplicate a vacuum bag for about 20 years. Because the IP laws are kind of fucked.
I took technology out of my analogy to illustrate that the problems we have are deeper than you may have assumed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How is Apple a monopoly? (Score:5, Insightful)
Anti-trust law, and monopolistic behavior, isn't just limited to true monopolies, where only one company controls a market. Anti-trust law also applies to markets that are controlled by a very small number of companies. When it comes to app marketplaces, there are really only two: Apple and Google. Microsoft and Amazon have app stores, but they make up an insignificant portion of the market, allowing Apple and Google to ignore them competitively.
When a company has so much control that they can charge whatever commission they want, you know, like 30%, that is monopolistic behavior. In a marketplace with many competitors, there is no way companies could get away with such a steep commission.
Re:How is Apple a monopoly? (Score:5, Insightful)
They can't charge whatever they want, though. If they raised the amount to 80%, nobody would pay it. Honestly, if they raised it up to 40%, there's a good chance that most app developers would start to balk and look for other places to develop for.
Also, as has been remarked upon many times, the 30% take is common in the games industry on consoles, and yet nobody seems to be suing Nintendo, Microsoft or Sony for the same behaviour. As I recall, Epic even tried to dodge that question and did so poorly, not making a compelling argument for why those companies deserve a pass on their 30% tax but Apple and Google don't.
I think the 30% take is too greedy, but I don't feel like there's any reasonable way to claim that Apple is a monopoly that requires anti-trust regulation for this specific thing when Google is providing a better deal right now, and has a reach that is still somewhat larger than Apple's even in the USA. There are precious few places in the world where iOS holds equal or higher marketshare than Android, so it must be the case that Apple's dominance is not absolute—there's competition, if people are willing to partake in it.
Google has an effective monopoly on search, even with the rise of DDG. It's because Google search is still the best search. I could click anywhere else and often do, but I still have to go back to Google because it gives me the best results when I need them.
Much in the same way, I think the claim that there's no competition doesn't hold up under even light scrutiny. There's competition and it's not what people want.
Re:How is Apple a monopoly? (Score:4, Insightful)
You're not wrong, it could be worse. The point is not the specific 30% threshold, but the greed. When companies are so powerful in a given marketplace that they can get away with overt greed, they have too much power. The market mechanisms that control prices have failed. That's when anti-trust law needs to do its job. In the case of game consoles (another market controlled by a small number of players), it has failed to provide the proper enforcement.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with this too, I just don't think that the state has a lot of leverage here, and that the claims of 'no competition' are overblown.
Interestingly, if Apple dropped their cut of the take to 0%, I think that would ALSO be subject to anti-trust regulation. Apple actually doesn't need that money to be ultra-profitable, so I think it would be seen as an anti-competitive loss leader.
Re: (Score:2)
Even a 100% monopoly can't charge whatever it wants. If there were a 100% monopoly on cars, it couldn't charge a million dollars per car. Most people would just not buy a car, and take a bus or stay home instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Fair point. But of course a company that did that wouldn't make much money, and any competitor at all would disrupt that. Apple is making a shit-tonne of money, meaning they're charging a price people are willing to pay and paying out enough to devs that it's worth their time, and there is one major competitor in the market that offers a meaningfully comprehensive product.
Re: How is Apple a monopoly? (Score:2)
More Anti-Trust Enforcement Needed (Score:3)
While I largely side with Epic, I have a real problem with the way they went about this. Still, if anything, it shows that we need to stop just waving through all these M&A deals and start going in the opposite direction of breaking up some of these larger companies.
Darth Vader quote (Score:2)
Then I should be able to uninstall Edge & Cort (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Cortana isn't even enabled by default.
When has that ever stopped Microsoft? Microsoft has a long history of hijacking our settings for search, browser, and, coincidentally enough, even the toggle for enabling Cortona after we've disabled it. If you don't think they'll do it again, I have a bridge to sell you.
I'd suggest that that's why it's so important to be able to uninstall it outright, as the OP was suggesting, but I've seen enough to know that won't stop Microsoft either: they'll simply reinstall it on the next update and set it to be enab
Pot. Kettle. Black. (Score:3)
Wow, talk about disengenuous. Microsoft is still significantly worse than Apple, they just keep it under cover better. Something should be done with all the $Trillion companies to make sure they are kept under control, broken up, and prevent new entrants to the club. Government can’t regulate them when they get that big.
Re: (Score:2)
Hypocrisy doesn't matter. Apple will fire back. A full-on hypocritical war between Microsoft and Apple over who's the biggest 800 lb. gorilla can only benefit the consumer. (And the lawyers. Don't forget them.)
Shorter version of the amicus... (Score:2)
"If Apple isn't stopped now, it will continue getting better than Microsoft in every area other than weirdly confusing license agreements and Windows Updates that don't work."
Dude! (Score:4, Funny)
It's Groundhog Day, not April Fools'.
pot, meet cattle (Score:2)
In other news, the catholic church has stated that child predators are a serious issue...
Strategic (Score:2)
Apple is just a tactical thing for Microsoft. They *needed* Apple so that Microsoft didn't have a desktop monopoly. If I remember, Microsoft injected money into Apple:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
How weird things are.
Idea for new Steam game (Score:2)
"Barrel of 800 pound Gorillas"
In which we get various 800 pound gorillas pound their chests and call out other 800 pound gorillas for doing things all the 800 pound gorillas are doing.
And then bribe the lawmakers (oops campaign donations, my bad) to have their way.
Oh boy (Score:2)
LOL! (Score:2)
Pot: HEY! KETTLE! You're BLACK dude!
No Fair (Score:2)
They out monopolized us! Do something!
There is no legislative cure for stupidity (Score:2)
If users enjoy being restricted and overcharged, there will always be someone available to abuse them. There is absolutely no reason for lack of affordable phones or for not having a super secure by default device that can only be unlocked with a user visible action like removing a screw.
oh diddums (Score:2)
Poor Microsoft
Apple and Google are carving up the world and only leaving a teeny slice for them.
Adverse Effects (Score:2)
Interestingly, I have zero adverse affects from anything Apple does. I have no Apple devices, and use no Apple services (Duck Duck Go uses Apple Maps under the hood; but that's their problem, not mine). I am able to avoid Apple very easily.
Microsoft, on the other hand, has its tentacles wrapped around EVERYTHING. Even as a Linux user, Microsoft is inescapable in its monopolistic market control. Even my motherboards, which run Linux exclusively, require a Microsoft signing key (which Linux distributors have
*ring, ring* Hey, pot! This is kettle... (Score:2)
... YOU'RE BLACK!
Seriously could you imagine this headline being published in the '90s by anyone other than The Onion?
Microsoft might be right... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You don't see what Microsoft is doing because you are willfully ignorant. Which is the point, isn't it.
Re:Lame to bash MS for this (Score:4, Insightful)
Then again, their Xbox division keeps buying other studios, some of them which were already bigger studios buying smaller one. At one point, there won't even be non-Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo/Steam alternatives for gaming. I could see Microsoft buying Valve and Steam, and Sony and Nintendo merging together as they're the last two Japan-native gaming companies.
So where do we draw the line? When should we begin to stop these mega-mergers? The less competitors there are, the less competition there is.
As an example, the first smartphones didn't cost as much as they do today. Apple started the trend of expensive smartphones and all the others followed. Remember that even the first smartphones, as old and slow as they seem to us today, were cutting edge technology at the time. So reasoning that it's "normal" for smartphones to be so expensive today makes no sense, they should have cost a lot more back then, too. So apart from dumb flip-phones, are there even any good, low-cost smartphones models anymore, from any company?
Re: (Score:3)
I mean - let's do a quick look here. I think there's different motivations for the mega-corps. I think Microsoft has/had a track record of buying competitors to swallow them and digest them whole, either stealing all their products or just closing them down to remove the competition. This is pretty clearly anti-trust competitive behaviour. Now let's look at something Amazon has done - they started their own last mile fulfillment. They did this, not to squash UPS and FedEx, and USPS but because those compan
Re: (Score:2)
I have an A32 from Samsung that cost about $300 (actually less). It was an almost identical sidegrade from my previous Galaxy S8. In fact, in many aspects it's better than my S8, and has full 5G C-band capability. It looks cheap, but I put it in a carbon fiber case and now it looks damn sexy.
True: You can't do it with Apple. But all you have to do is get off the latest/greatest treadmill with Android. There are inexpensive smartphones available.
Re: (Score:2)
I could see Microsoft buying Valve and Steam ...
Not while Gaben is around. He already worked for MS. He's not interested in doing it again. He seems to enjoy what he's doing these days. I would worry if his health went south, or if he started expressing desire to retire, but as long as he's having a good time, Valve is safe from MS.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that's good to hear because IMHO the only thing that can potentially stop the Meta/Oculus cancer is whatever Valve is going to come up with next, i.e. "Index 2" or whatever form it takes.
Microsoft are too business-oriented in the Windows sector and never announced anything VR-related for their Xbox division.
Sony is almost killing itself from the inside on some fronts (from either political, leadership, hardware and/or partnerships decisions) and although they did announce PSVR2 and the specs seem good
Re:Lame to bash MS for this (Score:4, Insightful)
Excepting how the new widgets bar completely ignores your default browser choice and opens up Edge, as does the search function in the Start menu. Also, you can't choose your Start menu search engine. It's Bing or nothing, baby.
So next time you see Edge and Bing market share, understand that it is artificially inflated by hard-coded usage in Windows 11. Any browser would do to launch from the widgets panel, but I am not allowed to choose it. It's Edge or nothing, baby.
Microsoft is back to the browser wars. That's why there's no longer a general "default apps" section like there was in Windows 10 and prior. I'm sure you've seen the stories about how that is missing. It's missing for a reason. Microsoft, after being forced to accept easy default browser and media playback choices by antitrust rulings, is back to its old tricks. It's no longer easy and/or effective to choose your default media or browser apps.
The fox still guards the henhouse. I'd love it if this starts into a war of the major players calling each other out for it, because then the consumer wins.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not so sure of that. I don't think it's a coincidence that the number of daily users for Teams has skyrocketed after they started bundling it with Office 365. You could also make similar arguments for OneDrive and Sharepoint.
They're also repeating their anticompetitive behavior with browsers. Edge is bundled with Windows and it can't easily be uninstalled. And this tim
Re: (Score:3)
Firefox is dying, Safari is limited to Apple hardware. Their only real competitors are Amazon and Google, and since Amazon's competition is limited to cloud services, Microsoft probably sees Google as their main competitor on the desktop.
This is an Alien-vs-Predator dilemma, though. Whoever wins, we lose.
Re: (Score:3)
Did Netcraft confirm that?
Re: (Score:2)
Multiples times!
Re:Lose-lose (Score:4, Informative)
I don't know. Doesn't seem to work that way in Civ. The evil AIs fight it out and then I just pick up the scraps and win a domination victory, or sit back and win my science victory while they fail at domination. For this reason, I frequently take up the offer of a joint war and then just sit there and laugh at them instead of contributing any troops.
Maybe we should do the same. They deserve each other.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple and Jobs were never and still are not M$; they are an elite brand like Ferarri in that they want to be the best and desired product. They want to lead and change the world and that mantra Jobs promoted and believed in drew in talent who wanted to be part of something great. Musk has captured that appeal today and the talent flocks toward him now (even from Apple.) Apple's coasting and has some talent left over; for a while.
M$ wanted to control and monopolize everything because they just had to be "go