Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

to johnbondjovi:

It's interesting to see how one insists on holding certain principle and their derivatives so linearly true. Microsoft is breaking the *law*. Punish them. Apple is not breaking the *law* yet. No punishment for them. Yet. Google is not breaking the *law* yet. No punishment for them, either. Yet.

You seem to like to prescribe and only to prescribe solutions to remedy policies violated more than to look closer and stay with the problem at hand longer to see the whether greater good can be obtained than by issuing the traditional remedies given to these violations of rules, which are here with us in the first place to do good but are bound to be altered. Aren't you tired/sick of that?

Why do I say so? If 15 years ago Microsoft was guilty, why haven't they been punished? Perhaps there were holes in these regulations. Perhaps the government thought the tax was so good coming from Microsoft they can easily overlook the lawsuit. Microsoft was given when A then B, but they chose C which got them D instead. Perhaps the US regulation is not as strict as the EU. I think it's that simple. I think it's because there were the rules, there were the rule appliers, and there were very good arguers with Microsoft that show these policy followers, like you, don't make sense. And that was when someone who need to say, hold on a second, yes these are the laws written down but you are *obvioiusly* doing something far from good and are just as *obviously* as argued by your lawyer unpunishable, hence the laws must be rewritten for you and for the future. thank you very much. That should have been but it was not.

Now, like you, if every prosecutor seeks holes only when they are discovered, then *things* can be 'too late' or *things* can be just fine. But it's the 'can be too late' part that we should concern ourselves. Like you, many car makers make irresponsibly inefficient cars thinking that when the time comes we need to switch, we then will switch. How about an ancienter example? Some civilization in the Amazon actually chopped down all the trees in their country to make boats, and then ended up with no trees. Simple, isn't it? If I declare a move to make an OS tonight, and decided to throw in my own browser tonight and distributing it to Aunt Elyssa tomorrow when I see her, it does sound funny to come down to my apartment to warn me of monopoly behavior. I've got reasonably negligible potential. Apple doesn't have that. Google doesn't have that. We can't just wait to see it grow large enough to take action. You don't skip your yearly check up either, do you?

And recently AT&T rejected Skype's use of its cellular 3G network for calls because it has every right, it claims, to let its *competitor* to use its cellular network. They got their way. Microsoft now offers its competitor's browser on a du jour menu, that's more than generous. How large is large? Do you decide? Does EC decide? Oh, it's not who decide, it's how. Okay, sure, then. How? 65%? How about 64.999% Come on, just one thousandth of a % point, can you take Microsoft off the hook, please? How about 64.998%? It's practially the same as 64.999%. And so on.

Do you notice a lot of things we use our hard earn money to purchase today comes with very third grade components? Why aren't they one by one sued? Why aren't their mother companies forced to offer choice of their respective competitors' components? I think it's because whatever it is, it won't change that future that much that fast. Maybe in a thousand years' time you won't be wanting to use a 2009 abc component for the 3009 xyz. But you know as I do that you barely want to use, most of the time, 2000's product on your 2009 box. And it doesn't seem to be slowing down, this trend. It's the potential money in a pseudo-potential / kind-of established market of a confirmed realm of technologies (computers). Everyone can see this. And this is why it got US government's attention 15yrs ago. And this is why it got EC's attention a couple of years ago. But if it weren't for the potential it has to affect so much as oppose to made in China nail vs made in Mexico nail for the plumbing machine used predominantly in Alaska, then who cares? Google has potential, Apple has potential, Linux got potential, for the same kind of motivation, they should also then be examined. Not just when they or others have proved themselves to be the giant, then you go after them. That's shortsightedness, that's the policy-following brown noser, that's falsehood from incompleteness in thinking, Like

Yours.