no that's a bad analogy and totally wrong, you really don't understand anticompetitivenessJoeshie said:I have no problems with EU getting pissed at Microsoft bundling IE with Windows. I do have problems when the EU suggests that Microsoft must be forced to include the competition into their OS. It would be like forcing Coca-Cola to put Pepsi ads on their Coke cans.
If anything, it's the EU's suggestion that is anti-competition.
actually i've probly forgotten more about linux than you'll know, i've been running it for over 12 yearsThrobbingEgo said:You're free to uninstall it in 7. Or just install Linux.
That new Ubuntu release looks pretty slick. Just saying.
the thing you 2 don't understand is when they look at if someone has an unfair monopoly, they look at the COMMON person, not some techie or geek that has a clue. they look at joe sixpack and family. they ask the question "do they know there is an alternative" in EVERY antitrust case it has been a "NO"
now there are other factors to this as well, m$ also forced companies to NOT include other web browsers in their os install, they also charged all OEM's a premium whether or not they installed a m$ product and then undercutting everyone else for the cost of their operating system and then since they were losing to netscape they decided to tie ie with the os and they basically killed netscape there because most people had no clue there was a netscape because they didn't know much about computers
so to use the coke-pepsi analogy, and correctly this time, this is like having to pay coke a $1 tax every time you want to drink any type of cola no matter what and coke is $1 cheaper than every other, would the vast majority of people actually drink pepsi anymore if they had to pay $1 more per can for a pepsi? no they wouldn't, some people would but the vast majority wouldn't pay the extra $1