“N” for “Not”
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Tue, 2006-10-10 20:39
A quote from Dick Armey in The Washington Times, 5 October 2006
Apple recently ran into a buzzsaw in France over iTunes, and other European nations smell blood in the water. The European Union has blocked the merger of American companies such as GE and Honeywell and Sprint and MCI, and Microsoft has been under constant fire for its products in Europe. The problem is not that consumers are being harmed; rather, the problem is that European firms do not like the competition.
In the United States, the antitrust laws are premised on consumer harm. No consumer harm, no antitrust violation. Vibrant competition is the gold standard for U.S. authorities. Europe has a completely different take, as suggested by the fact that they require a “Commissioner of Competition.” For Europe, managed competition is the ideal, with regulators taking an active role in designing the market and products that consumers ultimately can purchase. Dominant firms can compete, but not too hard.
[…] Under orders from the EU, Microsoft stripped out the media player to release Windows N for Europe. The “N” might as well stand for “Not” […] As it prepares to launch its newest version of Windows, European regulators are again threatening to take action. Security problems have been a concern to anyone using the Internet, yet the European Union has warned Microsoft about bundling new security features with the products it sells to consumers. In a networked world, the diminished security capacity of computers in Europe would be felt globally.
I don't share your anti-competitive ambiguity
Submitted by Flanders Fields on Thu, 2006-10-12 10:47.
What is passing here in Europe as protecting Europe against the big, bad so called American companies is sticking it to the people of Europe. The prices here are ridiculous in a modern world. The lack of service is almost criminal. The regulators are not interested in protecting the public as much as they are interested in extorting more to prop up their power-the same as any good socialist-even if the people have to pay more to get less for otherwise desireable and useful products. I guess people put up with it because they do not know any differene. It is more difficult to stomach for those of us who have experience with low prices and good products with reasonably good service. From what I can tell, you have never had that in Europe.
Government/Industrial/Legal/Complex
Submitted by Amsterdamsky on Thu, 2006-10-12 10:12.
Of couse the merger of KLM and Air France went through like shit through a goose. The resulting monopoly raised all their prices on several routes they control and has posted record profits since.
Both Sides Have Justifiable Points To Make Here
Submitted by Mission Impossible on Wed, 2006-10-11 04:00.
I despise the Leninist (centralizing) tendencies of the EU as much as anyone here, but in the case of Microsoft (and Boeing) they do have a valid point. Perhaps Dick Armey has selected bad examples to underline his argument.
The software vendor primarily responsible for our lack of PC and Network security (and thus all the spamming, spyware, viruses, and identity theft) is Microsoft. Oracle's Larry Ellison once famously derided Gate's software as "vapourware." Microsoft software was always crudely composed and vastly inflated in code volume compared to most other competitors. Those of you who remember the wordprocessor "WordPerfect" will know how superior it was to MS-Word. It failed in the market only because Microsoft sabotaged it by keeping secret some aspects of its Windows Op System.
Boeing always survived because it was kept healthy with military and NASA budget handouts. Frequent flyers know the Airbus aircraft fleet are superior in design.
As for GE, I didn't know it was still an American company. I thought, by now, it had opened so many overseas branches, and employed so many Asians, it would have to be called an Indian company by now. Ipods are made in China. Many of us are sick to death of these American corporate tactics, which only satisfy shareholders, and not the American workers.
So, Americans as a people should not be too defensive over European sensitivities on this issue.