Apple, Microsoft: Birds of the same feather

January 27, 2009

Microsoft is being sued in the European Union(EU) for antitrust practices – yet again. The piece of software that’s the bone of contention is Internet Explorer. In spite of being one of lousiest browsers, extremely prone to security exploits, Microsoft’s Internet Explorer still holds a majority stake in the market of web browsers. Mozilla’s Firefox, comparatively a much superior product, comes second by quite a distance. The EU now wants to stop Microsoft from bundling IE with its Windows family of operating systems or bundle other competing browsers too. The rationale behind such a directive is to allow users the choice of trying out an alternative.Anyway, Microsoft’s practices have always been anti-competitive and for this reason it has been much vilified by the pundits.

applelogoOn the other hand, Apple, in spite of being even more closed than Microsoft, has never come under the radar of the anti-trust laws. Firstly, Apple prohibits the usage of its operating system on any hardware other than Apple branded ones. The hardware that Apple sells has significant markups even though it is not necessarily superior. So for the same hardware capability, consumers pay an exorbitant price. Isn’t that anti-competitive? How is it then that Apple never comes under the scrutiny of the anti-trust sharks? When Psystar started selling computers with Apple Mac OS installed, Apple decided to sue to the company. Many thought it would be an open and shut case, but guess what? Psystar continues to sell its brand of Open Computers preloaded with Apple Mac OS. Psystar has also brought forward anti-competitive charges against Apple. Till date Apple has not won the case. So is there are a chance that Apple might come under the anti-trust laws at last?

And Apple is a really sore loser. The recently announced Palm Pre stole the thunder from Apple in this year’s CES. Experts are predicting that the Pre would probably dethrone the Apple iPhone. So what does Apple do? It responded with a veiled threat of suing anyone(read Palm) for violation of their IP. Well the iPod design was not Apple’s and they ripped it off. They survived that because the previous patent was held by an individual who could not renew it due to financial constraints. And being the unscrupulous corporate that it is, Apple did not even think of paying a one time royalty to the guy. But when sued, they brought him over to lend credence to their case in court.

So ladies and gentlemen, next time before maligning Microsoft over a coffee-table discussion, please give Apple a fair thought. They are no better than Microsoft. The only difference is that Apple enjoys the loyalty of a few high-nosed zealots that Microsoft does not have.

Entry Filed under: Hackintosh, apple, apple safari, firefox, iphone, iphone 3g, ipod, mac book, mac book pro, mac os, macbook air, macbook touch, mbp, microsoft, mozilla, mozilla firefox, operating system, palm, pc, psystar, web browser, windows. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

2 Comments Add your own

  • 1. dizzle  |  January 27, 2009 at 11:57 pm

    Please don’t be so ignorant.

    You say, “Till date Apple has not won the case. So is there are a chance that Apple might come under the anti-trust laws at last?”

    Do you know ANYTHING about the case or law at all? Let me educate you.

    1. Parties don’t simply “win” cases out of the blue. There is a procedure to go through. The part of the case where there might be a “winner” hasn’t even come close to happening. The trial isn’t scheduled until November and neither party has filed a motion for summary judgment. Did you just pull that comment out of your rear?

    2. In this case, the anti-trust allegations were dismissed by the Court. Did you even bother to find that out? In that portion of the case APPLE WON.

    Sheesh. All of this stuff is public information, there is no excuse for such ignorance.

    Reply
  • 2. dizzle  |  January 28, 2009 at 12:02 am

    I would add that while I don’t defend Microsoft very often, the EU position’s is ridiculous. Perhaps you should get over your hate to at least get basic facts right and look at the cases without emotion.

    I really am eager to learn how much of the Psystar case you have read to feel qualified to write those statements. I am guessing you haven’t read even one of the filings. I have read not only every filing but 75% of the case law cited, and 100% of the case that was significantly relied upon.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Express your opinion

I am on LinkedIn

View Prosenjit Bhattacharyya's profile on LinkedIn

Blogroll

Recent Posts

Top Posts

My Posts

Blog Stats

My Categories

apple app store future technology google google chrome google phone iphone iphone 3g ipod Kubuntu laptop Linux mac book macbook air mac book pro macbook touch mac os mbp microsoft mozilla new laptop notebook open source operating system palm smart phone Ubuntu Uncategorized web browser windows

My Tags

adobe android android market apple apple iphone apple iphone 3g app store call drop chrome firefox flex g1 google google android google chrome google phone iphone iphone 3g iphone 3g problem ipod javascript kde Kubuntu laptop lawsuit Linux mac macbook macbook pro mac os microsoft mozilla new apple laptops new macbook new macbook pro notebook open source palm psystar silverlight smart phone t-mobile g1 Ubuntu web browser windows