LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Linux - News (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-news-59/)
-   -   Is Microsoft Buying Anti-Virus Companies to Undermine Linux? (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-news-59/is-microsoft-buying-anti-virus-companies-to-undermine-linux-336142/)

tadelste 06-22-2005 01:13 PM

Is Microsoft Buying Anti-Virus Companies to Undermine Linux?
 
I'm guessing that Redmond has fallen out of the Federal Trade Commission's jurisdiction since it has scooped up RAV anti-virus and now Sybari and discontinued Linux and UNIX services without as much as a "boo". They only left distributors holding squat in 60 countries and left 10 million users without service.

Here's my questions and my assertion about Microsoft's contribution to an ugly America. IS all fair in love and war? How about in restraint of trade?

http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/38606/index.html

ctkroeker 06-22-2005 01:44 PM

Well, NO it is not fair, but it's legal, right? I just read that and i mae me really mad at M$, they are selfish and do not mind terminating anything in their way.
what can you do:mad:

Kdr Kane 06-22-2005 01:47 PM

There is nothing stopping IBM or Novell from buying up anti-virus companies.

tadelste 06-22-2005 02:01 PM

I'm asking a question about legality
 
Quote:

Originally posted by ctkroeker
Well, NO it is not fair, but it's legal, right? I just read that and i mae me really mad at M$, they are selfish and do not mind terminating anything in their way.
what can you do:mad:

You see, it may be illegal because they are a monopoloy and anything they do in restraint of trade is illegal.

Now, why in the world aren't the people who enforce these laws jumping on Microsoft?

tadelste 06-22-2005 02:03 PM

Yes there is! IBM may still be subject to their Edict!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Kdr Kane
There is nothing stopping IBM or Novell from buying up anti-virus companies.

IBM faced a trial and were found guilty of being a monopoly. They had to comply with their edict. They may not be able to buy just anything they want.

But regardless, whose minding the store?

ctkroeker 06-22-2005 02:06 PM

Re: I'm asking a question about legality
 
Quote:

Originally posted by tadelste
Now, why in the world aren't the people who enforce these laws jumping on Microsoft?
Maybe they are on M$ paylist;) .
On a mor serious note, probably because their scared that M$ might do something to them, somehow.:tisk:

ctkroeker 06-22-2005 02:07 PM

-

Kdr Kane 06-22-2005 02:31 PM

Re: Yes there is! IBM may still be subject to their Edict!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by tadelste
IBM faced a trial and were found guilty of being a monopoly. They had to comply with their edict.
Really? Can you show me a link for that? Because I don't believe that is true.

69_rs_ss 06-22-2005 02:51 PM

MS might have been found a monopoly, but not in the Anti-virus realm. There are many big players out there that have their own linux versions.

hackerarchangel 06-26-2005 12:09 AM

ok this topic is interesting... Microsoft only has a stranglehold on the OS side of the market, and only when you buy a computer with a preinstalled os on it... They was forcing windows down our throats, because whenever we bought a non-custom machine form a major store, it had windows. Now i can go to my local staples and a get a relatively cheap desktop with Linspire on it. Kind of cool.... oh, one other thing, they can buy the antivirus until someone says they have to big of control, and they go to war again....

allforcarrie 06-28-2005 08:08 AM

Re: I'm asking a question about legality
 
Quote:

Originally posted by tadelste
You see, it may be illegal because they are a monopoloy and anything they do in restraint of trade is illegal.

Now, why in the world aren't the people who enforce these laws jumping on Microsoft?

they TRIED..... it didnt do any good.

tadelste 06-29-2005 05:31 PM

Re: Re: Yes there is! IBM may still be subject to their Edict!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Kdr Kane
Really? Can you show me a link for that? Because I don't believe that is true.

http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1735

And what you "believe" has nothing to do with reality - except your own.

Also, you just demonstrated your incredible ignorance.

Get your act together and make something of yourself.

Life requires some effort.

Have a beer.

tadelste 06-29-2005 05:33 PM

Re: Re: I'm asking a question about legality
 
Quote:

Originally posted by allforcarrie
they TRIED..... it didnt do any good.

Well, you got me so riled up, I went and roped a longhorn:

http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/38971/index.html

Following Bill Gates' Linux Attack Money

tadelste 06-29-2005 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 69_rs_ss
MS might have been found a monopoly, but not in the Anti-virus realm. There are many big players out there that have their own linux versions.
Another dunce?

Not in the anti-virus realm?

God help the children of this world because we got some uneducated brick heads passing their bricks on to future generations.

I'm sorry, but it's sad and its funny at the same time.

perfect_circle 06-29-2005 06:24 PM

I don't think that the monopoly problem is that they are buyng companies or developing new kind of software. I think that what was considered to be illigal is develop an OS where an Internet Browser and/or a media player cannot be removed. Because if you want to use firefox or opera you have to have them both: firefox and internet explorer. This is something that is considered to be illigal. (they kind of changed this after SP1 because they were forced to do that).

If Microsoft develops an Anti-virus, it's OK to ship it with Windows, but they have to respect the other competitors, which means that If I as a consumer find another antivirus better and want to use it instead of the Microsoft one, I should be able to remove it.

Another thing that is considered as a monopoly tactic is to keep parts of the windows API for your self, so that your native programs run better than the others.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:23 AM.