Compliance Toolkit

Story: RealNetworks cries foul over Microsoft antitrust case

• 
• 

Stewart,

Far from being off-topic, this discussion is about a lot of the background of this current case. We've been here before, in the Internet Explorer vs Netscape Navigator instance, so it is correct and relevant to look back at what happened there and see if we can learn lessons from it that may relate to this case.

So, to go back over your points.

1) I am an IT developer and I'm telling you categorically that it is not possible to uninstall Internet Explorer from Windows 98, ME, 2000, XP, or 2003. I would like to invite you to try this - uninstall it in the normal way, then run Windows Update, or go into Windows Explorer and type in a web URL. Look what pops up! The reason is, Windows Explorer and Internet Explorer are now essentially the same thing. Microsoft tied them together deliberately to sidestep antitrust legal proceedings in the US that would have forced them to sell Windows without IE. In any case, this point is irrelevant so let's leave it there.

2) Of course you SHOULD look for other media players. The point I'm making is that most people won't look for them. Why should they when they already have one? If you've looked at other players and you prefer the Microsoft one, fair enough. Personally I find Quicktime works better for me, but different strokes....

"It is probably only coincidence that millions of people agree with me as far as Windows Media Player is concerned."
- or it could possibly be the fact that millions of people had it installed along with Windows in the first place, whether they 'chose' it or not? Either way, how can we know, because millions of people have never thought about going to competitors? This, of course leaves Microsoft in a fantastically strong position to go after the entire media market, as I outlined in my previous talkback.

And actually flexibility IS power. If I'm thinking of upgrading my system and go to Microsoft saying, "well, if I wanted I could move to Linux/Mac at the drop of a hat", they'll fall over themselves to try and persuade me to install Windows. I'm flexible, but Microsoft want me to be locked in.

In the case of RealNetworks, if I buy my music from them, I can get a version of Real Player for Windows, Mac, Linux, even my mobile phone! Whereas if I'm buying WMA encoded tunes, I can only ever play them on Windows. Buying RealNetworks tunes gives me more flexibility than buying WMA tunes. Ideally of course, tunes would be sold using an Open DRM system that all media players support and the world would be a better place.

3) You say the companies deserved what they got. Why, exactly, did they deserve this? Did Netscape deserve it because they produced a brilliant piece of software, far better than their competitors and thus achieved a 80%+ share of the market? Do you think they *deserved* to be ousted by an inferior (at the time), buggy and insecure Internet Explorer because Microsoft happened to own the operating system everyone used, and thus could push IE on everyone with very little effort?

Now the same thing is happening to Real Networks. They pioneered the entire concept of streaming media over the internet. They were the first, and produced a very good product that everybody used. Now we're seeing the same thing happen as with Netscape. Everyone has Windows Media Player, because it comes with Windows, so as a web developer, what do you release your media in? Suddenly RealNetworks themselves become irrelevant, because noone's producing RealMedia files anymore. Microsoft have once again illegally used their Windows monopoly to force dominance of another market they previously barely had a foothold in.

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread