Still, the EU is acting incredibly French-like in its dealings with the Redmond giant.
The most recent report contains some startling commentary that brings into question their entire case against the company.
Last week, [Competition Commissioner Neelie] Kroes told the American Bar Association in Washington: "In 50 years of EU antitrust policy we have never before encountered a company that has refused to comply with a Commission decision."
I guess that I didn't realize that the EU had been around for 50 years. Perhaps that is part of their problem -- they seem to think that they evolved out of the ashes of WWII, when in fact they are a recent innovation that does not even represent all of Europe.
No significant innovation???????? No significant innovation???????? If there is no significant innocation, then why is half of Europe so intent on using and copying and competing with Microsoft products? Could it be because there are no decent operating sytems coming out of Europe?
Microsoft has said it would charge for interoperability information because the data was based on the company's own innovative work and protected by patents.But the Commission charged in March this year that competitors gave away such software whether or not it was patented.
"The Commission's current view is that there is no significant innovation in these protocols," Kroes said in March.
Sort of reminds me of the Airbus consortium. Where would they have been if they did not have Boeing's market research to rely upon when they started out. Is it a coincidence that their product line almost perfectly mirrors Boeings? Oh, except for the fact that the engineers and technicians can actually create a wiring harness that works.
So back to Microsoft. Sure I hate them. There is a lot to hate -- until the cheese eaters at the EU get into the act -- then they are my best friends.