Sat 05 Jul 2008

RSS Feed

Edited by Paul Hales

Published by Incisive Media Investments Ltd.

Terms and Conditions of use.

To advertise in Europe e-mail here

To advertise in Asia email here.

To advertise in North America email here.

Join the INQbot Mail List for a weekly guide to our news stories:

Subscribe

Schools body backs EU probe of Microsoft

OOXML flanked in standards battle

BECTA THE UK's Education technology quango, has thrown its lot in with an EU anti-trust investigation of Microsoft. It was only in February that the EU slapped a $2.5bn fine on Microsoft for abusing its dominant market position by restricting the ability of its server products to interoperate with those of competitors.

Becta, which governs IT spending in UK schools and colleges, said today that it briefed the commission about its own complaint regarding the limited operability of Microsoft products, as well as what it said where Microsoft's " anti-competitive" licensing practices.

The quango told EU investigators how poor interoperability limited schools' choice of software, and drove up the cost of IT. Dr Stephen Lucey, Becta's technology director, said it wasn't only the market that Microsoft "damaged" by erecting barriers to trade with limits on interoperability. It even effected education policy, harming results and hindering school efforts to bridge the digital divide.

The complaint hinged on Microsoft's Office Open XML (OOXML) document format. Microsoft won some Brownie points for OOXML recently when it got on the fast-track to approval by the International Standard's Organisation. But Becta said Microsoft skewed the market in its favour by giving its application software native support for OOXML, but neglected to do the same for Open Document Format (odt), a competing standard.

Even when Microsoft did support odt, it did so poorly, said Becta. The EU had opened a new anti-competitive investigation of Microsoft - this time of its desktop applications - in January.

Becta's last complaint on the matter, to the UK's Office of Fair Trading, was similar in scope.

Microsoft was not available to comment. µ

Comments

Fine's Purpose

The purpose of the fine was because Microsoft was not cooperating with the actual ruling and subsequent penalties once found to be a criminal monopolist. It wasn't a fine lobbied due to their monopolist abusing their market position, it was because they weren't cooperating.

In 3 countries they are known as a criminal monopolist. It is about time at least one of them held their feet to the fire. If you don't Microsoft will learn all sorts of ways to get away with abusing the system further.

We don't need a criminal monopolist in charge of 90% of the world's computers, that's a simple fact.
posted by : Jim B., 13 May 2008
IThound
Search for solutions, reports & analysis

Newsletter signup