By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
zero129 said:
EpicRandy said:

I also saw this on Wikipedia but it is incomplete. It looks like the only wrong thing done by the judge was inappropriate talk to the media while the thruth is that those talks were loaded with partial take against MS

The opinion was notable for its rebuke of Judge Jackson. ``The trial judge engaged in impermissible ex parte contacts by holding secret interviews with members of the media and made numerous offensive comments about Microsoft officials in public statements outside of the courtroom, giving rise to an appearance of partiality,'' the court said. ``Although we find no evidence of actual bias, we hold that the actions of the trial judge seriously tainted the proceedings before the district court and called into question the integrity of the judicial process.''

nytimes.com

Also, in the end, it doesn't really matter, the whole thing happened only because of the time it happened, OSs were only a thing to the masses for less than a decade and a great part of the reason it was seen as monopolistic was due to incompetent competition which was tripping over themselves every now and then (and yes that include Apple).

The very same behavior that got Microsoft into trouble back then is used without consequence by Google, Apple, Sony, Nintendo, Amazon, etc. and is in fact still being used by MS (all bundle their app and stores with their respective OS). So, to me, It's funny to use a 20+ years old case to paint today's MS evil all the while every other actor with the proprietary OS are depicting the exact same behavior and are just lucky they haven't been challenged and/or that the context of today is more lenient on those practices.

Indeed, I guess he missed how Sony in 2019 stopped other stores from being able to sell Digital Codes for games and was sued in a Class Action lawsuit but the judge threw the case out. I guess going by his way of thinking the Judge only threw the case out since he must of been paid off .

ConservagameR said:

If what the initial judge did with the media, made the entire case against MS, then MS would've been found not guilty in the end, which didn't occur.

I'm not even going to start when it comes to all the things that have happened in the past that wouldn't happen or would be handled differently today. 

The initial post was about MS and their relationship with PC's, as to control. I never said MS is alone in this and even Big Mach alluded to that repeatedly.

Why even start in the first place?. Clearly your post and posts after in no way proofs your point and by continuing to single out MS for "Things that happened in the past" that every company gets away with today isnt helping your case at all and you know it judging by what i bolded as you dont seem to want to talk about it when it comes to other companies who isnt MS.

Where do you stand on Microsoft buying Activision/Blizzard?

The OP must have meant to include Sony and Nin in the title, I guess?

XB Series S sales mean nothing since they wouldn't have sold the same if launched today.

XB 360 RROD means nothing since they would have designed and manufactured it differently today.

In the end, they don't really matter, they only happened because of the time they happened, apparently.

Don't forget to include Sony and Nin in this as well. Can't leave them out since we're wiping the slate clean.

Feel free to disagree. All the consensus here is getting boring.