Lenovo folds smartphone unit under Motorola, plans to streamline mobile portfolio

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 30
    mnbob1mnbob1 Posts: 269member
    davidw wrote: »
    But Apple OSX and iOS are not monopolies. Apple can't be abusing something they don't have.

    http://www.cluteinstitute.com/ojs/index.php/JBER/article/viewFile/2508/2554

    It wasn't so much the bundling of IE with Windows that got them in trouble as it was all the other stuff they did




    >>>To summarize, Microsoft’s predatory conduct and exclusionary behavior were not appropriate or even legal methods of conducting business. The main areas of fault are as follows:
    <ul style="list-style-type:none;"> [*]


    [*]
    ?  The bundling of Internet Explorer with Windows Operating System using the market power of its operating system to gain market share in the web browser market.

    [*]
    ?  Giving away its Internet Explorer web browser for free to keep other web browsers from becoming competitive and attempting to force other web browsers out of business.

    [*]
    ?  Creating a Microsoft-specific version of Java so that the Java language would not become standardized and therefore used by all web browsers.

    [*]
    ?  Microsoft featured Internet service providers on its Windows desktop if the provider denied the user a choice of web browsers allowing them to use only Internet Explorer.<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> </span>


    </ul>




    <ul style="list-style-type:none;"> [*]
    ?  Microsoft signed agreements with PC vendors like Dell if they agreed not to remove Internet Explorer from the desktop and agreed not to feature other browsers such as Netscape Communicator.

    [*]
    ?  Microsoft offered rebates to PC vendors if they agreed not to promote other operating systems.

    [*]
    ?  Microsoft gave preferential treatment to PDA and cellular phone vendors if they featured Internet Explorer as
    their web browser. <<<<

    [*]  
    [*]  
    [*]  
    [*]  
    </ul>

    OEM's like Dell, Compaq and others were required to pay Microsoft a Windows licensing fee for every PC they manufactured even if it was shipped to the customer with a different OS installed. The so-called Windows tax.

    OEM's were prohibited by their Microsoft contracts from pre installing 3rd party web browsers and in some cases applications. This led to the demise of Netscape and other up and coming browsers and the increased use of the poorly written Internet Explorer.

    The things that didn't come up in the proceedings was that Bill Gates was a master at ripping off technology even more than Samsung. Microsoft was in a partnership with IBM for a new OS called OS/2. They had released the text version and working on the GUI version. Jobs and Apple had introduced the Macintosh and Jobs was looking for applications to legitimize the Mac. Gates agreed to develop office apps. This allowed MS engineers to get their hands on the Mac and Gates realized the OS/2 project was headed in the wrong direction. He left IBM high and dry and kept Windows an MS project.

    There were two MS-DOS apps that helped build the PC into the business world; WordPerfect and VisiCalc. Gates decided there was no room for them in the Windows world since MS was developing Office apps like they had for the Mac. Both of the 3rd party developers wrote Windows versions but unfortunately MS didn't share all of the same API's with them and in some cases MS went deeper into the Windows code. Something they only shared when competing with Apple. PageMaker was one of those. I can remember running PageMaker on a custom version of Windows 2.0 on floppies. Ughh. How far we've come.
  • Reply 22 of 30
    mnbob1mnbob1 Posts: 269member
    ^^^ I still say Microsoft was not a monopoly. The government should not have gotten involved. When companies fail to be responsive to customers, they leave. Apple out-innovated Microsoft and now they are winning.

    Microsoft was and is a monopoly as is Apple. The problem was that Microsoft abused its market position to force the demise of their competitors illegally instead of just relying on the market demand for them. They wrote illegal contracts with their OEM PC manufacturers that prohibited them from doing business with some of Microsoft's competitors and in some cases held them hostage with threats of not selling them Windows licenses or significantly increasing the cost for the license. So you see why the government got involved? I'm guessing you're too young to remember all of this. Bill Gates and Microsoft screwed over IBM, Netscape, Mozilla, WordPerfect, Steve Jobs, Apple, VisiCalc, independent app developers, Internet web access, Sun Systems JAVA and too many to mention here. Ballmer came in and was just an idiot. Jobs and Apple right now have the last laugh.
  • Reply 23 of 30
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    Doesn't it just warm your heart watching all these iKnockoffs bite the dust just days before Apple launches the next iPhone?
  • Reply 24 of 30
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member
    Actually what happen was that Lenovo shut down the Motorola business. Move the Chinese phone business under the Motorola name and will make these Chinese phones under the Motorola name.

    How do I know this, I have friends and know lots of people at Motorola here in the states and they all got their walking papers last week.

    Lenovo is going to try and sell their cheap phones under the Motorola name since it is seen as a quality brand around the world.
  • Reply 25 of 30

    Don't underestimate Xiaomi, they have one of the most skinnable custom Android ROMs out there which is why the Chinese market prefers.  Iphones are only for rich Chinese.  Xiaomi is the people's smartphone.

  • Reply 26 of 30
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post



    I still say Microsoft was not a monopoly.

    :???:

     

    By what measure?  They were clearly a monopoly.

  • Reply 27 of 30
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

    How long before enough competitors go bankrupt for Apple to be sued for a monopoly? :p


    The question really should be who will win out this battle of the super cheap phones.  China devaluing their money makes it even more profitable than ever to sell devices abroad.

  • Reply 28 of 30
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Vision33r View Post

     

    Don't underestimate Xiaomi, they have one of the most skinnable custom Android ROMs out there which is why the Chinese market prefers.  Iphones are only for rich Chinese.  Xiaomi is the people's smartphone.


     

    Its also a Intellectual property nighmare outside China. Plus, it's not using Google stuff which is kind of problem isn't it?

    90% of the general public, especially people with more money than time, don'T give a crap about custom roms.

  • Reply 29 of 30
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Originally Posted by Vision33r View Post

    The question really should be who will win out this battle of the super cheap phones.



    I want to say, “Anyone but Samsung,” but the sheer brashness of the copying of native Chinese companies puts them to shame.

Sign In or Register to comment.