[HN Gopher] EU tech sector fights for a Level Playing Field with...
___________________________________________________________________
EU tech sector fights for a Level Playing Field with Microsoft
Author : thibautg
Score : 74 points
Date : 2021-11-26 21:05 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (antitrust.nextcloud.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (antitrust.nextcloud.com)
| bserge wrote:
| So that means more investment and better wages, right?
|
| Right?
|
| Look at those quotes. "We can't compete so we're bitching about
| it, maybe the EU can help us".
|
| I mean, don't get me wrong, I also hate how a few big platforms
| dominate everything. But that's exactly what "the people should
| be free to choose" led to.
|
| Now they don't like it. The people "should be free to choose...
| as long as they choose us" huh.
|
| Maybe if the best employees weren't working for Microsoft because
| your wages are shit and your management is shittier, and you
| actually had someone with 2 brain cells doing marketing...
|
| But nah, the EU can fight for you. We'll all use inferior shit,
| but at least it's gonna be local. Like Telekom and Vodafone.
| KODeKarnage wrote:
| "EU tech sector fights to have an EU judge reset the scoreboard
| to zero after decades of losing the game against Microsoft"
| hvgk wrote:
| You don't have to use their crap. I don't.
|
| It is chosen by businesses and individuals because it's about the
| only complete solution out there (even if it is a monumental shit
| show) which is cost effective. Either that or they are ignorant
| or genuinely like it.
|
| The EU tech sector needs to build something better. LibreOffice
| and Linux as it stands is not it. I tried over and over again to
| use it but it's just not good.
|
| I'm lurking in the leper colony of iCloud, Sheets and Numbers for
| reference and do most of my stuff on iOS. It's different but not
| better.
| xxpor wrote:
| It seems like (anecdotally) there's a decent number of shops
| that are 100% linux for servers, except there will still be an
| AD + Exchange setup because there's really no comprehensive
| solution in the open source world, like you said.
| hvgk wrote:
| That is exactly how my employer works. I use O365 outlook web
| access begrudgingly.
| agust wrote:
| The point is not that the people aware of the situation can
| avoid using these services, the point is that Microsoft (just
| like Apple and Google) is abusing its control over the OS to
| entice millions of people to use their own services. This is
| not an even market, competition is distorted. How could better
| competitors emerge in such situation? As if the unlimited
| fundings these companies have was not enough.
| rolandog wrote:
| > The EU tech sector needs to build something better.
| LibreOffice and Linux as it stands is not it. I tried over and
| over again to use it but it's just not good.
|
| Can you elaborate?
|
| I have had quite a nice experience on the Linux ecosystem and
| with LibreOffice too.
|
| But there's usually a point where you realize that "this
| should've been a script" (tm). I do concede that Excel pushes
| that point further down the road with what I remember to be
| better performance when working with bigger files, but by no
| means something so drastic.
| atian wrote:
| > But there's usually a point where you realize that "this
| should've been a script" (tm).
|
| Unlike private companies, accountability stretches much lower
| for FOSS projects.
| typon wrote:
| I didn't think I (as an experienced software engineer) would
| struggle so much to save a file until I had to use Office 365.
| I wish Dropbox was more popular in your average small business
| office.
| anandrew wrote:
| Can you elaborate, for those unfamiliar with Office 365?
| BlueTemplar wrote:
| I'm holding for now, but the pressure to start using GitHub and
| LinkedIn keeps growing...
| axiosgunnar wrote:
| It's actually very simple:
|
| Ban FAANGs from public procurement in the EU.
|
| That's it.
|
| Watch them squirm, pocket their billions spent on lobbying, and
| then say ,,sorry no" and ban them from all public procurement
| processes, in all countries in the EU.
|
| In 10 years, Europe will be a software superpower.
| echelon wrote:
| MAGMA [1] is more appropriate now.
|
| [1] Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta, Apple
| wanderingmind wrote:
| Or MAAMA (Alphabet instead of Google)
| ectopod wrote:
| Or with Netflix, GAMMAN.
| the8472 wrote:
| Banning specific companies is silly because then the next big
| company not on that list will just do the same thing they did.
|
| Just set general policy. If you require open source and open
| standards etc. then microsoft could play too in principle, but
| they probably won't anyway.
| Giorgi wrote:
| Yeah right, with all the restrictions and regulations EU will
| never touch anywhere near "superpower" territory, ban anything
| you want, even with toughest protectionism (which is always
| bad) EU lacks manpower, knowledge and education for sufficient
| IT sector development.
|
| Software developers like (as one might assume) to earn money
| and immigrate to US on first possibility or job offer, where
| there is ongoing boom in innovation and development, where
| companies compete to hire them, nobody likes to be suffocated
| with heavy EU taxes and get lower salary because main
| competitors are banned.
| akersten wrote:
| > In 10 years, Europe will be a software superpower.
|
| LOL not at EUR40k/year for senior devs they won't be. You'll
| sooner see Europe become the #1 exporter of H1Bs.
| geoffcline wrote:
| F: not sure how much public procurement they are doing
|
| A(pple): seems unrelated and unhelpful to ban this large
| hardware firm if the goal is to be a "software superpower".
|
| A(mazon): ok sure, build your own europe cloud.
|
| N: lol
|
| G: excellent idea to ban the only major competitor to microsoft
| office? chrome os for schools, gmail for business compared to
| exchange, etc.
| mrkstu wrote:
| So start a trade war and ghettoize the entire EU software
| industry in one fell swoop?
| andrew_eit wrote:
| Does anyone have any good arguments for why we lack any serious
| blue-chip competitors in the EU?
|
| I mean we have things like Spotify and SAP (though they're b2b).
| But I really can't see any parallels with the US tech industry.
| There really is no company that comes to mind in the EU where I
| think "yeah that's where all the software engineers want to go
| to".
|
| Also what I find super weird is that actually, a lot of the other
| industries are providing the golden ticket type jobs for SDEs
| that, in the US, would be reserved for FAANG. For example VW has
| some pretty great Digital "labs", pay is quite high, and they're
| even one of the biggest forces investing in quantum research,
| funding phd programmes and the like.
| lrem wrote:
| What we're missing is the valley, where huge piles of cash are
| in search of anywhere to go to. Where as little as a sales
| pitch can give you backing to hire fifty people for two
| years... After which everyone figures out the idea wasn't any
| good, investors didn't win on this ticket. And you proceed to
| think of your next pitch, with nobody holding the previous
| failure against you.
|
| Or, so I've heard.
| 094459 wrote:
| The EU tech companies only have themselves to blame in my view.
| I've been working in tech for over 30 years and it was precisely
| those EU tech companies that created crap products and treated
| their customers like crap, that made consumers and businesses
| look elsewhere. I have very little sympathy I'm afraid as if I'm
| a business or even providing public services I want the best
| products, support and customer service. That is all it takes to
| compete, so let's see some EU tech companies stop whinging and
| start serving customers with amazing products and even better
| service. I've seen it in pockets, so I know the potential is
| there.
| ThalesX wrote:
| When I, as a European Union citizen, want to watch some videos of
| how to access European funds for investments on the EU
| Commission's website, they are all securely hosted in European
| Data Centers, using a nicely European-built streaming service to
| play them. Just kidding, they embed YouTube, an American company.
|
| I think until the weird robed cultists that run the EU find some
| time between their Brussels orgies to encourage innovation inside
| the EU borders, we'll only be using fines and legalese to even
| the playing field with the rest of the world.
| [deleted]
| n8cpdx wrote:
| What is unfair about the playing field? Why aren't European
| innovators creating YouTube alternatives? If they are, what
| specifically is it about EU law that prevents them from being
| successful?
|
| It seems like there might be a cultural issue at play - I keep
| hearing about how European VCs are much more conservative, and
| European banks/investors in general just don't want to invest
| in software like they do in the US.
|
| Every time there's a post about working hard at startups, or at
| work in general, the European commenters are the first to raise
| that as a self-imposed crime against humanity. But some would
| argue that a small uptick in hustle might help Europe compete
| with FAANG and Silicon Valley startups. It's not impossible to
| compete - see Spotify, which drove more established US
| competition out of the market.
|
| I understand the European solution is to have national
| champions that are heavily subsidized (the US does this to some
| degree, too, at its peril) - but should that be the first
| choice?
| ThalesX wrote:
| > What is unfair about the playing field?
|
| I'm not arguing that it's unfair, I'm arguing that the EU is
| not doing enough to encourage development within its borders.
|
| > Why aren't European innovators creating YouTube
| alternatives?
|
| I have unsourced beliefs in this matter, that a lot of
| innovators follow capital outside of EU. There is not a
| single start-up that I worked with locally, that didn't end
| up incorporating in US for the capital and the market.
|
| Recently, the EU start-up scene is picking up, so I hope we
| can see more and more successful companies springing up here.
| But we're very far from competing with the US and China.
|
| > If they are, what specifically is it about EU law that
| prevents them from being successful?
|
| I'm not an expert, so I couldn't really say this, however, I
| know one major issue is the cultural and language barrier.
| There must be solutions to it, and there must be money in the
| EU to finance looking for such solutions.
|
| > I keep hearing about how European VCs are much more
| conservative, and European banks/investors in general just
| don't want to invest in software like they do in the US
|
| This is also true; changing recently. I also agree with
| everything that you posted after this, with the mention that
| it should be a market-led choice, which type of engagement
| you want with whichever company you choose.
|
| > I understand the European solution is to have national
| champions that are heavily subsidized (the US does this to
| some degree, too, at its peril) - but should that be the
| first choice?
|
| I believe that, in general, investing smaller sums in more
| companies across multiple industries is the best solution in
| terms of government intervention. Then specialized programs
| for more capital infusion to companies in various stages of
| development, based on proper due diligence. But again, I'm
| not an expert.
| BlueTemplar wrote:
| Not sure what Spotify did, but usually potential competitors
| to GAFAMs just get bought : see Skype or Nokia for instance.
| nickff wrote:
| > _" I think until [those] that run the EU find some time
| between their Brussels [meetings and conferences] to encourage
| innovation inside the EU borders, we'll only be using fines and
| legalese to even the playing field with the rest of the
| world."_
|
| The real question is what the limits of government support and
| 'encouragement' are. It seems like governments are capable of
| enacting massive infusions of capital into stable industries,
| but there aren't many cases where the government itself created
| 'innovation'.
|
| There are arguments to be made around semiconductors and the
| military (and similar examples), but that was mostly the
| government fostering the demand side, not really 'taking
| charge'. There is no lack of demand for software products in
| the EU, but there does seem to be a distinct lack of
| innovation.
| ThalesX wrote:
| > The real question is what the limits of government support
| and 'encouragement' are.
|
| In this case, they could encourage European competitors to
| YouTube by using their services and infusing them with some
| capital. By digitalizing the processes across the union, and
| by again, using European services.
|
| They certainly have the money; maybe they can spend a bit
| less on those "[meetings and conferences]".
|
| I'll give you another example. Because Germany is big in
| Pharma, they encourage the pharma industry along with its
| research and development. Because of this, when the pandemic
| hit, we were already exploring some interesting options. This
| should be the tech case also, not just pharma.
|
| "but that was mostly the government fostering the demand
| side" - this is a great way to do it, yes.
|
| > there aren't many cases where the government itself created
| 'innovation'
|
| Maybe my understanding is wrong, but I feel like a lot of
| innovation comes from heavy government-backed entities. And
| then the capitalists come and distribute these innovations in
| various forms to the population.
| nickff wrote:
| > _' In this case, they could encourage European
| competitors to YouTube by using their services and infusing
| them with some capital. By digitalizing the processes
| across the union, and by again, using European services.'_
|
| Capital infusions have a troubled history, as they've often
| been used for political payoffs to companies with dubious
| prospects (Solyndra). I'm also not sure the government will
| choose 'the right ones', as their criteria may not match
| those of the consumers, which will lead to specialty
| government contractors (like US ship construction since the
| Jones Act).
|
| > _" Because Germany is big in Pharma, they encourage the
| pharma industry along with its research and development. "_
|
| This seems to be a typical failure mode of government, they
| encourage & subsidize existing, visible industries, and
| ignore/tacitly punish 'up & comers'. The film industry is a
| typical example of the subsidies, and software is a classic
| example of the neglect.
|
| > _" Maybe my understanding is wrong, but I feel like a lot
| of innovation comes from heavy government-backed entities.
| And then the capitalists come and distribute these
| innovations in various forms to the population. "_
|
| I think this depends on how you frame the issues; for
| example, you could say that ARPAnet was the progenitor of
| the internet, or you could say that 'cisco' was the real
| innovator. I tend to view 'true innovation' as transforming
| a niche or speculative idea into something widespread and
| common, but that's not a universal perspective.
| jsnell wrote:
| The press release claims they've filed a formal complaint. Can
| anyone find a link to it? Because complaining just about
| OneDrive/Teams being pre-installed in Windows seems like pretty
| weak sauce.
| bnt wrote:
| Ok, but then force Android and macOS to unbundle their crap. Why
| do I have to use Chrome and Gmail as default? Why do I get force
| fed iMessage, Safari and iCloud?
| agust wrote:
| Also unbundle Safari from iOS and put an end to the browser
| engines ban. That's far worse than default software on Windows
| and Android.
| apetrovic wrote:
| Yup, the Chrome monoculture will save us all.
| echelon wrote:
| I want real Firefox on iOS. Not a shoddy safari skin.
| Mikeb85 wrote:
| > Chrome and Gmail as default?
|
| You don't... You can have Firefox and Outlook as defaults if
| you want. Ever use a Samsung phone? It comes bundled with a
| bunch of Samsung and MS crap, despite being Android. Samsung
| has their own web browser, their own store...
| rolandog wrote:
| Agreed. Please unbundle everything!
| Mikeb85 wrote:
| On one hand, I hate MS. On the other hand, EU tech companies need
| to be better and EU consumers need to support them.
|
| Step 1: all the tech companies should stop using Windows (and
| MacOS for that matter). They whine about MS but still use their
| products. So use Linux, use LibreOffice, use EU based email or
| roll your own, develop software on open standards, etc...
|
| Look at what the non-MS (and non-Apple) FAANGs do; they use OSS
| operating systems, tech stacks and build their whole
| infrastructure on open tech and standards, apart from a few
| proprietary bits rolled in-house.
|
| EU tech's problem is that they all try to be MS but aren't. None
| of them seem to model what they do on the successful non-MS/Apple
| big tech companies.
| jimbob45 wrote:
| It sounds like you're advocating for using local products
| rather than the best products available.
|
| That's fine but it's not something that will ultimately benefit
| the EU after China and the US retaliate in kind.
| Mikeb85 wrote:
| Absolutely advocating supporting local businesses. Just like
| I advocate using OSS. Is an EU company going to make a better
| search engine than Google on day one? Is any company going to
| be an absolute world-beater on day one? Sometimes voting with
| your wallet means supporting something you _want_ to
| succeed...
|
| I mean, I'll never use MS products nor buy an Apple product,
| ever. Not even if they have the nicest X. Because I don't
| like the prospect of a world where it's only MS/Apple. So I
| use products that are good for an open world as much as
| possible.
|
| In the real world, people support local businesses. People
| support small business and hand-made products, even if it's
| more expensive. Because that's how you grow your local
| economy.
| geoffcline wrote:
| their demands
|
| > No gate keeping (by bundling, pre-installing or pushing
| Microsoft services) for a level playing field. > Open standards
| and interoperability that make an easy migration possible. This
| gives consumers a free choice.
|
| poorly defined and vague. what is "gate keeping"? what is a
| "level playing field"?
|
| migration of what? what is envisioned by open standards? what is
| a free choice?
| BlueTemplar wrote:
| Yeah, I sometimes wonder why the GAFAMs haven't been kicked out
| of the EU yet...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-26 23:00 UTC)