Comment Re:drop in the ocean (Score 1) 777
I'm curious how the EU decides what to force microsoft should do -- while they may legally do a lot of things, who decides what is feasible to force them to implement in a certain timeframe, and what constitutes non-complience? The article mentions a "monitoring trust," but who ARE they?
Forcing designers to design a certain product in an unreasonable amount of time is typical "pointy haired boss" syndrome; what do you do with "pointy haired judge" syndrome? A quote from MS's legal chair, from the article: "the firm had done its utmost to comply with the EU's demands, but Brussels kept changing the goalposts." That sounds like a pretty common conflict in normal business: designers design something, but it's not what the client thought they wanted, so they change specs at the last minute, etc. Except in this case, the "monitoring trust" (client) has the backing of the whole entire EU!
Maybe MS is being belligerant about the whole thing, maybe not. Either way though, I think it's a valid issue: who decides, and what qualifies them to make that decision?
Forcing designers to design a certain product in an unreasonable amount of time is typical "pointy haired boss" syndrome; what do you do with "pointy haired judge" syndrome? A quote from MS's legal chair, from the article: "the firm had done its utmost to comply with the EU's demands, but Brussels kept changing the goalposts." That sounds like a pretty common conflict in normal business: designers design something, but it's not what the client thought they wanted, so they change specs at the last minute, etc. Except in this case, the "monitoring trust" (client) has the backing of the whole entire EU!
Maybe MS is being belligerant about the whole thing, maybe not. Either way though, I think it's a valid issue: who decides, and what qualifies them to make that decision?
