Slashdot Mirror
AOL, Microsoft Squabble Over Control of Online Music
Section8 writes: "As if Microsoft wasn't pushing on so many other fronts already (see Part 1 and Part 2), now it seems that Microsoft is seeking to place itself in total control of what format we use on the Internet to view anything. This article in the Wall Street Journal gives some interesting facts about what Microsoft is trying to do out there. Great quote from AOL rep: "[it is] Microsoft's intention to gain as much control over music on the Internet as they have over operating systems on the computer desktop, and we couldn't accept that"." AOL's merger with Time-Warner has given them greater incentive to not use Microsoft's media format... There's also a report on the AOL/Microsoft talks published by AOL.
It's good to see two monopolistic goliaths go at each other. God help us when they make peace and join forces!
Is it just me, or is anyone else both horrified and amused by the twisted relationship between these two companies? Kinda like an incestuous marriage in which both partners are bipolar.
Blar.
Despite what all the naysayers say, I believe we are seeing a shift in Microsoft's support of open standards towards the better. Recently, we saw them embrace the new P3P W3C privacy standard, for example.
As long as they use continue to use open standards (http/html, xml, ogg) to distribute their music, the competitive commercial environment will take care of the rest. If someone believes that Microsoft is distributing money at too high a cost, they can use the same tools to sell music themselves, as any company would do in an open market. The only risk is that Microsoft might try to replace say, html, with their own proprietary system that only runs on Windows. Only then do competitors like AOL and you and me face a serious risk.
I don't use any of their software, but -- who knows -- their services might be good stuff. We all know that most of their endeavours outside software are pretty good (hardware like optical mice, force feedback joysticks, Xbox). Kudos to Microsoft and shame on you if you revert to your proprietary tactics of yesteryear!
now it seems that Microsoft is seeking to place itself in total control of what format we use on the Internet to view anything
That's shocking! What, have they developed some sort of ultra-secret "explorer for the internet" application that can be used to view web pages?
Is there some "media player for windows" that will be provided with every copy of their OSes?
Nexy you'll tell me they have even built an "encoder" of some sort for this strange new audio technology.
Its a good thing AOL has discovered this secret, nefarious plot and warned us all in advance!...
---------------------------------------------
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
I just hope that Microsoft doesn't take control of the online porn industry, it's shady enough as is.
Microsoft seems to have decided that it has nothing to fear from the court, and unfortunately it may be correct. However, I prefer to think that the court of appeals hinted that it would not break up the company in order to see how Microsoft behaved once the pressure was off, and that they are taking careful note of the fact that the company is continuing to engage in plainly anticompetitive practices based on its monopoly power.
Tim
So AOL/Time Warner doesn't want Microsoft to control internet media. Probably all we're like to see come out of this is another proprietary format that's designed to limit the consumer's rights and focus on making money for AOL/Time Warner.
How the hell would they do that? I'm a consumer, I want to consume internet music...
Real Media, Quicktime, Windows Media... I can't believe these fools can't agree on a standard format of somekind.
be realistic
...AOL Time Warner has announced an alliance with Red Hat Linux to bundle the Real Audio streaming content software on a bootable CD to its 16 million customers...
(and then I woke up)
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
Thank god we have AOL/TW to compete against Microsoft -- they're such a wonderful alternative to an obvious monopoly.
And don't kid yourselves, both Microsoft and AOL/TW are monopolies, despite whatever you might have heard about regulations being wrong, and another form of 'communism', etc. Whatever the rhetoric, the fact is that our founders understood the need for regulations as a protective measure for consumers, and democracy as a whole. You can read about how their concerns were ignored in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, when restrictions on mass ownership of news/media outlets were all but erased; here, here, here, and here.
Issues with AOL/TW not allowing competitive ISP ads on their cable, and everyone knows the issues with Microsoft.. Which one's the worse?
It looks like for this issue with file formats, we should be supporting AOL, since the Real Player is available for Linux, unlike the Windows Media Player..
Is there any work on a player for Linux that would play the Media Player files, or is there a problem with Copyright/Trade secrets for any potential developers?
Looking for any old 8-bit Heathkit/Zenith software/hardware - http://heathkit.garlanger.com
AOL owns WinAMP and if M$ wants control over the music file format it might want to fight over WinAMP's ability to play windows media files, and next thing you know the newer version of the windos media audio or video format will be unplayable on winamp. So they may be trying to also get rid of MP# which will never happen. By the way, how come windos is the "choice" of consumers everywhere? Why because the already built computers come with it. And now M$ doesn't even have to pay companies to package windos with their desktops. Compaq Dell and the like can literally screw M$ domination if they packaged their computers with any Linux distro, and the users got used to it.
BTW Netscape 6.1beta1 is now out and it's based on Mozilla 0.9.1 it's a MASSIVE improvement over Netscape 6.01 and 6.0 which were quite frankly a joke, therefore Netscape's not dead yet and if we can get AOL to support Netscape/Mozilla then there's a good future for the browser.
I say we support whichever side looks like they're losing.
bukra fil mish mish
-
Monitor the Web, or Track your site!
Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
www.fogbound.net
Microsoft isn't trying to control anything based on merit or technical superiority. They are trying to control the market by forcing exisiting competitors out of it. I see Microsoft as a modern day "Mafioso"; the difference is that the sleepy heads in gov't will not make change until it's absolutely too late. The stuff Microsoft is doing wouldn't have been tolerated 20 yrs ago, times change and the people in gov't change and/or get greedy and the only hope is that they get greedy enough to choke on their own salivation.
political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
Which of the following is most evil:
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine! =P
I swear I'll never read another article concerning the music media again.
from now on I mind my own business as I proceed to rip all my CDs to .mp3 format, if it dies out it won't be because of me. And yes, I do intend to share!
I'm a writer, a poet, a genius, I know it. I don't buy software, I grow it.
As long as we all keep using MP3 (and it's not going to go away) or Open Source altervatives, this will be like two fleas fighting over the dog.
I guess mindshare is everything... and MP3 has it. Sorry AOL/MS.
I will, however, have to reassess the statement that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."
How ironic that since we have a government not interested in enforcing anti-trust law, the major force for promoting competition in the sheep-consumer marketplace is the merged corporate monolith AOL/Time-Warner.
What a world...
War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. - George Orwell or George Bush?
ROTFL. I think they should all join together and form a single giant conglomerate called Big Brother Unlimited.
Try Netscape 6.1 PR 1, it's much better than the crappy Netscape 6.0 browser, if you've not tried it, give it a go and let them know what you think (select Help > Feedback Center), even if Mozilla based browsers get a 20% market share it should be enough to encourage webmasters to code to standards and write pages to work anywhere.
Either the content providers (AOL-Time Warner) or the big ass OS manufacturer desides. Hmm, no matter what, there is ONE standard, most certainly not open, that is going to be pushed onto the web etc etc etc. I just say, we loose. I use windows, but I still loose with this. This is just one little step towards the next step, a controlled and censored media (internet, newspapers, TV, radio, etc)...
Open standards for content is much much more important than bitching about Microsoft Windows. I just wished I could tell you all how to fix this...
It's got to suck to be Real Networks right about now, just like it sucked to be Netscape a couple years ago.
That said, the biggest problem I see with all of this is that MS will most likely not make there proprietary formats available to users of other operating systems and stengthening their monopoly as well.
I think that MS should be allowed to create whatever formats they choose to use for their products but they should be forced to either: a) publish the format for anyone to see and use or b) create viewers/editors for alternative operating systems includeing Linux, BeOS, and others.
I like being able to get RealPlayer for Linux, particularly when most streaming video and audio is in Real format. I don't like the idea of not being able to get any streaming audio or video or getting poor quality because everyone has switched to a MS format which is only available to users of Windows.
All I ask of MS is to provide viewers/editors to other operating systems or to make it possible for third parties to create these viewers/editors.
Let's not waste this opportunity.
--
Slashdot monitor for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.
According to an AOL official close to the negotiations, Microsoft wanted consumer access to RealPlayer disabled, a step that AOL felt would tilt the scales in favor of Microsoft's Windows Media. RealPlayer and Windows Media use rival formats, making content formatted for RealPlayer incompatible with Windows Media.
Does anything seem funny here. If realplayer and M$ Media Player use different incompatible formats, why would M$ not install it. It does not compete with their product. What I am thinking is that there may be a deeper issue here. One is that they would want to reduce the amount of realplayer formatted files on the net. But why, everyone knows that no one will switch to wma's. It will be either mp3's or something else. Not wma's. I don't see windows winning here.
Also I think there is another thing brewing here, although this one is more of a conspiracy theory, but given the XP integrated CD-R copyright protection, and online checking that only 2 copies of same disk can be installed, it is a possibility. Something tells me M$ will force every player to go through the codec system, meaning realplayer would have to use the codec, thus Windows Media would be able to play any format, and since its preinstalled....(fill in rest here). The funny thing is that given the track record of realplayer for win, I don't think that that is such a bad idea.
On the other hand I would hate to see M$ player be the only player, given that it starts sucking more and more, especially in the RAM department.
Remember, when you are downloading MP3's, you are downloading communism!!!
badness 10000
I know that windows users are mindless sheep who can not see the difference between an anti-competitive, innovation hampering, standards breaking company and a normal ma & pop shop but please stop with the 1950's McCarthism commie talk just because one of your friends told you that linux user's where communists :-)
Using and/or developing open source software has nothing to do with communism, it has to do with co-operation and problem solving, computing is not like farming or fast food or some other regular business it is more like a science and a technology that is developing very quickly and is just as important to our evolution as say, modern medicine or energy generation
i for one believe that people should work and co-operate together for the advancement of computing not hide there favorite new advances from other brilliant minds like one would hide their new cheese burger recipe.
I do not believe that proprietary software is "immoral" or "wrong" however i do believe that people working together openly to develop new software technologies and sharing ideas and advancments is a great thing and is much more productive than the proprietary development model.
While i do agree that computing is a great source of income and jobs in this world i also believe it is a great technology and it's continued advancment can not be trusted 100% to companies especially these days when most companies fight each other with lawsuits and illegal practices rather than better products and idea's.
Not to mention that the Internet was developed with *our* tax dollars and depends 100% on open standards and protocols. Changing the formats of the internet to only work with your products is no different that changing a national interstate highway to only work with yoru model of car. that is exactly what microsoft is attempting to do. Also if you knew anything about the law you would know that using a monopoly to try and gain another monopoly is illegal.
I do not appreciate being insulted, and called a communist, especially by a person who obvioulsy has no idea what they are talking about
How soon untill Microsoft wants to controle online porn? I mean they are a huge part of all online revenue.. looks attractive...haha no pun there
...someone were to try to take an open source audio standard, like Ogg Vorbis, and add some kind of content protection to it (a la WMP) so that the RIAA would be happy with that as a format. In many ways, Microsoft seems to be trying to encourage use of WMP because of its content protection schemes, and recording artists (read: RIAA) like that idea.
;-P
Of course, there are the usual complaints and caveats: for every content protection scheme, there is a potential hack (though one wonders if open source could do better at content protection); why should there be protection in the first place (though suppliers -- i.e. RIAA -- will never go along with that line of argument IMO); would such an effort result in a fork of OV (since I doubt the main body of developers would go along with such an idea); and so on.
I don't really advocate this, but I think it's an interesting idea nonetheless, and it would at least be a way to put a dent in WMP as a format of choice for the RIAA...
Oh hell, I'll just go back to ripping my own MP3s with iTunes. Rip, mix, burn and all that.
cya
Ethelred
Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.
Considering HD sizes and broadband coming along, bitrate doesn't matter much.. 128k, 64k.. so what? If I can put it on overnight and have DAYS of music when I wake up? (If I have decent sites to get it from, which aren't *that* hard to find.. say two-three friends with similar interests and mutual leech + all public sharing tools)
What truly matters is the LIMITATIONS. Can I play this on another platform? Can I copy this to my RAM player/mp3 cd player/mp3 car stereo/mp3 home stereo? Can I share it with whoever I want? Can I convert it to a future format, or am I forever stuck with the one I have?
Also, most good systems are open standards, think mpg3/4, which are currently the most used audio and video standard (though you need at the very least a wrapper to make a MOVIE with both video and sound, like wmv, divx etc). People can look at that and suggest how to make it better.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
And if it isnt yet now, it will be in a couple of years, whatever we all want it to be or not, and after a couple of years there will be one big revolution and the world will be one, cause microsoft made it one microsoft only world and we all will hate it so much that it will become our common enemy, thus meaning we all have the same goal and become one big happy family..
GO MICROSOFT GO!
As long as you write your own damn code you aren't 'forced' into using any license.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
It really whips the llama's ass.
A truly great player for things we cherish most (read: mp3)
Why not just bundle that...(besides it is owned by AOL).
M$ will never agree.....
Remember, when you are downloading MP3's, you are downloading communism!!!
badness 10000
... None of above, they're all just as evil.
I don't even use linux, I'm somewhere between a 'techy' and a 'computer illiterate', and I'm more driven by politics than computers, so I doubt I have the patience to figure it out.
That said, you completely missed the point. I doubt you read what I linked, and you obviously don't understand the difference between a monopolized market and 'competitive capitalism'. Let me try it this way:
AOL/TW vs. Microsoft = Plutocratical
Speakeasy DSL vs. Carolina Broadband = Capitalistic
If you can't see the difference, let me expand on my point: the first group accounts for over 25% of ALL MEDIA in the country; including TV, radio, newspapers, movies, music, software, and the internet. They have no competition because they control the medium through which their competitors would normally be advertising. Once the practice in that story spreads, in places like Charlotte North Carolina (where I live), you won't see any commercials that advertise any product that competes with any product sold by AOL/TW -- because Time Warner provides the ONLY Cable TV service.
And why the hell are you so motivated to be against diversity of choice?? No one here is trying to change the laws from what they were; the Telecommunications Act did that by changing what the laws HAD BEEN FOR MORE THAN A CENTURY. The people who ARE trying to change them, are doing it to put them back the way they were SUPPOSED to be.
Naysayer checking in here...
.ogg, they can't apply Digital Rights Management to it to make the RIAA happy and they can't control it. ...Well maybe they could if they attempted to 'pollute' it like they did to Java. But why would they bother, they just use their desktop monopoly to force people to use their own Media Player formats by breaking the competitors product. "It ain't done 'til Lotus won't run."
...endeavours outside software...
They are not using open standards to distribute the music, that's the whole point to the article.
The content may be transmitted via TCP/IP, but they are encoding in their own media format (including DRM and being proprietary source just for starters) and trying to kill the Real format.
MS will never do anything with
MS using open standards? I think not. They have subverted or attempted to subvert every single standard they have come near (Kerberos, smart tags, anybody?)
One doesn't trust an addict until they have admitted that they have a problem, apologized/made amends *and* exhibited changed behavior. MS has made no steps whatsoever of this kind. They continue to thumb thier nose at government anti-trust action, lie, deceive and subvert to this very moment.
Well, they don't have a monopoly on endeavours outside software, they are at least required to compete on the merits of the product.
Kudos to Microsoft and shame on you if you revert to your proprietary tactics of yesteryear!
??? Huh? Revert? Yesteryear?
Shame on them? Proprietary tactics? Yup. To this very day. That's what the whole problem is in the negotiations between them and AOL.
And shame on AOL too. They're no angels. They demand proprietary solutions as well. They just don't have quite as large a monopoly to leverage.
War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. - George Orwell or George Bush?
Think for a minute about how content-protection works and you'll realize that an open-source alternative is totally impossible. The whole idea of content protection is limiting how people use digital media, and preventing them from copying it. This relies on a media player program that limits how people use that digital media. Obviously, this means that the player program is working on the "security through obscurity" principle.
For instance, if the consumer is not supposed to make a copy of some streamed content, the player program accomplishes this by simply not giving the user that capability. If a particular media file is only supposed to by playable by a certain person on a certain computer, the playr program accomplishes this by looking at part of the file that gives it such instructions, and comparing them with something stored on the computer.
Obviously, if you had the source code to a program which worked in this way, it'd be trivial examine that source and write a patch which disabled all the content-protection mechanisms. Open-source software simply cannot be used to limit people's freedom.
This is only true if you are talking about the old internet, the one used by the DoD and the defense industry. That baby was designed for national security and can withstand a nuclear strike. However, the modern internet, optical fiber based, was developed by the major telecommunications companies to increase voice traffic. Data traffic was originally secondary. I seriously doubt the companies like Cisco, Alcatel, and Lucent were using tax dollars to develop their products.
and depends 100% on open standards and protocols
Um, wrong again. Open standards don't really exist in networking or in telecommunications. Every vendor does things differently. The OSI model is NOT widely used and each vendor has its own implementation of what they want to do. Remember IPX? TCP/IP has finally taken over and dominated networking as Novell will now allow a server to run on solely TCP/IP.
Lets get real people.
---
We must find the Goldilocks zone.
Microsoft isn't trying to control anything based on merit or technical superiority.
What a load of shite. The two main things talked about in the AOL/MS discussions are web browsing and multimedia. IE is technically superior to the competition. WMA is technically superior to MP3. WMV is technically superior to Real Video.
Pretend all you want that Netscape's troubles were due to IE bundling instead of the simple fact that their code was crap, but the fact of the matter is that the real reason people switch is because Microsoft puts out a better product.
Cheers,
Personaly I'm going to stick with mp3 for audio, and mpeg for video. Since I runs a PC, a linux box, and a couple macs, this is the only way to go. Those are the only two formats that are truely compatable between these various systems. Or, at least the only ones that matter IMHO.
While they may not be truely open source (I still shudder at that name (it should just be GPL folks)), I don't care. The formats have been toyed with enough that they are understood.
Just my 2 cents
http://www.xpurple.com
Microsoft and AOL have (mostly) gotten their power fair and square.
Bzzt. Sorry, if you'd read some balanced coverage of the antitrust trial you'd know that this isn't true.Female Prison Rape in NY
Not so much Anti-MSFT, just more anti-monopoly. This situation could well have been totally different.
Imagine if it was IBM's OS/2 that became the number 1 desktop? Do you not think that you would be say this instead:
"Slashdot is becoming less and less of a place of information and more a platform for anti-IBM, anti-corporation propaganda."
Who knows in this case if MSFT would have taken a liking to Linux and made their own distro?
You are of course correct in that corps have to make the most money available. The part you did not cover is what happens when it becomes to big and powerful, therebye halting consumer choice, killing off innovation and driving up prices? That is a hallmark of a Monopoly....
So, yes most people here are angry at MSFT for those very reasons.
>Many of slashdot's readers fail to recognize that Microsoft and >AOL are both responsible for making the internet accessable >to the normal, non-techie consumer.
Have we forgotten OS/2 (you know, the one from IBM that got killed off)? AOL had clever marketing, just pour out millions of CD's....Indeed I remember the days before AOL, it was so easy to get connected via Compuserve. And if you were in the UK, Demon Internet was very easy too. Hate to say it, your remark was almost as bad as the one some people make about MSFT and paychecks...Sorry it could have easily been another company. And yes, we could easily be "hating" that other company.
StarTux
the penguin the back has seconded the motion. All in favor say................... what the hell does a penguin say?
photosMy Photostream
...about how when elephants fight it's the little animals (i.e. us) who get hurt.
MS just did, that's the point of the article. And AOL wasn't the one forcing or guilting anything. They wanted to purchase a service from Microsoft, and Microsoft started making demands that AOL reduce the value of their product by removing support for a third party Microsoft competitor's media format. AOL declined and let the matter drop. Where is AOL forcing anything? Are the suing to get their software onto the desktop(they would actually have a valid case because Microsoft's demands are illegal)? No, they're simply letting it drop.
More like "Walmart to have clothing department". Yeah, you never see anything like that in real life. Hell, there's even a McDonald's in the one around here, which is probably a more accurate analogy.
Lemme guess, you're one of those right-wing authoritarian feudalists who call themselves free-market capitalists? You seem to know, but simply not understand, that America Online does not produce an operating system that competes with Microsoft Windows. Neither does Real. Let me repeat that for the thinking-impaired in the audience:
AMERICA ONLINE DOES NOT COMPETE WITH WINDOWS
AMERICA ONLINE DOES NOT COMPETE WITH WINDOWS
AMERICA ONLINE DOES NOT COMPETE WITH WINDOWS
REAL MEDIA DOES NOT COMPETE WITH WINDOWS
REAL MEDIA DOES NOT COMPETE WITH WINDOWS
REAL MEDIA DOES NOT COMPETE WITH WINDOWS
You also seem to be under the delusion that AOL is trying to force their way onto Windows when by all accounts(except yours) that is not the case. Microsoft does not need AOL, Microsoft is not in any danger of going bankrupt if they don't get this deal, Microsoft owns the service that AOL wants. It is Microsoft that holds all the cards, and it is one of Microsoft's extra-market demands that is the sticking point in the deal, and it is AOL that chose not to play by Microsoft's rules.
Mirosoft actually acts like a commie government. ...
The irony is that our government has been fighting
the commies for years to preserve our freedoms
but is letting a dictator free to control people's
lives. Eventually you will see Microsoft's logo
all over. You'll see it when you watch TV, read
the newspapers, wipe your ass, etc
Anyone not using a Microsoft product on their
TV, computer or telephone will face the chance
of being prosecuted as an heretic or a criminal.
> i for one believe that people should work and
> co-operate together for the advancement of
> computing not hide there favorite new advances
> from other brilliant minds like one would hide
> their new cheese burger recipe.
that's it, i demand 'fatburger' release their cheeseburger recipe under the GPL.
if they refuse, why, i'll just order one 'to go' and reverse engineer that sucker and post it all over the web.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
Yea, MS is a pussy cat, and open standards pillar.. What are you talking about? It drives me nuts - each time somebody sais something bad about MS, there are always another somebody saing, you know - MS is actually has a very good a. OS b. Brouser c.Database d.Hardware e.programing tools d.whatever. If you like it so much then stay with them and pay them and shut up. There are other people who do not feel this way and they concerned whith MS using their desktop monopoly to control yet another market segment. Is it hard to understand? It is not about product it is about freedom of choice. How do you know that the product good or bad if you have nothing to compare with? It is that simple, so try to understand other people's point of view. O C@n@d@!
since when does "thin-skinned, humorless" = "insightful?"
I survived the Dick Cheney Presidency 7 to 9 AM 7-21-07
So who owns the matrix? Or just watch the cookies!!!
My name is NEO!
3 S.E.A.S - Virtual Interaction Configuration (VIC) - VISION OF VISIONS!
And as long as everyone can learn carpentry, electrical wiring on the professional level, plumbing, roofing, concrete work, masonry, and a dozen other related fields, they have no right to complain about shoddy home construction or high home prices, or expensive union labor. Build your own houses, you slackers!
Mr. Gates likes to say that the products that are coming out of his company are designed to help his customers. However, his primary motivation must be to enhance shareholder value.
Corporations that operate in a competitive market enhance shareholder value by providing valuable products and services that customers WANT to buy. Coporations operating as monopolies enhance shareholder value by eliminating competition in a predatory manner. As a monopoly on the desktop market, Mr. Gates has no choice but to operate his company in the current manner. He owes it to his shareholders.
As far as Slashdot turning into an anti-MS forum all I can say is that, for the most part, anyone can post whatever they want here. The IT workforce is a highly connected community. This is one of the free places on the web where we organize and communicate. Just like our source code, you are free to listen in and hear exactly what we are thinking. We are not afraid to show you our code and we're not afraid to show you our thoughts. All of us are stronger than any ONE of us.
I want to be alone with the sandwich
Thanks!
Uh, ok. that ws completely irrelevent.
further clarification
I survived the Dick Cheney Presidency 7 to 9 AM 7-21-07
I wasn't discussing simply just realaudio/realvideo vs wma/wmv. I was discussing microsoft as the entity they are. Don't take what I say out of its context. Microsoft didn't try to control the web browsing market fairly. If you are blind enough to belief so thats your prerogative.
The reason people switch is because in most cases they don't have to switch they are already using Microsoft products that were preinstalled for them. You're just trolling right?
more like 99.44%
Does anyone else think this statement sends a chill down their spine? Is it as much a threat by what it doesn't say as it is by what it does?
What would it be like if MS didn't "work to make sure the [service of your choice] runs well on Windoes XP"?
--
Your Servant, B. Baggins
This reminds me of a (joke) article I read quite some time backn ary.htm
http://www.adelaide.net.au/~attema/Vews/humour/bi
bzzzt sorry,
I already read it, and I still stand at my point, which many people around here seem to have failed to understand.
If I create a product that everyone uses, and I become rich off of it, I deserve the wealth and power that comes along.
And about the posts above, I do see that people aren't FORCED to use the GPL/GNU, but..If anyone had bothered to read http://www.gnu.org, you can CLEARLY see that it is an anti-corporate communist, license that many sheep seem to follow blindly without actually bothering to see the consequences.
Because the RIAA probably won't be interested in allowing anything that cannot be licenced/authenicated/taxed to have access to their bitstream. Sure, you may not care about Britney or the Backdoor Boys, but most people do, and most people still use Windows.
The question is: Will being cut out of online music streaming hurt non-proprietary alternatives? I say it can if the RIAA takes a long term view and lets people trade music for now until digital distribution becomes the norm. Then, anything that cannot talk to MyPassport, MyCreditCard and MyCelPhone will get locked out from packaged music. People want music and games more than they want freedom.
"Everything is adjustable, provided you have the right tools"
Once again, history is written by the victors. May we never forget that Microsoft's "Internet Exploder" was way behind Netscape in quality and only caught up by slowing Netscape down. Not that Netscape's code wasn't crap mind you ;)
How we know is more important than what we know.
Guy, the communism thing is from a joke propaganda poster. I guess you've never seen it. Here it is.
You had to use Outlook or Outlook Express as they are the only ones that support the secure password authentication...
Why did this troll get modded up?
How is Real an open standard?
How has Microsoft subverted Kerberos? Hint: They haven't.
Why must Microsoft bend over backwards to integrate AOL's crappy software into Windows XP?
You know, if AOL actually used open standards they wouldn't have to build specialized crappy software.
I'm not sure that any of this is really news - at least it's not new. Microsoft has been battling to get a foothold for their music transport format for quite some time now. That they have a relationship with AOL is CERTAINLY NOT NEWS. That they behave as if their windows desktop space is a comodity to be bargained with shouldn't be news to anyone at all. There have been a number of articles on this subject.
/. which describes the RIAA's version of a Streaming-only service.
In fact, Microsoft - through implementation of HailStorm - is looking to find more virtual realestate to sell off or rent out, since windows desktops have physical dimensions. The solution here will partially be implemented with OfficeXP and will be firther implemented with WindowsXP. By moving services off the desktop and onto servers, microsoft is then only limited by the size of the enviromentally controlled warehouses they use for their server farms.
Back to the main issue of media formats for a moment: I wouldn't be suprised to see a move by Microsoft to implement 'streaming only' restrictions into media recordings. This idea has been played with by several companies and recording industry organizations including the RIAA. This is discussed in a vary good posting on
I agree that this move by microsoft is yet another anti-competitive behavior, but I have ceased being suprised by Lord Bill's moves, a long time ago
--CTH
---
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
If I create a product that everyone uses, and I become rich off of it, I deserve the wealth and power that comes along.
True, but you do NOT deserve the right to use your wealth and power to prevent others from gaining a foothold in the market. This is the basis of anti-trust laws.
And about the posts above, I do see that people aren't FORCED to use the GPL/GNU, but..If anyone had bothered to read http://www.gnu.org, you can CLEARLY see that it is an anti-corporate communist, license that many sheep seem to follow blindly without actually bothering to see the consequences.
How is the GPL 'anti-corporate'? What 'consequences'? A corporation can easily use the GPL and still make money. Example? The guys who are building games from the GPL'ed Quake engine and retaining the rights to their GAME DATA. At the same time, it's not like these guys are exactly driving other game companies out of business, so in this case the other corporations aren't being hurt by the GPL, either.
So what is GAINED by GPL'ed code? Experience. By playing around with such things as the Quake engine source, that's the kinda stuff you do to learn how to make games. So basically GPL code is a vast resource of knowledge for young programmers to learn and gain experience in writing code.
I'm surprised nobody else really commented on this. Read that line again in the article. Microsoft wanted AOL to sign a "Mutual Legal Release" which basically said they wouldn't take legal action against each other for the term of the contract.
Would YOU sign an agreement like that with Micrsoft?
What you are forgetting, is that most people are not computer literate and really don't know/care about these issues.
So climate's changing. So what? It has always changed. The big news would be if it wasn't changing. - Dr. Philip Stone
How is that not relevant??? House = Operating System
So climate's changing. So what? It has always changed. The big news would be if it wasn't changing. - Dr. Philip Stone
> AMERICA ONLINE DOES NOT COMPETE WITH WINDOWS
AOL competes with MSN which is owned by MS.
> REAL MEDIA DOES NOT COMPETE WITH WINDOWS
Real Media competes with Windows Media Player which is an MS product bundled with Windows.
Microsoft is trying to get into the online music business. Real Media is already involved with it. AOL wants in also. This means that they are all competing over it. Random thought: If AOL comes out with an OS, will you only be able to connect to the internet via them?
So climate's changing. So what? It has always changed. The big news would be if it wasn't changing. - Dr. Philip Stone
Oh yeah now I remember no matter who I root for, I still feel ill to the stomach region. Yet another little one of lifes lose, lose situation.
Lets just hope that the "third party" does better in this one.
If we don't make light of everything, we are just stumbling in the dark - Blank
...the vanilla MP3 format sucks ass when compared to WMA (Windows Media Audio) mainly because it is a much older design, hence way behind the state-of-the-art in audio compression. I haven't listened to MP3 Pro, but WMA gives you much better bass frequency responses, and allows a much higher sampling rate per MB of disk space than MP3, roughly 2:1. (MS actually helping keep your hard disk usage down a little? Hehe!).
There is, of course, the two small matters of turning off that Digital Rights Management option, so you can use your recordings of your CDs wherever/whenever you want, and that you have to be running Windows to play them back...
(I haven't touched on Ogg Vorbis because I have never tried it. Maybe one day)
"Life is like a sewer - what you get out of it depends on what you put into it" - Tom Lehrer
Hust look for a new image format with embedded watermarking, which will be the only format supported by IE 7.0....
Microsoft will win. It's as simple as that. Most of my friends use already using Windows Media for downloading clips and stuff, and it is my humble personal opinion that RealPlayer (although quite fast)... kinda sucks. It would clutter your system tray, and bombard you with that stupid channel commercials from time to time (and me being on the other side of the world, the name AOL doesn't mean anything).The Windows Media formats were quite a joy to use for users who didn't want a fuss. There was nothing to install (>= WinMe), and it works.
.....And has anyone else noticed that Microsoft's making itself extremely vulnerable to the courts? I guess it will break up after all.
And really this is kind of vain.It's two proprietary formats.Who cares which one will win?
But personally , i would prefer WM, since it comes with Windows (note this phrase, that's the way the whole Winworld thinks, convenience is above everything).And this is actually Microsoft strategy, to turn their OS into a everything-but-the-kitchen-sing , all-singing all dancing, erm, thing.
But Windows Media Player is sooooooooo slow on my PC.And i noticed that all players would play MP3 much better than WMA's , which need all of your processing power.
But rest assured, if Microsoft tries to stop us from playing a cross-platform format like MP3, it will lose. Oh yes, it will lose...
There is no such thing as 'world peace'.
Pretty good for a convicted monopolist!
Do other felons manage to perpetuate their crimes quite as efficiently as Microsoft's executives?
I think this is what we define as competition in the 21st centuary.....
It was only a minor miracle he wasn't on the Ballot in Florida.
Are you sure he wasn't?
Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
JonKatz
Hardly. The patent is soon bound to expire. It would be a stupid stunt as well. Bad PR is not always good PR.
- Steeltoe
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
Is it just me, or does this COMPLETELY remind you of Antitrust. Is this first stage until MS Windows2k2 (W&MD Edition)comes out? lol W&MD being World & Market Domniation Edition :)
It's all about tha rice!
They think that RealPlayer with all it's privacy issues and it's old technology is right for consumers.
Cheers,
Anon
For any of you who have been breathing for the last decade or so, it should be obvious about the way M$ operates. The history of incremental co-option of sphere of influence should make it plain that while it might be music on the web today, it will be video on the web tomorrow. If you were Time Warner with a large content library, would you care to limit your distribution channel on the web to a single vendor? I think not. Especially when M$ has demonstrated that they love to get you, close off your exits and then put a gun in your face for more money. I can see it now: "Digial rights enabling? Well, that will be an incremental $$ and btw, for us to support it, you will have to upgrade to Windoze XPensive". Stay tuned gang. This one is going to get interesting. Can you imagine what might happen if AOL were to start to distribute a Linux that the average joe could use on those millions of CDs they send out??
Sex is heriditary, if your parents didn't have it chances are good you won't either.
If anyone had bothered to read http://www.gnu.org, you can CLEARLY see that it is an anti-corporate communist, license that many sheep seem to follow blindly without actually bothering to see the consequences.
Is a license that is anti-corporate and communist bad?
thenerd.
The camels are coming. I'm in love.
As long as you write your own damn code you aren't 'forced' into using any license.
With GPL this is not true. If you link to GPLed code your code is forced to be GPL. This may not be such a big deal with applications, but it can be a real pain when writing drivers. Linux doesn't have a binary driver interface. This is one of the reasons that you don't see Linux drivers for a lot of hardware that's out there, or that you see open source drivers that are missing large portions of the functionality that is available in the binary Windows drivers. A lot of companies aren't willing to give away to many secrets about technology they spent millions to develop, and the design of Linux combined with the GPL makes it difficult for them to hide that information. You can still do it, but it's more difficult. Your driver breaks as the kernel goes through minor revisions. Kernel patches for other packages can easily be incompatible with your driver. Supporting different distributions is even a challenge, so you end up supporting just Red Hat to keep support costs managable. Supporting Linux drivers is a considerable challenge, and in the end how much more hardware are you going to sell because you have a Linux driver.
You want more Linux drivers, give us driver developers a binary driver interface. There is a price you will pay for them. You will end up with more closed source drivers, which is a serious issue for many Linux developers and users. Not only is there the philosophical issue of closed sourse software, there is the real issue of bugs in drivers can easily crash the kernel. A good binary interface will encourage programming styles which produce fewer bugs, but the simple fact remains that crappy drivers crash kernels, and if the source is closed, the only choice you really have is to not use it if it doesn't work well. Some companies aren't going to write open source drivers, or provide enough information for other to write them. It's up to the kernel developers to decide how willing they are to support binary driver developers. I heard that Linus is against a binary driver interface, though I have that information second hand, so I can't point you to a quote. If this is truely the case I don't expect a large increase in the number of device drivers available in the near future. Linux is a constantly evolving OS, so maybe the right time for a binary driver interface will come.
And what are any of us doing other than bitching about it? seriously... i'd like to see what some people are doing to 'Topple This Totalitarianistic Tyranny' and perversion of the information age(which i think the purpose is to make all info available, not just the info you like, not sure on that, though)
Is a license that is anti-corporate and communist bad?
Yes, because if it was the only license in use, other people would make your choices for you. I like FREEDOM, rather than SLAVERY.
This is a horrible analogy because when the house is built you own it, you don't license it. This completely invalidates any argument you were trying to make with the analogy.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
here is another point. Microsoft came out with windows. Everyone (A large percentage) is using it. If someone came out with something better, and it gained massive popularity, they wouldn't have a monopoly anymore. But, there about 1% of the people bitching that are actually trying to do something about it. The people with the loudest voices, are usually the most INsecure.
I see your point, but I have two questions...
Why couldn't you just do what nVIDIA did with their kernel space driver and make a binary-only module which is compiled in with the actual kernel interfaces? This would allow future changes in the interfaces while still staying compatable with older drivers if support stops.
(I guess this is rhetorical)
Why must the hardware manufacturers worry about telling people about the interfaces to their hardware which doesn't have to give any information about any closed processes that occur inside?
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
how did I NOT answer the question ?
sorry, I dont have a whole website dedictated to such things, with 100's of zealouts bitching loudly.
I am also not spamming the messageboards with such things as: linux isn't fair, windows is better, blah,blah (insert linux zealout rant here)
first and foremost, microsoft never FORCED the consumer to purcahse the windows operating system. second, What im try to show you, is that the only way to really win is to come out with something better. responses from slashdot are typical ofthe same people that support affirmative action and welefare in american society today.
how did they do that?
by creating things that were better and more innovative than anyone else. Netscape and mozilla are a GREAT example. I run Netscape, the pages are sluggish, it takes 20 seconds to load, and it crashes, constantly. This includes both windows and many distros of linux
Bullshit. Microsoft products have rarely even approached the quality of their competitors. IE is one of the few counterexamples, and it still can't touch Opera. In addition, it sure as hell isn't innovative; it's just another Mosaic clone.
We see how many people are using opera
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
bitter comments from a bitter slashdotter
that's BULLSHIT!
I have used opera, and it's not even in the same league as Internet Explorer.
Just because it's Open-Sourced, Doesn't make it better.
definition of communism (www.dictionary.com):
A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members
I rest my case
I would imagine the people you aksed were either:
1) linux zealouts or
2) anti-microsoft
Ok, so those who go GPL/GNU are "sheep" who are being herded towards some goal. I guess by going Microsoft, you are not a "sheep?" Do you see what the end goal is? How about total control over everything possibly controllable? How about "no choice for you!" Can you elaborate on the consequences GPL/GNU followers are being herded toward? Versus Microsoft-type followers?
The way old, established laws are changed is seldom cool. "The powers that be" persuade the public to believe that the old laws no longer apply. How hard is it to persuade the "public" into believing something? Example: Coke does a pretty good job - the fizzy gas bubbles hitting your face are "sexy" and fun and make you laugh. Hee hee! Ever laugh when you open a Coke? No. But the sexy girl on the ad is pretty cool, no? I wonder how many people bought into that campaign.
Coke's (for example) kind of advertising is child's play compared to what the government and Fortune 10 companies can come up with. Look at all the backtracking Microsoft has been doing lately. Many people aren't taking their sh-t anymore. Before, they'd feed us lies and we'd believe it because we were naive. Now, we're FINALLY on to their tactics. What tactics aren't we on to these days??!!
Want to know what I think? The only people who are really on to Microsoft are techies. So Microsoft's next tactic is to say to themselves "who gives a sh-t about the techies. Everyone else is blind, so we'll target them with this B.S. advertising." Everyone else includes our managers, by the way.
Nuff said.
lol
all that can also be said about the FSF. Only the true techies can see what their final goals are. Really, they want to get rid of all intellectual property rights. (I would rather have a corporation that is less controlling. IE. A better OS, which No company or group can accomplish)
I hate microsft, bu that doesn't mean the FSF is my friend.
'Nuff said