Microsoft: The Gatekeeper of the Internet

jeffy124 writes "C|net News.com is embarking on a seven day comprehensive report on how Microsoft is moving themselves into position to be The Gatekeeper Of The Internet through Windows XP. The first installment explains the basics of how this is going to happen: Reminders that last for days encouraging users to sign up for Passport, and how Windows will evenutally resemble services like AOL."

Comments

It's All About The Average User

[Self Bias Resistor]

The point is not that the technically adept will possibly somehow be denied access to the Internet (which wouldn't happen for a whole slew of technical reasons), but that Micrsoft will get an unfair headstart on those who aren't technically minded. Your 'average user' may not know that you don't need Passport to use the Internet under Windows XP. But if he/she gets constant reminder messages for days suggesting to them that they get a Passport account, then they may start thinking "if I don't get a Passport account, I may be missing out on something (ie. may not be getting the "best" services)". Especially if, as the article suggests Microsoft might starting including "features" in XP that may only be accessed with a Passport account. Those who know enough about computers will know how to set up their systems under XP using their own software and Internet access. But it's the 'average user', who doesn't know these things, that it's going to most affect.

In this case, education will the key. If people know that they can use XP just fine without a Passport account, then they may be less likely to sign up for one in future (hey, it's yet one more password to memorise). That is, unless MS doesn't in future require users to have such accounts to use key features of the operating system. It's bad enough that it's compulsory to register your copy of Windows XP (otherwise it stops functioning). To say nothing of the fact that even in the face of an (once) impending antitrust suit by the Department of Justice, MS are continuing to "bundle" products and services to their operating systems more tightly than ever.

Boy, I hope the DOJ is reading this....

[n8willis]

Is anyone else amused that the Justice Department has a separate contact address just for people who want to complain about Microsoft?

Nate

2nd installment is also available

[cr@ckwhore]

Since c|net started this on Oct. 17th, the 2nd installment is available also.

You can read it here: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-201-7502765-0.htm l

Re:Quote of the Day (scary!)

[Masem]

Renting whatever is always a lose-win situation for the customer and the renter, respectively, particularly in the long run (more than 3-5 years)

• Apartment renting: Typically, if you frequently move large distances, renting is ok, but if you are fixed at a certain location in the country, you can usually get house payments + utilities + properties taxes well under the monthly rent for property in the same area. In addition, you lose the ability to play with equity on your home, which can be a valuable source of funding for emergancies
• Car Leasing: Again, a loser for the rentee: while the monthly lease payments might be lower than for a new car, you have more liability for your car if it's in an accident, and typically more for insurance in some areas. And again, you lose the money that you can get from a reselling of the car in the future.
• Software renting: Particularly in the case of Microsoft, you must continue to rent the software in order to continue being 'compatiable' with everyone else, so while the cost to rent software might be less than purchasing it on a 2-3 year time scale, you must consider the 5-10 year time scale for mission critical software in order to keep up.

The overall problem with renting software is that renting is just one step away from pay-per-play, which Microsoft has subtly indicated that they wouldn't mind that, and in the opposite direction of the principle of first sale. Just like we are discussing how slowly eroding civil librities is more likely to be accepted by citizens than a swift removal of them, removing the buyer's rights from software by going to seat-licenses, then renting, then pay-per-use will be more of an accepted transition if it is done slowly.

In addition, while I am a linux user, I want my games, and I want them at the same time as most of the rest of the world enjoys them as opposed to months later. While the catch-22 syndrome of linux games has been discussed before, I don't think that will be resolved until the linux desktop is more fully realized. Thus, until that happens, I will continue to have a Windows box to play games on as well as most of my web browsing with a non-MS browser. However, while for the immediate future, I expect Win98 to be sufficient, with all modern hardware and games continue to provide support for it, once MS decides that the latest version of DirectX will only run under XP or higher, I will need to consider upgrading (I'm considering it right now, given the know improvements in stability between XP and 98). I know XP will remain a single-cost purchase, but what happens when the next step comes along? I would suspect that most causal computer users are in the same boat as me in their feelings to software renting vs purchasing.

Hey Big Brother, Thanks for the help!

[AmbientBlue]

So I tried using Windows XP a little a few weeks ago.. I quickly went back to, umm, er, '98 after experiencing DNS trouble with my ISP while using it..

But in the day or two of using it I had an application error spawn a process that sent system information INCLUDING personal information like REGISTRATION and whatever NAME you had in the appropriate field. I didnt even have a choice! Well -- you have a choice if you are at the machine when the error occurs. After a minute or so it sends it anyway.

It would be cool if I got a call from a tech support expert with an automatically open trouble ticket, but no.. That isnt what its for.. Its for taking personal information, matching it with your network location, and using it to whatever purpose they desire.

Pretty F***ing sneaky.