Slashdot Mirror
E.U. Commission: More Antitrust Trouble For MS
Tidal Flame writes "According to Wired news, Microsoft appears to be in hot water over antitrust issues again. The European Commission says it will require Microsoft to 'share more proprietary information with its rivals' and 'uncouple' it's Media Player audiovisual software from the Windows operating system." iCoach points to this article at The Register covering the same.
Microsoft has had anti-trust trouble since, I think, 1997. With enough money in the bank to run the company without profits for decades, they will be able to hire whatever celebrity attourneys are necessary to win the case. This is run-of-the-mill Microsoft business.
In the long run, we're all dead.
You're right, I did lose a million dollars last year. I expect to lose a million dollars this year. I expect to lose a million dollars *next* year. You know, Mr. Thatcher, at the rate of a million dollars a year, I'll have to close this place in... 60 years.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
They've had to "uncouple" IE. Now they're being asked to uncouple Media Player.
What's next? Uncoupling the calculator? The start button? Command prompt?
Following this line of thinking ad absurdum, what exactly is Microsoft allowed to package with Windows? Sheesh!
In the Portland, Ore area and like card games? Check out: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/portlandgames/
(comic book guy voice) Most impossible to understand comment, ever (/voice)
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
It's like telling a thief to "steal less". As long as Microsoft does non-free software (as opposed to GPL or BSD-style), rulings like this will only help legitimize them rather than raise concerns of their ongoing practices.
I was greeted with a microsoft screen-covering advertisement when I clicked to the article.
Next, on Jerry Springer: :)
"Windows is a Kernel. Deal with it."
When microsoft share['s] more proprietary information with its rivals. Is THAT the day that pigs fly?
Got Extra Money?
and who thinks they won't find some way to try to stick people with media player anyway?
Why can't they just have a checkbox when you install Windoughs for if you don't want these things (such as IE or WMP)? Linux Distrubutions usally don't make you install a certain browser (depends on the distro). If they do this, they probably will make you enter the product key 6 more times per product checked to not be installed;-).
I agree with this. The bundling is (clearly?) not the problem. The GNU/Linux distros bundles browsers, media players, calculators and that's fine, that's a good thing.
In fact I have a hard time considering an operating system that doesn't ship with a compiler.
Of course Microsoft will do everything in its power to find a loop hole or get the decision overturned.
I wonder if MS was hoping that nobody would notice they did the same thing with Media Player that they did is MSIE.
I could see a conversation between a consumer and MS now:
Consumer: "Hey! You guys are shoving Media Player down my throat."
MS: "Media player? What Media Player?"
Consumer:"Oh, come on! You didn't actually think nobody would notice did you?"
*MS waves hand in front of consumers face*
MS:"There is no Media Player."
Consumer:"There is no media player."
MS:"You don't want any plugins."
Consumer:"I don't want any plugins."
MS:"Move along."
Consumer:"Move alone. Move along."
The flying hamster of DOOM rains coconuts on your pitiful city.
The calculator and command prompt can be uninstalled. The Start button itself is not an application, so I won't comment on that. But Explorer, which provides the start button and desktop can be replaced. IE and the Media Player, however, can not be uninstalled. What's next is anything that is integrated which can not be uninstalled yet has competition.
Developers: We can use your help.
then, when I clicked back to the page after my posting, the ad link was broken, giving me a 404 error.
What's next? Uncoupling the calculator? The start button? Command prompt?
Oddly enough, those three are prime candidates for replacement. It's easy enough to replace the windows calc, there are still tons of explorer (start menu/taskbar) replacements, and as for the command prompt--IIRC, some of the more popular UNIX shells have been ported to Windows, either by themselves or with CYGWIN.
But despite all this--I can't replace IEHTML with Gecko.
Media player is integrated into the OS, much like IE. And thus it loads faster and is generally more robust, for the same reasons IE loads faster than Mozilla.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
why, why, why do we care about this??
:-)
i thought this was a linux website, not a 'against windows' website.
you have a user id in the 400k's. you're just now realizing this?
by the way, they have computers you can carry around now -- they don't use vacuum tubes or take up huge rooms in a basement somewhere
Who cares if they can't be uninstalled? It is trivial to install a preferred player or browser and make it the default. With the size of hard drives today, the 10 to 100 MB that IE and Media Player occupy is trivial as well.
Please make Microsoft explain why they bought key OpenGL patents during 2002 just to jump off the OpenGL group the year after.
Please, force them to keep those patents open to the community for at least fifteen more years, or something like that.
We make a lot of fun of Gates, but hmm, could you imagine ... 'puttin' on the ritz, baby'
Having a monopoly isn't inherently evil, it's just how the power is used people. Having media player isn't bad, but making it so quicktime and realplayer don't work correct is. There are benevolent dictators, then there's all your money belongs to me dictators.
Fries
Toast
Kissing
Horns
Ticklers
Doors
Polishing
Y'all should go hang with loony old Bob Ney.
T&K.
Political language
Just a brainstorm solution for *all bundling* of software: Why not let MS bundle any software it likes, but under one condition: It has to adher to open standards. If it wants to distribute WMP, let it do so, but only the codecs that play open and well-defined media formats. So it has the choice to remove WMx-files or to document them fully. The same line of reasoning could be followed for future inappropriateness. dizzl
Hey, having a media player come with windows server is the kind of value added benefit that Microsoft talks about when comparing Windows server to other operating systems. Now if only my racks came equipped with speakers in them, I'd be set. Maybe some zero-U solution can be found out there for me. The idea of watching streaming media while doing sys admin tasks is something that you just can't beat...
perhaps not, but this'll sure as hell get them around the DMCA for developing that stuff in Europe.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
While this horse has been beaten pretty much to death, pre-loaded DLLs are not the only reason IE loads faster than Mozilla. IE also has an advantage over Mozilla because the windows version of Mozilla is a pig. Opera loads faster than Mozilla as well, and it ain't because MS built in special support for the nice folks over at Opera.
Roving Web-Teleoperated Robot
I'm sorry, but this is idiotic. I've had about enough of this 'coupling' shit.
This is how it works:
Media Player and IE are both FULLY REUSABLE ActiveX components that come with windows. Any windows developer can 100% rely on the fact that they will be installed on a windows machine (Well, not 100% with media player, but with IE, 100%). This means you can add simple media playback and web functionality to a program without having to purchase external tools or spend hours integrating some external solution!
I don't WANT components I rely on to be uninstalled. All Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer really ARE is glorified activex component hosts. The real work is done by DirectShow and the Microsoft HTML library.
I can see how this is bad for competition, but we're going after the wrong target here - IE and Media Player aren't the problem; the way they're being used is.
using namespace slashdot;
troll::post();
The EU commission unlike its American counterparts is made up of a diverse mixture of cultures and backgrounds.
Playing to the commission and its composition authority will be orders of magnitude more difficult than doing it in the US, especially the French and Germans.
Not to say its not possible, just a lot more difficult.
Independence? That's middle-class blasphemy. We are all dependent on one another, every soul of us on earth. G.B Shaw
I think MS should be allowed to package any additional software it wants with windows as long as it is removable. MS does this to some extent already (some stuff can be chosen during install), but they could do a fair amount more.
I think the stability and security of Windows could also be greatly enhanced from the ability to remove parts from windows. Sick of IE vulnerabilities, uninstall it. I use a fair amount of additional software that is installed with windows (movie maker, media player, IE, etc.), but I wouldn't object is someone else wanted to remove those components from their system.
The flip side of the coin is the handiness of having things integrated. I like having the OS be feature rich out of the box. I don't like having to download additional software to perform basic tasks. I'm sure there are better calculators out there, but the one bundled with windows is ok for what I need it to do.
Almost? Shit man, MS gaves us Impossible Creatures and Asheron's Call. What the fuck did the french ever give us?
Diablo, Warcraft, Half-Life, and Tribes.
You DID know Vivendi was a French company, right?
What the fuck did the french ever give us?
A victory in the American Revolution ?
What would Lemmy do?
I agree with you that "disable" this, break out that, are not the proper way to address the monopoly issue. The truth is that these approaches do nothing to redress the playing field. I for one would much rather see the EU state that OEMs and resellers must sell hardware without any preinstalled or bundled operating system. This would break Microsoft's grip on the OEM market which is the real remedy that is required. At that point, Joe Sixpack can choose the OS of their liking (for a price) and either have the onsite tech install it or install it themselves. If Microsoft truly has the best product, they would have nothing to fear with this arrangement.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
[disclaimer]I don't know so I'm asking[/disclaimer]
.wma .wmv) potentially displacing other non-MS formats?
Isn't the danger more with the proprietary windows media formats (.wm
If WMP is guaranteed to be installed by default on all Win PC's and is set as the default player for all known media file formats, doesn't this cause concern that MS can then attempt to use their monopoly position to displace other formats? Does that unfairly disadvantage competing software makers that might then be forced to license wm formats?
Again, I don't know - just asking the question.
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
I really hope they do uncouple WMP, after I installed it to play some videos, my WinAMP quit workings. Coincidence? I think not...
If what you are reading sounds funny, or sarcastic, lame, or stupid
it is because it is supposed to be. just laugh
It was the initial bundling which causes the problem. The fact that they came as the defaults and at first could not be changed from being the defaults that get them in trouble. At the time of the abuse of monopoly, you could not change the default web browser or media player. Today it's trivial, earlier it wasn't.
Developers: We can use your help.
No, not Media Player, but that Real crap. I wish they'd just go tits up (nod to the reg). If Microsoft reigns for a thousand years and slaughters helpless companies left and right, it'll be a small price to pay if it rids the earth of the real player. Oh forgive me, the realone player.
and 'uncouple' it's Media Player audiovisual software from the Windows operating system
I wonder if some of the new 'proprietary information' will include some of the WMP technology so that Winamp et. all can play the files properly. At the moment nullsoft is required to not do anything to WMP files but play them - no visualisation etc.
I enjoy having media player come with windows, but it does give Microsoft even more power in the industry. The long term cost to consumers from this market power could be greater than the short-term cost of further separating Media Player. Secondly, Microsoft does need provide more information to third party software developers. According to this article at ZDNet http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t297-s2121402,00. html "Microsoft used undocumented application programming interfaces (APIs) to make the company's software work better with Windows than competitor's" products. This is an example of the anti-competitive behavior Microsoft exhibits.
Let's beat up the new kid.
Again, it's because there's basically no commercial competition to the window manager, GDI, DirectX, scheduler, ODBC subsystem, and file systems. There was competition for web browsers and media players. It was the way they handled those particlar applications (and others) that got them in trouble. Blending other software into the OS monopoly in order to undercut competition is the abuse of monopoly.
Developers: We can use your help.
Tell them to have the U.N. write a resolution against you. That way everybody wins: they get to look busy, and you don't ever have to comply!
"Lord, grant that I may always be right, for Thou knowest that I am hard to turn" -- A Scots-Irish prayer
2003-03-11 15:43:20 EU experts believe Microsoft in violation (articles,microsoft) (rejected)
*sigh*
"If you are on fire you can just stop, drop, and roll. If you fall into Lava you are just dead." - my 5yr old daughter
No, Joe User wants a turnkey solution, he doesnt want to deal with installing an OS. And if he did, he'd chose the easiest to install. This would be Windows.
So then there'd be a lawsuit that states "make your installer a pain in the ass and rename your driver files to stuff like tulip.o so noone knows what the hell is going on."
Now, selling OEM hardware preinstalled with a Linux distro that works well and does everything Joe User wants it to, without having to learn any new skills or become a l337 h4xor would be the solution.
Because Joe User isnt fixing what isnt broken. He'll use Linux all day and night so long as it works. How many people still run Windows 95 or 98 because thats what came on the machine when they bought it?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Would you expect to be able to charge for a media player in today's marketplace? Good luck!
That's the issue: other potential vendors are prevented from selling their products.You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
"Math in a song is good."-Linford
I agree. I never have quite seen what the problem is here. Windows also comes with a "word processor", and art package. Okay, wordpad and paint may be a pretty crappy at those jobs, but Corel and Adobe don't seem to get their knickers in a twist about those. They simply release a vastly better product. If a larger company can provide better software for free, then you lose out. This would still apply if MS didn't have a monopoly, but was simply bigger.
MS have done a lot worse than give away a free browser. They should be concentrating on that instead.
How about this: your OS is an OS, not an app. Your OS is a service provider between hardware and apps. Apps do things like play media files, browse the web, etc.
There you go. Keep your OS an OS. Everything else is unneeded, undesired, and merely designed to widen monopoly to include the means of info distribution, what info is distributed, and who gets to access info.
Sorry, this isn't a place for M$ (or any company) to control.
In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
I'm sorry, but quicktime sucks ass... You can't go full screen, files don't play automatically when you double-click open them, the quality is shit, the list goes on and on. With realplayer, your viewing window is surrounded in crap, and it is generally annoying. I love when MS integrates software like this because it has no additional cost and doesn't shower me with ads.
Everytime microsoft integrates something to the os (and it is pretty decent), I don't have to cough up dough for a third-party product. I'm not going to pay $30 for quicktime pro when I get a superior media player for free.
I think open-source will provide constant, unbeatable competition to MS, and the end result won't be the downfall of MS, but a very dramatic increase in the quality of their operating system.
OS will be like a pace partner in running, they won't ever beat you, but they will make damn sure you are running hard the entire time.
what are you talking about? Surrender? We bought the Louisiana "Purchase" from Napoleon because he needed the money to fund his European wars.
Napoleon would have eventually lost it in the eventual surrender to the british, but they did not surrender the Louisiana Purchase to America.
I/O, I/O, its off to disk I go, with a read and a write, and a bit and a byte, I/O, I/O, I/O, I/O
Did you do the simple click-through install and NOT tell it to NOT bind MP3, etc. files to itself?
All I want is a kind word, a warm bed and unlimited power.
So now, instead of telling MS how to run their business, they'd be telling hardware sellers how to run THEIR businesses? That doesn't seem any better for me. If a hardware seller decides not to sell any non-MS OS's with their system, that's their business. If there's really something better for a particular market, that company will lose business and be forced to adapt. But time after time has shown that *nix based PC's just don't work in the marketplace. Hell, VA Software (owner of Slashdot) even couldn't make it work. Forcing companies to sell something they wouldn't normally sell is not how capitalism works, and it doesn't benefit anybody, except competitors that normally couldn't compete in the marketplace.
I have a store. A real "brick & mortar" store. There are plenty of things that I choose not to sell because they don't fit my business. If someone said that I *had* to sell a particular product, I'd tell them to take a flying leap.
Windows is a product of Microsoft. IE is a product of Microsoft. Media Player is a product of Microsoft. Microsoft sells Windows. Consumers buy Windows. Microsoft can do whatever they want to Windows as long as the customer buys it. Nobody is screaming ANTITRUST to McDonalds for 'incorporating' McDonalds fries into their McValue Meals. If Microsoft can learn to cook a cheeseburger, they can incorporate a Microsoft cheeseburger into Windows if they wish, IT'S THEIR PRODUCT! And if that cheesburger becomes the most popular cheeseburger on the market, THEY DONT HAVE TO SELL THE RECIPE TO MCDONALDS! Nobody is making McDonalds release information on their proprietary fries so Burger King can use them in their value meal. BK makes their own fries. You don't have to goto McDonalds to get a value meal, but you can't goto Burger King to get McDonalds fries. You don't have to use Windows as an operating system, but you can't run Media Player without it. Open your eyes and use an open *nix system with open media formats.
If at first you don't succeed... How does that go again? Ah, forget it.
The tricky part is that M$ is a monopoly. With 90-95% market share in Operating Systems, bundling browser with their operating system gives them 90-95% market share in browsers. Same goes for Media Player. This is considered as an unfair advantage.
getSexySig();
It's like the government telling automakers they're required to have cup holders suited for 64 oz cups in all vehicles
Actually, its more like telling the Microsoft Motor Corporation that hey are not allowed to sell cars designed to only work with the Microsoft Oil brand gasoline when there is no reason why it shouldn't also work with the competitor's gasoline.
You can't take the sky from me...
Its silly to remove IE and Windows Media Player. I prefer them to other competing products. Many windows media players are not freely distributed, nor work as well. I suppose you could claim that I am paying for them since I purchased Windows XP, but at least they provide free upgrades. Competing products such as Quicktime do not. I have used both activex components in programs. A modern OS should have a built in internet browser and media player. I don't want to search or pay for one on top of the price of the OS, I just want them to work, and they both do extremely well.
I don't understand the deal with windows media player or IE or zip or firewall or MSN..... You can use different software to play media files (the Playa, WinAMP, etc.) and Mozilla/Opera, Winzip, Zonealarm, ICQ so what's the big deal? Most OEM PCs come with different jukebox software installed or freely downloadable alternatives, so media player etc etc isn't mandated. This sounds like a pretty dumb thing, I would say most consumers like having a media player , web browser, zip program, firewall, IM client built in, who cares if its an MS player or not?
You must be one of Microsofts favorite customer types. The one that'll happily buy the Bundle(tm), with whatever middleware and applications Microsoft decided to snuff out this time around.
Somehow I don't think you've understood any of the reason why anti-trust laws exist. If you can make sure 95%+ of your target market has it installed by default, or just make it hard to replace or make replacements unreliable and not follow standards, you will take over the market regardless of your actual product qualities. That is not fair competition, that is abuse of your monopoly. Maybe the EU courts will be less blind, deaf and dumb than the American ones.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I just tried out both Mozilla with "quick start" enabled (which makes up for the pre-loaded DLLs of IE) and made an informal test on an XP box. Both loaded up in about 1 second.
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke
It depends if you count the stock options or not, for just one item. One review of the number,I saw had M$ lossing $4 Billion in 1999 alone, when stock options were included. Last I understood M$ had $24 Billion worth of stock options outstanding.
Let's say McDonalds has a monopoly on the fast food market. Should they be able to say "Fuck the customer, if they want a burger, they will buy our orange drink crap too"? US (an apparently EU) law says no. You aren't allowed to leverage your monopoly to beat your competition. To continue with the analogy, if I already have a drink that I like, I shouldn't need to use their proprietary orange drink crap with my burger.
I'm a lawyer, but not yours. I wouldn't represent someone who thinks taking legal advice from Slashdot is a good idea.
Reason has nothing to it. Companies, like individuals should be allowed to make any stupid decisions that they choose to make. As long as nobody else is harmed, why not let a company make a car that works only with Brand X oil? Hell, my Corvette *had* to have synthetic, and I believe that it was only warrantied if I used Mobil One oil. Stupid decision? I dunno. I bought one anyway. I didn't have to. I could've been super evil and said, "I can't buy this because I only use Penzoil". But that decision was up to Chevy, and nobody else.
I'll hold him down =)
--even a broken watch is correct twice a day.
>> if you dont like windows media player - write a fucking better one. if you cant, look on the internet - for surely someone already has
Noone has. I've looked. Media Player leaves a *lot* to be desired, but everything else out there is just crap. I dont like WinAmp, it's too awkward. Divx Playa is buggy, crashes, and resets my monitor resolution to 800x600 every time I start it up. Quicktime is a friggin joke. RealPlayer One, puhlease.
The only way these guys see to compete is to get the courts to bar MS from having a better product than they do.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Without the French Navy disrupting British supply and ensuring ours we would have lost that war going away. The French sent the British packing at the Battle of the Virginia Capes, then blockaded Chesapeake Bay and transported American and French troops to Yorktown, forcing Cornwallis's surrender.
It is cowardly, and a betrayal of whatever it means to be a Jew, to act as a white man
-James Baldwin
@_@ media player has been bundled with windows since at least v3.1 @__@ why make a fuss now?
The last time I tried to install a Microsoft security patch, I was confronted by an EULA that would have given Microsoft the right to alter my system at any future time without my knowledge or approval. The EULA went on to say that such alterations might prevent me from playing some media, and that Microsoft could not be held liable for my loss of functionality.
How do you think this might effect a content producer's choice of media format? If you were a content producer, would you have second thoughts about using a format that Microsoft could break at any future time? Is it possible that you would be inclined to chose Microsoft's preferred media formats to avoid such dificulties?
As a user in the 1k's, I think I've seen enough /. stories to comment. People are only vehemently against Windows around here because most of them use it and so are upset about being weak and hyprocritical ;)
The truth is that these approaches do nothing to redress the playing field. I for one would much rather see the EU state that OEMs and resellers must sell hardware without any preinstalled or bundled operating system.
It would also need something along the lines of the only discounts they can offer being volume discounts. Not exclusivity discounts.
He's speaking as a developer. He can write an application that uses the 100% guaranteed to be there, IE HTML Rendering Engine, without having to write his own HTML Engine, or go out and try and integrate someone elses and deal with installation hassles.
It's funny that Microsoft gets a lot of shit for bundling software with Windows when just about every Linux distro you find at the local Best Buy comes with 10x more user applications... everything from web browsers to graphic editing tools to compilers to word processors... etc... etc...
So, why is it wrong for MS... but alright for Red Hat, Mandrake, etc?
--
"What do you want me to do? Whack a guy? Off a guy? Whack off a guy? Cause I'm married."
Rich
MS is only profitable in desktop OS and Office suites. In those two categories they have obscene/enviable profit margins (depends on your viewpoint). These are used to drive all of their other initiatives which are almost all universally losing money. (Some at quite a high rate including MSN and X-Box.)
The best thing that the DoJ and EU trials can do is make more of MS's partners warry of doing business with them. Things like License 6 are already annoying businesses and BSA audits are certainly bringing it tons of good will for Linux and alternative-OS choices.
No, MS isn't going anywhere anytime soon. I just look forward to the day where Chompaq or Dell start selling non-Windows consumer PC's.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Probably msn messenger.
Would you expect to be able to charge for a media player in today's marketplace? Good luck!
why wouldn't someone charge for a media player? doesn't real one cost money (after 14 day trial)? how about quicktime 6 pro? and of course, we can't forget about windvd!
based on your question, one could easily argue that microsoft has no future because a free alternative is available.
Wave upon wave of demented avengers March cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream
No, Joe User wants a turnkey solution, he doesnt want to deal with installing an OS.
In which case there would be 3 items, hardware, software and the service of installing the latter onto the former.
And if he did, he'd chose the easiest to install. This would be Windows.
Except that this isn't the case for all hardware. Especially once you move away from the home user market.
Since when can a government entity tell you what to or not to include in your software?
Since when? Ever since Microsoft was found to be a monopoly in a court of law, that's when.
>>>This is my first post on Slashdot [Yay!], but I have to use it to do something that most people probably won't like, defend Microsoft.
If you know your own mortality, LEAVE NOW...
I said I'd only post a few times. Now look at my Comments
Think about it.
(and yes, the USA needs the world more than vice versa - that's a fact and please verify it before responding)
it's in my head
I use it because I am familiar with it, and so is the rest of the family, I taught them how to make cds from MP3's and how to rip them with it, I am not going to teach them again, it was painful enough the first time, and please don't make your bait so obvious when trolling...
If what you are reading sounds funny, or sarcastic, lame, or stupid
it is because it is supposed to be. just laugh
A) VA Linux ONLY sold rack mounts.
B) Capitalism is determined by competition in a free-market. The desktop PC OS market is governed by a monopoly which by it's very definition means it's no longer a free-market. Look it up.
C) Did you even read my post? Did I even *mention* forcing anybody to sell anything? No. It's about forcing somebody to *not* sell something in a bundle. There are plenty of rules like this already in place, ask your local telephone company for one example.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
The problem as I see it is that they work with non-free software (not only non-free from a copyright perspective, but hassled with patents as well). If they did free software the market share wouldn't be a problem since you could fork at any sign of misbehaviour (whether spyware or pricing).
Flaimbait or not, he has a point. And, I share it.
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
So, why is it wrong for MS... but alright for Red Hat, Mandrake, etc?
Say it with me..
MO-NO-PO-LY
That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze
Nope, I did the customized one and told it to just bind .avi and .mpeg videos to itself...
If what you are reading sounds funny, or sarcastic, lame, or stupid
it is because it is supposed to be. just laugh
Would you expect to be able to charge for a media player in today's marketplace? Good luck!
That's the issue: other potential vendors are prevented from selling their products.
And??? Anti-trust/monopoly laws were established to keep monopolies from harming consumers, not their competition. How does having the market value of a media player equaling 0 hurt the consumer?
When you go to buy memory modules do you think "These prices are too low, these memory makers must be making almost no money" or do you think "Hey, this is great, I can get memory for really cheap"???
Also,if you care about companies well being, do you buy a higher priced product to keep the lower priced one from getting a monopoly or being unfairly competive. Do you use Paintshop Pro or the GIMP? If you use Gimp (which is free like Media PLayer), do you worry that Jasc can't sell their product??
This is my first post on Slashdot [Yay!], but I have to use it to do something that most people probably won't like, defend Microsoft.
;) ...
:) heh).
:)
You're allowed to do that, just be sure you have some valid points ready
Yes, I loathe the general instability of their products and the outrageous prices, but Microsoft is a company. A company in a capatilist system.
I believe the word you were looking for was "capitalistic" (although, that might have two L's I'm not completely sure
Why do we punish them for doing their job? People say they need to cripple a successful company in order to let lesser ones compete, but what companies are they helping?
Well, the Linux distributors certainly qualify, but think about the fact that there has not really been another commercial OS to make inroads into the desktop market.And don't quote superiority of Windows on the technical level, I might choke on my drink while laughing! I mean really, MS got where it was because, 1) a PR department from HELL, and 2) evil business practices (of which I won't detail, as this post is going to be longer than I wanted).
What OS is there that the general public [People on the AOL level of understanding] will want? I know Linux is great, but it is not something for the general public in its current flavor. Most end users won't understand what compile even means.
I couldn't tell you the last time I needed to compile something on Mandrake. And that is the distro targeted at the AOL-level users out there. I wouldn't know about Lindows, never used it, and don't plan to in the future, either. OTOH, compiling is handy if you have a piece of hardware and you need to compile a module, and that's something that shouldn't happen on an AOL user's system anyhow.(**Disclaimer: I use Mandrake on the desktop, Slackware on my server.)
My point in general, I guess, is that Microsoft does have a product for the general public, yet everyone sees having a good foothold on a market as a tyrannical thing.
Oh, they have more than a "good" foothold... And let's not spend too much time on HOW they attained it. Not to mention those same methods are still in use to maintain it.(And since they are declared a monopoly, they aren't allowed to use those methods.)
If people don't want to use Windows' Media Player, they don't have to. I use WinAmp, and it works perfectly. I don't worry one bit about WMP, I see no reason that Microsoft should be forced to rip away the Media Player for one, which would most likely lead to many more holes in the code which could cause even more errors when visiting web pages with any kind of audio or movies or even inserting a CD
True, you can use WinAMP in place of WMP. That's not completely the issue. Think about the "AOL user" as you put it earlier. If there is already an application of the sort the user needs, why are they going to bother going out to get another one. AOL users (generally) are too lazy to do that, they will just use what is available.
Well, I'm done on this post, have a good day
GNU/Linux bundles these packages as.. yes.. packages, and they can be uninstalled. With Linux you also have a choice to roll your own without anything preinstalled. Things like Gentoo Linux come close, and Linuxfromscratch is the ultimate down this lane.
However with Windows, I get everything except the kitchen sink (because mozilla already has that) and can't uninstall most of it. It does allow me to delete calc.exe and erase its icon, but who cares about calculators? The really important bits that rake in the $$$ are hooked and bolted onto the OS and I haven't managed to erase them without seriously destabilizing the OS. Now if I can't do that, how will Joe Sixpack do it? Of course, Joe Sixpack doesn't care.. *sighs melodramatically*
Learn from the mistakes of others. There isn't enough time to make them all yourself.
A point i can think of is that if i sell a computer i have to sell THEIR browser, and not the OTHER browser. I could sell both of course, but for several reasons (confusion of users, more disk space needed, problem with the file associations) this could put ME in disadvantage. So the OTHER browser is practically off the market.
If you don't understand this then just tell me, whats the big deal with letting me uninstall explorer?
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
lol yeah... its sad, but your right... and i partially agree... but surely someone can do better.. i mean... how much do you actually use wmp? i.e: load playlist, shuffle, repeat, play. done. if your dj'ing theres plenty of better tools out there... and yeah, winamp can be pretty odd...
but the truth is.. its not even about writing a "better one"... its about finding one that suits your needs. for some people, the standard cd player that came with win95 is good enough.
again.. im too tired to rant.. lol.. i need sleep. =/
Coll, so what if i want to use ANOTHER media player which is for windows ?
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
But what is the matter with you guys ? Nobody sais to remove them!! It's the OPTION to remove them that is important.
I wonder how did you get the impression that you can compare the filesystem and a scheduler with an application. ( Maybe because you have been told the they can both be "fundamental part of an OS"??? )
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
And don't think for a minute that France had forgiven England for the Frenceh & Indian War (after which the French were forced to cede Canada to the British). Much to their surprise, I would imagine, they didn't get any of their territory back after the Revolutionary War.
Perhaps THAT'S why they are so bitter towards us Americans?
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Actually no, it's because there are fundamental parts of the OS and "fundamental" parts of the OS.
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
I don't understand the deal with windows media player. You can use different software to play media files (the Playa, WinAMP, etc.), so what's the big deal?
So it wasn't any big deal a few years ago when Windows 95 was bundled with IE because I could use Netscape or Mosaic to view HTML pages? I'm sorry, what's the number 1 browser on Windows today? IE...
(comic book guy voice)
How does a comic book sound?
simply there are money to be made from selling this stuff (and MS actually DOES sell office) while there more money to be made from giving away the other stuff (that Ms actually forces on people).
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
Right. I'm sure there might be technical differences (is Media Player as hard to uninstall as the shell or the file manager?) but honestly I don't think that integration and bundling is inherently bad. The problem is non-free software.
The technicalities might have become worse over the years. The last Windows I tinkered with extensively was Windows 95, where I managed to replace everything (and then though "why bother?" and switched to GNU/Linux).
Isn't the danger more with the proprietary windows media formats (.wm .wma .wmv) potentially displacing other non-MS formats?
IMHO, no... The reason people use different media players is because they support the playback codec of the content. As long as content creators use standard file formats (mpeg, avi, ogg, mp3), MS can't force them to use a different format. If media player only supports wma playback, I'll listen to my mp3s on some other player.
As a consumer, the content is much more important than the way its encoded. If I can't play it with media player, I'll use something else. If someone makes an audio file, I don't really care if they paid MS an encoding fee, I will enjoy their content even if I have to play it on something non-MS made. As long as people encode media that I want in non-prop. formats, MS really can't do anything.
Yep -- some of us are, anyway.
Breakfast served all day!
i simply throw the fries away, and voila i have a burger with NO fries.
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
> As long as content creators use standard file formats
.wm becomes the new 'defacto' standard because something like 99% of your target audience have brand new Dells with WinXP and windows media 10 player installed? [/devils]
[devilsadvocate]But why bother if everyone has wmp installed? Why mess with 'standard' formats, esp when
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
If that isn't like an alarm bell to you, I don't know what I can tell you.
Microsoft is a business that, by employing a government-granted (and by force upheld) monopoly on producing copies of it's software. They're purposely decreasing the use value of it's products (the otherwise inherent copy- and modifiability of software) just to increase the market value for them. They're increasing the short term monetary value by creating artificial scarcity through abuse of copyright.
That's something that makes me want to react against it.
Thanks for the tip. Were I to start my own business it would not be "selling software" as were it physical products. If it were at all software related, it would be something like writing custom software on a case-by-case basis, or using the street performer's protocol, or writing free software as added value to a hardware product.
The Statue of Liberty?
Reason has nothing to it. Companies, like individuals should be allowed to make any stupid decisions that they choose to make. As long as nobody else is harmed
As long as nobody else is harmed
As long as nobody else is harmed
As long as nobody else is harmed
Microsoft is harming others when they use their quasimonopoly position to bully competitors into oblivion. It isn't right of them to write code that identifies Netscape and breaks it, it isn't right of them to send broken tables to Opera so it'll look defective, it isn't right of them to make WMP unremovable from the OS just to annoy people into using it.
my Corvette
So, how did those penis enlargement pills work out for you?
*had* to have synthetic
If your fancy car has a fancy engine that needs fancy oil, that's one thing. But if you'd bought a non-fancy car that was arbitrarily designed with a superfluous need for a specific brand of oil, you might have appreciated it when the courts freed you from that burden.
You can't take the sky from me...
Why should one not use winamp?
It's a 100% working mp3-player with tons of good plugins and nice skins, it has never let me down and is an allround good program. Why should I use anything else?
(Oh, wait...I'm not using winamp anymore...it's all XMMS for me now ~_^ Ok, so apart from changing OS, why should I not use winamp?)
Rich
MS has only dominated desktop computing for like 7-8 years now. 10 years from now they could be reduced to bit player. Its hard to see anything beyond the present if you don't look at history. This is especially true for young people who don't know a world without MS and also haven't studied history. Once IBM was the only game in town and also there was a time when Novell was everywhere. Hell look what happened to Xerox. MS doesn't own the server market and they also don't own the mobile phone market. 5 years from now some startup could launch some weird holographic computer device thingy that completely replaces the need for Windows desktops, cellphones and PDA's.
The point is neither you nor anyone else knows what the future has in store. One thing is for sure though, it's simply foolish to think MS will dominate computing forever. History shows that's not likely and realistically simply isn't possible.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
One of the problems is that Joe User's idea of what constituded extra hassle has been slowly manipulated by Microsoft.
It used to be that if you wanted to run a word processor under DOS, you had to go out and buy WordPerfect, TenBest, or some other application. Games were sold separately too. You could get shareware terminal programs from freinds, and then order the full version.
People didn't complain about it at the time. They would only complain about it now because Microsoft included QBasic with DOS, Minesweeper, Solitare and Write with Windows 3.1, freecell and bundled AOL offers with Windows 95.
Microsoft has continued to pack more and more "extra" features into Windows, to the point where they're considered basic functions. Remember ordering Snagit for Windows 3.1? You know, that really powerful screen capture utility that would capture specific regions, timed shots, even animations? Windows has a stripped down version called the "Print Screen" key.
It's the whole concept of Microsoft taking other people's ideas and embedding them into their software. (You've got Media Player, Compressed Folders, Terminal Server, Internet Explorer, Disk Defragmenter, Backup, and just about everything else under the "Accessories" menu.)
The problem isn't with the fact that the stuff is there, the problem is with Microsoft's not playing fair with other companies as it put the stuff there. More than one small software house suddenly found itself without a foot to stand on because the latest version of Windows had their functionality built-in.
What's this Submit thingy do?
Rich
What the EU is actually saying is that Microsoft has to sell the car with an empty tank.
Ok, the car analogy has gone to hell. (hey, I didn't start it...)
No, they are not saying that Microsoft isn't allowed to include WMP with Windoze, they are saying that Microsoft isn't allowed to make WMP unremovable.
Its the bit where its impossible to remove it that is getting them upset, not the fact that its in there in the first place.
Of course, this all AFAICK because I'm not a slave to Overlord Gates. If you can remove your WMP from your windoze machine, then this is all pointless. If you can't get rid of WMP because Windose won't let you, then its an issue.
P.S. Man, that Wired article's layout sucks...
You can't take the sky from me...
A) VA Linux ONLY sold rack mounts.
That's where they should have thrived. They didn't.
B) Capitalism is determined by competition in a free-market. The desktop PC OS market is governed by a monopoly which by it's very definition means it's no longer a free-market. Look it up.
free market:
Definition 1
Business governed by the laws of supply and demand, not restrained by government interference, regulation or subsidy.
You're talking about government restriction. That's not free. That's quite the opposite.
C) Did you even read my post? Did I even *mention* forcing anybody to sell anything? No. It's about forcing somebody to *not* sell something in a bundle. There are plenty of rules like this already in place, ask your local telephone company for one example.
You can say it any way that you want. The fact is, you're still suggesting that a gov't FORCES a business to sell product A as opposed to product B. The only reason a gov't should FORCE a company NOT to sell something, as you put it, is if it's inherently dangerous (ie: a doll stuffed with arsenic)
And, I think that the phone industry is a pile of shit. It's too expensive and service is shit because it's regulated. That's why I had my home phone disconnected.
WMP is not free from Microsoft. They just charged you more for windows in the first place. Windows has an 80% profit margin. The price has gone up with each new version ahead of inflation.
How does a monopoly hurt consumers? It maintains the monopoly and charges what it likes. As an example - your memory chips. Everyone makes SDD RAM, and its cheap. Look for Rambus RAM - "hey, this memory is hideously expensive".
Yes they can.
1) Boot into DOS command line (not command prompt from Windows).
2) Find the directory containing IE/MP and use the command RD/s to remove them.
3) reboot into Windows
4) Run Regedit and manually remove all references to deleted applications
Windows won't let you remove these directories from Explorer, but it can be done under DOS. Note that it doesn't work in command prompt from Windows, you have to reboot into DOS.
I used this technique to remove IE, MP, and Outlook from my PC at home. Works fine.
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
How about this:
1) Create a superior media player
2) Sell it
3) Profit!
That should be:
1) Create a superior media player
2) Sell it
3) Profit! (briefly)
4) Watch helplessly as Microsoft bundles a slightly-less-capable-but-good-enough equivalent with the next version of windows.
5) File lawsuit against Microsoft, spending millions on legal fees.
6) Maybe get a pitiful settlement years later, long after it's too late to matter.
7) File for chapter 11 bankruptcy.
See the problem?
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Yes you can use different software. But first of all, since you're a reader of /. I can assume you know your computer. Most people wouldn't know where to start installing new software. Seconds the main problem is simple. Say I have a company selling cute pink little windows extentions and they become a hit. MS decides to add them to the standard windows for free. Not as good, but he..
So from one day on an other my company has become obsolete. Everybody has windows, they all enjoy free pink fluffy thingies and I'm will be out of bussiness.
MS used their monopoly to take over the pink fluffy thingies market. This is forbidden in most civilized countries.
They use windows to promote office, I never heared of stacker again. QEMM was driven out of the market by EMM386.sys (hardly as good, but good enough) IE was improved until netscape was a footnote in history. After that there were hardly any real improvements anymore (besides those features needed for the deeper intergration into windows.. Look judge! Windows will not work without...)
Did the world become a better place? Yes and no.. John Doe gets a complete and nicely intergrated system.. but.. the with profits as high as they are the windows/office monopoly it is an overwelming proof why monopolies are bad. They higher the prices and stiffle innovation. (and no, I don't consider again an other interface and the addition of extra features which were available for free already innovation. The only innovations from MS are in the marketing department. And maybe in the financial/juridical part)
Anyhow, as far as I can see MS is becomming it's own worsed enemy and one way of the other, they will go the way of the greeks, the romans and the other "empires". Some of the good things live on, a lo of the bad things will disappear for a generation or smt. and for the rest they will become history.
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!
"And??? Anti-trust/monopoly laws were established to keep monopolies from harming consumers, not their competition. How does having the market value of a media player equaling 0 hurt the consumer?"
The problem with a media player having "zero" market value is that it doesn't. Were it not for the excessive integrated bundlebloat such as IE and WMP, MS would be able to build new versions of windows more quickly, more cheaply, and more easily. In turn, they would be able to lower their prices while maintaining the a hefty profit margin.
There is really no logical reason why they should build and integrate programs such as these with the OS, when they could save themselves the developmental costs and pass those savings on to consumers in turn, who can download whichever app they want to use.
The only possible motivations for bundling these programs when there is no significant profit involved is to use the method to push competition by the wayside; once this is accomplished, later versions of their OS will cost more, and Joe Public will pay it because he doesn't want to lose the fuzzy, stupifyingly 'user-friendly' apps that he had bundled into the last version...
The bottom line: if MS had to stop bundling and provide their bundle-apps as free downloads ONLY, then the browser/media divisions of MS would begin leaking money just like all the other non OS/Office divisions, and MS would have to charge less for Windows due to lower perceived value.
This results in a win for consumers, who pay less for their OS and learn to get better apps themselves for free; MS then loses money on the apps and possibly cuts them (more likely though pounding money into them ala XBOX just to kill competition) but may gain more OS customers due to reduced prices.
So while MS may only break even, cutting bundled apps would be a big win for consumers.
Yes, as long as nobody else is harmed. That has nothing to do with competition. That has to do with defective and dangerous products. With competition, somebody is ALWAYS "harmed" in the fact that someone loses out on the business end. That's a fact of life. That's how business works. Companies that can't compete shouldn't exist, that's the whole point. I won't do business with companies that whine and ask for gov't intervention to help them compete. The fact that we live under a gov't that even considers such bullshit is criminal and morally corruupt.
To to growing interest in opposing MS they will introduce MS Anti-MS with every copy of windows. This would point to MS-sponsered Anti-MS sites hosted on MSN thereby removing competition in that market as well!
This one's easy... Why alienate 1% when using a standard format, you could alienate 0%? DVD playback isn't bundled with windows, but it enjoys decent success. Content and codecs will be the driving force behind the player, not the other way round. As much as I loathe the quicktime player, I dl'ed it to see the Mario Sunshine videos. The only people that really have control over what player is used, is the content creators.
I use only NT, 2k, and XP because of work. I assume you're referring to 95, 98, and ME because the "workstation" Windows' won't boot to DOS. So they can not be removed from all versions of Windows (at least not with your method).
Developers: We can use your help.
ok, i guess it can be said once more, just because i liked this "more holes" stuff. Nobody wants ms to rip away media player. Just the OPTION to uninstall it would be just fine.
:))
Now, uninstalling media player would NOT lead to "many more holes in the code". A "hole" is actually not a piece of code removed, it's a piece of code being there doing the wrong thing.
But you are right they really should be called humbs
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
Indeed I found mediaplayer to be uninstallable from Windows XP Pro. I didn't give it quite as much time as I did back when Win98 included IE and I wanted to rip it out so it might be possible, but it's certainly far from simple. I remember Win95 having an explorer.exe replacement built in, something really innovative called progman.exe ;-))
Learn from the mistakes of others. There isn't enough time to make them all yourself.
this is so very much JUST FUD ... it really makes me wonder...
/usr/bin/play). Apart from that, it was such a dreadfully slow and heavy player...
anyway i could argue that playa does NOT reset monitors to 800x600, winamp is a HELL of a lot easier and more NORMAL than windows media player, quicktime is not a joke it's an EXCELLENT piece of software, and realplayer one.. well i don't know about it, never seen it.
Also i would like to point out that when i got to use WMP i couldn't even make a playlist (yes i am sure it can be done, it just was just NOT easy for me. And I can make playlists for
maybe bundling it with windows does help this beast to be a bit faster, but, come on there are so many better players..
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
>> if you dont like windows media player - write a fucking better one.
... ... is to prevent Microsoft doing their usual product-tie-and-price-dump tactic, which is illegal under US and EU rules if your company is an "effective" monopoly.
With what? Developers cost money. Oh, hey that's right - Microsoft can write off millions, because they can reclaim it all from the cost of windows.
>> The only way these guys see to compete
Man, they really did a job on you in "commies are evil" class...
Companies that can't compete shouldn't exist, that's the whole point.
Might makes right, I gotcha.
I won't do business with companies that whine and ask for gov't intervention to help them compete.
What, you mean like Microsoft?
The fact that we live under a gov't that even considers such bullshit is criminal and morally corruupt.
Well, your spelling ought to be outlawed, for starters. Maybe afterwards we can look into outlawing government interventions in big buisnesses. Then we'll see about lifting the ban on slavery...and later on we'll get rid of those stupid laws that say that you can't work employees to death or force entire families to cover 24h shifts...those laws suck too!
Sheesh.
You can't take the sky from me...
It maintains the monopoly and charges what it likes.
Yeah, except in this case, the cost is zero. How are you hurt? Lets say MS has a monopoly on the browser market. If MS is an abusive monopoly (one that is hurting consumers), they should be charging an exhorbinant price for IE. They aren't. They currently charge $0 for IE.
This raises two points; either MS is not a monopoly and the true value of a web-browser is zero, or they are a monopoly and aren't abusing consumers (since even though they have a monopoly, they are charging $0 for IE). Either way, there isn't much ground for a lawsuit.
As an example - your memory chips. Everyone makes SDD RAM, and its cheap. Look for Rambus RAM - "hey, this memory is hideously expensive".
Yes, but in the MS system it's not that way. Only MS makes IE, yet it costs nothing. You don't even have to own windows to get a copy of it! (Check their page for mac downloads). The memory example you pointed out is one where the monopolist charges a higher price than true market value (RDRAM is expensive for other reasons, but we'll ignore that). In the case of Microsoft, they are charging less. Again, how are you hurt?
A) What the hell is a "Deltic"?
B) About the content - what the hell are you trying to say?
I can't help it - I'm a 19D.
Might makes right, I gotcha.
That's how capitalism works. Although it's not necessarily "might" per se, but who prevails in the marketplace for whatever reason: price, quality of product, marketing, etc.
IE cost them a fortune to make. They are not charging $0 for it - they provide it as part of windows, which they charge for, or as a download for the Mac, which provides IE due to a deal with Apple, and Apple includes the cost in the amount you pay for their systems. Either way it's not free.
;)
However, a dedicated browser company, cannot compete fairly on price, as the equation is artificially skewed. Even the OSS browsers have ridiculous amounts of development behind them that has been writen off as either "a labour of love" or a dead company's gift to the world.
The point is that Microsoft are not providing IE for free - you get it as part of windows which you pay for. Part of that cost is IE (the millions that it cost them to make). So by your very words, comparing with the $0 Mozilla, "If MS is an abusive monopoly (one that is hurting consumers), they should be charging an exhorbinant price for IE" - they are - more than $0. Apparently, IE is an essential part of windows according to Microsoft, and windows isn't free - so IE can't be "free" as you put it.
Exorbitant - spelling care of MS Word spell checker
And since the thread was "Media Player?", I would apply my arguments doubly so.
hey, some people really want windows to be better or gone, i don't use them but they are usually right in front of some "i need you to teach me computers" people that just don't accept "this is actually not my job" for an answer.
Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
Uninstall.
-pyrrho
Wrong on both analogies...
I've never noticed anything that made media only play on windows media player. I'm more than happy to use winamp, along with some extra plugins and codecs that play all the media I want.
The issue is around WMP coming integrated with windows, which is dumb.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a big fan of MS and it's squash-you-like-a-bug marketing tactics... but when you're trying to build a "multimedia operating system" (and don't tell me XP is not) then integrating multimedia components isn't really so bad. Nothing stops the user from buying/downloading a product that's more convenient to use, it's just that WMP comes in the OS, and many media features are integrated.
Personally, I sometimes like the fact that integrated browsing in explorer gives me a preview of an AVI (in case the content of a recently downloaded file is objectionable to me) or allows me to preview audio. I'm sure that perhaps somebody else could do a better job in areas, and windows is still a bloated mess, but taking all this out would reduce the OS to a shell of its current self.
That's how capitalism works. Although it's not necessarily "might" per se, but who prevails in the marketplace for whatever reason: price, quality of product, marketing, etc.
Car bombs, kidnapping, intimidation, poisonning, arson, libel, abuse of monopoly situation, horse's head in the bed sheets, ninja assasins, etc.
Any laws preventing these natural capitalist tactics are morally wrong wrong wrong and obvious commie ploys!
You can't take the sky from me...
Hey, does anybody know where the nearest dealership is. I heard about the Xwagon and it sounds really sweet. I just hope I can fit in there with the steering wheel though.
guarantees?-)
the only guarantee with off-the-shelf software is that the eula will be horrible to understand and will void anything else you might thought them to guarantee.
off-the-shelf software tends to have ridiculuously bad attitude towards guarantees, strangely enough nobody seems to even care. software is bought 'as it is' without any guarantee that it does half of the things it says on the box. imagine that with regular products like bicycles, ovens and so. you would be pretty pissed off calling at the consumer support line if you bought an oven that worked for one week and the store refuses to refund it!
heck, there is a guarantee(almost certain from past behauviour) that ms will break it's OWN implementation from working with future versions totally correctly.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
More like...the French intervention in the US Revolutionary War was not by the consent of the French people. It was the action of a monarch's paid army on a foreign adventure that few even paid much attention to. So the French then, as today, didn't really care much about it.
The bad French attitude comes from the eclipse of their national star and their sense of being a second-class power. Objectively, would you grant a UN Security Council veto to France (or Britain, for that matter) today? Nah, India would get it.
They know this too.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Huh? I've priced out IE, it's like $200. Sure they throw in a piece of crap OS with it but I don't want the OS.
This is also the problem with Windows Media Player, why should I have to put out hundereds of dollars because MS has leveraged their monopoly so media only comes in their formats?
Dave
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Agreed. One of the reasons I sent in this story was to counteract the idea one user had (although it wasn't serious, just humourous) that I was Bill Gates because I had posted a comment earlier about how I thought the numerous personal attacks on Bill were a little childish. I'm not nessecarily pro-MS, but I still don't think we need things like that here.
Windows Media Player has been bundled with windows as far back as Win31 (perhaps more).
OK, this I find confusing: on Windows, the command interpreter (I assume that's what you mean) can be un-installed and replaced, but the terminal emulator can't?!?!
There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
-- David D. Friedman
The window manager is a fundamental part of the OS? Since when?
There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
-- David D. Friedman
Actually, a filesystem is a fundamental system service, but a partiular filesystem is not fundamental. On any decent system, filesystems can be swapped out.
There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
-- David D. Friedman
scripsit jcast:
Terminal emulator? Where did that come from?
In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
You know, terminal emulator, as in the thing that connects your keyboard and screen to the stdin/stdout of the command prompt?
There are reasons why democracy does not work nearly as well as capitalism.
-- David D. Friedman
scripsit weave:
Um, why do you need speakers on servers for this? Or a media player? I've got speakers and a media player on my workstation (and my laptop for that matter); if I need to mess with a server, that's what ssh is for.
(Running mpg321 over a ssh connection to the server is a good way to give someone a heart attack if the server does have speakers, BTW, especially if you choose the mp3 and your timing carefully... aumix -v 100 && mpg321 evil.mp3)
In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
scripsit praedor:
These things aren't always clear cut. I think we'd all agree that The GIMP is an application, for example. What about Galeon? I say app. How about your window manager? File manager? Not so easy. How 'bout cat? Part of the OS? less? bzip2? I'm not going to make that call.
This is why the problem is so difficult, because there's no clear line, unless you say that the OS is just the kernel. (Then it really is just Linux, and not GNU/Linux. <grin>) I've done Linux from Scratch before, and I've come to appreciate a distro that comes with a bit more...
I can see how a Windows user, unfamiliar with all the ramifications of MS's anticompetitiveness, would say he wants all he can get to ``come with Windows.'' When I was younger, I thought it was pretty cool that DOS had started to come with defrag or whatever it was called; it took time to realize that this wasn't necessarily a good thing.
In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
Why alienate 1% when using a standard format, you could alienate 0%?
I don't know... That didn't seem to work with IE and web standards. The question now is more like, "Why limit functionality by using a standard format, when we will only alienate about 1-2% of the market?" You seem to have forgotten history, and...
Put identity in the browser.
If MS wants to build, say a componentized HTML renderer, or media playback library (DirectShow) that any application on Windows can use what's so wrong with that? All that IE and MediaPlayer are are simple wrappers around those reusable components.
If you think about it, apart from the very inner guts of the kernel, virtually everything an OS provides is some sort of reusable component for applications to take advantage of. Ten years ago, a TCP/IP stack was considered an exotic extra for Windows that one had to install separately. Now it's considered a part of the core system. Why are media codecs or HTML renderers conceptually different? (Or are you in favour of forcing MS to unbundle their evil monopolistic TCP/IP stack, fonts and graphical filesystem viewer?)
I've always said that if I ever go Unabomber, one of my first pairs of targets will be the Mediaplayer dev group and the offices of Real. They will each receive a pipe bomb set to go off at the exact same time. When they go off, I envision a little piece of paper floating out, only to be grabbed out of mid-air. Each note will read "This pipe will configure itself to be the default for all future bombs." And then each person will hold the paper to the sky and scream "Khan!" At least in my daydreams.
"The French never did anything that didn't directly benefit them"
Since when has sheer altruism been a motivating factor in international affairs?
Do you seriously thing dubya would be so keen to liberate the people of Iraq from a vile tyrant if:
He had no need to "busy giddy minds with foreign quarrels", having been scorched in the Enron scandal? Minor motivation
Iraq didn't have vast oil reserves which GWB can control directly or by proxy? Major motivation
I despair sometimes, I really do...
T&K.
Political language
But won't this break all the 3rd party apps that are expecting either Media Player or IE to be there so that they can call on MP or IE as an ActiveX component? Also, hate to discourage you, but IE isn't contained in just one place on the hard drive. There's the IE folder sure, but there is also IE information in "Documents and Settings" and perhaps other places.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
That's true, but based on what I've seen and read of MS's activity over the years, I've seen nothing to make me believe they're benevolent. If MS were indeed benevolent, I wouldn't have as much of a problem with them. But they aren't. They just want all the corporate power they can have, yet more still.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
They've had to "uncouple" IE. Now they're being asked to uncouple Media Player.
What's next? Uncoupling the calculator? The start button? Command prompt?
Following this line of thinking ad absurdum, what exactly is Microsoft allowed to package with Windows? Sheesh!
Replaceable componentry is usually advisable based on engineering principle, but in this case legal systems are imposing a component based approach, attempting to protect their free markets.
-pyrrho
I don't think that persuing the Media Player issue is so important as stuff that benefits the consumer. The consumer currently doesn't have a choice of OS. This is because Microsoft "awards" the so-called "market development funds" and other such offers to OEMs which install Windows on all PCs that they sell. These offers are just loopholes to get around the so-called "uniform licensing provision". The margins on PCs are so small that if an OEM looses these discounts they will become uncompetive. That's why you don't see Linux offered on any low range PCs from the big OEMs. I think the EU should outright ban the "market development funds" scheme and all other such "offers" to really level the playing field.
M$ ain't going to change it's product (Windoze) to accomodate the legal problems of one Continent
Actually, they probably would if it comes to that. They make a lot of their revenue in Europe, perhaps even as much or more as in the US (the EU does have 380 million people after all, and many members are among the richest countries in the world). Microsoft is a company that wants it all, they wouldn't ever sacrifice the European market and let open source establish a bigger base there from which to eventually take on Microsoft with increased strength.
Neither Germany nor Italy ever attacked us; our beef was with Japan.
But there's a little something called an alliance that obligated us to be involved in the European theatre, which, might I remind you, included freeing France from German occupation. Please feel free to explain the direct benefit we accomplished there.
But today we have France thumbing its nose at its obligation to NATO, choosing instead a road defined by opposition to the U.S. at every turn, rather than its duty to protect its allies (Turkey).
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
I still find the main block to selling Linux into commercial companies is Office. I can't bullshit people with "OO.org is 100% Office compatible" because unless your a multi-billion $ monopoly you can't lie to people and have them come back.
.doc file without graphics, frames or tables having moved an inch in any direction. 95% is not enough for people who have thousands of docs going back to ther year dot and don't have time to spend shuffling misplaced logos and the like.
/bill/gates
Open M$Office file formats to competitiors and the M$ stranglehold will start to fall apart.
The topic of conversation should be more about how seemingly intelligent people in the US gov and EU comp. commision are apparently blind to the grip that M$Office exerts over the market place.
To finish, I have several clients who have been all ready for Linux until I told them OO.org was about 95% likely to open a
COME ON EU FORCE M$ OFFICE INTO A COMPETETIVE ENVIRONMENT! Then maybe we'll see how value added the 95% of functions that no-one uses really are.
grep -i concept-of-ethics-or-morality
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
Window manager: app.
File manager: app. of course, last time I checked files were not hardware.
cat: app. naturally.
less: app.
bzip2: app.
Part of the OS? anything that administers hardware (drivers, memory managers, filesystem software, schedulers, etc).
The classic definition works fine, why do you mess up with it?
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Political contributions are far more controlled in the EU than in the US (in the UK you can't buy TV airtime for political adds and all parties must be given fair access tonews on TV and radio).
Big mergers that went without a hitch in the US were stopped fully in the EU due to concerns about monopoly creation.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
... they need to be educated.
Nobody objects to MS being a successful company, what many people despise is that sucha successful company uses illegal and immoral means to keep its dominant position in the market.
Many people want a healthy innovative MS that earns its cash based on merit and not based in arm-twisting and "embracing and exteding" to the extent that they are found guilty in a court of law.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Okay, I realize that the popular conception of the war is that France sat around and did nothing while the Americans came to the rescue, but let's look at the actual chronology of the war:
1939:
9/1: Germany invades Poland
9/3: Britain and France declare war on Germany
9/5: USA declares neutrality
France obviously got their asses kicked, but the point is that they were coming to the aid of a defenceless ally.
1941:
12/7: Japan declares war on USA
12/8: USA & Britain declare war on Japan
12/11: Germany & Italy declare war on USA
12/11: USA declares war on Germany & Italy
Isolationism was a popular sentiment in the U.S. at the time, despite what the popular image of the era is. Note that in WW2, the U.S. did not declare war on each of the axis powers until they had declared war on the U.S. first. France, meanwhile, had a mutual-defence pact that obliged them to go to war for their allies. While I agree that the French contribution to the war pales in comparison to the U.S.'s, we shouldn't pretend that they were simply doing nothing, or that the U.S. was simply being alturistic.
Listen shitface, your a loser pornographer... you don't have a corvette... get out of you're fantasy world!
"Entropy is the bad-guy, and he is everywhere"
Hitler, in their eyes, was supposed to take Poland and start tangling with Russia, which was the "big enemy" as far as Nazi rhetoric was concerned. Meanwhile the Western Europeans were supposed to sit it out while the totalitarians killed each other off. Churchill was against this, but he wasn't in a position of real power until too late to affect the outcome.
Hitler obviously had other plans, however, and the French reaped what they sowed at Versailles, and had continuted to sow in their callous sacrifice of the Sudatenland, Czechoslovakia, Austria, and, effectively, Poland as well.
"All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others." - George Orwell