Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Agrees to Stop Hijacking Music-Shopping
ScottSpeaks! writes "CNN , ABC, and others are reporting that Microsoft has agreed to fix Windows XP so that it no longer launches IE (instead of the user's chosen default browser) when the user selects the "Shop for Music Online" option in Windows XP. MS isn't admitting that it's a violation of the consent decree they signed to get the DoJ to drop the anti-trust suit against them, but threats to take them to court over it are what prompted the move."
Microsoft has agreed to fix Windows XP so that it no longer launches IE (instead of the user's chosen default browser) when the user selects the "Shop for Music Online" option in Windows XP
Pops up Mozilla... "This site requires IE 6.0 to be viewed".
C'mon, it's not that difficult...
how long until
MS isn't admitting that it's a violation of the consent decree they signed to get the DoJ to drop the anti-trust suit against them, but threats to take them to court over it are what prompted the move."
........without turning this whole thing into an anti-Microsoft rant, (I fear this will happen) we hear this kind of thing again and again from Microsoft. Microsoft violates (again) the terms of the anti-trust trial and says "ooops, my mistake." and agrees to change its behavior (barely). How do they keep getting away with it? I don't really have an answer for it but, they appear to have a somewhat schizophrenic relationship with their potential markets.
:-)
So,
The issue here is manifold: 1) Microsoft is a monopoly (not necessarily bad), 2) Microsoft leverages that monopoly against other markets (bad). The problem is that they really can't help themselves because their shareholders (disclaimer: I own some Microsoft stock) demand greater returns on their investment and they really don't know how to do anything differently. Microsoft is maturing and recently has paid out dividends (about time), but they seem to be continuously stumbling over their own feet in various markets. Microsoft has some smart folks there (including a few friends of mine), but as a whole the company has the appearance of a bunch of malicious geeks who are smart, but are not very creative, resulting in a desperate desire to be cool and seen as cool. This could be a result of marketing management keeping the programmers etc... under control, but Microsoft as a whole lacks that essence of coolness that gives them an edge. Therefore the predatory nature of the monopoly as they gobble up every concept that could be seen as giving Microsoft some degree of edge. It also might be that they are so big, they really don't have the ability to move very quickly or be objective in their analysis of markets. I would bet that if they broke themselves into a number of different companies (that even had the possibility of competing with each other), they would be much more competitive and would prove a much better return on investment.
Come on Bill, how would you like to be the principal of five or six big companies? One company can only get you so far you know.....?
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Maybe I'm being dense, but what's the big deal with Microsoft launching their browser for their music shopping service? If they'd used a browser control on their own app, would anyone have complained? It's not like there aren't 1000 other places online to buy music.
Really, perhaps the issue should be the existance of a "buy music online" selection in XP at all. I hate all those pre-loaded ads that come disguised as usability enhancements.
I use XP Pro at home (Your condolences are not necessary) Mozilla Firebird is my default browser. I despise IE. The only time I see IE launch is when I do windows update. I wonder if there's any way microsoft could be convinced to program Windows update in a way that it could be accessed by other (standards compliant) browsers.
Conserve Oil, Recycle, Boycott Walmart
I think the only real surprise to me here is that someone bothered to call MS on the rule-breaking.
That's good to see.
I wonder how many people will bother to download the patch though; I doubt many people keep up to date on that sort of thing. Sneaky on the part of MS, really. By the time someone noticed that they were breaking the rules, it was too late for the vast majority of Windows users.
In another suprising turn of events, terrorists have also agreed to stop hijacking airplanes.
it's a bit odd that they have a specific button in XP that says *Shop Online for Music*?
Granted they've now allowed folks to browse their music retailing partners web site in a different browser.
But I wonder what business deal has been done with the music retailer(s) so they can have a ready made market of Windows XP users sent direct to their door(s).
Worst
Considering...
"Windows is about choice, you can mix and match all of this stuff," David Fester, general manager of Microsoft's Windows digital media division, told the New York Times. "We believe you should have the same choice when it comes to music services."
This is different how?
Apple is not a convicted monopolist.
Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
Actually, in a sense I am being forced to. You see, the software I use is only available under Windows (a lot of CAD software and what not). Microsoft's monopoly position has driven the market into a situation where software vendors much support Windows in order to get users and users must use Wnidows in order to get software. Now, all of -my company's- software is written cross platform with wxWindows because it is a no-brainer -- MFC? wxWindows?
But the simple fact is, if I want to make a living, I have to use and support Windows. You could argue that well, just have an unsuccessful business and live poor. You'd be right. I could just live poor.
First off, Apple does not hold over 90% of the desktop market. If it wants to be propriatary it isn't killing competition. When MS does it however, they manage to lock out other companies from the 90+% of the market that they are targeting. The fact of the matter is this, if MS continues to use no-complient HTML in their browser and also continues to forces the use their IE browser in windows, then people can't choose to use linux/free BSD/Mac OS unless they use a MS based browser (which they don't always keep updated). "Why?", you ask, because if 90% of the people use one OS with one browser, then many sites will be written to comply to that non-complient code and you get the errors that we see today: "This Page Requires I.E. 6.0 to view." Then you no longer base your choice on preference, but on the ability of the other browsers to function (since the DMCA causes problems with trying to emulate functionality).
And that is why it is bad for MS to be allowed to force their Browser upon their Windows XP.
I could be wrong however.
Mac users have options, and unlike IE, Mac browsers actually follow standards.
Your plugins for Excel example is off the point. When it comes to MS forcing its browser on users, the problem is that they are trying to defeat and close open standards. The WWW was never supposed to require any platform. It is supposed to be an Open Standard. Everytime some lazy coder caters to the anti-standard functions of MS tech, the universality of the web shrinks. If MS actually followed web standards, browser detection could be a thing of the past. They continue to require developers to cater to their crap. Through their quirks they've usurped the universal, open nature of the web and mad significant portions of it closed to anyone not choosing their crap platform.
MS should have to change to adapt to the world, not the world adapt to MS. Picture a four-lane highway. Some Canyonero driver is straddling the line, forcing traffic to stay behind it. The road was built for two lanes of traffic going in each direction. A standard was established, but one driver, just because he can, keeps it from working as designed. Shouldn't the cops get that driver off the road?
The potato it is uninformed.