Slashdot Mirror
Windows Could Lose Media Player in Europe?
Chris Gondek writes "If Microsoft cannot settle an antitrust case brought by European Union regulators, the company may be ordered to remove Windows Media Player as an integrated feature of the dominant Windows operating system, at least for personal computers sold in Europe.
The European Commission also could order Microsoft to include rival media players with Windows to make those products as easy for users to access as Microsoft's own music and video player."
Also, who gets to decide what products should be included ? I don't use media player, I use zoom player, but I seriously doubt I'll have anything to say on what products should be included instead.
IMHO, instead of including other products etc, let the user choose whether or not he/she wants to install media player during the installation of Windows.
I make short films, and stream with windows media all the time. Everybody has it, and it's a lot less hassle then supporting all three formats.
By not including windows media player, it has less of a chance of becoming dominant, and most people don't want to configure and support Quicktime, Real, and Windows Media.
If only this would result in the addition of an open standards media player for Windows...
I couldn't agree more. As much as Microsoft does have a monopoly, this does not make sense. Maybe they should be ordered to make it easy for OEMs to include any media player they want.
But then the next service pack would probably revert this... all sorts of problems.
Besides I have a little sympathy for Real, QuickTime etc. because I'm sure that once they'll be in they'd try to be every inch as monopolistic as Microsoft.
Maybe a better approach would be to order that Microsoft has to release interoperability specifications for any data format they use. And make sure that unlike in the US, this ruling can be used by Microsoft's biggest rivals, which means Linux, which means that people could use it specifically in GPL software.
IF the installer forced an actual installation rather than made it an OPTION. If it were an option, then IMHO it would be a Good Thing(TM) (even if no one actually installs them).
It would be better perhaps to open the Windows Media format instead... it could open the competition for the best player.
No-one said Microsoft is going to to ship with Realplayer. All the EU is forcing them to do is to ship two versions:
One with Windows Mediaplayer and one without.
That's all.
Like this the OEM might still choose to install additional software from third parties. But this won't be MS'es business.
It's about choice. And you will be able to choose your ol' Windows with the Mediaplayer if you want to.
HerbieStone out.
You're right, it's not. Neither is a 3D engine (DirectX), a browser, an email client, a remote desktop protocol and program, a backup tool, a disk defragmenter, a paint program, a text editor, a solitaire game, a file zipper, and all those nice device and database (ODBC) drivers really aren't part of the OS either - after all, it's not like Microsoft makes most of the stuff that requires those drivers.
Actually, Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to provide any of that to the consumer. Everything they provide in the OS is a lost sales opportunity somewhere else. It's totally anti-competitive of them to provide any of it. You should have to pay for every feature you get. The OS should just make the computer run.
Let's see - besides the cost of the core Windows OS then (which I'm sure you'll argue should be free - so let's just leave that out), you would probably pay about $50 each for every new program you add to the system. If you add 10 new programs to the computer (which is conservative), you get to spend $500.
Now, what does Media Player have to do with the core OS? Nothing. It "merely" makes it useful.
Troll.
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
If, however, I choose to remove part of that said product and add a third-party product, then I have the right to be able to remove it. I do not want 2 media players...I want 1...The one I choose.
Why can't I uninstall the in-built defragger, or the scandisk? These should be bolts on an OS, not "PART" of the OS. Let me install what I want...
In reality this "let me install what I want" is plainly obvious...Linux...
(And for all you nerds out there I am writing this at work where I am forced onto a windows platform)
In the end, however, we are talking about an "operating system", not a kernel. It is more akin to saying that RedHat can't distribute the media player of its choice with their product. Is it such a bad thing to bundle software into my product offering? I don't think so. What is wrong is the use of that leverage by hiding APIs, lock in OEM agreements etc...That is where we have to tackle M$, not in petty "oooh, you shouldn't have that login screen because company X, Y and Z have login programs. Your abusing your monopoly..." blah blah.
I am not pro-M$, but let them friggin develop their own OS in the way they want. Just stop them shoving it down our necks.
When all is said and done, nothing changes...
I pay a lot of money for my hard drive. So if Real Player wants to force itself into my hard drive, can I charge them rent? I think Microsoft should make their player a downloadable option just to get rid of the European nag. (as other have suggested) Better yet stop supporting the European market (that would be ideal) :)
Real player was good a long time ago, then it got crappy. Even when I did have a registered version, the unregistered version would creep onto my computer and then annoy me with spyware, pop up ads, and trying to overbear my windows settings.
If people want it, they will download it, if they don't know any better then why should we use their ignorance against them by forcing them to have a program they may never utilize!
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
While I agree this is the wrong solution (a better way would be to open up the file formats and codecs) there is one possible interesting side effect.
....
If MS have include Winamp, then Ogg support would be avaliable by default on every new computer in Europe. Would help it a big bit I'm sure.
Except what's to stop MS from keeping all the file associations linked to there own programs? Dosen't matter how many other media players they include if the default is there own.
Anyways, it's a stupid idea
I, for one, do not have the windows media player. I only have mplayer stuff wich is available for linux. (I don't know, if there is support for Windows-Media format for linux-applications.) And you are exactly describing the reason, why it is a good thing to stop them gaining a Monopoly with their format: How can there be an OS cometition when the application-"standard" controlled by one OS vendor pushing his own OS?
Trolling is a art!
Ok I was waiting for this one. Not surprising.
First MS is not the first company to be condamned by a Europe court. You want to sell things in Europe? So you have to follow Europe's rules wether you are American or European. I have countless examples. The biggest difference here is that unlike in America, MS is not allowed to inject millions of dollars in Europeans governments. Lobbies can't buy European politics. Sorry, try again.
Yes, the Evil Europe is subsidizing the Evil Airbus and the Good US is trying to compete with the Good Boeing.
Wake up, US and Europe both agreed to a treatie in 1992 which regulates government funding in companies.
Both are allowed to subsidizing up to 33% of the investments in their companies, in direct and indirect fundings.
Indirect fundings happen when the US government gives billions to Boeing for designing new military planes and when Boeing uses this research to create civilian airplanes. Airbus suffered from that for years.
The difference here is that the 1992 treatie implies the refunding of all direct investments but not indirect investments. So Airbus has 17 years to give the government back it's money where Boeing will never have to give to R&D money back to the US government.
Iraq: war to save the U
"Real is very well-behaved on Linux. It just politely and unobtrusively works"
Perhaps Real and its advertisers believe that Linux users have no interest in buying anything, so they didn't bother to put the spyware stuff in the Linux version.
I would be happy to not have any at all "pre-installed". I use WinAmp personally but keep having the headache of where I delete icons and file extension preferences from Window's Media Player and get them all again the next time I do a Windows Update. I could see getting them again if I updated the player but I get them on security updates!
This antitrust kind of nonsense is getting a little out of hand.. how is this any different to Apple shipping iTunes and Quicktime as the default music & video players on their operating system?
I use Media Player for playing video on my Windows PC (Winamp for music though!) - and whilst I understand this not to everyones taste, and that MS should offer alternatives - but I don't see how this is any different to Apple.
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
Apple also neglets to add third-party software that is competitive to its own on the computer. Without looking at the issue closer I would suspect reasons for not including them would be effort, support, QA and maybe even not wanting to give the competition an edge.
What I would like to see, whether this be Microsoft, Apple or any other computer company, is a third-party showcase CD bundled with the OS. The CD would include a showcase of software available for the OS. The content would be the sort included with your average computer magazine. I would suggest that the third-parties on the CD should subsidise the cost of the CD, since they are being done a favour by be being included. Its not necessarily a perfect solution, but it is one that could be of interest to some people. Of course if you make a 'temporary' installation of these OSs you won't necessarily have this CD, but then the choice of yours for purchasing a permananent CD. Maybe the competitors could get together and have shops include this CD with all new computers. The OS manufacturers needn't be the ones with the initiative.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Linux doesn't come with Windows Media Player, or winamp, why should windows come with other people's shit. This doesn't make any sense. I think Europe is just ass backwards and hates the large American company. Windows should just screw them over and stop selling in Europe and offer no more licenses to Europeans, and then go on a lawsuit frenzy against anyone that continues to run windows over there.
It's ok if you hate Microsoft but telling them their not allowed to enhance their products is retarded, if you get a AC delco stereo in a GM car(AC delco used to be owned by GM, maybe still is) you can't take GM to court because they didn't package their car with a aiwa stereo.
Also, windows makes no attempt to not allow you to install real player, or quick time, so i don't see how their in the wrong.
Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
Netscape was poop circa NS4. It was that blunder that got them in trouble, since people began looking for other browsers. Had NS4 been even equal to IE4, NS would probably still be dominant today (and Mozilla would probably never be open-sourced, but that's neither here nor there).
When competing with Microsoft, the cardinal rule is: don't release crap. If you try to race Microsoft to see who can do the crappiest software, you're toast, because no one is better at making money off of crap software than Microsoft. Look at Adobe. They're getting squeezed by Apple and Microsoft in their core business (photo software). Yet, neither is really making a dent, and likely never will. Adobe continues to release quality software, and even if Microsoft releases a Photoshop competitor that matches it in quality, Adobe will still win, thanks to the installed base of experienced users. Of course, if Adobe stumbles and Photoshop has a bad version that nobody wants to use, Microsoft may well take over the market. But you can hardly blame Microsoft for Adobe releasing crap, can you?
You've gotta love the hyprocrisy of Europe
First -- you've gotta love those that put an equal sign between EU and Europe... Makes it sound like you think all europeans think the suggestions in their entirety are good suggestions. That's about as stupid as saying the same with americans and their elected president.
Second -- your post is off topic.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Besides that, the web services industry pretty much as a whole. They control both AIM and ICQ which together make up a most impressive userbase. They in the past have followed a lot of the same practices as Microsoft. They would crowd out competition all the time. I remember they went in and bought out my local ISP so for a time AOL was the only option. Then I found another ISP which three years later was bought out by Earthlink. None of the large ISPs are what I would consider responsible corporate citizens unlike my former favorite Ben and Jerry's. Sadly they two have been bought out by a much less friendly corporation.
How do you decide what browsers get in?
If I create a hacked up leviramsey version of Mozilla and post it on SourceForge, am I entitled to demand that my browser be included?
Or if some company decides to customize Moz with the hidden motive being to get their logo on the desktop of every copy of Windows. Should they get free advertising like that?
These things look simple when you assume that there's only a few options. But if there's a situation where Netscape and IE are the only browsers to get this privilege, is that not an anti-competitive action against Opera or Mosaic?
So what you ae telling us is that MS is selling products below their real value?
Just so you know, that practice is called dumping and it is illegal.
Either that or the products you are listing are not as expensive as you claim.
If goverments around the world do not have the balls to treat it as what it is is a different matter, but it lights my day when people like you arrive to the correct conclussion without aiming to do so: MS is killing the IT industry and the situation is so desperate that the only way to have some choice is to do the stuff yourself and give it away for free.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
"Linux doesn't come with Windows Media Player, or winamp, why should windows come with other people's shit."
Kernels dont tend to ship with media players do they? But I think you'll find most distributions ship with multiple media players....
"My parents were strict, but they never pitted me against livestock" - Doug Stanhope
- Microsoft Windows 2000
- Microsoft Windows NT 4.0
- Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition (Me)
- Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition
- Microsoft Windows 98
- Microsoft Windows Advanced Server Limited Edition
It's there, and there is nothing you can do about it."Your first session will include learning the difference in 'left click' and 'right click' "
So, that means that Apple did it right then.
I remember my first Mac (a Mac PLUS), I got it when I was 8 or something there around. It came with a diskette containing training software, teaching you to click, double click, point and drag using a cool animated (I was 8) game in wich you would point at numbers (in order), click on doves to make them fly away, and double click on windows to see who was behind them. After this cool point and click game you got into training to use the desktop (I don't know what exercises were available as I always quit when I got this far).
The point being, why don't Apple (or MS) include such software with the computer anymore?
"Civis Europaeus sum!"
Internet Explorer works great, and no one is charging me to use it.
Are you shitting me? Isn't Microsoft one of the richest corporations on the planet? Did they get that way by simply giving away their stuff? Everybody paid for their copy of IE..
You hate cross platform products, you hate backwards compatibility.. You're like the Anti-Tim Berners-Lee.
Why do I keep typing pythong?
Have you ever opened up MS messenger and clicked on the email message link at the top?
Most links I have open up in firefox - that one opens in IE.
Probably. I don't know that for a fact, but I do wonder how this would be playing out if Microsoft were an EU operation. Oh well.
The commission never had problems to fine european companies for anticompetitive behaviour. For example, in one decision VW has to pay 100M Euro for obstructing dealers to reimport cars from one country to another. I don't know how this worked out though, as the Cort of Justice had overthrown this very first decision on this subject.
You can look here for other cases.