Slashdot Mirror
EU Releases Microsoft Antitrust Report
Hassman writes "Ever wondered the reasoning behind the EU fining Microsoft and ordering them to sell a Media Player free version of Windows? Well now you can stop wondering. If you aren't up for the full read (it is 302 pages), check out the Reuters summary. Want more? Check out a quote from the summary: 'There is a huge switching cost to using a different operating system [as in not Windows],' he [a MS exec] wrote Gates. 'It is this switching cost that has given customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO, our lack of a sexy version at times...' Mmm...sexy indeed." Reader BrerBear writes "News.com is reporting that the European Union has released its report on Microsoft's conduct, to which Microsoft has pre-emptively responded. Inside are more classic examples of what one should never write in an internal memo: 'In short, without this exclusive franchise called the Windows API, we would have been dead a long time ago,' from Microsoft Sr. VP Bob Muglia."
For those who won't RTF 7 page MS response, here's my "flaimbait" quote from Microsoft's response.
All other contemporary operating systems, such as Apple's OS X, similarly tout their integrated media capabilities. The Decision expressly rejects (Para. 822) the principle that tying analysis for finished products should focus not on whether there exists a separate demand for a component but on whether there is any demand for the finished product with that component missing. For example, the fact that there is a market for shoelaces does not mean there is a market for shoes that have their laces missing. Common sense dictates that it would be misguided for regulators to require shoes to be sold in such a manner, even if this would create greater opportunities for companies that sell shoelaces. 1 The Decision goes on to dismiss the fact that all other operating systems also come with media playback software, ostensibly because some (but not all) of these finished products incorporate media players developed by other suppliers. (Para. 822.)
Go ahead, mod me down for common sense ...
I would be appaled if they were forced to rip out media player. It's the #1 player used for streaming media. It's nice to rely on the fact that most people have this installed. The only other competitor, Real, brings only spyware-laden shit to the table. QuickTime is used by no one else commercially except for Apple themselves.
This would be very bad for the Internet.
..about these internal memos, sometimes they're too funny to be true, its like they feel compelled to give us even more ammo!
It's hard enough to remember my opinions, never mind the reasons for them..
This is news to whom?
Can I bum a sig?
So, the memos point out things we already knew. At least they are smart enough to admit that they don't have a great product. If only they were smart enough to fix it and do right in the future.
Evolution or ID?
Well It's About bloody time! I feel like it might be the best thing the EU has done for us, what with the Patents and all.
I can't wipe my ass without Micro$oft patenting the technique!
Keep the faith, share the code
Then why don't make the one without WMP as expensive (or more expensive even) as the one with and let the market sort it out?
Or would the EUC be so bold as to tell some company how their products should be priced?
The man of knowledge must be able not only to love his enemies but also to hate his friends.
For a second there, I thought you were talking about "wiping your bloddy ass" -- I figured a little Preperation H would clear that right up, jolly good!
'It is this switching cost that has given customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO, our lack of a sexy version at times...'
I wouldn't exactly say patience is the right word, how about ignorance? It was very difficult for most computer users to leave the more comfortable Windows enviroment, but then again I learned DOS when I was 6 yrs old to play Montezuma's Revenge. So it cant be that hard.
> 'It is this switching cost that has given customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO, our lack of a sexy version at times...' Mmm...sexy indeed.
Let me just say, there is no switching cost: you have been fooled. It's not your fault; Microsoft has been fooling billions of people the same way you have been fooled. Offset training and allocation of new resources in your company for purging out Microsoft as being standard operating costs (upgrade costs), not "switching" costs; it's a farce to think otherwise.
Long term benefit in using a reliable system makes any switching price worth every penny. Short term benefits are that you can simply ignore the next bout of viruses, your staff will love you and you can also take credit for the increased profits from operating a tight ship.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Those two words do NOT belong in the same sentence.
I'm amazing. You aren't. SUCK IT
Don't forget that in the US MS was convicted as well.
The fact that they are convicted twice won't change a thing until they actually *PAY* the fine.
MP3 Search Engine
The United States has declared the enforcement of a sovereign nation's own laws to be weapons of monopoly destruction.
Doing the Right Thing should not be preempted by making a buck.
I've always figured that MS execs were smart enough to know that their products are garbage. This just confirms that.
President Ed Black wrote letters to Secretary of State Colin Powell and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, telling them he knew they had been asked to "take extraordinary actions" because of the European decision.
Black urged them not to intervene. He said Microsoft was pressuring the U.S. government to pressure the European Union to ease off Microsoft.
Am I the only European here scared by this snipet from the Reuters article? Are we going to be bombed? Colin Powell is involved, next will it be Rumsfeld? What kind of excuse will he find this time?
I'll do it for cheesy poofs.
The worst that would happen though, is that MS would strip the player from the windows CD.
People would still be able to download it from their website for free, just as they have with every successive recent version of WMP.
True, a lot of consumers wouldn't realise and wouldn't bother - at least not until websites and files started telling them that they needed WMP to play the file they're trying to view, but I'd hardly say that it would be a disaster.
We wouldn't have to deal with Real's bullshit if Media Player didn't force them to go to such steps. There was a time when Real player was spyware and adware free. Anyway, I think this would be a good time to get an official port of mplayer to windows so it could spank them both like a couple of bitches.
You just need to insert "is not" between them.
The Erogenous Zone
Standards are needed - and despite Real's protestations to the contrary, there are two main reasons their "product" has lost market share left and right.
#1, they feel the need to load it down over and over with spyware - especially that Gator crap. And then they put in the constant-nagware messenger of their OWN with that "Real Messenger" garbage.
#2, their encoding schemes SUCK. Compared to the visual quality of Divx encoding, WMF, or even earlier-series Quicktime (which had some real nasty blocking problems), even modern Realplayer blows chunks.
This exec spreads fear and dissent. But it is all lies. He lies. Alternatives to Windows for individuals (Customers, if you will) are often obtained for the cost of 720MB of bandwidth, which is often "unlimited" or "unmetered" over the course of a month and already paid for. The only cost involved for an individual to switch is the time and effort to learn the other operating system. The cost for a company will be high since they are expected to compensate their employees for their time. But the cost for individuals to switch is low. If they are a homeless greasy bum with nothing else to do, naturally this cost will be very low.
We will surround their pricey vendor lock-in, and then it will be they who will be surrounded. We will continue to give away our free alternative operating systems for the price of what it costs you to download it, and a shoe.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
And really, MFC gets a bit of a bad rap. Sure, Document/View is horrible, but other parts of MFC are pretty well done. That, and one thing MS has done pretty well is release a good IDE. It's mostly consistent, and yeah, .NET IDE is drastically different at first, but it took me about 5 minutes to get it to behave like VC 6.
Now please just don't get me started on the clusterf*ck known as COM/DCOM or the abomination that is .NET... both of which make me glad I switched to Linux 3 years ago at home.
Well now you can stop wondering. If you aren't up for the full read (it is 302 pages), Although the PDF is only around 1.42 Mbytes. How much space would the same document take up as a powerpoint presentation?
About what player is included. People get all worked up because of a built in media player (Mac OSX has one) or built in browser (KDE). Its fine for free software companys to do it because they are sticking it to "The Man" (MS), but if "The Man" does it they freak out. Fare market? Come on people, the world isnt fair. You cant have a perfect world were people all can have a share of the money/market. Is MS a monopoly? Yep. Do people bitch about MS because its the cool thing to do? You bet. MS isnt going anywhere, no matter how much you poke your little Bill Gates voodoo doll, or pray for it to happen. The best thing to do is make that killer alternative, and make everyone want to switch to it. I dont see that happening in the foreseable future.
I use BSD, Linux and Windows and all have their niches. But MS is the major desktop OS, and will be for quite some time.
I have been thinking all week why the NIST should standardize the windows API.
I think that NIST would be better than ISO/ANSI/IEEE, and they have a working agreement with ANSI. Also the specification would cost less (if at all) than an ANSI/ISO version.
By standardizing the API, you immediately have the government buy the software that uses this standard. It would make our country secure not to be dependent upon one single supplier of an OS (as much as Microsoft thinks otherwise).
It also means that Windows stops being the moving target that it is.
Before you troll me with free enterprise/right to innovate/unnecessary/linux blah blah blah, anything that lessens the cost for everybody is a good idea. The OS is the only thing that has increased in cost as compared to other parts to the computer.
I know linux is free, but the fact remains that the vast majority of computer users use a Microsoft product, and wants to keep their software investment minimal (even though all the software companies want us to continually upgrade).
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
"Inside are more classic examples of what one should never write in an internal memo...."
I disagree. It is sometimes one's duty to point out that one's employer has weaknesses. These are exactly the sort of things one *should* write in internal memos to people who can and should do things about them. *Good* leadership wants to hear about the company's weak spots so that they may be addressed.
Yes, sometimes bearing bad news gets you fired. In the short run that's really bad, but in the long run I'd rather not be working for weaklings and cowards anyway.
Maybe... but recent steps of Microsoft seem to prove it tries to head in the right direction. Giving up remaining a monopoly at all costs, cost of customer comfort being not the least, and finding a decent, wide niche in the OS market, as one of many, competing with others, but often cooperating too, accepting better solutions than their own without trying to cripple them (see Java VM, crippled Quicktime, forced integration of seriously inferior MSIE 3.x). It seems Microsoft noticed their destruction may be a completely unintended side effect of Linux growth if they don't stop being so evil, and just like IBM who was seen an evil empire, but nowadays is quite liked, Microsoft may try to do the Good Things because even if they don't pay in short term, as direct marketing profit, they will pay in long term, improving their reputation?
Several more kicks in the ass, just like the WMP case definitely help getting there. You might want to see Microsoft destroyed, sure. But would you really mind seeing Microsoft just becoming true Good Guys?
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
umm..this memo is from one guy that may have been in charge of MS's C++. It was written in 1997 and reflects this single person's view of the products MS had released in 1997 and before.
Anyone who claims that Windows 2000 is buggy and unstable is in error. And an idiot.
Fortunately, more Iraqi's then not are happy to be rid of Sadam and are looking forward to ruling themselves.
If I lived under a brutal dictatorship, I'd want someone to intervene on my behalf so my children would have a better life. Maybe that's just me, though...
He said Microsoft was pressuring the U.S. government to pressure the European Union to ease off Microsoft.
Wow, this sentence really, really needs parentheses. Like this:
He said Microsoft was (pressuring the U.S. government (to pressure the European Union (to ease off Microsoft))).
Also note that this structure is circular; The innermost element is actually the outermost element as well.
Now that's what I call hierarchy.
Score: -1, Insane
What's a guy gotta do to see some *BSD is dying trolls in this thread?
Shoe laces wear out and snap. Media Players don't.
It's a bad analogy (from Microsoft - I realise it isn't you who put this analogy forward).
Cheers,
Ian
Why the hell is this modded +5 Insightful? This guy hasn't got a clue about the costs involved in corporate level IT.
I knew it, Microsoft is no better than Enron!!!
Enron has built a massive power plant in Dabhol, India.
One problem, the whole operation is massively uneconomical!
When local governments refused to sign contracts with Enron to buy power at something like 4 times the cost of power from current power plants, Enron's bargaining tactic was to threaten to lobby the US government to cut off foreign aid to India.
Because of Enron's close contacts with high government figures, Indians believed that they could actually do this.
Enron bailed the Indians out of this problem by going bankrupt.
I wish Microsoft could do the same!
This is a common tactic that is used to confuse people into thinking that Microsoft is just trying to do normal business and not using monopolistic tactics to keep people from switching OS's. Almost everything Microsoft does is designed around keeping people from switching. That includes, extending standards, proprietary file formats, licensing agreements ect. You can never stop Microsoft until you break their tactics. Of course, they camouflage their real tactics with simple analogies that they expect everyone to believe.
All that is changing in Iraq is who is doing the brutality, and who is getting the oil profits. There is not less brutality, and it doesn't appear there will be less brutality in the next several years.
There is a huge switching cost to using a different operating system
The switching cost definately is a reason for large companies not to switch to Linux, but there is a totally different reason for small companies. I have been working with, for, and around small companies (25 employees) for years and almost all of them are running some flavor of windows/windows server because Bob from accounting knows about computers and knows how to fix issues if they come up. These companies do not have the budget for a full time system administrator, so they make do with what they've got. Since most people are running windows at home, Windows is going to be the easiest thing for these companies to use at work.
Johnkoerner.com
Actually, no they don't HAVE to take on a greater responsiblity; as they have shown all along. But if the market is going to get better instead of worse then they must be forced to.
Real use to be such a superior product until they thought that Microsoft was going to buy them out.
Okay, I'm sure there's a valid reason, probably legal, but to make porting easier to another OS, like Linux, why hasn't anyone tried to port the Win32 APIs? Put them on top of a windowing toolkit (or just use the raw XLib) and make all the appropriate changes under the hood, so to speak. Mono's doing something similar with the whole .NET libraries, but presumably even .NET on Windows is making Win32 API calls underneith all that wrapping.
:) ).
I'm not saying this is easy, or even necessarily desirable (see: slipperly slope) but since Microsoft has tried making it "easy" to port apps to Windows, why hasn't anyone turned around and make it easy to port Windows apps to Linux (we'll leave MFC & ATL for later.
One man's switching cost is another man's hobby. The MS antitrust suits are still total BS, althought I'm basically on board with Windows haters.
I don't know if this is true but I suspect that there is less brutality now than under Saddam. The difference being that it is now visible and (mostly) under public scutiny.
Kiss Mighty Fine MicroSoft?
There is absolutely no need to trash Microsoft this time... they did it themselves!
'There is a huge switching cost to using a different operating system [as in not Windows],' he [a MS exec] wrote Gates. 'It is this switching cost that has given customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO, our lack of a sexy version at times...'
and
'In short, without this exclusive franchise called the Windows API, we would have been dead a long time ago,' from Microsoft Sr. VP Bob Muglia.
and isn't that the truth? I write software for a living. If I did my job as bad as Microsoft has over the years, I'd be fired!
From the perspective of most web content developers, that is nice.
Skipping cross-platform compatability testing and corrections eliminates at least half the time for your typical HTML monkey.
If I lived under a brutal dictatorship, I'd want someone to intervene on my behalf...
If I lived under a brutal dictatorship I would do everything to end it myself.
Oh wait... I did that already. But it was another country and another dictator I got rid of. So maybe my opinion doesn't count.
And for sure: I would curse the country that basicly said: You are incompetent to deal with your dictator on your own, which we let go 10 years ago because we didn't want him away at this point. So this time we will bomb you into shock and awe, then we wreck or let wreck every public service that is and stop you from rebuilding it because we promised the contracts to our buddies first.
What happened to let people decide for their destiny themselves? How long would Saddam Hussein have been in power if the U.S. just said: We don't care? One year? Two? Ok. There is the argument that this would have meant another 10000 or 20000 dead people on the hand of Saddam Hussein's regime every year.
How is that worse or better than the probably 30000 dead young men enlisted to the Iraqi army and the 15000 dead civilians? The so feared Republican Guards just disappeared. Those actively supporting Saddam Hussein knew when to hide. But not the young people who were serving an army they probably didn't like, but which died by defending the home of their families.
I can't hear anymore the argument that it was best for Iraq to get rid of Saddam Hussein by first bombing the land into chaos and then fail to have a contingency plan. What if Iraqi people were able to sort out Saddam Hussein themselves? Did anyone ever looked at the alternatives?
Or was it that Saddam Hussein had to be removed by external force because otherwise the Iraqi would have dealt with him, and then the U.S. couldn't close the ring around Iran and Russia, because a selfliberated Iraq may have had no incentive to let them in?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
.... is not what you use to make your clothes smooth and presentable....
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I found it bloody hard, I had mostly got rid of it, but then windows decided to put it on again.
This was on a bleeding terminal server, where you don't want users browsing for porn and watching it. (there was little CPU power and limited network connectivity to the thing)
Anyway in the end I had to accept it and remove user permissions on it, which sucked heavily. When the 2k server was replced with 2k3 there was all sorts of this useless crap stewn all over the place.
Also when I set a default App, it should do it for all users and not require my tampering.
Windows is awful for this.
In philosophy there's a saying, "there is no natural law." One could say of business, "there is no business ethics."
The lack of compiling kernels the lack of playing hunt that package the huge libary of games "yeah windows really sucks huh"
Ahh... the old "huge library of games" argument. Because, as anyone knows, all the discriminating IT professional cares about (as opposed to, say, some random 14-year-old kid on Slashdot who forgets to hit the 'f' key some times) is playing games.
MOD PARENT UP - a very interesting point
Ironic that the EU used Windows pdf software to create this report.
"Acrobat Distiller 5.0.5 (Windows)"
.... hasn't been caught conspiring to ONLY include their brand of shoelaces, and browbeating the other lace and shoe manufacturers to "follow their lead..or else", nor that shoes be so constructed that using another brand of lace makes your shoes fall apart, or to make the task of inserting new laces so difficult as to be near impossible without getting the "secret shoe lace instructions" that are "licensed" and "propietary".. and even if you get the shoelaces inserted, they constantly fall apart and won't hold a knot. There's the difference.
They got caught, with more than enough evidence, of being serious crooks and liars and have gone well out of their way to stifle competition using illegal tactics. It's more important for them to maximise profits at the expense of following the law or building functional products, or NOT building stuff that breaks other peoples stuff. Just reality. They are crooks, plain and simple. Just very wealthy and powerful crooks. If they WEREN'T, then we wouldn't have all these people pointing it out. If they hadn't strong armed the box vendors, then it wouldn't have come up. If their stuff wasn't designed on purpose to break other peoples stuff, no one would have brought it up. And yada yada yada, but they did all these things, it's pretty clear they have a deep seated corporate culture and mindset and practice of serious lawlessness that goes directly to the top guy, then goes back down and spreads sideways. And they accept getting busted because it won't matter, they can absorb any of the fines and still keep doing lawless acts, over and over again.
They need to have their corporate charter revoked, not just a pussy fine. I mean, busted, jailtime for gates and some others. gone, out of business. tough beans to the investors, maybe they shouldn't "invest" in crime, it's called being a skunk and being part of the crime. Anyone who holds their stock now and DOESN'T realise the company is crooked does not have my synmpathy, it's been proven over and over again. and if they do and still wish to "make money" off being crooked, being part of it,well, IMO they are just as guilty. Same with several other large mega corps,REVOKE their incorporation, that's the ONLY THING that willwork with this sort of thing, until "they"-the serial crooks still out there- get the message to stop being crooks and bullies just because they think they are big enough to "get away with it" and it's just "part of doing business". I got a clue stick for those people, it's quite possible to be in business and make money without being a crook.
Are we going to be bombed?
Shees, does this mean that I will have to fit my Linux boxen with a laser spoofer, missile warning system and an ECM pod?
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
Its just as much about the oil as the US weapon
industry.
I predict that within 5-10 years after the US has pulled out of Iraq, a new large scale war is
initiated by the US (or a couple of small ones, with big pay-offs).
Bomb ready sir.
If I lived under a brutal dictatorship, I'd want someone to intervene on my behalf
Are you really sure about that?
I live in Spain, which had a dictator (who was sometimes brutal) up until about 25 years ago. But if you ask people today I think most would tell you that they wouldn't have wanted the USA to invade to get rid of him.
People everywhere have pride. They like to sort out their own problems. That's as true in the USA as anywhere else. I'm sure if Bush suddenly decided he was a dictator and was going to halt democratic elections the people of the USA wouldn't be clamouring for the Europeans or Chinese to "liberate" them.
mod parent funny!
DEAD-ON!
And WINE.
Most of those business specific applications are low-powered database front-ends that would run perfectly in wine.
And considering the cost of training and switching versus the recurring costs of Windows licenses...
GeekNights!
Late Night Radio for Geeks!
It goes beyond pride. If my country was so bad that my family was in danger of being killed (Rwanda/Kosovo/Iraq) or being starved to death, I'd swallow my pride so my kids might have a better life someday.
> Upgrading for the sake of upgrading is ridiculous.
I would have to agree with you, for Windows. But for Open Source systems, you don't have to pay to upgrade, so it's nice to have the latest stuff, and it's free so, why not?
But Microsoft's been playing this security card for some time now and they have the house almost beat! But the house always wins.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
My reason for still using Windows isn't switching cost as such, but simply that I am used to Windows, and I've found 2000 and XP to be stable and convenient to use. Convenient, simply because I'm used to it. Of course, there are numerous security holes, and that is worrying. I would have felt better using an alternative operating system, but I am simply too used to Windows, and it is convenient enough that I can't be bothered to switch. Apart from Windows, I don't really run any MS software, apart from perhaps Notepad. My browsing, e-mailing, newsgroup browsing, image editing, document editing, etc. is all done in non-MS software. Windows is just a convenient way for me to launch this software, and then there's games of course.
But I digress. Back to the point, which is that these quotes are seriously outdated, and Microsoft has actually come a long way with their products since then.
That said, you have a good point when you call it lies that the switching cost is huge. I agree with you on that. When it comes to money, I think switching cost isn't a major obstacle, as long as you can be bothered to learn something new. I do use Linux every day for work related things, but to work efficiently, I still use Windows as my primary OS.
A company would probably save a lot of money by moving away from Windows. Training cost shouldn't be too much either, as long as the employees get systems that are set up and ready to go, with all necessary software available.
Maybe the claims from MS that the switching cost was huge nearly ten years ago was what saved them, since their products were really terrible. Today, Windows is actually rather decent, and people tend to stay with what they are used to. Internet Explorer is a really bad browser, though, so Windows is the only thing I really use which is created by Microsoft.
Clever signature text goes here.
how much am I paying for NTFS compression then? I mean that was more than ten years ago.... You'd think they'd start charging money for it eventually....
.bombs flamed out. And it's not because Microsoft is evil, but rather the market is unforgiving.
The job of the OS is to take input from the user, and render output to the user. There is no reason an OS shouldn't just understand what audio and video are, and what to do with them. Windows having a media player is both obvious and good. To bad linux makes it a hassle, but there's that whole soundcard mess to get through first. Now Windows forcing one to monogomously use the microsoft approved media codecs, that is very bad. And also what they didn't do. Far from just real and quicktime, there's all the dvd software, of course software that really whips the llama's ass, and well, in perhaps an ironic twist, there's always mplayer.
Car manufactures all colluded to install car stereos, in every car! The horrors! They're an evil cartel and must be broken up! I might add, installing software, at least on windows, is a hell of a lot simpler than installing a car stereo. The only two people I know with stock stereos drive an Avalon and a Jaguar respectively. Microsoft's media player is a non-issue.
If companies could come up with something superior enough to offset modest effort of installing something, people would install it. People install bonzi buddy, so that barrier for entry is very VERY low. If you want to make it something people will buy, well that's a little trickier. Which isn't microsofts fault. Most media players are free. And even the versions that aren't have alternatives that are.
The simple fact is Microsoft is the 600 or so lb gorrilla not because their bastards, but because they grow as their customers demand. Perfectly? No. Servicably? Yes. They don't wander around resting on their laurels content to fiddle as the new little guys plan their "operation crush." IBM did, they died, and have since been resurected. Xerox, wow. Everyone knows that story. Netscape was full of such talented programers the founder now specializes in moving programing jobs to india, and couldn't keep up with the underfunded academics who continued developing Mosaic when Mark was pleasuring himself with a fist full of franklins. It's not a coincidence Google, Amazon, and Ebay lived while other
> Sure, there's no switching cost as long as you get your ass over here and show my company how to use this damn Linux thing
Do you know how to use Windows? Okay, do that, without all the goofy bloat. Hire some people who know what they're doing with Linux and fire your Windows staff, or retrain them (which likely would be a good investment, considering loyalty and other business factors).
> and you find, install, and train us on business apps that are as good as the ones we have now.
It's called Google. Have you heard of it? Oh and Source Forge is pretty damn sweet, too.
> And of course, you should be able to train all of us instantly after you do our conversion
Yes, but with your attitude, I'd have to recommend the company fire you and hire someone who isn't so antagonizing. That way some Open Source programmer could actually get money and you would learn a valuable lesson -- that Windows makes you cranky.
> since any time spent learnign a new system IS A SWITCHING COST.
When God created humanity, he killed the dinosaurs. Some species survived, but the really big badasses are no longer. The choice is yours; you can be a dinosaur, or you can evolve.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Let's say Apple ruled the domain. Everyone ran on Apple's hardware, ran OSX, etc. Would everyone start treating them like they treat Microsoft?
/.'ers have toward Microsoft truly due to their business practices, or simply because they dominate the market?
I guess where I am going is... is the hatred
hmm, 'Capital Depreciation Analysis' software notwithstanding, 90% of computers in offices could be replaced with something like Linux tomorrow, and the users would notice the change of desktop background and not much else. Word processing/spreadsheets are not complicated, nor are they platform specific, and the needs of many business users are not very advanced.
To avoid locking yourself into any one platform you could build vertical business apps with java or serve them through a web-browser, and you wouldn't have any problem switching client computers (assuming your OS of choice hadn't tried to lock out java as something which would allow their business users the freedom to, oh, wait...). If current software on Linux isn't up to the task, consider OS X.
I'd use Windows where it is truly your *only* choice, for the rest of the computers, it's time to consider the alternatives (and there are several, not just linux). Windows costs a huge amount to maintain, and you have to spend a lot more on protection from things like viruses/worms and locking down the clients in the first place (because of the continual flood of security alerts).
If you're talking about switching costs you should consider the cost of staying with the platform you're on too - it is by no means negligible.
> You're talking about operating costs. Completely different.
Microsoft has been selling this line since they first recognized Linux as a major competitor. There is no cost to switch. It's a lie.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Give me an OS that you would install by putting a CD in a drive, typing a computer name, and where you would not see one setting unless you REALLY wanted to mess with them. And by the way, why aren't we acessing all the settings from one single point called setting?
User, they want to USE computer, not mess around with it. Do you want to repair your car every 2 months? Do you want to rewire your electric wire every 2 months? Do you want to rebuild part of your houses every 2 months? Do you want to "configure" anything every two friggin months?
!!! NO you want to friggin USE it. !!!
Computer are not special. Don't think they should deserve special treatment.
Yes, they can do a lot, but they aren't god or something.
> Then your computers must be from some magical fairy land where patches never come out, new versions of XXX are never released and users never break anything.
Oh Jesus! That made me laugh really hard. I remember trying to show a new website to a manager once. The site was coded with XHTML and CSS. He was running IE 5.0 at the time; this was about a month ago. I guess up until that point, he thought his system was running perfectly, too. And he was wrong. When he pulled up the site to look at it, the CSS didn't show up so all he could see was the basic web page -- and he got hopping mad about it; asking why we spent so much money developing it. He basically shot first and forgot to ask questions later. He's the manager nobody likes very much, so I guess IT just kept skipping his office upgrades, as punishment. When I updated his system, he asked what I did with the old crappy site because he wanted to show someone how much money we wasted. He liked the *new* site though.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
I want to see network protocols and file formats, and I want to see them freely available. Interoperability with other operating systems is what matters.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Oh, wait. WMV is a locked MS format and they won't let anyone tap into it.
Wow, I guess Winamp uses magic powers to play WMV/WMA files.
Your business is quite particular though, as it's an engineering shop with lots of specialised apps, thus you have to stick with Windows, as that's what you chose. Fair enough. Switching costs for *you* and other shops like yours would be very high.
I was just pointing out that for the majority of corporate users (at least that I've seen, in large Insurance companies for example), there are perhaps 1 or 2 bespoke apps (for accessing the mainframe databases), and everything else was standard and available on other platforms than Windows. Thus switching would be relatively painless, particularly if they'd thought ahead and hadn't allowed a vendor to lock them in.
Java isn't the only choice obviously, it was just an example of something that was designed to address the issue you have (high costs if you ever have to switch to an incompatible version of windows/other OS). You do say that 60% of your computers are not running anything special, but perhaps you have other reasons for wanting them on Windows.
Many small businesses don't use their computers for much more than email and typing letters, but as you point out, yours does.
oh, you weren't rude at all : )
How did Microsoft come to dominate the market, if not through their business practices? They got big not necessarily by being better, but also by kneecapping those who did better with system "improvements" which happened to break their implementations. (see also "anti-competetive practices.")
Would people treat Apple as bad as Microsoft if they were as big as Microsoft? Maybe not quite as bad. It'd be close, anyway. Sure, they user experience would be better (for most, anyway), but Big Apple'd probably still keep their architecture closed, and given their history of litigating against people who try to copy their look, their legal department would eventually need their own zip code. For that alone, people would come to despise them even moreso than now.
In any case, there would be many happy and complacent with the leader, even if that company were chaired by Satan himself. At a dinner out a few years ago, my father voiced the opinion that the world should standardize on Windows. (Hint: he's old and doesn't want to learn anything else)
And then some are just never satisfied with the leader. Some like buying cars, fully loaded, off the showroom floor and tooling around in them the same day. Others like assembling the parts themselves. For those who like getting into their boxen up to their elbows and rewriting parts of the operating systems to fill their need, there would still be a need for Linux.
It also bears mentioning that if Big Apple is anything like Current Apple, they'd probably be finessing and romancing Linux instead of using FUD. Except where Linux copied Apple's looks, in which case in go those damned lawyers again! So Big Apple's business practices would earn them a few less brickbats, that's all.
And as for your other question:
Sadly, some /.'ers hate anything that isn't Linux.
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
You can't put a price on evolution. It's priceless. The payoff for us humans, for developing minds, has put us on top of things, but we could just as easily go the way of the dinosaurs if we fail to take the next step. Windows was great for the Nineties. But this is the new millenium.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Quicktime opens up faster, plays movies smoother, and PLAYS VIDEO IN THE BROWSER! Windows Media Player simply doesn't do this, it's a standalone application that is too big and clunky. Quicktime has been the standard for video for years, Windows Media Player never was any good.
Microsoft uses a nice analogy... from the analogous world. In the digital we live in and where Microsoft has its business it is completely wrong.
Everyone can make "compatible" shoelaces. I can do it, you can do it. A better analogy would be, if Microsoft constructed their shoes, in such a way, that no other party could produce compatible shoelaces.
It is the closedness of their APIs, not the bundling of the Media Player, which made the EU perform its actions.
I find the low comment count (for an anti-Microsoft article) amusing. Clearly people are just bored with this whole agenda that OSDN has against its competitors, using a "tech news" site it just so happens to own in order to post negative articles. The damn JPEG patent article has more comments than this, and I see more and more people rising up and posting about how tired they are of the mindless drone "M$"-bashing and RIAA-bashing and whatever else.
I guess I just remember when Slashdot was a good source for interesting technology news. Now it's a proactive, agenda-driven website that bills itself as a news site. OSDN owns Slashdot--is it any coincidence so many articles negative toward OSDN's competitors get posted? If Microsoft owned a website that posted anti-Linux articles all the time and called itself a "news" site, all of Slashdot would be up in arms. But too many fanboys have joined this site, bought into the groupthink, and formed their worldviews entirely from Slashdot headlines. That's how you get the whole Linux-is-100%-perfect mindset, the everything-M$-does-is-bad, the piracy-is-just-free-advertising, and whatever other drivel Slashdot pushes down our throats.
If it's not a headline entitled "Microsoft Violates Human Rights In China" (a real article) that blames Microsoft for the Chinese government's actions (and--surprise, surprise--ignoring the fact that China has its own custom Linux distribution, and Red Hat changed KDE flags to sell there...yet no "OSS Violates Human Rights In China"), or a new user-ran executable that somehow gets labelled "New Microsoft Hole" (a real article), or a study showing Linux as the most breached OS on the net with a headline that magically gets changed to "Linux Most-Attacked OS" instead of "Most-Breached", or theaters arresting some guy for bringing a camera into a theater, and Michael posts it as "Theaters Using Night-Vision Goggles" and magically turning it into some bizarre privacy issue...hell, I could go on and on.
Not to mention that for a site which has such a pro-Open Source agenda, the way editors run things is decidedly closed. CmdrTaco never listens to anything you say, and e-mails you send him are either never answered or receive very nasty, sarcastic replies. I can't begin to imagine how many people will never get mod points again because they dared reply to "The Post." And of course, there are Michael's modbombs and user insults.
Anyway, I imagine this will get modded Off-topic at least once, but I accept that because I just had to say my piece. Slashdot has become really rotten. A lot of new OSS guys come here and have their whole worldviews shaped by the agenda-driven, fact-twisting articles posted here. That's where all the asshole zealots come from that hold Linux back. Everything here is accepted as truth, and nobody seems to realize that outside the little niche here, nobody knows or cares about "Linux," "RIAA," or even "M$."
I always thought it was so cheesy when the villian in some movie would capture the hero and say, "I want you to die knowing my evil plot. This will be my last punishment." Then you just know the hero is going to escape, and use this newfound knowledge to thwart the villian. This has been so overdone that you'd think everyone would have seen it at least once and gone "mental note..."
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
I would be appalled by any web site that assumed that everyone runs with the Microsoft media player installed. Fortunately, I find the alternatives supported by most respectable web sites, and I will install most alternatives as required.
** It is unethical to use unlicensed Microsoft software -- just because it is unlicensed does not change that it is from Microsoft **
The thing is, I couldn't give a monkey's butt if Real Player goes away for good. It's second rate and noone likes it. What I do care about is the future of computer interfaces - and this ruling just put us nearer to the command prompt a further from minority report. So, let's say WMP is taken out for 'anti competitive' reasons. What next? Longhorn can't ship with Avalon (which was going to give me a cool 3d interface, a richer media experience, a touch of the future) becuase Macromedia get's scared that it will crush Flash and goes telling on them to the EU? How ridiculously unfair is it to tell a company that it can only add new features 'as long as they aren't very good features' (i.e. no chance of competing)? Would you want a bunch of dim-witted EU lawyers designing your next-gen product for you? AARRRGGGH.
Sorry to bust your bubble, but you're wrong. You're trying to fit your perspective onto a situation that has nothing to do with it. It does not work that way, you don't just wake up tomorrow into a dictatorship and wish for the good days to come back at any price. You're in it from the beginning, that's all you know and the 'solution' is something you - your country - have to discover on your own, or it's worthless.
Short prediction on what's going to happen in Iraq - the 'democratic regime' will be a joke, people don't know yet how to live without fear there. So at the top the previous rich and greedy (Saddam and his system) will be replaced by others, not rich but greedy, that will kiss US' ass. They will be as bad or worse for the general population (wrt to stuff like being starvetd to death, for example) since the top now will mull the country for what's worth (after the 'allies' take the cream for fighting the war) according to their desire to become rich as well. It's just going to be a different type of oppression and not called this way, since now it's a 'democracy'. Also, don't forget that elections are really easy to forge, too - there's a snowball's chance in hell that there will be enough 'independent observers' interested in overseeing them; heck, I'd be amazed if they don't just get one party/coallition with a huge majority. You really think people there *know* how to weight platforms in an election???
This could go on forever. The point is, moving from dictatorship into democracy requires public education as a critical part - and that's one thing US is not interested to provide (it's quite different from 'replacing an unfriendly regime'). This is what the GP poster meant. Yes, it also has to do with pride - you know, things you build (or get the chance to build) with your own hands are the ones you value most. But one has to have gone through the process recently enough to remember it (see for instance Lincoln saying that liberty must be paid with the blood of patriots or it's worthless).
'In short, without this exclusive franchise called the Windows API, we would have been dead a long time ago,' from Microsoft Sr. VP Bob Muglia.
It's not exclusive; there's wine.
The exclusive franchise without which Microsoft would be dead lies in OEM preinstall pricing.
"Skill shows through where genius wears thin." -Wittgenstein || Religion: uniting aviation and architecture.
That European would have to have some big, big arms to cut an American car in half along with its 10 liter engine.
>Let's say Apple ruled the domain. Everyone ran on Apple's hardware, ran OSX, etc. Would everyone start treating them like they treat Microsoft?
>I guess where I am going is... is the hatred /.'ers have toward Microsoft truly due to their business practices, or simply because they dominate the market?
Though I cannot speak for all of /., I think it's the former because of the latter. After all, if they didn't dominate the market, then their business practices wouldn't matter nearly as much.
If there were, say, 3 browsers splitting the market and IE was still one of them you'd... still be doing that.
:P
There's no possible way supporting multiple standards, including one difficult one properly, is easier than supporting just the difficult one. That's not to say we mightn't be all better off if, say, Mozilla was the standard with 98% market share, but there is no way in the foreseeable future you are not going to have to support IE and its quirks.
Well, unless you run a website that caters to the linux community. But as soon as you care about nontechnical people, it's IE fun hour. Which is vastly superior to the IE and Netscape fun hour(s) during all the versions of Netscape that weren't fit to wipe a cat's ass with. Just because Microsoft is evil doesn't mean all of the alternatives are good.
For the 1.0E9th time...
Giving away a browser and a media player is not the problem. It is using monopoly power to promote your product over the opposition. MS has a monopoly with Windows. I don't think anyone will argue this and none of the regulatory bodies have tried to take action against this. However, they have made it a practice to tie other products such as Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player to Windows. That is illegal all by itself, but MS goes further. They use their position to promote proprietary file formats only supported by their products. Take a look at what they did with Java, or with all the IE-specific DHTMLs and JavaScript variants. For the media player, it is even more obvious with their streaming file format.
[As a side note, one of my favorite examples of how using one MS product can force you into using another is MS Exchange. Obviously you have to use Outlook as a client for this (this is not too bad). Exchange can also be a web mail server allowing access through a browser. However, that browser has to be Internet Explorer -- at least if you want to be able to hit the "reply" button on a message. For that matter, try accessing the Windows Update web page without using IE...]
The best part of it all is that MS is quick to admit that they plan to continue these kind of actions. In a month or so they will release an "update" for Windows that includes a firewall product that is strikingly similar to Zone Alarm and anti-virus software that is very similar to Norton Anti-Virus. Does anyone think that their virus definitions will be compatible with other anti-virus software? Does anyone think that their new firewall will allow users to run Zone Alarm at the same time?
It is real easy to see that Apple is doing most of the stuff that MS is doing, with the only difference being that Apple has an extremely small market share.
The other difference is that Microsoft is a monopolist, and has been convicted of this in a court of law in the U.S. This is a sufficient difference, because the law applies differently to monopolies than it does to other companies. That's how antitrust laws work.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
This is the correct answer, witness the MSFT funded BSA's efforts lobbying the commision for unlimited patentability. Interesting to note internal markets commisioner Bolkestein threatened commisioner Monti just as he threatened the EU parliament.
How exactly do you expect WMP's competitors to make a quality product, when WMP's existence on the market neatly prevents them from being able to charge money for their product?
Remember, "we'll pour lots of money into making a product that will dominate this market, and not expect any of it back!" is something that in most markets only MS can do; this is, in fact, one of the biggest complaints of those who claim MS's monopoly unfair.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
go to c:\Windows\inf\sysoc.inf
from there remove the HIDE leaving the commas and the like. Go to add/remove programs and remove windows componates. You will now see pinball
"I have been working with, for, and around small companies (25 employees) for years and almost all of them are running some flavor of windows/windows server because Bob from accounting knows about computers and knows how to fix issues if they come up. These companies do not have the budget for a full time system administrator, so they make do with what they've got. Since most people are running windows at home, Windows is going to be the easiest thing for these companies to use at work."
You see a problem. I see a business opportunity. One plus that Linux has (aside from others) is it's remote capabilities. I can SSH in and fix a lot of problems, and the one's I can't, I can send a person over to fix your machines, per an incident. Much cheaper for you than trying to clean up "Bob's" mistakes. It also helps support the local economy, something necessary in these troubled times.
BTW Why is the "/." crew turning the "You're posting from an open proxy", on and off. Didn't MS get slammed for a similiar tactic from it's DOS days? IMO I don't care, it's simply annoying, even when it's false.
> We *have* to keep using them though, because all the financials and invetory systems are on these beasts, and no one knows how to get it off.
:-)
I am terrified to read this, considering your company makes explosives, and giant lasers (not to mention everything else LM does). I mean, come one man... somebody get a clue down there and figure out the problem, assess the costs and fix it.
If you can figure out how to zap missiles out of the air from airplanes, you can figure out how to replace modems, and perform upgrades.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
wrote Gates. 'It is this switching cost that has given customers the patience to stick with Windows through all our mistakes, our buggy drivers, our high TCO
Hmmm... High TCO? Pardon but I'm a little annoyed at this. For years they have been touting their "low TCO" as a selling point. Now they admit they have a higher TCO than the other solutions available.
I'm sure Microsoft has some redeeming value but it's apparent companies should reconder when looking at upgrading/continuing with Microsoft products. Even rich companies want to save money. Here is how. Get rid of Microsoft products and go with something better (subjective statement I know).
It's already happened once in my lifetime. People used to say "Nobody ever got fired buying IBM". It could happen again.
Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
The so feared Republican Guards just disappeared.
Some wish they would...
What if Iraqi people were able to sort out Saddam Hussein themselves?
They weren't able to do so for decades.
I agree with you that the people of Iraq may not be ready. However, there are many cases this century where goverments have been installed. Some have succeeded - some have failed. Today, a mere 50 years after after causing 2 world wars, Germany is a productive member of the international community. What would you have the world done there? Leave the people to fend for themselves after the total destruction of their government?
I'd rather try and fail, then not try and fail (ala Rwanda).
Maybe there are two teams in Microsoft, each pulling in opposite direction? Internal battle? The lure of the Dark Side is still strong...
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
WMP is not to the OS as shoe laces are to shoes. It can be argued fairly that shoes are not usable without shoe laces. Windows Media Player is not in the same category in relation to the OS. Many people can and do live without WMP.
Remember, there are some pretty high paid fisherman that work for Microsoft. I am afraid, you just swallowed their bait.
Bloody hell, they say that like it's a bad thing.
Intellectual property rights are out of control. Without going into whether they're good or bad in themselves, they're definitely out of control and enforced for all of the wrong reasons at the moment.
And as for dominant firms unnovating, well this if often not a good thing. It either comes at the expense of the non-dominant competition or of the customer. (And occasionally be buying up the competition, but ruining the innovation by MS-corporate-decision-making)
TiggsIf the law didn't allow them to get away with running roughshod, they'd actually have to try hard to be truly innovative. And I can't see how that'd be a bad thing.
Tiggs
"120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
OK. We'll get rid of Bush for you presently.
I hope you don't mind the cluster bomb on your house, or the two dead "civilian casualties" that used to be your children. Or the fact that we'll stay around until we want to, and place our puppet government which will give away your natural resources to us.
Oh, and don't forget we'll rebuild everything we destroyed, inflate the prices and then bill you. You don't have any money? No problem, you'll owe us. A modest 2 percent interest, and you'll owe us forever and ever.
Just let me gather some troops and we'll be on our way.
From the Microsoft rebuttal: It is also notable that the specifications Microsoft must now license do not yet exist. Microsoft will have to create them. These specifications, which will comprise thousands of pages of valuable information, will qualify as copyrighted works in their own right and as copyrightable preparatory design material for a computer program under the EC s 1991 Software Copyright Directive.
This just confirms what we've been thinking for a long time -- MS software is not planned. The protocols aren't mapped out or specified. The implementation *is* the specification. Software just happens; there is no such thing as Software Engineering in the Microsoft world. To get a written specification, it has to be reverse-engineered from the product.
Ouch.
The time required for the user to learn all of these new packages would cost them huge amounts of time!
It becomes essential that the "make things different" crowd understand why it's NOT a good idea to "make things different" on the Linux platform, just because it's Linux. The more alike the apps and the OS are to Windows (only having much more sound and freel-available code), the easier this migration will be. The prospect of adoption demands that Linux apps be very similar to what users already know.
Once a system ha sbeen set up, I'm not sure the average user would have that much trouble finding their way around a Linux desktop. I think it would a fascinating exercise to watch this process in action - sit someone down in front of a Linux box, and ask them to accomplish a common task- see how long it takes them to figure it out. This information can then be used to refine the various aspects of the Linux desktop experience that users find troublesome.
Yes, it's nice to rely on 'standard' client software being installed on all desktops.
But who cares what that standard is? If Microsoft hadn't bullied Netscape off of the desktop, they would have been the standard everybody coded to, and the situation would be essentially the same. You might not like the Netscape standard, but NS didn't start getting nastily proprietary until Microsoft started a 'features war' with them.
Same applies to Real. If Real were the standard, and all PC manufacturers included it (and were not *prevented* from including it during the years of illegal MS tricks), developers would have had the standard they needed. Once again, Real didn't start playing nasty until their means of making a living was illegally pulled out from under them.
I suppose you can use todays distorted marketplace to make a case for the status quo, but that doesn't address the laws that were broken to get us here. And we still have Apple and Linux users excluded by Windows Media developers. A truly cross-platform standard is always going to be better for developers and consumers both than a 90+% 'standard' that locks out the healthy competition that is the goal of all antitrust enforcement.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
The more alike the apps and the OS are to Windows (only having much more sound and freel-available code), the easier this migration will be.
This is assuming that those of us who code and use Linux give a damn about whether or not Windows users 'migrate' to Linux.
Most of us don't. Most of us aren't crusaders against the Evil Empire(TM). We really don't give a shit about Microsoft, nor 'winning' any imaginary battles. The crusaders need to piss off and find some other cause to rant about, and leave us coders the hell alone. At least until they decide to start cutting us paychecks for what we do FOR FREE on our own time.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
Obligatory Futurama quote:
What makes a man turn from good to neutrality? - Zap Brannigan
If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
The Shia of southern Iraq already tried to revolt...and failed miserably at the cost of tens of thousands of their own lives. They were SLAUGHTERED, dipshit. Yeah, they OBVIOUSLY could handle an insurrection themselves against a ruthless and uncompromising dictator! People like you are a cancer to human society and need to be removed before you kill the whole body off by spreading your disease everywhere. I recommend the "radiation treatment" to remove you from society...i.e., shoving a nuke up your lame ass.
si vis pacem, para bellum..."if you wish peace, prepare for war"
Disregarding MS's copyrights is a bad, bad idea. It makes them look like the victim, and it helps spread lock-in. For example, when the Vietnamese gov't recently announced that they were switching millions of systems from using pirated copies of Windows to using Linux, that was a major blow to MS. And yet, if you believe the standard propoganda, it should have been considered a victory. That's hundreds of millions of dollars in "losses" that they're no longer "suffering". Shouldn't they pay taxes on that? :)
Every single one of those issues listed on that website refer to options that can be turned off on the privacy page that appears ON FIRST STARTUP.
Christ.
Americans of the late 19th century would have understood. Having been beaten into economic submission by the railroad and oil trusts, they howled for reform. That's how we got the laws that occasionally have been used to protect us: citizen action. Unfortunately, the sorry history of US antitrust law since is one of big money obstructing progress and undoing results at nearly every step.
If we're ever to get out from under the yoke of our Microsofts and Wal-Marts, which depress innovation, cripple competition, batter markets and saddle society with a host of costs and social ills, we'll need to resurrect that lost spirit of the engaged American--the citizen who knows his interests and how to fight for them.
"This Word for Windows" *type* *type* *type* " is quite possibly" *type* *type* *type* "the worst software" *type* *type* *type* "that I have ever used." *type* *type* *type* "Take that, Microsoft" *type* *type* *type* "signed EU"
"oops, better disguise this...Windowd XP Start Menu --> Adobe --> Distiller"
HeeHee!
Have you Meta Moderated t
And I expect one of MSFT's next moves will be to help make sure that newbie purchasers of "home" Linux boxes (such as the ones targeted to appear here) have bad experiences. Probably not too hard when such newbies are buying budget boxes from Walmart and won't be hooked into security-patch central, etc...
If MS can influence such "entry level" Linux experiences to go awry, that could be far better FUD and anti-Linux PR than anything coming out of the SCO/IBM/Baystar/RBC stunts...
Don't be surprised if you start seeing some REALLY SHODDY Linux configurations showing up at budget retail outlets...
This is why Microsoft and other large companies will always and forever dominate this industry. This is why open software will never be mainstream.
The reason? You and most open source developers reserve the right to not give a shit. At least Microsoft has obligations to please it's customers in some way.
Congradulations, you and others like you have branded the open source community as assholes. People everywhere will eventually begin to hate us.
Hope you're happy.
This has been done in various companies and studies.
Bottom line: Linux is not harder to learn than Windows IF YOU DON'T KNOW WINDOWS! The problem is people WANT Linux to BE Windows!
This is a people problem, not a Linux problem.
How many of these Windows trolls ever ask how long it took THEM to LEARN WINDOWS WHEN THEY DID NOT KNOW WINDOWS?
I was in Federal prison from 1993 to June 2001. The last computer I worked on was a 66MHz 486 and the last computer I owned was a 33MHz 386 with 2MB of RAM running DOS with PC-Tools and some other stuff. Windows 3.1 was on it but never run because the machine didn't have 4MB of RAM.
I had to learn Windows 98 in 2001. I just installed Windows 2000 a couple months ago. I've been running Red Hat Linux 7.0 on my old machine and 7.3 on my newer machine.
So I have direct experience about learning Linux and Windows ALL AT ONCE - and at age 55 to boot.
People who say older people cannot learn Linux because it is not as "intuitive" as Windows ARE FULL OF SHIT! Period.
I have CONSTANTLY run into situations on Windows AND Linux where the software was unintuitive or downright fucking STUPID! But the main point is that once you know the basics of ANY GUI system, you can learn another one very quickly with minimal disruption.
The key point is: IF YOU WANT TO! Corporate managers do not want to regardless of any Linux advantages because they are idiots , most corporate drones do not want to (since they don't want ANY extra work regardless of what it is and what the benefits might be) and most Windows trolls don't want to because they want to run their mouths. Only when the pain of making Bill Gates the richest asshole in the world (after the guy from Ikea, right, okay) gets greater will they maybe wake up and smell the shit from Redmond.
I figure Longhorn's need for massive hardware and software upgrades maybe will do it - but I'm sure there will be a lot of morons who continue to suck it up and fork over the bucks to Bill.
There are no shortage of morons in the business world. There are morons probably running Autocoder these days.
All that matters is the EVENTUAL economics. Linux is evolving faster than Windows and costs less. Ergo, it is a near certainty that it WILL replace Windows in X amount of time - the only uncertainty is X.
The only way this can NOT happen is if somehow Bill Gates chokes on some foi gras, the Microsoft culture undergoes a massive change equivalent to IBM's embracing open source, and they actually start to spend some of their billions of R&D on REAL R&D instead of creative new DRM and licensing ideas.
Fat chance, trolls.
Have a nice day.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Now I know what Tarantino dreams about and and why.
But if the only pair of shoes you could buy that worked with the only fashionable socks came with a lifetime supply of shoelaces you had to take, you'd most likely then put replacement shoelace companies out of business. Then, later on, the fashionable socks would no longer work with those shoes and you'd have to buy new ones. You'd also then find out that the lifetime supply of shoelaces don't work with them either.
The other shoelace companies have gone out of business and now the shoe seller owns a monopoly on that business as well, forcing you to buy them now if they want, but they had the magical ability to create a more or less infinite amount of a physical product at no additional per shoe cost, they may or may not do it again.
And uhh, lets also say that the shoelaces eventually integrate direct music sales, putting other music sales businesses at a big disadvantage since they have the barrier of installation and exposure that an integrated solution does not have to overcome. Can you even think up a shoe analogy for direct music sales?
Just a subtle reminder that you are - OFF-TOPIC!
Mods! Mods! Help!
Score:5, Troll is almost in your grasp!
Big bucks for 1990.
for all the hypocrites here that claim to be libertarians, but only are concerned with their own rights, and not those of Bill Gates.
... If my Live!, from New York, It's Saturday Night history is good.
> If your externally available site doesn't work on IE 5, then it is correct to say that you wasted a lot of money on a site that doesn't work properly in all browsers.
Yeah it worked. But IE 5.0 doesn't support CSS, so the site looked very plain. We just plain-texed it for browsers that choke on CSS. It was actually in the dev dox to do it that way, and that just added insult to injury.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Your dictator saved you from Communism and saved your country from engagement in WWII.
He killed a few Communists and the like, but that is hardly wrong.
> Try sending a open office document to a customer and when they can't read it in Word, see how much switching is really costing you, and how soon you'll be fired for your decision to switch.
Whatever you say, Bill.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
"...and isn't that the truth? I write software for a living. If I did my job as bad as Microsoft has over the years, I'd be fired!"
Or outsourced.
Put tits on Clippy?
The truth is that Bill Gates doesn't trust the society that he lives in to make the best choices and will push society to his own benefit.
Or maybe BIll Gates does trust society to make the best choices, and that's why he pushes it. As far as I can tell, what Bill Gates wants is not what is best for society.
Qxe4
No, they didn't.
They fined Microsoft $590 million dollars. Last quarter, Microsoft made $10 billion dollars in profit.
Microsoft has $40 billion in the bank. They recorded record revenues and earnings in the last quarter.
Instead of forcing Microsoft to do something that would change their actions, they gave them a slap on the wrist. A version of XP without WMP. Microsoft's really moping about that one. Oh, and a $600 million fine. Just another cost of doing business.
The US DOJ did a much better job. They forced Microsoft to stop bullying their OEMs. No longer can Microsoft force OEMs to ship Windows on every computer. That's why you see companies like Dell and HP shipping systems with Linux.
No, the DOJ did not go far enough. But neither did the EU. The EU did *nothing*. Microsoft doesn't care about a fine. They are like a rich businessperson who continually speeds and is continually ticketed. You can fine them all you want, but it won't have an effect.
Bottom Line (TM):
- The EU gave MS a slap on the wrist
- The DOJ ruling was too weak, but it did stop MS from bullying OEMs
Unfortunately I am not able to find a link, but during the US trial against Microsoft, an engineer from Apple did state that Microsoft deliberately had some of the APIs crash (randomly?) when it detected that the calling application was the Quicktime player.
Similarly the file explorer would not show search results when the file type was Real Audio -- although Microsoft was quick to say that this was just a bug which they had fixed.
I would be happy if someone could add links to articles mentioning the two incidents (searching for microsoft, trial, real, quicktime etc. doesn't tighten the net).
Linux isn't the way it (mostly) is "because it's Linux", it's that way because it's Unix (although not in the sense SCO claims).
Unix predates Windows.
The current trend seems to be that half of the new GUI apps try to behave like Windows apps, the rest either try to behave like Unix apps or to do something different altogether.
I for one will avoid those apps that behave like Windows apps (because Windows behavior conflicts with Unix conventions). I won't create or contribute to such projects. I doubt I'm alone.
This whole judgment should raise alarm bells on both the pro- and anti- Microsoft sides of the fence -- but everyone is so busy bickering about trivialities about whether MS, their company or products are 'good' or 'bad' or whatever that everyone is missing the big picture. This is -- what the hell is the point in building ANY product or service -- if you're going to have to GIVE IT TO YOUR COMPETITORS FOR FREE. What good are copyrights -- what good are patents? Microsoft -- good or bad -- have invested thousands of person-years developing THEIR PRODUCTS -- and now some foreign government seems to have the right to render them completely worthless. This is NOT a case of a MONOPOLY for god's sake -- Microsoft doesn't own and restrict access to your telephone lines, power lines or control the water flowing to your home. They build SOFTWARE. PERIOD. If you want to run Mac OS, or UNIX or whatever the hell you want -- you HAVE THE CHOICE. No bone breakers are coming to your place of work and breaking your arms and legs if you don't buy their stuff. If Microsoft wants to IMPROVE their product -- do they not have every right in the world to do so? If they want to include new features or improve existing ones -- why shouldn't they be able to do that too? Does Ford have to give their designs to GM? Does Plaxo need to share their drug recipes with Bayer? NOT BLOODY LIKELY -- BECAUSE RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATION are exactly what separate one business from another. Winners and losers -- survival of the fittest. The most certain way to KILL INNOVATION is to strip people of the BENEFITS of DOING IT. (In most cases -- that means providing PROTECTION of intellectual property so that companies CAN EXPLOIT -- and YES -- heaven forbid -- PROFIT FROM IT.) This isn't a question of money -- it's a question of the protection of a company's right to develop their own products as they see fit. Take away that -- and you may as well revert to communism. (And we saw how well THAT worked.)
One Word: Velcro
(as in shoes with no shoelaces)
The game of Go (Igo, Weiqi, Baduk) has the simplest concept and the deepest play.