Slashdot Mirror
MS To Offer Windows Sans WMP, If EU So Orders
PSwim writes "Microsoft has said it will remove Media Player from Window, if ordered by the EU this week. The 'Windows-Lite'
version will only be available in Europe. Best quote from the article involves its refusal to release networking documentation: '"The Commission says Linux would disappear" if Microsoft did not grant access to its documentation, Smith claimed. "But Linux is alive and well and I don't know any person at Linux or any Linux programmers who share the Commission's view."'"
Who cares if the commission's view is shared by the OSS crew. Their ruling should be final and Microsoft should comply in good faith if they want to continue to trade in the EU.
They'll probably get chance to appeal the descision but I doubt the ruling will be overturned. Personally, I'm sick of them appealing on grounds they should have brought up earlier in the process. I think that if you appeal in a corporate case such as this and you lose the damages should be increased. You can justify this by lost interest due to the money sitting for in Microsoft's bank and not the EUs bank account for duration of the appeal process plus a surcharge for wasting everybody's time
Simon.
"...I don't know any person at Linux..."
WTF?
Internet Explorer gone, but it's too well embedded. However, with all its vulnerabilities I wonder if Microsoft will try to change this. Oh wait... *reality strikes* How long before the next version of WMP is too well embedded to be removed?
--
Given the other option is to stop selling Windows in the EU, this is not very surprising.
Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
[...]Linux would disappear if Microsoft did not grant access to its documentation[...]
:D :P
Muhahahahaha ! Ha-ha-ha ! Ha-...ha-...ha-ha-ha !
Sorry guys, I can't help myself, I just had a giggling spasm
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
mplayer can put it back much better.
>"Microsoft has said it will remove Media Player from Window, if ordered by the EU this week.
Of course. The other option would be to stop selling Windows in the EU. Who would have expected that?
Microsoft has protested in the past that unbundling elements of Windows would be difficult and could even damage its operating system.
hm... i do not mean to flame against microsoft (yet another time), but wtf? why and how should a media player damage the os, if decently programmed? to me, it sounds sensible to separate the operating-system from the applications built upon it, not coupling them to an absurde degree. well, from the point of view "it will be easier to distribute both products that way", it is understandable, of course, but shouldn't a clear design weigh more than marketing advantage? mark the should, which is - sorrowfully - the keyword here.
ah, and by the way... what will microsoft do? if i was them, i'd offer a network-based installation of wmp, which is (semi)automatically triggered after the installation of windows. thus, they do not ship wmp with the os, but effectively bundle it in 90% of all installations.
The rest of the world would continue to use the full version of Windows, and it encouraged content developers to continue to encode music and other digital products in its Windows media format.
simply cute. encouraging developers to use a proprietary codec (i hope i am correct) to create content, when you need to additionally install software for that codec. *hm* a different approach than the one i outlined above, but an effective one, too.
though i have to say, if i was content provider, i'd see absolutely no advantage in using wmp if the player is not bundled with the os, only the drawback of lock-in by microsoft.
just my 2cent
If you don't learn from history,
then you are an idiot by definition.
--- Vadim Yasinovsky
The term crippleware usually applies for software which has voluntarily been cut-off in order to force the buyers to upgrade for more functionalities.
This is, of course, only if Microsoft actually intends to offer an upgrade scheme (they could just force the Windows Lite purchasers to acquire a full XP license at full cost)...
Now, after this annoucement, it becomes obvious that Microsoft is entering a new era in which they will be forced to lighten their products under the hostile eyes of the trade police...
What willfollow ?
Well, they'll have to cut costs in order to remain competitive in this regard.
I guess, something just broke in Microsoft and it's time for the new Norton-likes to come back and propose better add-ons than the ones that were forcibly integrated into Windows...
Trolling using another account since 2005.
I've never understood what's wrong with Microsoft having WMP in Windows. Any operating system should come with a decent media player, and WMP is one. I mean its not perfect, its not as stripped down as some better ones, but hey, its better than Realplayer, and why in the world would the average user want to have to download a seperate program to simply see a news broadcast? Most Linux distros come with mplayer--is that a monopoly?
I'm having a press conference tomorrow where I will announce that I will pay the speeding ticket if the court so orders. I just want to make sure they understand that going into the appeal hearing.
Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
I predict Microsoft will make it's prediction that Windows will be crippled w/o the player come true by putting something into the software that annoys the end users.
First, it's the EC and their stance that "Linux would disappear" - this makes me a bit happy, 'cause it means they'vre probably tried to understand what the fsck the case is about. On the other hand, it gives us a hint as to how much we can expect our politicians to actually understand about these matters. I really don't think, though, that it's too much to ask from an assistant to a member of the Commission to just explain that Linux is on more hardware than just Samba servers.
The other funny thing, which is absolutely hilarious, is that Microsoft's general counsel Brad Smith doesn't "know any person at Linux or any Linux programmers who share the Commission's view."
What, I know several people at Linux, they say it's a great place to work and they have a beautiful campus and stuff...
:wq!
If anything's bad, isn't it their proprietary codecs they try to push in the media industry?
I'd rather see them have the WMA/WMV codecs excluded and if a user plays such things, s/he gets directed to a Microsoft web site where they can be downloaded.
Not allowing a stupid media player just seems silly to me.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
One must admire MS for the spin of this question.
MS got everyone to babble about install-options (WMP yes/no?) instead of the real thing at stake:
Open formats e.g ISO standards or privately owned formats?
Hello, everyone, it isn't about WMP yes/no. It's about standard formats with competition or not. Did you get it now?
-- From Denmark
I'm not in Europe, but I am a Windows user. Quite simply, the windows product is all about simplifying the user experience. The system is designed so that most users can complete common, but new tasks with minimal knowledge.
In this case, users may want to view media from the internet. Without WMP, they must find a player for it. But without knowledge about what everything is, its a hassle. But boom, WMP is in the system set for default, and now all the work is done for them.
The solution is just that, a solution to interfacing users to common tasks. It does that well. But I don't see it as being unfair or bad to continually add features to the OS to continue this goal. Maybe it leads to the adoption and common use of some less then open standards.
But there is still choice. In most microsoft dominated formats, there is some form of compititon from the MS standard.
I have, and will continue, to root for Microsoft in these somewhat useless cases.
The service pack will install WMP 9 anyway...none of this matters a single bit in the end. The only way to "stop" MS is to really go after them, jihad-style.
Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
"If you won't play with my toys the way I want you to..."
Seems to sum up the Microsoft business strategy rather well.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
this is facinating me somewhat, 'cause it somehow brings up this question I seem to be unable to answer myself...
If Linux, or the OSS if you may, can't survive unless MicroSoft grants access to their documentations and specs, who in the name of sweet lord Jesus managed to pull through the Samba Project support for MS clients?
BTW:
I heard this joke on Billy once (please mind the language):
Bill Gates once bought a dutch prostitute, and screwed her as hard as he could. When they were done, she sighed and shook her head while saying: Now I know why it's called Microsoft...
Remove WMP from Windows...
Wow.
I don't suppose anyone will be surprised to find the link to the WMP download presented in bold, flashing red letters among the list of "High Priority" updates (formerly merely "optional software updates") each and every time a European user runs "Windows Update."
Legislative micromanagement of Microsoft's stack of software is futile. Gate's and crew are quietly snickering as they squeak past another round of legal nonsense with another pointless concession.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
"Microsoft has said it will remove Media Player from Window, if ordered by the EU this week."
Wow. I always thought Windows had its limitations, but apparently you can only open one window at a time with this cut-down version! Hmmm, which one to open...
More like... nerdular nerdence!
Ehm, the problem is that no OEM vendor can ship Windows without the WMP. Now tell me one reason, why a company selling computers with Windows pre-installed should not be able to sell it with their own media-player, or at least an other player if they think it's better or do have an economic interest in it?
wait a minute. i remember a couple of years ago MS applied a patent for, well, what we have known as symlinks. why can't they point the default media player to a generic place and use the symlink... err... shortcut(whatever they call it) to the actual non-msMediaplayer or to wmp? makes sense to me. oh, wait. it makes sense. sorry! nevermind!
If APPLE wants to survive in the media player market, then the morons should make available for FREE a decent program which can encode video in the Quicktime format! Quicktime Pro can supposedly do this, but I haven't been able to get it to work, and encoding in Vega Video is a chore and a half and sometimes does not work for whatever reason. And Quicktime Pro, even if it can save quicktimes, can't LOAD a lot of the AVI's I have so I can REENCODE THEM!
And RealMedia is just complete crap. Can't save the videos 90% of the time because of copyright protection. Can't encode videos. Videos won't seek properly. Can't play video in slow mo, or step through frame by frame. Utter crap.
I actually would PREFER quicktime to Windows Media playe rand encode my videos in that format if it was easy to do so. Only quicktime allows me to step through one frame at a time forward or back, and seek quickly to different parts of the file. Some media player files don't let you seek at all, and those that do only let you seek to keyframes and there's very few of those a lot of the time.
Much as I hate to admit it, Microsoft's dominance with Windows Media Player is because it's easy to encode videos for it, not because it's part of the OS, and most certainly not because it's the best product. Hell the damn thing even makes me wait while my CD spins up when I try to go to the play menu even if I'm only going there to slow down an avi I'm watching that I got from the web.
At the risk of being branded flamebait...
- Weapons of Mass Pornography
- William's Measly Protectorate
- Wily Militaristic Pretenses
- Weapons of Mass Procrastination
- Wrong, Mainly Preventable
- Wasted Money Plans
- Worthless Management Potential
and last, but by no means least:
- Really Ignorant Apelike Arseholes.
~
~
~
-- INSERT --
The company had "spent millions" so that it could meet the court's judgment, he added, suggesting that development work has already been done to offer a version of Windows in Europe without the WMP software.
Removing a media player from an OS costs MILLIONS! I feel like making a joke but this is just too ridiculous. The sad thing is probably many non-techies believe these blatant lies. And I don't care what expenses they dream up (testing, lawyers, still more lawyers, cost of diminished monopoly power), this is pure BS.
Anybody know which server software they are talking about?
Secondly, if Microsoft can fuss, whine, cry, etc, over how taking some component out is "too hard" and would cripple Windows (mind you, switching the machine on seems to do that just fine) then how are they capable of removing the media player just like that? That, in itself, should send up huge bright red warning flags that Microsoft is, and quite probably always has been, lying to the courts about how "difficult" the process of removing something is.
Third, by putting some psychological pressure on Windows developers to use the Microsoft in-house format anyway, it seems clear Microsoft is attempting to cripple any efforts to switch to other formats. Pointing to things like Apple's iTunes doesn't help the argument, as that is a very carefully-crafted niche market that nobody can step into or out of. It's not in competition with anything, and as such, cannot be listed as a competing format. DUH!
Last, but by no means least, server docs would be nice. Claiming that nobody would be interested in them and nobody has asked for them is at best disingeneous (Microsoft doesn't tend to release anything it doesn't absolutely need to, and even then it's a struggle) and at worst an outright lie (I'm willing to bet at least one WINE developer has asked to see networking and media low-level documentation, and I'm willing to bet they got refused, too).
Sorry, it's hard to feel much pity for Microsoft over this. Their entire case is built up out of mistruths, scams, shams and ignorance. (Some of the ignorance is even their own.) Until they learn to "play nice", they really should accept that it is only by the generosity of the EU and other Governments that they are allowed to play at all.
Marketing is not a right, it is a privilige. That is why, for example, in the US you have business licenses. Despite abusing that privilege, Microsoft is being told that they can carry on. With some relatively minor restrictions. IMHO, that is exceedingly generous. And given their past record, quite likely too generous.
Sooner or later, someone is going to get tough. Unless a volcano in Washington State erupts first and buries Microsoft HQ in ash*. I'd feel sorry for the innocents inside (assuming any were innocent) but it would save the world, which could be quite nice.
*Volcanos are generally compliant with UNIX98 standards, starting up into ash. However, they are known to have a buggy IPC implementation. On failing to negotiate a handshake with the surrounding geography, volcanos are apt to core-dump.
Only if by "face-to-face negotiations to tease out technological nuances" he means "coercion".
Is there a term for FUD so transparently unlikely that it causes no F, U, or D? Anti-FUD. The inverse function of FUD. RAW: Reassurance And Wellbeing.
Well, we all know better than that of course; why, just yesterday a Harvard professor jumped on the bandwagon warning that the current patent system inhibits, rather than encourages, innovation. How is Microsoft any different? When everyone knows M$ will come out on top in any battle it chooses to fight, the incentive to try to create something Redmond might want to compete against drops to zero. But if the EU succeeds in putting Microsoft in its place, that will tell a lot of software companies (and VCs!) that their products might finally have a chance of competing on their own merits.
Oh, and "privilege some special interests"? It's funny how one company can be so bad if it gets some help from the government (the criterion for "special interest"), but another company is beyond reproach if it has an advantage that everyone is already dependent on its products.
one hundred twenty
is just enough characters
to write a haiku
RealPlayer?
that they are attempting to protect/support Open Source (no matter how disillusioned they may be about Linux 'disappearing' if MS included WMP...).
I don't see any problem with allowing MS to bundle Windows Media Player. I'm sure aspects of it are used all over the place, e.g. Thumbnail previews of videos, descriptions and summaries in the properties tags. If they want to provide all this functionality they are either going to have to allow:
A) 3rd party providers to provide this information for the OS
B) To have a cut down version of media player which cannot play movies by itself but serves this info.
I'd rather have neither and I'm sure Microsoft don't want 3rd party applications providing information for their summary boxes as they might be buggy etc and cause exceptions...
Airbus don't want people to use other peoples Engines in their aircraft because Airbus don't think it is safe to do so. Is that a monopoly???
Microsoft has said it will remove Media Player from Window, if ordered by the EU this week and will bundle in a media player it calls "Yet Another Media Player" which is said to look completely different from WMP. It will have a different skin.
As far as the law is concerned, the competition between open and closed formats is irrelevant. The only thing that matters to the competition authority is that the competition between media player vendors is not biased in favour of the desktop OS monopoly. The obvious justification of the law is that stronger competition results in better products for the consumers (and the OEMs that package the computer software for consumers). Where are all the resident advocates of the power of the invisible hand now?
Uh, why should you be able to sell a computer with whatever crap you want on it? Windows is not yours to change.
And let's face it. When vendors have tried to 'customize' Windows or add their own tools to it, it has always sucked. Ever tried using a brand new Packard Bell or Dell? You always end up with a ton of crap installed that takes up about twenty icons in the tray. In the worst scenario, you end up with some horrendously lame media player or no-name virus scanner written by a drunk Chinese five year old embedded into your computer. Vendor customizations suck!
The proposed EU remedy is foolish because it does not address the heart of the problem, namely, that Microsoft is using their Windows monopoly to enter related markets (in this case media distribution via WMP software and the WMV format). Dropping WMP from Windows in Europe won't hinder Microsoft from entering those markets worldwide. And most people in Europe will download WMP anyway since it will be free and most video content will require its use due to the prevalance of the WMV format. The only effective remedy is to require Microsoft to open source the WMV format (and possibly the WMV player as well) so that the user's choice of operating system is completely independent of their choice of media player/format.
The job of the computer and OS combo is simply to operate on and then render data to the user. The data might be Nigerian currency speculation, or it might be midget clown porn, or just a simple list of recipies in appleworks. But when you've got certain kinds of data, HTML, common video formats, text files, that are so common they are literally everywhere, it makes a lot of sense to build the ability to render that to a user into the OS. Nearly all users must have, and will certainly expect that functionality, save them the obvious step.
Then there is the unreasonableness of the European argument. Microsoft can't give certain functionality away to customers who a majority, certainly here, would consider to be overcharged, and which functionality it can and can't give away is completely arbitrary? Why shouldn't they be sued for giving away Wordpad, and notepad, or even including a textbox such as the one I'm typing in as a standard feature of the OS? (Don't shit the bet, I'm using Redhat) Once more, why can't microsoft give their media player away for free, but MPlayer can? And if it's just a matter of the free labor of installing (which is truly insignificant in windows) how come Mandrake can include Mplayer in their distribution (where the labor saved is more significant)?
The fact of the matter is it's for the customer to decide what should and should not come with an OS. IE, Outlook Express, Wordpad, maybe Media Player: Yes. Windows MovieMaker, or whatever it was called: No. It's not for a board of protectionist bureaucrats who think that customers are cheated if they're not forced to go some player vendor and click on "download now" before they can watch Paris Hilton having sex through the filter of "Inside the Kill Box."
Ehm, if the vendor fscks up the computer people don't buy it. It's that simple and it's called capitalism. So your argument doesn't hold any water.
And preciesly why shouldn't a vendor be allowed to ship windows with a different media player again? He isn't changing the foundation of the OS, he just wants to ship a different media player, that's all.
"But Linux is alive and well and I don't know any person at Linux or any Linux programmers who share the Commission's view."'"
;-) or a programmer, but I AM responsible for switching our companies main old crappy (SCO) machines to Redhat. I use Linux since uhm, the Minix days.
.net and JAVA software is lacking (Mono is not nearly complete, and is exactly fighting this catch-up game, JAVA is a nifty SUN Trap) and MS file formats could potentially be 100% closed in a single update (Yes MS DOES hold your DATA ransom) Managers will always take the save route. Or at the very best, change will happen very very slowly.
Well, I do. Granted, Im no "person at Linux" (WTF? does FSF member count?
-Without- access to documented API's, compatibility battles are always going to be a "catch-up" game.
Meaning MS can leveradge its closed fileformats and closed API's to keep a lock on its customers.
Even the much applauded SAMBA (Love it, love it) is mostly reversed engeneered, and often has to deal with changed Windows OS behaviour between releases and SP's.
To get out of this deadlock, people can either massively switch away from MS (unlikely, but possible) or have MS open up its secrets, and level the playing ground. Only THEN can Linux and MS compete on the one level that mnatters: "innovation".
No matter how good Gnome and KDE have gotten, if the
"/Dread"
Even if the documentation is written as well as their sw :)
Think about samba.
M.
"I'd like to see Internet Explorer gone, but it's too well embedded."
Uh, no, it's not. Take a look here: http://www.litepc.com/
Many people seem to be saying, "Gosh! Removing WMP from Windows seems so harsh! This is silly!", or words to that effect.
If Microsoft wants everybody to stream using its media formats, it will want to ensure that Windows Media Player is installed on as many computers as possible. Obviously.
The point here is that Microsoft owns Windows. Microsoft adds to Windows what it desires, and what is most beneficial to Microsoft itself. People usually use what comes installed with the operating system (IE, WMP), and once you're used to one thing you're less likely to switch (as we've seen with Internet Explorer).
Microsoft gains an unfair advantage by doing this, and there is very little competition at this level.
Microsoft finds it attrocious that people have suggested adding Real Player (and other competing apps) to Windows. Microsoft knows that doing this would take away its advantage - if it didn't, why would there be such a big issue? Ok, Microsoft may say that it would cause users more hassle by having to download WMP; but, Microsoft has also said that it doesn't understand the fuss about bundling WMP, people can still download and install Real Player easily enough. Well, in that case, why not remove WMP and let people choose what they want to install?
I expect that if WMP was removed, Microsoft would add a pop-up window as soon as you run Windows for the first time, asking you to download and install it.
The same cannot be said of Open Source apps on a Linux DISTRIBUTION. Linux is not manufactured by one company, other companies create distributions that contain various competing apps.
If Microsoft open-sourced its file formats, and ensured that it would not use any patents surrounding them to limit their use in any way, this would certainly help things.
If Microsoft got other companies to create Windows distributions in the same way as with Linux, this would also help.
Software choice?
Linux/Open Source/Anti Microsoft News
This will harm what I'm doing. I would like very much to rely on WMP being installed. If I can't do this, it means I'll have to tell people to install it, and that means fewer people will use my products. Ironically they involve making your own media player using the media technologies in WMP as a base, so it's actually stifling competition. :-)
"Media player" is a generic term, the real name for this product is "Windows Media Player". In this case, something like "Microsoft has said it will remove its media player" would make more sense.
What, Microsoft will refuse to remove WMP if ordered next week?
There's no such thing as "Windows-lite". This term has been used previously to mean Windows XP Starter Edition, which is a whole different product than simply "Windows XP without WMP".
Was it the article that refused to release networking documentation? Don't you mean Microsoft refused?
Smith? Smith who?
"at Linux"? Linux isn't a company, a place, or an organization. You can't be "at Linux". Though this is an error of the person quoted and not the submittor, it's silly to let such a stupid error into the submission, and pointless, except for the purpose of ridiculing "Smith".
I wish Slashdot's editors would do some actual editing of submissions before they let them onto the front page.
Quality, performance, value; you get only two, and you don't always get to pick.
"Windows Sans WMP"? Is that some new font? A replacement for "MS Comic Sans"?
Reminds me, I must go delete Comic Sans from the secretaries' machines, since they don't write comics. Well, departmental meeting minutes are close...
SMB has actually been documented by MS.
From The future of CIFS by Jelmer Vernooij of the Samba team:
2.2 The NFS/CIFS marketing war
During the internet hype in the nineties, Sun and Microsoft got in a fight about which remote file system API was going to make it. Sun was promoting NFS, Microsoft was promoting SMB.
In order to get SMB supported by other vendors, Microsoft did a couple of things:
Samba even got donations from Microsoft during this period, including funding for trips to conferences and MSDN donations. Microsoft developers were encouraged to work with Samba developers to get a working implementation of a SMB server and client on Unix.
Microsoft won the war. CIFS became the standard (for LANs, at least). After this, they lost interest in having other vendors support CIFS. Rather, they tried to get everybody to use their products.
I guess that explains why you can't buy a Dell these days without the Dell Media Experience software.
"Most Linux distros come with mplayer--is that a monopoly?"
No, for the primary reason that Linux has less than 1% of the desktop market. On the other hand, MS has been ruled a monopoly by the US government and thus is subject to different rules.
I assume you know all this and are just trolling, right?
"Me either." ?!!
You may want to consider the following alternatives to your notundoubleplusgood construction:
"Nor I."
"Neither of us understood it."
"I didn't understand it either."
"Me too."
"the windows product is all about simplifying the user experience."
Wow. Based on my experience, its about selling mediocrity.
Which I guess satisfies some people.
... for Microsoft.
Come to think of it, can it really get any slower, or are they confusing technical progress with market dominance?
Speaking of Windows, the other day I installed win2k on a PC as I needed to use some Windows software, and then set out to mount the NFS export from my Linux system, only to find that Windows does not support NFS.
I then went and searched the web for a free NFS client for Windows, but I can find only servers, and a client for win9x. Does anyone know of a free (beer is good enough) client that lets me mount NFS (or FTP, SSH or HTTP) directories as if they were drives on win2k? If not, I guess I could install Samba, but I am not that happy to run yet another service...
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Microsoft will ship Windows without WMP, it won't also ship any codecs or any way to download them unless you install WMP.
:)
So essentially you'd be shafted if you wanted to use any other media player to view WMP files, until youve downloaded and instaleld WMP
You want "Windows-Lite" ? just install XP Lite and remove any windows component you don't like.
MS takes WinXP Professional SP2, uses XPLite 1.3 to do a PowerStrip then they sell the result at the price of Starter Edition.
Brrrriiiing... the alarm clock rings... well... back to reality.
The same rules don't apply to Linux and Microsoft, because of the difference in market share.
Two words:
Use fluendo.
If I'd be a windows user today, having or not having some particular media player would be the last of my concerns. I'd be more interested in removing more...eh, dangerous... uh, features.
There you are, staring at me again.
Toyota includes tires on all their new cars! My own brand of tire has no chance to compete! Make them stop!
No, it really wouldn't. I'd bet that your average PC user doesn't appreciate the issues with IE. Many probably don't even know what a "browser" is, they just know to click this button for "the Internet" (not to be confused with e-mail).
Choice is not always a good thing. For average people without the time or inclination to learn the finer points of a subject, a single "good enough" option is often better than a choice. For people who do have the inclination to learn more, the choice is always there anyway, as the fact that I'm typing this in Firefox testifies.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
"We are ready to restart negotiations with the Commission. We have always said people have issues that need to be addressed through face-to-face negotiations to tease out the technological nuances. We remain committed to that," Smith said. Notice it was just a Microsoft guy saying that the comission said that and not the actual comission. I want the name of the comission person who said that. This is pure fud for the uninformed. they still have to get their jabs in even though they have their tails between their legs. why can't they just comply and shut up and quit saying who said what and just stick to the case. I am so sick of their fud machine
Well, herring, eggs, sausage, and herring. It's got not much herring in it.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Thank you for installing Microsoft Windows XP (EU Edition).
Windows is now checking Microsoft's website for updates and new features.........
New Features Available! Please choose what you want to download:
1. Windows Media Player. This is required if you want to play MP3s, watch videos or DVDs.
As the original writer of the submission you so eloquently call "shitty," I felt the need to respond a bit.
You did read the article, didn't you?
I wish people would read the article and think about it before posting (flaming). Then again, I'm starting to be kind of old around here.
But Linux is alive and well and I don't know any person at Linux
I'm sure they imagine a giant L-shaped building somewhere in Helsinki, where foreign-speaking communists plot to find new ways to pirate MP3s.
Considering they've said, on many occasions that removal of WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER (see? redundant) is impossible, it's interesting to note that they will remove it.
I don't find it interesting at all. What other option they would have? Stop selling Windows in Europe. Do you think they even considered it?
Where is this "Linux" place? Is it like Disneyland? Can I take the kid and the dogs and hang out?
If I remember correctly, wasn't SAMBA created w/o documentation? I thought I remember reading that it was developed "by the wire", ie. using a protocol monitor precisely because there weren't any docs on MS networking protocols? I can't find the link, or I would post it....
Microsoft will not have an OS that support the demands of Disney, etc...
Disney, etc... wants to have an OS that will support any DRM tool possible to ensure their IP.
MIcrosoft can't give it any more to them in Europe, so you MUST install this "upgrade" to ensure Microsoft's agreement with Disney.
It's only money nothing more, no politics, etc.... just your hard earned money what they want to control.
If Microsoft release accurate documentation, it will both handicap their efforts to lock people out and dilute their ability to turn everything they touch into an "IP" black hole.
That latter is kind of a Midas touch, short term spectacular but sooner or later everything's turned to pyrites and then Midas starves in a cold hard house full of statues.
This attitude toward full and accurate publication is true for some things already; but when Shorthorn gets its WinFS and a few more bells and whistles the absence of documentation would be crippling for any competitors hoping to get a toehold in markets currently 0wn3rz3d by Bill "your computer is My Computer" Gates - if, by that time, there still are any. The Linux revolution appears to be snowballing at an unprecedented rate right now.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Maybe it shouldn't be a free download then, but they should be demanded to ask a fair price which resembles the cost of making WMP. Also, no special OEM deals should be allowed, so OEM's and consumers are "forced" to choose with price and quality in mind, instead of blindly going for the MS option.
Well, don't worry about that. We can get you back before you leave. (Dr. Who)
What about "Neither do I?"
The EC ruling is just plain stupid. It will have no real effect on MS's apparent monopoly. Even if MS had to put other players on the OS, that would not change much. All it really does is annoy and inconvienence MS.
This will have a very insignificant impact on the acceptance of Linux by consumers or increase Ma sales.
i would rather have windows come with WMP than not. I will install it anyways as there is a significant amount of content available in only WMF. For content that it available in only WMF and Real format, i would much rather install WMP than Real (It has a much better install experience).
Wait a second... are you saying that MS should be forced to charge and Linux distributors should not be? And before you say "yes, because MS is a monopoly", stop and think about it. Microsoft became a monopoly, in part, because of the hidden charge of MS software (eg, OEM bundling deals) which made the software seem "free" to consumers. The companies that distribute Linux also allow for free distribution of their product. How, exactly, is this different?
I can tell you why it is different: MS, love them or hate them, was able to convince OEMs that paying for Windows licenses was in their best interest. This is called "business". While MS most definitely used some underhanded and ethically (and legally) questionable tactics, they still succeeded in having massive market penetration.
Secondly, while I don't know you or your beliefs on the "freedom" of software, it does strike me as odd that someone on /. is advocating the forced charging for a piece of software. Isn't software supposed to be free like the birds? Or, if you do have to pay for it, can you not at the very least download the source code and immediately create your competing product, if you are so inclined?
I guess the whole concept of a monopoly to me is absurd. In a free, open market people are able to choose which product they want to buy. This applies to the OEMs as much as to the home consumer. It's not about stopping a behemoth like Microsoft, it's about creating a compelling product, marketing said product to the consumers, and ultimately taking a leading market position... not bitching and complaining that your competitor is cheating. If Netscape had put 1/2 as much effort into creating a compelling product as they did into litigation and bickering with MS, we might not be seeing server logs with 95% Internet Explorer.
So please explain to me why you corrected your parent post's use of a statement agreeing with a negative ("Me, either") with a construction designed to agree with a postive ("Me, too") You apparently know nothing of which you speak. Educate yourself before you bother giving correction to someone who needs none.
Put identity in the browser.
- Microsoft uses WMP as a tool to push the Windows Media format at the expense of the all the others, they are dreaming of a monopoly in this area.
- WMP is spyware. It sends too much information back to Microsoft to my taste. What I'm listening or viewing is none of Microsoft business.
No, what I really would like to see, is Windows coming with a selection of browsers
I'm coming to believe that flavors of Windows will be offered like this. You'll have AOL/Windows, MSN/Windows, Corporate/Windows, HPConsumer/Windows, ThirdWorld/Windows, etc.
"Windows" is regarded as an essential commodity ingredient, just like a CPU. The price will be capped, MS will be paid something, but the brand will have lost all meaning and any cachet.
The situation will be like VISA cards that come from different banks. A "VISA card" doesn't mean anything but "credit card" to anyone. Fringe players like Mastercard, Discover, AMEX, and Diners Club play like yipping dogs around that behemoth - no serious competition exists and the transaction fees are non-negotiable.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Kinda like MSN-messenger. Trying to remove that crap is hell-on-earth(tm) as well.
I more or less did all that stuff you mentioned + thourough registry disection. In addition I replaced all the executables with dummy-files (rundll32.exe), just for the sake of apperance.
Didn't help one bit. A quick visit to www.hotmail.com with MSIE, and wow, magically MSN-messenger is up and running again.
I bet the Windows-core has all these "services", including fronends, embedded, and any attempt to remove the executables will be overridden by with LOCAL-SYSTEM authority, unless Windows is fooled to believe the genuine files are still there.
Someone please inform me how this is done...
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
Microsoft will offer both versions, and OEMs will probably just take the version with media player attached, since otherwise they'd have to research other players to bundle instead and that's probably a lot more effort than they want to put in.
In this day and age, a PC vendor can hardly sell a PC without the ability to play music and video. That is can be added later is irrelevant to the masses who are used to just double-clicking the icon for some track in explorer and having it start playing in a program that doesn't even appear to have a name if you're running it in Skin Mode. It's just "the music thingy".
What made you think it was a good idea to put an apostrophe in "Gates", by the way?
Oops... I misread "Microsoft business strategy" as "Microsoft business tragedy" Man, I need to go home... it's five o'clock anyways.
The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.
Maybe, after finally figuring out "the modularity thing", they'll be able to make the next version of Windows Server without WMP too.
[...] it does strike me as odd that someone on /. is advocating the forced charging for a piece of software. Isn't software supposed to be free like the birds?
Yes, but a WMP that's free as in beer isn't free at all. It's more a Lock-in strategy, like Internet Explorer was a lock-in strategy. Btw, if Netscape 5 had come out, and was a good product, Microsoft still made it impossible to charge for it (like Netscape used to charge for commercial use). The hidden cost of Internet Explorer (free with Windows, so they did charge for it) made it hard or impossible to compete.
That Netscape has sucked with version 4, and there was no version 5, doesn't give an excuse for Microsoft's behaviour, those are 2 different issues, which together led to the current situation.
That's the same as it is now, people should make quality competing products, and the monopoly abuse of Microsoft should be restricted. It's not one or the other, it should be both.
I don't understand the first part of your post though... You don't agree with Microsoft having to ask a fair price for their software, thus being less able to abuse their monopoly to build up other monopolies? You think abusing their monopoly is fine, and competitors should just make a better product, and all will be well?
The market is broken now, and absolutely not free. The first priority the EU should have in this case is to have a free market again. Making WMP unfree as in beer would help that case.
Well, don't worry about that. We can get you back before you leave. (Dr. Who)
...BSD, on the other hand, is dying.
With WMP off of Windows, manufacturers are free to put whatever media player they want on their computers, if they want a media player at all. Those will go great along side those "Internet Access for Only $9.95" links.
I'm going to go create my own technology news site, with blackjack and hookers. You know what? Forget the news site.
Who in God's name moderated this drivel as insightful?
The fact of the matter is that you could remove zlib from the operating systems and many versions of Linux for embedded devices do just that. And a library that runs a top and separately from the opearting system is very different from a media application that you cannot remove cleanly.
There are no sound programming decisions for the way WMP is embedded and interwoven into Microsoft. It is the tried-and-tested strategy of leveraging your monopoly position as an operating system provider to gain against your competitors in unrelated markets.
Quicktime for Windows? Euuuurgh!
There comes a point when you must face reality, and if you do not do so, then the consequences are your fault. Everyone at Microsoft should, by now, have a reasonable expectation that some government is going to fiddle with things. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying they should know it's coming. So maybe they ought to start designing things better (since unfortunately, market forces haven't required them to).
People are saying that taking WMP out of Windows "cripples" it and that every OS should come with a media player of some kind. But that's bullshit. AmigaOS (and later, BeOS) showed the right way to handle this, many years ago (though AmigaOs didn't take the concept very far before the Commodore death-throes..).
Instead of WMP's codec-implementing backend being an integral part of the system, it should just be an "Datatype" API that is integral. Then their codecs could just be module that plugs into this.
If they implemented it this way, then not only would removing WMP be a relatively easy thing to do that would not cripple the system, but it probably also would have pre-empted them ever being ordered to remove it in the first place. And really the same architectural issue goes with their web browser. If it's really so tightly integrated, then it's badly designed.
I wonder if any designers at Microsoft are going to wake up to this reality, and start handling this sort of thing correctly. It would save them a lot of trouble in the courts. Oh.. that's right, now I remember: if they had such modular designs, then the components would be open to competition. Can't have that!
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
"Microsoft has said it will remove Media Player from Window, if ordered by the EU this week. The 'Windows-Lite' version will only be available in Europe. Best quote from the article involves its refusal to release networking documentation: '"The Commission says Linux would disappear" if Microsoft did not grant access to its documentation, Smith claimed. "But Linux is alive and well and I don't know any person at Linux or any Linux programmers who share the Commission's view."'"
... " Who's refusal? WHO? Microsoft or the EU?
..." Where's that then? Linux Corp., Linux City, Linuxland perhaps? Don't substantiate badly cited references.
Did everyone else find this headline really easy to read? Or is it just written really badly?
First off, "it's refusal to release
Secondly, "if Microsoft did not grant access to its documentation, Smith claimed." SMITH WHO? Smith and Wesson?
"I don't know anyone at Linux
Gaah. MODS?
"It's not your information. It's information about you" - John Ford, Vice President, Equifax
The other thing MS should be forced to do is charge more for the IE + WMP version. They are obviously subsidised. A convicted monopoly should not be allowed to subsidise an extension of their monopolistic control over such an important market.
True, WiMP can play any .avi file on a PC where the appropriate DirectShow codecs are already installed, but how can codec developers register their DirectShow codecs with Microsoft such that Windows Media Player will download them based on the codec IDs in each .avi file in the same way that it automatically downloads those DirectShow codecs produced by Microsoft? And how can format developers register their wrapper layers (ogg, matroska, mov, etc) with Microsoft?
I read somewhere a few nights ago that in Russia WindowsXP-lite can only run 3 applications and could not network. Mainly they plan to sell the version to poor countries like Russia and Hungary.
Wow, that is real usefull.
As usual my guess is Microsoft will follow the letter but not spirit of the law and offer a version of Windows so crippled that no European OEM will sell it.
http://saveie6.com/
The "Me, too", in response to "I didn't understand it", reads as "I, also, didn't understand it".
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
There can't be anyone left that is stupid enough to run a shitty, insecure, troublesome OS like MS Windows.
Oh well, when you get owned by a script kiddie, or you end up crippled by the latest virus/trojan/worm, it's your own fault for running Monkeysoft shitware.
Everyone on slashdot "believes" in OSS. They want it to succeed b/c they work on it, hate MS or a million other reasons. Gov'ts and Corps just want to know what it will do for them. If it gets them out from underneath a predatory monopolist - fantastic! If it improves security, gives them greater flexibility and gives them leverage in negotiating other platforms - isn't that enough?
/. thinking that they have the best understanding of everything. Like this guy above - who says all gov't officials need to understand how software is developed. Give me a break. Govt's buy cars, insurance, build schools and develop economic systems without knowing the full extent of each and every item. And to demand that the gov't act otherwise is foolish and quite frnakly patronizing.
Using it b/c its nonwindows is enough.
I'm sick and tired of all the folks on
People shouldn't buy software if they don't know how its made? Then I guess computers should be sold to the three guys in San Fran who build and code their entire computer from scratch. Grow up and call me when you get a life and understand what other people's lives are like.
WMP? What's that? Is it anything like MPlayer or Totem?
With apologies to Ralph Wiggum.
creation science book
... business practices. They lie, cheat, and steal to get ahead. Plain and simple. Which is why I run Linux and help as many people (270 and counting) as possible switch to Linux from MS Windows.
Windows is simply garbage and anyone with any intelligence knows it.
"price" and "quality"... in the same sentence as "MS"?!
If you wanted price and quality, you'd run Linux.
$ftp ftp.mozilla.org /pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/0.9rc/
Connected to ftp.mozilla.org.
220 "Blah Blah Mozilla Mirror"
Name (ftp.mozilla.org:(name)): anonymous
331 Please specify the password.
Password:
230 Login successful.
Remote system type is UNIX.
Using binary mode to transfer files.
ftp> cd
ftp> get FirefoxSetup-0.9rc.exe
ftp> bye
Well, it's grammatically wrong. You should use use "I didn't understand it, either" or "Me, either." When agreeing with a negative, use either, not too.
Put identity in the browser.
But still, even if a DSP is fast enough to decode Vorbis, the standard argument is that it'll probably use fewer cycles and thus less current to decode MP3.
OEMs will probably just take the version with media player attached, since otherwise they'd have to research other players to bundle instead and that's probably a lot more effort than they want to put in.
Or the OEM will choose between RealPlayer and QuickTime based on whether RealPlayer Music Store or iTunes Music Store wants to pay more to get new customers.
but apparently you can only open one window at a time with this cut-down version!
I thought Microsoft was selling Windows XP Starter Edition only in poor eastern countries.
Linux isn't a company, a place, or an organization.
Linux is a kernel. OSDL has the best claim of being "the Linux company".
FTP.
SSH.
RCP.
Which could be eye-candied, but making the clear point that IE is a different product and that you have to make a decission to install it (implying there may be other options).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
When agreeing with a negative, use either, not too.
Wouldn't that be neither?
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
"I do, too."
"I don't, either."
"Me, too."
"Me, either."
"So do I."
"Neither do I."
Neither is OK, but the complement of so, not too.
Put identity in the browser.
I remeber a few years ago in Microsoft's Antitrust lawsuit they stated that they could not remove Internet Explorer and other things as it would make the OS unstable as they were built-in.
Now they are offereing XP Embedded and stripped down versions to other countries.
This sounds like perjury to me. They lied to the courts becasue they are doing exactly what they said was impossable. I just don't get it.
I am a IE to Firefox convert (back in the day I was a Netscape to IE convert) but I wish I could remove or totally disable IE. I would love to type in a URL in a window and have it launch Firefox instead of becoming IE and viewing the page that way.