Slashdot Mirror
Software Piracy Due to Expensive Hardware, Says Ballmer
frdmfghtr writes "ZDNet is running a story where Steve Ballmer tries to pin the blame of software copyright infringement on expensive hardware: 'One way to stem piracy is to offer consumers in emerging countries a low-cost PC, Ballmer said. "There has to be...a $100 computer to go down-market in some of these countries. We have to engineer (PCs) to be lighter and cheaper," he said.' Does he think that cheaper hardware will make copying software harder to do?"
When Google integrates an OS as their service. Imagine that one-day a Google like service where you turn on your computer and it connects to Google without any local OS (other than a BIOS and hopefully the BIOS is the Open Source one). Your files, settings and information are stored on the service. Sure you could have USB drives locally to store private info if you desire. But I wonder what Mr. Ballmer would say to that lowest of low price cheap hardware? You could take the money that would have been spent on the OS and allocate that to help pay for the service. At $100/12 = $8 a month; even at $300/12 = $25 per month - not bad having a use anywhere service whereby you don't have to maintain the OS or the Hardware.
"Did you hear that Bob? Err, I mean, 'Blue Beard'?" (which is NOT a good pirate name!)
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
He's really grasping at straws, isn't he? Anecdotal evidence suggests the exact opposite. When the price of hardware goes down, the market generally demands that software costs go down as well. That's why there's so much griping about Windows being large chunk of computer costs these days. I've even heard people use that as justification for pirating software! ("My computer only cost $500, so why should I pay Microsoft $250 for Windows?")
In addition, many people seem to be particularly upset that they're forced to pay Microsoft enormous sums again, and again, even if they don't want to. In other words, people feel like they've already payed Microsoft their dues, so why should they pay it all over again? This has the effect of delaying upgrades until new computers are purchased, with businesses being the primary exception.
Because of Microsoft's stranglehold on the market, they are able to rope companies into upgrade contracts that extort payment for new versions. Under these contracts, failure to upgrade results in higher costs for later upgrades. So much higher that it makes more sense to upgrade now rather than later. Could any other company pull these sorts of strong-arm tactics? Of course not! In any other business, you'd find a competitor and switch to them (or at least use it as a negotiation tactic).
Let's hope that the rise of Mac OS X, Linux, Novell, and Sun as desktop competitors will finally provide a viable choice for both home and business.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
...and crime will go down.
OK, give me a $100 computer, but I'll still refuse to pay for Micro$oft crap on my computer!
It's absolutely amazing that the head of one the biggest corporations can publcily say something so totally and utterly stupid.
In other news, it was announced that speeding was primarily due to long roads. Starting next year, all roads will be shortened by 10% and this should achieve a 10% slowdown in highway speeds.
Agile Artisans
Yeah, software piracy is completely due to expensive hardwre. It has nothing whatsoever to do with overprices software. How can we have cheap PC's when the OS costs 25% + of the purcahse price of the PC?
-Arthur
Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
Further proof, if any were needed that Ballmer's grip on reality is becoming yet more tenuous.
Linux / OSS will not bring M$ down, it's already happening internally.
When you can buy a pretty good OS-less computer at Walmart.com for around $250us, that's pretty good. No, BALDmer, we need cheaper software.
So I buy a $100 PC, but then need $700 for an OS and desktop suite (WP, spreadsheet, et. al)? Steve, put down the pipe, you've been hanging out with Darl too long.
Or is this a sinister MS plot to get people hooked on cheap PCs, then use a subscription $9.95 a month model to 'rent' the software?
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Isn't the problem expensive software?
He's just been seeing too many politicians making absurd claims on television lately, and thought he ought to get in on it too.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
PCs are cheap here. You can get an entry level PC for less than $500. Still there's piracy.
Look at the Palm or mobile phones. Cheap cheap cheap. Still there's piracy.... and a lot of those programs only cost $5.
The cost of hardware and software have nothing to do with it. If there's a way to get a "free copy", some people will always go that route.
Companies that make hardware shouldn't be allowed to make a decent profit. Microsoft should be allowed to continue to extort as much profit as possible.
Maybe it's because cheap hardware doesn't meet the requirements for anything worth pirating?
Another reason pirating happens is often the price of the software itself- how will cheaper hardware affect software prices?
Maybe the reason for piracy is that the software itself is expensive. Duh...
Um I have the feeling if a computer cost 10$ in 3rd world countries people would still steal software cause ITS THE PART THAT IS TOO BLOODY EXPENSIVE for their economy.
hundreds of dollars for office, photoshop, windows, ect. (Yes I know there are alternatives, but many people do not know about OpenOffice, Gimp, and Linux.)
Does he think that cheaper hardware will make copying software harder to do?
lets hope so?
Offer them excellent open source software for free. This way they won't even be tempted to pirate the stuff.
This way to the egress...
MS's problems aren't because they don't understand security, or customer satisfaction, or that monopolies are held to a different standard..
It's because the people in charge live in a different universe!
You have something with almost zero marginal cost, and mark-up measured in thousands of percent, and he thinks the problem is because the *hardware* (which has a large marginal cost, and has mark-up measured in the single-digit percentages) is too expensive?
Sweet Jebus, software is pirated in third world nations because the software is too expensive.
I wonder what color the sky is in his world?
A Windows license is atleast half of that, or slightly less in case of the XP Starter Edition. But we're not going to see that in alot of countries.
Either way, it doesn't leave alot on the hardware side of things.
At the moment, Windows XP costs as much as a CPU.
I guess if the overall computer got cheaper, Microsoft could jack up the prices for Windows and nobody would notice a huge price change.
Well, considering Microsoft is looking at a bleak future in the PC operating systems market, this may be their only hope. A sign of desperation perhaps?
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
If you look for something that is old enough. Oh, but they won't run his bloatware :-| I guess that he is still wanting to sell M$ software, not use them with Linux.
So he is talking a $100.00 PC with a $200.00 OS and $500.00 office suite? How is this going to cut down on piracy?
I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?
I'm sorry, but less than 24 hours after a story here discussed the pirate industry in Russia, and made the point that the average monthly wage is $240, and some software licences cost $600, comes this?
Please. Cheaper hardware is going to exacerbate the situation by providing even more poor people with the desire for new software that the can't affoard. The only solution is to take computers from poor people. I'm joking, but I hope you can see my point...
He may look like Young Frankenstein, and dance like Elaine Benes, but the man is a shrewed business shark. Either what he says is true, or more likely it is a "FUD" plan by Microsoft to achieve some sort of effect that we are not discussing here. From my point of view, however, his statement makes no sense at all.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
A $149 PS2 didn't stop GTA: San Andreas from being pirated.
It's a sport for the crackers, often easier than buying for the consumers and always cheaper. So how is paying for software to compete with getting it for free and without leaving the house?
(And I maintain that Office is their most popular app because, as we all know, IE isn't an app - it's part of the OS. *cough*)
Send your friends messages of love at fuck-you.org
I seem to title every response to a Ballmer quote this way. Now he want cheaper hardware. Will microsoft also follow suit? He just wants hardware costs to come down so he can get into emerging markets AND keep his profits. I have absolutely no problem with profits. But this just shows how MS uses sideways tactic to get them. In a time when the tech industry is realizing the high TCO of the redmond giant, what do they do? Try to get the hardware makers to lower their costs. Someone really has to tell the emperor about his clothes.
My
Fact: my Athlon 2400 PC (a whole bundle of difficult-to-fabricate components) costs less than Microsoft Office Pro (a few easily duplicated CDs), and Steve tells me its the hardware thats overpriced. Sure Steve. Whatever.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
What mr. "You can run a clock AND a calculator at the SAME TIME with Windows 1.0!" here is basically saying, that out of the pie that is the money paid for a new computer, software vendors (Microsoft) should get a bigger piece (than the people who actually make the computer itself). They want the price of computer hardware to go down so it'll be easier for them to shove their malfunctioning OS down everyone's throat. No siree bob. I paid good money for a powerful, reliable set of electronics components. Software is the instruction manual for them to work. Instruction manuals should be Free. Go OSS!
If it weren't for fog, the world would run at a really crappy framerate.
Will make copying software harder to do?
No, he thinks he can starve the hardware companies, and take all of that $100 himself, which is more than Microsoft would have gotten out of thirdworlder anyway. Not to mention he'll then have software lockin, when in 50 years the third world is better industrialized and those people have more money to spend (and the police state to enforce infringement).
The main reason people aren't paying for software because hardware's too expensive? WTF?
"Dave, I stand still--the conclusions jump to me!" - Bill McNeal, NewsRadio
After RTFA he talks about how pc's need to be under $100, he talks about how they need to do this in contries such as India where there are 5x as many hotmail accounts than PC largly do to internet cafe's.
He's not talking about piracy at all, He wants more money by having everyone in these countries buying a PC. Think of how much miney they are losing because many people use 1 pc. Piracy my arse. He's trying to make more money.
500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
.... about the X-Box.
It's very inexpensive, and as far as I know, it's the most hacked system out there.
First of all, the writer of the article should be ashamed. This article makes no sense.
Second of all, if Ballmer said these things, HE should be ashamed. His quotes make no sense. "Integrated Innovation?" Even your own employees don't know WTF it means?! Come on!
Companies have been talking about making computers "simpler, easier, more productive" since Shockley "invented" the transistor.
Don't waste your time, move on.
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
> When you can buy a pretty good OS-less computer at Walmart.com for around $250us, that's pretty good.
Yes, but when the computers get down to $-500US, they can be sold with lots of bundled software for $250US, and nobody will need to steal anymore.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
The software price is something else. Why the hell shall someone pay lots of $$$$ for a piece of software that can be copied easily. Especially since he has to pay, but the producer of the software product refuses to be liable for any problems that result in using this thing. So people see that they are just there to pay and to increase the profits of the software company.
Cheaper PCs won't solve this problem. And I know that its much more difficult to lower the hardware price because the margin in hardware is just a few percent for every unit sold. The big profit seems to be in software... deliver something that doesn't work, charge the user like hell and then refuse to make it work.
And BTW: Its not a problem at all since there is a lot of free open source software availabe for everyone. So all what Microsoft is going for is to lower the price of (PC+Software) without losing their profits.
What the fuck is this guy talking about? Does he just pick random words from a dictionary and say them hoping to form a sentence in the process?
By the way, a press release has been posted on Microsoft's website today. It turns out that the reason for so many new Windows XP security flaws is because footballs aren't fuzzy.
I just have to ask -- if you're getting the hardware for $100, are you going to shell out $300 for software?
I don't remember there being so many complaints about software piracy when it was $3-4k for the hardware, and maybe $20-50 for most software.
All that you're going to have is more people who can afford the hardware, but can't afford the software on top of it... and more piracy as a result.
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that many people consider downloading from the internet or talking a friend into burning a copy much easier than shelling out however much the program costs.
Even more, will making cheaper computers bring down the ridiculous price tag of some applications?
A high price tag in software most certainly does not justify piracy, but it certainly helps to facilitate it.
____________________________
What did the Buddhist say to the hot dog vendor?
"Make me one with everything."
If people can get ahold of cheaper hardware, then good for them. That isn't going to make them more willing to pay full price for software.
Some people will always want to get shit for free. Inexpensive hardware doesn't make that $125 OS any cheaper, let alone free.
Socialism: A feeling of discontent and resentment caused by a desire for the possessions or qualities of another.
No, but it will allow Microsoft to penetrate these markets even deeper by providing those $100.00 PCs with a slimmed-down version of the Windows operating system, of course. (Granted, those $100.00 PCs will also be used to run Linux, if they get to be that cheap, which furthers Microsoft's own assertion that Linux on PCs allow people to pirate Windows).
It also falls in line with their previously-stated goals to populate third-world countries with these PCs as well. Those countries can't afford it in their budgets, but if you make the cost of the PC $100.00 or "near-free", at some level, you can get more copies of Microsoft Windows into more people's hands.
--
Support Plucker, buy some gear!
I have no problem spending money on computer hardware, but I balk at spending anything on software. More than half of the time it does not work the way would like so I get rid of it, and for that reason alone I refuse to pay for it. On the flipside of that arguement though, when I find something that I really do like I will buy it, even though I have a cracked copy.
If the software industry wants to put an end to piracy, maybe they could try putting out software that doesn't suck rocks once in a while. Although I know this would be tough for M$ to stomach, there are a lot of companies hat are coiming relatively close and just need to push quality to the last step to be respected and trusted.
Like arts? Like cheesy little Indie mags? Check out www.artwerkmag.com, and don't laugh at the bad coding please.
Cheap hardware causes people to reevaluate Windows, and use Linux instead (because Windows will cost substantially higher in pencentage cost compared to hardware). So, Microsoft certainly does not want so. However, because of fear of Linux, they will do whatever it takes to be first in the 3rd world country. You see how they did this with US market: take a large market share, and people will not switch easily. So, they will try to subsidize and sell cheap hardware (directly or not). Basically give a way for dirt cheap like XBox with a lost. Then gain market share. Why would this sneaky snaky guy talks about this. So it will help him later on when people start sueing them for undersell and dumping and anti competitive. It's all monopoly.
The thing they don't know is that Linux will be easier and easier until the point that their assumption about the migration pain proved to be wrong.
Oh, I just gave them this hint. Well, there's not much else they can do.
...of CD's is to blame for pirated music.
Let's see, the cost and performance of PC hardware is constantly dropping, and how's the price of software been doing?
You know, if they'd just sell hummers for $100, people wouldn't steal gas anymore.
666-607: 6th floor apartment of the beast
microsoft's problem may be more along the lines of......
DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS
The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it.
-Oscar Wilde
Good point.
I'd better run out and check if GoogleOS.com or gOS.com has been registered, so we can start the rumor mill.
Visit the Game Programming Wiki!
A fair desktop machine can run between $300, and $400 to build. A copy of winxp pro is $200, and a copy of win2000 pro is $300, and server $800??? Why is it that the software is as much, or more than hardware? I can go download BeOS, Linux, or most other systems for free. Panther costs about $110. Why is windows pirated so much? Because it costs TOO much, just like paying $17 for a CD with 8 songs is plain rediculous.
He said:
One way to stem piracy is to offer consumers in emerging countries a low-cost PC, Ballmer said. "There has to be...a $100 computer to go down-market in some of these countries. We have to engineer (PCs) to be lighter and cheaper," he said.
No where did he actually blame PC hardware for piracy. He simply said that in the "lower" markets, there need to be cheaper PCs to help curb the piracy issue. Big difference in the two statements.
Bored? Why not join a decent mess
What rubbish!!! Piracy of SOFTWARE has nothing to do with HARDWARE!!! Wake up MS!!!
I find it hard to believe that it costs more money to develop software that it does to design and manufacture hardware. This seems like FUD to me. Hardware, over time, becomes less expensive and gives better performance. Why is software exempt from this? Why does Windows cost more now that it did in the past? Why does MS Office cost more now than in the past? Is it somehow more costly to improve and existing code base instead of designing a new one?
UNIX/Linux Consulting
Just think who profit the most of piracy.
-It make their software know
-It make their compagny know
-We speak about them (In good or bad)
-Piracy create a need for people who don't know how to pirate. So they go buy the software.
Think about that guy, Compagny are playing a game when they say that they suffer of piracy. In sort of manner, their software become know because of piracy.
Hardware is not the reason why we pirate, its only because we know how, and Software Compagny's know that.
But sure that in Software Compagny's were getting pirate too much, thing would change. No one work for peanut.
Jim
Huh?
This makes absolutely no sense. Though, if you look closely at most things Ballmer says, they don't make any sense either.
The problem is windows is in dire need of fast and expensive hardware. Doing everyday stuff doesn't wotk faster now than with older windows versions. Why? hardware got faster for sure.
www.weberseite.at
I think it's mostly a human "fault". Everybody has a moral compass more a less. I suspecy for very few it's always pointing directly North (eveyone has mud on their shoes), while for many of the "chronic" pirates. it's always due South. For many others, myself included, it's in the middle. I'll find something on a torrent/usenet group that looks interesting (may be music or sw) and if I truely like it, I'll buy it (doom3, far cry, painkiller, Children of Dune soundtrack come to mind). Now I don't always immediate delete the stuff I don't like, but I don't use it either. Now there are tons of gray areas; downloding tv shows from a torrent...is that legal? I could have tivo'd it, but someone else just happen to do it for me.
I think part of the other problem with piracy is just civil disobedience (largely from people of our mind set) who are feed up with all the rules about what we can watch/hear, when we can watch/hear, and how often we may do so as dictated by the larger corporations.
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
It started off with the "iPod users are thieves!!11!!11!!" outburst; now he delivers this ripper. What next, Slashdotters are closet Windows(TM) lovers?
...
The meds seem to have no effect, Ballmer. Check the dates
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
When Microsoft commissioned a study that correlated lack of education to pirating? Their logic was that most pirating occured in counties that had very little education. So their plan was to increase education to combat piracy. (Of course any moron could tell that the real reason was that countries with little education also were very poor) This article just adds further to the fact that they are completely clueless (maybe intentionally) about how overpriced their software is.
All generalities are dangerous except ones that start with "All
One of the reasons hardware is so expensive is because the hardware-requirements for current software (step forward microsoft) keeps going up. Any $100.00 computer they can currently make won't be powerful enough to run XP, Word and whatever other MS products that increasingly suck memory and processor cycles.
Even if this statement weren't bullshit, microsoft would still be partially responsible.
Training monkeys for world domination since 1439
Push for the development of a standardized, low-cost computer, and you can ensure that whatever hardware you want goes into that computer. Like hardware-level access controls. (TCPA comes to mind.)
It's not the low-cost that would prevent piracy, it's the design. Otherwise, they'd strip down their XBox design and market it as a computer.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
Yes, it will, because the down-market, sub-$100 PC will be a cardboard box whose guts are a picture of a motherboard and a mental image of a CD writer.
The part he hasn't thought through is that folks will only need a mental image of a blue screen to make it work up to MS's usual high standards.
This just goes to show that most of us aren't successful because we aren't stupid enough to say something like that with a straight face.
See what I've been reading.
The poor guys are just powerless - we really need to cut them a break, what with all the dirty third-party developers causing all their security problems ... and now look how the hardware developers are practically forcing people to pirate software becuase of their high prices.
;o)
And with the justice system constantly nit-picking...
(violins playing in the background)
...that narcotics officers should raid the Microsoft HQ offices, and bring many drug-sniffing dogs with them.
Now, all doubt in such suspicion has been removed.
What an asinine argument. No, it just can't be the fact we charge $400 for our software, it has to be something else. Please. This is no different then trying to blame global warming on the aluminium manufacturers on the grounds that "if we didn't have the cans, we wouldn't have anything to put the aerosol in".
i know i'm a fool for thinking /.ers should try reading an article before ranting (especially one about MS) but...
all ballmer is saying is that people in developing nations will be more likely to pay for software if they have the option of owning a computer. you can't pay for windows if you can't afford a pc! its a valid point, though obvious.
Umm, Steve, it's partly your fault people need faster hardware? Each new release of MS {Windows,Office,Whatever} needs bigger and bigger specs. If Windows Longhorn ran faster than Win XP on the exact same hardware, the base price for new machines would drop due to natural market pressures. Instead each new release inflates the system minimum requirements which naturally inflates the cost of a baseline system.
Disclaimer: pretty much all of the computing industry, including open source software, are constantly requiring more and more powerful CPUs.
The "engine" that drives software piracy has little to do with money, but more to do with mentality.
Most people in "the scene" do it for fun and the recognition they get from their immediate peers, not because of money. Since they will keep releasing "free" versions of the software, others will keep (ab)using it.
I was bought out of my share of a small computer store in January... If the software "greats" have this kind of attitude toward the hardware guys I guess I made the right choice!
is because Microsoft now has cheaper versions of the software available to put on these cheaper PCs. The stripped down versions of Windows, for instance. It would certainly be hypocritical to say PCs should cost $100 when the OS itself costs more.
And the reason for this, after all, is to open up the low-end market so that Microsoft can tap that revenue source. After all, if they offer something for $200 normally, and offer a strip down version for $50 such that people can afford it, it's still better than getting $0 because people can't afford to pay for it and end up pirating it.
The funny thing is, from a certain standpoint, Microsoft is actually NOT trying to stop piracy (the official line is always to be anti-piracy, of course), but Microsoft probably realized that their software will be pirated, and in some ways, this loss leader in the emerging markets should strategically be allowed. Because then, Microsoft will dominate even more, especially where Linux is popular. On the other hand, Microsoft can't grow that market if the people cannot afford to pay for the hardware. Keep in mind that Windows is as dominant as it is today partly because it was easy to copy Windows. They could have put really difficult schemes to prevent piracy, but they didn't, because ultimately, that's not how they make their money anyway. They make their money by having dominance and then sell software based on it (Office, for instance).
And in the future, Microsoft want DRM and they want to do transactions. They want more people on the internet using windows, and the way they can get that is to have as many people as possible with little cheap boxes that run some form of Windows that can at the very least access the internet so they can spend money through Microsoft channels.
Wait.... Ballmer wants the OS to make up 66% of the price of a new PC? Let's see... the cost of mass-duplicating a CD compared to the cost of manufacturing a rather complicated collection of electronic parts. Yeah, that makes sense.
So, where does Ballmer score his blow?
I suppose with cheaper hardware, the total cost of purchasing the hardware/windows bundle becomes cheaper too, meaning that MS can sell more copies of Windows. The more copies they sell, the less people will need to copy it. Is that how Steve is thinking, I wonder.
In that case, what happens in the case that, since the hardware is being sold so cheap, it turned out that it is not capable of running Windows. Doesn't XP require 128Mb memory to run? And a few hundres MB of disk space? And a certain level and speed of Processor? Has Steve thought about that, I wonder. Could he, without realising it, be pushing for hardware that will only run another popular OS, and not his own product?
Just a thought.
T.
Oh, I'm sure it's blue there, too. That's why it's such a prominent color in their OS.
"You're older than you've ever been, and now you're even older."
The XBox is a cheap hardware platform, and pirated XBox games don't exist...
He is where is he because he was along for the ride with Gates/Allen.... Although I didnt like that made for TV movie about Apple/MS etc, it did paint Ballmer like an idiot at least!
Even If these countries bought $100 PCs they still won't be running Windows, because system requirements would be way under suggested requirement for Microsoft's software. Thus they will either have to run Linux, or pirate the windows software to see if they will even work on these systems.
Software is stolen because it is...
1. Easy to copy.
2. People don't really see it as stealing.
Hardware is on the other hand HARD to copy, It has a value the customer can see and it is not easy for him to make a few copies of his great new video card to hand out to his friends.
If there was a xerox machine that could copy a CPU or a video card people would be doing that too.
Humans are basically about getting everything they want as cheap as they can. Most will stop at harming another to do it so they won't walk into EB and shoplift their next video card. (some will but not most)
Making hardware cheaper will not reduce piracy.
- F1 NEWS
I don't know how they do it in the US, but here in Germany you can get your cell phone very cheap or for free if you enter a long term contract with your cell phone company. They are betting on the fact that once they you don't have to pay the money all at once they can bleed you dry little by little. ;).
If you have a low hardware price the entrance barrier for getting a computer/cell phone becomes very low. They hope most people don't look at the montly costs too closely and once you have the hardware it would be stupid to waste the money you already spent
If you can do the same with a computer and lock up the hardware so that only your software runs on it, they hope to get a lot more money. The same principle works for video games, printers and razors.
***Quis custodiet ipsos custodes***
'One way to stem piracy is to offer consumers in emerging countries a low-cost PC, Ballmer said. "There has to be...a $100 computer to go down-market in some of these countries. [...]"
Cost of cheap WallMart computer: $250
Cost of pirated software Windoze, word, etc: around $400
So, a simple way for M$ to make millions of dollars would be to give away free computers in China -- by reducing the cost of a computer to $0, they would completely eliminate piracy and earn $150 for each computer they give away. They could make billions!
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
-Errors in MS products behaviour due to stupid user errors.
-Security breaches in Microsoft's products due to plugins.
-Worst hurricane season in Florida in recorded history due to a cyclic weather phenomenon.
-Global warming due to increased levels of CO2.
Okay, maybe Microsoft didn't cause those last couple, but I say we blame them anyway. They've been transferring it just a little too often, and I think it's about time they take on their share.
So, Microsoft, what are you going to do to reduce world emissions? And have you hired out enough landscaping companies to clear away all the downed trees? You better jump on this stuff. You wouldn't want to be declared the cause of cancer, would you? 'Cause I'll do it.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
I remember being the first kid on the block to have a Plextor 1x CD writer. That was expensive.
I remember being the first kid on the block to have a Jaz drive. That was expensive.
I remember being the first kid on the block to have a DVD writer. That was expensive. (Actually, by now, I'm no longer a kid)
Expensive hardware lends itself to many "creative" uses...
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
+5 Funny! That is hysterical!
EXXON = "gasoline costs too much because CARS are too expensive!1"
RIAA/MPAA = "our releases cost too much because the CD and DVD players cost too much11!! It's all their fault!"
"JoeConsumer" and most PHB = "Uhh (picks nose), OK,now we get it! What a deal!"
And here's the really weird part. All the big box vendors will read this, every boss action out there will see this and realise that Ballmer just dissed them righteously, I mean about as insulting as you can get, and they will still keep shoveling money to redmond.
Hey big vendors,ya,YOU, is that comfy up there with no K-Y?
Microsoft's rhetoric lately seems to be trying to convince people that hardware should be free. That doesn't make any sense, especially not when you compate the costs of hardware to the costs of software. So just what are they up to with repeating these bizare statements?
Who are they trying to brainwash? And for what?
If they already have a PC to run the pirated software on, why do they need a cheaper one?
Sure,$100 computer sounds great, just bought my first computer for $150 by the way on monday :)
... network connectivity via wireless and maybe some nice cheap Windows XcheaP and that would make the home computer something like a cellphone. Maybe even have an embeded system that gets files remotely of a server so no need for large expensive drives....
Imaging have a $100 Z-series machine :)
Yes I understand why we need one of those cheap computers but we also need cheap
If one looks carefully at the marketing
hype and roadmaps that Microsoft has
publically announced, one can easily
draw the conclusion that "broadband
everywhere", tightened DRM & "Trusted
Computing", and Web-based services is
leading to a Microsoft paradigm that
will be renting software over the 'net
on a per-use basis, with all data storage
at Microsoft. Think "WebTV" everywhere!
There may be a small number of users that
will subscribe to such a business model.
IMHO, this will be the beginning of the
end for the Microsoft monopoly (& "tax"),
and the beginning of widespread adoption
of the F/OSS model.
This, of course, is nonsense.
They are asking "How can we stop piracy?" when what they NEED to be asking is "How can we increase sales?" These aren't equivilent questions in the least, but they seem to believe they are. We all read that story about piracy in Russia. If a single $15 CD costs approximately 1/4 of an average citizen's weekly pay there, there is simply no way in hell they're going to be paying $200 for MS Office. EVER. Doesn't matter how frigging cheap you make the computers, even if you give them away in very large cereal boxes, the people are NOT going to spend half their month's paycheck on a piece of software.
This will not hold true in ANY scenario. Ballmer & Friends appear to believe that if they eliminate piracy, copies of Office will fly off the shelves. Even if they did manage to make a copy of Office which was 100% unpiratable (for the sake of argument), that wouldn't spur sales any. The people would just start pirating some other piece of software, or use OOo.
The *only* rational solution to the problem is to drop software prices. The ONLY one. No other solution has the potential to actually increase software sales. (which certainly should be their goal, unless they've given up on actual profit in their eternal search for scapegoats) Yet that's the one measure Ballmer says they will NOT implement.
Interesting, huh?
My theory, incidentally, is that Microsoft is terrified of these hypothetical localized copies of their software leaking into the mainstream and selling at a discount. That's why their cheap XP-lite is so crippled. It doesn't HAVE to be, but they're so protective of their market share that they're unwilling to risk it in any way, even at the potential benefit of even more markets.
Either that or, as I said, they've become so focused on pirates that they've forgotten to actually do business in the meantime.
Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
A $100 computer..
with a $200 operating system.
Genious!
Although I'm pretty sure he's means to make "lite" hardware like the WinXP starter edition. This shouldn't be difficult.. especially for chip manufacturers. The cost to actually produce chips is very low.. it's the engineering that costs the big bucks. There's no reason why Intel/AMD couldn't dust off the optical masks for the P3/Athlon and make a bunch of chips on the cheap.
I am the maverick of Slashdot
Intel should produce a $100 PC and it should be very Linux friendly and preinstalled with Linux even. In fact it should specifically not be windows hardware compliant. Microsoft would have fits. I'd pay to watch that show.
How they feel about the spread of light and cheap MP3/etc music players, and the amount of music copying going on. Obviously the problem is that iPods cost too much, right?
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
Microsoft is the primary reason hardware is so expensive: Microsoft Windows XP, Microsoft Office, and all that are resource hogs that must be installed, administered, and run locally. Furthermore, it is Windows XP that is so tied to PC hardware. And it is Microsoft (and Apple) that push useless eye candy on the masses, requiring an arms race in hardware.
In an ideal world, we'd have $100 ARM-based, silent, solid state systems on everybody's desk, with lightweight software suites that get day-to-day work done, and most functions moved off to the web. Even as it is, properly configured Linux-based desktop environments can run fine on sub-$200 PCs or embedded PCs.
But, frankly, Microsoft wants it that way. Many people pay for Windows and Office only when they buy a new PC, so if that desktop machine from 1990 were still usable with today's software, Microsoft's revenue would suffer greatly. Furthermore, if PC hardware were down to $100, people would look even more seriously at whether they want to shell out 5-10 times as much for Microsoft software, software whose features they mostly don't use anyway.
This is just an attempt at preparing the world for Microsoft's next business model. Remember when he said hardware prices would go down to zero and that software would be the only expense left ? That's the same thing, he's desperate to make the rest of the world follow in their plans, but it's not working at all.
Maybe we deserve this world ?
IT budgets are finite .
IT budgets typically cover hardware, software, and (sometimes) services.
Services are not much of an issue since that typically comes from staffing. It's a lot easier to shift capital money from HW to SW purchases than to shift expensed money from staffing to purchases.
MS doesn't sell hardware. Well, they brand keyboards, mice and xboxes. But that ain't where they make their nut.
Therefore, it is desirable that the entire IT budget be allocated to software. Hardware has to go.
Hardware has to go. QED.
Ideally, MS would prefer that IT budgets are spent entirely on software licenses, and no hardware at all. Without actually installing the software or even opening the boxes, there would no concerns about tech support, liability, or piracy for that matter.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
Offering cheaper hardware in third-world countries (and of course eventually here) will make copying software (music, books, information) harder to do - as long as Microsoft has a part in the design process (and thus can include all the DRM we love).
we discovered a new way to think.
Wal-Mart Store #2516
743 Rainier Ave. South
Renton, WA 98055
So, computers are expensive despite the fact that computer manufacturers have a very low profit margin (about 5 %)?.
Microsoft software, however, is really cheap!! They only have a margin of about 80 %, despite the huge number of pirated copies.
I wonder what will be hear next, just cannot imagine it!!
I myself can't even concieve of spending more than 50$ on ANY software title for my personal use. I don't even like to spend that, because chances are that I'm going to use it to accomplish a specific task, then stop using it.
If a company I work for needs a piece of software though, I certainly think that the proper licenses should be purchased. So they have to keep the prices high so that businesses make up what they lose to personal users copying the software. But it's also those high prices that will keep me from purchasing it for my own use.
Just another vicious cycle...
"We have to engineer (PCs) to be lighter and cheaper," so that we can sell our OS for more.
Grow up monkey boy, people are pirating your stupid ass software because they feel it is not worth the exorbetant prices you are charging.
I have always said that if Microsoft Windows XP Pro was around $50(USD), I would happily pay for a real copy. Then, it would be worth buying because:
:)
-I avoid the hassle of copying a cd or looking for it online.
-I avoid the hassle of obtaining a key that works...possibly having to find key generation software out there...which may have a virus or spyware in it.
-You don't have to worry about not being able to get software updates because they figured out your key was fake.
-You actually don't hurt Microsoft, and instead help their revenue, which helps to pay for development of new software.
-Microsoft quits bitching (you really can't blame them).
-You get that "feel good" feeling of not being a criminal.
Microsoft, please look into selling Windows at an approximately $50 retail price. Sure, there may always be software pirates, but at $300...that just hits my checking account too hard when I'm already in 9k of debt like many out there. That's my honest take on it. I wonder how many other people out there feel the same way. Maybe windows is just overpriced...
Ballmer is clearly out of touch with reality on this. Cheap hardware will not change the software piracy problem a whit. Why do people pirate software? Because operating systems run $80-$120, Microsoft's Office suite costs $450, Anti-virus runs $40-$80.
These ridiculous software prices, the constant need to upgrade and relicense and pay the same prices over and over and over -- that's what drives people to pirate software. Or turn to open source software solutions. Microsoft's trash got tossed out of my house on its ear 5 years ago. Nuttin' but Linux and there are scant few things I can do without their virus propagation system.
In the M$ monopoly there is no supply and demand to set a reasonable price for your software, only the costs related to the manufacture of it. Plus profit , of course.
The consumer cannot affect change to the price of M$ software. In a mostly capitalist world the market will find a way to meet demand, in this case by using piracy.
M$ is not a monopoly (in their mind) and is forced to blame it on some external factor, the cost of harware.
If only the Linux community could harness this idea's energy they could really do major damage to M$. Prove to the world that quality and stability don't have to cost $200 per copy.
No he doesn't - he simply thinks that lower hardware prices will reduce piracy. Whether you agree with him is another point entirely.
Computer: $700
Paying for officialy licensed windows versions of all the software I use on a regular basis in Linux: ~$2000
No Steve Balmer. I would say the software piracy is due to the expensive nature of software. Idiot.
The network would be the computer. They were just 10 years ahead of their time.
Back in the days (only several years ago) when a computer normally cost $2000+ and the sub $1000 wasn't even around, MS could resonably charge $150 for an OS because it was But now that computers have come down to ~300-400, who wants to pay 100+ for software now that it represents > 25% of the total cost. Answer, not many. MS needs to reprice the OS to ~10% of the cost of a computer.
> a $100 computer to go down-market in some of these
> countries. We have to engineer (PCs) to be lighter
> and cheaper,
How much cheaper can Microsoft expect hardware to get? It's almost costless as it is now.
The Microsoft OS is the real cost barrier. The cheaper hardware gets; the more folks will want an OS just as cheap. Microsoft will have to lower their prices.
When Microsoft lowers their prices then they will have to partition their market into full/higher cost solutions and chopped/lower cost solutions; this will give Linux a clear advantage because Linux can offer a fully appointed OS with no cost differential.
I expect Microsoft's momentum to carry it a few more years yet... but after that the energy will have bled off and people will begin to see the benefits of Linux more clearly.
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
Comment, and my reply.
Do not touch -Willie
This solution exists for twenty years. It is called X terminal.
As for your questions
What if it's compromised
There was posted news on slashdot many times, that Windows system on broadband connection is going to be compromised in 20 minutes without qualified sysadmin supervising.
System offering public service would be supervised by team of qualified admins, so it is much less likely to be compromised.
What if it crashes
Do you have backup device capable of backing up your hard drive? Do you use it daily? What would you do if your system crashes? Spend a day reinstalling everything and loose data?
If public server crashes, it is likely to be fixed by its admins very soon, and your data restored from backups.
It is much more probably that your connection to this server would crash. And deprive you from working with entirely functional server. It is a drawback of OS-as-service solution.
And paying for something that's free now?
Are you sure it is free now? I'm running couple of X terminals home. One of them is more than 10 years old and never need hardware upgrade. But if I count all the money I spent upgrading my home computer last 10 years, it would probably cost more than $50/month. And countless hours administering the system. How much your work-hour cost?
I'll register fhf.org already, and prepare to welcome our Open Blueprint Overlords!
(for the slower people, that's Free Hardware Foundation)
Exercise caution when modding this message up: the author acts like a jerk when his karma is excellent.
Right, and charging between $199-499 doesn't cause anyone to pirate Microsoft XP or Office.
The only reason why Ballmer is saying cheap hardware is because he still wants to make maximum profit off the software, while makeing the consumer happy because they got a computer for $400, ie $100 for hardware and $300 for software.
But it seems to me that piracy is so rampant not because of hardware costs, but because software costs will nickel and dime you to death (obviously, this doesn't apply to OSS, so spare me the "OMG use Lunix!!11" responses).
-Firewall........$50 ...and that's just to start; basic sorts of things that a typical home user would have. Suddenly that $500 PC isn't such a good deal.
So, first I start off with the $300 OS.
Then, take a look at the other day-to-day software a typical user will (probably) need / want:
-Anti-Virus......$50 / year
-Compression.....$25
-Anti-Spyware....$25
-Image Editing...$200+
-Decent IMing....$20
-Office..........$150+
-Popup Blocker...$25
I think what Steve Ballmer meant to say is that Software Piracy is due to expensive software. Hardware now is the cheapest it has ever been for such capable systems. If commerical software is such good value for money, why would there be such growth in the use of open source software? Why should people pay full price for a slightly modified Windows every few years that only brings more obtrusive 'Product Activation' and 'Digital Rights Management'? These things only serve to irritate users, and make Windows an unacceptable choice. Users should be free to install as many copies as they like on their own systems, with no extra cost for multiprocessor licences, server versions, etc. These are the reasons that I switched to Linux myself, along with the improving usability that Linux is achieving, and ethical concerns about buying US products, given the recent behaviour of the United States.
This is where it's headed. The Microsoft Tax paid monthly, or your machine turns into a 100% space heater(as opposed to 97% when running MS crap). Will be the best thing that ever happened to Desktop Linux (or other free alternatives).
Can I install Linux on the new Cheap M$ PC? That's all I want to know. I'll bet that's all they want to know in Africa or Honduras, too.
There is not nearly enough love in the world, but there is far too much trust.
I have the distinct feeling that this isn't true.
1) I have a work PC, a home PC, a laptop, and a work PC at another site that I spend half my time at. Why does that mean I have to fork out for 4 X copies of Windows XP to keep the corporate standard so that I can connect into the network?
2) People see the OS as an enabler for the hardware, nothing more. People talk about Windows, it's the standard, they don't like the idea of paying for it, as if it's built into the cost of a PC as far as many consumers are concerned. A lot of people don't realise that they are paying for it when they purchase a new PC.
3) People don't mind paying a percentage of the cost of a PC for windows e.g. 10%. Now, the cost of an OEM license of Windows is about 1/5 or more the price of their PC. They aren't willing to wear it.
4) People have forked out for Windows again and again and again. They really want something new that will really impress them. (As a community, we really need this ourselves on linux to boot MS out of the market but nevertheless) They aren't recieving that at the moment because of the whole thing about it being the standard...
Either way, they are seriously lost here.
IBM bought Unix and made AIX as an enabler for the hardware they were selling, the market hasn't changed. Microsoft had better realise this fact and fast.
Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
Ironically, Microsoft's software is so bloated it needs expensive hardware to run.
It's sad that microsoft would think of this. It produces a few products, these products come with no warranty, very little support, no major shipping or logistical issues, no problems with keeping stock and their products sell for years.
Your average hardware company has to design, build and test many new physical products each year, and provide warranty on them. Then the oem has to physically put them together, keep large amounts of stock, pay for shipping and transport, provide a proper warranty on systems, and handle all the silly issues that crop up. All that in addition to the actual cost of the Hardware. Surely microsoft don't expect any company to do all this for a paltry profit of $10.
gee steve I built my computer right at $110.00 - I went to local store and looked at the price of windows xp pro and it was $196.00 and I would have to buy more ram for windows xp pro which would increase the price of hardware even more - instead of that I downloaded fedora and it installed nicely and works great - does what I want it to do - so what was the point of his article. he is an idiot - how does he keep his job anyway - if somebody wanted to build a computer to use at home for the $100.00 budget they can - now if they want to put his os on it then it gets to be double and triple. just shut up steve - I am sick of hearing about your stupid remarks. do some research before you open your fat mouth.
It isn't about the cheaper PC's. It is about them cajoling the local governments to subsidies the cost of Windows. Seriously, they can get one country to agree to buy 1 copy of windows per person they they can move on to the next, etc.
A new version of Risk should be released. With Linux, BSD, OS/X and Windows being the various sides...
I've heard Donald Trump on one of his shows say, that he loves real estate because one can see and touch the buildings, whereas stocks and certificates are just pieces of paper.
So yeah, I'd have to agree that most people do prefer the tangibles over the non-tangibles.
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
If it wasn't for the cost of the Microsoft Windows licence pcs would cost 100$.
411 Y0UR 8453 4R3 8310NG 70 U5!! -NSA
So that $100 PC....will that include a full version of Win XP, full version of Office XP (lets be generous Home edition), and other productivity software?
Oh wait lets not forget that software, once produced only requires an investment of a DVD.
On this $100 PC will the the software total a cost of say $30 and the rest of the cost of the PC (hardware) will be an additional $70?
And why is it that the third world countries only reap these benefits? Who is footing the bill? Does that mean I will have to pay more on my computer. I may not live in a third world country, but I should not have to buy someone in India a computer so he/she can ANYHOW take my job in the future.
The real problem is - you will never see a $100 PC because MS produced OS and OFfice cost more then $100.
What a jackass!
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
Ballmer also defended a comment made earlier this year by Bill Gates, Microsoft's chairman, who said security will not be an issue in three years. "If (that) was something we weren't shooting for, no one should come to this keynote. Whether that statement will come to be true or not remains to be seen. But it expresses Bill's fundamental optimism," he said. What are they smoking, seriously? Security won't be a problem in three years? How long have they had the trustworthy computing initiative? Security will ALWAYS be a problem as long as 1. There are crackers out there 2. Companies put profit and meeting the deadline in front of releasing a good product with secure code. I'm wondering when they'll realize that putting out good and secure code = profit. In the long run, releasing crappy products but meeting their marketing deadlines will cut into profits.
Is he on crack? The reason software is pirated is because of the ridiculous prices we have to pay for it! Who the hell can afford to pay upwards of $1000 for Photoshop? Or how about $600 or more for Microsoft Office? I can build a high performance gaming machine for less than that! As an example: I have purchased every single version of Linux that I have. Why? Because given the option of paying a REASONABLE price or downloading for free, I will pay for it. I have paid about $50 for each distro I have purchased. If Steve wants us to pay for Windows, let's see them sell it for $50-$60. I would gladly pay that. Let's see Adobe sell Photoshop for $100 or less. Is there really a reason to sell it for more than that? Steve: if you want to prevent piracy, sell software that John Q Public can afford to purchase.
Software is going to become a commodity not hardware. Hardware already is pretty cheap even while hardware development costs and productions costs often exceed the costs of a disciplined software development project. Microsoft has two cash cows and almost everything else they make is a flop at least in part because they are not disciplined spenders. Office and Windows are gradually waning as all cash cows eventually do and that waning is increasing. The software market is undergoing a slow but very major correction in the form of FOSS. Because competition was blocked by a monopoly and because the equipment and knowledge needed to develop a competing product were relatively widespread would-be competitors reacted by building their product in such a way that Microsoft's bankroll it uses to compete (or anti-compete) becomes mostly irrelevent. You can't buy out FOSS, you can't sue it out of existence, you can't target any specific company or person in order to get rid of it. FOSS is a response to the heavy handed tactics of Microsoft and to a lesser extent it is also related to a number of other near-monopolies that developed in the software industry.
Windows and particularly Office cost way too much. One would never think that in this age of 3d-games and super computers in the home and screensavers that cure cancer that an unimpressive package that does word processing, spreadsheets, boring presentations, and a seldom used database would be sold for $400. They simply fought all their compeitors to death or scared them enough to stay out of that market.
Software is what is going to get cheaper. FOSS software makes it possible to get the most use out of each line of code by allowing it to be used over and over by different users who have different needs.
The ever shrinking cost of a low-end PC have already commoditized hardware to about as low as it can reasonably go given that hardware manufacturers are not going to waste their time building old parts to sell for pennies when they can build new technologies to sell at a higher price. Then mass market them at the midlevel and then drop down the price to move out the remaining inventory when they announce something new at the high end.
Some components can get cheaper especially when sold at retail chains like CompUSA and BestBuy where a hard drive still costs $80 no matter how small. Its their minimum hard drive price. You will often see a drive going for 80 or 85 and it will be double the size of the one going for 79.99.
Hey Steve, go out and pick up a copy of the Programmer's Paradise catalog sometime. Developer tools nowadays cost more than the cost of a new PC. If anything, the cost of these specialized tools drives piracy more than anything (and to a certain extent drives OSS alternatives).
Probably the same that Darl uses!
To reduce piracy, they must reduce the price of software. It doesn't matter if people pay 1 cent for a computer. If they have to pay $300 for a software they will simply pirate it!
Ricardo da Silva Lima
I don't know about you, but I travel quite a bit, and an internet connection isn't always possible. I don't just do work when I'm connected. I sometimes must work when I have no connection available. What good is my GoogleOS then?
It is quite easy to produce computer under $100
Just don't put 1GHz processor there - put 100Mhz one, don't put 1GiB of RAM, put 64Mb and so on.
Unfortunately, current Microsoft products wouldn't run on such hardware with reasonable speed. OO.o, KDE and GNOME wouldn't run at all. But something like old good GeoWORKS/NewDeal or Framework IV would run and justify needs of most users.
May be port PalmOS to desktops?
Here is my argument. The price performance ratio on hardware gets smaller every year. That means you continue to pay less and less for more.
The problem is that O/S companies like Microsoft don't deliver the same. I can't own software. I can't transfer software. Software is 30% of price after all.
I do not agree with Steve's assertion about lower cost hardware making piracy less desireable. I sure don't see any Microsoft related hardware that is priced much lower than competing products. I've always seen people who are able purchase hardware that is better than Software in terms of capability because software just passes away so quickly at times. [There are healthy margins out there though] I realize that this is not a main part of a computer, but I think there is a large enough price disparity to wonder about cheaper hardware. When I was in Beijing this Summer, I picked up a Logitec Orbit Webcam for about $13 US. On Pricewatch was Logitech QuickCam Orbit Webcam 961310-0403 Retail for $109.00. The cheapest webcams I've found anywhere here in the US is $16 on Pricewatch and certainly NOT anywhere close to the quality I have.
come to oppositeland!
just walk out your front door!
its a place where hardware costs are responsible for software piracy!
its a place where despite no WMD in the report, the report was a clarification of the justfication to go to war based upon the fact that WMD existed.
its a place where pissing off a billion and a half muslims apparently makes them LESS likely to want to bomb the shit out of you.
The gas companies saying the gas prices are so high because people have automobiles. Or the odd relationship that spammers, anti-virus, and virus/worm software writers all share.
Does Ballmer have some numbers to stand on here? Or is he simply saying things "just to be right". Hardware costs money to develop and fabricate, so does Software. While I would like to see hardware prices be lower, I would also like to see a lower housing costs and taxes.
This also seems like yet another moment of arrogant and indictive gabble by Ballmer. I think that the PR people should advise him to stop before he starts burning bridges.
But that's just me
Please tell me how to sell a $100 PC when the OS is $200, Mr. Ballmer.
The biggest problem lately is the increasing percentage of the cost of the PC being the cost of the OS alone. The problem with software piracy isn't expensive hardware, it's CHEAP hardware, because if you're spending $3000 on a computer, $100-200 for the OS doesn't seem to be that much. If you paid $200 for your box, then $200 for a copy of XP seems like a LOT.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Note to Ballmer: Last time I checked, there wasn't a lot of hardware piracy/theft going on. It's the software that these people want, numbnuts. Although I cannot fathom why anybody would want to use your CRAPTASTIC products, this point should be obvious. And, by employing a bit of deductive reasoning, one can conclude that YOU CHARGE TOO MUCH for it.
Karma Schmarma
say, their latest MS Office cost them: $1 Billion; to develop (That's ALL COSTS INCLUDED - EVERYTHING!)
and say, about ~400 Million users are going to somehow use it - either pay to upgrade, or it comes with their next PC ... etc ... but about ~400 Million users in total will use it...
that comes around to, $2.5/copy ... to pay for the initial development cost ... so say me, what those $133.99-$429.99 prizes are ... if note OVERPRIZED! - I'd say a fair rate would be anything from '2-10 x ${DEVELOPMENT-COSTS}' ... but '53.596-171.996 X ${DEVELOPMENT-COSTS}' is starting to look a bit ridiculous *IMHO*
I don't claim I know more than I know, and if you know you know more than I know, then by all means, let me know.
Driving those prices down will not be hard for manufacturers, as greater consolidation will continue to force smaller, or less nimbler, players out, or for them to thrive unexpectedly.
Unfortunately, and not regrettably, for microsoft, they cannot accept lowering the cost of their software. They are addicted to cash and power as junkies are to powder and temporary euphoria.
However, the AMD/Intel component of the equation must not be ignored. The equation must be balanced, and microsoft is the inequitable portion of the equation, NO matter what the claim to provide. As AMD & Intel and BIOS chip makers approach a symbiotic or near-convergence situation, computers will essentially be very mobile and OS independent or OS agnostice right in the palm of our hand. Promises will eventually be delivered, but microsoft will be on the low side of the properly balanced equation.
F/LOSS/Linux will drive the point home. It is inevitable, since the profit side of the F/LOSS equation is SERVICE-oriented, not charge-for-code oriented.
This is as it should be. Thanks to F/LOSS, maybe a new paradigm will emerge the victor for the next 20 or so years.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
The price of automobiles is too high, so I'm going to steel my next tank of gas. If only they'd lower the price of a car, I wouldn't steel gas!
When a system cost $US 2000, the OS was a small percentage of the costs and ppl did not care. when a system costs $us 100 and the OS costs 200, then ppl get downright pissed.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
To be able to pirate Windows, you have to afford the hardware (hey doh). So, by increasing the number of people who can afford the hardware but not the software (as world wide, there's a lot more people in the lower brackets) AND making the software:hardware price ratio worse, piracy will be reduced? Not even Jobs' reality distortion field could make that ring true.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Does he think that cheaper hardware will make copying software harder to do?
It will be if MS specs new "features" into the hardware. Don't forget that they already control the PC hardware spec.
How many $100 computers do you know of that can actually run Micro$ofts latest bloated and inneficent software?
I thought I made a mistake once, but I was wrong.
Ballmer also defended a comment made earlier this year by Bill Gates, Microsoft's chairman, who said security will not be an issue in three years. "If (that) was something we weren't shooting for, no one should come to this keynote. Whether that statement will come to be true or not remains to be seen. But it expresses Bill's fundamental optimism," he said.
:D
Sure, everybody should just rely on Bill's fundamental optimism and the accuracy of his intuition regarding the future of computing. After all, 640kB of RAM *is* enough for anyone, right? Maybe someone should tell Bill that, as a rule, one shouldn't make such absolute statements, since they tend to make you look silly.
On the topic of Microsoft's shifting marketing initiatives, Ballmer admitted that the company's "integrated innovation" message isn't easy to grasp. "Sometimes, our own people get confused about it. But it's one of the top concerns we hear from customers--they want a coherent development platform and management tools. Most of the integrated innovation points are about reducing complexity," he said.
Reducing complexity is all fine and dandy, but that usually also means reducing flexibility. Microsoft may integrate everything with click'n'play user interfaces, but they leave no room for automation and customization (with scripts for example).
I find that usually heterogenous and open systems are easier to manage (if you have the know-how). You will only seldomly find that something is "impossible", in contrast to Microsoft's products, where you often can't go much beyond what the GUI offers.
Oh well, complexity and flexibility have always been proportional to one another, and are likely to stay so.
Microsoft's intentions in the business software market became an issue in the ongoing trial involving Oracle's hostile takeover attempt of PeopleSoft. Ballmer reiterated that Microsoft has no designs on the very high end of that market. "We are not targeting the largest enterprises. We're not going to bid on a supply chain system for General Motors. That would put our products out of the simplicity band for the companies we target," he said.
Could it be that they know that these "very high end" markets have a need for availability and reliability above all? I guess Microsoft does not want to be responsible for General Motors' assembly lines stopping due to software problems. They dodged that bullet
Wenn ist das Nunstruck git und Slotermeyer? Ja!... Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!
Software has inherent value, but with the restrictive licenses that are being used, software has a much lower value than hardware.
Hardware can be bought, used and re-sold. We aren't crying over hardware prices as long as we feel we can reaasonably use it.
Because of the tendancy to make their old products worthless by forcing upgrades (via security holes and file-format juggling), the effective value of MS software is much lower than it should be. Mind you, I think the prices are already much higher than they should be.
By limiting the use of the software to a single computer, instead of per person or per household (meaning I could install on both laptop and desktop), the software is worth less.
Furthermore, because software doesn't have any resale value, it's worth even less.
By changing their pricing model, licensing terms, and business practices, they could probably curb piracy.
I guess they would probably make far less profit in the first world, and so it's not a viable alternative for them. Instead they can try to make hardware manufacturers lower their prices, and get governments to enforce their licensing rules.
Seems funny to me that they cry about spilt milk like piracy in developing nations; where few people are wealthy enough to purchase hardware, let alone software.
Fortunately, it doesn't look like Ballmer realizes that this will help Linux. The wealthy individuals in the poorer nations will be able to buy an extra computer. Few choose to use Linux as a primary OS, but no problem, they'll soon be able to tinker with it on a secondary computer.
Praise be to CB.
...do you put a horse?
Software Piracy Due to Expensive... er, Software?
How's about going and taking a look at the Dell Poweredge SC. Dell will happily sell you a Poweredge SC for $399. They consider it to be a server class machine! [0]
What's the cheapest Windows Server OS they'll bundle with it? $349.
The hardware's cheap-- and gets cheaper every day.
-JDF
[0] For very limited values of server...
People steal cars because toll-booths cost too much!
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
And your point is?
Switzerland is a small country, with a small population, no poverty, and excellent social programs. I suspect that there is more likely to be a causal relationship between those factors and crime rates than firearm ownership.
If you compare the incidents of violent criminal acts per 100,000 people in western European nations versus that of the US, you will see that there is no positive correlation between higher rates of gun ownership and a lower incent rate of violent crime. If there is no correlation, there cannot be a causal relationship...
Yes, this is off-topic, but I could not let the claim stand unchallenged.
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
If anything, lower hardware prices would increase piracy. If an extra couple hundred million people can suddenly afford computers, wouldn't that just create a huge new market for pirated software?
Can Ballmer even pretend the stuff he's saying makes any sense? He thinks increasing the demand for software among the poor will reduce piracy?
I'm all for cheaper hardware, but when the cost of the software running exceeds the cost of the machine, what do you think is going to happen?
What's he going to say next, if they start charging more for Windows people will think it's more secure? Wait, that could actually happen...
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
In the fine /. tradition I did't bother to RTFA but I suspect that Ballmer and Microsoft really mean to get people to use one of the cheep PC's that are totally controlled by them using DRM at the hardware level. In the name of copywite protection they aim to control your PC completly.
zenray
I truly believe that software piracy will begin to be VERY expensive when open source solutions equal or exceed what is for sale. Software is changing the way people think about their solutions. One such thought is, "Why should I pay for a product upgrade when the current product does the job?" Another thought is, "I can talk to the person that made this open source solution, and get what I want." This type of software morphing is growing, were as the "Closed Source Third Party Solution" is definitly shirnking.
Great idea, let's find a way to force down the price on something that actually has a marginal cost of production so that we can continue charging an exorbitant amount for software which has 0 incremental cost.
I'm sure the hardware manufacturers will just trip over themselves to cut their own profits so that Microsoft can continue to make even more money on their sub-standard software.
Finkployd
I ran Ballmer's speach through the Google "marketspeak" translator and it came out something like this (paraphrasing):
"Consumers are willing to pay $700 or more for a home PC. Microsoft believes that it is in our best interest if $100 of that goes to the hardware manufacturers so that $600 is available for the consumer to give to Microsoft. This will allow for Microsoft to continue to 'innovate'."
I think the translator is incomplete, that last sentence seems untranslated to me.
But I've ALWAYS found that I spend MORE for software than I do hardware. The machine I'm typing this posting with is a dual Athlon system that I spent about $1000 to build. The software (OS, office suite, compiler, and several other apps), however, set me back nearly $3000. I wonder what Mr. Ballmer has been smoking if he believes that "expensive" hardware is the reason people pirate software. I also wonder where I might be able to get some of what he's been smoking ;)
I don't pirate the software I use; I believe in paying for software so I have the legal right to use it. I'm currently in the process of moving away from expensive software and to using more open source software.
If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
With the advent of cross-platform toolkits like GTK+, OpenGL, and OpenAL, it's becoming much easier to write an application and make it cross-platform with minimal effort AND have it perform excellently. (As opposed to Java, which is a great way to piss off your user by hogging 250M of memory for a freaking IM client... God those were painful days before the TOC protocol and later gAIM. Anyone remember the nightmare that the Java AIM client was?)
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
I live in one of these developping countries.
There are lots of small shops selling "custom built machines" (that is, they buy parts and assemble the machines in the back). You can get a Athlon XP 2.x with 256M of Ram, 40GB drive, etc and a 17" monitor for about R$1500,00 (that's a little over US$500). This does not include an OS... Windows XP Pro retail costs R$999, Office 2003 will set you back R$1699 more...
Btw, an Office upgrade costs R$799, and MS Office versions are realeased every 18 months.
Software is already more expensive than hardware.
... cheap software that's actually *worth* the sticker price?
Ed R.Zahurak
You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.
Go to the Correct Url
I don't claim I know more than I know, and if you know you know more than I know, then by all means, let me know.
And most of the utility stuff here is available for home users for free, even on Windows.
One way to stem piracy is to offer consumers in emerging countries a low-cost PC
So what sickness is it? Is he lying? Is he delusional? Is he patronizing (thinks we're stupid)?
Maybe he's trying a little too hard to keep those hugh profit margins.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Hi,
there is some sense to that: Cheaper computers mean, that
1. more people can afford to buy computers
2. some percentage of these people will not pirate but actually buy the software
So the net effect is they sell more software.
twm
Why is this so hard to understand? People will come up with all sorts of explanations for their behavior. They do it because they can get away with it. Stealing in the retail industry is rampant as well. People are just stone-cold thieves. Now, software which is priced to high may make the rationalization easier, but in the end, you steal because you want to.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Mac hardware is more expensive than PC hardware (before any true believers jump on me, I'm not making any value judgement here). Yet Mac software is pirated disproportionally less than software for Windows. Yes, Windows is significantly more popular. Apple is said to have ~3% market share. But I would say there is more than 100 times more software packages that are more heavily pirated under Windows.
If I had three PCs where I would normally have one, I'd have three pirated versions of XP instead of one as well.
... has just become an old FUDdy Duddy.
;)
Time to put him out to pasture Bill, he's past his sell-by-date
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !
MS likes to get in on hardware standards committees, because it gives them an opportunity to push for standards that will make things difficult for their competitors. Whether this is yet another attempt to push for another hardware spec remains to be seen, but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.
I pirate windows because I don't really want it, it's forced on me by other companies such as Macromedia who make good software that I need to use sometimes, hence the dual boot. There's no way I'm paying $300 for an operating system I don't want and only use occassionly, and grudgingly I might add. I don't understand why pc software makers only release their software for one platform? It's ridiculous. Ask 3rd party console game makers how much sense it makes to release a video game for one console. (unless they're getting some kind of incentive from a particular console maker, or were bought out). Why do software companies insist on only supporting Microsoft and then cry about their tactics?
...steve! comparable PC's have always been cheaper.
--- widget evolution: enhanced, plus, super, ultra, extreme, exxxtreme, ultra-extreme,
Balmer thinks that if hardware were cheaper, people would have more money left over. If people have more money to spend, they can better afford Microsoft software. Balmer thinks that if people could afford Microsoft software, then they would rather buy it than pirate it. He probably thinks that it is less of a hassle to buy software than pirate to it. There are people who think the opposite for good reasons.
However, like traffic tickets and sales tax, MS Windows is a regressive tax; it hurts the poor much more than the rich. The solution is to scale the price of Windows so that it is a fixed percentage (like 10% maybe) of the total PC cost, but with a max cap of say $200. Under this pricing scheme, a $300 PC would cost $330 if you wanted Windows on it. A $10000 PC would cost $200 if you wanted Windows on it. That would make Windows more affordable in developing countries where cheap PCs are in high demand.
As far as the big picture is concerned, what Balmer ought to consider is what _Microsoft_ does that is wrong and evil. Exploiting the poor is evil. A lot of people simply don't realize just how _evil_ exploitation really is because they haven't lived in 3rd world countries. Strongarming businesses is also wrong. Releasing insecure software which forces IT folks to spend countless hours dealing with spyware, viruses, and/or trojans is evil too. No wonder Microsoft has an image problem!
I think the main reason why OEM hardware manufacterers still don't sell PCs with no OS installed is because Windows allows them to test their PC's hardware. This comes in handy when you have to provide support for your product. Instead, what OEMs should do is include test software on a bootable CD that tests all the PC's hardware. What do people think about this?
This was the Sun MicroSystem "thin client" model first proposed in 1986. No disk or OS in client computer. On the other hand, companies like NCR were promoting "smart terminals", for example X terminals" that had the XWindows graphics system downloaded into a terminal computer for local rendering. It was sort of a gradation between smart terminals and thin clients.
Over the decades, there has been a constant pull-and-tug between centralized and decentralized computer services. This evolves along with CPU, pipe, and graphics technology. We have people promoting "supercomputing under your desk" and "grid computer utilities" currently the extreme poles of decentralized and centralized computing.
Sorry, I misread the post I was replying to. Please ignore.
Hardware has a slim ~5% profit margin Windows (i'm guessing here) has a 90% profit margin Problem: poor people don't want to pay for crappy windows Solution: expect hardware manufactures to produce computers for less to increase the number of units sold, bundle crippled windows and torment the suckers into upgrading after they populate their hardrives.
Stop invalid scientific research. Ask your local scientists to feed their lab rats with a phytoestrogen-free chow.
Low energy use is the most important thing for low cost computers!
Imagine the infrastructure needed and that the power usage cost easily rises beyond the purchase price of the computer.
I have 1 Gbps Internet access@home
Perhaps he has market research to show the increase in total sales is enough to offset the leakage towards Linux, alternatives OSes (including MS-Win* migrations) and illicit copying. I suspect he's wrong. Leakage will increase with decreasing price. Profit-maximizing monopoly pricing strategy is crucially dependant on the exact shape of the demand curve.
Anyways, Ballmers wish is close to reality. Fry's already sells bottom-end Linux machines at $200. The same machine with MS-WinXP costs $300.
This is Microsoft still flogging the dead horse of free hardware with subscription software. This is exactly the opposite of Linux and open source, who do you think is going to win?
Cheaper PC's? I for one am sick and tired of hardware that dies shortly after the warranty is up. In the last four years, out of 9 desktop computers and 3 laptops, I have had a cd burner to die, a motherboard, a couple of keyboards, a trackball, a monitor, 2 power supplies, 2 harddrives, and 4 UPS's. I have repaired 3 (working on number 4) motherboards that had "Taiwanese Exploding Capacitors" in them. See here if you don't remember the story. http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/11/04/175 1210&tid=137
:)
This list failures does not count lightning or power surges, as those are not really fault in the equipment, nor does it include the non PC equipment I have had to die. I don't buy cheap hardware, I pay for good hardware but I'm not getting it.
Yet I have hardware that is 8+ years old still chugging along. Monitors that are 11+ years old that are still working.
I don't want cheaper hardware, I want BETTER hardware.
Sorry for the double post, my grey matter hardware is fragmented.
I think the angle that Ballmer is going for here is that he thinks there is a set price at which people will no longer pay for a computer, and wants to put the burden of lowering the price on hardware manufacturers instead of themselves.
Let's say $500 for the PC plus $100 for Windows plus $300 for Office = $900. But if they can pirate the software they just pay $500, so they buy it. Steve seems to think that if you make the hardware cheaper (instead of the software, Go Microsoft!) that people will be more inclined to buy the software. Of course what will happen is that people will take their really cheap hardware and continue to warez the OS and apps. I find it hard to believe that Microsoft is really that out of touch...Oh wait, no I don't.
-R
The OS is *plumbing*. It ought to be take-it-for-granted invisible. When I turn the spigot, I expect water to come out of the faucet, and I don't think about the pipes behind the walls and in the basement. Except for construction or renovation purposes, I consider the plumbing to be *part of the house*, not a separate entity.
Microsoft has brought this problem on themselves. They have taken something that ought to be plumbing and turned it into a high-profit, high-visibility product. They have pushed to turn every other (non-Microsoft) aspect of computing into a commodity, while preventing something that *ought* to be a commodity, the OS, from being one.
They deserve a comeuppance for distorting the marketplace this way. Unfortunately others have bought into this model as well, and will also be hurt.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
I think the point Ballmer is trying to make is that if a person can save a few hundred dollars on the price of a PC, they'd be more willing to buy software with some or all of that savings. I know I'd be tempted to do so.
My first PC, a Dell, cost something like $1200. I spent maybe $250 on hardware upgrades. My current machine, a custom-build PC, cost $850, with only $100 in hardware upgrades. I used some of the money I saved to buy a few games that I previously had illegal copies of.
Could Ballmer be any more of an ass? (OK rhetorical question)
Because of Microsoft's stranglehold on the market, they are able to rope companies into upgrade contracts that extort payment for new versions. Under these contracts, failure to upgrade results in higher costs for later upgrades. So much higher that it makes more sense to upgrade now rather than later. Could any other company pull these sorts of strong-arm tactics? Of course not! In any other business, you'd find a competitor and switch to them (or at least use it as a negotiation tactic).
Free Desk
I can illustrate your point by my recent experience. My wife had a laptop that had Win2k on it. She used it during her Masters work, and after she was done with that, it was mine. (muahahaha) The networking was screwed up on it anyway, and I was unable to repair it with that stupid reinstall CD that came with it. I installed various Linux distros on it, it was my play machine. So I recently decided to make the leap to wireless. I had Mandrake 10.0 installed on the laptop, and bought an 802.11g card and router. I futzed with the card on that laptop for 3 days. Finally I found out that there was a reported bug with that chipset where the latest and greatest revision didn't work with the firmware that worked with previous cards. (It is a Netgear W511 with the Prism54 chipset) The bugzilla report said they couldn't fix it. So I was stuck. I could return the card and the router (since they came as a set) and buy another one, or I could bite the bullet and install Windows. I only have a copy of Win98, so I installed it and it worked. But the damn laptop kept locking up and going into Safe mode. So I *acquired* a full copy of Win2k, installed it, and everything is fine now. My wireless connection is great.
I have some issues with this scenario:
I wanted Linux on that laptop, but wasn't willing to jump through all the hoops to get wireless working. I know I just got a bad card, but it was a hassle that was getting on my nerves.
I was forced to acquire a copy of Win2k because the licensed copy of Windows I had (Win98) was unstable. TECHNICALLY the laptop came with Win2k, but those "reinstall" CDs are worthless. So did I already own a copy of Win2k? Probably not, but I didn't care. I wasn't going to fork over for a retail copy of it. If they ever fix those prizm54 drivers, I'll probably switch it back to Mandrake (test out the firmware with Knoppix first though)
Bottom line was that I wanted to use the laptop as a wireless workstation. To me, the OS was irrelevant. Unfortunately, in this scenario, MS was the enabler instead of Linux. But I would not have shelled out hundreds of dollars for an OS that I already owned a copy of (in theory)
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
He lives in an insular world full of people sharing his opinions. Certainly none of the rank and file are going to tell him his ideas are stupid. It's hard to see the world in practical terms when people are kissing your ass all day. And Ballmer has been there long enough to completely lose touch with reality.
So, in Steve's world, it's perfectly logical to think expensive hardware drives software piracy, not expensive software. After all, Windows is such a bargain for what MSFT is charging it couldn't possibly be their own fault, now could it?
I used to see the same thing in law enforcement. It's a pretty insular environment, most of your friends are cops. You deal disproportionately with the less attractive elements in society and after a while it does start to jaundice your view of the world. Not always and not everyone to the same degree, but it happens.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Software is pirated because it CAN be pirated. You're gonna have a hard time pirating silicon. This is the prime difference between SOFTware and HARDware. Trust this, if Linux weren't open source, people would pirate it. People pirate software they will never use to it's full extent either. I wonder how many people have pirated copies of Autocad that they really don't know how to use at all. How many pirated copies of photoshop are used just for resizeing and converting image types? Why do people steal things? That's a real question. They steal what they think they "deserve". It's a real bullshit mentality. At least in the case of stealing Windows XP, people really do get what they deserve. Sorry I'm going on so long here, but new ideas keep popping up. Yes, I'm suffering from post before you think right now. Maybe it boils down to laziness. People will steal Windows XP before they learn to run Linux. People will steal Photoshop before they find out what other options that exist for less money or for free, as in The Gimp. So, who are the real assholes? Sure, Ballmer makes some pretty outrageous statements and basically exists to ruin the good names of the software developers and geniuses that work for him. But, the real assholes are the unwashed masses that allow companies like Microsoft to make products that actually push up the cost of hardware by being bloated and full of useless "features". Let's face it, without customers, a company means nothing. This is not to let MS off the hook entirely though, they do everything in their power (too much power) to keep customers "loyal". As stated in Full Metal Jacket, "It's a huge shit sandwich, and we're all going to have to take a bite." But that's not entirely true either. Believe it or not, Microsoft actually "helps" open source users by forcing an increase in the power of hardware systems. My Linux box really flies on some pretty cheap hardware. It's just a P3 1GHz/512MB RAM/GeForce 5200 and it runs great. Most people wouldn't even purchase a system with those specs if they saw it in a store. I'll tell you what, I bet it runs better than most P4 systems sold with windows in most cases the average user comes across. It's not that I can't afford a fast computer, I'm writing this on a G4 Aluminum PowerBook, a computer I was proud to pay a ton of money for. Anyway, Ballmer, you may be right, statistically, but philisophically, you're dead wrong man. Matt
And now my day is complete, thanks!
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Yes, he's totally off his rocker. ...But thoughout history, this has alwayshappened when too much power has been concentrated in the hands of a few.
We're living in the end of the Microsoft era, IMNSHBCO.
Saving a few bucks on your PC wont effect the fact that the software is overpriced. These days the hardware is not the prime factor in cost like it used to be. ( unless you go for one of those esoteric gaming machines or special purpose workstations )
However, if they have a hand in the 'specs' of these new low cost PCs, you can bet they will be so restricted that using anything that is copied ( or not approved to execute ) wont happen..
its a switch of cause and effect to please the uninformed masses..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
<tinfoil hat>
Widespread marijuana use would be an excelent way of keeping the proles quite and docile. Even better than TV. You'd think TPTB would welcome that.
</tinfoil hat>
Does Ballmer base his claims on the fact that PC business has such a diverse user base?
If not, I don't get it.
I mean, every platform has users who don't obey license agreements. Be it copying the software or otherwise.
Apple has been many times accused of having too expensive hardware (which I think is a myth from the last millennium), but still - the piracy on x86 PCs is way more common than on Macs. And the same thing on Sun, HP workstations etc.
I really don't buy the Ballmer's explanation, which is based on expensive (?) hardware. I would say, that it's more likely that;
a) large market share of Windows and applications for Windows
b) expensive software
is more likely the reason which has created this overbloated group of people who don't pay for their software.
I agree with Ballmer on one point, though. We really should have $ 100 or even cheaper PCs.
Why should we be paying $ 300 for a PC that is several times as fast as is needed? I wish I could buy a PC for 50 bucks that had a even a tenth of the performance...
In fact, I can...at least if I'm lucky enough to find someone who would sell a second hand PC.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
It's not really justification, but there is something to the cost between hardware and related software. When I buy a CD burner, it generally comes with Nero. For general purposes (burning data discs, audio disks, converting from MP3) it's pretty good software, burning is easy and effective. Back in the day it used to be that most burners came with Roxio, which was fairly simplistic and easy for users to use as well.
When DVD burners because moderately affordable, I bought a 4x burner. The DVD software it came with was crap. The UI as best was confusing, and while it could burn video DVDs it was quite restricted in what you could do with menu layouts and/or video conversion. Cost of decent DVD authoring software: more than twice that of the burner.
The same software is about half the price now, but of course now I can buy a burner that's 16x for less than half the cost of my original 4x.
As for OS piracy, you buy a computer, then you have to pay half again the cost to get the OS which then gets infected or croaks immediately upon first hitting the internet unfirewalled. That, or you get the cheaper "included" version of the OS, which is locked to the hardware making upgrades a pain in the butt, and supposedly non-transferrable. Then, you must pay again near the same amount for office software when all you want is to type a document. (this is for Joe user here, I run dual-boot with 'nix and tossed my MS-Office copy for OO).
For some applications software has gone down in price, or FOSS alternatives have arisen. For others, the price has gone up drastically. Remember when you could get a shareware copy of a game at $5, play it, like it, and then send in for a registered/full copy for $25 more. New games now are coming in the range of $60-90... a pretty chunk of change.
I'm not condoning piracy but when people find the cost of shelling out for various software far exceeds that on the hardware's pricetag, piracy will happen. New PC: Add to the cost the OS, Productivity software, antivirus, and perhaps some hardware firewalls (router, etc). When one buys a car it runs, with gas being an expectation. When one buys a fridge or stove it runs. DVD players require discs to play, but there's no cost of OS or other unexpecteds.
Basically what Steve is saying: "The [hardware] cost of computers is hurting our margin". Right Steve, you are an idiot.
Computers have never been cheaper.
In fact, most people wonder why the cost of the software has remained the same when the computers that they buy have continued to increase in performance and decrease in size.
The only true justification for the cost of the software, especially in light of its commoditizing competitors is that the not free software offers more value, performance, and a higher level of reliability than its free counterparts. I think small business server offers a pretty good value for the money - SQL Server, Exchange, and a file server all on one box.
XP is a bit high especially with the price gouging Professional edition that offers "features" such as remote access. In general, MS is going to need to offer more, for less. Office is also overpriced, and getting into a $600 commitment for XP+Office is pretty much outrageous. There needs to be a "correction" in the MS market place.
My thoughts to MS: Stop whining deliver more for less.
Must have missed something, if I can't afford a pc, chances are I will not be needing any software.....
Microsoft has finally, at the highest levels, gotten as scared as /. readers have always said it SHOULD be. Here we have Ballmer, a shrew manager and businessman saying pure nonsense that he could not possibly believe. And last week /. reported a Gates interview blaming the flakey reputation of his joined-at-hip browser/os duo on the way users use the products...do you think Billy Billions really can be that stupid and still have made the company as dominant as it is? Billy bull and Ballmy bull! This is pure desperation talking at us.
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
Balmer's an idiot. Counterproof is available right where I live:
Low-end PC for 299,- Euros
That's without software. If you want a windos with it, it's 399,- Euros.
Does the ape really think dropping the price to, say, 199,- without software and 299,- with windos will reduce copying of windos? Yeah, right.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Kerry said no such thing.
Kerry is simply pointing out that unless we get international agreement on some level on attacking countries we see as a threat, then we'll always be viewed as a rogue and will find other countries fighting against us, if only covertly.
The Iraq war seems to be popular mainly in the whitehouse; I can find no one else who thinks it was a good idea.
Seriously, the world's biggest software monopolist who conciously fucks with standards, formats and compatibility simply to push us along the upgrade path like lambs to the slaughter telling us that problem is fucking hardware? Maybe that works with the strippers in Bangkok but not here.
...... got your ears on Steevie?.....Linux (etc.) because that's what will run on it and that's what they can afford. Not your shit.
Tell you whut Steevie - show me how the $238 pc I have is going to make your life perfect and what you will tell me is I don't even have enough hardware power and resources to run YOUR FUCKING SOFTWARE on it.
So don't tell us the problem with your software is that no one gave us a free pc to run it on. Every years hundreds of thousands of people send old pcs to Asia to run
Considering that your average PC is just about one of the worst things you can toss into a landfill, should we really be encouraging people to toss them out even more rapidly than they already do, by making them cheaper?
The main driving force behind waste is making the (sticker) price of everything we consume trivial.
Then again, this is a slightly different issue.
For those not RTFAing:
"PCs are not selling to the lower end of the population in China and India. People buying machines there are relatively affluent. So...should the prices be lower? Not really. Until government and situational factors reduce piracy...those affluent people cannot pay, so they don't pay," Ballmer said.
Everyone seems not to be reading what he said. Does this not seem perfectly rational/reasonable?
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
The real reason so many people pirate music is because players cost too much.
If Apple reduced the price of an iPod to $50, then no-one would bother pirating mp3 files, would they?
Ballmer really does confuse me sometimes.
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
I'd have thought that software piracy was more related to Microsoft trying to force everybody to upgrade, upgrade, upgrade, so that it can maintain its income.
Each new version of Windows usually needs a complete hardware upgrade: you either run with the latest hardware or have Windows running slowly on your old hardware.
The only reason that most people need to continually buy new hardware is because Microsoft designs its operating systems to the standard spec (or what it assumes will be the standard spec at the time of its release).
Linux/Open Source/Anti Microsoft News
Of course not. He's very reasonably suggesting that by saving money on hardware, consumers will have more money to spend on software. It's only reason to ask a highly competitive market with relatively low margins that doesn't impose any sort of EULAs on their customers to cut margins further to support the software industries copyright protected markets with much larger margins and restrictive EULAs.
Tomorrow I'll be explaining how we can improve customer satisfaction by eliminating competition.
Search 2010 Gen Con events
Steve Balmer has nothing intelligent to say. Who keeps getting his quotes, from where?!?! are they actually getting them from, and why or how is this slashdot news? I come here to read news posts that are interesting. Not soap opera media attacks.
Make a 'home license' for products like Office, etc. that costs $30, and keep the corporate licensing the same. In this way, people would be more apt to pay a few $ for the software instead of pirating, but no revenue would be lost from corporate sales. MS would be bound to make more money than they are now (I don't know a single non-corporate entity that has payed for Office)
I don't believe this guy said that. Is it possible that he's thinking that reducing the price everyone will buy a PC and there would be an increase in potential customers? Would people buy an OS for $XX in countries where software piracy is not even reglamented??
This guy is even out of his mind or they really have some evil plans.
Why would I pay $300 for a $3 CD I can get on the corner?
If that's the way he feels, then Microsoft should start their own cheap hardware division, and then they can really find out if that's true. They shouldn't be asking the rest of the industry to be footing the bill for their problems.
// file: mice.h
#include "frickin_lasers.h"
As in the old TV series White and Black everything is twisted. I live in an "emerging country" and the cost of a M$ license is unaffordable. Here it's almost the same to buy a computer (only Hw) than to buy a M$ license. (u$s 300 each) Inspite what this "executive" could say, at least the hardware you can buy, it really works!!!! (and I don't have to stay 2 hours downloading a patch)
Software is not just the operating system. Oh, the OSS zealots will flame me for this, but let's just say that, for your $100 computer, all software titles fell to ten percent of their cost today. For the mass market, woo hoo! Given a $25 OS that comes with a web browser, however faulty, and an e-mail client, they can be underway in short order. Add onto that a "home edition" of a productivity suite for another $10 and a good graphics package a la PhotoDeluxe or one of its commercial competitors for another $10, five or six games for a total of $30, and you've come out with a very usable computer for $175.
But now look at a commercial desktop. Let's say the same $100 worth of hardware does the trick. Your OS is the "Pro" version, costing $40 instead of $25. Then you need a development suite, which will set you back $50, plus something like TOAD for $70. Don't forget the office suite that you can get for the low low price of $25 because you bought in bulk, but it doesn't include the project management component, another $30, nor the superwhammadyne drawing package for another $30. Add to that a scattering of productivity pieces for $7 each ($35 total). Before totalling, though, you have to add in the vertical market software that is required for your industry. They're going to come in at between $250 and $500 for most seats, because even the small time vendors are in with this new 10% pricing paradigm. And, lucky for you, you only need two for each workstation.
So your commercial desktop costs $1130 to put in place, less than 9% of which is the cost of the hardware. See the leak?
The Spoon
Updated 6/28/2011
This should be a wakeup call for hardware vendors to DROP M$ LIKE A ROTTEN POTATO .
They've just come out and said, you guys don't provide value to the equation, we do. We want the biggest part of the pie.
The Dells and Gateways of the world can still make their piddling single digit margins selling their hardware the penguin people just as well as 'doze users. (Hell, if they don't have to pay the M$ extortion, that's more money for them).
Microsoft, on the other hand, has nothing else to offer. They must convince consumers that they provide some sort of value for their money.
The only way M$ can make a rational argument for this is in a package lease kind of deal, where the customer coughs up $25 / month. Out of that, the pie has to get split up among : 1) the hardware provider, 2) the ISP, 3) the software providers.
Software piracy isn't due to expensive hardware; it's due to expensive (or, to be more precise, overpriced) software.
RMN
~~~
Okay...let me get this right....
In the past 5-10 yrs computers have dropped from $3,000-$4,000 for a full system. To $500-$1,000 for a FULL system.
That is 75% - 84% drop in price. Meanwhile, Microsoft's operating systems have dropped how much?
Hardware manufacturers are now commodities making $10-$20 on many cards that used to have $100 profit.
If anything, I think software piracy would drop dramatically if I could buy Windows XP or Office for $50, or professional editions for $100 (and upgrades for $50).
Anyone think Ballmer's has big balls for just saying this publicly?
And if I could get a computer for $100....why the heck does my Xbox cost $150 with 3 yr old technology? *humpf*
First he says that iPod owners are all theives (which is weird, because most of the music purchased online goes onto iPods), now he's saying its the hardware company's fault that his product is pirated.
Let me set this straight for you, B-man. The reasons for these two phenomenons are VERY similar:
1) People mainly pirate music because almost NO ONE feels that a CD is worth $17. Its price gouging, its unfair, they stifle competion, and the record company fatcats are getting disgustingly wealthy by ripping off artists and the public while pushing a mediocre product.
2) People priate MS software because almost NO ONE feels that their OS is worth $300, and almost NO ONE feels that their Office package is worth $400. Its price gouging, its unfair, they stifle competion, and the coporate heads are getting disgustingly wealthy by ripping off coders and the public while pushing a mediocre product.
Clear? Good.
Ballmer is either stupid or just plain misleading. The average person sees hardware as a physical commodity to buy. They really don't mind paying a few hundred for a computer, but sure, cheaper is always better.
However, they see software (aside from the cheap media costs) as intangible, as something ludicrous to pay much for. When you start approaching $60 or so for software, people start turning their heads away.
Nevermind the research and production and development costs. We're talking about the reality of the money source, here -- people.
It's funny to think there's people out there who will pay over $60, let alone well over $150 for a shrinkwrap copy of Windows. That's just insane.
'Cause you know there is no software piracy on cheaper hardware devices like the X-Box (isn't that about a $100 PC?) or PS2.
And DVD players are so cheap that no-one wants to pirate movies.
Xesdeeni
And with digital TV sets, the cost of the hardware could be reduced even more, just a bluetooth keyboard/touchpad_or_mouse combo, and a small tivo_ps2_xbox_ipod_mediacenter box, it could be very cheap, and standardizable.
They never steal anything, like GUI's, disk compression, the Spyglass web browser, Palm PC's, handwriting recognition tablets, MS/DOS, or Borland's development staff. Steve really has the moral high ground here.
There *will* be a decline in piracy of MSware as more and more people migrate to Linux.
The decline in Windows and Office sales will be accompanied by a corresponding decline in piracy of same.
It must be expensive hardware than doing it, there's no othere explanation. I mean, the price of the hardware necessary to build a new top-of-the-line system is maybe a full hundred dollars more expensive than the OEM costs of MS Windows an Office, combined! That's a rediculous amount of money!
What next, automakers blaming accidents on migrating pigeons?
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
The High Price of hardware??
Is he Joking? How about the Extremely High price of software. For crying load i can get a new computer for less than the cost of a full retail copy of office. And if you want figure in the upgrade in 2 years your up to 7-8 hundred dollars easy..
We need to face the fact that we pay err are charge way to much for software.. This method of though was formed after realizing that microsoft still had 35 BILLION in cash..
This idea won out over the whole "global warming" idea... but, they haven't ruled it out yet. I hear that people are more productive at piracy when the temperature is warmer.... some study was recently posted about this...
So maybe he's half right. Piracy is certainly also caused by inexpensive hardware (as in Why should I pay $700 for software that I'm going to run on a $29.95 computer?"). So piracy is caused by expensive hardware or by cheap hardware. Simplifying theequation, piracy is caused by hardware. Q.E.D.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Or it could be expensive software. I don't know I could be wrong here.
God, I love reading quotes from this idiot! He is a marketing person's worst nightmare in the form of a bald gorilla. Keep up the great work, Steve ;-)
"Klaatu, verada, necktie!" -Ash
Mod AC parent up. Its a typical anti-M$ slashbot, but it makes some insightful points.
...but MS needs to change their business model to full subscription service (which would no be popular, as it's currently NOT one).
How/why? Think of it as content delivery instead of software. Most content delivery services heavily subsidize the hardware costs - DirecTV, Dish, Cable, Cell Phones, etc. all will give you free hardware or let you buy the good stuff at a reduced rate. Even TiVo, which is really just a software company with data updates, has subsidized the hardware in the past. All to get you locked into a contract or hook you on a service which is billed monthly.
What if microsoft stopped selling stand alone discs and oem copies? What if you could only subscribe to the MS operating system for $19.95/mo (33.95 for the pro version, and 7.95/connection/mo for the server version, of course) plus $9.95 for the word/excel productivity add-on? Now what if you could buy a Dell 4600 in a standard config for $99 with a two year MS committment, and get a $99 rebate? Or buy any computer and get a $299 rebate when you sign up for 2 years of MS service? They'll still give you all those free updates, like they do now, but they'll have a steady revenue stream from subscriptions.
Steve Ballmer is right. And wrong. And I expect a future where I'll have to pay the software bill along with electricity, phone, cable, and beer-of-the-month.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
"We're more secure than the other guys," he said. "There are more vulnerabilities in Linux; it takes longer for Linux developers to fix security problems. It's a good decision to go with Windows."
From this story.
Sounds like Steve has been hitting the crack pipe again.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
There are already 50 dollar laptops out there. I wonder what OS comes on these things?
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
I can honestly say my 200 dollar processor has nothing to do with my pirated version of windows.
1) connect to the internet
2) help kids with schoolwork
word processing
drawing
page layout
print to cheap color printer
3) web connection
4) play lightweight games - most non-geeks use game consoles for "real" games
Even better if it were "instant-on/restore-to-default-state-on-power-on" like the old Commodore 64 or Cybersource's Linux-based Safe Internet Computer
A manufacturing-cost-reduced Pentium-1 based computer running Linux, MS-Windows NT Workstation, or MS-Windows 98 could do all of these things. Sadly, viruses and exploits are a crippling threat on the no-longer-maintained MS platforms.
Hmm, here's a thought:
Mod one of those open-source Linksys routers to include a web browser and some way to run that browser remotely - VNC, X, faked MS-Windows Terminal Server, java-in-a-web-browser, it doesn't matter, then block all direct traffic between the LAN and the internet. *Poof* instant "browsing appliance" and ultra-secure firewall all in one. Of course, you'd lose bookmarking, printing, and saving of web pages, but in some environments that would be a plus. Hmm, combine this with an old 486 running NT for schoolwork and you've got a nice, cheap system.
Note to patent hoarders: It's obvious to those skilled in the art HOW to do the above, it's just a bit of work.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Does he think that cheaper hardware will make copying software harder to do?"
No, your reasoning is wrong.
Reducing the cost of hardware leaves budget for buying softwares.
Give your mum a free PC and she will buy a Windows license to go with it, which she would have copied from you if she had to buy the PC too and go over budget. Do that a hundred thousand times and you get the picture.
That's the logic behind the idea.
Face it folks.
You can get a descent PC for $899 including an lcd monitor.
Add $300 for Windows and $499 for office and half the price of the pc is for Microsoft sofware!
Balmer is soooo full of shit and he is trying to make a lie become a truth.
If I can not afford more than $900 for a new pc do you think I am going to pay these outrageous fee's for software? I am just going to install BSD or if I need Windows, pirate it. Plain and simple.
In 1995 MS office cost $175 while the average cost of a pc was around $1800. Do the math with costs?
Now the percentage is approaching 50%!
http://saveie6.com/
Ballmer seems to ignore that the problem isn't 100$ hardware, or 50$, or 10$. The problem for emerging countries are the 300 bucks (minimum) to get MS Windows + Office.
20 years ago:
Hardware:
5MHz CPU
512KB RAM
20MB HDD
14" monochrome CRT
Total price: $3000
Software:
MS-DOS: $60
Operating system = 2% of total cost
Today:
Hardware:
2.4GHz Celeron
256MB RAM
40GB HDD
15" SVGA LCD monitor
Total cost: $500
Software:
Windows XP Home OEM: $100
Operating system = 20% of system cost
The price of the OS has increased by an order of magnitude relative to hardware costs... and the cause of piracy is expensive hardware? Pull your head out, Ballmer.
is that there's always someone to blame.
I don't get it.
Make fun of Bush: +5, funny (or insightful). make fun of Kerry: -1, Troll. Let's at least be consistent, and perhaps less hypocritical
the problem is that consumers and even many businesses percieve software as being of little value.
... all for $500 (including hw). Because, after all, what good is a computer with no software?
I know companies (here in the third world) that wouldn't hesitate in spending 10K on a new router or sophisticated server, but get offended if you were to charge them $300 for a piece of custom built software it will take you 2 months to write.
Hardware is like a VCR.. software is like a movie. Users want cheap movies, but don't mind spending for the coolest VCR.
Ballmer wants to lower the price of hardware so that he can get a bigger piece of the $500 pie.
Another problem with software: you want to have all kinds of software.. but to get it is expensive. People here (in S.America) EXPECT to get Office, an Anti-virus program, Corel draw, Nero, Adobe premier, and even AutoCAD preinstalled on their system
By the time hardware manufacturers can produce a decent PC for only $100, the hardware will be crammed full of all kinds of DRM goodies to prevent you from illegally copying or using illegally-copied software.
The low cost would just be an inducement to "upgrade" to a shiny new computer that will only let you do what They wany you to be able to do with it.
Running an aplication without the use of an OS ... uh-huh. Exactly *how* this application is supposed to run is beyond my imagination.
You don't have a very good imagination. All those early home computers could run programs without an OS. I could fire up my Atari 800, type in a program from Compute! magazine and save it on a tape and run it whenever I wanted. There was no OS. And before you go and say that the BASIC interpreter was the OS, keep in mind that you could type in an assembly listing using a program called "MLX", and that AtariWriter was written in assembly, and came in the form of a cartridge like a video game. No OS was required at all.
Same goes for TRS-80 Models I, II, II, CO-CO, etc, the Commodore PET, the Apple I, II, the original IBM PC. These machines may have had some sort of OS available but they could all run programs directly off tape, ROM or floppy as the apps themselves could contain all the service routines you needed.
I wouldn't store sensitive data on a public system, but I'd store the bulk of it on one as most stuff on my PC isn't all that sensitive. For the rest, I'd keep it on a USB drive, or burn it to a CD. No need for an OS for that either.
I see things returning to the days when the OS wasn't front and centre (back in the day, you'd at most have a rudimentary BIOS). For inexpensive "appliance" machines, the modern OS and BIOS will merge into a "super BIOS" where the BIOS becomes more capable and/or the OS diminishes in visibility. The XBOX is heading that way--you just plug in the game (app) you want and turn it on--no click "start->games->etc..." or windows to navigate, etc. There's a market for a PC like that, where you just plug in the word processor, or email, etc (or at most select it from a very simple menu). That would serve many people quite well.
Microsoft is free to charge whatever they want. But Microsoft is not free to charge more than the market will bear without consequences. If they charge more than the market will bear, they lose customers or encourage piracy. (I know, the copyright violations are still illegal. But Microsoft makes the illegal more tempting for many people, and many people are quite bad at resisting temptation...)
That's interesting considering that greater than 90% of all installed Macs have completely legitimate software on them .... the last time I heard that number was below 50% (for a totally legit system) on the Windows side.
And since Apple hardware is more expensive (at least initial purchase) then this hardly holds any water.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
I was just looking at the latest Fry's Electronics ad yesterday. They had a low-end Athlon 2600+ board w/ CPU, I think, for $45. Throw in a cheap box and power supply for $50, and maybe a 40GB HD for $40, and you're approaching that. This is for white-box/retail stuff.
You can believe that Dell or HPaq could pump these things out, as could any white-box computer VAR, for $100. Oh, this doesn't include an OS. So throw Linux on it ($0). What Steve really means is that the price of the hardware has to approach $0.00 so that Microsoft can still sell WindowsLite (or whatever they'll call it) to the computer mfgr for $80 wholesale (leaving the mfgr $20 markup).
But having a $100 computer (with OS, whatever it happens to be) won't make the "legit" software applications any cheaper, and so the pirated versions will still outsell the legit ones 100-1.
I guess Ballmer expects that being able to get the PC hardware for $100 instead of $500 means that customers would then be willing to pay $300 or so for a licensed copy of Windows, right?
Wrong. I'm willing to bet that a significant number of people willing to run an unlicensed copy of Windows on one $500 PC are willing to run *five* unlicensed copies of Windows unlicensed on *five* $100 PCs.
He should be focused on making his software cheaper.
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
Delusional.
"I'm not ashamed I can't function in society like I'm supposed to." - Paul Westerberg
...Ballmer's argument is not in line with the path MS is taking with OS and application development. The only exception is with "XP Starter Edition". The next big thing is Longhorn, which will probably need a P4 with 512MB and 3GHz processor to run really nicely. I know hardware prices are coming down all the time, but will such machines really cost as little as $100 for a *complete system* of this kind by 2006?
Hardware margins are already quite low, and MS is not doing much to slow the increasing processor demands by its products. Ballmer's putting a lot of pressure on the hardware guys and not everyone can sell a PC at a loss like MS does with the XBOX. I say it's time for MS to meet PC makers half way and offer its OS to RETAIL customers at a significant discount--maybe under $50 for XP Home--and give it to PC makers at half that if they really believe in PCs for the masses.
Software Piracy Due to Expensive Hardware, Says Ballmer
Hahahhahehehehehahahahahaha!
That Ballmer's a real cut up!
It seems to me, as I read that article that what he is really saying is this:
Piracy is bad! People in underdeveloped countries use Internet cafes because they cant afford computers of their own. In India and china there are 5 times as many hotmail users as their are computers. Therefore, if we force hardware companies to sell $100 computers to all these people, we (M$) will have 5 times as many new people to charge for our software.
It really sounds like he is very uncleverly hiding a vie for market share in a "Raa! Raa! Piracy is Bad, WOOOOHAAAAAAAAA!" kind of speech.
I fail to see the connection between current piracy levels and the creation of a HUGE new market for MS to sell their crap.
"Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
I hope Bush isn't teaching math, 'cuz it's fuzzier than ever.
It's better to compare the percentage of the prices are actually profits. Hardware, the profit margins are razor thin (or in some cases, at a loss to maintain market share; this is especially true in the hard drive business. Those in the hard drive business who are late to market with a specific new feature or capacity can't really sell at a profit as their competitors have drove the prices down already). Compare that to bloated software prices and ever increasing "restrictions" and fine-print. Just imagine what would happen to the auto industry if they imposed such restrictions as "not being able to sell it later" or restrictions on where and how you can drive it, or when you can drive (aka a curfew).
Steve Ballmer was caught smoking crack while doing an interview with Zaff-Davis.
Does he really think that people pirate because HARDWARE, which takes a lot of time, energy and equipment to manufacture, is big, bulky and very tangible, and that they cannot duplicate with resources at hand, is thought by the consumer to be too expensive?
Isn't more likely that they think that CD that can be copied for 25 cents at any computer is too expensive? Not to mention that there are competitive products for free, which give the impression that MS products are a rip-off!
Maybe it's just that I live in the real world, and he lives in the rarified air of MS Corporate BS!
HexaByte
HexaByte - he's a square and a half!
And people complain about Steve Job's reality distortion field. Ballmer's reality distortion field is way out there.
Steve Ballmer, citing the high price of gas, noted that the problem is the high cost of new cars.
Look at the writing on the wall. Most of you are correct in saying that since the cost of hardware is so cheap we are asked to look at the price of software and most of us realize that the MS "suite" of software (OS and Office) is too expensive for the functionality provided.
Microsoft wants the hardware to be very cheap so that they can start selling a subscription service. Most Americans wouldn't think anything of paying $35-40/month for a computer - heck, they pay that for their cell phones already. So if the hardware is $100, then where is the other $380 going (approx); and what about the next year and the year after that. MS would get incredibly rich.
The FOSS should also be looking to take care of that threat also and would be able to compete better. Imagine the following option:
1) Buy a windows PC w/a $40/yr subscription
2) Buy a FOSS subscription for $20 or less/yr
Then MS would really be staining their shorts.
Now, let's see: I want to get MY work done.
My clients are in video, audio, web, and print. I need:
Adobe Photoshop
Adobe InDesign
Adobe Illustrator
Macromedia FreeHand (because I like to work in it better than Illustrator)
Macromedia Dreamweaver
Quark Xpress (for cranky or fussy printers who are still runnning Quark 4 on OS9 or 2000)
Macromedia Fireworks
Macromedia Flash
Ableton Live (for music development)
Adobe Audition (for Windows based destructive editing)
Propellorheads Reason (for composition)
AVID DV Express, Pro edition (for video)
Adobe After Effects
Adobe Premiere (because it comes with the Video Bundle)
And, of course, MS Office
TOTAL COST OF SOFTWARE?
Assuming I buy most of it in Bundles (Adobe Creative Suite, MM MX suite, etc.) I come out to a rough number of:
$7700
At that point, a $1000 computer is one of THE LEAST of my expenses. When you bring in a DV camera, a decent audio ADC, Firewire RAIDs, scanners, printers, and similar crucial items, a $1000 computer becomes even less of a cost to the total operation. A $500 computer becomes insignificant - heck - it's almost impossible to find a decent multichannel audio ADC for less than $600.
Ballmer is COMPLETELY wrong, or, more likely: HE'S LYING. SOFTWARE is the expensive item, followed by peripherals. The last item is the computer. The expensive part of the computer is not in its cost, but in configuring it to one's needs, which takes time (which is extremely expensive) software (which isn't cheap) and peripherals (which can be cheap or extremely expensive).
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Does he think that cheaper hardware will make copying software harder to do?
He can think it all he wants, doesn't change the fact that he's a fucking idiot, not to mention one fat assed monkey.
--Nuintari
slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.
That may be his point, but if so, it is a dumb one. Yes, it is true that if one spends less on a PC, they may have more money to buy software. But this point makes a number of assumptions. First, cheaper PC's will let people with less money buy PC's. So they will not "save" any money because they don't have the extra money to begin with. Second, there is the assumption that the saved money would be spent on software. But why? Especially when it's available for free. If I had no moral obstacle to taking software without paying, why would an extra $200 in my pocket change that? I think Steve-o is really off base with this one. But that is not unusual.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
"That don't make no sense"
Dogma - "let's just say we'd like to avoid any empirical entanglements."
10 years ago..
$2000 486-66Mhz came with an $100 OS (Win3.1)
Now..
$400 Celeron comes with $100 (OEM price) OS. Even if Dell/HP get it for $40, its still 10% now vs 5% then.
It seems to me that people are allowed to tell boldfaced lies and get away with it. Was it always like this or are people just getting more flagrant about it? Or maybe people dont care about the truth anymore.
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
I have SEVEN "sub-$100 machines" in my care. Assorted P75, 133, 200, 350 and they all run either Linux or BSD. None of them are capable of running Win 2000 or XP.
Ballmer forgets that the reason people have expensive, high-spec machines is because THATS ALL XP WILL RUN ON.
Good lord, Steve, get a clue!
I wish at was Friday, but I dont want to wish my life away. So I wish it was last Friday.
Funny that Microsoft is advocating cheaper, lighter PC's while Micro$oft continues to bloat out their operating system requiring MORE RAM, MORE CPU, MORE Disk, etc. Add to the bloated OS the various flagship products contained within Office and it's easy to see why people 'need' the higher end hardware for basic office productivity.
Ironically, the way that users could afford cheaper PC's with lower resources as advocated by Balmer, is to run Linux (and the users save on the cost of the OS and Applications to boot!). Heck, you could boot off Live CD's and use smaller capacity hard drives for storage. The additional benefit is a much more stable and secure platform for users.
You can copy software. You can't copy hardware. People want a good deal.
So they copy software and look for the cheapest hardware that does what they want.
I don't see how the price of the hardware makes much difference except maybe on the off chance that people spending less on hardware might buy more software. But it's much more complicated than that.
I have first-hand knowledge of both Thailand and China, and I can tell you that the hardware there is already cheap by our standards. But it's still beyond the reach of most of the population. Ballmer does make a semi-interesting point about the cybercafes (although he manages to scramble it, like most of his other utterances)--the people can't afford to have a PC at home, so they have adopted a scheme that they can afford. And therein lies a fundamental point that Ballmer and Co. just don't get: They would have to practically give away PC's with Windows already loaded to get these people interesting in taking one home with them.
The other issue facing MS is one of national pride, which they also don't seem to get. I know from my own experiences that many Asians regard MS as an arrogant and obnoxious US company, and their monopolistic game plan causes a significant amount of anxiety, and some degree of embarrassment, for both governments and end users. When they pay for Windows, where does their money go? Back into Thailand or China? No, it goes into Ballmer and Gates' pockets. And then they get to watch Ballmer on video do his "monkey-boy" prancing at MS presentations, or Gates going on about his great vision for the future, which is something that even makes me squirm to watch. Do the Thai and the Chinese resent giving their hard-earned money to a bunch of greedy American bozos? Hell yes they do.
Trying to sell marginally usable and drastically overpriced software to people in other countries without giving them some reason to feel good about their money going overseas is never going to work for MS, or any other company. You've got to give something back, and you've got to make the buyers and users feel like they have a stake in it, otherwise you're just another foreigner intent on taking advantage of the locals. The Chinese still remember the Boxer Rebellion and the occupation of Manchuria very clearly. A little thought will show why the Chinese want their own version of Linux and not Windows on their PC's. It makes perfect sense from a Chinese point of view.
Ballmer's biggest problem with Asia is that he appears to be completely incapable, like many Americans, of even recognizing that the Chinese, the Thai, or anyone else in Asia, might have a point of view different than his own.
As one of the volunteers running the "Big game list" ;) quoted above, I'll point you to the best-of-the-best showcase game we've got at the moment. It's not on the list yet because it hasn't passed our tests, and it's an early beta, but have a look anyway:
,but so small that most users can't notice it consciously without deliberately looking for it. Yet... We continue to see lazy dumb-ass failed C++ devs who try Java for a few weeks, can't be bothered to learn it, then decide to slate it.
http://www.megacorpsonline.com/screenshots/
(I'm hoping they have enough b/w for this). Yes, that's a pure java FPS game with realtime shadows.
It is a matter of simple fact that Java execution speed is within 5%-10% of C++ execution speed for every app. For almost all apps, Java is within 1%-2% of C++. This assumes that the code is written by an equally competent java dev as C++ dev. This also assumes you look at the app as a whole - e.g. in games, java performance may be as much as 30% behind C++ on a single frame or two, but at 60 frames per second that difference vanishes overall; it makes a difference
At the same time, those expert C++ devs with a genuine interest in learning new things who try java seriously, and give themselves a few months to learn it properly, quickly find it's a hell of a lot better than they expected. Feedback I get privately usually runs along the lines of "I really miss X from C++, but Y and Z from Java just about balance it out so that I feel Java is better overall. Far from perfect, but definitely better".
PS there's a preferred URL for the Big Game List (whose real title is "Java Games Factory"), which now has it's own domain, although the content is currently identical: http://javagamesfactory.org/
20 mil and I will! Learn Esperanto with 20M others.
I would not ever pay more for my OS than the computer. $100 computer doesn't mean I'm going to spend the $100+ for Windows. Don't rape me on software pricing so you can buy another private jet and I won't pirate your software so I can use my computer.
A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
Windows would be twice the cost of the computer. And that's supposed to stop people from pirating it?
steve
Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
... and Microsoft wants a bigger piece.
Nah. My theory is that Ballmer sees their problem as people are spending money on hardware that Ballmer thinks they ought to be spending on software. Every dollar that Intel/Dell/HP/etc makes is a dollar that Microsoft didn't make. No one should be expecting Microsoft to be lowering their prices in lockstep with any price reductions that the hardware vendors put into place.
What Microsoft is hoping for is a situation where cheaper computers are in the hands of the masses resulting there will be an even bigger demand for software. What they don't seem to realize is that, for poorer countries, that could easily mean an even bigger demand for counterfeited software. Or the folks in those countries will just load a free OS on those computers. Microsoft would like very much to prevent that from happening. (Good luck with that.) The trouble is that someone from a poor country has a small set of choices. Say they've got $500 to spend. They'd like a computer (perhaps so they can become computer literate and work for one of those outsourcing companies):
Ballmer seems to think that people will choose Option 1. I would contend that Option 1 is the last choice people will make. (Me personally? I'd go with Option 2 since it allows me to support the OSS "industry".)
Some day they'll understand that the world is not always looking for ways to send their hard-earned money to Microsoft.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
"PCs are not selling to the lower end of the population in China"
The average yearly wage in China is about $5000, and in India its about $2900. So, Balmer knows how to read basic english, or at least repeat something.
So, increasing the number of computers will lower the amount of software piracy. So, Balmer knows how to read basic english.
Whatever you do, don't lower the actual cost of software, no that'll never affect a person's choice to get for free what is normally expensive, especially in countries with those kinds of annual incomes.
"Software Piracy Due to Expensive Hardware, Says Balmer"
I think that it would make as much sense to say, "Software Piracy Due to expensive but useless Microsoft Millionaires!".
I'm sorry - this is completely insane. What right does he have to tell the hardware manufacturers to lower prices? The HW guys are producing an actual, physical product. If there are 10 grams of silicon in a chip, then the company must buy 10 grams of silicon, do something to it, then sell that 10 grams of silicon to the customer. A software company on the other hand, merely needs to toggle the voltage on a wire that someone else built and paid for. "Buyers of software pay for the work of the programmers," you say? Do you think that buyers of hardware are not also paying for the work of hardware designers? I'm not saying software should be free - obviously someone has put in some work and should be paid, but there's no reason it should be nearly as expensive as some would have it.
Of course, the only way I'd even consider supporting this idea if it allowed me to order the OS of my choice at purchase time.
Then again, maybe just the software licence(s) need to be included in ROM, and that ROM soldered on the MB. It's a thought.
Disclaimer: I don't mind ensuring that only licensed software is run. I just don't want the Windows Monopoly to force me to buy yet another copy of Windows with every new PC, when I already own more legal copies than I have hardware to run them on.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Actually, I'd love to see a $100 PC that could handle web browsing, maybe Email and some other basic functions (calculator, maybe some basic office-type apps). I would consider putting one by every phone in the house as a phone/information directory, one in the kitchen for accessing recipies (etc.) and maybe even one in the garage/workshop for woodworking plans, automotive info, etc. Need not be very muscular, say 1Ghz with 256MB/RAM and maybe a 10GB or so HD. Put an ethernet connection and I'll run the CAT5 to it, wireless would be a bonus. Small and portable would be required specs and battery operated would be a nice to have.
These would NOT replace my main PC which is tuned for gaming. They would allow more ubiquitous access to information. Mini "info-terminals".
I could do this now with a bunch of laptops, but it's very rare to find a decently functional laptop for $100. And most current older desktops are too big for the space I'd want to put them. Maybe hacked X-boxen? Transmeta chip systems? Ideas?
I keep five computers going with a few hundred dollars in OSS/GPL donations each year. After seeing how much some people spend on software I think increasing my level of donations would not be any big deal.
Since I got three of the computers used because they where "out of date" and wouldn't run the software people were using they were pretty cheap also.
If I wanted to get a copy of Windows Server 2003, Office XP, Maya, SoftImage, Dreamweaver Studio MX, Photoshop Suite,m etc. and I pirated it, it wouldn't be because the machine cost a lot of money - it would be because the SOFTWARE cost a lot of money. You wouldn't steal gas because the car cost too much. When will they realize that:
a) some people will always pirate anything that's readily available
b) some people will pirate software because they can't afford to purchase it
c) the price of their software is too high for many people
This is a question of whether or not people would reject 'free' (as in cost) software. Pirated software is most often cost-free or considerably cheap. Why would someone reject that? THAT is why people are pirating software.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
On the Commodore 64.
So PLEASE don't mention Java Applets. You're likely to get stoned for it.
Look. I-- I'd had a lovely supper, and all I said to my wife was "That piece of applet was good enough for Java".
Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
This is like saying that starving people in "Third World" countries simply need access to cheaper silverware to eat with...
kM
-- You can't drink all day. (Unless you start in the morning...)
Oh, I am sorry Mr. Ballmer, I never imagined it was the hardware manufacturers fault that your software is overpriced. So, who do I make my check out to.. Is that Ballmer with two L's or one?
As is often the case, this will take root with young people first. A case in point, my 14 year old son. He discovered Linux earlier this year and is using it about 90% of the time. He just ordered a wireless adapter that is Linux compatible so that he can use his notebook (which is now running Linux) 100% of the time. He doesn't have the demands and requirements of a business user, but, he and other kids are the ones that will eventually change the IT world to what they like and are comfortable with. Most kids in his 8th grade class are conversant with and like or use Linux. Just my two cents.....
http://www.busyweather.com/
Well I might not agree with what Barney is trying to say in theory, in practice im all for it! Cheaper hardware all the way!.. just cheaper hardware, without windows on it.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
"...And their are no infidels in Bahgdad!"
;)
The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
"The biggest problem we have right now is that people who should be paying for software aren't," Ballmer told an audience of technology executives at an industry conference here sponsored by market researcher Gartner.
Yeh, I'd say that is a problem. I'd also say, then you've known or now know that "what the market will bear" is baring itself for you to see, Stevie. Bear it or bare it and grin that chesire grin (and, maybe grunt), now.
Seems Stevie wouldn't know the truth if it bit him in his ass. Talk about (apparent) flip-flop. Just a few weeks ago, one of their shills said that the sales of computers with LINUX installed on them (sans windoze) was the cause or core cause of piracy or likely to increase piracy. Is this, then, Ballmerese to fall in line with the analysts' admonition that microsoft better "learn to love Linux"? It's not expensive hardware that is driving the cloning. even cheap hardware (or build-them-yourself) is not necessarily the reason for cloning.
Commoditized hardware, by definition is not "expensive", right? So, then, which people in the masses are contributing to the purchase of "expensive hardware"? What is the force behind this?
It's mainly people's addiction to windoze. That addiction has passed critical mass, and the market saturated, or supersaturated with windoze. Since people who already don't want Linux or who don't know about Linux/F/LOSS just only know windoze, then that is what they'll pirate--windoze and winwarez. Even so, it cannot be that incredible a loss for them (ms, no, but other s/ware companies... yes or maybe), as it's a small loss (for ms). Really, how many people stealing windoze will it take to hurt ms, considering the COST and PRICE of windoze and the medium by which it's delivered? How many of those people needed to hurt their bottom line can effectively USE the number of "stolen" installations (physically OR in virtual disks) and be located and identified as using but didn't pay for it?
Now, that critical mass is fizzing out, and Uncle Stevie is waving his HAND, trying to allay fears of the board and investors/analysts. All that hand-wringing angst is coming back to roost at home, for they have so wrought and rended the field that there's just very little fertile soild left in which to harvest OR grow. They ruined the topsoil, set ablaze but cemented over by rampant, unabashed greed and hammer-fisted pricing and distribution structures. They poisoned the sublayers by sowing emnity among some analysts, investors, and IT departments not afraid to shift, and high-profile enough to pierce the ms FUD veil.
His comments are probably frightening and dangerous to the hardware industry. I suspect those which are reactionary and bitter at ms' dangerously-placed comments now are going to even harder look to Linux to tie their calls into.
Ballmer's comments also could be a trial balloon to find which manufacturers are willing to splay themselves to "m's shaft" in order to dupe Congress or some legislators into allowing ms more of the hardware market. Of course, there will be some of those "share-whoreders" who'll literally RIP their clothes off to be had by ms. IF ms could consolidate more hardware and BIOS manufacturers into its warchest, they could then try to "hail mary" Linux development by choking off affordable manufacturing routes that have to exist for Linux to be installed with fewer incentives being needed to coax them in the first place--other than the sheer low cost of adopting Linux in manufacturing and IT, and soon, the office and home desktops.
Hardware is too expensive? What a proclamation. Hardware prices have been steadily falling, Stevie. What planet are you on? Or, what planet did Ballmer's container (body) come from? It must've popped out of a quantum slipstream or wormhole from an alternate universe after inputting bad trajectory coordinates and then been "populated" or occupied by
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Windows 2000 : $200
M$ Office 97 : $500
For Total = $700 per sub-core-CPU-user-seat-license.
It's very expensive !!.
M$ sucks 2'000-millions licenses from 1'000-millions persons using only O.S. & Office
M$ sucks $1'400'000-millions !!
open4fre ©
$300-400 dollars for software doesn't sound like a whole lot (hell, Ballmer's SOCKS cost that much!).
However, in the Walmart world (pretty much where everyone else lives) that it a lot of money.
IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
Pretty easy to refute him. I've even done a study involving DRM and music. If the cost were significantly reduced and the choices were available, people would just buy software/music. Instead, it's easier to pirate it.
The real trick is to find an acceptable price point where most people opt to buy instead of pirate. There will always be some pirates, but if it is easier to buy than DL, most will pick to buy.
I've got one good example: iTunes. Buck a song. Seems to do quite well and consumers can just buy what they want, not have to buy the entire, overpriced album.
Is to eventually convince people that cheap hardware and expensive software is just the way it is. Oceana has always had $100 computers with $1000 operating systems.
Right....the reason people pirate software is because hardware is too expensive. I have seen full systems go for the same price as M$ Office. That is some leap of logic Mr. Steve.
The gates in my computer are AND, OR and NOT; they are not Bill.
If lowering the hardware costs will prevent piracy, why do people still pirate PS2 or Xbox software when the hardware is only $149? Just today there was an article on GTA San Andreas being on the net a week before the official release.
I have been working complex, graphical Java apps for a couple of years now.
I have previously had many years of C and C++ experience.
Java with Swing is very flexible, especially with respect to event handling.
It is complicated, but after a while, you get further up the learning curve.
For us, the result is fast enough. We might be able to get faster results with C++ but we don't for a variety of reasons.
Our app is cross platform and we use:
JDBC for database access
XML parsers
JBoss for JMS messaging
Serial port communication
Socket communication
Eclipse for development
All these components are free as in beer. We can keep bumping up to newer versions and hire more programmers without adding licensing costs.
The serial/socket stuff in Java has a nice common interface built on top of java.io classes.
And we dont have to port it. No #ifdef WINDOWS stuff.
At a previous job, we used a proprietary messaging system with C++ and the cost of it was astounding.
JBoss/JMS is free.
Their answer to porting issues was simple: no Unix is allowed in our plant.
Our customers are always asking for custom graphics and we have always been able to do this with Swing.
SWT might be better, but we now have a considerable body of code that we reuse and I don't think we can afford to convert it all.
Java is actively supported and there are always new Apache or Sun libraries coming out.
The libraries are all well documented.
My only complaints with our setup are:
1) Eclipse does not have a screen builder, so we hand craft our screen code by hand.
2) Eclipse will print source files on Windows, but not on any Unix platform.
We are not doing 3D game programming or anything like that so the performance is quite acceptable.
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." -- Albert Einstein
My day is complete when I've marked someone as 'Foe'
oh wait...
I don't read or respond to AC posts
Spoon boy : Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only try to realize the truth.
Neo : What truth?
Spoon boy : There is no spoon.
Ballmer: Spoon? I only see a chicken with a dog's tail and a bulldozerhead
Neo: Wow. This guy is the one.
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
Some have said that a decrease in the price of computers will cause a decrease in the price of software. This isn't true.
Since they are compliments, a decrease in the price of computers actually results in greater demand for software and an increase in price. This is simple beginning college economics.
A simple example of this is to consider what has happened to the price of software as computers have gotten cheaper over the last few years--price has actually gone up. Software is more expensive now than it was 5 years ago.
What Ballmer is doing here is advocating lower hardware price precisely because he knows it means Microsoft will be able to set a higher price for Windows as there will be more demand.
No need to worry however, as influential as he may be, he certainly isn't powerful enough to lower hardware price just by saying it should happen.
"The biggest problem we have right now is that people who should be paying for software aren't," Ballmer told an audience of technology executives
Then why all the anti-Linux FUD if piracy's your biggest problem
"PCs are not selling to the lower end of the population in China and India.
Maybe this is because the lower end of the population has more on it's mind. For a start how about the fact that they live miles from anywhere have no electricity, running water, proper medical care etc. On the whole I'd say that lacking a PC ranks fairly low on their list of priorities. At best it'd be a mediocre way of keeping the goat pen gate shut.
So...should the prices be lower? Not really. Until government and situational factors reduce piracy...those people...don't pay
OK so we're at an impass. People over there can't afford a PC and you aren't willing to reduce the cost of Windows to make it more affordable to them. The cost of hardware has plummeted over the last 5 years as companies adopted their business model to the new global market by sacking loads of people and shifting the work overseas. As a result the percentage cost of a PC build that Windows represents has increased. If you're not willing to ship your operation to China/India/Taiwan and aren't willing to cut your prices the only course left is to tell people to install Linux rather than lay the blame on the hardware makers.
In recent months, the software maker has announced plans to introduce low-cost "starter editions" of Windows XP into countries including India, Russia and Thailand.
Great idea. Why have Linux and 3000+ applications when you have a crippled version of XP instead
"There's no appreciable amount of Linux on client systems anywhere in the world"
Yet!
Paris said Linux was dramatically more expensive than Windows. In...Brazil, it's the same thing
Err.... No it didn't. Paris said MIGRATING from Windows to Linux was dramatically more expensive. Is it Linux's fault that the legacy of years of proprietry file format use and software designed to stop people migrating has bumped the cost up. Migrating is a one time expense particularly when you migrate to open standards that save you from suffering the same fate again.
"Yes, we lost the city of Munich. But the fact that the same story gets told 65,000 times, and they are still diddling around to some degree...come on, where's the evidence?"
Munich paused to consider the risk of software patents crippling their project (don't want to step on other people's IP after all) and are now rolling again. "The evidence" will arrive soon enough.
Bill Gates, Microsoft's chairman, who said security will not be an issue in three years.
In 2002(ish) Brian Valentine said that security had never been a feature of Microsoft products. With a 15-20 year legacy of piss poor security I can't see Windows being secure for a lot more than 3 years.
Ballmer admitted that the company's "integrated innovation" message isn't easy to grasp. "Sometimes, our own people get confused about it.
That's probably because Integrated Innovation is the just another load of bollocks from the same marketing minds that talk of synergising creative energies or whatever wanky buzzword may come along. It confuses because in reality it means nothing of any substance.
Microsoft has no designs on the very high end of that market.
Why aim high when mediocrity is so profitable.
That would put our products out of the simplicity band for the companies we target
On the whole more FUD and Bullshit from the Ballmer stable. Another sign that creativity left MS years ago. .So you're describing your customers as simple? (See, twisting words is easy isn't it)
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
While you got the main point right, you make a perfect example of another thing that is absolutely ludicrous.
.. etc.
Let me illustrate with a comparison
I need to work on my car, I need
A Craftsman Philips screwdriver
A Craftsman Flat screwdriver
A Snap-On battery drill...
Do I really need the *specific* brand of tools I list? No. Why should it be any less ludicrous to specify a *specific* brand of software? A phillips screwdriver, any brand, can turn a phillips screw, any brand - there is only one reason that a given 'photo editing package' (for example), *ANY BRAND* cant work on photos produced by a different brand of photo editing software, and that is that it was *intentionally* made to use a proprietary format to prevent standards and compatibility.
If makers of hardware started using 'Fringle' (I made it up) screws, patented the design, so that you had to buy a 'Fringle' screwdriver for $129, it would be insane. I feel it is *just* as insane to do the same with software, yet everyone seems to just accept it.
...the cost of software in general.
One of the great things about linux, is it lets you learn for very little cost. Be it programming, database design, web page design, etc. Of course folks will buy a $100 PC, and still pirate... And some of us will buy the $100 PC just to run linux on...
--- I was far from home, and the spell of the Eastern sea was upon me. -Lovecraft-
He also states that it would not help piracy in some countries. Lower cost hardware lowering piracy only applies to countries that can barely afford computers at all, if they can even afford them.
READ
THE
DAMN
ARTICLE
YOU
NEWBS
This cost is also present in designing hardware.
What's different is the cost of reproduction.
Software is incredibly cheap to reproduce because it is merely a "signal", a pattern . Reproducing software costs no more that the cost of electricity.
Free (as in Freedom) Software is a good thing, but it not free as in cost. It's cost may be low and may be spread between many more workers than traditional software, but it still costs time and effort.
Hardware designs too could be done in the same way, but reproducing the hardware can not.
A company like IBM, on the other hand, which sells silicon but gives away information, can expect a long and prosperous future.
Unless IBM adds value to that information in some way compared to its competitors, it will end up as an also-ran like HP and Dell and all the clone box shifters.
IBM does not give away all of its information. It does not give away its hardware designs. I'm not even sure that any of its non-UNIX/Linux OSs are "open" in terms of specs. let alone code. IBM has the world's largest patent portfolio, containing a vast number of softwate patents. IBM is not giving these away.
IBM will survive because it has tricks up its sleeve like every other company trying to make a buck.It will provide its own proprietary enhancements to the "free" information to distinguish itself from HP, Dell, Apple, Sun, etc. There will also be a degree of vendor lock-in as a result.
Everyone is doing this: RedHat, HP, IBM, SGI. You may not believe it, but each of these companies adds its own "secret sauce" to that which is Free. IBM with its Linux port to S/390, SGI with its scalabiltiy patches and HP with whatever looks like corporate suicide this week.
These companies are doing a really good job of using the Linux bandwagon as a marketting tool. The funny thing is, people here are drinking the Kool Aid.
Stick Men
WTF? This is complete balderdash! All "in-box" drivers (i.e., included on the Windows CD) are installed to the hard drive at setup time. You don't ever need to "insert the Windows CD" anymore. That's how all of the OEMs set up systems now.
Anyone telling these poor souls that they need to go buy a full retail version of Windows just to get an in-box driver installed doesn't know ANYTHING about administering windows...
Perhaps the last time such people used Windows was in the Win98 days? Perhaps they should re-examine their biased assumptions?
To run a $299 Windows?
These folks pirate Windows because the version they can afford is crap, crap that they were already forced to pay $50 for despite not wanting it.
For those people, who's yearly wages are a fraction of that made by Americans, stealing windows is like stealing a $300/pill prescription drug that costs pennies to make.
I'd honestly like them all to switch to Linux, because piracy should not be condoned, but Microsoft brings it on themselves, and then passes the blame.
What I suspect Microsoft is eventually planning to do is to partially cover the price of hardware, under terms that require manufacturers to only produce drivers for Windows, protected by software patents wherever possible. Complying manufacturers will win in the marketplace, and Microsoft will have strengthened its hold on the market. Windows will further advertise Microsoft products and services, and undermine free alternatives for security reasons. MSN Explorer will be the default browser. Users will be able to order or rent and install software much more easily than if they walked to a store, but the software will either come from Microsoft or there will be a Microsoft tax (listing and certification fees) included. blah blah blah.
It would be brilliant for M$. It would sell a lot more copies of their software. Simply because (clearly) more new PCs would be sold, and Ballmer is assuming that most of them would be pre-loaded with Windows.
At the moment the Third World is running millions of old machines which probably started with Win95, but which have typically been upgraded with pirated coies of 98 or ME. This is the thorn in M$'s side. Ballmer wants to get the Third World moved onto Palladium machines with newer versions Windows (probably tailored to the Third World). That would make future piracy more difficult, and M$ would then have got the Third World onto the same sort of upgrade escalator as the corporates of the West.
Wrong or not, I do not think the guy was trolling. Being ignorant does not a troll make. Goddammit, I really wish people would quit calling everyone who is wrong a troll!
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
If the 'Fringle' screwdriver is the most used and widely supported tool, then of course that is what a *business* person is going to use.
Seriously, I do believe that people have lost perspective.
The grandparent is correct in all aspects. If your client base requires those bits of functionality, then your business damn well better provide the defacto standards for software tools to get the job done efficiently.
Now. If you are a prosumer or serious hobbyist, then knock yourself out and fiddle all you like. In fact, the market needs blokes like you. Competition and all that.
open4free ©
Have you ever heard of development costs? The software you use cost a TON of money to develop, and has a relatively small customer base compared to the hardware it runs on. Remember, all the web surfers in the world will be using the same type of hardware you're using, while a select few people actually NEED the software you're using. So, sure the software is expensive. The point is, that software is the real tool. The hardware is the platform.
If you're running all that software on one $1000 computer, then I pity your customers for your productivity.
Because they are so much more expensive, so they must pirate so much more. :)
But that isn't the case, many people admit to pirating less once they get a Mac, for many reasons.
Fellowship 9/11
I have to disagree with the original premise. I would sooner agree that piracy is encouraged by cheaper hardware.
think back to 1995 when the average decent PC cost almost $3000. adding $300 worth of software constituted 10% of the hardware price and was easy to justify.
now a decent computer can be had for $600. add $300 worth of software to it and it constitutes a whopping 50% of the hardware price!! this is not to mention how little legitimate software $300 will buy today.
This is the same reason I can't convince family members to buy a $600 19-inch flat panel. they reason that the monitor should not cost the same amount as the computer and then go looking for a $200 monitor that theyre going to hate.
A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
I was to understand Microsoft is pretty hush-hush about the terms of their OEM licenses.
Also, that 'copies all drivers to the HD' feature doesn't always work. I've been bit more than once uninstalling USB Host Controllers from devmgmt.msc only to have to hunt a CD with the required software down (you need it for some intel mobos). And there's the problem of hard disk corruption...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Fester Ballmer's idiotic pronouncements are starting to get even more idiotic than Scott McNealy's. Any idiot can figure out that the root cause of software piracy in developing nations is the extreme poverty. Does he really think that those poor workers making a few bucks a day to press and pack Windows XP discs or Xboxes are going to choose a legit copy of Windows over having some vegetables to mix in with the rice they eat three times a day?
Maybe if all of the big western companies that buy off politicians in developing nations to keep the work force oppressed and labor prices low would start paying a decent wage and providing some western-style health care benefits to workers in developing nations those people could afford legit software. But as long as they have a hard time affording food, software is going to get pirated left and right.
Its the $1000 worth of hardware that you have to buy for a good system - THAT is the problem. Not the fact that you buy 4 bits of software these days and it costs more than the hardware. What a steaming crock of smelly shit.
4 Words. Steve...loves...to...bullshit! yeahhhhhh!!!! yeahhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!! Who said you could sit down.
Go dance somewhere else monkey boy.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Software piracy is due to expensive software. ~$300 hundred dollars for Office it's not surprising.
"Ok Mr. Ballmer, please step away from whatever glue you've been sniffing." About says it all here!
[Now, I'm off to lift my le... Um, visit... at another place.]
I thought software piracy was due to the high SOFTWARE cost.
$200 for WinXP professional PER PC.
$100 for Microsoft Office, per PC.
Hello????
Who can argue when the hardware costs LESS than the software.
_________ Help me get a PSP!
Try the first rule of showbusiness: Give the people what they WANT.
.net passport that people can exploit to spam them. They want some specific things in roughly this priority for most people:
.hosts file.
People don't really want a messenger service bugging them to setup a
1. Enough of an office suite to get their basic work done.
2. Games that actually work without having to do 40 driver updates and config tweaking.
3. Integrated messaging for the services they use already.
4. Integrated antivirus.
5. Integrated utilities such as compression, disk maintenance, and settings migration/sync to portables and other machines.
6. Integrated antispyware.
7. An automaticly upgraded popup/ad/spam/antiworm system like a dynamicly maintained
8. Integrated multimedia apps like photo/video/audio editing.
As for MS, Office is so often bundled they're basicly getting the #1 priority all of the time, and trying really hard to keep people locked into their solution. As long as they can maintain that, they'll likely stay on top becuase people just can't rationalize giving up their primary work app when all their files since the beginning of time are slaved to it.
MS is doing pretty good on #2 as well, games mostly work these days and work well and fast. It's nothing at all like the days of making a custom config.sys and autoexec.bat to get enough memory and the right drivers for each game.
#3 has enough free options that it's usually not an issue, but IMs are so common now they should just be in the OS so people don't have to go download them. EVERYONE uses it.
#4 is an industry unto itself now but people seem to be getting pretty miffed at having to spend $50-100 for software that then wants you to pay $20/month after awhile to keep it from falling apart. Especially something that's become essential due mostly to software engineers not doing their jobs right.
#5 is something that was done halfassed. Yes XP can now read zip files (yay!) but really this needs to be fleshed out to cover all kinds of file and compression formats and add alot better maintenance than "Desktop cleanup wizard". MS automaticly updates things like THEIR codecs in media player, but if you want divx, xvid, real, etc, you're going to spend alot of time downloading things and praying you don't get spyware.
#6 Is a no brainer. Why the antivirus companies are not catering to this market is beyond me. Most people see spyware as a more immediate threat and annoyance due to the constant popups and browser hijacks, so they're willing to spend more on it than antivirus. But there's very little out there on the market. Yes adaware is great but how often do you see it on the shelves at CompUSA? Again this is something that should be fixed in the OS and probably legislated against so that the number of people trying to exploit the system for it goes down.
7. Again a no-brainer. Firefox does a decent job of this, but doesn't get rid of it completely. MS is starting to catch on, hence the popup blocker in SP2, but it still needs to be done a bit more agressively. I'd pay a decent amount per months for a system that would dynamicly log where all the ads come from and then just add the IPs of their servers to my firewall list.
8. Apple is winning tons of people here, and MS is ignoring it. So many people do photo work with digital cameras these days, this should be an obvious integration point. People will start demanding video and audio soon too. Yet the only decent solutions are $300+ apps like photoshop and premiere that you have to buy seperate. Most causual users aren't gonna spend that to remove the redeye from junior's 2nd birthday party. Granted most digital cameras come with some laughable halfassed attempt at photoediting software but the proprietary interfaces on them are HORRIBLE.
Now, the various other OS options out there do better and worse on various points. MS doesn't seem to want to integrate anything useful anymore. App
Introducing the new Occam Fusion! Now with sqrt(-1) fewer blades!
I mean THE Steve Ballmer of Monkey Developers fame ?(video).
Next we'll be said that it is the price of the bottle that makes the price of wine high, but whatever Ballmer drank before that show I highly recommend: it's a TRRRIPPP out of reality !
Anyway I guess that what Ballmer wanted to say it's the following: if the demaned quantity was bigger, Microsoft could still be abominably rich because instead of selling 1000 pieces at $100 (nominal revenue, $100K) we could sell 100000 pieces at $10 (nominal revenue, $100K) and Microsoft would get the same $$ cut while people would get the OS.
Problem is M$ wouldn't go as low as $10 because the market demand isn't COSTANT, but it can fluctutate (damn the people that doesn't want to upgrade with slower software or useless not demanded applications, we need more ingnorance and naivety to make profits !). Also, nobody could force M$ (not even M$) to put price at $10 if the people is happy to pay $20 (one more reason to breed ignorance and naivety)
In practice, Ballmer would like the PC to become cheaper because it would create more demand (good for M$) effectively shifting cost-of-making-new-customer to hardware makers, who obviously don't agree with his project of getting their own profits.
Problem is the demand for PC doesn't rise quick enough for a number of reason: one could be that a lot of people is overworked AND use to see PC as a work instrument and the last thing they want to do when finally at home is again more PC time : one gotta give users a TANGIBLE BENEFIT if they want them to naturally demand a good.
In my example, 'Fringle' isnt a type of screw or screwdriver, its a *brand* of screw/driver. 'Philips' isnt a brand (even if it may have been once) I dont have a problem with patents protecting something from competition for a *limited* time. But intentional obfuscation combined with illegal monopoly leverage, I do.
That Microsoft was allowed to *almost* completely lock out all possibility of competition in the OS and 'Word Processor' (as an aside http://www.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/wp.html) markets is a tragedy.
Different vendors/programmers should have the opportunity to provide the same 'bits of functionality' on a variety of platforms/brands, without being locked out by secret proprietary formats.
The state where a specific *brand* of software controls over 98% of the market for a particular *type* of software is *NOT* a normal or healthy condition, and *will* correct itself - its only a matter of time.
this is to promote embedded CE desktops..
more P.T. Barnum-like propoganda..
i hate microsoft.
Remember the cheaper DRM controlled hardware MS and SUN talked about many months back? Thats what they mean by cheaper hardware.
They want to control the hardware and force people to whatever license terms they see fit. The only cheaper hardware they like is the one which allows them total control to and through their software.
This is silly. So nvidia, intel, all the board manufacturers lower their prices so MS and the other corperate software giants can still sell their software at insane prices? "hey make your stuff cheaper cause they cant afford ours" Doesnt work.
I believe a sillier question is, "Does he think that lighter hardware will make copying software harder to do?"
But, really, it seems to me that I'm not bent on piracy... iTunes works for me because it makes it easy enough to get music that I want, without breaking any laws. I don't have to go looking on whatever file sharing network is popular today, I don't have to search the web, I just have to click on a couple of links in iTunes. I believe that stopping piracy is most easily accomplished by making it easier to get what you're looking for legally.
I'm sick of being unemployed, but I'm glad I don't have to work for a company whose high-profile CEO publicly makes these kinds of unwarranted assumptions. Nowhere in the article does Ballmer clearly identify how software prices have any relationship to hardware prices.
... The ability to do home networking and to create multiple user accounts on a single PC has been removed, while display resolution is capped at a maximum of 800 by 600 pixels. More important, users can run only three programs or have three windows opened at once, a limitation that research company Gartner believes could frustrate users and drive them to buy bootleg copies of Windows XP instead.
But lower prices have become part of Microsoft's strategy for gaining market share in developing nations. In recent months, the software maker has announced plans to introduce low-cost "starter editions" of Windows XP into countries including India, Russia and Thailand. These versions will be bundled only with entry-level PCs and will not be available for retail sale.
That's the closest he seems to come to linking the issues of software costs -- in this case, the cost of the OS -- to hardware costs. In the linked article, the software is described as being available only in Hindi. Even more significantly, says that linked article,
So, is the cost of an OS really the problem? Well, you can get by with OpenOffice software instead of Windows, find open-source chat and email programs, and compute away.
By the way...concerning everybody's favorite free (as in beer) software, the article says
The Microsoft CEO bristled at the suggestion that Linux is gaining in popularity as a client operating system at the expense of Windows. "There's no appreciable amount of Linux on client systems anywhere in the world," he said.
Verification of this assertion is left as an exercise for the reader.
Back when home PCs were an expensive novelty, my dad, who then worked at Texas Instruments, thought that the TI 99/4A ought to be given away for free with every purchase of an arbitrary suite of software -- this was before we all started using them for spreadsheets and word processing, and long before the Internet became commonplace. I wonder if Ballmer would dare to try to give away hardware pre-loaded with Micrsoft OSes and apps, charging people only for the software. If he did, I predict that given rampant piracy and the Open Software initiative, his attempt would flop.
"How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
Re:Ballmer's WRONG, hardware is cheap. Numbers her (Score:1) by The Cisco Kid (31490) on Thursday October 21, @03:14PM (#10590868) While you got the main point right, you make a perfect example of another thing that is absolutely ludicrous. Let me illustrate with a comparison I need to work on my car, I need A Craftsman Philips screwdriver A Craftsman Flat screwdriver A Snap-On battery drill... .. etc.
Do I really need the *specific* brand of tools I list? No. Why should it be any less ludicrous to specify a *specific* brand of software? A phillips screwdriver, any brand, can turn a phillips screw, any brand - there is only one reason that a given 'photo editing package' (for example), *ANY BRAND* cant work on photos produced by a different brand of photo editing software, and that is that it was *intentionally* made to use a proprietary format to prevent standards and compatibility.
You're completely wrong. When a client wants a Flash animation, it has to be a flash animation, and flash makes Flash animations.
When a printer expects a Quark Xpress 4.x file, you have to send them a Quark Xpress 4.x file - no ifs ands or buts about it.
When a program I'm using requires a Photoshop psd file and it's internal layering configuration in CMYK, GIMP isn't going to do the job, period.
The list goes on and on. When I'm called in to do audio mixing, it's usually done in ProTools. If I have to take files home, it is easier to take them home and work on them in ProTools. Period.
The only program I regularly "cheat on" is Illustrator, because I think it's a piece of shit, and I'd rather use FreeHand and then export from FreeHand as an Illustrator file. Too bad Macromedia has basically killed FreeHand - it's still better than AI, but that's a nother discussion.
When a client is PAYING ME to deliver in a specific program, I had better use the program. When I go to work on site, I have to know that program, and not its Free/OSS analogue. It's what I get paid to do.
Now if you want to dork around with analogical software on your own time - fine. But that's not how the professional world operates.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Ridiculous. If it was beneficial for hardware vendors to swtich from "M$" they would do so. Do you think the vendors like to be beholden to Microsoft? They obviously see it to be a valuable relationship. The reality distortion field is really large around here.
Oh, by the way slashbots: Microsoft just reported their quarterly earnings. Their revenue was $9.19 billion in the last three months, up from $8.22 billion the same quarter last year. Thats a 11% increase. Gross and net profits were up too.
It looks like they don't need to support the AC's advice after all!
Have you ever heard of development costs? The software you use cost a TON of money to develop, and has a relatively small customer base compared to the hardware it runs on. Remember, all the web surfers in the world will be using the same type of hardware you're using, while a select few people actually NEED the software you're using. So, sure the software is expensive. The point is, that software is the real tool. The hardware is the platform.
I completely agree with you. I wasn't *complaining about the high cost of software* - I was criticising Ballmer's idiotic notion that if computers cost $100 there would be less software piracy, by demonstrating that software is usually the most expensive part of a given computer system.
If you're running all that software on one $1000 computer, then I pity your customers for your productivity.
Actually I use several computers. the cheapest one cost me $1300 and the most expensive was $3000. Note: I said:
This is not a point of practicality, just a point of economics.
I would never run all that software on a $500 or $1000 computer. THAT would suck. I was simply
USING THE STRUCTURE OF BALLMER'S ARGUMENT AGAINST ITSELF
So, please, before you post something, think twice: once would be an improvement.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Please make sure he is getting enough exercise and sunlight and is eating right. Thanks.
How about Linux on a Xbox? If Microsoft is losing money on the game console and expecting to make it back on game disks ala the Gillette Biz Plan, then Linux on Xbox would be the death-of-a-thousand-cuts!
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Im not arguing with how the industry (currently) works, what Im arguing is that it is unnatural and unhealthy, and *WILL* eventually go the way of the dodo.
No other industry I can think of works this way.
If you go to get work done on your car, it is perfectly aceptable to use dealer parts, or any of a number of aftermarket vendors. The specs for the parts arent kept secret, and any vendor has the opportunity to make a suitable part.
If you go to work on your house, and you buy pipe, , 2x4's or nails, you probably hardly even glance at what *BRAND* of those items you are buying - becuase it almost doesnt matter. There is a spec for the part, and for the most part, any *brand* you buy will meet that spec, and the pipe from Brand Y will quite happily connect to the fittings from Brand X.
Eventually, the IT industry will correct itself, and no one will expect (or produce) files that are proprietary to and work with only one specific brand of program. Interchange formats for various types of data will be openly published, and the idea of saving or transferring data (of any kind) between organizations in a brand-specific format will be ludcicrous.
Even in some areas of the IT industry, it is already this way. If you want to send an email from one domain to another, you use SMTP, not a specific brand of program. The Web is almost all that way - granted, there are some sites that choose to make themselves inaccesible to anyone not using 'Brand X' of browser, but they are becoming fewer and fewer. Even online banking sites, once very reliant on proprietary software on specific platforms only, have realized that they have to support the standard, not a specific platform.
The problem is the developement team can't get one button mice, Mine has five buttons, left, right, scroll wheel straight down, scroll wheel rolled forward, scroll wheel rolled back. We had a Microsoft Intelli-mouse that had 7 buttons! One button mice, is that a Mac thing? I know when I'm on a windose machine, with its' use the right-button occassionaly, if you really need to attitude, constraining. My thinking is with 5 buttons, and the [ctrl], [alt] and [shift] keys, I should be able to get 125 different commands!
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
... where will we end up ? If products cost less, who is producing that product will get less money, and won't be able to buy... A vicious cycle, a spiral into chaos. Services and Products just cost what they have to, and if soemone can't pay for that, then i'm just sorry for that !! Whats the point of making things cheaper, if they really are not ?? Lowering quality ? No thanks ! I would prefer keep my old box than buying junk.
That some study came back saying "Wintel PCs are too expensive" and Ballmer (or more likely some sycophant) interpreted this as meaning "Wintel hardware is too expensive."
AOL has done that (dumb terminal idea) for a while. Most of their (l)user connect to the AOL service through some terminal and they are xxxx. => dumb terminal
Yes it can.
If we decide to not pay for 2 years of software maintenance on one of our ProEngineer seats it is cheaper to buy the software again. Once other company would not allow you to put your software on maintenance unless EVERY seat was also on maintenance.
So, that spreadsheet from 5 years ago.... Do you really want to call it up? You have not paid 4 years of maintenance on the Publishing software, 5 years on Office suite and 4 years on your OS. Total is $10x48 + $10x60 + $10x48 = $1,560 for opening and printing one spreadsheet!
He must think that we are mindless drones!
Your Average Joe
The Xbox is now less than $150. However, the games for it cost about $50. Some of that money game developers take in is then given back to Microsoft for licensing costs. However, piracy is rampant on the Xbox. It's so easy to throw in a mod chip and hard drive that will allow someone to rip the game straight to the system. Hell, it gives a better playing experience. No more swapping out discs, worrying about scratches, or slower loading times when you use a system that circumvents their system.
Hardware will never be this free. People see a computer as a box with button and a screen. They don't care about the software on it. They can always ask some kid down the street to put a new copy of windows on it because people who don't deal with software on a daily basis don't feel it's tangible.
Microsoft should just sit tight, count their money, and pray they don't lose market share to Linux and Apple. All these attempts to convince people Linux is bad and Windows Starter Edition is good just makes people more aware of their alternatives.
*golf clap*
I mean really guys - this is just so obviously wrong
Balmer must be sitting up there in his office today laughing - lets see just how much we can wind up the geek community. See them frothing at the mouth over at slashdot!
Right here
Did you know you can be apathetic to apathy? Not that I give a shit...
Blaming everyone else since the 70's....
News at 11...
Did you know you can be apathetic to apathy? Not that I give a shit...
And we all know how great WebTV is! Whoohoo!
They must have warehouses full of the things. Perhaps this is just Ballmer's way of trying to spur the market and actually sell some.
The irony is, you can actually build a real PC for not too much more than $100:
Cheap PC Chips MB w/onboard video/sound/etc: $30
Used AMD CPU: $30
256 DDR: $30, sometimes less.
Cheap no-name hard drive: $40
cheap keyboard/mouse: $10
cheap case: $20
used VGA monitor: $30 or free
Total: $200. Or two payments of $100.
This assumes the user will have DSL or something, which is all the more ironic considering the monthly DSL fees approach 25% of the cost of the machine.
And while we're at it, let's blame hardware theft on expensive software, too.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
Note that this is running on a primarily one-button OS, but the same menus appear on every window in my (5-button) Linux version.
The GIMP 2 still has less nuanced plugins than PS, but the gap is noticeably smaller and it has some plugins that PS doesn't have.
The GIMP 3 will be even better both absolutely and relatively.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
As will The GIMP 3. And other stuff. For AUD$1200 a seat less. Have you used The GIMP 2 recently?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
...or two: where is most lawless software used? In places with cheap hardware, or places with pricey hardware?
I thought so.
<whack> Pointy hat on, go to the corner. Bad Steve, no doughnut.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
If you go to get work done on your car, it is perfectly aceptable to use dealer parts, or any of a number of aftermarket vendors. The specs for the parts arent kept secret, and any vendor has the opportunity to make a suitable part.
Cars are not software. Software is a tool.
Example: I sometimes do calligraphy (of all analogue outdated things to do) and I can assure you that in certain times, a speedball nib *just won't do*, and my clients expect as much. If they're expecting extremely sharp edges at small sizes I had damn well better be using a (FLASH FLASH BRAND NAME ALERT) Brause nib because Speedball SUCKS ASS in small sizes. SURE: technically I could use one, if I wanted to spend all fucking day wasting a ton of paper on some sputtering piece of crap. At super small sizes I have only found Brause to be worth a damn. Mitchell's can be very good, but there's something about Brause that I find is dead on perfect at tiny sizes.
Now, if I need a stroke that's a centimeter wide, then I'm not going to bother with Brause or Mitchell - I'll use my Speedball steel brushes, becasue they are quite adequate at that size, and much less prone to stick and make a mess. I COULD use razor-like Brause nibs, but it would suck and the client would be Very Mad.
You're (clearly) a FOSS zealot. FOSS has its place, but it's not universal, especially when people need specific things done on deadline and absolute compatibility must be guaranteed, no ifs ands or buts.
At that point, you need everyone singing in tune.
You're trying to shoehorn in an agenda completely alien to Ballmer's argument. I was simply pointing at the actual errors in his argument. My refutation complies with Occam's Razor, yours does not, as yours is insisting on a completely different model, which is totally unnecessary to refute his argument. I refuted Ballmer very exactly, and demonstrated the falsehood in his argument, and how it doesn't apply to anything today or in the forseeable future.
you can toot your FOSS horn all you want, and that's your perogative, but you should know that your argument is cumbersome and unnecessary.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Actually, I made the same point somewhere upstream, and I'm a freakin' M$ shareholder and generally prefer using Windows on my desktop. -- What I got from Ballmer's remarks is that if hardware were cheaper, M$ would get a bigger piece of the pie for every system sold. IOW, that M$'s portion is the only part with any value, and if the rest of the industry can't make a buck because their margins have been shaved below profitability... oh well!! (Remind anyone else of WalMart's tactics??)
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Of course iPod == theft. "Theft" is any money paid to anyone other than M$ !!
(Tho I think you've got a good point about the spin angle)
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Why not put real copy protection in Windows? I'm not talking media protection - I'm talking Windows itself.
The reality is that if the copy protection in Windows actually worked and people couldn't pirate Windows any more lots of people would suddenly realize they can't afford Windows and all the other MS software. If that was to happen, competing desktop sytems would have a chance.
All this talk from Ballmer about software piracy is just crap - he knows software piracy helps his company.
Software Piracy Due to Expensive Software, says I
There's no 'on' position on the Slacker switch!
My God, this is truly hilarious. When I read the headline I almost choked with cappuccino because it reminded me what Eric Raymond was saying two years ago. So, Steve Ballmer wants cheaper hardware...
"The biggest problem we have right now is that people who should be paying for software aren't. There has to be...a $100 computer to go down-market in some of these countries. We have to engineer (PCs) to be lighter and cheaper." -- Steve Ballmer, 2004.
"What may kill Microsoft is the 'margin squeeze' on hardware. Hardware prices have been dropping and dropping and show no signs of stopping. As the price of hardware goes down, the percentage of the cost of a system that is for a Windows license (the 'Microsoft tax') increases. When computers cost $3000, paying $120 for Windows was hardly noticable. But when the price is around $500, it starts to make a big difference on OEM's profit margins. When prices drop below around $350 for a system, OEMS won't be able to pay the microsoft tax and still make any money." -- Eric Raymond, 2002.
Now, when the prices dropped to the level Raymond was talking about and people indeed are less and less convinced that they should pay a large percentage of their money for an operating system which doesn't even include Word, Steve Ballmer wants computers to be even cheaper to solve that problem.
Mr. Ballmer, you are right. We all know that people will more gladly pay $500 for your software if their computer costs $50. And gladlier still if it costs $10. And also we all know that it is impossible to make the software cheaper because unlike hardware it has very low profit margins and a very high per-item cost of manufacturing. We all agree with you, Mr. Ballmer, hardware should definitely get cheaper. In fact, I think that you may achieve the same effect by raising the prices of your software. Good luck.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
A 3K PC back in 1995 was a cutting edge top of the line machine with ever bell and whistle in it.
A "decent" average PC back in the mid 90's was abour 1200 (I cant remember if that included monitor).
Then again This is what I was selling to the public in Columbus Ohio. YMMV in other less techniclogicaly advanced areas.
DOS + Windows cost about $100 and when win95 came out it was selling at $100.
Things have changed much, IMO you can still buy a decent machine for $1200, and a #K macvhine now is still uber.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
I hate to rain on your AC superiority complex but at the same time MS posted those numbers (after the close) they also revised down the numbers for the current and next quarter (or so the financial news tells me). So not everything is perfect in the land of MS software.
A stocks price now does not matter much unless you take into account where it is going.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
but even their basic version is free. My original statement still stands: I don't know anyone who pays for IM, and I don't think Trillian Pro is something a typical home user wants/needs when gratis software here is really the default.
Ok, a better example. Cars are data. You work on cars with tools. Do you need a specific *brand* of socket wrench, screwdriver, or jack to work on a car? Perhaps the same brand the factory used to build it originally? No! In fact, if you happened to have a forge and the appropriate machinery to do so and for some reason it cost more to buy a socket wrench than it did to make one, could you not make your *OWN* wrench, if you wanted? Obviously in the case of a wrench thats contrived, as the factory to produce a wrench obviously costs a lot more than a wrench, and its only cheap in mass quantity, but that doesnt apply to software.
Why should you need a specific *brand* of tool to work on data?
Oh! You mean there is competition in the market, where individuals can prefer one brand over another, *solely* on how well each brand performs?
Fantastic! Thats exactly what I'm looking forward to someday in the software world, where companies and individuals can choose which brand(s) of software they want, without any need whatsoever as to what brands some other company or individual uses. None of this 'Other business use Brand X to send their information, which sends it in a secret format that only Brand X can read, therefore I *have* to use Brand X otherwise I wont be able to read their information'
I'm assuming a person using a 'Speedball nib' has no problem reading calligraphy that you wrote using a 'Brause nib'? (Although it does strike me as odd that each brand/maker of 'nibs' doesnt make a variety of sizes. some tuned for 'small strokes' and some for 'wide strokes' - but I would assume, and hope, that they have every opportunity to do so, and nothing is locking them out of doing so - either that, or perhaps this preference is just *your* preference, perhaps other people who write calligraphy have difference preferences)
As far as my being a 'FOSS zealot', yes, I personally prefer Free Software, but I dont demand that all software be free (although it would be nice) - I dont even demand 100% compatibility - only the *opportunity* for it - no secret data formats as 'standards'. (You can use a secret format if you want, but when it comes time to exchange data with someone outside your organization, you should be willing and prepared to do so in a *documented* standard format. Eg, documented so that *anyone* with the appropriate skillset can produce software on any platform to produce it and/or read and understand it)
I only want a level playing field, where *MANY* providers of a given type of tool all have the opportunity to produce comparable tools (and yes, differentiate themselves in performance, features, stability, etc) without anyone being locked out by secret data formats, and no one is forced to use a specific brand of tool to access information produce by someone at another organization.
Take another example - an envelope is a tool, one you use to enclose information. And a senders choice of envelope brand has no affect on a recipients choice of letter opener. Or for that matter, their choice of printer brand when printing the letter doesnt force any choices on the recipients choice of scanner brand, if they choose to scan the letter.
The main point - the brand of tool that either a sender or recipient of information makes should not have any forcing effect on the brand that the other party chooses. (Obviously, they need to use the same *type* of tool - you arent going to receive a video on an old teletype - but there should be nothing forcing the *BRAND* of the tool th
So, what Microsoft really wants is cheap hardware running Windows.
my dell in 1995 was $3000 and was hardly cutting edge. it was a pentium 75 in a time when the pentium 90 and 120 were top. it had 16 MB ram and a 1GB drive. 17 inch sony trinitron, not some behemoth 21-inch. $3000 included win95 but not office 95.
A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
I once knew a senior manager for a supposedly responsible IT firm who believed that since he was paying UKP 15 a month for broadband, he should be allowed to download all the MP3s that he wanted.
I think the lameness filter requires some text in the message so this is it.
Thats what happens when you buy a Dell, or a Packard Bell, or any branded PC. You get price screwed.
Didnt realize what you were using for the baseline priceing your post.
That monitor alone was over $600 of your cost if not more. I didnt sell a lot of Sony Trinatron stuff back then because it was so expensive and most customers wanted a decent PC and the cheapest monitor they could get away with.
I was looking at the $$ value you gave and thinking of what I was able to provide at that time, but I built the boxes myself.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.