Slashdot Mirror
EU Sleuths Think Microsoft Sabotaged Windows
Adam Zweimiller writes "The Inquirer is reporting that in it's ongoing battle with Microsoft, the European Commission is investigating the possibility that the Vole has sneakily sabotaged the Media Player-free versions of Windows it is obliged to ship to the EU. A report (subscription required) in today's Wall Street Journal suggests Microsoft has fiddled with the registry in its stripped-down Windows offerings and the result is that video clips embedded into Microsoft Word documents don't run properly, for example."
The whole Euro market is bigger than the US...
Would be a great boost for Linux though if they did.
From TFA: Microsoft's digital video competitor RealNetworks had been able to demonstrate a Media Player-free version of Windows running "without technical glitches", the Journal notes.
Setting his threshold to 5, Sparky eliminated most of the trolls on /.
Well if the problem is with Microsoft Word not playing embedded files, dump it.
Microsoft took away support to another application. The only other alternative to it would be get rid of the conflict, Microsoft themselves.
Openoffice isn't going to kill budgets. Have another player installed. Switch and be done with it.
Quicktime plays fine in openoffice with a mpg format.
In the past I would agree with you, these days however Real Player 10 is not spyware and is free of malware.
Seems odd to me that they want media player removed, but still want to play media under certain conditions.
Why is this even remotely odd? It's just the difference between libraries and an application that uses those libraries. The equivalent operation on a Mac is trivial: just delete Quicktime Player from the Applications folder. As it happens, this won't affect any other Quicktime dependent application -- it just removes a single app.
On the surface, this appears to be the same BS that MS tried to play off in the US antitrust case regarding the bundling of IE. MS purposely chose a twisted interpretation of the scope of "Internet Explorer" to claim that IE was inseparable from the rest of the OS. That is, they chose to interpret "remove IE" to mean removal of not just the top-level application and/or icon, but of all related architectural components. That alleged inseparability was a mind-numbingly stupid claim to anyone with an iota of actual software development knowledge.
That's not really a good analogy.
A better analogy would be like Microsoft purposely sabotoging their own document format to make it impossible for other word processors to legally interoperate with it.
Wait no, A better analogy would be like Microsoft serving up broken web pages to the browsers of competitors.
No, wait. A better analogy would be like suggesting Microsoft would break Windows so that it would refuse to run under a competitor's version of DOS.
Maybe it's like Microsoft shipping a browser that has the option to uninstall other software vendor's browsers. Or Microsoft forcing OEM's to pay them a fee for every computer they ship, with or without Windows installed. Perhaps it's like Microsoft hiding crucial API's from everyone but themselves, and when forced to expose them for all to see defining "all" as anyone who can pony up 50 thousand dollars plus additional fees. Or Microsoft attempting to ship broken versions of Java to destroy the standard. Or forcing OEM vendors to carry Microsoft ads, and only Microsoft ads, on all desktops sold. Or negotiating with another company for a year only to steal their technology. And then refusing a court order to turn over all e-mails from that period.
But all of this is metaphorical: Microsoft would never do anything like this. This is all speculative fantasy. And besides everyone in this country is innocent until proven guilty in at least 4 different courts of law.
The ______ Agenda
But Windows Media Player is playing embedded documents. The host application playing back the stream is a codec that decodes the stream for any application that may want it, including Media Player. This is why you can download a DIVX codec and have it available in any application that may have an embedded media file marked for DIVX. Windows Media player is just a shell.
.exe file. Can Media Player still play the file? You betcha.
Do this... Install Quicktime from Apple. Delete the quicktime player
You are right in that this would be an easy demonstration to fake. But it would take longer to fake than to do the real thing.
The ______ Agenda
Actually, no. You can install Qt/Embedded and recompile most of kde against it, and use that with the linux framebuffer, if you want to.
I am trolling
the point is, Words mime-type handlers allow it to use other media players to render embedded content if WMP is not present.. Microsoft have disabled this ability, so that a version of Windows with a rival media player alone won't work.
It forces people to install WMP to regain lost functionality that shouldnt have been lost, and that's definitely sabotage.
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
No it can't; not unless the codec comes with a DirectShow filter. Apple (and Real) do not do this, in order to keep eyeballs in their clients.
I've been using it for the last year or so for exactly the same reason as you, and not had a problem.
Excellent list of points. Add to that:
Microsoft having Office 95 ask for a memory address at the 2GB limit, even though no desktop machine at the time came with even 512MB. The sole purpose of this exercise? To have Office not be able to run on OS/2, whose VM had a limit of 512MB (the shame!!!).
Or about making Office 95 docs incompatible with all previous versions of Office (again, a direct stab at forcing everyone to upgrade, and leaving OS/2 out in the cold. It wasn't so much about other word processors, since none of them could accurately deal with the ever changing screwed up word markup, and they were always months and months behind at the time.)
Or, how about Microsoft selling an "OS" to IBM before they actually owned the rights to it?
And lastly, the little negotiating with a company for a year and stealing their tech has happened numerous times.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
but that it _forbid_ OEM's to install Quicktime or Realplayer on systems shipped
Been in the OEM business for many years, and we have yet to see any documentation from Microsoft preventing us from installing ANYTHING we want on the OSes for our PCs.
Additionally, prior to Windows2000, Windows95 and 98 had REALPLAYER on the OEM setup CD provided by Microsoft and it was installed in Windows, just they also had setups for AOL, Compuserve, and MSN.
If Microsoft is FORBIDDING the installation of this software, why is it on the OEM CDS that Microsoft provided to Manuafacturers up until the time these companies started stabbing Microsoft in the back by participaiting in lawsuits against MS.
Bully for Microsoft. I would of stopped putting RealPlayer, and AOL on my OS setup CDs as a courtesy to these companies once they testified against my company.
But EVEN after all that, there is NOTHING to forbid the installation of these applications, our Microsoft Contact, knows we do, and has even provided help from Microsoft on some of our installation troubles with these products, which they DID NOT HAVE TO DO.
The consipiracy theories here just keep getting bigger and bigger.
As for the whold Media Player issue in this thread... A) The EU requried MS to Remove Media Player (the UI) B) The EU required MS to Remove Media player control (the applet that allows it to play on web pages, and also provides OLE access). So even if the CODECS are installed on the system, but there is NO EXISTING Applet or Application to process them, how in the world could any reasonable person expect the video to play?
This is the most uneducated and ridiculous item I have seen in a while. And goes to prove the Government should fund and support technology but NOT REGULATE IT, as most people in the Government DOn't Get, won't get, nor have any expertise in these matters, no matter how many witnesses and hours are spent trying to EDUCATE a judge just so they can make an honest ruling.
I am so sick of Gov't thinking it knows better than the 'scientists', and 'technology' leaders of the world. Support these people don't second guess them.
As for the Intenet Explorer trial issues with regard to the Microsoft Monopoly, even the creator of Netscape later said it was bullcrap. (And he would be considered educated in the field, far more than the judges and lawyers making decisions FOR US).
This is gotten insane, in the US they preach capitalisim, yet when lawmakers or competitors draw into question a company that is too successful, the get put on a block and picked apart.
Sure there were idiots at Microsoft that did screwy stuff, but that doesn't mean Microsoft as a whole set out to do 99.9% of the things that Slashdot members keep refering to, over and over, and very inaccurately as well.
Get over it...
You don't like Microsoft, beat them at their own game. Truly make an Open Source OS that is as easy as Windows and supports as many program and hardware as Windows, and can do so without having prioritory Hardware like Apple does, and you will not even have to worry about Microsoft.
Ok, off my rant, and 90% of this stuff was NOT directed at the person that I am replying to, but I had to get it off my chest and into this discussion thread.
(Sorry in advance to RogerWilco)
-Also ignore the typos and grammar, I can see several in a quick proof, but don't have the time to edit them today.
TheNetAvenger - ranting off....