Slashdot Mirror


South Korea Fines Microsoft $32 Million

laffer1 writes "South Korea has fined Microsoft $32 million and ordered two new versions of Windows be made. The first version will be stripped of Windows Media Player and MSN IM software and the second must include links to competitors."

613 comments

  1. Microsoft's Reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Here's $40 million. Keep the change.

    1. Re:Microsoft's Reply by bringmewater · · Score: 2, Funny

      hahahaha, and we'll throw in a free order of intel cpus

    2. Re:Microsoft's Reply by __aaxwdb6741 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm starting to think that Microsoft has a pre-set budget for these kind of expenses.

      Also, I'm starting to feel sorry for Microsoft. Partially because they didnt steer to avoid this kind of trouble.

    3. Re:Microsoft's Reply by DGtlRift · · Score: 0

      Seems like they have sacked the budget for bug-fixes for fines like this.

      --
      How about a spell checker for slashdot, or even more impressive, a spell checker for strings in C-Code? Use lint! -DG
    4. Re:Microsoft's Reply by penguinoid · · Score: 1

      Would people quit saying that miro$oft will just give away money? To people who sued them, what's more. FYI, MS reduced the fine to 1/10 the original, and will appeal. Yes, $32M is a drop in the bucket for MS, but there are only so many drops in the bucket.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    5. Re:Microsoft's Reply by moro_666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      starting to think ???

      this is just the cheapest campaign that microsoft can get. advertisement is the proper english word for it.

      quite millions of people see news about it on cnn and other tv/news channels, pretty many thousand slashdotters read the article, for 32 millions this is a damn bargain.

      and if they lose the appealing case too, its addition just another free commercial which be banging on the big bell of news channels.

      write: oh we are in court
      think: free advertisement & commercials all over the world.

      --

      I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
    6. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      but there are only so many drops in the bucket.
      Not when the bucket is placed in a torrential downpour of several billion raindrops per year.
    7. Re:Microsoft's Reply by kfg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Microsoft were fined a mil a day they would run out of money in. . .never.

      KFG

    8. Re:Microsoft's Reply by FooBarWidget · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What campaign? Everybody's already using Windows. What do they possibly have to gain from a marketing campaign?

    9. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Cat_Byte · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm starting to think that Microsoft has a pre-set budget for these kind of expenses.
      Every large company does. Many are even self-insured because it is cheaper to set aside the same amount of funds and just pay out huge sums of cash (not to mention revenue from outgoing lawsuits). I can't name names but I know this for a fact.
      Also, I'm starting to feel sorry for Microsoft. Partially because they didnt steer to avoid this kind of trouble.
      If it wasn't 32M for media player and IM it would have been something else. Some of the anti-Microsoft people won't be happy until Windows is nothing more than a Window manager like KDE. Then again....KDE and Gnome come with media players and GAIM so they better watch out....

      --
      Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one the bus load of girls just went down.
    10. Re:Microsoft's Reply by sgant · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are you kidding? Bill Gates did a Frank Sinatra and just took a big wad of cash from his pocket and stripped off 32 million and an extra $50 and said "and here kid, get yourself a haircut".

      --

      "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    11. Re:Microsoft's Reply by hedge_death_shootout · · Score: 1

      torrential downpour of several billion raindrops per year.

      Not to mention the increased revenue when swarms of South Korean consumers descend on the shops to snap up a copy of the court-mandated 'lean and mean' version of Windows.
      Dont these judges realize what they're doing is counter-productive!?

    12. Re:Microsoft's Reply by tehshen · · Score: 2, Funny

      ...to bring it down to the $32 million?

      --
      Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
    13. Re:Microsoft's Reply by michrech · · Score: 1

      Then again....KDE and Gnome come with media players and GAIM so they better watch out....

      No, KDE doesn't. The distro packager puts the media player and GAIM into the "KDE" package for you.

      --
      bork bork bork!
    14. Re:Microsoft's Reply by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I think they'll be happy when they can get windows as separate components. Like the kernel, the window manager, the web server, the media player, the web browser, the IM client. Then they can pick and choose the pieces they want to use. Does anybody else find it weird that you still can't run a windows web/DB server without a GUI. Sure GUIs are nice sometimes, but just having it loaded takes up a good chunk of RAM. It would be nice if you could unload the GUI for the 99.9% of the time that you aren't using it. Kind of like you can do with linux/unix.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    15. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Prophet+of+Nixon · · Score: 1

      Well, you could boot your shell off of Taskman, and run a minimal GUI, only running Explorer as an application when you need to. Don't know of any means to run a newer Windows off of CLI only though.

    16. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Yvanhoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's stop this nonsense about judgement being 'free ads' and let me make a two-in-one Slashdot Special : MS and GWB bashing.

      GWB got a lot of free advertisement in the arab world for the iraq war, strangely, I don't think it qualifies as "free ad campain" for Bush's popularity.

      This works the same. A lot of people hear about MS with this in Korea, sure. But MS isn't your typical start-up struggling to be known. 90% of PC owners get a one minute MS add during their computer start up. Their name is known. But now it gets associated with "evil big corporation illegaly using a monopoly". Not the typical message marketing guys want to produce. Plus, it also informs less tech-savy users that alternative IMs and movie players exist and THAT is another thing MS would never put in an ad campain.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    17. Re:Microsoft's Reply by odourpreventer · · Score: 3, Funny

      I can't help reading this as:

      SK Government Official: Sir, the budget for 2006 is set, but we're missing $32M.
      Higher ranking SKGO: [Thinks hard] What about suing Micro$oft?
      SKGO: Good call sir, I'll get right on to it.

      It's stupid, I know. I'll shut up now.

    18. Re:Microsoft's Reply by mjkelly · · Score: 1

      I just saw this reply over on google news. I didnt see anyone list it so here it is http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28194

    19. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Magic5Ball · · Score: 1

      Yes... just like how European computer shops couldn't keep the court-ordered Windows N in stock because consumers wanted to pay more for less. Oh wait, that didn't happen at all.

      Microsoft mostly wins because this ruling will have next to zero negative impact on new PC sales (and hence new Windows licenses) since the vast majority of purchase decisions do not hinge on the inclusion of free, downloadable software.

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
    20. Re:Microsoft's Reply by flosofl · · Score: 2, Funny

      "and here kid, get yourself a haircut".

      No, that would be in the case of North Korea...

      --
      "This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
    21. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Foofoobar · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, that free commercials underlying message is: "Microsoft: sue all you want, we'll screw you more."

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
    22. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah because Microsoft really needs advertising... if only they could get their product out there, if only people knew about windows....

    23. Re:Microsoft's Reply by cbreaker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think he just missed out on the years 2001 - 2003.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    24. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Nytewynd · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      New Zig?

      --
      /. ++
    25. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Skrekkur · · Score: 1

      This was just a reference to "all your base are belong to us", a joke that you might possibly get if you'd look at that wikipedia article its funny its a really bad translation. Also very connected is the fraze "They set us up the bomb"

    26. Re:Microsoft's Reply by FooBarWidget · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please explain then, I don't recall that Windows had less market share in 2001-2003. The anti-trust cases in the US didn't even make a dent in Windows's market share.

    27. Re:Microsoft's Reply by crimperman · · Score: 1
      Yeah because Microsoft really needs advertising... if only they could get their product out there, if only people knew about windows....


      They seem to think they do - read any IT publications/websites without M$ adverts recently?
      In the UK they have been running a series of ads telling us how great Windows is because of all the software you can run on it. Of course they forget to mention that you have to pay for most of that software.
    28. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's true. Amortizing an estimated $40 billion in cash reserves over 15 years indicates an after distributions and taxes profit in excess of $7 million per day.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    29. Re:Microsoft's Reply by FireFury03 · · Score: 2, Informative

      And possibly more to the point, 1. most Linux distributions come with multiple "competing" applications so the user gets a choice from the start and 2. whoever is bundling the applications generally doesn't make them themselves (Gaim, FireFox, etc. aren't made by KDE, Red Hat, Novell, etc).

    30. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Tab+is+on+Slashdot · · Score: 0

      up us*

    31. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      I think Microsoft's position is that any serious server is going to be beefy enough that the 4 MB or so used by the windowing system is only a drop in the bucket. There's not necessarily anything wrong with that... if your server is dropping connections because it's short 4 MB of RAM, you need to buy a beefier server anyway, right? Freeing up that 4 MB isn't going to make a huge difference in performance... it might be ok a week, then start dropping connections again.

    32. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it should read "All Your Packages Is Belongs To Us."

    33. Re:Microsoft's Reply by bill_kress · · Score: 1

      > GWB got a lot of free advertisement in the arab world for the iraq war, strangely, I don't think it qualifies as "free ad campain" for Bush's popularity.

      Probably got the moran a second term--If that's not a good ad campaign, what is? (Of course, it's only free from his personal point of view)

    34. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Probably got the moran a second term...

      Hint: if you're going to insult somebody, spell "moron" correctly, else you're the one that looks like a "moran."

    35. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hint: If you're going to insult somebody's spelling, keep up to date on internet memes.

    36. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, like Microsoft pays taxes ...

    37. Re:Microsoft's Reply by killjoe · · Score: 1

      I hate to break it to you but GWB did indeed get a lot of free adversiting in Iraq and all that advertising helped him win two elections and gain a republican majority in both houses.

      GWB may be reviled in most of the world and by a lot of americans but his campaigns in Iraq and afghanistan helped him with his base and helped him win an election.

      On a side note 9/11 was the best thing to ever happen to GWB. Before that he was seen as a bafoon who was destined to serve one term and then retire. Now he is seen as a bafoon who served two terms, embraced torture, invaded two countries, ran the economy into the ground, and destroyed american credibility and moral leadership all over the world. But hey he did server two terms.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    38. Re:Microsoft's Reply by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure Windows 2003 did this. As it is meant for servers, it kinda makes sense.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    39. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      I thought the campaign in the US has been the most expensive in the history of american politics ? BTW, I was speaking of his popularity worldwide. It was only a real life example that wide visibility != popularity.

      The GP tended to say that even the news of MS loosing a trial would count as a commercial for it. I find it as misleaded as considering Farenheit 911 as a Bush's electoral advertisement because we see him so much in it.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    40. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *phrase

    41. Re:Microsoft's Reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Call it prevention

    42. Re:Microsoft's Reply by brunson · · Score: 0, Troll

      In Soviet Russia
      haikus write YOU for profit
      Insensitive clod!

      Your first line has too many syllables.

      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      Jesus loves you, I think you suck
    43. Re:Microsoft's Reply by ruiner13 · · Score: 1

      If microsoft needed help with brand recognition, I could see how it would help them. However, just about everyone has heard of microsoft these days, so it can only hurt their image, not help. Small companies benefit from bad press more than large established ones.

      --

      today is spelling optional day.

    44. Re:Microsoft's Reply by odourpreventer · · Score: 1

      Depends if you pronounciate it Sov-iet or Sov-i-et.

      Line two can have either seven or eight syllables depending if you say hai-ku or ha-i-ku.

    45. Re:Microsoft's Reply by tyse · · Score: 1

      Shock! Horror! Exchange of money for goods and services!

      What is the world coming to.

    46. Re:Microsoft's Reply by bill_kress · · Score: 1

      I was mostly being sarcastic, however Americans tend to be so varied and generally, umm, not bright that we often vote for a candidate or buy a product simply because we have heard the name. I think that's what the original poster was trying to say.

      Many of these people can't even find USA on a map--to recognize that any given repetition of some name is positive or negative is too much to ask of most Americans.

    47. Re:Microsoft's Reply by crimperman · · Score: 1

      Shock! Horror! Exchange of money for goods and services!

      What is the world coming to.


      I wasn't complaining that you have to pay for the software I was complaining that the Microsoft advertising campaign implies that as long as you have Windows you can do all the media production stuff they speak of. The only concession they make is saying "There's a world of software running on Windows..." nowehre do they mention that additional (and often expensive) outlay is required.

      They're not the only ones and it drives me mad. I lose track of how many times I have to explain to people that merely having a Centrino chipset does not mean you can use wifi broadband on the beach!

  2. Whats the real issue? by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it because their IM was tied to windows (tied in what way ,
    networking protocol, hidden lockouts for non windows systems or
    only ran on windows?) , or because they bundled this and media
    player with windows?

    Either way I can't help wondering if this is a good thing since
    if Suse or Ubunto or some other linux dist suddenly becomes popular
    overnight, will they get nailed for bundling 100s of apps with it?
    Will a judge know (or care) of the difference between open source
    and MS when it comes to bundling freeware in a distribution?

    1. Re:Whats the real issue? by Spad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's highly unlikely as most distros bundle 2 or 3 of any given type of app with their releases. They can hardly accuse someone of monopolistic behaviour because they're including XMMS & Mplayer with their operating system, can they.

    2. Re:Whats the real issue? by dorkygeek · · Score: 5, Funny
      Is it because their IM was tied to windows...

      No, simply the government wants to get young people to use email again.

      --
      Windows is like decaf - it tastes like the real thing, but it won't get you through the day.
    3. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, I don't know what the sense in this is. So, now, Microsoft could simply choose to SELL messenger and media player to the people in these places.

        It's on the same vein as forcing them to unbundle notepad from the system, or to unbundle Excel from Word when you buy Office. It's really stupid.

        Force them to provide links to competitors? That's like saying Pepsi must provide coupons for Coke on their packages! wtf?

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    4. Re:Whats the real issue? by Depili · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Keep in mind, that linux distros usually bundle several apps for the same task, and also that the apps are usually made by different people than the distro itself, so in no way is it helping to create a monopoly.

    5. Re:Whats the real issue? by millahtime · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ya know.... M$ could remove them from Windows and just give cds with them on it away free at the door. With every purchase. Not bundled this way, just a freebee.

      working for corperate america has really taught me how to think like this. to walk the line. Well, time for my coffee and first meeting of the day.

    6. Re:Whats the real issue? by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 2, Informative

      The difference here is that MSN messenger wasn't just an app. It was an entire service.

      If I get Gaim with a distro, I won't get an account. I have to go to a third party service, get a Jabber, MSN, AIM or what have you account, then I can use Gaim. With MSN messenger, I have to go to a Microsoft service (MSN), and am indeed persuaded and encouraged to go there. I sign up to their service, and continue to use the client packaged with the OS. There's a clear distinction here.

      I'm not sure how MSN messenger works exactly, but I imagine that signing up for an MSN account is all but an automated process at this point.

      The second difference is of course that Microsoft has a monopoly position in the desktop market and is clearly (ab)using that monopoly to leverage their position in the IM market. By packaging MSN messenger with their OS, they are cutting off the competition's oxygen.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    7. Re:Whats the real issue? by tpgp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, I don't know what the sense in this is. So, now, Microsoft could simply choose to SELL messenger and media player to the people in these places.

      Err, yes - and compete with the other players.

      It's on the same vein as forcing them to unbundle notepad from the system, or to unbundle Excel from Word when you buy Office. It's really stupid.

      Force them to provide links to competitors? That's like saying Pepsi must provide coupons for Coke on their packages! wtf?

      Not its not.

      Imagine if coke was the sole supplier of fridges as well as being a major drink company.

      It would be like saying that coke must allow drinks other then coke to be stocked in coke fridges.

      Its about using a monopoly in one market to unfairly compete in another.

      --
      My pics.
    8. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Either way I can't help wondering if this is a good thing since if Suse or Ubunto or some other linux dist suddenly becomes popular overnight
      Firstly, it's "Ubuntu" :p

      Secondly, the whole point of these sanctions is to stop a Monopoly from leveraging its monopoly in one area (in this case, desktop OS's) to gain a monopoly in another (in this case, IM and media, due to Microsoft's closed IM network and media codecs). Since neither Ubuntu or SUSE are likely to get anywhere near a monopoly, and since neither even own any networks or codecs or anything, the comparison is moot. Plus, many distros (but not Ubuntu) bundle many apps all with the same function, so it's not like they are including just one IM client and unfairly shutting out all of the others.

    9. Re:Whats the real issue? by CaymanIslandCarpedie · · Score: 1

      OT: I cannot find the actual ruling just crappy summaries like above. Anyone know a link?

      OK, back on topic.

      Force them to provide links to competitors

      Who decides what competitors to provide links to? How many? Maybe I'm a bit cynical, but for some reason I expect to see langauge in the ruling which will require links to certain South Korean competion (like Daum who originally made these complaints). Not that supporting local companies is bad, I'm just curious what back room deals where made in wording this to give certain specific companies an advantage more than opening to all companies in general.

      Now taking tin-foil hat off ;-)

      --
      "reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
    10. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure. At least then the competitors could ask the distributors to give away their freebie cds too, and then the user can choose what gets installed on their computer.

    11. Re:Whats the real issue? by /ASCII · · Score: 1

      Best. Post. Ever!

      --
      Try out fish, the friendly interactive shell.
    12. Re:Whats the real issue? by drsquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Last I looked, Microsoft didn't stop other media players from running on Windows.

      And your analogy fails AGAIN when you realise that Microsoft don't provide all operating systems, but there are competitors, one of them with a FREE product.

      A better analogy would be, Coke making most of the fridges, so they should be banned from providing free cans of coke when you buy one. Or they have to allow Rola Cola to advertise inside them.

      Unbundling media player helps no-one. It just hurts the user as they have to go out and download a media player rather than having it built in.

      If you don't like media player there's nothing stopping you from installing something else so what's the problem?

    13. Re:Whats the real issue? by camcorder · · Score: 1

      If Suse or Ubuntu capture 90% desktop market, no doubt that they they will get sued. It's not something to do with being open source or not. It won't be a case between two open source applications, becuase there's no profit behind it. But even open source applications can make some companies die but also some companies to live.

      The problem is actually exploiting the monopoly position, nothing else.

    14. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine if coke was the sole supplier of fridges as well as being a major drink company.

      It would be like saying that coke must allow drinks other then coke to be stocked in coke fridges.


      no -- it's like requiring coke to stock its competitors' drinks.

    15. Re:Whats the real issue? by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

      if Suse or Ubunto or some other linux dist suddenly becomes popular
      overnight, will they get nailed for bundling 100s of apps with it?


      That's not going to be an issue.

      Linux distros bundle third-party apps from all over the place.

      Microsoft only bundles its own software.

      Can you see Microsoft agreeing to bundle RealPlayer with Windows?

    16. Re:Whats the real issue? by giorgiofr · · Score: 1

      It would be like saying that coke must allow drinks other then coke to be stocked in coke fridges.

      As far as I know I can install lots of media players on my box. Actually, I *already* have quite a few on it, vlc, mplayer, windows media player, quicktime, a couple of dvd thingies, and possibily other ones.
      Besides, is your take on this that everything Linux is bad because, you know, it gives stuff away for free? Lo and behold, the rampant hypocrisy...

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    17. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "no -- it's like requiring coke to stock its competitors' drinks."

      No, coke & pepsi are something that anyone is able to buy/get.

      Installing a different IM client or a rival media player and setting them to default app is still beyond the abilities of most windows users.

    18. Re:Whats the real issue? by Jaseoldboss · · Score: 1

      It would be like saying that coke must allow drinks other then coke to be stocked in coke fridges.

      You're thinking of the Unilever case.

    19. Re:Whats the real issue? by burdicda · · Score: 1

      Helluva difference between putting the apps on the same cd and hooking them into the kernel
      and not providing the means of removing them...

    20. Re:Whats the real issue? by mykhailjw · · Score: 1

      Couldn't agree more about make links to their compeditors. It is the one big reason that I have problems with the Phillip-Morris rulings. Making them place ads and tv spots to try and get people to quit their product or to not even start. Not that I think that smoking is good for you but at the same time that first drag should have told you it was bad for you. Kinda like dealing with M$, the first couple of problem should have clued you in on the fact that you might have to look else where to find reliable software.

      --
      "Do you know how dumb average is?" - Peggy Hill
    21. Re:Whats the real issue? by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      You misspelled "frisbee", HTH...

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    22. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that MS *only* include *their* IM client and such with *their* OS.
      Linux distros don't have the same problem, as you get *more than one* *unrelated* IM clients and others bundled with an *unrelated* OS.
      MS could bundle competitor's applications in their OS to avoid those kind of monopoly litigation.

      And keep in mind the real issue is they try to leverage their monopoly in *OS* market to gain market shares in *applications* and *services*.

    23. Re:Whats the real issue? by tpgp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A better analogy would be, Coke making most of the fridges, so they should be banned from providing free cans of coke when you buy one. Or they have to allow Rola Cola to advertise inside them. [emphasis mine]

      *grins* Your second analogy is exactly what people what microsoft don't allow (or didn't before getting their predatory asses hauled through court) - OEMs having Real / Quicktime / etc media players installed instead of Media Player.

      Unbundling media player helps no-one. It just hurts the user as they have to go out and download a media player rather than having it built in.

      Nonsense. Unbundling media player helps the market as it allows all the media players to compete on an even basis.

      --
      My pics.
    24. Re:Whats the real issue? by JackAtCepstral · · Score: 1

      Installing a different IM client or a rival media player and setting them to default app is still beyond the abilities of most windows users. And this is Microsoft's fault how? You wouldn't blame coke or pepsi if folks didn't know which side of the drinking glass was the top when the poured the can of soda into (or onto) the glass, would you?

      --
      Cepstral: Quality TTS for OS X, Linux, Windows
    25. Re:Whats the real issue? by tpgp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As far as I know I can install lots of media players on my box. Actually, I *already* have quite a few on it, vlc, mplayer, windows media player, quicktime, a couple of dvd thingies, and possibily other ones.

      Yes, yes. You can install other players. Are they competing with WMP on equal terms however?

      Besides, is your take on this that everything Linux is bad because, you know, it gives stuff away for free? Lo and behold, the rampant hypocrisy...

      Hypocricy? Cute.

      I don't think Microsoft should be forced to sell their products. The OEM should be allowed to decide which media player to include on the final O/S. What is your problem with that?

      --
      My pics.
    26. Re:Whats the real issue? by JackAtCepstral · · Score: 1

      Kinda like dealing with M$, the first couple of problem should have clued you in on the fact that you might have to look else where to find reliable software.

      Tell me, honestly, how often does a Windows XP computer not running Roxio CD Creator crash? For me, never. I've been running XP since it was released. I have no problems. In fact, I haven't done that "reinstall every six months" thing since before XP was released.

      --
      Cepstral: Quality TTS for OS X, Linux, Windows
    27. Re:Whats the real issue? by Alistar · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you but I'd rather have Windows Media Player than RealPlayer or Quicktime installed by default.

    28. Re:Whats the real issue? by Red+Alastor · · Score: 1
      Either way I can't help wondering if this is a good thing since if Suse or Ubunto or some other linux dist suddenly becomes popular overnight, will they get nailed for bundling 100s of apps with it?
      The difference is that they aren't bundling their own applications and they can be removed very easilly.
      --
      Slashdot anagrams to "Sad Sloth"
    29. Re:Whats the real issue? by chrisnewbie · · Score: 0

      One word "censorship". the less they can view or chat with, the better government protects it's point of view while limiting it's citizen to,,,,nothing.

    30. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's like saying Pepsi must provide coupons for Coke on their packages!

      That's more like, if Pepsi had a monopoly on fast food restaurant and used to bundle a free pepsi can with every meal served, forcing them to inform customer that they can also bring their own cola from another vendor.

      They could also choose not to include a free pepsi.
      Or even to provide free cans of cola from other vendors.

      They use their dominant position in a market to push their shares in another, that's the problem.

      IMO, your example would be a good analogy if the court's decision was to force MS to include some form of -or pointers to- linux with every windows copy they sell.

    31. Re:Whats the real issue? by servo335 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Imay get flamed for this but i see no problem with Micro$oft including their products with Windows. If you dont like them nothing stops you from getting itunes/quick time or realplayer. Nothing stops you from downloading aim or icq or yahoo or google im. This is just a government way of making money offpeoples stupidity.

    32. Re:Whats the real issue? by tpgp · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know about you but I'd rather have Windows Media Player than RealPlayer or Quicktime installed by default.

      Well, I don't know about you - but I would much rather have mplayer, Zoomplayer or Classic Media Player installed by default then Windows Media Player

      The point here is currently only one entity can decide.

      --
      My pics.
    33. Re:Whats the real issue? by SilverspurG · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Tell me, honestly, how often does a Windows XP computer not running Roxio CD Creator crash?
      After ten years of dicking around applying band-aids one would hope that they've finally made a stable OS. Now we're stuck with a bloated ball of band-aids.
      --
      fast as fast can be. you'll never catch me.
    34. Re:Whats the real issue? by hackstraw · · Score: 1

      1st, I am not a Microsoft fan by any stretch of the imagination. The only software product of theirs that I use is the Windows Media Player under OS X, and anybody who has done the same can share their opinion of that software (hint, it sucks).

      But OS X ships with a damn good browser, its own horrible nagware almost media player (Quicktime player) and iTunes, and its own (decent from what I hear) chat program.

      What is the big deal? There have been many alternate file managers for OS X and WIndows over the years. There have been addon disk utilities for DOS/Windows until Microsoft made their own. It looks like the spyware and virus stuff might be added to Windows (why someone would buy an OS that _needs_ additional software just for it to run is beyond me).

      So what is the big deal?

      On a side note, the link to the program in my sig seems to have stopped development. Its a shame, because it was/is? the best audio player for OS X and its not that great. Is there any other new work or would someone be interested in forking Cog to make a decent audio player with me? I know nothing about GUI programming on OS X, but I can learn.

    35. Re:Whats the real issue? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Unbundling media player helps no-one. It just hurts the user as they have to go out and download a media player rather than having it built in

      By the time you get your OEM-installed Windows PC, everything, includung the media player, is a few revisions and security exploits behind and you have to spend a few hours updating everything, or get pwned. So actually the user is potentially harmed. It'd take no more and perhaps less time to download a non-MS player. Or more likely, you'd get a choice on CDR with your machine. However, the longer-term issue is that it makes Windows Media the default format. So media publishers can just supply WM files and ignore any alterantives. Anyone who wants to sell media has to pay MS. You want DRM with that? After a while, you won't have a choice.

    36. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This goes back to Daum.

      Basically Daum.net is a huge internet site in Korea that offers a range of services. One of those is IM. However as IM is bundled with windows they basically couldn't sell thier IM Client.

      Not the same as AOL which could leverage off its customer base (by forcing installs) or just buying out existing popular IMs.

      Now they settled out of court with Daum to basically shut them up, however the Korean government said they would still go ahead with the case.

      I'm pretty sure there is a /. story on this (probably been posted more then once as well :p )

    37. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bill? Is that you?

    38. Re:Whats the real issue? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      It's because they have it so it's extremely hard to disable MSM, plus other programs they bundle (Outlook Express, IE) prevent it from closing a lot of the time. It's also Windows-exclusive from what I can tell, but that shouldn't affect the lawsuit any.

    39. Re:Whats the real issue? by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

      Unbundling media player helps no-one. It just hurts the user as they have to go out and download a media player rather than having it built in.

      Allowing the bundling of Microsoft-only middleware to continue could hurt everyone, especially businesses.

      Microsoft complains that Open Source hurts businesses, as it's free, but that has never stopped Microsoft from bundling.

      Where does the bundling stop? Maybe the next Windows is going to include a PhotoShop clone? What happens to PhotoShop then?

      When it was suggested that Microsoft bundle RealPlayer, Microsoft said that there's no need as people could just as easily download it. I guess the same logic doesn't apply to Microsoft's products?

    40. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did Corporate America teach you to spell too?

    41. Re:Whats the real issue? by bigman2003 · · Score: 1

      This would make sense...except for the fact that Apple controls most of the DRM music market.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    42. Re:Whats the real issue? by ozydingo · · Score: 1
      So, now, Microsoft could simply choose to SELL messenger and media player to the people in these places.

      Yes, in the same way that AOL sells AIM, Yahoo! sells Yahoo! Messenger, Winamp sells their player (yes I know they have a pro version that is for a price, before anyone gets all "Oh let me aruge something I think I know about!" realize I'm talking about the basic player, which already does more than WMP) That's just to name the more popular ones. (Yeah iTunes as well...btw wtf is up with that, why does it decide it can just leave two processes running on my computer after I close it? I think they were iTunes Helper.exe and iPodService.exe, or something like that...asswipes.)

      If they choose to sell media player, all I'd have to say is good freakin luck getting or retaining a customer base

      Agreed that forcing them to provide links desn't seem like a very sensible solution though.

    43. Re:Whats the real issue? by byolinux · · Score: 1

      I'd rather have QuickTime and iTunes.

    44. Re:Whats the real issue? by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is that in many cases you can't even fully uninstall these programs. There's no reason why you should be forced to have applications with tons of holes in them (wmp, ie) just to use their operating system. I think it would be advantageous to everyone if you could swap out all the components of windows, and replace the ones you wanted to. That way, you could have a windows machine, without having the terrible browser which is IE, installed on your system.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    45. Re:Whats the real issue? by mykhailjw · · Score: 1

      I have fewer problems with XP than with any other Windows version since 3.x and the ones that I have had have not been totaly M$ fault (aka bad drivers from vendors, uninstalls that are not clean, bugy add on software) but look at how long since 3.x that people have had to find other means to get their computer to act the way thay want to under 95, 98 & SE, ME (terrible idea). M$ has finally wised up and implemented the "trusted" vendor/driver solution so you know if it has actually be tried out and meets expectations.

      --
      "Do you know how dumb average is?" - Peggy Hill
    46. Re:Whats the real issue? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Last I looked, Microsoft didn't stop other media players from running on Windows."

      So keeping certain Windows APIs hidden from competing media applications doesn't count?

      "And your analogy fails AGAIN when you realise that Microsoft don't provide all operating systems,"

      But Microsoft is using its inordinate market power to keep those competitors down, using pressure on distributors instead of actually making a competing product.

      Vanderbilt didn't have a monopoly on oil, either, but that didn't stop him from doing a heck of a lot of damage.

      "Unbundling media player helps no-one. It just hurts the user as they have to go out and download a media player rather than having it built in."

      It only "helps noone" because Microsoft refuses to deduct the R&D spent making WMP from the price of a Windows license. As much as many of us may be tempted to believe so, Microsoft didn't simply reach up their collective backsides and pull out WMP fully formed from nothing.

    47. Re:Whats the real issue? by tepples · · Score: 1

      If you dont like [Windows Media Player,] nothing stops you from getting itunes/quick time or realplayer.

      Show me the way to uninstall Windows Media Player from my Windows PC and replace its DLLs with a wrapper around QuickTime, and I'll believe you.

      Nothing stops you from downloading aim or icq or yahoo or google im.

      Other than that MSN Messenger is taking up RAM every time I log in, and people without much Windows customization experience don't know how to turn "that stupid weeble thing" off?

    48. Re:Whats the real issue? by MoogMan · · Score: 1

      New Microsoft Windows XP! Now $5 cheaper, and with ALL NEW EXPANSION PACK PLUS PRO XP!!!111

    49. Re:Whats the real issue? by just_another_sean · · Score: 1

      Or just bundle it on the Windows Install CD. I don't think the problem is them giving it away. It's the fact that it comes preinstalled and is difficult to virtually impossible to uninstall them in favor of something else. Uninstalling Media Player, Outlook Express or Internet Explorer using the Add/Remove Windows Components amounts to simply removing shortcuts. If you open a command prompt or use the Run dialog and type iexplore and hit enter then Internet Explorer opens up just fine. There are Group Policy options that can be set to prevent these components from running but I'm not aware of any options for Joe Home User to prevent them from functioning.

      Let them give the stuff away, via download or on the CD. Just let me decide if/when I am actually going to install them or use a competing product.

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    50. Re:Whats the real issue? by level_headed_midwest · · Score: 1

      And if there ever WAS any hint of a suit, they'd just not install any by default and put a little note to look in Synpatic (or YaST, urpmi, yum, or Sourceforge) for media players in the "multimedia" menu.

      Very easy fix. I bet even MSFT could do something like that, except for the automatic package manager deal.

      --
      Just "gittin-r-done," day after day.
    51. Re:Whats the real issue? by shbazjinkens · · Score: 1

      A better analogy would be, Coke making most of the fridges, so they should be banned from providing free cans of coke when you buy one. Or they have to allow Rola Cola to advertise inside them.

      Yes, but imagine that the cans are glued inside limiting the amount of space and cooling resources for other cans. THAT is my problem.

    52. Re:Whats the real issue? by mgpeter · · Score: 1
      Either way I can't help wondering if this is a good thing since if Suse or Ubunto or some other linux dist suddenly becomes popular overnight, will they get nailed for bundling 100s of apps with it? Will a judge know (or care) of the difference between open source and MS when it comes to bundling freeware in a distribution?

      Microsoft is a monopoly, they have an extremely strong market share - I mean heck you cannot even buy a computer from a large reseller without windows (Anti-trust anyone). The problem they have is when they bundle ANYTHING with windows they immediately have a majority share in the market - This is a gross mis-use of their monopoly power, and something that needs to be prevented for a free market to flourish.

      IMO - the U.S. justice department is totally dropping the ball here. Microsoft IS stiffling innovation and nothing is being done about it in the U.S.

      Back to your statement, it is not illegal for anyone to add applications to their product - unless of course they use their monopoly power to control an entire industry to use their product over any of it's competitors.

    53. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Maybe the next Windows is going to include a PhotoShop clone? What happens to PhotoShop then?


      Photoshop, considering it is a far superior product compared to anything else out there (except the GIMP, compared to which it is merely superior), would prevail, as all the graphic artists would understand that Microsoft's thingy sucks compared to Adobe's and buy PS. Normal people don't pay for PS anyways, they just pirate it.

    54. Re:Whats the real issue? by BewireNomali · · Score: 1

      Right, that one entity is you.

      --
      un burrito me trampeó.
    55. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why am I the one entity that can choose what is installed on your PC?

    56. Re:Whats the real issue? by fymidos · · Score: 1

      >As far as I know I can install lots of media players on my box.

      Yes, but can you choose *not* to install WMP?

      >Linux is bad because, you know, it gives stuff away for free?

        Linux does not "give stuff away for free": The software is free. Some distros include Real Player (among many others media players). They would propably include WMP as well if it microsoft allowed it, and there was a linux version. If microsoft included all those players as well, nobody would complain about anti-competitive practices.

      Microsoft is on trial because they *are* a monopoly and they *only* bundle their own player, which you are forced to install.

      --
      Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
    57. Re:Whats the real issue? by DavidBartlett · · Score: 1

      I don't mind at all that IE, MSN IM and WMP come bundled; it's just that they are so tied into Windows that you can't get rid of them.

      --

      -DB-
      E-mail is like a prison: a prison with no walls... and no toilet. -Strong Bad
    58. Re:Whats the real issue? by Digital11 · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone pay for an IM client in the first place when all of the most popular IM networks are free to use?

      --
      I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
    59. Re:Whats the real issue? by giorgiofr · · Score: 1

      Oh really. I must have been quite drunk for not noticing the man who held a gun to my head last time I installed a Windows box.

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    60. Re:Whats the real issue? by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      hm... I didn't know that media was limited to music.....

      not to be a complete ass, there are lots of websites that offer streaming video and the likes only in wmv because of this player being on every computer. This is how you illegally leverage your position. Force everyone to have one player and have it support certain locked in formats. Do you think office could have gotten nearly as large if .doc, .xls, adn the rest weren't as locked up as they used to be? Until oo.org, I don't remember a program with which I could modify and save to the .doc format. So even if I don't want to use word for my text editor, I have to simply because there is no other program with which I can conduct business with the rest of the world. I say that is a bit of a catch 22 and I ought to be protected from such a situation.

    61. Re:Whats the real issue? by johnnyb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If OSX were a monopoly, it would be a big deal. Since they are not, it's not. In addition, there are no OEM resellers of OSX.

    62. Re:Whats the real issue? by CPUGuy · · Score: 1

      Then the said 3rd party software maker is all of a sudden getting a competitive edge that the start-ups and other companies do not.

    63. Re:Whats the real issue? by johnnyb · · Score: 1

      Even more so, there's nothing that forces any particular OEM to include any particular package. If I'm an OEM, I can strip off and install anything I want on Ubunto, and I don't even have to pay Ubunto anything.

    64. Re:Whats the real issue? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I don't know what the sense in this is. So, now, Microsoft could simply choose to SELL messenger and media player to the people in these places.

      They already sell messenger and media player everywhere, they just roll the cost into Windows so if you've bought Windows you've also paid for both of the aforementioned programs whether you want them or not. Just because they don't have a separate price tag does not make them free.

      It's on the same vein as forcing them to unbundle notepad from the system, or to unbundle Excel from Word when you buy Office. It's really stupid.

      Yeah, forcing monopolies to unbundle their products sure is crazy, because I failed Econ 101 too. As for Word and Excel, if MS is found to have a monopoly on either word processors or spread sheets then yes, they should be forced to sell them separately. You seem a little unclear on the concepts of "monopoly" and "bundling." If someone has a monopoly then their customers have no choice but to buy their products. If they bundle, then many customers are forced to buy a second product that they don't want. This is very, very, very bad for the economy, the consumer, and the industry in question, thus it is illegal.

      Force them to provide links to competitors? That's like saying Pepsi must provide coupons for Coke on their packages! wtf?

      Pepsi does not have a monopoly. Pepsi has not been convicted of breaking the law to the detriment of Coca-cola. Do you honestly believe that if the courts in the U.S. found Pepsi guilty of a crime that resulted in Coca-cola losing a lot of money that Coca-cola would not win reparations of some sort?

    65. Re:Whats the real issue? by bigman2003 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I ought to be protected from such a situation


      Protected by whom? I assume you are referring to the government.

      So, the government should be involved in our lives down to the level where they can determine which text editor we do, or don't, use?

      And what about Apple's dominance of the portable music player market. Should the government be doing something about that?
      --
      No reason to lie.
    66. Re:Whats the real issue? by patio11 · · Score: 1
      The point here is currently only one entity can decide.

      Roll your own Linux distro and the default is whatever you want it to be. Or use Windows and go to through the unending torture of installing application software on a Windows system -- since you gave me the links I counted and it took a grand total of tenmouse clicks to get Classic Media Player installed (try it: 3 to download, one to minimize firefox*, two to unzip the download using XP's default behavior, two to open Mediaplayer, two to open the file types preferences, one to mass-check all the boxes and one to hit apply). I'm lucky enough to live in Japan, land of the ungoldy fast Internet, so the entire process probably took about as long as it took you to write your post.

      * Handy Windows tip I learned last week that might be useful for people: windows key + M auto-minimizes all open application windows, so I could technically have saved a click here.

    67. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you might think before you act...

      You can *not* get IE to get out of your windows box. If you tell windows to stop using IE as web browser, MSN still uses IE... meaning u MUST use this.

      This is completely different than what ubuntu and others do, they ship their distro, you CHOOSE what you want, on the install itself. For some programs there are no alternatives to use (due to legal restrictions or availability). If there is a program available, and they do not offer it in their tree, you are free to create your own .deb installation file, and install the software on your box (e.g. you don't HAVE to install mozilla, if you want lynx as a browser)

      Bundling software is, in general, a bad thing. You tend to force people to use your software, instead of giving the opposition a good chance. (Now I know that the uber capitalists in here will say that you must do it, you must make profit. That does not belong here, it is another discussion, and you are wrong ;-)). This is mainly a problem with their bundeling policy, a standard installation, you get it all. Many linux distros bundle software, but don't force you to install it, it is bundled with the distro so you can *choose* to install it.

      As to say about the commercialising they get with this... plain old bad luck, you might get publicity, but it is *bad* publicity. As a small firm it is good if you get in the news, even if it is bad news, as a big company, you will go down eventually. People only hear bad news about Microsoft, they don't want that. I even notice this in my personal, not so geeky, community that I live in.

    68. Re:Whats the real issue? by Phisbut · · Score: 1
      Tell me, honestly, how often does a Windows XP computer not running Roxio CD Creator crash?

      "Reliable" software is not only software that doesn't crash, it's also software you can install and trust that your box will not get hacked in a matter of minutes. Sure, your WinXP box might not crash, but it could be turned into a zombie pretty fast if you didn't get third party software that serve no other purpose than to patch the OS (antivirus, firewall, anti-spyware, etc.)

      --
      After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
      - The Tao of Programming
    69. Re:Whats the real issue? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      This would make sense...except for the fact that Apple controls most of the DRM music market.

      How many sites with streaming media now give you the choice of WMP, or nothing? With the player becoming ubiquitous, so does its proprietary format, and eveyone who wants to create or broadcast such will have to pay Bill.

    70. Re:Whats the real issue? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Unbundling media player helps no-one. It just hurts the user as they have to go out and download a media player rather than having it built in.

      MS does not sell OS's to users (99% of home sales). MS sells an OS to PC manufacturers. If MS is prohibited from bundling their media player with their OS, it theoretically it opens up the media player space to equal competition as each media player vendor has a fair chance of getting the PC maker to pre-install their software. Realistically, it probably does not do enough to stop MS from coercing the PC manufacturers into just installing their media player using differential pricing.

      If you don't like media player there's nothing stopping you from installing something else so what's the problem?

      If every time you buy a car (from the one monopoly car maker left) you get a free, lifetime supply of cheese you can always just throw it away and buy different cheese elsewhere, so what's the problem? The problem is you just f*cked the cheese market. The problem is most people don't know there are alternatives, or won't bother to go get them, and they have already paid for Windows media player (the cost was rolled into Windows which was rolled into the cost of the computer they bought). As a result no other media player can sell their product (all the remaining ones are free, ad supported, or supported by other companies with a vested interest in stopping MS from gaining another monopoly). Thus, instead of having a desktop OS monopoly, MS has a desktop OS and media player monopoly, which they can then leverage into a media distribution, or creation, or some other monopoly. In the mean time, the media player industry suffers since MS has no reason to improve their product since they have no one competing with them. Maybe you've noticed how much IE has improved in the last six years? Web browsing has stagnated for more than half a decade and Web developers have to code everything to really, really old standards that are not even completely implemented. Expect the same for media player technologies once MS takes over that space.

    71. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the government wants to get young people to use regular mail again, they already tax that, that can't find a way to tax email or ims.

    72. Re:Whats the real issue? by 4of12 · · Score: 1
      or to unbundle Excel from Word when you buy Office. It's really stupid.

      Well, stupid for Microsoft, I suppose, since it would expose them to greater competition against Excel and Word.

      Consumers would benefit immensely if Microsoft made the interface specifications to the their products completely open, free and unencumbered so that consumers could buy bundles in competitive marketplace with lower prices, higher quality products and a faster pace of innovation. As it stands, you can buy your convenient, powerful bundled Word/spreadsheet or Excel/document prepartion software from exactly one source. Sole source means the pricing power is skewed towards the supplier.

      There's a favorable argument for bundling based on the convenience it provides. But bundling also provides hidden chains that limit purchasing decisions because you can't move to a better spreadsheet without giving up Excel's interoperability with Word or vice versa.

      Bundling the OS with the computer is "convenient", too.

      Bundling their way up the application software stack from the OS has worked well for Microsoft over the years and I don't expect them to give up this lucrative strategy easily. If they have to pay South Korea US$32 million or the EU some fine an order of magnitude larger, that's just testimony to how valuable the API is to them. Risking the occasional fine, settling with aggrieved litigants is just a cost to be weighed in the overall accounting.

      Too little, too late legal sanctions requiring MS to distribute stripped, unbundled versions long after their competitors have bitten the dust are only a minor blip on the radar. The underwhelming uptake of Windows sans media player in Europe indicates that closing the barn door is being done after the horse has left.

      Meanwhile, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly is satisfied with dog and pony shows that will have negligible impact on the competitive landscape. Indeed, time is on the side of MS as they roll-out Innovative© bundled new products and multi-year licensing schemes to their corporate captive audience that build up barriers to migration on multiple fronts. It used to be that competitive products had to work just like Word or Excel. As new entries like OpenOffice and Mozilla/Firefox provide good functionality and reasonable MS interoperability to address to those old barriers to migration, new barriers get put up. Most corporations are too wedded to Exchange, Active Directory or have already bought a multi-year license agreement that make migration away from Microsoft uncomfortable.

      Thomas Penfield Jackson was right; he still says what he thinks. If he had kept his mouth shut when he was supposed to then this agonizing drawn-out process of killing the beast to release its stranglehold on the market would not be necessary.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    73. Re:Whats the real issue? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      >> If you dont like [Windows Media Player,] nothing stops
      >> you from getting itunes/quick time or realplayer.
      >
      > Show me the way to uninstall Windows Media Player from
      > my Windows PC and replace its DLLs with a wrapper around
      > QuickTime, and I'll believe you.

      Why would you want to do that? QuickTime plays .movs, WMP plays .mpgs. You can tell the operating system to open .mpgs with QuickTime, if you desire, though how successful it'll be, I don't know. Perhaps you want the MS .mpg codecs in there, if QuickTime is bright enough to use them.

      >> Nothing stops you from downloading aim or icq or yahoo or google im.
      >
      > Other than that MSN Messenger is taking up RAM every time I log in,
      > and people without much Windows customization experience don't know
      > how to turn "that stupid weeble thing" off?

      The bundling issue has nothing to do with RAM usage and everything to do with MS eviscerating the competition through bundled applications. Go sit in the corner.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    74. Re:Whats the real issue? by Macrat · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      And you just named the 2 worst proprietary tools.

      I guess yopu enjoy bending over for the man.

    75. Re:Whats the real issue? by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with MS trying to sell software? If Windows was shipped with no applications would you go out and pay MS money for the pile of shit known as IE or would you just download FireFox for free?

      The problem is _not_ that MS are giving stuff away for free, it's that they're bundling their own stuff with the OS so 99% of the time people won't even look at the alternatives to the bundled software (hell, 98% of the people probably don't even know there _are_ alternatives since everyone just uses the bundled software).

      And then a major problem with the vast majority of people using what MS supply is that MS "standards" become the defacto standard which everyone uses and that excludes the minority who don't want to pay MS money for their inferior products.

      If MS just supplied the unbundled OS and then let people download the applications they need then it would become more obvious that there are (often better) alternatives.

    76. Re:Whats the real issue? by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      A better analogy would be, Coke making most of the fridges, so they should be banned from providing free cans of coke when you buy one. Or they have to allow Rola Cola to advertise inside them.

      Your analogy fails because Coke is a consumable. A better analogy would be the (almost) sole manufacturer of fridges bundling a free life time supply of coke that's delivered to your door by magic. Now, maybe Pepsi tastes a bit better, but does it taste better _enough_ to warrant the effort and money involved in buying it instead of using your free Coke that you never even need to go to the shop to buy. I would argue that it immediately puts Pepsi at a huge unfair disadvantage purely because they didn't own a fridge manufacturer.

    77. Re:Whats the real issue? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Why would you want to do that? QuickTime plays .movs, WMP plays .mpgs.

      Say what? QuickTime can play .mpg (MPEG-1 wrapper, MPEG-1 video, MP2 audio). And given that .mov and .avi are just wrappers, QuickTime can play a .mov or .avi that uses any codec that QuickTime knows about. The primary thing you can't play in QuickTime is .asf/.wm*, and that's largely because of patent issues.

    78. Re:Whats the real issue? by JackAtCepstral · · Score: 1

      Sure, your WinXP box might not crash, but it could be turned into a zombie pretty fast if you didn't get third party software that serve no other purpose than to patch the OS (antivirus, firewall, anti-spyware, etc.)

      No anti-virus or anti-spyware for me. But I am behind a firewall. But isn't everybody? Would you connect your Linux or BSD or OSX or Solaris or... box directly the 'net without any sort of bastion?

      --
      Cepstral: Quality TTS for OS X, Linux, Windows
    79. Re:Whats the real issue? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      What I've found is that all of those players are shit. Sure, they have better interfaces (well, some of them, certainly not zoom player or mplayer) and they're generally lighter and faster, but all of those programs (I've tried them all, and more, like vlc for example) crash constantly on both win2k and winxp, both fully patched. wimp also seems to deal better with slightly wonky files than anything but maybe vlc, and vlc is crashtacular on windows. Mostly I go ahead and use wimp or I use powerdvd, which for the purposes of playing non-dvd/vcd/svcd content might as well be a wrapper around wimp.

      Keep in mind that I am not a clueless newbie and if these programs are crashing on me more than wimp, it is assuredly not my fault. I keep my systems clean and updated and in general I know what I'm doing - and what I'm doing is using wimp.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    80. Re:Whats the real issue? by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      you should work for the creationists, great job taking a line out of context.

      am I forced to get my music from the Itunes music store just so that I can conduct basic business interactions with the community at large? am I in any way forced to buy an Ipod to listen to music because everyone uses fairplay to provide music? The resounding answer is a huge no so try again with a more relevant example.

      I did not say the government should in any way determine which text editor I use. I said the government should prevent a company from spreading its monopoly situation in such a way that it effectively determines which text editor I use. Unfortunately for those of us outside a nice bubble, feeling a different text editor is better is a complete non-issue. we must use microsoft office in order to conduct business because other editors are effectively prevented from reading from or writing to such a format.

      By preventing bundling, the government is forcing consumers to get slightly more educated. Of course, if they then choose, anyone can go download WMP as easily as anything else, so why should it be bundled?

    81. Re:Whats the real issue? by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      What all these countries are getting at is that they don't want Microsoft to be the gatekeeper of all things digital, but trying to work through the courts is a fumbling and uncoordinated process.

      I think the legislatures should all use their power of imminent domain and declare all the file formats as public. There could be all sorts of creative legal theories to support this such as implied contract. (You said I could use your software to create MY documents, yet you maintain that you get to retain the keys...)

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    82. Re:Whats the real issue? by doubledoh · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      The problem is that in many cases you can't even fully uninstall these programs. There's no reason why you should be forced to have applications with tons of holes in them (wmp, ie) just to use their operating system.

      It is so frustrating as a libertarian to read so many comments like this. YOU DON'T HAVE TO INSTALL WINDOWS. NO ONE is forcing you to buy, install or use windows. If you don't like the way windows bundles software or how windows makes uninstalling their bundled software difficult...then don't use windows!

      Microsoft is a company that makes software. There are HUNDREDS of other company's that make other similar software. If you CHOOSE to use windows, then you are chosing the entire package that they offer. If that package isn't to your liking, then you may choose to use another piece of software (like unix, linux, apple, and the hundreds of iterations thereof). You can even build your own operating system for free exactly how you like it. Microsoft is not responsible for making operating systems exactly how YOU want them. They are responsible to their shareholders and as such, make operatings systems that appeal to the most possible people in the marketplace at the best possible price. Most people actually like having more software bundled in for free (gasp).

      Again, there are too many choices in the marketplace to even use the word monopolist. You can't be a monopolist if anyone can produce similar products freely (as hundreds of companys and linux distrubutions do). This just sounds like Anti-Microsoft group thinking to me. The fact is, nobody owes you anything, especially a microsoft windows OS that is specially tailored to your communistic ideals. Grow up.

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    83. Re:Whats the real issue? by Small_kid · · Score: 1

      Imagine if coke was the sole supplier of fridges as well as being a major drink company.
      It would be like saying that coke must allow drinks other then coke to be stocked in coke fridges.


      Yeah, but at least you can get rid of the cokes in the fridge.
      You can't to the same with windows media player and msn messenger.. they keep coming back! :o imagine having an endless supply of coca cola coming out of your beloved coca-cola-made refridgerator! You'd never have to go buy any more soda, be it coca cola or pepsi, ever again!

    84. Re:Whats the real issue? by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      Thank you, god: an intelligent comment on slashdot.

      I'll answer your rhetorical question in case others aren't capable of doing the same: No, the government should NOT be involved in anything other than protecting freedom. That freedom, by the way is extended to companys that should be free to decide what they package with their operating systems to make them more desirable to the consumers that are also free to buy or not buy their products.

      As much as I dislike DRM and proprietary formats, any company should be free to institute whatever protectionist schemes that they like (short of government legislation) just as long as I am free to avoid companies that persue this parochial approach.

      Freedom is a two way street. Sometimes you aren't gonna like what's on that street, but at least you are free to turn around and go the othe way.

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    85. Re:Whats the real issue? by Shaklee39 · · Score: 0

      Media Player Classic. Then what? Did you mean than? Fuck you.

    86. Re:Whats the real issue? by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 1

      What about the apps that aren't included? Just because you include 2 or 3, then some of the dozen others can sue because you're not including THEM too.

    87. Re:Whats the real issue? by SeattleGameboy · · Score: 1
      I don't think Microsoft should be forced to sell their products. The OEM should be allowed to decide which media player to include on the final O/S. What is your problem with that?

      Well, this has happened alrady in Europe with their anti-trust settlement. Guess what, no OEM's wanted the "crippled" version. They are just selling the bundled version just like before.

      So what good THAT anti-trust suit do other than lightening up MS' pockets are little bit? What good will this do?

      What you all seems to ignore is that for something like this to be valid and successful, there has to be a CONSUMER DEMAND for this! There is no outcry (other than Slashdot) for an unbundled version. In fact, 95% of the consumers are HAPPY that these apps are bundled.

      This is much ado about nothing. MS will just count this as a cost of doing business and move on. No Korean OEM is going to sell the unbundled version and everything will blow away in few months after that. Just like it has with Europe.

    88. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, if all things were equal then I would agree with most of what you said. However, things are not equal. There is NO CHOICE for the vast majority of computer users. When a typical user purchases a computer from one of the big OEMs (or even the smaller ones) their ONLY choice is Windows. In fact, they don't even get much of a choice there --- it is typically the latest version of (desktop) Windows or nothing. So do not say no one is being forced to buy Windows, if there is no other choice than Windows then the typical user _is_ being forced to buy Windows when they purchase a computer.

      Other people do not have the choice because they or others they deal with are locked into Microsoft's proprietary formats. Hence, you need access to the data then you use Windows.

      Yes, there are hundreds of other companies that make similar software to Microsoft's. Now tell me how many of those other companies have the clout to coerce OEMs into bundling deals at the expense of pissing off Microsoft? Or did you forget about the part about Microsoft forcing OEMs to not offer competing products bundled with the computer purchase?

      How can you keep a straight face when claiming Microsoft is not a monopoly or even wields monopoly power? In the end, it really does not matter what you or I think as Microsoft has been legally determined to be a monopoly. I should also mention, it is not illegal to be a monopoly, but it is illegal to abuse a monopoly. Microsoft has greatly abused their monopoly status. Were you asleep during the Microsoft anti-trust trial?

    89. Re:Whats the real issue? by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1
      So keeping certain Windows APIs hidden from competing media applications doesn't count?
      This is pure FUD. Just check MSDN for information on the apparently "hidden" Windows APIs. You can build a media player with the WMP API's, DirectShow, or even just from scratch (ex WinAmp/FreeAmp). If you use DirectShow or WMP you can even play WMA/WMV.
      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    90. Re:Whats the real issue? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      You don't get to use volunteerware as an argument for why the free market isn't broken. The fact that you pretty much have to have a fundementally gratis product to get anywhere these days rather soundly demonstrates how broken things are. The ability to post something on sourceforge doesn't equate into a working market.

      There is exactly ONE commercial operating systems company to offer an alternative to Microsoft.

      Claiming Linux as argument for Microsoft as not a monopoly is sleazy and dishonest in the extreme.

      YOUR attitude about the proper focus of business is exactly why things are so wrong in the market. Me, the man with the cash, should come first, not the stockholders.

      This wannabe robberbaron crap you're spouting is just assinine.

      The likes of Microsoft should at least have to pay lip service to the customer even if people like yourself would willingly lick their boots.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    91. Re:Whats the real issue? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Microsoft dominates the distribution channel for consumer computer hardware.

      People here need to stop thinking of themselves as the customer. Dell, Gateway & Sony are the customer.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    92. Re:Whats the real issue? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      No, they should be involved in CORPORATE governance to a sufficient degree that there aren't any abusive monopolies and that I GET TO CHOOSE what text editor I use.

      As things are now, you are just gleefully trading one dictator for another.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    93. Re:Whats the real issue? by tdubya · · Score: 1

      So should General Motors be forced to exclude the dashboard in case the user wants a ford dashboard?

      --
      I read /.! I like seeing how misinformed, short sighted, and downright stupid some people are.
    94. Re:Whats the real issue? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      And your analogy fails AGAIN when you realise that Microsoft don't provide all operating systems, but there are competitors, one of them with a FREE product.

      According to every court that has ruled on the issue so far, MS is a monopoly. A monopoly is defined by controlling an entire market such that others cannot compete. Please note, that is market not product. For example if there was only one company that sold tanning booths, but there was also a house manufacturer that made there own and gave them away with every house, and people could still tan outside under the sun, it is still monopoly because neither of the second two options are competing in the market. In fact, the presence of Linux and the fact that it is made by a collective and not sold is a very good indication of the presence of a monopoly. When your strongest competitor gives their product away for free you're probably a monopoly.

    95. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft is a company that makes software. There are HUNDREDS of other company's that make other similar software. If you CHOOSE to use windows, then you are chosing the entire package that they offer.

      Right, so we're talking about Windows here, and there are "HUNDREDS" of alternatives made by companies.

      List 50. No, I'll make it easier. List 25 companies, 25 alternative operating systems that are commercial products, commercially available from generic computer stores at this time, run on common hardware, are designed for the Intel/AMD x86 range, and aren't restricted (by licence) to run only on a specific platform (such as the x86 Macs). Oh, and you're not allowed to count resellers, such as Redhat, who didn't create most of the Linux system with their own resources. (Trolls and zealots alike: I'm making no value judgements on the amount of work they've put into the system.)

      Also, for every alternative (to Windows) operating system, you have to provide a list of at least 3 manufacturers (OEM) or re-sellers (local computer stores) that sell a PC with that OS installed.

      Hundreds, eh? I'm waiting.

    96. Re:Whats the real issue? by agingell · · Score: 1

      Interestingly this was exactly the case in the UK, Coca Cola assisted small shops in the purchasing of drinks fridges and then specified which drinks were to be allowed in the chiller. Oddly enough these turned out to be Coca Cola products Coke, fanta etc.

      This was ruled to be monopolistic due to the fact that the retailers were in small premises and therefore would not have the space for more than one chiller unit. Coca Cola had to allow other products in the chillers.

      There was a very similar case with Walls ice cream and their freezers (which were supplied / purchase assisted to small shops), this in tern restricted the products which could be kept in the freezer. This was also ruled as monopolistic, now they are not allowed to restrict what products are allowed to be included.

      Another case is to do with car dealer fore courts, manufacturer sponsored dealerships were restricted from selling other vehicles, this is now not allowed and if they wish to do so they are free to do so with no penalty.

      What I am getting to is that there is a great deal of precedence in this kind of case, it is not necessarily the bundling of MediaPlayer et al, that is the problem it is the restrictions imposed by the OEM agreements whereby PC suppliers get software products cheaply in bulk for supply with new units. If these agreements restrict what the OEM is able to do to the software (e.g. installed media player and put their own favourite one on) then there are monopoly implications.

      It is unfortunate that the fines are so small, not so with the EU, but if OEM restrictions are altered then it would be worth it.

    97. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just today got msn messenger working with wine in ubuntu. I had to install almost every system software package from winetools. Got fed up with too many flashy thingies --> back to Gaim.

    98. Re:Whats the real issue? by Braino420 · · Score: 1

      Either way I can't help wondering if this is a good thing since if Suse or Ubunto or some other linux dist suddenly becomes popular overnight, will they get nailed for bundling 100s of apps with it? Will a judge know (or care) of the difference between open source and MS when it comes to bundling freeware in a distribution?
      You're kidding right? Hrm, maybe you were thinking about this too hard and you forgot about the whole monopoly thing. It would be kinda silly to take an open source OS to court for monopolistic practices. You know, since it's free and OPEN.

      --
      They call me the wookie man, I guess that's what I am
    99. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      Now, that sounds like a serious issue with the "Classic Media Player"'s installation. most applications to install, you just open the archive (which can usually be done by double clicking) then double click the single exe or msi, and it extracts it, and runs the setup.

        Any software that does not have effectively single-click installation (minus any choices that must be made during installation) should be shot.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    100. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Nonsense. Unbundling media player helps the market as it allows all the media players to compete on an even basis."

      Anyone care for a glass of socialism?

      Lets look at the underlying principle of the whole matter:

      1. Microsoft developed Windows. (FACT)
      2. Real player, mPlayer, Winamp, didn't. (FACT)

      Why should Microsoft allow these media players to be the 'default' on a platform they spent millions, if not billions, on developing? Let alone force Microsoft to give these companies shout outs on their OS? ON TOP OF PAYING $32MILLION.

      What rational person would see this as justifiable?

    101. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      ...and that's because all the others that have been put into the marketplace have failed. It's obviously not impossible to succeed, Apple's still around aren't they?

        IBM's PC OS division, Be, and a lot of other people have tried and failed. It's not because it's impossible for them to succeed.

        It's for the same reason we almost all use X86 based systems, today. People wanted to use software that was written to run on an X86. Then they wanted to be able to take their home software to work, or their work software to home. Suddenly, the IBM PC became the defacto standard hardware system.
        That Windows has become the defacto software operating system is for the same reason.
        Yes, there are hardware alternatives to X86.
        Motorola/IBM are still out there with PowerPC, right? But did AMD want a market share in that range, or did AMD want to take a bite out of Intel? And how did they do that?

        Let's go back to the late 70's. You want an operating system? Great, every model has it's own custom OS. You want a different piece of hardware? different operating system. You want to drive a floppy drive that didn't come with the box? Write your floppy driver for your operating system. Oh, you want to print? Hi Richard! Let's write a printer driver!

        Have you got a better idea than one system? If you do, I bet it runs Windows software.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    102. Re:Whats the real issue? by TastyCakes · · Score: 1

      As the other responders to your post pointed out, OEMs can bundle alternatives to media player, just not uninstall it. The real question is why should a government be able to say what features an operating system should come with. Playing media is a major part of what people use computers for. Why shouldn't such an important feature come with the OS? If windows releases its own effective virus scanner and makes third party virus scanners unnecessary, are you going to listen to norton and mcafee whine that it's unfair because suddenly they're pointless? That's precisely what Real Player did. But in truth they shouldn't blame Microsoft, they should blame themselves for not producing a product sufficiently attractive to convince the user to switch from the default OS-included equivalent.
      People that sell add-ons for cars don't whine that GM doesn't give them the option of shipping that way. IE in particular and Media Player to a degree can be seen as essential parts of Windows. If you want to switch to better alternatives - fine, nothing is stopping you, just like if you want to trick out your civic. But saying that Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to give you the abilities of these programs by default is silly.

    103. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      Show ME the way to uninstall glibc from Linux, and I'll show you the way to remove major components of Windows. Let's see which operating system can do something after a significant portion of it has been crippled?

        (btw, to uninstall media player, you go to Add/Remove Software, check "Windows Media Player", and click Remove)

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    104. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      Great, I want to use a text editor that operates in EBCDIC, rather than ASCII!

        See, there's a REASON you can use text editors on any kind of TEXT file that you want. TEXT is defined in this case as ASCII data. Before ASCII, there were (at least 2, maybe more?) standards for information interchange. I don't think anyone's using EBCDIC anymore, though I could be wrong, but there's a reason for that. They wanted to be able to have their data go from place to place, and still work.

        You want a successful word processor? Well, you'll have to operate with the formats that people are already using. Same thing with a text editor, and everything else now. If I pulled out a text editor that couldn't edit standard ASCII, do you think anyone would want it? I don't think so.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    105. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      They already do. It's called PAINT. Maybe you've heard of it?

        You want to do well in an existing market, you get out there and you do better than the existing products in the market, and/or you at the very least have far better marketing than the existing products in the market.

      Why would Microsoft bundle RealPlayer, when they already have their own product that does what Real does (and doesn't suck as bad as Real [buffering] Player)?

        (do you know anyone that actually uses Real Player? really?)

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    106. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      There is nothing stopping any PC manufacturer from bundling additional software that does not come with Windows along with their PC products.

        In fact, a lot of OEMs do bundle Real [buffering] Player with their PCs as well, because WMP's Real support totally sucks ass, and there is a lot out there that is Real. At least, they did when I was selling PCs at retail a few years back.

        Exactly who do you see in the Media Player industry? I see Microsoft, Real, Apple.. any others? Those are the big ones. They are all still around, and I highly doubt they are going anywhere. The rest of the competition aren't businesses, so they really don't count as being in the industry.

        Web browsing has stagnated for more than half a decade because web developers choose to not use functions that IE has not implemented. Why do they do that? (hint: it's because people want other people to be able to see their web pages. And there are still people out there using goddamn NAVIGATOR TWO POINT OH. Even if IE had been updated in the last 5 years, we'd STILL be in the same place)

        I expect that until earthshattering MUST HAVE TECHNOLOGY comes out, anything that has advanced far enough to produce a usable standard, is going to stagnate.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    107. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      Everyone has a choice as to wether to buy Microsoft or Red Hat or Novell or IBM or Sun or HP or whatever products. Bundling is bad for the economy, and the consumer, and the industry in question, and is illegal? OK, so, say I want to buy a computer, I need to go to Dell to get a computer, Apple to get an Operating system, Real to get a player that will play one type of a/v, Red Hat to get a GUI, *insert more crap here*

        When I buy a car, I get a car, and I also get all the fluids in the car, the gas, the oil, I get tires, I get air in the tires, etc. Is that illegal too?

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    108. Re:Whats the real issue? by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      As long as Linux distros don't make it impossible to remove XMMS and Mplayer, certainly they can hurl accusations without being hypocritical.

    109. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      Are you telling me that the Win32 (and is the new one called Win64?) API is not publicly accessible?

      If I'm not mistaken, Word Perfect Office is still out there, and so are other Office competitors. And they run on... WINDOWS!

      If some manufacturer made a good version of every single application I could ever possibly want, along with an operating system, I don't think I'd be the one to complain. And neither do the users that that is good for. Why should they?

        Operating Linux should require that everyone go and build their Linux From Scratch to get it running, that way nothing is bundled with it.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    110. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      ...and my dad's ex-wife had no idea that you were supposed to change the oil in a car every 3-6 months, or 3-6000 miles. (her engine went BOOM about an hour after he changed the oil.. the car ran for almost 10 years on it's factory supplied oil)

        It's not our problem that people are dumb.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    111. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      ....and people would probably buy it because the [buffeirng] Alternatives [buffering] kinda [buffering] suck [buffering] compared [buffering] to [get my point?] WMP.

        I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, but before I realised that iTunes came bundled with the QuickTime player now (there's some more bundling that ought be illegal!), I had noted that I had some weird things running.. apparently itunes/quicktime installs at least three different things to startup, in two or three different places.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    112. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      When I go to Taco Bell, and order a package, I get a Pepsi product. And if I try to bring a competitors product into Taco Bell, they'll tell me to leave. Amazing :D

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    113. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      As a matter of fact, you can choose to not install media capability at all, if you'd like.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    114. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      I don't know of any sites that give me the choice of only playing the media under Windows Media. Do you?

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    115. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      Hmm. I don't have any problems with VLC crashing. Unless I try to use the VLC plugin, which crashes everything regularly and quite hard. And continued to do so even after I removed it, until I re-installed WMP.

        Hallmark of open source programs to not be very nice to other programs.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    116. Re:Whats the real issue? by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      You know, if all things were equal then I would agree with most of what you said. However, things are not equal. There is NO CHOICE for the vast majority of computer users. When a typical user purchases a computer from one of the big OEMs (or even the smaller ones) their ONLY choice is Windows. In fact, they don't even get much of a choice there --- it is typically the latest version of (desktop) Windows or nothing. So do not say no one is being forced to buy Windows, if there is no other choice than Windows then the typical user _is_ being forced to buy Windows when they purchase a computer.

      Since you seem keen on legal determinations, you surely know that ignorance is never an excuse for not obeying a law. Similarly, just because the "average" consumer doesn't know about other alternatives does not make the majority software maker responsible. Your argument is like saying that it's not the consumers fault for only finding Toyota's at a Toyota dealership! The fact is, most people actually WANT windows and that is why most people buy windows (and most suppliers supply it). Demand creates markets, supply fills them. Even still, I don't believe for a second that people are unaware of alternatives. Apple is a famous computer company that makes computers just as well and sometimes better than PC's. Even a quick search on google for "Alternative Operating Systems" churns out hundreds of viable alternatives. Unless one is a complete technophobe, one cannot pretend to not know about other alternatives. Your point is moot.

      Other people do not have the choice because they or others they deal with are locked into Microsoft's proprietary formats. Hence, you need access to the data then you use Windows.

      Another car analogy: That's like saying that people don't have a choice when going to their Ford service center and replacing their engine with a Mercedes diesel engine. If you don't like the package and all that it entails, it is YOUR responsibility to choose wisely...not the company manufacturing the package. If you are weary of being tied to proprietary formats (I assume you mean Microsoft Office formats), then you or your company should make more careful buying decisions...or the leap to open source solutions. By the way, I've been a Microsoft user for over 13 years and I can open ALL of my "proprietary" microsoft files in Ubuntu/Open Office just fine. Your point is weak, and as far as I'm concerned irrelevant. Software purchase and the ramifications it entails is the buyer's responsibility. And by the way...despite the existence of free alternatives, Microsoft still sells it's products successfully many would argue because they are often superior (not just because they are sometimes bundled). I think you'll find alot of people buying Office 12 because of it's innovations...even though Open Office is free.

      Yes, there are hundreds of other companies that make similar software to Microsoft's. Now tell me how many of those other companies have the clout to coerce OEMs into bundling deals at the expense of pissing off Microsoft? Or did you forget about the part about Microsoft forcing OEMs to not offer competing products bundled with the computer purchase?

      No one is coercing anyone to do anything. If you sell PC's, you are free to install Linux or others and sell it like that. If the company chooses to use the most popular (and desirable) OS (Windows), then they will draft out a deal that is beneficial to both parties. If the deal isn't beneficial to the OEM, the OEM is free to decline and go with something else. Yes, I know that his product won't be very marketable without Windows...but isn't that the point? Windows has made a product that people want (and have spent BILLIONS of dollars marketing and developing it)...aren't they entitled to reap the rewards of their investment?

      How can you keep a straight face when claiming Microsoft is not a monopoly or even wields monopoly power?

      I can keep a straight face because it's true. A mo

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    117. Re:Whats the real issue? by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. Unbundling media player helps the market as it allows all the media players to compete on an even basis.

      The problem is allowing OEMs to distribute versions of Windows without MS IE or MS MP. Microsoft used to ban OEMs from removing Internet Explorer. Expensive end-user customer support for web browsers double, obviously, and customer confusion also increases. So it is not unbundling per se that was required, but giving customers (such as the OEM) the choice to install another browser or Media Player.

      Don't forget Microsoft also knowingly lied to coders about their JDK. MS claimed that their JDK would produce Sun Java compliant code when it did not. Some MS executive sent an e-mail along the lines of "we'll just be quiet about J++ making Win32-only Java."

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    118. Re:Whats the real issue? by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      It's not our problem that people are dumb.

      I don't see the relevance of your arguement - who are you suggesting is dumb here? The people who are using the bundled software because they can't be bothered to download something better? The third party manufacturers who get run out of business by Microsoft's illegal practices? Or maybe the people who _want_ to use a non-microsoft application but can't because the world revolves around the defacto "standards" from MS?

      MS's illegal business practices don't _only_ harm to people who are "too dumb" to know any better, they harm everyone except MS because they run competing companies out of business, make it impossible to use non-MS platforms and when they have the "market share" they cease putting resources into it's development.

      Or are you saying that the stagnation of the web over the past 6 years due to IE's lack of development is good for everyone? Yes, I really like having to write web pages in a half arsed implementation of part of a 10 year old standard.

    119. Re:Whats the real issue? by suitepotato · · Score: 1

      If you don't like how Microsoft builds their OS then don't frigging buy it, it is just that simple. This boils down to people whose lack of technical expertise is showing brilliantly like a nova turning to the usual old standby of whining.

      I've been in network and PC and software support forever now and Windows HAS NO ISSUES ON PAR WITH THE FUD-HYPE WHEN YOU HAVE A SINGLE CLUE WHAT YOU ARE DOING. That amazingly simple. I've beaten Windows XP down like a chump on too many boxes to count and the damage done was MINE. NOT MICROSOFT'S. THEIR product worked fine. It didn't start to misbehave until I farked with it in a way either calculated to cause it or that was brazenly indifferent to good operating practice.

      This is NOT unique to Windows. I can bring almost any Linux distribution to its knees with a few such moves. That it is harder and less point and click than Windows is totally irrellevant. The default Red Hat, SuSE, Fedora Core, and Ubuntu distros when installed to their carefully chosen default configurations are just as well behaved as Windows (but not nearly as easy to use).

      This is about people wanting Windows whatever way their whim of the moment decides it should be, wanting Windows for less money or for free, wanting Bill Gates and Microsoft to take it in the shorts, but not because Microsoft has done anything criminal or unethical. If Gateway wants to bundle Ubuntu or Windows, that choice is Gateway's, NOT Microsoft's. It is simply not profitable to bundle and deploy Linux as opposed to Windows. Hence the box builders go with Windows.

      The idea that Microsoft somehow makes box builders deploy Windows instead of Linux is truly tail wags the dog thinking but par for the course on Slashdot.

      --
      If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
    120. Re:Whats the real issue? by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      great job at using a terrible analogy. ASCII and EBCDIC are completely open formats. any half assed programmer could write a program to go between the two if there were any demand. Go pay someone to make your editor that you want. That is the open market. Obviously, you aren't willing to pay enough. But there are loads of very wealthy companies backing very bright programmers trying to write programmers that can accurately mimic the .doc, .xls, and the rest of the ms office programs. Now I wonder, why can't they get one that accurate inputs/outputs my resume in the format? because unlike your flawed examples, none of those formats are truly open. so, try again.

      The idea is taking one monopoly and extending it into other monopolies. that is illegal and that is why they are being forced to unbundle software. Now they can't leverage their dominance in the OS market(also earned through illegal means) and build a monopoly in this market. If they want the monopoly, they just have to be the best media player out there.

    121. Re:Whats the real issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shess the Slashdot comunity have no common sense.

      The applications Microsoft have been bundling are OWNED and DEVELOPED by them, and they used their monopoly to create another one by bundling.

      In the case of Open Source Operating Systems, they normally bundle with applications not owned by them, they might join in the development, they might develop some of their own tools, but never do they come with nothing nothing owned by them, and never do they bundle with properity applications to kill the competition.
      -- Shimon

    122. Re:Whats the real issue? by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Nonsense. Unbundling media player helps the market as it allows all the media players to compete on an even basis.

      How does it help the consumer? Did anyone ask them whether they wanted the media player removing? Of course not.

      The consumers get screwed so scumbags like Real get to make more money with their worthless products. Disgusting.

    123. Re:Whats the real issue? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Everyone has a choice as to wether to buy Microsoft or Red Hat or Novell or IBM or Sun or HP or whatever products.

      MS sells desktop operating systems. Every other company you mention sells other products that happen to include desktop operating systems, or sell a very small (insignificant to the market) number of systems. Apple, IBM, Sun, and HP sell hardware that comes with an OS. Red Hat, IBM, and Novell sell services and support that come with an OS. Monopolies are defined by markets. No one else can compete in the desktop OS market. Even solutions that were arguable superior when they were released were killed. Look at BeOS, for example.

      OK, so, say I want to buy a computer, I need to go to Dell to get a computer, Apple to get an Operating system, Real to get a player that will play one type of a/v, Red Hat to get a GUI, *insert more crap here*

      MS does not sell PC's. When you want to buy a PC with Windows on it does that mean you have to go to MS and buy the OS and then Dell to buy the machine? No you don't. You go to Dell or any other retailer and they are happy to sell you a bundle of items, preconfigured. Dell, HP, Apple, K-mart, and Bob's computer shack are all retailers that are not monopolies. They can bundle anything they like. Now what if Dell obtained a monopoly on desktop computers? There is still no problem, because Windows is not made by them, thus they can still bundle whatever they want so long as it is not an OS they make, themselves. Get it?

    124. Re:Whats the real issue? by po8crg · · Score: 1

      I'm in the process of rolling out Windows XP Pro N in a business environment.

      This is really handy as it stops people playing WMVs, MPGs, etc that they get sent by email, which results in our Exchange server not getting clogged up with video files.

      I note that you can't get Media Center N, though!

    125. Re:Whats the real issue? by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      I think it's amusing that you have to require rules and conditions for me to support my argument, Anonymous Coward, despite the fact that I made no such rules and conditions in the first place. The fact is, the market doesn't behave in a fashion that YOU get to decide, the market simply is what it is. There are hundreds of Linux distributions, Unix based OS's, Apple desktop and server software, Solaris renditions and so on. Whether some of these products are commercial or open source is irrelevant: Operating systems are operating systems regardless of price and distribution reach (or indeed marketing prowess).

      You also seem to make the sophmoric mistake of attacking the wrong party. Is it Microsoft's fault (as if it could be a fault) that most people want Windows on their hardware and therefore most smart hardware manufacturers package their products with Windows? Doesn't the choice of what operating systems to preload on their hardware soley lie with the OEMs? Microsoft certainly isn't forcing anyone to buy their software...but intelligent hardware manufacturers that actually want to SELL their products realize that Windows is the most desireable OS in the consumer market--and obviously offer it. Walmart, despite being the largest, most expansive retailer in the world failed to sell a great deal of their Linspire boxes (even though they were priced very low)...why? Because most people want Windows. YOu might not like this fact, but it is a fact, and the business world wisely allows facts to determine what they market (for the most part).

      You want me to name 3 OEM's or resellers that sell hardware without an OS? Why? It's certainly not Microsoft's fault that many OEM's install their OS on their systems...it's the market's fault. You see, the market (consumers that don't know how to build their own machines), WANT Windows and that's what they get. Those that don't want windows need only to use google to find these 3+ OEM's that you seek. I found 52 without even trying by the way: Linux harware vendors. Most of this hardware is offered with or without Linux. Newegg.com offers many "barebones" packages without an OS, and there are dozens of other online computer retailers that also sell barebones packages which anyone who is actively seeking can find. Nevertheless, the fact remains, it is up to most OEM's to maximize their market...and they successfully do this by offering Windows on their machines because that's what most people want.

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    126. Re:Whats the real issue? by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      The fact that you pretty much have to have a fundementally gratis product to get anywhere these days rather soundly demonstrates how broken things are.

      Actually, most of Microsoft's products aren't free, and they still manage to persuade consumers to purchase them...perhaps because to most consumers paying some money for a good product is better than paying no money for an inferior one. By the way, this in no way reflects my view of open source software because I think there is lots of great open source software. Nevertheless, I realize that many people enjoy the familiarity, the hardware support, and the extensive availability of well funded 3rd party software products available on Windows machines...and for these reasons, I think many people continue to purchase Windows despite the free alternatives.

      Claiming Linux as argument for Microsoft as not a monopoly is sleazy and dishonest in the extreme.

      Actually, I'm claiming that Microsoft isn't a monopoly because it isn't. Even if there were NO other operating systems in the entire world, they still couldn't have a monopoly because they do not have exclusive control over the resources required to create operating systems (software programmers). You must have exclusive control over a scarce resource to be a monopoly, and no one person or company can have exclusive control over the creation of software. It's impossible.

      YOUR attitude about the proper focus of business is exactly why things are so wrong in the market. Me, the man with the cash, should come first, not the stockholders.

      Indeed, you the man with the cash ARE first. If you the man with cash don't buy a company's products, then the shareholder's lose. You truly are in control, BECAUSE the stockholders depend on you (or whatever market they are after) for a profit. The proper focus of business is to please stockholders...but that can only be done by pleasing consumers. Clearly Microsoft has achieved this beause they are a very profitable company.

      This wannabe robberbaron crap you're spouting is just assinine.

      Uh oh, your "logic" isn't holding up so well...so your Plan B is to spew out feeble personal attacks and colorful adjectives?

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    127. Re:Whats the real issue? by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      I don't know of any sites that give me the choice of only playing the media under Windows Media. Do you?

      Yes, I do. But even if I didn't, it's not Microsoft's fault that it has a popular player used by many websites. The websites themselves are responsible for maximizing their audience...if they fail to do that, you can't blame microsoft. They could easily offer their movies in quicktime, realplayer, or flash video formats. Amazon.com offers their music previews in Real and WMP for example...and lots of cutting edge sites use flash video as almost everyone has the flash plugin.

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    128. Re:Whats the real issue? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      There is nothing stopping any PC manufacturer from bundling additional software that does not come with Windows along with their PC products.

      First it takes effort to add software to an OEM machine. OEMs know they need a web browser, but since MS has already included one bundled with their monopoly product, they now need an additional incentive to choose anything other than IE. Thus IE is given preferential treatment because it is bundled. That is called unfair competition and it is the result of a monopoly bundling a product with it's existing monopoly product, something specifically illegal according to US anti-trust laws. In fact, bundling is the first example listed in anti-trust legislation. Additionally, OEMs are prohibited from removing IE or other MS implemented software before it reaches the customer.

      Second, due to their monopoly position, MS has an excessive amount of power over computer manufacturers. They can put any company out of business simply by raising the price of Windows for that customer. They already charge different prices to different vendors. There have been reliable reports of MS both officially (in contracts) and unofficially (over dinner) telling manufacturers that if they include products from other vendors the price of their windows purchases will go up.

      Web browsing has stagnated for more than half a decade because web developers choose to not use functions that IE has not implemented.

      I agree with this.

      Even if IE had been updated in the last 5 years, we'd STILL be in the same place

      I disagree. Most Web developers (I've done a bit myself) code to deal with the majority of users. That means the most common 90% or so. Now Web technologies are mostly designed to degrade gracefully. That is to say, if I implement new features using CSS2, that does not mean the site is unusable for those without support for that protocol. It costs money, however, to implement new features and if 90% of users can't see them, then it is just not cost effective. If, however, 50% or more can see them, the situation changes drastically. IE's continued stagnation at a feature set that includes a partially implemented, buggy version of five year old technology has personally cost me at least a month worth of work time, versus just coding to the standards. It has also held back the implementation of dozens of new technologies.

      Your argument predicates that a new feature/technology must be so much better than what IE offers that people will upgrade to something else, but that very belief indicates an unfair market, where one party has to be significantly better in order to achieve the same results.

    129. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      IE sucks, so write for Firefox, Opera, etc, and tell your users to upgrade.

      Everyone says "wah wah Microsoft harms everyone", but it's only because they choose to be harmed by it.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    130. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      "EBCDIC was devised in 1963 and 1964 by IBM".

        Sure, anyone could write a program to go between the two. And IBM's not going to stop you. Microsoft isn't going to stop you writing a program to go between Word and WordPerfect, either. But, there's absolutely no compelling reason why they should have to tell you HOW to do it.

        In early times of computing, the open standards won. We're no longer in that era, though. We're 30 years beyond that time. Now, whatever wins, is whatever gets in the hands of the users.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    131. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      That was exactly what I said. You just re-stated it for me, in the opposite sarcasm. :D

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    132. Re:Whats the real issue? by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      IE sucks, so write for Firefox, Opera, etc, and tell your users to upgrade.

      Right, and a web based business can _really_ afford to be incompatable with 95% of it's potential customers? I'm sorry, but if you think the majority of IE users will upgrade to FireFox just because some e-commerce site wants them to then you are sadly mistaken.

    133. Re:Whats the real issue? by gordo3000 · · Score: 1

      yes and that leads to a monopoly which is economically inefficient(by an incredibly long ways). but hey, if you like the more inefficient system, then go right ahead. it seems if we can't agree on that point, then none of the conclusions will agree.

      I damn well don't feel like paying more because other users are complete idiots when it comes to computers(another economic failure, not even close to good information) so I am all for hte government stepping in now and then and forcing a bit more knowledge on the people this way.

    134. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      ...and who would choose [buffering] Real [buffering] Player over [buffering] WMV [buffering] or AVI [buffering] formats?

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    135. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      So, what you're saying, is that I should have to individually purchase every tool with my system, from the computer (even down to it's seperate pieces?) to the kernel to the command line tools, to the GUI, to the email program, the web browser, etc?

        I thought we determined in a previous post you had replied to me on, that that wasn't the case. Because that's what you're saying in the first part.

        IE's lack of proper OBJECT support has probably been the cause of zillions of wasted hours and dollars. This will be "kind of" fixed in IE7, but will anyone use it? I doubt it.

        The belief that a product has to be BETTER to be accepted is how the market is SUPPOSED to work. It's all screwed up though because people just don't care. That's what seems to make this particular capitalism work so well though.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    136. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      THAT is where the point that i've been trying to make comes in. IE is the least common denominator. 7 years ago, if Netscape had won the browser war, and IE had negligible usage numbers, everyone would be writing for Netscape 4 compatibility. But, that's not how it happened.

        They wouldn't be writing for Netscape 6 or Firefox now, they'd still be writing for all those people who never upgraded their browsers.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    137. Re:Whats the real issue? by XO · · Score: 1

      I agree it's inefficient, and it's silly. I don't have much of a suggestion to improve upon the status quo, though, really.

        About the last thing I want is to have to install an operating system just to be able to get a machine running, if i bought that machine pre-assembled, and then have to choose amongst the 28 different offered text editors, select 1, and still get 10 of them that weren't on the list. (sound familiar?)

        Actually, the LAST thing I'd want is after all that to have that same operating system not work with software or data that came from my buddy's sytem who has an identical computer, except has a different hard drive. or amount of installed ram. or whatever.

      --
      "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!" http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
    138. Re:Whats the real issue? by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      if Netscape had won the browser war, and IE had negligible usage numbers, everyone would be writing for Netscape 4 compatibility

      No they wouldn't - they would have been writing for a reasonably recent Netscape on the assumption that people would keep reasonably up to date as new versions of Netscape are released.

      The problem with IE's market dominance is that for the past few years there has been _no_ development so users didn't get to upgrade their current web browser, they had to switch to a completely different product instead (which most users won't do). What makes it even worse is that the continued bundling of an ancient technology with a modern system makes IE _look_ to most users as if it is a up to date technology. This means that most users _do not even know_ that their use of IE is helping to create a stagnant world wide web.

      I'm not sure what's worse - the fact that IE hasn't been developed in years or the fact that Microsoft is releasing a new version of IE that still won't support current standards. People will download IE7 and assume that it's up to date when infact it's _still_ old technology that's been given a bit of a face lift. (IE 7 _still_ won't support important standards like XHTML which have been well supported by other browsers for a long time).

      The idea of excluding IE users from commercial web sites is crazy _because_ of it's market share - businesses just can't afford to lose the majority of customers who will refuse to upgrade in the short term. Whilest excluding IE users may well improve the web in the long term, by the time it does all the businesses who tried it will be bankrupt.

    139. Re:Whats the real issue? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      So, what you're saying, is that I should have to individually purchase every tool with my system, from the computer (even down to it's seperate pieces?) to the kernel to the command line tools, to the GUI, to the email program, the web browser, etc?

      How can you possibly interpret my previous comment to say this? Individuals have no restrictions on what they can buy. Companies that don't have monopolies (like HP) have no restriction on what they can sell. The only companies that have restrictions are monopolies, and then only in what they can sell bundled together, based upon existing markets. HP obviously wants to sell a fully functional computer so they will probably put together hardware, OS, applications, etc. and sell them, which is fine. MS is free to sell them that OS, the applications, and even the hardware, so long as they are separate sales, not bundled together.

      The belief that a product has to be BETTER to be accepted is how the market is SUPPOSED to work. It's all screwed up though because people just don't care. That's what seems to make this particular capitalism work so well though.

      Capitalism breaks when it encounters monopolies. That is why there are laws to deal with that situation. End users shouldn't have to care. End users are used to dealing with free market products, and when there is not a free market the government is supposed to ensure that the companies involved behave as if there were. Customers can't be blamed for buying the only thing available in the store and they can't be blamed for not doing research and finding out they are being screwed. Half the posters on Slashdot can't seem to grasp what a monopoly is and what its affects are.

      What the government is supposed to be ensuring is what MS is doing does not adversely affect customers or the industry, but they have been paid off. The courts keep finding MS guilty and MS keeps settling lawsuits and paying out millions, but it is still not as much money as they are making by breaking the law. What the courts should be doing is preventing MS from bundling any products together. Failing that (as they have) they should separate the company into competing organizations and let capitalism work again. If they split the company and gave both rights to the source code developed to date we'd have competition near instantly and none of this would be a problem.

  3. 32 million? by BAILOPAN · · Score: 3, Funny

    I wonder if Microsoft will be able to pay this...

    --
    If you say "here goes my karma" I will bite you!!!
    1. Re:32 million? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I wonder if Microsoft will be able to pay this...

      Sounds like another round of layoffs are going to be called for...

    2. Re:32 million? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here goes my karma.

    3. Re:32 million? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it too much, or too little?

    4. Re:32 million? by Belseth · · Score: 1

      Gates is petty enough to pay it in pennies. He'd probably hire a team of people to unroll them all just to add insult to injury.

  4. In Korea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Only old people sue Microsoft

    1. Re:In Korea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In communist North Korea, Microsoft sues YOU!

    2. Re:In Korea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sad truth is in South Korea everybody uses Microsoft.

  5. How about No? Or have some XP N. by VJTod · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Can't they use Windows XP N from europe (that nobody wants to use)?

    Windows Messenger CAN be uninstalled - that's a right of the computer maker.

    And the computer maker is already capable of installing whatever additional software they choose.

  6. One version must be stripped of the WMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "The other version must come with links to Web pages that allow consumers to download competing versions of such software,"

    Microsoft will never go for this.

    1. Re:One version must be stripped of the WMP by lowe0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nor should they. I can see it now: "I clicked on a link that Windows showed me, and the software I downloaded killed my computer!"

      If my name is going on the package, I sure as hell wouldn't want something in it that I don't have control over. It's just asking to be blamed for the faults of others.

    2. Re:One version must be stripped of the WMP by corellon13 · · Score: 1

      They shouldn't because this is a ridiculous demand. No matter how you feel about M$, it is insane to suggest that they link to their competitors. Leveling the playing field is one thing, but forcing a company to direct business (in a sense advertising) to another company is crazy. I mean, think about it, this could end up a two-way street and I for one do not want links to IE popping up in FF!

      --
      Do what is right and let the consequence follow
    3. Re:One version must be stripped of the WMP by js3 · · Score: 1

      consumers will never go for this. I don't wanna spend 200$ on an os just to see ads from another company lol, and if I spend 200$ it better come with a media player. I wonder who makes these idiotic rules.

      --
      did you forget to take your meds?
  7. Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by millahtime · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't know if there would be this level of complaining and problems with M$ if they innovated, did right by their customers, and honestly tried to put out a good product. M$ has become the GM of the software world. Sure they are big and have moeny for now but there are a lot of unhappy people with their product just waiting for a true viable alternative at the desktop to come along. So, when the Toyota of the desktop computing world finially is ready to step it up they will slowly be able to nick away at M$ and for similar management thinking as GM.

    1. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by Drinian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So, when the Toyota of the desktop computing world finially is ready to step it up they will slowly be able to nick away at M$...

      It already has. It's called Apple.

    2. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      Apple isn't a real alternative to Windows, because you have to buy their hardware (which many complain is too expensive).

    3. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      I don't know if there would be this level of complaining and problems with M$ if they innovated, did right by their customers, and honestly tried to put out a good product.

      So, you're saying they never innovate, ever? They have no happy customers? They never try to put out a good product? You know that's not the case. Now, how about if they - even by your standards - made a good faith effort to do everything you think they should to make their software more innovative, and better. How about even cheaper! Then what? You'd have even less incentive for competition to form, and even less reason for other companies or projects to exist. Then you'd have everything you'd like about MS software, but people would still complain that they're too big. They can't win, in your world. If they're not very good at something, they get yelled at. If they're too good, they get punished for being successful.

      they are big and have moeny for now but there are a lot of unhappy people with their product just waiting for a true viable alternative at the desktop to come along.

      Apple? Or, how about the endless parade of stories here on slashdot about various companies, grandmas, and governments firing up Linux distros for their desktops? There are choices, which is what makes this nonsense in Korea nothing more than a sleazy little money grab... with ugly implications for a software developer's right to put whatever features into an O/S they think should be there. No bundled IM client allowed? What? Who cares? Anyone hip enough to want to use IM is going to take the two minutes required to download whatever client they want regardless. Regulating that through government action is absurd.

      So, when the Toyota of the desktop computing world finially is ready to step it up they will slowly be able to nick away at M$ and for similar management thinking as GM.

      So, that means you're against what Korea just did, right? Because if MS's own lack of quality is inevitably going to make it fail up against better software vendors, we certainly don't need governments telling them how to build specific features in their O/S, right? Your take on it is that the market is going to either cause MS to do better, or make them go away... so why get the government involved in the software market's preferences?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    4. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      It's a perfect example. Years ago, I was looking for a car. My cow-orker raved about how fantastic her Toyota was, so I looked for one. I took one look at the price, and bought a Ford. And while the Ford never had a BSOD, I never thought of it as anything beyond "good enough". I still hear people rave about their Toyotas.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    5. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by gnuLNX · · Score: 1

      It only seems expensive in comparison to cheap Dell boxes. But if you factor in the quality of the hardware you quickly realize that Apple computers are not such a bad deal. Plus with apple computers you truly get a Computing System (TM) out of the box that just works....and no you don't with Windows. I spent most of a day installing a new copy of XP on a Dell server. I spend less than 1 hour on an identical computer with Fedora Core4.

      I don't currently own a Mac, but I did recently get to play with a friends developer Intel based Mac and I can assure that I will be purchasing a Mac next. It get all the power and developer tools I get with Linux, and the just works part that makes using computers fun. Sure I will always keep Linux around, but I also have no problem paying for a product that is developed 100%. Most open source projects (mine included) are developed 80%. No one wants to put the final finishing touches on projects that don't make money, because those aspects of coding, and document writing just aren't as fun as hacking.

      --
      what?
    6. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by qray · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Value is in the eye of the beholder. For me, value means not having to take my car in for repairs every month. So yes, I'm willing to pay more up front so I don't have to see a repairman on a regular basis.

      I once opted for reducing the up front costs one time. I then add edup the amount of time I spent taking the car to the repair shop, being towed, etc. not to mention the out of warranty repairs, I would have been better off with a higher priced car. I'm not talking Ford vs Toyota necessary, this was just my observation of the two brands of cars I've owned.

      It's also been interesting to compare my parents time spent at repair shops and stranded compared to mine.

      That said I have Window's at home. The price is right, and it has never given me any problems. I've used Apple in the past, but it never impressed me enough to make me want to switch. I wouldn't mind using it. But for home, I have to consider games, and many of the games my children and I play aren't available on the Mac. Hopefully that may change with the move to Intel. I'd honestly consider getting a Mac for my wife, as I think she'd find it easier. The other factors unfortunately override that.
      --
      Q

    7. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      GMAFB. Apple's only had 30 years to build their market share, and to this very day, no one but Apple makes software for them.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    8. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by sheldon · · Score: 1

      I spent most of a day installing a new copy of XP on a Dell server.

      Some people are skilled with computers.

      Some people ask "Do you want fries with that?"

      But hey, look on the bright side. Maybe their french fry cooker needs a new copy of XP installed.

    9. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by ad0gg · · Score: 1
      I spent most of a day installing a new copy of XP on a Dell server. I spend less than 1 hour on an identical computer with Fedora Core4.

      Obviously you don't spend all day installing Windows on dell servers because if you did you would know that Dell has unattended OS installation system which you can install windows in under an hour(including all the right drivers) by filling out a few fields and a single click. Thanks for playing though.

      --

      Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

    10. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      GMAFB. Apple's only had 30 years to build their market share, and to this very day, no one but Apple makes software for them.

      And Adobe. And Microsoft. And id. And Epic. And Maxis. And Bioware. And Interplay. And (of course) Bungie. And most of the projecs on SourceForge.

      I must have been absent when Apple bought Microsoft. Care to dig out he /. story on that?

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    11. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      It only seems expensive in comparison to cheap Dell boxes. But if you factor in the quality of the hardware you quickly realize that Apple computers are not such a bad deal.

      And when you take a look at the laptop market you see that it's hard to find an IBM compatible laptop that's guaranteed to run some *nix flavor for the price of a 12" iBook. If you don't have the money to get yourself a ThinkPad or a different laptop with a good Linux track record (and you don't want to spend hours trying to get Linux - including WLAN - to work) an iBook can be a great choice.
      I hope that the Intel iBooks will be out when mine dies. Having the power (and especially Wine compatibility) of an Intel processor with the cheapness of an iBook and OS X to boot would be really great.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    12. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Bungie can hardly be counted as a separate company to Microsoft, since they are part of Microsoft Game Studios now. Also, I'm not too sure about their commitment to the Mac... Halo 2 certainly hasn't been released for OS X yet, despite being over a year old.

    13. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by JoshWurzel · · Score: 1

      I think Apple would object to being referred to as "the toyota of the desktop computing world". They might prefer BMW, Mercedes, Porsche, Bentley, or Aston-Martin.

      Linux is the Toyota/Honda: cheap, reliabile, and infinitely modifyable.

    14. Re:Wouldn't be all this bitching if.... by gnuLNX · · Score: 1

      Where would you like those fried served?

      --
      what?
  8. Hmmm by Ragein · · Score: 0

    At least this will force m$ to give links to other open source options with their os. But i can only wonder how much m$ will make off linking appz stadedly with widoze. More the 32 mil?

    --
    They fitted George Orwell's coffin with rollers so he could turn over more easily years ago.
    1. Re:Hmmm by SolarCanine · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, it doesn't say links to open source options...it says links to competitors.

      If I'm Microsoft, I'm linking to crappy, expensive, third-party apps that look like crap. I'll satisfy the demands of the court and make people think that staying with my (media player/instant messenger/web browser) is by far the way to go.

    2. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, this is the one condition that they "should" already be compliant with. Windows XP has always included a link in the Start Menu to "Windows Marketplace" where competitors list their products. I can go there and find WinAmp, Real Player, iTunes, QuickTime, AOL Instant Messenger, ICQ, Yahoo, Trillian, Jabber clients, GAIM, the Sun JRE, OpenOffice.org and AbiWord, all with links directly to a download site.

      Check it: http://www.windowsmarketplace.com/prices.aspx?item Id=1108779&stext=openoffice

      Honestly, I think the only way Microsoft could really take this further is to install a Windows client to search Windows Marketplace. They really cannot bundle those applications without becoming liable for them, and that's really the function of the OEMs. Why aren't Korean OEMs installing alternatives? MS is trying to build a platform of expected features so that people don't have to reinvent 800 different wheels. Media services and messenging services are expected now.

    3. Re:Hmmm by LocoMan · · Score: 1

      Nothing forces them to put links to open source options, as far as I understand it, that is. They could get away with just putting links to winamp and real player as competing media players, and yahoo messenger and ICQ for IM programs.

  9. Sounds like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...the Koreans are getting a happy ending for a change.

  10. South Korea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why stop at 2? Why not demand microsoft release 17 versions, one with no numbers, one with no "Q" characters ( cont p.94 ).

    Seriously, South Korea is dreaming.

  11. Oh god by ilovegeorgebush · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Jeeze, can't someone do something about this in a more serious manner? I mean come on, how many times are they sued and 'sanctioned' for not complying to anti-competitive laws etc. Its quite obvious suing isnt doing anything (come on, how much do they earn?) Someone do something that'll harm them! And jeeze, someone give the koreans an ubuntu disc or something *rolls eyes

    1. Re:Oh god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nah - give 'em gentoo - will keep them quiet longer

    2. Re:Oh god by Skye16 · · Score: 1

      I agree. Start out with a ludicrous sum as the judgement; say, infinity megajillion dollars.

      Then, after the appeals have run their course, it should be back around the billions. And then it'll FINALLY be a swift kick in the nuts to Microsoft. Then they'll actively engage in fair competition. They'll find out that having a field full of competitors will actually protect them from having to deal with stupid law suits about stupid media players and IM clients (or browsers), because then they can package whatever the hell they want and people won't be able to claim they're a monopoly. Of course this would require real tangible innovation on their part, which costs more than regurgitation, but in the end the market and the people would be better off.

    3. Re:Oh god by penguinoid · · Score: 1

      Looks like suing microsoft is the new fad. Too bad much of Europe sued through the EU instead of individual countries. How long before all the other countries start suing microsoft? Much pain for microsoft, and thay can't just say screw you, use linux to a country. Pretty sweet, this precedent stuff.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  12. M$, here's a biz plan for you.... by millahtime · · Score: 3, Interesting

    2 Steps to profit and less complaining from the gallery...

    1. Come up with completely open standards that are not controlled or licensed by you. Come up with these standards along with your peers in the industry, working together.

    2. Build software apps and services to smoke the competition in these areas using these standards.

    You have the money. And I would stop complaining cause I would ahve one dope system.

    1. Re:M$, here's a biz plan for you.... by Fraize · · Score: 1

      millahtime said:
      2 Steps to profit and less complaining from the gallery...

      1. Come up with completely open standards that are not controlled or licensed by you. Come up with these standards along with your peers in the industry, working together.

       

      Bad idea, and here's why. When this standards committee comes back and tells them that the new standard is XYZ, and this standards committe's recommendations, for lack of better word, suck, what recourse do they have? Can they say, "well, these standards no longer appeal to us, so off we go on our own again," or will they be somehow forced to follow the new standards?

      Imagine for a moment that your company has been dictated, by a cabal of a few dozen other CEOs, how you should run your business and build your product. Your shareholders would run you out on a rail in a heartbeat.

      Many of you are software developers, and have written software by committee. Sometimes, the committee does a great job, and all is happy, but sometimes, the committee is out of their ever-lovin' minds, and it takes one programmer with the vision and the drive to do something to steer it right. This is the case here. Microsoft will never go for this because they lose control. If the committee makes a bad decision, what can MS do about it? Very likely, they have a minority voice in said committee, so their vote becomes a fart in a hurricane.

      2. Build software apps and services to smoke the competition in these areas using these standards.
       


      If such standards are available, anybody can write these apps and services, and MS loses any competitive advantage they have. For better or worse, this is how it's got to be. If MS won't do it themselves, then they'll have to be forced by government to do it, and do we *really* want the gubmint designing our software?

      And, on another note before I step off my soapbox, didn't I read a story a few months back about how Windows XP N (with no media player bundled) sold maybe a few hundred copies worldwide? What the hell's the point of unbundling if everybody wants the media player?

      --
      --Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    2. Re:M$, here's a biz plan for you.... by Trolling4Columbine · · Score: 1

      Sounds great! While we're at it, let's end world hunger and poverty, invent a clean, cheap, endless energy source, and get Muslims, Jews, and Christians to live together in harmony.

      Get my drift?

      --
      Socialism: A feeling of discontent and resentment caused by a desire for the possessions or qualities of another.
    3. Re:M$, here's a biz plan for you.... by Funakoshi · · Score: 1

      Result of suggested plan: Less money.

      I love anti-MS and pro-open standard discussions. It results in a great showing of the lack of business sense held by many IT professionals (Note: I did not say "all" or "most", I said many IT professionals). The reason a public company is in business is increase the value of shareholder wealth. Period. For-profit entities do not exist to save the trees, develop world peace, or make computer geeks happy. Moreoever, MS, like every company with a proper strategy, shouldn't want 100% market share. One hundred precent market share will lead to an industry that is easily entered by new competitors due to a lack of competition.

    4. Re:M$, here's a biz plan for you.... by b4k3d+b34nz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This definitely sounds like how the W3C (the group that creates standards for the web, for those who don't know) works. At least the part about standards. It seems to be working really well so far too. If IE wasn't bundled with Windows, people would have to choose on their browser based on what they liked about it. People like Firefox because of the extensions, Opera because it's fast and "just works" (Safari for the same reasons), OmniWeb because it's extremely innovative. Granted, this is a gloss-over stereotype, but how many people choose IE? Not very many, if they know about other options.

      It's unfortunate that Microsoft is using it's power in an entirely separate market (operating systems) to gain ground in another (web, media players, etc). Obviously the suit for $32 million isn't exactly going to make M$ reconsider their business practices, but it is another step in the process to non-monopolistic competition.

      The hardest part about the situation is education--if people are given a chance to try different products, they just might switch to them. Too often, though, people don't know that there ARE alternatives to media player, IE, etc. until those products start making headlines, like Firefox and iTunes have.

      --
      Grammar Lesson: you're is a contraction of "you are"; your means you possess something; yore means days gone by.
    5. Re:M$, here's a biz plan for you.... by MikeWeller · · Score: 1

      If MS didn't bundle IE with the browser, how the hell are users supposed to get one of these alternatives? telnet to mozilla.org?

    6. Re:M$, here's a biz plan for you.... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 0

      In case you haven't noticed, Microsoft is already accomplishing number 2 without needing to go through the effort of number 1.

    7. Re:M$, here's a biz plan for you.... by millahtime · · Score: 1

      To #1...
      There are a load of standards that work. Just look at IEEE for many of the things we ue like firewire, wireless, etc. It can work and does work.

      To #2...
      I use Microsoft Office cause it is the best office suite. Openoffice and the others are just not there yet. It's not about the format but the quality of the product. If you outperform the competition then it's pretty easy to sell that.

  13. Re:How about No? Or have some XP N. by Psiren · · Score: 1

    It's a shame they didn't take a look at Europe and see just what a complete waste of time it all was. It's just dumb and retarded. These are programs that people want to use. If they're bothered enough about using something else, it's not difficult to do so. Pointless, just fucking pointless.

  14. Windows XP N by Sarthek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This just sounds like a rehash of the rather pointless European rulings. Can't MS just ship Windows XP N out there and be done with it?

    Anyway, it's not like one can't stick alternative bits of software on top of what's already there. Having Windows Media Player installed doesn't stop you from using Winamp any more than having MSN Messenger stops you from using AIM.

    1. Re:Windows XP N by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      No but every music player or messenging program on Windows is increased by whatever crap Windows comes installed with (I've tried uninstalling msn messenger, not an easy task for the non-geek). Or the person can just use the default, which chances are, they will. In some places using one virtual monopoly to further other programs in a manner that is unfair is illegal.

    2. Re:Windows XP N by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe for the /. crowd this is true but lets not forget what happened to Netscape when MS started bundling IE with Windows...

    3. Re:Windows XP N by giorgiofr · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. MSN Messenger is not even included in Windows. You're possibly talking about Windows Messenger, which is crap and no one uses, because, guess what, they just GO TO THE FRIGGIN MSN WEBSITE and download and install the software. But I guess you're all against freedom when it's free to do something YOU happen not to like...

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    4. Re:Windows XP N by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      Aaah, thankyou. I knew there were two versions of the Microsoft messenger program, I couldn't remember the correct name for the bundled one. That one is a real bitch to uninstall.

    5. Re:Windows XP N by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      If it were possible for a user to remove WMP and MSN Messenger, most of the grounds for complaint would evaporate. That is: it's not the inclusion of these apps that's the problem (as I see it), it's the fact that they're forced on the user.

  15. Getting your slice of the MS pie by digitaldc · · Score: 3, Funny

    Anyone want to join me in a lawsuit? I own an island off the coast of Tasmania and I am really tired of having to look at Windows Messenger and Media Player every time I turn on my PC. I think I will iniate a lawsuit and win. Just look at it as payment for all the innovation and competition that Microsoft has stifled in the programming world.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:Getting your slice of the MS pie by donscarletti · · Score: 1
      I own an island off the coast of Tasmania
      You mean the Australian mainland? Mr Howard, is that you?
      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    2. Re:Getting your slice of the MS pie by Alystair · · Score: 1

      Do you have stairs in your house? Inquiring minds would like to know.

  16. Ridiculous by vectorian798 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Whoever it is, forcing links to be placed to "sites that allow one to download competiting versions of such software" is ridiculous. This is basically forcing a business to advertise for its competitors - it makes no logical sense!

    1. Re:Ridiculous by mallie_mcg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Whoever it is, forcing links to be placed to "sites that allow one to download competiting versions of such software" is ridiculous. This is basically forcing a business to advertise for its competitors - it makes no logical sense!

      Windows is the defacto operating system for many people. Microsoft placing these pieces of software into the Operating System install (and making them very difficult to remove by end users) gives them an unfair advantage. I am sick of the number of people who use MSN - because it came with windows is invariably the response ditto for WMP (but the use of WMP by people who I want to IM does not affect me, so I care a little less about this) this means that if I want to IM these people and cannot convince them to use a better/different protocol - I too have to use a MSN compatible program etal (sometimes the protocols change and I end up lagging behind, although this has not happened for quite some time). Forcing Microsoft to link to alternatives (for the version that has WMP and MSNIM installed) is certainly not rediculous, the consumer is purchasing an OPERATING SYSTEM not the associated tat that helps microsoft make even more money and build a nice little database about your uses and habits with your computer.

      I have no problem if microsoft were to offer these products for free, or even offer them via Windows Update (optional software section) as people would need to make a concious decision about what program or client they wish to use and would be more likely to research, rather than swallow the spoon fed baby food that Microsoft is shoving down their throat.

      Comparing a distro like Ubuntu to Microsoft in light of this ruling is just silly. Distro's are not operating systems that you are paying for per-se, they are bundles of software packages that can be found all over the net, and as others have pointed out, you get a lot of choice with most distro's. With Microsoft there is no re-packaging available to other companies so there could not be Soupysoft's Rindows made that for arguments sake packaged mplayer and google talk as its IM, while running the NT kernel and shell. If that were the case I doubt that this type of lawsuit would be as it is today.

      --


      Do the following really mean anything? SCSA MCP CCSA CCNA
      --I'm not actually after an answer!
    2. Re:Ridiculous by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is basically forcing a business to advertise for its competitors - it makes no logical sense!

      Actually it does. Microsoft broke the law. As part of Microsoft's punishment, it has to undo some of the harm it's law-breaking caused. Which according to the South Korean government, is that competitors were unfairly competed with, so now Microsoft has to work to undo that damage, by helping them out.

      It makes perfect sense, when you take into account Microsoft is being punished here. If you follow the law, you don't have to advertise for your competitors. You break the law, you suffer the consequences.

    3. Re:Ridiculous by flyinwhitey · · Score: 1

      "Forcing Microsoft to link to alternatives (for the version that has WMP and MSNIM installed) is certainly not rediculous, the consumer is purchasing an OPERATING SYSTEM not the associated tat that helps microsoft make even more money and build a nice little database about your uses and habits with your computer."

      So, if the consumer isn't purchasing "the associated tat" that comes with the OS, then why is MS being forced to advertise for third party "tat" providers?

      --
      How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
    4. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Actually it does. Microsoft broke the law."

      Here's an idea: DON'T USE IT IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT.

      Good God. How hard is that to understand with people these days? There are more Linux distros out there than I can even count or keep track of. There are even a handfull of different BSD's out there now, too. It's their operating system, it's their product, deal with it. As I said earlier, don't like it? Use something else. NOBODY is forcing anyone to use Windows.

    5. Re:Ridiculous by Evil+Adrian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      am sick of the number of people who use MSN - because it came with windows is invariably the response ditto for WMP (but the use of WMP by people who I want to IM does not affect me, so I care a little less about this) this means that if I want to IM these people and cannot convince them to use a better/different protocol - I too have to use a MSN compatible program etal (sometimes the protocols change and I end up lagging behind, although this has not happened for quite some time).

      "Better" is an opinion, not a fact. Just because you don't like MSN doesn't mean it's worse than whatever you use. I mean... feel free to provide examples of why MSN sucks or whatever.

      Forcing Microsoft to link to alternatives (for the version that has WMP and MSNIM installed) is certainly not rediculous, the consumer is purchasing an OPERATING SYSTEM not the associated tat that helps microsoft make even more money and build a nice little database about your uses and habits with your computer.

      Hahahaha... OK, tin foil hat man, please show me where Microsoft is building a database about my uses and habits with the computer when I purchased Windows. Seriously.

      I never got why people get so pissed if Microsoft throws in USEFUL programs with their operating system. It makes life easier for the user. Why should I have to download 300 programs? Why shouldn't I just install the operating system and have everything work?

      Are you telling me that Microsoft not be allowed to have a spell-checker in Word, because other people write spell-checking software, and strictly speaking, I purchased a program to type and print, not check my spelling? Should Word have advertising links to other company's spell-checking software, since theirs is "spoon fed baby food that Microsoft is shoving down their throat"?? Please, explain to me the difference between this argument and the operating system argument.

      I mean, we can extend your logic this way -- when I purchase a car from a car company, they have an unfair advantage installing their stereo and speakers in the car. That's just terrible, they should have to advertise for Sony, Blaupunkt, JVC, and all of the other car stereo manufacturers to me when I buy the car.

      Does anyone else see how fucking retarded that sounds?

      Comparing a distro like Ubuntu to Microsoft in light of this ruling is just silly. Distro's are not operating systems that you are paying for per-se, they are bundles of software packages that can be found all over the net

      So why couldn't Windows be called a distro? It's a software package of Microsoft's operating system and useful utilities. What is the fucking difference? GASP because I spent money on it? How does that make *any* difference whatsoever?

      With Microsoft there is no re-packaging available to other companies

      NO FUCKING SHIT! Because it's MICROSOFT'S PRODUCT! They shouldn't HAVE to make repackaging available to other companies! Johnson and Johnson is not going to let Proctor & Gamble include a sample of THEIR shampoo in "No More Tears", that would be fucking asinine.

      --
      evil adrian
    6. Re:Ridiculous by Secrity · · Score: 1

      This is basically forcing a business [Microsoft] to advertise for its competitors - it makes no logical sense!

      This penalty was imposed as part of Microsoft's sentencing for breaking Korea's anti-monopoly laws. As a part of the punishment for a company convicted of violation of anti-monopoly laws, it does make sense and it seems quite appropriate.

    7. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have a problem with MAC? They even tie the user to the hardware as well as bundle software on top of their OPERATING SYSTEM that makes it easy for the typical user to just start using it.

      Last I checked, I was able to download and use different Instant Messaging software and media players on Windows. How much griping would there be if MS mirrored the MAC model of "spoon feeding" you the OS / Hardware / Apps? Heck, you are pretty much tied to where you can purchase MAC's as well.

      I agree, forcing a company to advertise for its competitors is not ridiculous...its ludicrous. I don't see any "Windows can do this too" links in OSX. Coca Cola doesn't put a Pepsi logo on their cans or vice versa.

      The bottom line is that MS allows PC makers to bundle whatever they want and use whatever hardware they want. You should thank them for that not gripe about free applications they include in their OS. People expect systems to be able to browse the internet, communicate, and play media files.

      Complaining about being spoon fed these OS add ons is silly. You have plenty of other OS choices or is MS spoon feeding you their OS as well?

    8. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have no problem if microsoft were to offer these products for free, or even offer them via Windows Update (optional software section) as people would need to make a concious decision about what program or client they wish to use and would be more likely to research, rather than swallow the spoon fed baby food that Microsoft is shoving down their throat.

      Yes, but the people that are already informed enough to make a decision already have alternatives installed... Asking my dad to download and install software is just silly...

    9. Re:Ridiculous by DavidD_CA · · Score: 1

      Here's where I disagree. When I go out and by Windows, I *expect* it to come with such pieces of software. I would be very upset if I just paid $100-300 for an operating system and it didn't come with the ability to play DVDs or record CDs or have a browser out-of-the-box.

      Most new computer users think that computers come with Office or Works, and are very surprised if they get one that doesn't. Imagine that experience ten-fold if it couldn't even play CDs.

      --
      -David
    10. Re:Ridiculous by Ctawp · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but it's bs to require Microsoft to remove such things from a default install. When you install an OS, you want it to require as little additional setup as possible. You want things to just work. You don't want to have to hunt down and download a dozen different applications so that you can listen to music, watch videos, look at pdfs, etc etc.

      It makes complete sense for Windows to come with such tools (Office included would be nice, but oh well). You aren't required to use them, but they are there for you if you desire. And removing them isn't difficult at all, it's just that they are Windows components, so you have to click an extra button or two to get to them inside Add/Remove Programs.

      You know what doesn't make sense? People complaining about the company that gives them a platform for them to build their programs on and the potential to sell a product to millions of people. Platform not working out for you? You didn't make it, and you certainly don't have to develop for it.

    11. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you DARE expect me to explore those options on my own! someone here is making a lot of money...so much that it's got to be REALLY illegal in some way. it doesn't even need to be illegal! some people are so poor that being rich is just plain evil.

      That's why we need the government to take the money from them. if the government takes it from them it's ok because they're the government and they can do stuff like that. thanks, government.

    12. Re:Ridiculous by MikeWin10 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and lets look at how successfull Windows XP N was. No company wants to bundle it. Why would anyone want to buy an operating system that doesn't have any multimedia capabilities out of the box?

    13. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how does this cunt get insightful? slashdot is going downhill.

      You are a complete advert for durex. Neither Johnson & Johnson or Proctor & Gamble are LEGALLY MONOPOLIES.
      That means, put down your Magic the Gathering cards... and also put your cock away wankboy... that THEY ARE COMPETING IN A FREE MARKET.

      oh fuck off. Come back when your country isn't a fucking infant. 400 years, send a child to do a mans job...

    14. Re:Ridiculous by mallie_mcg · · Score: 1

      "Better" is an opinion, not a fact. Just because you don't like MSN doesn't mean it's worse than whatever you use. I mean... feel free to provide examples of why MSN sucks or whatever.

      I tend to view something as better, when it enables me to control its behaviour. MSN Messenger is a POS it will (did before I got rid of it) start up when you start up OE. It would start up every time you logged into the system and it required a series of long rundll arguments on the command like to get rid of the bloody thing.

      MSN Messeneger was not bundled with Windows until the point Microsoft launched their own service to take on ICQ then poof a free client was "handily included" and whoosh up screams Microsofts market share.

      When it comes to Microsofts Anti-Spyware and Anti-Virus products I am actually quite happy for them to bundle them with the OS, providing that they are FREE (as in no cost) as they are there to protect flaws in the Operating System that Microsoft are unable to fix properly, without the end user needing to resort to using AV or AS products. Hell if Microsoft release them and charge for them, I hope they smacked by some sort of suit - release problems charge for product. release a form of protection from problems - charge for product.

      My issue is where does one draw the line with what can be bundled with windows (by Microsoft), if someone has a piece of software that is innovative or new and Microsoft wants a piece of that market all they need do (and did in the case of the MSN Messenger Client, Internet Explorer) is bundle it in the OS. It becomes so all pervasive that its accepted and thought of as normal.

      The reason I dont have an issue with Apple doing it is because if for example Dell, Gateway, HP etal were to package their own selection of software with the default installs of those systems (even if it was the same package as what Microsoft does right now on the disk) is that it is a seperate company making a concious decision with regards as to what got packaged. They could (in theory assuming no special convincing) end up choosing Firefox for browser, Google Talk for IM and WMP for media.

      As to tracking of what you do - it is anonymous, but Microsoft build up a nice database to target their ad's to you. WMP has anonymous data collection features it kind of tells you about when you first use it, that is enabled by default.

      --


      Do the following really mean anything? SCSA MCP CCSA CCNA
      --I'm not actually after an answer!
    15. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Better" is an opinion, not a fact. Just because you don't like MSN doesn't mean it's worse than whatever you use. I mean... feel free to provide examples of why MSN sucks or whatever.

      No offline messaging! When will MSN Messenger FINALLY GET BLOODY OFFLINE MESSAGING LIKE ICQ HAD ALMOST A DECADE AGO!!!

    16. Re:Ridiculous by phreakhead · · Score: 1

      Windows is an modern operating system. Part of being a modern operating system is to have multimedia and communication capability. This is why Windows comes with WMP and MSN messenger. Apple does it, Linux does it (to a far greater degree), so why should Microsoft be punished for offering a complete operating system to their customers? I agree that the software they offer is crap, but I use WMP everyday because I'm too lazy to search for and download an alternative that is free and can play every media file I encounter. I think it is lame on South Korea's part to force Microsoft to cripple their OS; it seems like a desparate gold-digging attempt by some sneaky South Korean lawyers. If they really wanted to increase competition, why not force Microsoft to bundle competitor's players with the OS? Apple has included WMP with their OS along with their own Quicktime; I think Microsoft should do the same.

  17. The eternal what if...... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder what these courts would do if Microsoft was to actually produce a version of Windows that contained absolutely no 'bundled' software that had a competitor in the market. Imagine a version of Windows with no notepad, wordpad, IE, Windows Explorer, Windows Media Player, screensaver, network browser, task manager, disk defragmenter, TCP stack, Instant Messenger, backup tool, cd player, email client, remote desktop, scripting tool, command prompt or shell.

    Imagine an OEM having to supply alternatives to all of these things. Buying the replacements from third parties, or including crippled versions of full products, or using opensource alternatives where they exist. Imagine every OEM doing this, and choosing different products. Imagine sitting down infront of a computer and no longer having a guaranteed set of tools to work with - different browser, email client, file explorer etc.

    Im not actually sure I like this but where does bundling end? Consumers expect a certain minimum level of capability in a computer these days, but what is acceptable and what isn't?

    1. Re:The eternal what if...... by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      Imagine a version of Windows with no notepad, wordpad, IE, Windows Explorer, Windows Media Player, screensaver, network browser, task manager, disk defragmenter, TCP stack, Instant Messenger, backup tool, cd player, email client, remote desktop, scripting tool, command prompt or shell.

      I'm liking it so far. Imagine an OEM having to supply alternatives to all of these things. Buying the replacements from third parties, or including crippled versions of full products, or using opensource alternatives where they exist.

      How about KDE / GNU / Windows?

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    2. Re:The eternal what if...... by aussie_a · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I wonder what these courts would do if Microsoft was to actually produce a version of Windows that contained absolutely no 'bundled' software that had a competitor in the market.

      Celebrate?

      Imagine an OEM having to supply alternatives to all of these things.

      Oh the horror. There would actually be real competition for these products, better products and prices will crop up. It'll be the end of the world as we know it!

      Yes, Microsoft's illegal business practices have created an expectation that people have come to rely on. But if they were truly forced to cease these operations, then people would adapt fairly quickly, and we'd have real competition once more in many of the areas that Microsoft currently dominates.

    3. Re:The eternal what if...... by AceJohnny · · Score: 1

      Oh god I can't resist..

      Imagine every OEM doing this, and choosing different products. Imagine sitting down infront of a computer and no longer having a guaranteed set of tools to work with - different browser, email client, file explorer etc.

      You mean the way Linux distributions do? /me runs away from the troll hunters

      --
      Misleading titles? Inflammatory blurbs? Keep in mind that Slashdot is a tabloid.
    4. Re:The eternal what if...... by bombshelter13 · · Score: 5, Informative

      You know, it just sounds like you did a good job of describing Linux. I mean, take away all that stuff you described, and what's left? A kernel, prettymuch... and the 'OEMs' you describe, are, in this case, the distributions. Taking an operating system core with nothing else attached and packaging in all these extra tools you mention is ~exactly~ what the people Red Hat, Debian, Slackware, Ubuntu, and so on do as a matter of course. It's their primary job.

    5. Re:The eternal what if...... by Unipuma · · Score: 2, Funny

      Imagine a version of Windows where you could actually uninstall messenger, internet explorer, windows media player... or better still, choose not to install it in the first place through a (*gasp*) instalation dialog.
      Actually, you used to have the option to not install messenger, IE and the media player. Until someone somewhere decided it was an 'essential part' of the OS. (Whoops, did that happen at the same time they got competition in that area?)
      Then again, what serious server OS wouldn't install pinball by default and demand a GUI to work.

      Nothing wrong with bundling, but giving your customers the ability to -not- install a piece of software would be nice.

    6. Re:The eternal what if...... by virtual_mps · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Imagine an OEM having to supply alternatives to all of these things. Buying the replacements from third parties, or including crippled versions of full products, or using opensource alternatives where they exist. Imagine every OEM doing this, and choosing different products. Imagine sitting down infront of a computer and no longer having a guaranteed set of tools to work with - different browser, email client, file explorer etc.

      Imaging buying a new car and finding that every manufacturer has slightly different arrangments for the controls. Maybe the radio buttons are different, or the lights, or the windshield wipers. Maybe the window controls are arranged differently, or the cruise control. How would you cope with that? Could consumers figure out how to drive if 90% of the cars on the lot didn't have exactly the same interface?
    7. Re:The eternal what if...... by jrumney · · Score: 1
      Imagine a version of Windows with no notepad, wordpad, IE, Windows Explorer, Windows Media Player, screensaver, network browser, task manager, disk defragmenter, TCP stack, Instant Messenger, backup tool, cd player, email client, remote desktop, scripting tool, command prompt or shell.

      Those I can live with. But please don't tell me they'll stop including SOLITAIRE?!!!

    8. Re:The eternal what if...... by dascandy · · Score: 1

      > Consumers expect a certain minimum level

      Then offer a minimum level. Deliver software with a minimum functionality and allow them to be replaced without having to jump through hoops (try actually replacing IE).

    9. Re:The eternal what if...... by Linknoid · · Score: 1
      notepad, wordpad, IE, Windows Explorer, Windows Media Player, screensaver, network browser, task manager, disk defragmenter, TCP stack, Instant Messenger, backup tool, cd player, email client, remote desktop, scripting tool, command prompt or shell

      At least some of those things I would argue should fundamentally be part of the OS. The screensaver mechanism, task manager, TCP stack, command prompt/shell.

      Another group are basic utilities that should probably be included as part of a basic GUI: Notepad, Windows explorer, CD player, scripting tool.

      Then there's a group where it provides an underlying mechanism that should be included, but not the whole app: Media Player, remote desktop, handling of mail and web and ftp links (without Outlook Express or IE).

    10. Re:The eternal what if...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      It's worth noting that the "inconsistent desktop experience" is one of the most common complaints about Linux. New users get a bewildering array of choices and have absolutely no idea which one to choose. Do they use Thunderbird or Evolution or Sylpheed or KMail or what? Do they want Firefox or Mozilla or Konqueror or Epiphany or Links or Lynx or Galeon or...?

      So what do distros do? They pick one, mostly arbitrarily, and make that The Option. You can still download and install other programs, of course: nothing stops you from using Firefox in KDE. You just have to go through the extra step of downloading and installing Firefox, which requires you to know about it first. And uninstalling Konqueror may break some aspects of KDE so you'd better keep it around even if you don't use it for web browsing. Starting to sound kind of like the situation with Windows, yeah?

      Tying per se isn't bad at all. It's actually a good thing. When it's bad is when you start preventing stuff from working, which MS does have a history of doing. So they're hardly blameless here. But let's make sure we stay pointed in the right direction.

    11. Re:The eternal what if...... by strider44 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't mind Microsoft bundling stuff with their operating system, but is it really too much to ask that they allow users to be able to not install the things they bundle with their operating system?

    12. Re:The eternal what if...... by serialdogma · · Score: 1

      I know what sort of server would not have nethack on it? I have just logined to our Windows 2003 server from my mobile phone for a quick game but *gasp*, it was not to be found.
      Windows Server is just not ready for the mainstream.

    13. Re:The eternal what if...... by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Imagine an OEM having to supply alternatives to all of these things. Buying the replacements from third parties, or including crippled versions of full products, or using opensource alternatives where they exist. Imagine every OEM doing this, and choosing different products. Imagine sitting down infront of a computer and no longer having a guaranteed set of tools to work with - different browser, email client, file explorer etc.


      No doubt. I can't believe this has goine this far. Really, whether MS is too big or whatever is entirely beside the point. MS is a software company. They make operating systems. People expect operating systems to do things like play videos and stuff. Go figure, MS would rather write their own and bundle it with _their_ os than PAY to bundle someone elses software. Why would ANYONE in ANY business do something like that?

      Here's a parallel example: Imagine if it was legislated that FORD was too big and shouldn't be bundling only their own proprietary parts in their cars. Further, they are then forced to 'bundle' 3rd party engines in their cars. Huh? Wtf?

      Yeah, no shit. Wtf.

      Don't get me wrong, MS is a gorilla, and they certainly can do evil, but this is just good business. If Korea doesn't like what MS's product is, then they shouldn't freaking well use it. Personally, I hope MS tells them to pound salt.

      --
      No Comment.
    14. Re:The eternal what if...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The last thing the average user needs is a windows that is as complicated to use as Linux. Yes, you have choice, but who needs umpteen different file explorers?

    15. Re:The eternal what if...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Imaging buying a new car and finding that every manufacturer has slightly different arrangments for the controls. Maybe the radio buttons are different, or the lights, or the windshield wipers. Maybe the window controls are arranged differently, or the cruise control. How would you cope with that? Could consumers figure out how to drive if 90% of the cars on the lot didn't have exactly the same interface?

      That's not really the best analogy to what the gpp was asking. A better one would be with the manufacturer as MS and the dealerships as OEMs. Now imagine the cars arriving at the dealership without a radio, headlights, windshield wipers, etc, leaving those features to be installed by the dealer. Some people might like the freedom to customize but most people just want a product that does what they expect it to do with no hassles.

    16. Re:The eternal what if...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Deliver software with a minimum functionality and allow them to be replaced without having to jump through hoops (try actually replacing IE).

      Install browser of choice. Change 'Program Defaults'. Delete IE icons.

      Wow. That was hard. Yes, the IE dlls and program are still sitting on your system, but for all intents and purposes, it's gone.

    17. Re:The eternal what if...... by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      version of Windows that contained absolutely no 'bundled' software ... Imagine every OEM doing this, and choosing different products. Imagine sitting down infront of a computer and no longer having a guaranteed set of tools to work with - different browser, email client, file explorer etc.

      That sounds rather like Win 3.1, and even Win95. (That was before Bill discovered the Internet.) You got a floppy with Trumpet Winsock, Eudora, Netscape, Real player from your ISP. Anyway, there was a free market and fast evolution of alternatives. And viruses couldn't assume you all had the same stack.

    18. Re:The eternal what if...... by crimperman · · Score: 1

      Man, if I had the mod points I'd throw them your way! This is exactly what I have been wondering for years now. I don't get why M$ has been the focus of so many nutty rulings and lawsuits when countless other companies do the same thing everyday without the slightest peep from "Joe average citizen."

      "Countless other companies"? - care to name some? I can't think of anyone doing it to this extent because I can't think of anyone with the same opportunities and market share (in whatever industry). A person may choose to buy a Sony DVD Player (maybe not after recent events) but that doesn't mean they *have* to buy only Columbia/Tri-Star movies to watch on it.

      As it happens - Joe Average Citizen (by which I take it you mean the average PC user) doesn't seem to complain much about Microsoft's tactics either - it's generally M$' competitors/enemies who do that - but isn't that the point of the rulings?

      The average windows user doesn't complain because they're not usually aware that alternatives even exist. To them: Windows == the computer, WMP == how I play music, IE == how I browse the web with no choice involved at all. This is largely due to M$' marketing and deployment strategies.
      Now, those applications may well eventually become the choices the average user would make but the rulings are generally made to give them that choice in the first place. That is to encourage competition and thus innovation - that's the reason they give anyway.

    19. Re:The eternal what if...... by therealking · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Imagine a car where the brake and gas pedals are reversed, the shifter is 3 turn dials, and everytime you want to put in a new radio or radar detector you have to rebuild the engine.

      --
      Gadget News at Gizmo.com
    20. Re:The eternal what if...... by lbrandy · · Score: 1

      What a fantastic post...

      Setting up a windows machine to minimum functionality would take hours and multiple CDs from multiple vendors. It would take hours of downloading and installing individual components (since, of course, bundling unrelated software is clearly "against the law"). All in the name of "competition".

      I suspect most people will tell you it would be good for the industry... and they are wrong... there is nothing good for the industry about making computers impossibly difficult to set up.

    21. Re:The eternal what if...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, and it was hell to get it to work. Face it, computer are where they are because of Microsoft having the vision to make it an appliance, and not just some geek's toy.

    22. Re:The eternal what if...... by lbrandy · · Score: 1

      Bad analogy. A corrected version:

      Imaging buying a new car and finding that every manufacturer NO controls. Consumers had to consult the different vendors of the different controls, buy them, and install them themselves. Could consumers figure out how to drive if 90% of the cars had no interface, and had to spend hours and hours learning about cars and their interfaces, in order to make it operate in a suffecient way to get them from Point A to Point B.

    23. Re:The eternal what if...... by FinchWorld · · Score: 1
      Imaging buying a new car and finding that every manufacturer has slightly different arrangments for the controls. Maybe the radio buttons are different, or the lights, or the windshield wipers. Maybe the window controls are arranged differently, or the cruise control. How would you cope with that? Could consumers figure out how to drive if 90% of the cars on the lot didn't have exactly the same interface?

      Imagine buying a new car and finding none critical parts have been removed. Maybe the you wanted a radio, or lights, even 4 tyres. Maybe you could go and get some free parts or buy some. How would you cope with that? Would 90% of drivers figure out how to get all the parts they need and attach them without getting ripped off along the way?

      --
      "I may be full of crap about this game, and I may be wrong, and that's fine." -Jack Thompson
    24. Re:The eternal what if...... by Prophet+of+Nixon · · Score: 2, Funny

      Any ISP that offers me a disc containing Real Player gets their office burnt down.

    25. Re:The eternal what if...... by virtual_mps · · Score: 1

      I'll reply to you since you're the only one who seems to have even read the quoted GP and understood that the subject under discussion was OEMs integrating software (as opposed to the illiterates who thought the subject was computers or cars shipped completely without essential components).

      I think your analogy is off by one level. MS isn't the manufacturer, MS is a supplier--like the supplier of the hard disk or a car's steering wheel. The manufacturer/integrator is Dell or HP or whoever puts the OS into the box along with the case and the hard disk. The dealership is the person who sells you the computer. If you go to Best Buy, that's your dealer. The dealer could offer add-ons, but the box they get from the manufacturer would have a complete system. The only difference from the current system would be that one company wouldn't control most aspects of the software configuration that comes in the box, offering the manufacturers greater ability to compete on price or features. In other market segments a supplier doesn't get the kind of deference or control MS does--that's a symptom of a dysfunctional system.

    26. Re:The eternal what if...... by DaveW111 · · Score: 1

      "Setting up a windows machine to minimum functionality would take hours and multiple CDs from multiple vendors." Thats what Norton Ghost is for.

    27. Re:The eternal what if...... by Pollardito · · Score: 1
      Here's a parallel example: Imagine if it was legislated that FORD was too big and shouldn't be bundling only their own proprietary parts in their cars. Further, they are then forced to 'bundle' 3rd party engines in their cars. Huh? Wtf?
      yup, imagine if the phone company got too big and it was decided that they couldn't sell both local and long distance service
    28. Re:The eternal what if...... by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Don't get me started on phone regulations ;)

      --
      No Comment.
    29. Re:The eternal what if...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh. Good points there.

    30. Re:The eternal what if...... by thunderpaws · · Score: 1

      How Awesome! More (and likely much better) choices for consumers. What a concept! No doubt many hardware and software companies, as well as enterprising custom builders would offer better bundles. More standalone applications that newbies get to start their computing expierience with will be far more secure than the Os integrated crap that makes what we know as 'Windows' is. It would also likely further diffuse some of the worst prolems we see with so called DRM solutions.

    31. Re:The eternal what if...... by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Imagine a version of Windows with no notepad, wordpad, IE, Windows Explorer, Windows Media Player, screensaver, network browser, task manager, disk defragmenter, TCP stack, Instant Messenger, backup tool, cd player, email client, remote desktop, scripting tool, command prompt or shell.

      I think we can all agree that the minimum requirements of an OS are to allow you to do basic management of your hardware, and run one or more programs in a sane manner. I think we can also toss in a basic text editor, just for kicks. That gives us notepad, Windows Explorer (a.k.a. UI shell), task manager, command prompt and shell. Well, when you include all that in Windows, it almost becomes useful. In fact, that looks pretty damn near like the list for Windows 3.1, which wasn't exactly considered a commercial flop.

      Now, imagine if MS provided the other tools, and an api listing which could be duplicated (and replaced) by other software vendors. Browser by Firefox! TCP stack by BSD! (Oh, wait...) Email by pine! Media player by WinAmp! This isn't entirely unreasonable. People would fall over themselves to match the specs released by MS for the chance at real integration into the OS. This would require an open api by MS, at least in those areas, and the ability to uninstall their software, which I just don't see happening.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    32. Re:The eternal what if...... by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Yea, and it was hell to get it to work. Face it, computer are where they are because of Microsoft having the vision to make it an appliance, and not just some geek's toy.

      Computers aren't appliances and MS pretending they are is the source of most of the problems we face online now. And MS did nothing except replicate and appropriate work done by others. Without MS we might all be using Macs, or BeOS, or Atari; any of which were much better at "just working" than Windows ever did.

    33. Re:The eternal what if...... by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Any ISP that offers me a disc containing Real Player gets their office burnt down

      That was Realplayer 5; back when it just played media. After MS started bundling WMP Real responded to the losss of income by turning their player into a Trojan horse for spyware; but before then it was simple and effective.

    34. Re:The eternal what if...... by jonastullus · · Score: 1

      yes, i am sure it would be shearly impossible to find FREE replacements for

      IE                -  firefox
      email client      -  thunderbird
      notepad, wordpad  -  (choose one)
      Instant Messenger -  (choose one)
      Media Player, cd player  -  xine, mplayer, bsplay, ...

      and by the looks of it, my distribution of windows comes already without or with crippled versions of:

      email client, editor, network browser, backup tool, remote desktop, scripting tool, shell.

      sincerely...

    35. Re:The eternal what if...... by jonastullus · · Score: 1

      right, because getting a windows system up to usability is such a breeze these days...

      can't use IE for security issues -> firefox / opera
      can't use outlook express (same reason) -> thunderbird / pegasus / eudora
      don't want to use notepad/wordpad -> (something else)
      none of your friends is on MSN -> some instant messenger
      and most people prefer real dvd players over media player...

      not to speak of the necessity for third party drivers (independent of the above). and most people install an "office suite" anyway!

      so, the need to additional downloads/hassle is surely not the issue!

    36. Re:The eternal what if...... by crimperman · · Score: 1
      Deliver software with a minimum functionality and allow them to be replaced without having to jump through hoops (try actually replacing IE).

      Install browser of choice. Change 'Program Defaults'. Delete IE icons.

      Wow. That was hard. Yes, the IE dlls and program are still sitting on your system, but for all intents and purposes, it's gone.


      Okay so go do that and then go to the Windows or Office update site with your other browser?
      You'd also think that your suggestion means you'll be no longer be using IE but try printing an HTML e-mail from Outlook or OE without IE. I had a user who changed their IE print margins, went to print an HTML message and found half the text was off the page because the margin was too small for Outlook!

      Plus you forgot to add "turn off quicklaunch bar" as that is an instance of IE. I know this because when one of our PC's got infected by an IE Browser Helper Object (aka adware that popped up ads every five minutes). The thing kept popping up even though we did all you suggested. Turned out quicklaunch was running an instance of IE and the BHO as well!
    37. Re:The eternal what if...... by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      You're dead wrong and not understanding the previous posts. This is about MS bundling. It is as if there was only one manufacturer (MS) for car engines and they were bundling a car stereo with each car engine sale to car manufacturers. Very few people buy OS's from MS directly, the vast majority of people buy computers with an OS pre-installed. The original poster mentioned OEMs picking the components, not end users.

    38. Re:The eternal what if...... by botik32 · · Score: 1
      can't use outlook express (same reason) -> thunderbird / pegasus / eudora


      You mean pegasus is still alive?

      <gasp>

    39. Re:The eternal what if...... by flyinwhitey · · Score: 1

      "The average windows user doesn't complain because they're not usually aware that alternatives even exist."

      SO it's the responsibility of the court to indemnify users against their own ignorance?

      That's just dumb.

      --
      How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
    40. Re:The eternal what if...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say:

      Imagine an OEM having to supply alternatives to all of these things. Buying the replacements from third parties, or including crippled versions of full products, or using opensource alternatives where they exist. Imagine every OEM doing this, and choosing different products. Imagine sitting down infront of a computer and no longer having a guaranteed set of tools to work with - different browser, email client, file explorer etc.

      Im not actually sure I like this but where does bundling end? Consumers expect a certain minimum level of capability in a computer these days, but what is acceptable and what isn't?


      No offence intended, but how old are you? I ask because this is exactly what OEMs did before Microsoft got a firm, iron-clad grip on the OEMs' collective balls. OEMs used to bundle all sorts of different, non-Microsoft software products with your computer purchase. This is one of the key ways OEMs differentiated themselves from the competition. Were are talking no more than about 10-15 years ago.

      Repeat after me: Competition and choice is good for the consumer!

    41. Re:The eternal what if...... by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 1

      You mean like Japanese vs Euro cars? Which stalk is the indicators on? Manual or auto, or semi-auto? 3,4,5,6,7 gears?!? Column shift, floor shift, paddles, or on the steering wheel?! Power or manual windows? Oh noes, is the window button on the console or on the door? Does the seat belt pull from the left or right?

      People deal with this all the time. They can cope with computers that vary too.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    42. Re:The eternal what if...... by NCraig · · Score: 1

      Now, take this comparison further and note that Linux is generally relegated to use by the technologically adept. The vast majority of users prefer the comfort of Windows.

      Having a non-standard system diminishes the ability of the average user to comfortably operate the majority of PCs. The definition of "standard system" does not have to be privately controlled. However, the homogeneity of Windows is, in general, a positive feature.

      The general consensus here is that any "anti-monopolistic" action is a Good Thing. Yet it is important to remember that the true public good is not ideologically consistent. Acting upon ideals can, at times, be foolish. Remember: "All that glisters is not gold."

      Do you really believe that releasing a Windows kernel and relying upon various OEMs to add third party software is a logical solution? Will doing so help the end-user experience and abet productivity? Or will the change in distribution model lead to the same fragmentation that's evident in Linux? The many options available to Linux users is, to them, a great feature that reflects their control over the operating system. However, a multitude of configurations is anathema to the habits of the majority of computer users.

      Further, it is difficult to imagine Microsoft significantly dropping the price of Windows. Thus, a "Windows kernel distribution" would cost more than a standard copy of Windows due to the third party software.

      In situations such as these, it is important to consider every consequence of a supposedly desirable outcome.

    43. Re:The eternal what if...... by dascandy · · Score: 1

      > but for all intents and purposes, it's gone.

      No it isn't. That was my point exactly. You can only make pretend it isn't there.

      If you use:

      - A file open dialog
      - The quick launch bar
      - MSOffice
      - Most of the Windows built in functions

      you are in fact using IE. You are then still vulnerable for the exploits and all.

      Try removing iexplore.exe and then try "explorer.exe www.microsoft.com" -> that's an awfully nice IE window isn't it?

  18. Re:Screw Them! by Skye16 · · Score: 1

    I'm more along the lines of not selling Windows in Korea. First, crazy pirated CDs. Then, enough gamers clamouring that they actually do need good Linux support. Then, game companies actually providing that support. Then I could finally say goodbye to XP forever and not look back.

    Of course, the whole process could stop right after the pirated CDs, but I can dream.

  19. Europe, Korea etc should... by gimpimp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    make MS include optional software, perhaps on a second disk, with more important things like Firefox being the default browser on an out of the box install. CD 2 could have things like OpenOffice, or Free instant messengers.

    --
    i wish i was but oh well
    1. Re:Europe, Korea etc should... by crimperman · · Score: 1
      make MS include optional software, perhaps on a second disk, with more important things like Firefox being the default browser on an out of the box install. CD 2 could have things like OpenOffice, or Free instant messengers.


      On a second disc? Most people I know don't even get one! OEM installs with install CD's (NOT recovery cd's) are a rare thing these days.

      The real problem here is because almost all PC's come with Windows pre-installed. So if you buy a Windows box set then fine you get all the other stuff as part of the bundle you chose to buy. But when you buy a PC and it comes with Windows pre-installed then you should be given a choice which other apps you want to use - if any. M$ doesn't allow OEM's a lot of leaway when it comes to choice of apps to supply with their Windows installs.

      Here's what OEM's should be allowed to do - when you run the OEM welcome wizard (you know the bit that asks you what your name is) it should ask you what choice of browser, media player and e-mail client you want. The exact choice could be determined by OEM's and there's no reason why the M$ apps couldn't be default options. That way at least people can say "no" without having to jump through loads of hoops to uninstall the things you didn't want in the first place.

      It's OEM machines that have bundled software which is impossible to get rid of that annoy me - be they Windows with IE/WMP/OE, anti-virus try-outs or pre-installed ISP connections.

      [slightly OT]
      I bought a couple of NEC PC's recently that came with Norton AV installed by default. I didn't want Norton as we have a multi-licence for something else. But these copies of Norton had no remove app at all. They were not listed under add/remove programs, they had no uninstall program or link (regardless of who was logged in). Eventually I had to download another remove program from Symantec just to get rid of Norton AV. Of course while I did all this I had to keep closing Norton's reminders which were helpfully telling me my virus database was out of date and thus I was forced to connect a Windows machine to the web withot an up to date virus scanner!!!
      After getting rid of that - installing Firefox and hiding IE from the user was a doddle!
      [/slightly OT]
  20. As a Windows application developer ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is more bad news. I dread the day when there will be 50 different versions of Windows out there. Some will have MP, some will have IM, some will have IE ... what's a developer to do? We will be forced to bundle all of these service-level applications with our installer. The poor user will end up with 5 different browsers, instant messengers, media players, constantly answering the "Firefox is not your default browser" questions. This type of decision, in my opinion, is very bad for the industry, and especially bad for the end users.

    --
    The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    1. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1

      So perhaps you can explain to me, should my application need to play a video, how "open standards" solves this problem. My point (which you obviously missed) was that, since I won't know that there is a media player installed, I will be forced to provide one with my application. True, I *could* query the system using *open* standards and detect and use a pre-existing player. But, what if there isn't one? To cover that corner case (real developers cover corner cases, unlike OSS where they often blow them off) I would need to also provide a media player with my installer. I can't simply rely on downloading one because (here comes another nasty corner case typically ignored by OSS) not everybody has broadband. So, as long as I have to provide a media player anyhow, the path of least resistance would be to resign myself to providing one with my installer and not bother with any pre-installed player. Get it?

      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    2. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by aussie_a · · Score: 2, Insightful

      what's a developer to do?

      Not create programs that rely on a particular operating system, but instead create programs that can be run on any OS? Whether it be Windows XP, Windows N, Mac OSX or Mandrake Linux.

      [sarcasm]No, no. You're right. Let's allow Microsoft to continue its ethically questionable and illegal activities. I'm sure it's for the best in the long run.[/sarcasm]

    3. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by arendjr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can understand you don't like this situation, but you also have to realize it could've been avoided if Microsoft had at least taken a different approach towards bundling these type of applications. It's true users expect these types of functionality and it is a dream for application developers to be able to rely on a preinstalled component to handle the playing of video's. However, it went wrong because Microsoft just simply preinstalled their own programs, forced OEM's to use their programs and no one else's programs and implicitly forced application developers to come to rely on their programs (I believe this is true for both Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player, and it might become true for MSN Messenger as well). That exactly is how they abused their monopoly. If instead they had defined an open API that they themselves had implemented with Windows Media Player, but for which they had allowed competitors to implement the same API as well. If they had not forced OEM's to install WMP, but would have allowed the installation of other players that implemented the API. Then we would have had a situation where Microsoft could bundle WMP, but where OEM's still had the freedom to install other players, where competitors would be given a fair chance to compete and where users could freely choose without loosing the integration between applications they've become used to. Had Microsoft chosen an open approach towards offering this type of functionality rather than pushing their competitors of the edge, we wouldn't have the mess we have now.

    4. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The two approaches are not mutually exclusive. You could bundle a free OSS player AND query the system for the default. Only if none exists would you install the bundled OSS. Incidentally, this is already done: anyone providing documentation as PDF files already bundles some version of "Acrobat Reader" ...

    5. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I dread the day when there will be 50 different versions of Windows out there.

      But there ARE 50 different versions of Windows out there. Far more, even. Not only do you have different versions for different years (NT4, NT5, W95, W98, ME, 2000, XP), with different patch levels (XP bare bones, XP SP1, XP SP2), but Microsoft also brings out Windows in many different languages, which, unfortunately, all are subtly different. For different languages, the core functionalities will more or less match, but as soon as something "rare" happens (a device error, for instance), you can run into very weird behaviour. And you should, in general, not try to install English drivers on, for instance, a French system. Yes, it will work most of the time, but when it doesn't, your system will be pretty much screwed.

      The most funny language idiocy I encountered with Windows was when it reported to me (translated from the original Dutch): "Undetectable device detected". This was the most amazing thing I ever saw Windows do. Luckily in my fit of laughter I had the presence of mind to make a screenprint, which I still treasure today.

    6. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Kitsuneymg · · Score: 1

      do what games do with directx.
      Do you have a compatible version?
      If no then install newversion.

      Not hard

    7. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Cee · · Score: 1

      Well, you can always include VLC, like Google does (IIRC). Of course, that's not the best solution because it only deals with the lack of a media player, and who wants 12 different copies of VLC installed by all these different applications? I think the long term solution would be better software packaging with proper dependency management. Oh, by the way, from what I've heard almost everyone has broadband in South Korea :)

    8. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by lpcustom · · Score: 1

      Maybe it'll make windows developers learn more about what they are doing. It's better to have the choice of five different browsers that all use a set standard than one browser who's developers think they don't have to follow standards. If you are developing programs in windows and using prebuilt components in Visual Studio then sure it's going to be tough on you. That's very generic programming and you are making yourself dependant upon MS's developers to do 90% of the coding for you. If you are in the position where you have to bundle all these "service level applications" with your installer perhaps you should break down and write the apps into your program. If you had to write an integrated media player in your app you'd probably be happy that things like open standards exist.

      --
      Beer! It's what's for breakfast!
    9. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1

      Could it be the translation? That error would make a lot more sense if it was translated as "Unknown device detected". Perhaps the translator made a mistake? This never happens in any other operating system I bet.

      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    10. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1

      Yes, I *could* simply assume the end user had broadband and solve it that way. Doesn't work so well in the US though (where all the paying customers are).

      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    11. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course it was the translation, and, indeed, it was about an unknown device. All error code translations were so inferior, that an unsuspecting user would get totally confused. But this is still a rather innocent language problem. There are problems which are very bad. To give an example from another Microsoft product: I worked at a company where we had to use Word. Half of the people used a Dutch version of Word, the other half an English version. Unfortunately, documents made in the Dutch version would not be correctly readable by the English version, and vice versa. This was because the internal codes used by Microsoft in the document files were language dependent. Ridiculous, isn't it? To be fair, it might be that the current versions of Word are better compatible in this sense, although I would not be surprised if they were not.

    12. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1

      Acrobat Reader? Why not choose a different PDF reader? Oh, yeah, they're ALLOWED to be a monopoly so that we can have some consistency and not annoy the end-user with 5 different PDF readers. Sometimes it's hard to keep all the *special* rules straight.

      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    13. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Vampo · · Score: 1

      what's a developer to do?

      Not create programs that rely on a particular operating system, but instead create programs that can be run on any OS?


      -Hello boss, you know that deadline... Well, we'll have to push it back 6 months because our windows application needs to be able to run on every platform under the sun according to the /. crowd. Why are you laughing boss?

      Wake up people, not all developers decide what they are developing and what platform it's supposed to run on. Seriously, how many of you work for a company that would make a decission like that.

    14. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by NickFortune · · Score: 3, Interesting
      -Hello boss, you know that deadline... Well, we'll have to push it back 6 months because our windows application needs to be able to run on every platform under the sun according to the /. crowd. Why are you laughing boss?

      Yes, why is he laughing? He can deliver software that doesn't work on schedule, or he can make the time to do it right. If he routinely chooses the former, then you already have serious support issues and I doubt that unbundling MSN Messenger is going to materially add to them.

      Of course, there are cross platform solutions: Ajax, OpenGL, Java... even dotNet once mono gets up to speed. I expect most developers have heard of at least one of these. Maybe you could explain the idea to your boss and save some future pain?

      But at the end of the day, The ignorance of your manager is not our problem, and the fact that many of us, (myself included), have at some time been in that situation is not a compelling argument for supporting a broken and abusive monopoly.

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    15. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fucking little piece of sh1t, why should I as a consumer keep suffering from the abuses of the MS monopoly because you as a developer need/want to have your job easier?

    16. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by fish+waffle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      True, I *could* query the system using *open* standards and detect and use a pre-existing player. But, what if there isn't one? To cover that corner case (real developers cover corner cases, unlike OSS where they often blow them off) I would need to also provide a media player with my installer.

      Umm. Put on the box under requirements: "Media player capable of playing the following formats ..."?

    17. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by wjsteele · · Score: 1

      Right... let's do that... we'll end up with software that gets to use only the common functionality between systems instead of taking advantage of the system's true capabilites. That's utter nonsense.

      If my system has a particular peice of hardware, then I should be able to take advantage of it. The same is true with system software. True cross platform software really doesn't exist except for maybe...

      printf ("Hello, World!");

      But then again, that isn't even a true cross platform app... because it requires a some type of display for the standard output and not all machines have display capabilities.

      Maybe...

      void main();

      Yep... that'll work on just about any machine... how useful is that?

      Bill

      --
      It's my Sig and you can't have it. Mine! All Mine!
    18. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1

      In other words turf the problem to the end-user? This is an improvement?

      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    19. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1

      My point is that the consumer will suffer *more* given these types of decisions. It isn't about me as a developer. It's about what developers will end up doing ... either turf the problem to the end-user (as some have suggested here) or require broadband, or install stuff (perhaps redundantly).

      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    20. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by xtracto · · Score: 2, Informative

      ...and it is a dream for application developers to be able to rely on a preinstalled component to handle the playing of video's.

      And there is where the operating system services should come handy. Instead of providing a Media Player an Internet Browser the Operating System manufacturer should concentrate in creating a set of tools and APIs that can be used by developers to create END USER software to watch media and navigate internet.

      Think about something like KHTML engine or what DirectX [DirectMedia] is supposed to do. As an operating system manufacturing you should provide the tool for application developers. And concentrate on doing that RIGHT.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    21. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by vrioux · · Score: 1

      This was because the internal codes used by Microsoft in the document files were language dependent. Ridiculous, isn't it?

      Well if you don't mind, I'd really appreciate proof of this statement. I rely mostly on the opinion that MS products are cross-language as their development tools (VS) are prepared to take care of that. I don't see MS using underfeatured development environments where language is part of the code itself. What might have happened to you is that patches are not always available for all languages at the same time. If you upgrade your english systems (which will probably have patches released BEFORE other languages), you might no longer have the compatibility with other language (non-patched) systems.

      Oh, and if your network admin had the most basic knowledge of MS products, he would have installed Microsoft Multilingual User Interface packages on English versions of Windows to support non-english workers. That way, he would have been able to manage and update ALL machines at the same time without downloading two versions of all upgrades.

      My two canadian cents, which might not be worth anything in your country.

    22. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Tom · · Score: 1

      what's a developer to do?

      His job, you lazy fool. Are you a software developer or a software repackager?
      You don't need IE to send an HTTP request to update the high score board of your game. What you need is libcurl or something like it. You don't need Outlook to send a debug email, you need some mail sending library.

      Just because M$ calls its mail library OutlookBloat.dll and bundles it with the entire application API, GUI and 500 other things in there doesn't make it holy, you know? That kind of bundling is exactly what's the problem in this case, the EU case, the US case.

      In fact, any individual constantly and persistently breaking the law the way M$ does would've been in jail for years already.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    23. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by mpe · · Score: 1

      This is more bad news. I dread the day when there will be 50 different versions of Windows out there.

      There are already, if you take into account the various malware combinations which can be present.

      Some will have MP, some will have IM, some will have IE ... what's a developer to do? We will be forced to bundle all of these service-level applications with our installer. The poor user will end up with 5 different browsers, instant messengers, media players,

      A "service-level application", isn't really a web browser, instant messenger or media player in the first place. The title more meanifully applies to something like a rendering engine even a "bot".

      constantly answering the "Firefox is not your default browser" questions.

      Why should your application need a specific web browser or a specific media player in the first place? Even if your application actually does have a good reason for only using MSIE as a web browser or only using MS Media player to play sound or video files it is perfectly possible to do this without making any changes to file associations.
      A developer who insists that these sort of things be changed before their app will work is IMHO either lazy or incompetent.

      This type of decision, in my opinion, is very bad for the industry,

      It would be "bad" for developers because they'd have to make decisions they currently ignore when developing exclusivly for MS Windows.

      and especially bad for the end users.

      The current system is not exactly good for either end users or administrators. Including things like "IE must be the default browser" and "the user must have admin privs in order to run this program". The former is a user annoyance, the latter equates to operating Windows XP with the security model of Windows 3.

    24. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by GuildPort · · Score: 1

      Alrighty, come out with a framework that has development tools that are as good as Visual Studio .NET 2003 (we're not talking about 2005 -- the jury's still out on that and they will be for some time, something about a glove fitting), and we'll talk about making software that runs on any OS. [sarcasm]No, no. You're right. Eclipse roxx0rz!!11![/sarcasm]

    25. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by YU+Nicks+NE+Way · · Score: 1
      Instead of providing a Media Player an Internet Browser the Operating System manufacturer should concentrate in creating a set of tools and APIs that can be used by developers to create END USER software to watch media and navigate internet.
      Problem is, that's already the way Windows works. WMP is a thin skin on a common component. IE is a tiny layer on top of UrlMon. The hard part is the common core, not the application. In fact, the reason that Microsoft's bundled applications are typically so mediocre is that they are thin layers on top of public APIs.
    26. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by fish+waffle · · Score: 1

      In other words turf the problem to the end-user? This is an improvement?

      It's a solution that involves neither os-bundling nor supplying all components in every piece of software.

      This is a matter of enforcing a product dependency structure: either the user already has all the dependencies (built into the os), or all the dependencies come with the product, or they are at least informed of what dependencies they must resolve. From a consumer convenience standpoint the former two are preferable, but convenience has its price, either in producing software monocultures (os-bundled software) or in redundancy and unnecessary cost (i already own x, yet my new software comes with x).

      Consumers are well capable of dealing with external dependencies, from "batteries not included" to needing a cd-player to play their new cds. Note how these systems are best enabled by open/accepted interface standards.

    27. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by vorpal22 · · Score: 1

      I dread the day when there will be 50 different versions of Windows out there. Some will have MP, some will have IM, some will have IE ... what's a developer to do? We will be forced to bundle all of these service-level applications with our installer. The poor user will end up with 5 different browsers, instant messengers, media players, constantly answering the "Firefox is not your default browser" questions. This type of decision, in my opinion, is very bad for the industry, and especially bad for the end users.

      Exactly, IMO, why Linux hasn't made as much progress as it deserves to have made into the end user desktop market. There are some amazing Linux applications but with the diversity of desktop environments and window managers, GUI toolkits, system structure, distros, etc. which is way more varied than several different versions of Windows would be, it's no wonder that many companies have made no move to develop for / support their hardware on Linux.

    28. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1

      From a consumer convenience standpoint the former two are preferable

      On this we agree. So I can put myself at a competitive disadvantage by choosing the "high road" that promotes open standards. Or, I can bundle and please all but those customers who are informed about these matters (ie about 0.01% of the market). That's an easy one.

      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    29. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1

      Yes, I whole-heartedly agree. Unfortunatetly, the legal remedies to the lack of Linux desktop adoption *seems* to be bringing Microsoft down to the level of all those distros, rather than acknowledging that a broadly capable OS that can be exploited by multiple applications is a vastly better environment both for end users and for application developers. I hesitate to say this, but it almost seems to me that a better approach than forcing MS to downgrade their OS, would be to declare Windows a regulated utility. The free market works well while innovation is rampant and things are being sorted out. But, once things stabilize, standardization and regulation are oftentimes necessary. Consider phone systems, or the electrical grid, or the internet for that matter. All of these started out as "wild wild west" free-for-alls, eventually evolved into some sort of defacto-standard (aka monopoly which basically means the market picked a winner), and then became regulated. Maybe it's time to declare that Windows has won and get on with the next phase? Or, we could rip Windows apart and force the market to choose a new winner ...

      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    30. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Bender0x7D1 · · Score: 1

      That day is going to come in the second half of next year with the release of Windows Vista.

      See here for details.

      --
      Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
    31. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by LaughingCoder · · Score: 1

      Actually, all versions of Vista come bundled with IE, Messenger, MP, and lots of other things. Additionally they are layering on even more bundled capabilities, differing by version. Over time some of those will "stick" and be bundled across all Windows versions. Others will fade away or remain nichy on a particular flavor of Windows (Server versions, for example). Good developers understand that and plan accordingly. If a version of Vista with a particular capabiity is targeted, the application will require that version of Windows. There are many examples of applications that require Windows 2000/XP to run. That is reasonable. To expand the required platform to include a requirement for media player 9 or greater, IE 6.0 or greater, Messenger 4.0 or greater, XML parser 3.5 or greater, ... gets to be a bit cumbersome both for the product developer and the end user, don't you think?

      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    32. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 1
      Well if you don't mind, I'd really appreciate proof of this statement.

      Proof is hard to give in a forum message, but I can give you an example. Dates are encoded in a document as something like [YY-MM-DD]. When the document is opened, it supplies the correct date in the requested format. In the Dutch version, the codes were translated to something like [JJ-MM-DD], because in Dutch "Year" is "Jaar". A Dutch Word would not understand an English date-code, and vice versa.

      As I said, this may have been corrected in the newer Word versions. I can't say, because after this debacle I have only worked at companies that used English versions for everything. That is really the safest way to go.

    33. Re:As a Windows application developer ... by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      Don't suppose you could post that screenprint somewhere? :-)

  21. This still doesn't increase competition by tannhaus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem was once that these things came bundled with windows. That's not a problem anymore. The problem now is that the average person sees these apps as the primary app for that task. When they think email they don't think Eudora..they think Outlook. That's not going to change even if they unbundle things now and include links to competitors. The customer will simply say "Yeah...that's a link to realplayer, but where's windows media player?"

    That battle has been lost. Instead of concentrating on unbundling, these governments should focus on breaking the perception that email means outlook, that web browsing means IE, etc. Bundling was a way to thrust these apps to the forefront and choke the competition. That's been done. Unbundling now will just make the customer go through extra steps to get the same software back again.

    1. Re:This still doesn't increase competition by clembie · · Score: 1

      it's true! i can't tell you how many people, when i ask them what operating system they're using, respond with "Microsoft Office".

    2. Re:This still doesn't increase competition by flyinwhitey · · Score: 1

      If that's true, then why are so many people using firefox?

      Oh right, because it's not true.

      --
      How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
    3. Re:This still doesn't increase competition by tannhaus · · Score: 1

      So many people are using firefox? That's a new one. What's the percentage? 5...10% of windows users? THAT is so many people to you? That proves my point

  22. Give it to them.... by jollyroger1210 · · Score: 1

    ...But without a Korean translator.

    --
    Purple, because ice cream has no bones.
  23. Submit your links here.. by RenHoek · · Score: 1

    Let's think of competitor links that Microsoft should include..

    I'll start off..

    http://www-306.ibm.com/software/os/warp/
    Beware.. sales stop at December 23, 2005. So hurry! :)

    1. Re:Submit your links here.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So after Dec 23, 2005 buy from here,

      http://www.ecomstation.com/

      Nathan

    2. Re:Submit your links here.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah because we all want to use something that is on the way out... stfu

  24. Windows Media Player unbundling by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
    Utterly, utterly stupid. I can't think of why the EU and South Korea think this is so great.

    The issue is not about the availability of the software so much as the awareness of alternatives and the opening of protocols.

    Anyone who wants to open a WMV will just buy the bundled version, and people who take a political view against WMV will simply choose not to download the WMV.

  25. Starcraft instead.. by onion2k · · Score: 5, Funny

    If they'd bundled Starcraft instead of Messenger/Media Player there wouldn't be any problem.

    1. Re:Starcraft instead.. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

      You might as well tack on Lineage II, and with proper time, you might be able to make your money back in adena sales.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    2. Re:Starcraft instead.. by 21chrisp · · Score: 1

      If they'd bundled Starcraft instead of Messenger/Media Player there wouldn't be any problem.

      It sure would be once the University students got ahold of it. Starcraft must have resulted in more students failing than any game known to man. It's also known as GPA killer 3000 in some areas...

    3. Re:Starcraft instead.. by PsychicX · · Score: 1

      What if I want to play Dawn of War or C&C instead? I should have the right to play those games, and Microsoft should be forced to put links to those games' websites right beside the starcraft link!

    4. Re:Starcraft instead.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's actually an interesting idea. I wonder what WOULD happen if they really did such a thing...

    5. Re:Starcraft instead.. by Busy · · Score: 1

      Somebody please mod that insightful!! Microsoft has it's faults, but just because lots of users are too dumb to try different apps doesn't mean they should be punished. Why are so many slashdotters in support of the intelligent being penalized because of the faults of the ignorant?

      --
      Think of someone with average intelligence. Now think 1/2 the world is dumber than that guy.
  26. Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by OwlWhacker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Concerning RealPlayer, when it was suggested that Microsoft should add it to Windows, Microsoft said that people could easily download it, so bundling it with Windows was unnecessary and out of the question.

    Now that WMP and Messenger are to be removed, suddenly downloading a media player is such a terrible handicap!

    When it was suggested that Sun's JRE should be bundled with Windows, Microsoft asked why Sun should get a free ride on Windows, and was against adding third-party software to Windows.

    The 'free ride' of bundling obviously does make a big difference. Just because Microsoft owns the operating system, this doesn't mean that it should be allowed to bundle whatever it likes.

    What company is going to suffer as Microsoft has to bundle another product with Windows to entice people to upgrade? Maybe a PhotoShop clone is to be bundled with Vista's successor?

    1. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by ViolentGreen · · Score: 1

      Now that WMP and Messenger are to be removed, suddenly downloading a media player is such a terrible handicap!

      When I buy an OS, I expect to have basic functionalty such as a web browser and media player. I would rather they bundle them but give me the opportunity to remove them.

      Just because Microsoft owns the operating system, this doesn't mean that it should be allowed to bundle whatever it likes.

      Uh, what? Why not?

      --
      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
    2. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by strider44 · · Score: 1

      I don't like the Microsoft web browser and the Microsoft media player. Could you please tell me where the uninstall button is?

    3. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by strider44 · · Score: 1

      umm sorry mate wrong message to reply to. I totally misread your message, damn me for reading too quickly!

    4. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

      When I buy an OS, I expect to have basic functionalty such as a web browser and media player. I would rather they bundle them but give me the opportunity to remove them.

      Of course you do, so do I.

      Look at Linux distros, they come with various apps. The better solution is to have various apps, and allow the user to choose which to use as default.

      But is Microsoft going to bundle RealPlayer with Windows? No!

      Why? Because Microsoft only bundles Microsoft apps. This is anti-competitive. That's why the judge originally suggested that Microsoft should split: having Microsoft's operating system and middleware as separate competing divisions.

      If Windows came in distributions, like Linux, Windows would come bundled with other non-Microsoft apps. This would be great for innovation, and would prevent Microsoft locking in users via proprietary file formats and protocols.

      So far, if Microsoft wants a particular app to become standard on the Windows desktop, it gets bundled. Any proprietary file formats or protocols used then also become standard. Users are locked into Microsoft's solutions, and competitors are locked out.

      Microsoft really has to keep bundling extra apps to encourage people to upgrade, and these apps have to be popular enough to get people's attention. What gets bundled next? Office now has an accounting package bundled, rather than going to market separately and competing fairly. Is Vista going to have a PhotoShop clone bundled with it? It's possible! If Microsoft needs to get upgrades, that's the way it goes. What then happens to PhotoShop sales? Is this fair competition? What if your company makes a particular app, and Microsoft decides to bundle its own clone of it? You wouldn't feel that bundling does no harm then.

      Bundling harms innovation and competition.

    5. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by ChetOS.net · · Score: 1

      Why not? Who should determine what software is bundled... Other software companies? How about you bundle my competing software with your software. The market perhaps? I think the market has spoken because nobody is complaining except for liberals and foreign governments.

      Bundled Microsoft products are not getting a "free ride", they are the ride. People don't buy the operating system just because (otherwise Apple would have succeeded). They buy it for 1) bundled software, 2) supported software. Linux has a lot of bundled software (none linked to Microsoft products mind you), but it does not have much popular supported software (although that is changing rapidly).

      Also check out Acrylic which is a Photoship clone.

      If I don't want to use MS Messenger (and I don't), I install something else. If I don't know what I want then Microsoft says, "Hey, use ours!" and I am none the wiser... not Microsoft's fault, my fault.

      --
      "If God had intended us to walk he would not have invented roller skates." -- Willy Wonka
    6. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

      Also check out Acrylic which is a Photoship clone.

      I already have, that's my point.

      As for the rest of your comment:

      Please see comment here.

    7. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by CPUGuy · · Score: 1

      Acrylic is NOT a Photoshop clone, not even close to the same at all.

      If anything, Acryllic competes with Illustrator, as it is a vector drawing application, not a photo and image manipulation app.

    8. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by ChetOS.net · · Score: 1

      From what I can tell it is mostly a bitmap editor but has a lot of vector features as well. This lines it up with Freehand, but it also competes with Photoshop and Illustrator.

      --
      "If God had intended us to walk he would not have invented roller skates." -- Willy Wonka
    9. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by ViolentGreen · · Score: 1

      Look at Linux distros, they come with various apps. The better solution is to have various apps, and allow the user to choose which to use as default.
       
      I don't know that I would consider that a better solution. What's the point of having 5 different web browsers installed by default? Most people don't care as long as the browser works for them. Aren't the mainstream distros moving away from this philosophy anyway? Ubuntu (at least the previous version) comes with Firefox and Evolution installed as the only browser/email-client. I can't remember about the media player though.

      I agree with what you are saying about bundling affecting standards (I don't like WMA any more than you do) but I don't think Microsoft should be forced to push competing technologies over their own.

      I am just saying that no legal action should tell Microsoft what or what not to bundle with their OS unless there are valid security reasons. It is their product. It's not like you have to use the bundled applications. If people are happy with the bundled apps, they will use them. If not, they will look elsewhere.

      --
      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
    10. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

      What's the point of having 5 different web browsers installed by default?

      Why should Microsoft be given the power to choose which browser, IM client and media player is default?

      If IE is default, you get Microsoft's proprietary ActiveX accepted by default, and certain sites are developed around this. This means that no competing browser can be used. The same goes for Microsoft's proprietary non-standard extensions, causing Websites to display incorrectly in other browsers, even though those other browsers adhere to REAL standards.

      I am just saying that no legal action should tell Microsoft what or what not to bundle with their OS unless there are valid security reasons.

      The main issue is concerning proprietary or patent encumbered file formats and protocols.

      Perhaps Microsoft should be forced to stop bundling applications that use proprietary file formats, protocols and APIs.

      It's anti-competitive, and Microsoft knows this.

    11. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure. It's under Add/Remove Programs | Add/Remove Windows Components. Uncheck the boxes, click OK, and you're done.

    12. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by linuxmop · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why you use the term "given the power" in reference to Microsoft's ability to bundle various applications into their operating system platform. Windows was created by developers under Microsoft's employ. Microsoft retains distribution rights to the Windows operating system. Why would Microsoft need any additional rights or powers to include various functionalities such as web browsing or instant messenging?

      I have chosen to download and use the Firefox web browser. It is more than adequate for my needs. I generally choose not to visit sites that require ActiveX plugins, although I make exceptions when the need arises. It's nice, however, to have a web browser to use to download Firefox. Bootstrapping problem, and all that.

      By the way, you should try to get over your insistence on standards. AJAX, for example, is not a standard: the XMLHttpRequest object was created by Microsoft as part of Internet Explorer. It was later added, in modified form, by most of the other popular web browsers. Macromedia Flash is incredibly useful in certain problem domains; it is unlikely that your prized standards, Javascript and SVG, will ever catch up in quality and consistency. Nothing innovative ever comes out of standards organizations; they simply codify existing practice. Thus, as a developer, if I restrict myself to standards alone, I will miss out on new technologies.

      And finally, I see no reason for Microsoft to work to bundle third-party applications. This is the role of the distributor of Windows, which is, for most users, Dell. And you should note that Dell does often bundle other third-party media players and similar applications with their PCs. I think the whole confusion is really due to the fact that nobody sells a modified Windows bundle without a PC; I suspect such an idea would not sell well, as the majority of users do not buy operating systems retail.

    13. Re:Bundling is beneficial to Microsoft! by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why you use the term "given the power" in reference to Microsoft's ability to bundle various applications into their operating system platform.

      Microsoft operates as an anti-competitive monopoly. Whatever apps are set as default in Windows, that's what the vast majority of people are going to use. If those apps are based around proprietary file formats, protocols and APIs, this is creating a lock-in/lock-out situation that is anti-competitive.

      Considering that Microsoft is supposed to have abated its anti-competitive practices, either the applications using proprietary or patent-encumbered methods should be removed, or Microsoft's use of proprietary file formats, APIs and protocols should be abolished.

      I generally choose not to visit sites that require ActiveX plugins

      Well done, neither do I - but the world is not just made up of you and me. Unfortunately I know of many companies that need to access sites that require ActiveX plugins, they have no choice.

      if I restrict myself to standards alone, I will miss out on new technologies.

      Standards are not the reason you would miss out on new technologies.

      You'd miss out on new technologies because anti-competitive companies such as Microsoft won't develop an open standard (which would benefit the user, and increase innovation and competition). Instead these companies lock you into their software via closed 'standards' that you become dependant on.

      By accepting closed 'standards' you basically help a situation that stifles innovation and healthy competition.

      And finally, I see no reason for Microsoft to work to bundle third-party applications.

      No, I really don't think that this is the answer. Microsoft should be forced to open up its file formats, protocols and APIs.

  27. More versions of Windows?! by TangoCharlie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have trouble keeping up with all the various versions of Windows. We don't want more Windows, we want fewer!

    Seriously, this Windows XP N edition is a complete waste of time, money (truism?!) and energy. If the organisations which have imposed these rulings on Microsoft want to have any real bite, then they must simply ban Microsoft products.

    The key here is (I believe) that they don't want their legislation to have any "bite". They do this to satisfy pressure to be seen to be encouraging open markets and free trade while at the same time bowing to pressure from Microsoft.

    And, $40M, what a joke. I bet MS never even has to pay it. They'll simply do a deal to ignore all those illegal copies of Windows + Office in South-Koreas government offices! Expect an announcement of a new multi-million Microsoft purchasing deal in the very near future.

    --
    return 0; }
    1. Re:More versions of Windows?! by giorgiofr · · Score: 1

      Finally, someone who understands what's going on. Korea looks like a winner because they're doing something against the big bad corp, MS looks like a winner because they're complying and submitting and forgiving Korea for their past piracy too. People are OK because they just don't give a damn about bundling or paying licenses and keep living their lives, utterly untouched by this bullshit. FOSS zealots whine because, well, because that's they always do.
      I wonder if it's so difficult to support good ideas like FOSS without becoming a zealot and ridiculing yourself while alienating potential "customers". FOSS zealots who cry bloody murder and advocate censorship always get on my nerves, while I certainly appreciate Ubuntu's initiative to ship CDs for free to my house. See... It's not that difficult to provide some benefit for your "customer" and further your cause without looking like an idiot... If only RMS' cheerleaders would learn this!

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    2. Re:More versions of Windows?! by EvilMonkeySlayer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're going to really love Windows Vista there are 7 editions. Vista Starter Edition, Vista Home Basic Edition, Vista Home Premium Edition, Vista Ultimate Edition, Vista Small Business Edition, Vista Professional Edition, and Vista Enterprise Edition.

      I can't stand Windows/MSN Messenger, what I find infuriating is that if I uninstall it (it can be uninstalled by using an INI file tweak) Microsoft have reinstalled it in "critical" updates. If I want to stop it from running in the background (even after i've told it not to run at start up or in the background using the prefs) I typically have to mess around using either the registry or group policy on the local machine to stop it.

    3. Re:More versions of Windows?! by trollable · · Score: 1

      You're going to really love Windows Vista there are 7 editions.

      Only 7 editions? Linux has 358.

    4. Re:More versions of Windows?! by RichardX · · Score: 1

      You forgot Vista Turbo, Vista Championship Edition, and Vista EX 3 Plus Alpha Ultra Combo

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
  28. Re:How about No? Or have some XP N. by aussie_a · · Score: 1

    Oh I don't think it's completely pointless. After all, the South Korean government just got $32 million US. Nothing to sneeze at.

    The reason this isn't having any effect is because there's no real alternative to Windows. You've got Mac OS, which comes bundled with expensive hardware. And you have Linux, which hasn't reached a worthy position in the desktop market to take on anyone. No matter how many times someone reports that the current year is the year of Linux, there's no indication that it will be the year of Linux. And there's no indication that Linux will gain a strong position in the desktop marketplace anytime soon.

    So no matter how many lawsuits are brought against Microsoft, there's no real alternative for your average Joe.

  29. 32 Million? Way too much...because... by thomasdz · · Score: 1

    I've been told by someone at Microsoft that "640K should be enough for anyone"

    (yeah, yeah...I know...urban legend)

    --
    Karma: Excellent. 15 moderator points expire sometime.
  30. The problem with Messenger by Sockatume · · Score: 1

    I imagine the main reason they're opposed to the bundling of Messenger is that Windows Messenger can't actually be uninstalled in Windows (without command line or .bat work, anyway) and it launches itself automatically under various conditions.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    1. Re:The problem with Messenger by m00j · · Score: 1

      The easy way around that is renaming the .exe file. I do it for windows messenger as it randomly opens and signs in, making me sign out of msn messenger. Sadly everyone seems to use msn messenger now as I would much prefer to move to _something_ different. At least with tweaks I can remove all the extra crap that they stick onto it.

  31. $40M by TangoCharlie · · Score: 1

    It wasn't even that much! (I'm easily confused!).

    Jeez!

    --
    return 0; }
  32. Way to go, COMMIES !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If there's one thing good about communistic politics, it's that it can fine M$FT and actually win. Korea - land of the morning stink, but it smells better than Redmond!

  33. Really??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The commission ordered Microsoft to offer two versions of Windows in South Korea within 180 days."

    A government ordering Microsoft what kind of features are to be in Windows?

    How adorable.

  34. Fill me in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just an idiot and I'm only playing devil's advocat (i.e. I'm not defending Microsoft). But can someone **concisely** summarize for me why WMP and MSN's IM client coming preinstalled is different from Apple pre-loading all their stuff (Quicktime, iLife, iTunes, etc).

    1. Re:Fill me in by codefool · · Score: 1

      Simply put, the Apple market share is small, so there is less incentive for competitors to develop alternative products to Apple's own OS, media player, etc. Unlike Microsoft, Apple does not need to do anything to stymie or eliminate competition. Apple users are 'mostly' happy with what Apple themselves provide, so Apple putting the de facto software with the box is more of a convenience for the user than an attempt to pre-empt a competing product.

      --
      "Stop whining!" - Arnold, as Mr. Kimble
    2. Re:Fill me in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't including the built-in software in the Apple OS eleminate competition? Apple doesn't have a monopoly on Apple computers?

    3. Re:Fill me in by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      But can someone **concisely** summarize for me why WMP and MSN's IM client coming preinstalled is different from Apple pre-loading all their stuff (Quicktime, iLife, iTunes, etc).

      Apple is not a monopoly, MS is.

      Bundling is not illegal. Bundling a product with a monopolized product is illegal. If I sell cars, nothing makes it illegal for me to include a free lifetime supply of cheese with every car. My customers are free to choose between my car and cheese bundle and my competitor's car or cheese or car and cheese bundle. If, however, I have a monopoly on car sales, then everyone who wants to drive is forced to buy a car from me. Then, it is illegal for me to bundle cheese with them, because it is unfair to the companies that sell cheese and to consumers. Since they are forced to buy cars only from me, they are also forced to buy cheese from me. Cheese sellers go out of business and soon I have a second monopoly. Worse yet, the cheese industry suffers, since I don't have to compete on quality or innovation, since my customers have no choice. Soon the quality of cheese in general is worse and customers have to pay more and I can move on to establish yet a third monopoly by bundling something else, except this time anyone who wants either a car or cheese is forced to buy some other product.

      Apple bundles not only an OS and applications, but also hardware and services. It does not matter, because they don't have a monopoly on any of those things. MS does have a monopoly on consumer OS's, thus they are banned from bundling. They know it as well as anyone else and their business model is built upon the belief that the punishments for breaking the law will not be greater than the profit they make doing so. So far they have been correct due to the very slow nature of the courts, their huge legal team, and the influence they have in governments due to excessive lobbying.

    4. Re:Fill me in by danpsmith · · Score: 0

      But no one complains as long as the product is crummy. When the product is a real competitor, then they complain.
      Nobody complains about calculator being bundled with windows, or notepad, or word. But technically these things are unfairly competing too.
      This is where this argument has always fallen on its face for me. People only get out of joint at things that are decent products, or at least viewed as decent products.
      For example, Microsoft Windows 95 came with an early version of IE bundled with it that was a piece of junk. Then when they made IE3 and IE4 and those came bundled, everyone was all upset about it.
      Nobody cared when media player came bundled until it became like every other media player and packed in stupid skins and such. Now since it's basically the same as the rest of the media players, it's a problem that it's bundled. I don't understand why it's okay for Microsoft to bundle an inferior product, but not okay for them to bundle one that is just like the competition in the marketplace.

      --
      Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    5. Re:Fill me in by Zellis · · Score: 1

      Notepad and the inbuilt calculator have no competitors that I know of. The lack of complaint isn't because they're "crummy" products (although they are pretty unimpressive in functionality), but because there's no perception that innovation that could've been provided by a competitor is being stifled.

      My recollection is that the bundling of IE with Windows was viewed as a problem by many people from the very first moment it was announced. I don't know about WMP. I do know that people are very upset about the existence of MS' "open" XML format for Office 12 and its attempt to leverage the MS Office monopoly at the expense of ODF, regardless of any alleged superiority or inferiority of the MS XML format.

      Bundling an app that's so inferior that there's no way that a person would prefer it over the competition, or so simple in functionality that there's no reason to seek a better replacement, isn't such a bad thing because it doesn't annihilate competitor products. Bundling one that's as good or almost as good is a bad thing because it does.

    6. Re:Fill me in by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      But no one complains as long as the product is crummy. When the product is a real competitor, then they complain.

      You're mistaken. IE is crummy and people complain very vocally about it. You're also confusing consumer complaints with legal action. For legal action there needs to be demonstrable damage (losing market share). No one sued over the calculator program because there was no calculator program market (defined by dollars exchanged). There was a media player market, an browser market, and a chat market, most of which was ad supported.

      Personally I complain more when MS bundles a crappy product than a good one because I want to use a good product and when MS steals a huge chunk of the market with a crappy one competitors (not really competitors since bundling nullifies competition) are forced to raise prices to stay profitable or they go away and I end up having to make due with an old version of a good product or a crappy alternative from MS.

    7. Re:Fill me in by danpsmith · · Score: 0
      You're mistaken. IE is crummy and people complain very vocally about it. You're also confusing consumer complaints with legal action. For legal action there needs to be demonstrable damage (losing market share). No one sued over the calculator program because there was no calculator program market (defined by dollars exchanged). There was a media player market, an browser market, and a chat market, most of which was ad supported.


      There's plenty of calculator programs on the market, MS's calculator simply doesn't compete with the high-end functionality of something like say, Mathematica. There is a media player market now, but years before nobody was concerned when media player was a little piece of software that didn't include skins and such. IE was almost always bundled with Windows, IE didn't become a problem until it had most of the features that Netscape did. I think a lot of times people are just afraid that people will use the MS product because there's not much difference between that and the competition to the average user. If instead, people innovated and created products that address concerns that MS's products do not, and consistently did so, then they wouldn't have so much to whine and take legal action on.

      And I'm not confusing legal action with whining, because I believe they are extensions of the same thing. MS has provided a platform in which you can easily download a different browser, a different media player, etc. The fact that most people don't is simply telling the competition that the average user sees no advantage over running your software instead of the stuff that they have already without expending any effort. If there was a big enough difference, people would go out of their way to provide business to the better product. The increasing popularity of firefox is a testament to this statement.
      --
      Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    8. Re:Fill me in by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      IE was almost always bundled with Windows, IE didn't become a problem until it had most of the features that Netscape did.

      So here's a question for you. If IE "became a problem" and took over a big chunk of the market when it had "most of" the features of Netscape, then you have just provided an example of an inferior product taking over a market from a superior one. The main "advantage" that IE had at the time was that it was bundled with Windows. Since MS has a monopoly with their Windows product they are legally prohibited from bundling other products with it. They have chosen to ignore the law in this case and pay off politicians and lawsuits.

      Now do you really think dozens of judges in multiple countries have all ruled against MS, despite the fact that they have done nothing wrong?

      If instead, people innovated and created products that address concerns that MS's products do not, and consistently did so, then they wouldn't have so much to whine and take legal action on.

      Your proposal requires that other companies reach a higher standard that MS, in order to achieve the same results. That is called "unfair competition" and it is due to MS's monopoly position and bundling.

      MS has provided a platform in which you can easily download a different browser, a different media player, etc. The fact that most people don't is simply telling the competition that the average user sees no advantage over running your software instead of the stuff that they have already without expending any effort.

      A more eloquent person than I once said, "They need only create a product just 'good enough' that people don't trouble themselves to see if something better exists." That is what MS does. They make products that are inferior to those already on the market, but are just "good enough" that it is not worth the trouble and/or price to get a better solution. And that is what people use today. Web browsing without tabs, spell checking, translation, real pop-up blocking, ad blocking, secure defaults, support for the HTML, CSS, and XHTML standards written in the last five years, or dozens of other features available in other browsers. I don't know a single person with an understanding of Web technologies that would claim IE is superior to, say, Firefox; and yet IE holds 90% of the market. That is bad for consumers and bad for the industry and it applies to dozens of other fields as well. Do you really think it is a good thing that IE is the main browser despite its obvious shortcoming, just because it is the on MS forced Dell and other companies to bundle?

      The increasing popularity of firefox is a testament to this statement.

      The fact that IE retains 90% of the market despite being vastly inferior for half a decade belies your belief. Companies should not have to be better than MS, just to compete with them. If another product is just as good as one MS produces and at the same price than each should grab about 50% of the market. That is what is known a fair market.

    9. Re:Fill me in by danpsmith · · Score: 0
      The fact that IE retains 90% of the market despite being vastly inferior for half a decade belies your belief. Companies should not have to be better than MS, just to compete with them. If another product is just as good as one MS produces and at the same price than each should grab about 50% of the market. That is what is known a fair market.

      Not true. Let's face it, generic soda is just as good as Coke or Pepsi, but people buy Coke and Pepsi in mass amounts compared to these products. Some of MS's advantage is its name recognition. People outside of the software community know who MS is, and for whatever reason, they trust it as a decent name in software. Or at least "the accepted" name in software. A lot of people don't move to firefox (my dad for example) simply because they don't want some other bizarre browser they haven't heard of. I think this irritates people like you because usefulness and innovation doesn't necessarily breed popularity in the software world. People like me, however, are used to this sad trend. Music, movies, and even videogames all follow this same trend. Why should software be any different? The "good enough" mentality doesn't just pertain to software, it's everywhere and it's a function of the general populace being uninformed and loyal to brands.

      My point is that nobody cares that MS bundles some things, but yet gets out of joint about others. As long as the MS product is so inferior it doesn't capture any percentage of the market, nobody notices or cares. Then as soon as the bundled application gets a bit better and takes off, everyone gets irritated.

      MS's downfall is that they've become such a huge organization with so many tentacles that they cannot keep up with all the changes in their product lines. Therefore there are security holes, lack of features, etc. But as people get more and more irritated with these things, they will move to other companies. My sister got spyware so often from simply browsing that she was convinced to switch to firefox. All it takes is for the market to change, and for MS not to keep up with it and they'll go under. The people made MS what it is, only the people can stop it from chewing up every possible market.

      --
      Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    10. Re:Fill me in by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Let's face it, generic soda is just as good as Coke or Pepsi, but people buy Coke and Pepsi in mass amounts compared to these products. Some of MS's advantage is its name recognition. People outside of the software community know who MS is, and for whatever reason, they trust it as a decent name in software.

      You're overestimating their market influence. The truth is much of the popularity of IE is due to the fact that it is bundled. If that was not the case and most people bought computers that came pre-installed with Firefox, most would neither know or care that it was not an MS product. Most people making purchasing decisions decide to buy from Dell or HP because of the name recognition. They don't decide not to download Firefox, because they've never heard of Firefox. A good percentage don't even know what IE is and couldn't tell you if they are running Windows or something else. The fact that people have to take an extra step to get Firefox is the problem and it is the result of bundling.

      My point is that nobody cares that MS bundles some things, but yet gets out of joint about others. As long as the MS product is so inferior it doesn't capture any percentage of the market, nobody notices or cares. Then as soon as the bundled application gets a bit better and takes off, everyone gets irritated.

      If a bank robber tries to rob a bank, but accidentally locks themselves in their own closet for six hours no one knows or cares either, because they have not successfully caused any damage. It is when MS bundles products which take over markets based not on their own merits, but upon that bundling that other software producers and consumers are damaged.

    11. Re:Fill me in by danpsmith · · Score: 0
      It is when MS bundles products which take over markets based not on their own merits, but upon that bundling that other software producers and consumers are damaged.

      This is the argument I'm talking about. I'm saying that they are at least partially of their own merits. IE always came bundled with Windows, but Netscape came installed too. When IE surpassed Netscape (which I believe it did before the advent of spyware and the exposure of all of its security holes), Netscape no longer needed to be packaged. Which makes sense not only from a monopolistic point of view, but also because it costed the makers of such computers to put out less money. Netscape was a purchase product and MSIE simply came with Windows.

      And besides that point there's this one: If users who don't know anything about computers manage to download and install all kinds of other garbage, you'd think that if they wanted to, they would be able to download competing products. Are you saying that on a standard MS windows install you should have no browser? That is hardly an alternative. No media player? MS applications to me at least allow a gateway with which I can get the alternatives.

      And here's another point, if the user doesn't even know what program they are using then does it really matter to them which program it is anyway? The target audience for software these days I believe should incorporate the average user but target the high end user. Because as people get more and more tech savvy it will no longer go on what program was packaged with their Gateway, but what program is the most useful.

      --
      Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    12. Re:Fill me in by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      IE always came bundled with Windows, but Netscape came installed too. When IE surpassed Netscape (which I believe it did before the advent of spyware and the exposure of all of its security holes), Netscape no longer needed to be packaged.

      Ahh, but it was not when IE surpassed Netscape, but when IE became good enough that customers did not complain about it.

      Netscape was a purchase product and MSIE simply came with Windows.

      Except Netscape was free. Do you deny that being bundled is an advantage? If not, then IE has an unfair advantage, thus the monopoly was abused. If so, can you honestly tell me that if Firefox was bundled with all computers and IE was not, you don't think the market shares would change drastically?

      If users who don't know anything about computers manage to download and install all kinds of other garbage, you'd think that if they wanted to, they would be able to download competing products.

      The problem is that they don't know that they can, need to, or that there is any advantage in so doing. Most people just assume that Dell either includes the best product, or to get a better one will cost money. Clueless users don't install specific things, just ones they happen upon.

      Are you saying that on a standard MS windows install you should have no browser? That is hardly an alternative. No media player? MS applications to me at least allow a gateway with which I can get the alternatives.

      Do you think any computer retailer is going to sell a computer these days without a browser or a media player? I don't. How can you still not be getting this. When you buy a computer from Dell it will come with a browser and a media player. The problem is Dell should be the one choosing which one of those is installed, not MS. By forcing Dell to include IE and WMP to get Windows is a blatant violation of the law. MS gains market share by bundling, which is illegal for them, because they are a monopoly. Nothing is stopping Dell from selling a computer with Windows, IE, and WMP on it, but the law should be stopping MS from forcing Dell to sell that if they want to sell Windows. Vendors should include a browser pre-installed and on installer disk with your computer, just like they used to.

      And here's another point, if the user doesn't even know what program they are using then does it really matter to them which program it is anyway?

      Yes, because they are given an inferior product with security holes, and lacking features. In a free market, without bundling they would be given whichever program the retailer wanted to include and then the free market would decide which one was right. As it is now, they are all given an inferior solution because MS has forced it upon them.

      The target audience for software these days I believe should incorporate the average user but target the high end user. Because as people get more and more tech savvy it will no longer go on what program was packaged with their Gateway, but what program is the most useful.

      The evidence from the field does not agree with you. IE has been significantly behind in functionality to other products for many, many years, and yet they still have most of the market. Most users just use what comes with their computer and most people never know anyone who uses something else. As a result, users don't buy a HP computer that comes with the better browser and doesn't get viruses, because all the vendors ship the same thing, so there is no real competition for them to use to make a choice.

    13. Re:Fill me in by danpsmith · · Score: 0
      Maybe you're right that features and innovation won't always result in overall market share, but it's a market for a freeware item. So if people decide they will use an inferior product despite no difference in price, let them whine to someone else when a purple monkey popped up on their desktop out of nowhere. Saying that MS is being anti-competitional by not allowing Windows unless IE was exclusively installed is just another step in the equation. Who cares if MS decides what software is the best for the end user or if Dell does? Neither one has the end user in mind anyway. Like Dell or Gateway or HP ever packaged superior products with their PCs, they haven't. They package the most dumbed down, easy to use pieces of junk for every element of their computers to avoid tech support phone calls. Things with annoying interfaces like smiling dogs in wizards asking you what kind of CD you would like to burn with a big smiley.

      Besides, I bet people like Dell would prefer MS anyway, because then they can offer anti-spyware packages and upgrades when people only got spyware because their browser sucked to begin with. There is nothing more fun to a computer vendor than to sell a computer novice superfluous crap.

      People have the ability to decide for themselves what they want to use on the computer, the fact that they aren't aware of this ability just shows how disgustingly uneducated the populace is, and further illustrates that if you aren't going to educate yourself about technology then you probably deserve what you get.

      I also don't understand why people, outside perhaps the tech support industry, get irritated by MS at all. Nowadays they have plenty of competition for the aware user. I use firefox almost exclusively and does it really matter how many other people use my same browser? Other than a couple pages might be messed up when you visit em? Not really.

      Firefox and other companies also stink at ad campaigns and making people aware of their superior product. I think when we start to see Firefox commercials, particularly funny ones talking about maybe spyware and such, we'll start to see a shift in numbers.

      --
      Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    14. Re:Fill me in by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Who cares if MS decides what software is the best for the end user or if Dell does?

      The end user. If Dell and HP and Lenovo all decide you can bet some will make different choices, then the market can decide the best product. If MS decides they all have to use the same solution and the people are stuck using it. If Dell and HP and Lenovo are looking at a variety of choices, the producers of those choices will try to cater to their desires, which are to sell more computers, which is one step removed from the customer deciding. If MS decides there is no incentive to make better products or give the customers what they want.

      Like Dell or Gateway or HP ever packaged superior products with their PCs, they haven't.

      But if they are given the choice to do so, then consumers can vote with their dollars and buy from the company that gives them the best, or least annoying software. When MS decides, no one has a choice.

      Besides, I bet people like Dell would prefer MS anyway, because then they can offer anti-spyware packages and upgrades when people only got spyware because their browser sucked to begin with. There is nothing more fun to a computer vendor than to sell a computer novice superfluous crap.

      "Hey Bob, how's that new HP computer working out?" "Well, it's a lot better than that Dell which got viruses and I had to keep buying add ons for. I'm glad my cousin bought one and told me or I'd never have known."

      Do you see how much better the aforementioned situation is than the one we are in now, where everyone is stuck with only one option?

      People have the ability to decide for themselves what they want to use on the computer, the fact that they aren't aware of this ability just shows how disgustingly uneducated the populace is, and further illustrates that if you aren't going to educate yourself about technology then you probably deserve what you get.

      When people buy any product, whether it is a car or a computer, a smart shopper looks at several options, then buys the one that seems like the best suited, for the best price. This works great in a free market and is how people are conditioned to shop. They don't expect a non-free market where they are only given the option of one substandard product. As a result, most of them assume, incorrectly, that there are no other option. After all if there were, wouldn't they be available in stores?

      They should be available in stores and trying to shift the blame from the company that breaks the law to make sure they aren't to the deceived shopper is just blaming the victim.

      I also don't understand why people, outside perhaps the tech support industry, get irritated by MS at all. Nowadays they have plenty of competition for the aware user. I use firefox almost exclusively and does it really matter how many other people use my same browser?

      Yes, it does matter. First, because websites are crap compared to what they could be if the state of the art was not frozen, through this anti-competative behavior. Second, because their is no way to compete with a monopoly many companies don't bother to try, which further retards progress. Finally, there is plenty of other fallout from a massive user based trapped on a single, insecure product. The majority of automated worm traffic that clogs up the internet and slows everything down is the result of automatically propagating worms exploiting Windows, IE, and Outlook.

      Firefox and other companies also stink at ad campaigns and making people aware of their superior product.

      Firefox isn't a company. Companies can't compete against a monopoly so there are basically none left with significant market share. The Firefox team does a great job marketing considering they are just a bunch of guys working on donations. But no marketing campaign that does not cost many millions is going to have any affect compared to forcing everyone to have a copy of your program.

      I think when we start to see Firefox co

    15. Re:Fill me in by danpsmith · · Score: 0
      Yes, it does matter. First, because websites are crap compared to what they could be if the state of the art was not frozen, through this anti-competative behavior. Second, because their is no way to compete with a monopoly many companies don't bother to try, which further retards progress. Finally, there is plenty of other fallout from a massive user based trapped on a single, insecure product. The majority of automated worm traffic that clogs up the internet and slows everything down is the result of automatically propagating worms exploiting Windows, IE, and Outlook.

      As someone who designed webpages before, I know that the state of the art isn't in fact frozen. The truth is that you could design a website to easily scale back based on what the user is using. And if (and it is) more featureful (is that a word?) to use an alternative browser, you could include a link like "download firefox to get the most out of this site" the same way MTV tries to force you to download IE (as if you don't already have it). Web site designers are simply too lazy to implement this kind of thing. It's a bit frustrating, I'll admit, but it's fair from impossible.

      As far as the Windows monopoly is, let's face it, there is no alternative product for quite a few reasons. Apple has okay mainstream OS's but you have to be an Apple style individual, Apple has basically packaged their OS with their hardware and their mentality. It takes a unique individual to buy into all three at the same time and most companies that don't have an explicit need to do so aren't going to, it's simply not viable.

      Linux could be an alternative, it has everything going for it, it's free, it's open source and it's pretty secure. But you have to remember that in order to get things done, things must work. The Linux community is too divided between different distributions or even different GUIs to provide a united front like MS does with Windows or even Apple does to a better extent with their line. If there existed a Windows style GUI without all the bugs, I'm sure people would flock to it. But *nix has problems with support, and Apple simply has problems with its strategies. The average consumer is therefore not presented with a viable alternative. Windows is a monopoly because you haven't introduced a proper product yet. And if some company/development team finally does come up with such a product I'm sure the market will break wide open. The OS always dictates what kind of applications a person runs, can we face that fact? If you are an Apple user, chances are you are using a certain suite of apps, if you are a Windows user, chances are you are using Microsoft crap. If you really have a problem with Microsoft's monopoly, then you should unite to form a reasonable OS that does what Windows does, and then maybe you will stand a chance on everything else, and people will complain about what you bundle with your OS.

      --
      Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    16. Re:Fill me in by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      As someone who designed webpages before, I know that the state of the art isn't in fact frozen. The truth is that you could design a website to easily scale back based on what the user is using... Web site designers are simply too lazy to implement this kind of thing.

      They aren't lazy. It is not cost effective to implement a new solution (using many man hours) when that solution can only reach a small subset of the populace. You can urge people to download Firefox all you like, but the number who have the bandwidth and are willing to try some new random software is small for any given website.

      The average consumer is therefore not presented with a viable alternative. Windows is a monopoly because you haven't introduced a proper product yet.

      The average consumer can't go to the store and buy a computer without an OS. The average consumer can't go to a store and buy a computer without Windows. You claim this is because OEMs don't want to ship these products because the other OSs are not up to snuff. I think you're dead wrong. I've put my name on a purchase order for over a thousand desktops, each of which came with Windows. We specifically requested them without Windows, but the price was higher. None of these machines ended up running Windows. I know dozens of people who have done the same thing and I'm sure there are countless people in the same boat. Many large computer buyers have corporate licenses for Windows. They pay for two copies of Windows for each machine to make installation less painful. You don't think the number of companies with corporate licenses for Windows is a significant market? Why then can't you buy a PC without a copy of Windows you don't plan to use. Surely they can sell a computer cheaper without one, right?

      The answer is all the major OEMs have contracts with MS that say they can't sell a computer without Windows (or actually a DOS based OS). The contracts are trade secrets, but this has been confirmed by numerous insiders and has been common knowledge for years. This is the same reason why you can't buy a computer with Linux as the main OS in a store. It would cost the normal price (including Windows) plus the cost of installing/packaging a Linux distro. It has nothing to do with Linux not being ready.

      99% of home users run the OS that shipped with their computer, hence MS automatically has 99% of the market, regardless of how well competitors do.

      Apple has okay mainstream OS's but you have to be an Apple style individual, Apple has basically packaged their OS with their hardware and their mentality. It takes a unique individual to buy into all three at the same time and most companies that don't have an explicit need to do so aren't going to, it's simply not viable.

      Lots of people would love Apple to sell their OS for x86 by itself. They won't for the foreseeable future because it is too big of a risk to compete with a monopoly. Apple makes most of its money on hardware sales. They would sacrifice that market and need to make that money back on such a move. Given that no major OEM can pre-install OS X without paying for Windows at an arbitrary cost set by MS and given that no OEM can afford to abandon the Windows market, there is basically no chance that Apple could compete in that space, even with a better product. Several other companies you've never heard of have tried with superior products, including ones that ran Windows software. They were all killed and most of them have won big settlements from MS for that.

      Basically since MS has illegally locked down the pre-install market the only way to compete with them is to (like Apple) sell your own pre-installs, which necessitates getting into the hardware market. Aside from that, Linux will take chunks of the market away when they are so much better than Windows that Windows is not a viable option by comparison. That day may come, but it is by no means a level playing field and it certainly is not subject to the advantages of a free market.

  35. I wonder what these editions would be called? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. No Media Player, No MSN = Reduced Media Edition = XP N

    2. Links to Competitors = Toxic Waste Edition?

  36. Swapables components by La+Gris · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I wonder what these courts would do if Microsoft was to actually produce a version of Windows that contained absolutely no 'bundled' software that had a competitor in the market. Imagine a version of Windows with no notepad, wordpad, IE, Windows Explorer, Windows Media Player, screensaver, network browser, task manager, disk defragmenter, TCP stack, Instant Messenger, backup tool, cd player, email client, remote desktop, scripting tool, command prompt or shell.

    This is not a problem of Microsoft bundling tools that anyone would consider basic fonctions a computer should have out of store.

    This is a problem of:
    - Many of Microsoft bundled tools can not be replaced/removed.
    or
    - Microsoft bundled tools are unable to properly operate with other alternate vendors tools by design.

    --
    Léa Gris
    1. Re:Swapables components by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Making things bold doesn't make them true. While some of the MS bundled tools that the OP is talking about cannot be removed, they can certainly be replaced. There's not one item in the OP list that cannot be replaced.

    2. Re:Swapables components by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although the other respondend is sort of crrect, you actually make a good point. The issue is not that there is WMP or IE bundled into the OS but that the WMV format and IE HTML are closed standards. If WMV were opened up a' la Dirac or Theora, then WMP bundling isn't a problem. If WMP wasn't bundled, then WMV being a propriatory codec is not a problem.

      The problem is that the WMV format is being sold to buyers as "95% of the desktops you want to reach have WMV. The nearest other competitor has less than 15%. So buy our WMV license and you will have better market penetration". THAT is what the illegal comingling is to stop.

      If WMP played only MPEG/AVI/ohther open codec and the full specification of the plugin (so that a WMP-plugin compatible system could be made, and WMP-compatible plugin could be engineered) without having to give MS anything (because otherwise they are profiting from their position of monopoly in a different market), then WMP is not a problem.

      As the system currently stands, there is a problem.

  37. Governments bitch, Users don't by everphilski · · Score: 1

    The fact is governments bitch, users don't. The wording of the article makes it sound like Microsoft can only offer the two new versions but if they were allowed to offer the old standard product (like the whole "Windows N" thing in Europe) users would still choose the base product over a stripped-down version, like they did in Europe. Governments might have some pie-in-the-sky ideals but users want bang for their buck. I might not use Media Player and/or MSN Messenger but like hell if I'm buying a crippled copy of Windows!

    -everphilski-

    1. Re:Governments bitch, Users don't by Prophet+of+Nixon · · Score: 1

      I would happily buy a version of Windows without MSN Messenger. I actually sorta like WMP 10, but Messenger is an irredeemable piece of shit that I don't want on my computer. Even truly allowing it not to be installed would be nice. I want the next Windows installer to be more like the newer Office installers, where I can actually set components to 'not available', not just 'not installed' and never have the OS even look for them.

    2. Re:Governments bitch, Users don't by Xrikcus · · Score: 1

      On the other hand the people who are like you who would make the effort to buy the non-Messenger copy of windows would be the same people who would install something else, or simply not use it anyway. For those people who use it because it's what's there, they'd likely but the standard version of windows anyway.

  38. How about actually puniishing them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a way that wil give their competitors an advantage.

    Withold copyright protection from Windows for a year. Allow anyone else to produce a version with whatever software they want bundled.

  39. links to competitors? by fernique · · Score: 1

    "must include links to competitors"

    It's cool if it means that Micro$oft will include links to Mplayer and Psi accordingly!

    --
    igor
  40. How would this look if it were Apple? by John+Nowak · · Score: 1

    What's next? Apple has to stop including iChat and Quicktime Player? Should Apple have to replace Safari with Firefox? As much as I hate Microsoft and their practices, they're not doing anything wrong by bundling these softwares. In Korea, only stupid people are for this.

    1. Re:How would this look if it were Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you get it dear boy? Then I will shout. MICROSOFT IS AN ABUSIVE MONOPOLIST, wheras Apple is not (and make some nice computers too).

      Jesus H. Christ, you shills get stupider & stupider.

    2. Re:How would this look if it were Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad there are no competition in Apple CPU hardware. There may actually be competitive pricing if there were - but there is no monopoly. After all - they aren't a "Convicted" monopolist - they just act like one.

    3. Re:How would this look if it were Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad there are no competition in Apple CPU hardware

      Just like there is no competition in the pizzas sold by the pizza shop down the road from me. But there is competition in pizzas, which is why the shop down the road is not a monopolist.

      Are you shills born stupid, or do MS train you up?

    4. Re:How would this look if it were Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you have any understanding whatsoever why this is happening? I guess the U.S. gov. letting MS go off the hook so easy made people think that the crime MS committed isn't a crime, but what you are seeing is the PUNISHMENT for the CRIME MS committed. Is Apple guilty of the same crime? What makes you think that this is the regular rule that should apply to all businesses?

      BTW as an asian, I am very disturbed to see very different reactions from the /. crowd to the virtually same punishments that EU and Korea dished out to MS. Not to mention the reaction to the much harsher punishment that the U.S. judge had for MS. If this isn't the racism subconsciously working, I don't know what is.

    5. Re:How would this look if it were Apple? by soulhuntre · · Score: 1

      People will tell you that since MS lost the court case this is all fair now because the Government said they were a monopoly.

      Of course these same people diagree with just about every other court ruling about technology. When it suits their bias they are all for it. What would have been funny is if MS had won that case... would these same peopel now be saying "well, at least they aren't a monopoly"? I doubt it.

      --
      --> Fight tyranny and repression.... read /. at -1!
    6. Re:How would this look if it were Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an OS X user I'd rather they did. Until recently the only thing going for iChat was that Adium was still buggy, mplayer is a much better media player than QT Player and Firefox (1.0.7, 1.5 sucks) is overall a better browser than Safari. Also there is no doubt in my mind that there would be better music playing software for OS X if iTunes wasn't so dominant (all other serious players have been abandoned, both free and commercial).

      However out of the aforementioned examples only QuickTime affects me in any way when used by other people so I don't see legal action taking place any time soon.

    7. Re:How would this look if it were Apple? by John+Nowak · · Score: 1

      AHHHH! FUCK.

      Bundling software to play videos is NOT FUCKING ABUSING YOUR MONOPOLY. People are free to uninstall it, download another player, etc etc etc. HOW the FUCK is this FUCKING ABUSE OF ANYTHING!?

      And yes -- I'm a fucking Mac user! Fuck off!

  41. Re:Oh god - How to kill a giant by jimmypw · · Score: 0

    Comparing Microsoft to Goliath and S.Korea to David...

    1) Throw a slingshot ($32 Million)
    2) Hit them where it hurts (pockets dont hurt)
    3) ???
    4) History is rewritten

  42. You know what? I was thinking almost the same... by AccUser · · Score: 1

    I am going to sue GM and get them to make a car that doesn't come with their own branded CD playe, but does inlude product literature for Ford, Toyota, and Vauxhall cars in the glove compartment.

    --

    Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.

  43. Microsoft sponsors tax cuts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't help thinking that any government that is having trouble balancing ht books can just sue MS and be done with it now.

  44. Yeah, let's go ahead and release another version.. by polaris20 · · Score: 1

    Since Windows XP N is selling so well :\

  45. OSS Monopoly by Anti-Trend · · Score: 1

    Assuming open-source became the de facto and furthermore Ubuntu for some crazy reason became the monopoly, I don't how that could ever be seen as abuse of monopoly. In the case of Ubuntu or any other GNU/Linux distribution, most if not all code is licensed under the GPL. Not only that, but every distro I've ever used offered you the choice of multiple programs which fill the same niche.

    --
    Working in a DevOps shop is like playing in a band made up entirely of keytarists.
  46. Piracy by squidguy · · Score: 1

    This ruling is meaningless in Korea, except to fulfil what others have said in this forum: free advertising for Redmond. In reality, Korea is rife with software piracy -- and I'm not talking about people downloading warez, as one can buy (for a fraction of the retail cost) just about anything on the street (and in "reputable" businesses). This problem costs Microsoft much more than the fine.

    1. Re:Piracy by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      In reality, Korea is rife with software piracy -- and I'm not talking about people downloading warez, as one can buy (for a fraction of the retail cost) just about anything on the street (and in "reputable" businesses). This problem costs Microsoft much more than the fine.

      Didn't we go over this yesterday, guys? "Piracy" doesn't hurt Microsoft a bit, quite the contrary. It's like the tobacco companies in the pre-litigation days turning a blind eye to teenagers stealing cigarettes. Yes, you're forgoing a little immediate profit, but you're gaining market share, and one day those punk shoplifter kids will grow up to smoke a pack a day.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    2. Re:Piracy by squidguy · · Score: 1

      Viable logic in other places. Just about everything is pirated in Asia so MS still won't sell anything under such a model.

  47. Agree by PerlPenguin · · Score: 1

    Another thing that has always bothered me with these settlements is that they seem to almost always arbitrarily favor the next 'x' largest companies. So they decided that this company is using it's monopoly powers in an evil way, so they...spread the evil around so that the 'almost monopoly' companies (Sometimes MORE evil IMHO) can get in on the action. i.e. Is the government willing to force Microsoft to put a link to download my new media player product on every Windows desktop?

  48. I don't get it by utnapistim · · Score: 1

    " ... and the second must include links to competitors."

    Isn't that a given if you use IExplorer? I mean ... after a while 'links to competitors' just pop up on your screen.

    --
    Tie two birds together: although they have four wings, they cannot fly. (The blind man)
  49. Basic unbundling isn't anticompetitive, but... by Theovon · · Score: 1

    Microsoft did a lot of things besides bundling that were anticompetitive, like demanding a Windows license fee for every PC sold, regardless of the OS, specifically targetting competitors to put them out of business, charging PC makers more if they dared to sell PC's with another OS, etc. It's this kind of crap that has gotten them (and us) into this fix we're in. We're all suffering because of their bad behavior.

  50. What Microsoft NEED to do by mrRay720 · · Score: 1

    The stupid government decision makers want to be careful how they phrase the judgement here. If I were Microsoft, purely out of spite for such stupid 'punishments' I'd be looking at a way to get away with doing the following:

    5 levels deep in the control panel have a "alternate applications list" menu item. This then opens a page with the following:

    Download rubbish software made by people who have relations with goats here!!!
    http://www.microsoft.com/thecompetition/real/realp layer-v0.5alpha_download
    http://www.microsoft.com/thecompetition/yahoo/yaho omessenger-v0.1beta_download
    etc....

    Well it does what it says - lets them download competing products from the opposition, and if MS did this they'd have my support. Punish an alleged abuse of the open market by further distorting the open market by forcing a company to actively promote their competitiors. Morons.

  51. Why sue Microsoft by Flyboy+Connor · · Score: 1
    ...if you can just fine them.

    Seems like a cool thing to do. Maybe I should also send a letter to Microsoft, stating that I just fined them $40 million, and would they please transfer it to my bank account. Or rather, leave it in cash, small unmarked bills, in the third toilet booth of the restroom facilities of Sleazy Sam's.

  52. Re:How about No? Or have some XP N. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indeed. If I didn't know better,I'd say Microsoft somehow managed to push all the viable competitors out of the marketplace.

  53. You got what's coming to you! by thijsh · · Score: 1

    A lot of people complain about the fact that politicians punish Microsoft for bundling software, and of course this is crazy - doesn't Microsoft have the right (and obligation) to give the end user a complete package so they can do all basic tasks with their computer right out of the box (In fact they already included software like Macromedia Flash with IE).

    But what most people forget is that this is YOUR OWN FAULT. All computer geeks (that's you Slashdot crowd) have been complaining about unfair Microsoft for years now and this is where it will get you. Politicians never understand the heart of any case, they just hear a complaint, and when enough people complain they will take *some* action to save face, they do not care about the consequences of such an action... When there is compaining about unfair competition of Microsoft they will just make sure Microsoft can't bundle their usefull software with Windows. Finally the end user will pay the price, or worse - Microsoft/{insert any company here} will use the precedence of a case like this to get other companies to include their products.

    Long story short: Well done, you got what's coming to you. Complaining to everyone (especially politicians) will NEVER get what you want nor expect.

  54. I demand a new version of windows without... by Xenious · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I demand a new version of windows without the Start button. The word Start is monopilistic and I won't be forced to use it. They should be required to make an alternate version with a Go button.

    If you don't want Windows buy a Mac or install Solaris/Lunix and get over it. Stop the stupid fines and lawsuits. I use quicktime on my Windows box and Media Player doesn't cause me any problems. I use trillian and MSN messenger doesn't cause me any problems. If you don't like the built in products fine install something else.

    --
    -Xen
    1. Re:I demand a new version of windows without... by trollable · · Score: 1
    2. Re:I demand a new version of windows without... by nexxuz · · Score: 1

      There are ways to change the text of the "Start" menu http://www.theeldergeek.com/change_text_on_xp_star t_button.htm but the point is that it you want to you cannot (easily) uninstall those two peices of software (and I want that space back!)

      --
      I love random hex numbers! Just like this one, 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0.
  55. Ok, then.... by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

    I'm sure GM would have no problem with a ruling forcing them to include literature for Vauxhall cars in the glove compartment, considering they already do it!

    http://vauxhall.co.uk/

    Take a look at the bottom right corner:

    Copyright © General Motors Corporation

    Vauxhall is a division of GM, sold in Europe.

    --
    "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    1. Re:Ok, then.... by AccUser · · Score: 1

      My bad.

      I spent so long trying to spell Vauxhall, I missed that little detail... ;-)

      --

      Any fool can talk, but it takes a wise man to listen.

  56. Re:What is acceptable and what isn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You've already been modded flaimbait but Europe != a country!
    Not yet anyway.

  57. Re:Oh god - How to kill a giant by ilovegeorgebush · · Score: 1

    LMAO, nice analogy.
    1.) Steal the underpants
    2.) ???
    3.) Profit
    </southpark>

  58. MS are breaking the law. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's as simple as that.

    MS does have a monopoly and abusing this monopoly is illegal, no matter how often people on /. dispute this simple fact. Apple on the other hand doesn't have a monopoly, so they simply can't abuse it. (Btw., this has been pointed out on /. and other sides thousands of times, why people simply ignore this point is beyond me.)

    Now you are of course free to discuss if MS are really abusing their monopoly, if the remedies against this abuse are the right ones, etc., but please, don't simply ignore basic facts in order to make a point.

    1. Re:MS are breaking the law. by BarryNorton · · Score: 1
      Apple on the other hand doesn't have a monopoly
      Doesn't have a monopoly in the PC market, sure, but look at the way they're already running iTunes.

      If Christmas sales move iPods even closer to giving them a monopoly, then the shoe will be on the other foot...

    2. Re:MS are breaking the law. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I agree with you, I don't like how Apple is running itunes, but I fail to see how this is relevant.

      If they indeed do have/get some kind of monopoly in this market and start to abuse it they should also be held accountible according to the law, nobody is disputing that, so what's your point?

    3. Re:MS are breaking the law. by BarryNorton · · Score: 1
      If they indeed do have/get some kind of monopoly in this market and start to abuse it they should also be held accountible according to the law, nobody is disputing that, so what's your point?
      That they're already demonstrating that kind of behaviour (with the customers they have locked in with iPods), so that if they managed to build a monopoly (on music downloads) abuse would be inevitable.

      In fact I believe any company that grows to be a monopoly, in a capitalist system, will act this way. But we sit back and passively create these monopolies and ask for it to be 'put right' after the fact.

      Now I can see the advantage in moving to one telco, or moving to one hardware standard, or moving to one operating system (all monopolies that had to be broken), but I don't see why the sheep are all out buying (specifically) iPods (rather than MP3 Players) this Christmas...

  59. A far better idea would be a new installer by TractorBarry · · Score: 1

    What would be really nice is for the EU/South Korea etc. to force Microsoft to remove IE out of the core of the OS and to produce an installer that gave you full control over which additional programs you wish to install. That way I could install Windows without having to install all the crap I don't use such as IE, Media Player, Outlook (not to mention the myriad crappy services etc. etc.)

    Personally I have to use Windows on one machine as I use it to run Logic Audio and Sound Forge and it bugs the hell out of me that every time I have to reinstall the bloody OS, or use Windows update, it wants to install all these crappy Microsoft programs/services that I simply don't want.

    Now that would be a useful court decision.

    --
    Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
  60. The owner matters by Brunellus · · Score: 1

    The issue is that Microsoft is using its monopoly on personal computer operating systems to attempt to monopolize the market on applications running on that same operating system.

    Besides, the idea of going after, say, Ubuntu seems pretty silly. First, Ubuntu doesn't have monopoly status that it can abuse to take control of the applications market. Secondly, those application's don't really belong to Ubuntu in any meaningful sense other than that they can run on Ubuntu and they are included with the distribution.

  61. Similar to Real Settlement by cstream_chris · · Score: 1

    So many of you seem to think that Microsoft having to advertise for another firm is a terrible thing, but this is exactly what happened with Real (a real pain in the a$$ if you ask me). Microsoft must pay for $301 Million dollars worth of advertising for Real... Either way, MSFT is out millions of dollars which although you may not think it's significant certainly adds up every year. MSFT having to pay hundreds of millions in the US, millions in the UK, and now millions in Asia, and rewriting code to be "compliant" will begin to have a real impact.

  62. Re:Whats the real issue? CODEC by vettemph · · Score: 1

    >>>Last I looked, Microsoft didn't stop other media players from running on Windows.

    Maybe it is less about the player and more about the encrypted wmv format that is intentionally incompatible with FOSS.

    --
    The government which is strong enough to protect you from everything is strong enough to take everything from you.
  63. Re:Whats the real issue? - Users Want the Bundle by bob2cam · · Score: 1

    The EU's anti-trust settlement with MS included having MS offer a Windows version without the media player bundled. MS complied. The problem, from the EU's point of view, is that no one is buying the unbundled version. Users want the media player and they want it bundled.

    This mirrors a lot what we have found out within the company I work for. When given the choice, 90% of our users simply do not want to get rid of Windows, Office, or the media player.

  64. How about not using Windows? by stormy78 · · Score: 1

    This could all be fixed if they used Linux,. plus they'd save a crapload of money.

  65. This will never sell by Giometrix · · Score: 1

    People don't want stripped out versions, especially for something like a media player and IMing app. If people want to use other products, they're more than free to do so.

    Also, most people get their computers pre-built, which almost always already include alternate products (like AOL [yikes!]). Those that build systems and install Windows on their own presumably would already know about the other products and know how to install them.

    I suppose that leaves systems put together by small shops, though I'd assume the number of those would be quite small.

    If Korea really wanted to rid the country of a software "Monopoly" (I don't hold the view that MS is a mononopoly, not when there are free alternatives), they'd force companies like Dell to sell computers with Linux built pre-installed.

    -Just my 2c

    --
    Download free e-books, lectures, and tutorials at bookgoldmine.com
    1. Re:This will never sell by mgoss · · Score: 1

      I don't hold the view that MS is a mononopoly, not when there are free alternatives

      Just because there are free alternatives doesn't mean that Microsoft can't be a monopoly, although it is starting to get less the case as coungries, schools, businesses, realize they can use things like Ubuntu instead of Windows.

      What I mean to point out, Microsoft can be a monopoly, there's nothing wrong with being a monopoly. It's when being a monopoly hinders any competitors and Microsoft abuses their monopoly that it is a problem. If the whole entire world wants to use one specific product over another, no one is going to stop that monopoly from happening if it is what the people want. Abusive monopolies drown out competetors so they don't have any motivation at improving where they need to, can make ridiculous demands now that everyone is dependant on them, and so on.

      Microsoft has a pretty darn good monopoly in the Desktop market. Thankfully it is lessening a bit here and there as time goes on. The question is, not whether they're a monopoly, but whether they are abusing their monopoly?

  66. Re:How about No? Or have some XP N. by Delphiki · · Score: 1

    The reason isn't having any effect has nothing to do with there being an alternative to Windows. It's because all they're doing is forcing Microsoft to release a product that there is no demand for. Of course nobody is going to buy a product that is just like the regular one but with features that were already optional removed. And a version with links to competitors? That sounds more like a joke than anything else, but whatever..

    --

    Feel free to mod me "-1 - Angry Jerk".

  67. Stupid Gooks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does GM get sued because it puts a GM-developed air conditioner in its cars, not giving you the *choice* of other competitors? When will these morons ever learn? I actually used to think the S Korean gov't as semi-rational egoists. They're just looters like the EU, the Socialist Republic of California, and Mass. Poor MS, getting immolated yet again for being successful.

    1. Re:Stupid Gooks by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Does GM get sued because it puts a GM-developed air conditioner in its cars, not giving you the *choice* of other competitors?"

      Depends: does GM insist that every one of their cars be sold with a GM-branded a/c whether the customer wants one or not? Does GM insist that the a/c is an integral part of the car and the car simply will not run without an a/c? Is the a/c left running even in the dead of winter? Does GM threaten to stop dealing with dealerships that allow customers to remove the GM a/c and/or put in an a/c from a different manufacturer? Will GM threaten to take your car away if you open the hood and try to figure out how to disable the a/c?

      "Poor MS, getting immolated yet again for being successful."

      Yeah, I know. Mussolini got the trains running on time and look what they did to him!

      Nobody here questions that Microsoft is successful. The question is exactly what Microsoft is successful at. The government punishes lots of "successful" people: successful murderers, successful bank robbers, etc.

    2. Re:Stupid Gooks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at the Honda Accord. ALL models come with AC, standard. No way to delete it. Doesn't matter what trim level you get - it's there. Like MediaPlayer - in XP Home, XP Pro, 2K3 Server, etc.

      The car won't run without the AC system, since the AC pulley is required for the serpentine belt to work - without the AC compressor, the belt falls off the engine, and none of the accessories work. Worse than MP.

      The AC will run all the time - the compressor is always turned. If you use defrost or cooling, then it is actively conditioning air; all other settings means it's just passively running, being spun but not actually conditioning air. Like an application pre-installed as the default option - you want to play audio? MP starts by default, but when you're not playing music it's still present, just not active.

      Honda shops will not assist you in removing the AC system and trying to retrofit another manufacturer's AC unit - you have to go to an independent mechanic to do that. Like MS won't help you install RealPlayer.

      Removing the AC system from your Honda will void your warranty; if you screw up the car because you shorted out the electrical system while removing the AC, you have to pay to repair the damage.

      Yeah, I'd say the original poster's comments are right in line... This is just a case for the Korean government to look like it's doing something against "evil MS".

    3. Re:Stupid Gooks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at the Honda Accord. ALL models come with AC, standard. No way to delete it. Doesn't matter what trim level you get - it's there. Like MediaPlayer - in XP Home, XP Pro, 2K3 Server, etc.

      Nobody's requiring you to buy a Honda Accord. You could buy, say, a GM, or an old Triumph, or maybe a Chevy.

      So, what are the alternatives to Windows?

      The car won't run without the AC system, since the AC pulley is required for the serpentine belt to work - without the AC compressor, the belt falls off the engine, and none of the accessories work. Worse than MP.

      So buy a Prelude, or a Chevy, or whatever. You can't really get a viable alternative to Windows.

      The AC will run all the time - the compressor is always turned. If you use defrost or cooling, then it is actively conditioning air; all other settings means it's just passively running, being spun but not actually conditioning air. Like an application pre-installed as the default option - you want to play audio? MP starts by default, but when you're not playing music it's still present, just not active.

      So buy a Prelude, or a Chevy, or whatever. You can't really get a viable alternative to Windows.

      Honda shops will not assist you in removing the AC system and trying to retrofit another manufacturer's AC unit - you have to go to an independent mechanic to do that. Like MS won't help you install RealPlayer.

      So buy a Prelude, or a Chevy, or whatever. You can't really get a viable alternative to Windows.

      Removing the AC system from your Honda will void your warranty; if you screw up the car because you shorted out the electrical system while removing the AC, you have to pay to repair the damage.

      Duh. If you pull your soundcard out, and your computer explodes, you have to pay for repairing the damage, too.

      Yeah, I'd say the original poster's comments are right in line... This is just a case for the Korean government to look like it's doing something against "evil MS".

      Well, they have been convicted of monopolistic practices in several countries. They keep claiming that the monopolistic practices are good business sense, and generally ignore the rulings in various countries. If I were to ignore the law so severely, what would happen to me?
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.

      It's been 62 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment

  68. Re:You know what? I was thinking almost the same.. by Secrity · · Score: 1

    The anology would be be less totally wrong if GM was required to include the names and addresses for other CD player manufacturers in the glove compartment rather than literature for other car makers. GM would also still be able to give away "free" CD players, they just couldn't come factory installed. The issue that hasn't been covered is whether GM would be allowed to provide an "incentive" to dealers that required them to install the "free" GM CD players in all cars sold by the dealer.

  69. M$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    M$

    Stop it.

  70. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least it looks like people are waking up to the fact that they are being scammed by Microsoft! Surely they new their poor quality software and underhand tactics would come back and bit them eventually? Of course, its taken everyone so long to work this out that Microsoft have already had enough money to not care any more. The best thing to do would be to simply close the company down before they can do any more harm. Of course, Microsoft knew this day would come and so have tried to wedge themselves in the door, making it as difficult as possible to close the company. So how about this - imprison Bill Gates et. al and replace the staff? Maybe then we can turn this illicit den of thieves into something worthwhile?

  71. It's The Protocol Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the protocol not the applications. In essence, Microsoft is did the same thing to Real Networks with Windows Media Player that they did to Netscape with Internet Explorer, and to WordPerfect with Word. Microsoft waits for an innovative company to define a new market, and then creates a rival product which it bundles with its operating system for free. Later on, they settle-up for 600 million or so.

    By the way, Microsoft further cut off Real Players air supply by providing streaming media services to business for "free". The same services which Real Networks depended on for it's revenue stream. This forced Real to turn to turn to an ad-based revenue model. So of course, Microsoft is to blame for Real's spyware.

    In today's market the only thing that can compete with Microsoft is free software. This is because there's no "air supply" to cut off. This is a sad state for free enterprise and it's not going to be corrected until we move to open standards. This will finally re-open up the markets which Microsoft destroyed.

    With this in mind, its time for a major grass effort to support Massachusetts in it's bid for ODF. I can't believe Apple Computer and other major companies are not doing more in this regard. I guess the share holders like being locked out of the market.

  72. Not very serious punishment by 4Dmonkey · · Score: 1

    It looks like a joke, because one cant think of punishing someone just for bundling free s/w with the main product. But.... Those who know how difficult it is to remove MP and MSN messenger will agree with the judge. Last time when I tried to remove MP from a freshly installed win2k server ( as it was being used in a super secure app), the mplayer.exe file kept on regenerating, as if by magic. The messenger is also difficult to get rid of, especially for those who dont know regedit or cmd (covers 90% of win users). Order to create links for other products looks even funnier, but I think its just to humiliate MS or to teach them a lesson. Clearly the judge treated MS as a naughty kid.

    --
    God created man in his own image, but somehow he evolved into a hairless monkey.
    1. Re:Not very serious punishment by soulhuntre · · Score: 1

      "the mplayer.exe file kept on regenerating, as if by magic"

      Since you are an admin on a Windows Server, you might reallyw ant to actually look into the technology. The system file protection stuff is very cool and totally controllable. If you want that file gone, just pull it from the protected files directory.

      --
      --> Fight tyranny and repression.... read /. at -1!
  73. I suppose I just can't grasp the issue... by TaggartAleslayer · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that Microsoft is trying to create an "All in one" operating system. A bundle of software that is "all you need" when setting up a new PC. Most PC manufacturers include other options. Musicmatch, AOL IM, Quicktime, etc. These things come pre-installed on many systems. That is how it should be. A PC manufacturer installs the customer's chosen OS. The manufacturer then adds-in software bundles such as AOL, Musicmatch, Apple's iTunes and Quicktime, and the consumer now has alternatives on their system. If the PC manufacturer had not chosen to add the additional bundles, the consumer would have to locate additional software for himself. Where is it Microsoft's duty to supply alternatives? Doesn't the burden lay squarely on the consumer? If Microsoft blocked mention of competing products, or went out of their way to make sure they did not work on a Microsoft OS, then I could see a real problem, but as it is, they are getting fined for bundling free software with their OS? I don't like the idea of having to strip a product to its core to sell it. I like having additional "selling points" bundled in. As a consumer, I choose not to use WM9 as my default video player. That was the choice I made and it took only minutes after initial setup to download and install my preferred player. The install was not hindered in any way by Microsoft, nor did I feel pressured to use WM9 at any point. It is up to the consumer to find their own alternatives. Forcing that product's competitor to do so is beyond reasonable.

    1. Re:I suppose I just can't grasp the issue... by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      The problem is, Microsoft wants an "All-in-one" Microsoft only world. Shouldn't an OEM be able to include Netscape without M$ jacking up the Windows price on them? That kind of crap from M$ is WHY governments are cracking down on bundling.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  74. Nice idea, but... by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

    I'd love to, but I run Linux.

    1. Re:Nice idea, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA aAAAHAHAHAHAH oh you kill me AAHAHAAHAHAH

    2. Re:Nice idea, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You misspelled AAHAHAHAHAHA and aAAAHAHAHAHAH, and you have a lower-case 'a' at the beginning of aAAAHAHAHAHAH.
                                                                   
      ;)

      (Slashdot's lameness filters suck)

  75. Ridiculous I tell you by AviLazar · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I can understand the lawsuits against MS for anti-competative acts such as forcing a computer producer to only use MS products...or to not allow a company access to the necessary data so they can make a competative product for windows. (i.e. a competative browser).

    Maybe China should fine MS for bundeling "ipconfig" with windows. Better yet, they should fine MS for bundeling "notepad" with windows. This sueing for bundling crap is retarded. All that will happen is companies selling stripped down software, for the same price as non-stripped software and then the customer has to buy the add-ons. So now if I want notepad with my windows (which I do), I have to pay an additional $49.99

    These guys need to stop being stupid. The competitors need to just make a product that is better then the bundeled software.

    And 32 million? is the emperor of china trying to get a bigger bonus this year? At how much MS makes in two weeks (last i heard it was 250 million every two weeks) - this is not much of a slap in the face. Can MS fine China for all the hacking that goes on in there?

    --

    I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    1. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by Digital11 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      1. South Korea... Not China.
      2. How hard is it to spell bundle for fuck's sake?

      --
      I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
    2. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      Maybe China should fine MS for bundeling "ipconfig" with windows. Better yet, they should fine MS for bundeling "notepad" with windows. This sueing for bundling crap is retarded.

      All of these companies are just following the lead of the US government. With that precedent, these countries and unions can engage in corporate piracy to impose additional taxes against an American company, and to attempt to hobble it to help their own home-brewed competitors, and there is little the US can say to appeal this (given that Microsoft was found to be a monopoly in the US).

    3. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by kyouteki · · Score: 1

      And by China, you mean South Korea, right? Pig.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    4. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by Ed+Avis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The problem isn't caused by what Microsoft do, it's caused by what they stop others from doing. Microsoft can make a version of Windows with MSN Messenger built in, but I can't make a version of Windows with a Jabber client and sell it in stores or online. Forcing Microsoft to produce some token version without MSN Messenger won't have any effect.

      The marketplace could be made more competitive while still keeping copyright on software. Microsoft could set a fixed price, say $80, for Windows and you could buy a copy at that price. But any third party would be free to take Windows, add their own features and resell it. Obviously Microsoft would still have to get their $80 so this 'Windows plus' might sell for $100. This would make the software market a bit more like other markets, where it's quite legal to buy a car or a house, modify it and resell it.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    5. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      All of these companies are just following the lead of the US government. With that precedent, these countries and unions can engage in corporate piracy to impose additional taxes against an American company, and to attempt to hobble it to help their own home-brewed competitors, and there is little the US can say to appeal this (given that Microsoft was found to be a monopoly in the US).

      Like i said I can understand if they want to fine them for forcing hardware companies to ONLY utilize windows products in their OEM products. I can understand if they are fining MS for not giving a company an opportunity to make a product to work on Windows because it is competative. Actually I do not agree with these, but I understand where they are coming from....but to sue them for having a utility already built in? I am telling you, one day MS is gonna get pissed off, and sell us Windows in a stripped down version and before you know it - to get the same functionality as we have now, you will have to pay an extra $1k.

      I used to like Netscape...and then 4.7 was replaced by the next version which sucked. Netscape forced me to go to IE, which I hated at the time. I use FireFox now. I like windows media player. I can't stand realplayer or winamp. I like notepad. I like defrag. I like all the stuff that comes with my windows - in fact I hate when third party applications (i.e. Free McAfee trial) comes with it. If I wanted McAfee on my computer I would buy it. At least when I buy windows I know it should come with Media player...I have no idea it is going to come with a free trial to XYZ product - which 95% of the time I end up deleting.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    6. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      Apparantly it's very hard to spell. Or maybe I didn't care enough on such an informal medium.

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    7. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Hmm, I'm saddened to here this type of logic. Not that I endorse the people/companies that sue another company just because the lawsuit is over what is mild change to the defendant, but there is another, to me, more logical way to look at this. I'll take a stripped down version of Windows. I do enjoy the widespread support of its infrastructure. The hardware to software operation is very successful, and best of all you don't have to compile your own kernels and other fun things of this nature.

      On the other hand, I like to be in control of my own bells and whistles. Combine that with how lazy I am and you have yourself a recipe for - not getting other software. i.e. MS installs MSN Messenger - I've no need to go get Yahoo! Messenger or AIM, MS installs Disk Defragmenter(worst disk defragmenter I've known of) - I've less motivation to purchase Perfect Diskeeper.

      What you seem to be suggesting by, "The competitors need to just make a product that is better than the bundeled software," is that Mozilla or the makers of Perfect Diskeeper need to make an entire operating system comparable to Windows that comes preinstalled with there software. Otherwise, MS is lowering the market capability in all those bundled software's markets.

      Most importantly, this is the most humorous quote I've seen in a long time.

        - (i.e. a competative browser)
      Internet Explorer... a competitive browser?
      Now, that is some of the best, unforeseen irony I've ever seen. Sardonic!

    8. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "hear" is that I meant.

    9. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by estebanf · · Score: 0

      well.. you can't sell windows, as you are not microsoft... but you could sell unnatended installation scripts that bundle the installation with all the software , drivers, settings you want. You could even remove microsoft software like wordpad or media player from those scritps... use http://unattended.msfn.org/ as a start to build your own installation.

      --
      DON'T STEAL MUSIC!
    10. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by quanticle · · Score: 1

      Computer companies already do this. For example, when I bought my laptop, HP added Intervideo WinDVD player, so that I could watch DVDs (functionality not available on the standard Windows Media Player). At the moment, there's nothing stopping me from bundling Windows with whatever other software I want to and selling it.

      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    11. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oups you apparently did it again...

    12. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by Craster · · Score: 1

      Yes you can - just be an OEM.

    13. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by lowrydr310 · · Score: 1
      Better yet, they should fine MS for bundeling "notepad" with windows.

      I was thinking the same thing. Even more relevant - why doesn't South Korea sue Apple for bundling Quicktime with their OS?

    14. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      1. True. Were China to try to force de-bundling, they'd meet resistence from their own CD copy scam industry who wants a tightly bundled product to copy.

      2. Although "for fuck's sake" is technically correct, one might better write "for fucking's sake".

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    15. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by crimperman · · Score: 1

      "hear" is that I meant.

      "what" is what you meant as well

    16. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no no no... he said China, not the USA!

    17. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by AviLazar · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same thing. Even more relevant - why doesn't South Korea sue Apple for bundling Quicktime with their OS?

      Don't they bundle iTunes with Apple OS...and doesn't iTunes allow you to buy ONLY from Apple Store? I mean, if that is not anti-competative I don't know what is "yes you can buy 99 cent music...but ONLY from us."

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    18. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I didn't realise that Apple were selling MP3s to more than 90% of the market, and nobody else could. When did that happen?

    19. Re:Ridiculous I tell you by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      As an OEM, you can only modify Windows with Microsoft's permission and add things they approve of. If they don't like what you're bundling they can cut off your supply of licences (see Microsoft's threat to IBM that they could 'buy it retail') or raise the price they charge you for a copy of Windows by $40, putting a big hole in your profit margin or even wiping it out.

      There would only be real competition if the price of Windows were fixed for all market participants, instead of being set by arm-twisting deals between Microsoft and individual OEMs.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  76. Re:Whats the real issue? - Users Want the Bundle by fymidos · · Score: 1

    >Users want the media player and they want it bundled.

    I'm pretty sure that they would like photoshop bundled as well, what's your point? If they cost the same, naturally anyone will choose the most for his money.

    The problem is not the software, the problem is monopoly: Since microsoft has 95% of the desktop market, bundling media player with windows is, apparently, illegal. There are laws about such things, it's not a decision based on user surveys ....

    --
    Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
  77. This isn't like NASCAR.. by Tominva1045 · · Score: 1



    This isn't like NASCAR where everyone is supposed to have the same strictly-laid-out set of guidelines.

    Proprietary software products can give an edge that can generate earnings to make customers and shareholders happy. That's the purpose of a corporation.

    This Korean ruling is like telling Ford Motor Company that their Shelby line of cars MUST have little rubber magnets with pictures of alternative sports cars affixed to their dashboards.

    --
    Cogito Ergo Sum
    1. Re:This isn't like NASCAR.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't like NASCAR where everyone is supposed to have the same strictly-laid-out set of guidelines.

      I don't think that's right. I'm pretty sure there's this set of rules that companies have to play by. I believe they call it "the Law."

      Proprietary software products can give an edge that can generate earnings to make customers and shareholders happy. That's the purpose of a corporation.

      Yup, sure is. I'm pretty sure it's idiotic of people to want the entire world to adopt, say, Linux, as their primary OS. I think a fantastic middle ground would involve some using Linux, some using Mac, some using Windows, some using BeOS, some using BSD... you know, pretty much everybody using whatever they want to use.

      This Korean ruling is like telling Ford Motor Company that their Shelby line of cars MUST have little rubber magnets with pictures of alternative sports cars affixed to their dashboards.

      Well, that would be a great analogy, except that Ford aren't a convicted monopolist and don't control 90% of the world's desktop computers, so it's more like Korea telling, oh, I don't know, someone who controls 90% of the world's desktop computers that they're not allowed to use illegal means to leverage their multimedia software onto everyone's desktops.

  78. Nonsense (Was Re:Ridiculous) by Billosaur · · Score: 1
    It makes perfect sense, when you take into account Microsoft is being punished here. If you follow the law, you don't have to advertise for your competitors. You break the law, you suffer the consequences.

    Microsoft being punished? Getting free publicity? Yes, that's pretty severe all right.

    So what if Windows Messenger comes bundled? You don't have to use it! You can open your favorite web-browser (or IE, since that too comes bundled with Windows!) and download AIM or Yahoo! IM or IRC or whatever your favorite program is, and run that instead. Microsoft has not made it impossible for you to make other choices; they simply hand you their messaging software and say "here it is if you want it." The don't block links to the others, they don't make it so Windows will not install them, and they certainly don't launch DDoS against their competitors when you try to download them.

    This is just the same argument that fanatical groups against violence on TV and pornography use. They seem to think there's someone with a gun to my head making me do things that are bad for me. They're not! I have a choice. And if I don't want to watch something, I can turn the TV off. Same principle applies here.

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
    1. Re:Nonsense (Was Re:Ridiculous) by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Previously users would have gone to google to look for an instant messaging client, now they don`t bother because there's already one installed..
      Same with a browser, users would typically have recieved a browser on CD when they signed up with an ISP, nowadays they don't bother because they already have one.
      The average user doesn't realise how inferior or insecure the default ones are, they simply don't want the hassle of finding a better replacement.
      Also, since you can't easily remove the default programs, they're still there to nag the user into using them constantly, and some will have an attitude against wasting space by installing an alternative and still having the default program installed.
      And finally, microsoft prevents OEM's from bundling competing apps, remember when you could buy a new computer with netscape preinstalled? microsoft put a stop to that.
      And before the coments start, bundling on linux is different, there are multiple distributions of linux with different bundled apps and coming from different vendors.. What microsoft is doing would be more like linus bundling apps with the kernel, linux distributors are closer in function to the OEM's building systems and preinstalling windows.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  79. ms 'poor'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone who describes MS as 'poor', figure-of-speach or not, has a very warped view of reality

  80. There's much PROFIT in BUNDLING! by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

    People are looking at this in the wrong way.

    Microsoft is not offering its apps for no profit when it exclusively bundles them with Windows.

    Bundling has more of a purpose than giving nice free things to end users, and making it easier for them.

    Microsoft adds new middleware for various reasons:

    1) To encourage end-users to upgrade.
    2) To make its applications become standard on Windows Desktops.
    3) To enforce Microsoft's proprietary file formats/protocols.
    4) To gain dominance (i.e. Netscape)

    Note: with Netscape Microsoft could have sold IE at a profit, but ignored this lucrative market in favor of dominance and full control of what is supported. Microsoft added its own JRE instead of Suns, and Microsoft polluted this to cripple platform-dependance.

  81. Next up... by Pliep · · Score: 1

    ... lawsuit to keep MS from bundling Notepad.exe. People need a choice, MS is forcing the world to use Notepad.exe!

  82. MS by certel · · Score: 1

    And so it begins. Others will follow in the suit. I do feel somewhat sorry, though, because it is MS software and they can do what they please. Company's need to contribute more to the OS market.

    1. Re:MS by gagypsy02 · · Score: 1

      Actually, this could be a win-win situation..New Orleans sues Microsoft...pays school teachers...students graduate..join Microsoft...

  83. Support by Nightspirit · · Score: 1

    One of the problems with bundling 3rd party apps is support. Right now, if someone buys a copy of XP and has a problem with windows media player, they can call MS, and might get it fixed (MS support has been quite helpful for me in the past, but who knows). With 3rd party apps people are going to call MS, MS is going to tell them it is a problem with real player (and to call them), real player is going to tell them it is a problem with windows and to call MS, and users hate this shit. Companies always want to load off their problems onto another company. People are also going to see these 3rd party apps as "windows software" regardless if they are 3rd party, and you never know what the support for these companies is going to be down the road. If these 3rd parties end up with shit support, it is just going to make MS look bad. The issue is control, and with bundling of 3rd party apps, MS loses control over support. Heck, I used to consider realplayer spyware, and I'd hate to have it bundled if I pay for an OS. As a user, I expect my OS to come with a media player. I may not use WMP (I prefer j.river), but it should come with that functionality. The only issue I see is they should make it easier to remove (permanently) messenger and media player. (Are distributers like DELL and HP not allowed to [or foreced by MS not to] bundle 3rd party apps? I remember last time I bought a compaq it came with a bunch of useless crap bundled, like musticmatch demos). Linux doesn't have this problem because the free distros don't have mainstream support. Sure, they have forums and IRC, but for the non-tech this can be intimidating. Grandma can't just call up Ubuntu (actually, she can, for a nominal fee of $100, but few people are going to pay this for tech support that may or may not help).

  84. Support (correct formatting) by Nightspirit · · Score: 1

    Whoops, sorry about that. Correct formatting below:

    One of the problems with bundling 3rd party apps is support. Right now, if someone buys a copy of XP and has a problem with windows media player, they can call MS, and might get it fixed (MS support has been quite helpful for me in the past, but who knows).

    With 3rd party apps people are going to call MS, MS is going to tell them it is a problem with real player (and to call them), real player is going to tell them it is a problem with windows and to call MS, and users hate this shit. Companies always want to load off their problems onto another company.

    People are also going to see these 3rd party apps as "windows software" regardless if they are 3rd party, and you never know what the support for these companies is going to be down the road. If these 3rd parties end up with shit support, it is just going to make MS look bad. The issue is control, and with bundling of 3rd party apps, MS loses control over support. Heck, I used to consider realplayer spyware, and I'd hate to have it bundled if I pay for an OS.

    As a user, I expect my OS to come with a media player. I may not use WMP (I prefer j.river), but it should come with that functionality.

    The only issue I see is they should make it easier to remove (permanently) messenger and media player. (Are distributers like DELL and HP not allowed to [or foreced by MS not to] bundle 3rd party apps? I remember last time I bought a compaq it came with a bunch of useless crap bundled, like musticmatch demos).

    Linux doesn't have this problem because the free distros don't have mainstream support. Sure, they have forums and IRC, but for the non-tech this can be intimidating. Grandma can't just call up Ubuntu (actually, she can, for a nominal fee of $100, but few people are going to pay this for tech support that may or may not help).

  85. Konfabulator by Frankie70 · · Score: 1


    he Apple market share is small, so there is less incentive for competitors to develop alternative products to Apple's own OS, media player, etc. Unlike Microsoft, Apple does not need to do anything to stymie or eliminate competition.


    What about the Konfabulator/Dashboard story?

  86. I want my part! by vrta · · Score: 1

    I fine Microsoft $10.000... no lets make it $13.320!

    --
    Why don't sheep shrink when it rains?
    1. Re:I want my part! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fine Microsoft $10.000... no lets make it $13.320!

      You are fining a giant corporation and the best you can do is ten bucks?

  87. Pass me that crack pipe when you're done. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course, there are cross platform solutions:

    Ajax,
    Only for webapps. And even then it's not necessarily going to be cross-browser, depending on what you're doing with it. You don't write cross-platform applications by making a web site.

    That's an entirely different category.

    OpenGL,
    Ha! OpenGL support is so varied this is a joke. And it's getting more and more difficult to even come up with video drivers for Windows that include OpenGL; it once fairly recently took me a week to find an appropriate version of ForceWare.

    And even when you can get OpenGL from your card's vendor, who knows what version it is... They tend to be lagging behind compared to Linux and Mac OS X.

    Java...
    Java applications still suck, even on modern systems with scads of RAM.

    They don't behave like native applications.

    Functionality you get for free with native applications is either missing or doesn't behave properly.

    As a developer, when my choice is between "Application for one platform that works beautifully on one platform" and "Application for all platforms that falls short on all of them," I know what my choice will be.

    even dotNet once mono gets up to speed.
    You probably mean C# here... "dotNet" is an incredibly nebulous term, and if you're working with, say, C (which Mono doesn't even support and won't in the near future), you're going to spend a hell of a lot of time dealing with endianness and oddities in the ways some platforms interpret code.

    But we're still left with the fact that not ever platform has every UI widget, so you end up with essentially three choice, all of which suck:
    1. Rip out the portions you can't make cross-platform
    2. Draw a custom widget that's ugly on every platform or all but one of them
    3. Use ugly, non-native widgets on every platform ... And none of this is even touching on the fact that the Macintosh, Windows, and various X UIs all have very different interface standards. Mac users, for example, will smell a direct Windows port from a mile away and trash it -- it doesn't work right; it doesn't fit with everything else on their system. Windows users won't possibly know what to do without yet another task tray icon that pops up help bubbles every ten seconds (well, this one's sarcastic, but the rest of my argument is serious).

    If you want to see how elegant cross-platform can be and has been for years, open up Notepad, MSN Messenger, Word, and Internet Explorer. There's not a UI commonality between the lot of them. Notepad is still stuck in the 80s. But they're all supposedly part of the same system.

    Do you really want every application on your system to be that divergent in terms of UI? That's invariably what happens.

  88. Why do they care? by Saint+V+Flux · · Score: 0

    Why does South Korea or anyone else care if an OS comes with software to run media and for IM? Most people out there would be pissed if they got an OS that didn't do those things right out of the box (literal or metaphorical box). Really, is it that hard to go *click-click* and get Real Player or iTunes or whatever media player you want? It takes about 2 minutes to find, download, install, and set up AIM. Hell, there are even ways to remove Windows Messenger (I hate that damn thing) -- takes 20 seconds.......maybe less. So basically, the lawsuits are because people are too damn lazy to take 5 minutes to customize their OS after they install it.

  89. Stop the distros comparation by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

    Remember that MS is being punished by monopoly abuse. When a single distro gets 90+% of the OS market, you can start asking that question. And, by then, the answer will be: Yes, that distro shoud get nailed and oblied to bundle extra software any time that is hurts someone.

    But wait... You can bundle extra software with any distro you want! I forgot, I am comparing apples with oranges here...

  90. Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone else find this ironic given the charges against the South Korean government several years back for illegaly subsidizing Hynix?

  91. Wrong Korea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know if you're trying to be funny or if you're simply stupid.

    There are two (2) Koreas:
    1. Good Korea, also know as South Korea/Han'guk (high tech democratic republic)
    2. Bad Korea, so called People's republic of North Korea (evil "communist" dictator)

  92. Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So how does Apple get away with bundling all of its software with the OS? This seems to me much more anti-competitive behaviour than Microsofts much of the time.

    1. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because at present time, Apple does not have 90 plus percent of the desktop market. Should it ever attain that figure, you will undoubtably see lawsuits similiar to those against Microsoft.

    2. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other words, Apple gets away with it because they don't really matter.

  93. And the first thing consumers will ask is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the first thing consumers will ask is... How do I install Media Player and IM?

    Oh well, I guess it's good for the SK government. Pointless or just a hassle for everybody else. They would be better off just levying a special tax against MS. It would be more in line with reality, more honest.

    1. Re:And the first thing consumers will ask is... by crimperman · · Score: 1
      And the first thing consumers will ask is... How do I install Media Player and IM?


      I doubt they'll ask for a specific app - they'll more likely ask - "how do I play my music files and do that contacting people instantly thingy?" at which point their helpful techie/support person will tell them how to download and install one (of a range) or how to install one of the bundled (but NOT installed) ones.
  94. Get a life by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    I mean, this is rediculous, governments forcing companies to amend their products.

    I am getting tired of the constand MS bashing. They are trying to create a product that is easy to use, and has all the features users need in today's OS. Security, media playback, and email/messaging are all features most users want in an OS. Most of MS's competitors don't offer as easy to use or feature rich products as MS has in the box, but even then, there are countless free and retail products that compete against MS OS features, all people have to do is look for them. This whole idea that customers are being tied down and forced to use MS products is rediculous and unfounded. MS has always supported competition, it IS and OS where you can install whatever software you like.

    I am also tired of the double standard against MS. Apple installs iChat, iTunes, iPhoto, iMac, iDVD, Safari, Front Row, and a slew of other built-in features. Why isn't Apple being targeted by the EU and South Korea as well for anti-competitive behaviour. In the OSX market, few users are generally looking for solutions outside the many Apple offers pre-installed on every Mac computer, Apple at least has the benefit of creating OS add-ins that people want. Look at Linux and the fact countless gigabytes of GNU shareware is installed automatically by most distributions. It is actually confusing and difficult NOT to install a slew of utilities through most Linux installs.

    I don't understand why MS simply doesn't tell the EU and South Korea to F*ck off. I mean, MS should at least make them aware that other competitor products like OSX and Linux don't have the same restrictions, and that if they insist on suing MS, then ALL OS'es sold in South Korea or the EU should have NO built-in functionality other then a file system.

    In any regard, make a product that excels past what MS build into their OS, and people will get it and install it, government forcing consumers to buy a product devoid of features imposes on the rights of consumers to make their own choice about the products they can and can't buy.

    Governments should keep their noses out of it.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    1. Re:Get a life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple has software that doesn't come with it? Wow! I thought they didn't get sued because nothing existed on it -except- what came with it!

    2. Re:Get a life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoa! Your first paragraph sounds like a cut and paste from a MS press release.

      I am also tired of the double standard against MS. Apple installs iChat, iTunes, iPhoto, iMac, iDVD, Safari, Front Row, and a slew of other built-in features. Why isn't Apple being targeted by the EU and South Korea as well for anti-competitive behaviour.

      Ummm... I don't know. Perhaps it's because Apple does not have a monopoly let alone guilty of abusing it? In case you are stupid and not an MS shill, yes, there is a "double standard" once you obtain a monopoly. There are things a monopoly is not allowed to do that other companies can do.

      Governments should keep their noses out of it.

      So you prefer to be at the mercy of abusive monopolistic companies?

    3. Re:Get a life by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      I am getting tired of the constand MS bashing.

      MS is breaking the law. Just because you don't understand the laws, or the purpose for the laws, or the concepts of monopoly and bundling does not mean you should spout off a bunch of uninformed crap. Why don't you actually read a little bit about monopolies so that you can understand what the rest of us are talking about?

      I am also tired of the double standard against MS.

      Please look up the term "monopoly" in the dictionary. Some laws apply only to monopolies, for good reason. The laws apply the same to everyone. If Apple every gains a monopoly, they will apply to them just as much. MS knew the laws before they broke them, they are just betting the cost in fines and settlements will be less than the profit. They chose to be fined like this as part of their business plan. There is no reason to feel sorry for them over it. Thus far they have been right.

      I don't understand why MS simply doesn't tell the EU and South Korea to F*ck off. I mean, MS should at least make them aware that other competitor products like OSX and Linux don't have the same restrictions, and that if they insist on suing MS, then ALL OS'es sold in South Korea or the EU should have NO built-in functionality other then a file system.

      MS does not want to lose huge markets for them to sell into. MS does not want competitors to get funding by selling into markets it abandons. MS executives do not want to go to jail and have all their assets seized for breaking the law and then violating court orders. Having no built in functionality other than the core OS would be great for the industry and users. Imagine if each OEM (Dell, HP, Lenova, etc.) got to choose what browser to install on the computers they sell without interference from MS. The majority would probably choose something other than IE, with more features and more security. End users would have a better experience and be safer. Web page authors could code to standards instead of making multiple versions of each page. Internet Explorer might even finally get some of the improvements and features that have been in all other browsers for years as an incentive for OEMs to ship it. Heck your post would probably even be spell checked since that feature would be in your default browser. I think the EU, S. Korea, and end users would all be much happier with that situation. I know I would be.

      In any regard, make a product that excels past what MS build into their OS, and people will get it and install it, government forcing consumers to buy a product devoid of features imposes on the rights of consumers to make their own choice about the products they can and can't buy.

      Governments aren't forcing anything on consumers, just on the seller. The government has not said you can't buy Windows bundled with Explorer, bundled with a chat program, just that MS can't sell it that way to retailers. When a company that has a monopoly bundles other products with that monopoly, the market loses all the benefits of capitalism. There is no free market price, no or advancement due to the benefits of competition. Also, it allows that company to expand the monopoly into (eventually) all other markets. That is why pretty much every country in the world makes it illegal for monopolies to bundle products.

      Governments should keep their noses out of it.

      If governments did not regulate monopolies you'd still be renting your telephone from Ma Bell, and the internet would not exist. Intel would have a monopoly on computers, and Windows would not exist. The laws apply the same to everyone and exist for a good reason. I take it you never took even a basic economics course?

  95. S. Korea fights anti-competitive practices... by bombadier_beetle · · Score: 1

    ... when they're being committed by non-Korean companies, that is.

    --

    If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.
  96. And if I was Microsoft... by David+Horn · · Score: 1

    I'd simply stick two fingers up at the South Korean government and dare them to pull Windows from the shelves. While most /. readers would feel this is a good thing, could you imagine the uproar from business and government when they discover that they can no longer install MS software on their machines?

    Reality is, it's not going to hurt MS at all.

    --
    PocketGamer.org - For the gamer on the go!
    1. Re:And if I was Microsoft... by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      'd simply stick two fingers up at the South Korean government and dare them to pull Windows from the shelves. While most /. readers would feel this is a good thing, could you imagine the uproar from business and government when they discover that they can no longer install MS software on their machines?

      There would be no uproar. The new CEO of Microsoft Korea who took over for the old on, rotting in jail for contempt of court, would comply with the court order. You can bluster all you like, but the minute you directly contravene publicly visible court orders the government has to act. You are directly challenging their authority and if they don't toss you in jail, they are screwed. Only an idiot would put them in that position and not expect to go to jail. Hell, they could go down to the MS Korea offices and tell each person in the chain of command to comply and drag off any who refuse. For that matter they could temporarily appoint a new CEO for that branch.

  97. We all accept that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MS Window is the defacto OS nowadays and that if MS installs MSN and WMP in Windows by default leads to more people using it, but they definitely can do that. What they cant do is HIDE the uninstaller or making it really difficult to unninstall this apps. Or forcing MSN (msnmsgs) to be running in memory without even u knowing it (I hate it). If the MS install and uninstall program was a bit more flexible and accurate nothing of this will happen. And "unninstall" doesnt mean throw the desktop link to the garbage. ;)

  98. If I were Microsoft... by patio11 · · Score: 1

    ... on installation of Windows XP: Korean edition I'd pop up a message that said "The functionality of the operating system you just purchased has been crippled on the orders of the Korean legal system. You are still allowed to freely upgrade to a non-crippled version of the operating system by clicking the link placed on your desktop entitled 'Completing Installation' and following the onscreen instructions, or by clicking on the web link entitled 'How To Replicate the Full Functionality of A Western Windows Installation Using Third Party Software To Fill Holes Mandated By the Legal System'. We apologize for the inconvinence."

    1. Re:If I were Microsoft... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oops, you misspelled

      "Due to our illegal monopolistic practices, of which we have been previously convicted by different countries, we have been required to cut out the offending parts of Windows."

      You'll also need to throw in: "If you want to join us, just click here and tell us your credit card number, and your Windows registration number. If you don't, you may click here, and download a competing product."

      Honestly, do you expect them to foot the bill for all that bandwidth for free?

  99. Re:How about No? Or have some XP N. by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

    The reason this isn't having any effect is because there's no real alternative to Windows.

    None of the courts, thus far, have made any punishments even designed to break up MS's OS monopoly. If the courts wanted to fix the problem of an abusive OS monopoly, they could certainly do so. It is easy, split the company in five parts (just like they did with AT&T). MS service, MS OS 1, MS OS 2, MS Applications 1, MS Applications 2. Both OS companies have equal rights to all the source code developed to date as well as half the dev team. They are forbidden from colluding with any other MS company and watched by an oversight group. Both applications companies have equal rights to the source to the applications yada yada. Poof! Instant competition.

    All the rulings so far have been weak attempts at keeping MS from extending their monopoly into other areas such as media distribution, instant messaging, internet services, etc. That is all well and good, but just not enough when dealing with a company whose business model is built upon breaking the law and assuming the fines and settlements will be smaller than the profits.

    No matter how many times someone reports that the current year is the year of Linux, there's no indication that it will be the year of Linux. And there's no indication that Linux will gain a strong position in the desktop marketplace anytime soon.

    That is because the courts have never addressed MS's OS monopoly and done nothing about its anti-competative contracts that exclude competition on pre-installed OEM machines. Linux could compete just fine if it was purchasable, pre-installed on computers in the stores, and retailers would like to sell that way, but are forbidden from so doing because of MS's differential pricing that allows them to immediately crush any vendor that sells computers that way.

    So no matter how many lawsuits are brought against Microsoft, there's no real alternative for your average Joe.

    Well, it funnels some money away from MS to hopefully better causes and raises the price of Windows, which hopefully opens more of a market for low-end competition. Also, just because no government has implemented an effective solution against MS does not mean it can't be done. It certainly can be done. If MS OS company 1 and MS OS company 2 both have to renegotiate with Dell, do you think Dell will accept the same prices/features? Hell no, they will go with whichever company gives them the better price/feature set. This would drive both companies to have to try to sell cheaper and/or with more features the end user wants. It also ends MS's power over the OEM manufacturers. MS OS company 1 can't threaten to raise prices if Dell sells Linux since Dell can just buy a similar product from MS OS company 2, thus it opens the floor to competition from Linux and any other OS. Competition is good for consumers and the industry, if only the courts would actually enforce the bloody law, things could be better for the average Joe, as you put it.

    Please note, I am not in any way complaining about this particular remedy. South Korea knows US politicians would make life difficult if they tried to actually fix the problem with such a large, influential US company. The first judge who ruled in the US ordered them split up, but a lot of bribes, err lobbying, changed that in a hurry. I blame the corrupt US government that no longer answers to the people.

  100. Imagine by quokkapox · · Score: 5, Funny
    Imagine a world where people did not inevitably resort to car analogies when trying to make a point about computers.

    Over the weekend I parked my car next to a shady-looking minivan at the supermarket. I thought I locked the door, but ever since it's been driving itself around constantly, flyering windshields across the neighborhood with V14GRA ads and DDOS-ing the handicapped spaces...

    --
    it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
  101. yes, ms has nothing to do with this process... by wardk · · Score: 1

    I think your analogy is off by one level. MS isn't the manufacturer, MS is a supplier

    So they don't write Window is what you are saying?

    Writing the system IS manufacturing. burning and packaging is just a later step in the manufacturing process.

    we'd all be better off if MS just took their ball and went home. but then what would the minions use?

    1. Re:yes, ms has nothing to do with this process... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think your analogy is off by one level. MS isn't the manufacturer, MS is a supplier

      So they don't write Window is what you are saying?

      Writing the system IS manufacturing. burning and packaging is just a later step in the manufacturing process.

      we'd all be better off if MS just took their ball and went home. but then what would the minions use


      I think they were saying the analogy should not be Windows=car but Computer=Car and Windows=car component. In that analogy, MS would be the manufacturer of the t(y|i)res, the OEM is the car manufacturer (who chooses what t(y|i)res to put on it and the dealer is the computer store (some manufacturers sell direct just as some OEM's do).

      I'll agree with your last point though :o)
  102. Money grab by vandenh · · Score: 1

    Ok.. this has nothing to do with pro/anti MS tactics but doesn't it feel like lots of companies/countries are just using MS as an easy money grab?

    Nobody complains about this because everybody seems to agree that packing in stuff in Windows is bad... but shouldn't countries do something about it instead of just grabbing some easy money??? Put their money where their mouth is?

  103. Windows? What's Windows? by Shazow · · Score: 1, Funny

    Oh shit, you mean to tell me that there was an alternative to Unix this whole time?!

    Omg omg, where do I go about getting this Windows thing of yours?

    [/joke] :D

    - shazow

    1. Re:Windows? What's Windows? by Surye · · Score: 0, Troll

      [/joke] :D Oh shit, you mean to tell me that this was a joke this whole time?! Omg omg, where do I go about getting this sense of humor thing of yours? [/joke] :D - Surye

    2. Re:Windows? What's Windows? by moro_666 · · Score: 1

      Windows is just product of Microsoft, you seem to forget that they sell office productivity tools (which are not productive), they sell web serving software (which doesnt really serve so well), the sell database software (which is disgarded as non portable solution by clients), they sell embedded stuff for handhelds plus they have zillion things i can't count up here.

      Get the big picture: microsoft doesn't want you to buy windows today because they are having this troublecampaign in south korea, they are aiming at the point that you think about microsoft tonight and that you do the same tomorrow when you review this post of yours and you think about when they talk about the news again after 3 months going "oh that's what i commented on slashdot". This is what they want you to do. Not to buy windows or office tools right away, they want you to think about microsoft when you are thinking about computers.

      You're going exactly into the hole where microsoft want's you to be. And that is kindof sad.

      You try to slash the big fellow with a sword, but he turns it around and makes it a commercial ....

      ps. for the windows troll above, the fact that 95 people out of 100 use windows, doesn't in any way bend the fact that i have used only linux and sometimes freebsd for the last 5 years. and i dont miss the blue screens, viruses and spyware all that much to turn back any time soon. so everyone doesnt use windows.

      --

      I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
  104. Re:REAL competition by symbolic · · Score: 1


    Make Microsoft ship Windows with an option to install Linux.

  105. Actually by tacokill · · Score: 1

    They have about $40 billion in cash. $40bil @ $1mil per day = approx 40,000 days. Or 109 years.

    And just for comparison, $40bil IN THE BANK - Cash - is a HUGE amount. Even when comparing with the likes of Exxon, Wal-Mart, etc. As far as I know, it has the largest coffers of any (publicly traded) company. By a lot.

    There are some large private companies where we have no idea how much cash they have. Koch Industries comes to mind. Cargill too.

    1. Re:Actually by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Right. Because that 40 Billion is stashed under a mattress, not earning any return.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    2. Re:Actually by kfg · · Score: 1

      $40bil IN THE BANK

      Lend me a mere $10 billion. I'll do nothing with it other than put it in the bank. I'll pay you back at $365 million a year.

      I'll live in luxury "forever" without ever touching one penny of the orginal $10 billion.

      Microsoft works it's money a bit harder than that.

      KFG

  106. Microsoft should go ahead and do it by ccccc · · Score: 1

    Microsoft should go ahead and sell the new version for $0.02 less than the full version. Nobody would buy it, and they would still be in compliance.

  107. Easy solution for M$ by angelasmark · · Score: 1

    Pay the fine... Make the new versions of windows... Make sure said versions of windows can't launch starcraft or warcraft 3.... Said versions of windows never get installed once anywhere in Korea... As a side note.... did the Korean government not notice how well removing media player helped things in the EU?

  108. competitors by ReDiLect · · Score: 1

    "and the second must include links to competitors." How many competitors would they have to include then? all of them?

  109. Exactly right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The User.

    I know I have Quicktime, Mediaplayer, DVDExpress, Mplayer, and even Real. If I want something specific, there's nominal effort in obtaining it. But out of the box, a modern OS should know what common media files are and be able to render them to the user. That's what computers are for, rendering data to the user, and accepting data to process from the user. Unless my textbooks are wrong, of course.

    Microsoft should respond by killing all Korean support in windows, and preventing all of Korea from getting updates while viciously enforcing their copyrights and patents in Korean courts. Its not like anyone in Korea pays for software anyway. Throw them under the bus.

    1. Re:Exactly right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The User.

      I'm impressed. Folks, we have a new level of "I didn't read the previous posts," but then, this IS Slashdot, and this IS a Microsoft zealot I'm replying to.

      So, you think "the user" can decide what media player is installed on their system by default? How do you do this? Do you ring Microsoft, and ask them to make sure, say, RealPlayer is on the system? Forget RealPlayer. Pick a media player, any media player. Now, ring Microsoft and tell them you want that on your system, by default, every time you install.

      Go on, I'll wait.

      Did they laugh? OK, so ring the company you bought your PC off. Tell them that you want another media player on your system, by default, at install time.

      That's assuming they are even allowed to install another media player. Their OEM agreement with Microsoft might not allow them to.

      Here's the catch, though: they'll want money in exchange for that modification! I'm not talking about the cost of the media player, I'm talking about the cost of paying the company to install it!

      "So? What do you expect? Them to do all that work for free?"

      Of course not. Think for a minute, use those critical thinking skills:
      why would someone buy another media player when they've got one bundled with the software? The answer is that most people won't! Why not? They're lazy. Any of a large number of reasons! The most common one is that users are afraid of change.

      Example: one of my friends installed Firefox on a bunch of machines he was contracted to maintain. Within minutes of that, all the workers were complaining that they couldn't use the new browser. To fix that, he went around all their machines, and recoloured the Firefox logo - he didn't even change it, he didn't give it a new theme, he just repainted it to blue instead of red - and then sat them back down in front of their machines. All the complaints ceased.

      Then there was the intelligent and educated woman who had her computer replaced. The SysAdmin reconfigured EVERYTHING on the new machine, so that it was identical to her previous system, and when she came in the next day, she sat down in front of it, and then she rang him up and asked him for help. He explained that the computer was set up exactly like the old one, and she said...
      "But I can't use a new computer!"

      So, he came around and taught her how to use all the software that she had been using. She didn't say "Oh, this is just like the old one!" Every single thing was new to her.

      Don't believe me? Check this out: http://rinkworks.com/stupid/
      (You'll also find in there the real story of the guy who took the phone call from the woman who was trying to figure out if her computer was running, during a black out. He did NOT tell her to "take the computer back to the store," because she was "too fucking stupid to own a computer." No, he married her.)

      What's the lesson here? It's quite simple: don't assume that, because you're competent with a computer, everybody else is. Most people are afraid of the things, and if they can use something, but you replace it with something that looks even vaguely different, sometimes different only in their minds, you can expect all hell to break loose.

      People go with what they're given, for the most part. My mother still uses Microsoft Media Player, because she doesn't know there's anything else out there. My father, though, won't use a Microsoft OS outside of his work. They're too unstable for his liking, and his Linux box is set up just the way he likes it.

      Microsoft should respond by killing all Korean support in windows, and preventing all of Korea from getting updates while viciously enforcing their copyrights and patents in Korean courts. Its not like anyone in Korea pays for software anyway. Throw them under the bus.

      Oh, you're not just a zealot, you're also a troll? Then forget everything I just typed - like a fundamentalist, zealotry means never having to say you're wrong, regardless of all the evidence.

  110. Do it for the porn! by CyBlue · · Score: 1

    My biggest complaint is all the DRM'd porn. Whenever I try to DL some new autoerotic pleasure material, I end up with half of it redirecting me to license sites. If Windows Media Player weren't so popular, all of us single geeks wouldn't waste so much lube warming up just to see the 'acquiring license' message.

  111. Help yourself, I never touch the stuff by NickFortune · · Score: 1
    Ajax,
    Only for webapps. And even then it's not necessarily going to be cross-browser, depending on what you're doing with it.

    Stick to standards compliant browsers. That gets you something that works on firefox and safari. You can even distribute a custom XUL app as a front end. That gets you around the browser issue neatly.

    You don't write cross-platform applications by making a web site.

    You better tell these folks.

    And these

    And then there are this lot

    And then there's a little known crowd called Google. GMail and Google maps are both ajax based.

    Oh, and you don't need a web site, just a locally running back end that uses http over the port of your choice. It's no worse than running a database where the DBMS runs in its own process or thead.

    Java applications still suck, even on modern systems with scads of RAM.

    "Appeal To Suckage". Isn't that a logical fallacy?

    Functionality you get for free with native applications is either missing or doesn't behave properly.

    I belive that's called "writing buggy software". Its not java's fault if you can't use it correctly. It's not my favourite language either, but I don't blame the language if my programs don't work.

    As a developer, when my choice is between "Application for one platform that works beautifully on one platform" and "Application for all platforms that falls short on all of them," I know what my choice will be.

    So? No one is going to force you to write cross platform apps. Just because it may increasingly yeild market advantage, that doesn't make it compulsory.

    You DID have a better argument here than "I like what I like and everything else sucks" didn't you?

    You probably mean C# here... "dotNet" is an incredibly nebulous term,

    Um... no. dotNet (or more properly .NET) refers to MS answer to Java. More specifically to the CIL and the .NET runtime. There are a dozen or so langauges that can generate executables for the dotNet runtime. C#, granted, but also C++, Java, VB.NET... even Perl.

    If you want to see how elegant cross-platform can be and has been for years, open up Notepad, MSN Messenger, Word, and Internet Explorer. There's not a UI commonality between the lot of them. Notepad is still stuck in the 80s. But they're all supposedly part of the same system.

    So you're saying that because MS can't keep a consistent look and feel across multiple apps on a single platform, it therefore follows that no-onecan keep a consistent look-and-feel for a single app across multiple platforms?

    What were you saying about crack pipes?

    Do you really want every application on your system to be that divergent in terms of UI? That's invariably what happens.

    Counter examples: gmail, gaim, firefox.

    --
    Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
  112. Commuting by tepples · · Score: 1

    How many sites with streaming media now give you the choice of WMP, or nothing?

    How many sites with streaming media can be played at all while commuting such as in a carpool, bus, or train? Apple's model leans more toward DRM purchases and podcasts, which work well on its portable music players.

  113. I don't want MSN messenger on my computer... by twollamalove · · Score: 1

    ...so, how do I remove it from my windows install?...

    The real issue here is (and I haven't read any post that have said this) that you cannot fully remove MSN messenger from a Windows install (similar to how you cannot fully remove IE). The Messenger performs other tasks, which to me, seem only assigned to MSN Messenger so that it is vital to the windows package. Now, I've never tried to remove WMP (because, it's actually not a terrible app, though I still prefer VLC), but I assume that it is very difficult to remove it in full.

    The difference in my eyes, is that when a Linux distro bundles in software, they don't treat it any differently than if you had installed it yourself. MSN Messenger and WMP are "Windows Components" (straight from the horse's mouth, see the "Add/Remove Programs" Dialog and click "Add/Remove Windows Components"). Also, MSN Mess [no joke here, just lazy], for example, cannot, to my knowledge, be removed in full. I see this as a massive difference than just "bundled software." This software is entrenched in the Windows Install.

  114. Idiotic decree by RedLaggedTeut · · Score: 1
    The "Windows-Non-Media"-version already failed in Europe - its existance would only do go if companies could choose to sell the stripped down version on a whim and if they then would get a 10% discount on the license fees to pay to M$.

    while(++€euro){ --$dollar; }

    --
    I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
  115. HP bundles iTunes and QT by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 1

    *grins* Your second analogy is exactly what people what microsoft don't allow (or didn't before getting their predatory asses hauled through court) - OEMs having Real / Quicktime / etc media players installed instead of Media Player.

    Bzzzt!! Wrong! HP bundles iTunes and QT as the default media players. Dell bundles the horrible "Dell Media Experience" app as the default CD and DVD player. And I know that another OEM bundles RealPlayer. It's true that Microsoft doesn't allow OEMs to remove WMP, but users don't want them to (witness the utter failure of XP sans WMP in Europe). As long as OEMs can bundle other players as the default players, what's the problem?

    --
    -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
  116. Automatic to manual by MMaestro · · Score: 1
    Some people who have only driven automatic cars can't even figure out how to drive a stick shift car, let alone something more alien such as a boat or a tank. Or something vastly more complicated such as an aircraft. Heck, the idea of driving a motorcycle scares some people.

    Computer systems are scary, complicated, cumbersome devices compared to devices of the past.

  117. iChat anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft may be able to take the hit without blinking, but it'll be more annoying for Apple when they get sued for distributing iChat with OS X. And how painful it will be for the hard-working marketing folks at Apple when they have to link to Microsoft. Yep, I'm sure that's the next item on the court's agenda so get ready Apple....

  118. Not again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft emploees: 100,000 (10^5)
    Average Salary: 100K (10^5)
    Yearly expenses: 10^10 --> $10 billion dollers.

    You craphead! MS is a company that can survive ONLY as long as it's increasing its profits. No company survives on frozen capitals. Moreover if the investors understand what's happening and start to sell, microsoft can go down in 1 month.

    1. Re:Not again by kfg · · Score: 1

      The very business of many companies is to survive on capitals and show increasing profits while doing it.

      They've invented this shit called "compound interest."

      However, congratulations on your life being so charmed that you have yet to realize that employees are expendable.

      KFG

    2. Re:Not again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Average Salary: 100K (10^5)

      ROFLMAO. You obviously have never worked at Microsoft. Their average salary for devs and testers isn't anywhere near 100k. Microsoft still hasn't gotten out of the stage of using stock options instead of salary as compensation, MS employees aren't paid any better than your average tech company.

    3. Re:Not again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's probably including on-costs in the salary. These can sometimes be almost as much as the salary itself.

  119. It's not "Bundling", it's anti-competition by Proteus · · Score: 1

    Of all the comments I've read on this thread, I see a great many complaining that MS is getting unfairly chided for bundling software. I've even seen a thread about Linux distros "doing the same thing". Has everyone lost the capacity for rational analysis?

    MS is not being sued over "bundling" software; that is, they have not run afoul of the law for including applications with Windows. They are being sued because the applications they include are impossible to uninstall without damaging your system, and MS is losing because that technique is anticompetitive.

    If a user cannot replace the included software (like WMP and IE, for example) with competitive software, then MS is being anti-competitive. Sure, you can install Firefox and RealPlayer if you want, but you can't safely and reasonably get rid of WMP and IE. Attempting to do so without great care and a reasonable level of technical knowledge is likely to damage the OS. That behavior is unacceptable, and MS is finally being taken to task for it.

    Linux distros already allow you to easily replace software with competing software wihout causing damage, so that comparison is simply insane.

    All that said, I would agree that a better ruling would have been "change Windows so that you can uninstall stuff that's not core to the OS without breaking things". However, I think "make a version of Windows that doesn't have these things" is a reasonable compromise, and is actually better for MS than it could have been.

    --
    We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
  120. Google bundles VLC?? by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 1

    I'm curious, what Google software bundles VLC? Isn't VLS technically "illegal" since the devs don't pay for the various codec licenses. Those who hold the codec licenses (the various MPEG orgs, MSFT, Apple, Real, etc) haven't done anything against VLC (for practical reasons), but I'd be surprised if Google bundled software that could play MPEG2 (for example) without paying for the MPEG2 license. (Hell, Apple makes you pay $10 to get QuickTime player to play MPEG2, and MSFT makes you pay a third party for an MPEG2 codec for WMP).

    Secondly, if Google becomes a monopoly in its field (which it definitely is striving for), would you support them bundling a particular media player, making it harder for others to compete?

    --
    -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
    1. Re:Google bundles VLC?? by Cee · · Score: 1

      I'm curious, what Google software bundles VLC?

      AFAIK, VLC is not (yet) illegal. It was some time ago when I installed the Google video plugin, but I think their EULA mentioned VLC. Link + another link.

      Secondly, if Google becomes a monopoly in its field (which it definitely is striving for), would you support them bundling a particular media player, making it harder for others to compete?

      I don't follow how bundling some open source software makes it harder for others to compete.

  121. No windows in Korea... by botik32 · · Score: 1
    You know... I would LOVE to see Korea barring windows sales altogether - and any windows derivatives/modifications - for a period of until 20 years after the death of the author(s).


    That would balance the nonsense with copyright extensions. A bit.

  122. Current state of Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't this the current state of Linux? EVERY single distro has different libraries, different includes tools, different kernel versions, different everything. I personally believe this is the reason why Linux has not taken off on the desktop yet. There is no standard of what's on a Linux system. I believe that Linux would take off if the Linux developers were to select a standard list of tools and libraries (of the same version) to be installed if the default options were selected for a certain kernel version.

  123. Way to go Korea! by Angelox · · Score: 1

    Nice to see MS still doesn't own everyone

  124. Apple destroyed the Mac clone market by I'm+Don+Giovanni · · Score: 1

    Don't you get it dear boy? Then I will shout. MICROSOFT IS AN ABUSIVE MONOPOLIST, wheras Apple is not (and make some nice computers too).

    Apple abused its PPC OS monopoly to systematically destroy the Mac clone market in the late 90's; a more blatant example of monopoly abuse than anything Microsoft has ever done.

    --
    -- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
  125. Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft already invented a way to handle things like this with simple wizard install steps. Here is how the windows install should look like:

    Step 1: Standard or Advanced Install (pick advanced)
    Step 2: List of programs comes up (un check WMP and IM)
    Step 3: Install!

    No more WMP or IM, so simple!

  126. I don't get it! by jwill7g9 · · Score: 1

    I don't see how the bundled software is anticompetitive. IE never stopped me from using Firefox. WMP never stopped me from using VLC. Windows Messenger never stopped me from using Trillian. Even if MS bundled Virtual PC with Windows I would still use VMWare. There is nothing in the OS preventing anyone from running a competitor's product, Furthermore, all this software can be uninstalled or replaced fairly easily. Finally, why should any company be forced to advertise for their competitors. This is completely silly.

    1. Re:I don't get it! by planetfinder · · Score: 1

      I mostly agree with what you are saying but the depressing reality
      is that many or most people cannot, will not, or are not allowed to
      install software on the PC that they use to get their job done.
      By eliminating competition MS does effectively eliminate options
      for many people and the statistics of web browser useage
      make that clear. Additionally, there are important government websites that you cannot
      access with Firfox or any other browser that doesn't require
      the use of Windows. I believe that the number of these websites is increasing.
      I think that what people are worried about here is the possibility that lots and lots
      of important things will eventually be accessible only if you pay a tax to
      Microsoft. MS should not be allowed to abuse the monopoly that they have
      been allowed to keep. We are all directly or indirectly paying a Microsoft tax right now and we
      don't want it to increase. It would be a different matter if they
      were public service oriented and made a quality product but that
      isn't the case. They are a business dedicated to forcing money out of
      peoples pocket one way or another.

  127. don't think so by Khashishi · · Score: 1

    I think the "all publicity is good publicity" only holds true for fairly obscure products. Everyone knows what Windows is, so I don't think MS has anything to benefit from bad publicity.

  128. Windows does NOT have a Monopoly by doubledoh · · Score: 1
    The problem is not the software, the problem is monopoly: Since microsoft has 95% of the desktop market, bundling media player with windows is, apparently, illegal. There are laws about such things, it's not a decision based on user surveys ....

    The whole "microsoft is a monopoly" argument is so absurd because we aren't even talking about a scarcity of resources. If I owned 95% of the world's oil reserves, then I would truly have a monopoly because there is only so much oil to be had. But software has no such resource limitations. Anyone with a computer and a web server CAN produce an unlimited number of competing operating systems and package them with whatever software they like...oh wait, hundreds of company's already do this. Microsoft's Windows does NOT have a monopoly. It is impossible to have a monopoly with software when there are free, viable and unlimited supplies of alternatives available.

    monopoly (n.): Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service. Source: Dictionary.com
    With regard to the real definition, fist of all, Microsoft doesn't have exclusive control over the production of perating systems (there are hundreds of alternatives, many of which are free), and secondly, Microsoft does not control the means of production (as millions of people are capable of writing and distributing operating systems). It seems that the politicians and judges that went after Microsoft and labelled them a "monopoly" were more influenced by politics and lobbyists that the actual definition of a monopoly. You also have clearly become enamoured with the spurious use of the word as it suits your ideology to ignore facts.

    In addition to these facts, the operating system market is not a zero sum game. Because an OS is simply a piece of software, anyone is free to install multiple OS's on their hardrives to maximize their choices. Indeed, I have 3 Operating systems on the machine I'm typing on right now (Windows XP, Ubuntu Breezy, and FreeBSD). It is litterally impossible at this point in the game to assert that Microsoft eliminates choice when there are hundreds of alternatives available for FREE right now! Even if it had 100% marketshare, their product is certainly not exclusive and they certainly don't have a stranglehold on the means of production.

    Rhetoric never wins under scrutiny. You lose.

    --
    I think, therefore I doh.
    1. Re:Windows does NOT have a Monopoly by fymidos · · Score: 1

      >The whole "microsoft is a monopoly" argument is so absurd because
      >we aren't even talking about a scarcity of resources

      There has never been a "scarsity of resources" in making telephone lines either, but there have been monopolies in the communication market. This is the case in many countries today, actually..

      >It seems that the politicians and judges that went after Microsoft
      >and labelled them a "monopoly" were more influenced by politics
      >and lobbyists that the actual definition of a monopoly

      If you scroll down the page you referenced, you will find a more relevant definition of monopoly, and you can reach your own conclusions.


      Main Entry: monopoly
      Pronunciation: m&-'nä-p&-lE
      Function: noun
      Inflected Form: plural -lies
      1 : exclusive control of a particular market that is marked by the power to control prices and exclude competition and that esp. is developed willfully rather than as the result of superior products or skill --see also ANTITRUST Sherman Antitrust Act in the IMPORTANT LAWS section
      2 : one that has a monopoly

      Source: Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

      --
      Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
    2. Re:Windows does NOT have a Monopoly by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      There has never been a "scarsity of resources" in making telephone lines either, but there have been monopolies in the communication market. This is the case in many countries today, actually..

      Telecommunications monopolies artificially create scarcity because they are granted by the government (as are all monopolies). If a country had a true free-market, then every city, town and neighbourhood would be fighting off other companies that would love to lay cables in your streets so they could truly compete for your telecommunications dollars. It is the government that has made such competition impossible, so they are responsible for the monopolies, not businesses.

      Monopoly: exclusive control of a particular market that is marked by the power to control prices and exclude competition and that esp. is developed willfully rather than as the result of superior products or skill --see also ANTITRUST Sherman Antitrust Act in the IMPORTANT LAWS section

      Again, you seem to be glossing over the "exclusive control" part of the definition. Microsoft can not and never has had any exclusive control over the production of software. Without exclusive control of a particular market, one cannot control prices over anything other than their own software--which as mentioned has to compete with hundreds of other companies (some of which offer their software for free). If other companies want to support Microsoft by writing software for it, then they have chosen to do so despite the existence of other alternative platforms. No one has a "right" to put their software into Microsoft's products anymore than Ford has a right to put their engines into a Toyota. Or a better analogy would be, no one company or government agency has the right to foist their DRM protection scheme on Apple's AAC format despite the fact that Apple has a majority marketshare of the music downloading business. The fact remains...there are hundreds of other alternatives to iTunes, and there are hundreds of other alternatives to Windows. There is no monopoly here, please move along.

      PS, Your post only served to underline my valid points. Thanks.

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
    3. Re:Windows does NOT have a Monopoly by fymidos · · Score: 1

      >Again, you seem to be glossing over the "exclusive control" part of the definition.

      Microsoft has the power to exclude competition. Believe it or don't if you like, but it was (repeatedly) proven in court.

      >Microsoft can not and never has had any exclusive control over the production of software.

      Correct. It does have exclusive control, over the software *MARKET*. Note that this is not illegal. What's illegal is *using* this power.

      >one cannot control prices over anything other than their own software

      Indeed !!! And this is the power that a monopoly has: control over the price of its *own* products. Normally the price is controlled by the market itself.
      And make no mistake, Microsoft has *huge* profit margins in windows and office. Much bigger than any competing software. The combination alone of high market share and profit margins spell "monopoly".

      >No one has a "right" to put their software into Microsoft's products anymore than Ford
      >has a right to put their engines into a Toyota.

      Indeed, and no one asked for it. I don't understand how you got that.

      >despite the fact that Apple has a majority marketshare of the music downloading business.

      irrelevant. A majority market share, or even a monopoly is not the problem here. The korean court ordered microsoft to add links to competitors not because it was the law, or the right thing to do but as a *punishment* to illegal behavior.

      --
      Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
    4. Re:Windows does NOT have a Monopoly by doubledoh · · Score: 1
      Microsoft has the power to exclude competition. Believe it or don't if you like, but it was (repeatedly) proven in court.

      What the hell are you talking about? How has Microsoft excluded Linux distros and Apple OS from the market? Anyone in the world can download Linux for free, or order an Apple computer from apple.com. This is hardly exclusion.

      My quote: Microsoft can not and never has had any exclusive control over the production of software.
      Correct. It does have exclusive control, over the software *MARKET*. Note that this is not illegal. What's illegal is *using* this power.

      You obviously misread me. I said that Microsoft can NOT and NEVER has had any exclusive control over the production of software meaning that it hasn't ever had exclusive control and therefore cannot weild this "power" that you imagine.

      Indeed !!! And this is the power that a monopoly has: control over the price of its *own* products. Normally the price is controlled by the market itself. And make no mistake, Microsoft has *huge* profit margins in windows and office. Much bigger than any competing software. The combination alone of high market share and profit margins spell "monopoly".

      I think you're reading into this in a fashion that only allows you to extract the meaning you want. What I meant by a company being able only to determine the price of their products is that it is up to them to price their products based on their cost to make, how much profit they can earn and what the market will bear. It is obvious that Microsoft has chosen pricing points that people can bear because millions of people buy their software. If Microsoft made Windows $10,000 a pop, they would still retain control over their prices, but of course, no one would buy their product. And by the way, there is nothing wrong with "huge" profit margins if the market is willing to buy the products that weild such margins. There is nothing wrong with being "much" bigger than other competing software companies any more than there is something wrong with Tiger Woods being the highest paid golpher. Our society should reward success, not bash it. The combination of your points most certainly does not spell "monopoly," it spells illogical misuse of rhetoric that gets bowled over by the actual definition of monopoly which I've already refrenced (and which you clearly ignored).

      The korean court ordered microsoft to add links to competitors not because it was the law, or the right thing to do but as a *punishment* to illegal behavior.

      And the entire premise for the Korean court's ruling as well as any other court's previous ruling against Microsoft is a sham inspired by lobbyists and greed, much like your feeble, idealistically driven arguments.

      --
      I think, therefore I doh.
  129. Who can afford that many computers? by tepples · · Score: 1

    Not create programs that rely on a particular operating system, but instead create programs that can be run on any OS? Whether it be Windows XP, Windows N, Mac OSX or Mandrake Linux.

    Which would require even non-commercial developers of applications to own a computer running Windows XP and Windows XP N, a computer running Mac OS X, and a computer running Mandriva Linux, in order to customize the application for each operating system. Is this feasible financially for hobbyists who routinely get turned down for even minimum wage jobs?

  130. Linux PC vendor suggestions? by tepples · · Score: 1

    If you don't want Windows buy a Mac or install Solaris/Lunix and get over it.

    Where can a fellow buy a home desktop PC with Linux compatible hardware, with a Linux operating system pre-installed, with a warranty as strong as that of a national brand, and without having to already own a computer and subscribe to Internet access to order it?

  131. I don't see the problem here... by Randall311 · · Score: 1

    What is the problem with Microsoft supplying WMP and MSN Messenger bundled with XP? Apple jams QuickTime and iChat down your throat with OS X, but they aren't being sued. WTF is the problem? If you don't like it, then don't buy it.

  132. Why not? by flyinwhitey · · Score: 1

    "The 'free ride' of bundling obviously does make a big difference. Just because Microsoft owns the operating system, this doesn't mean that it should be allowed to bundle whatever it likes."

    Apart form the fact that you hate MS irrationally of course, why not?

    As others have said (and you've probably ignored their wisdom too) bundling an app doesn't force anyone to use it.

    Your assertion is just that, an assertion, with no basis in reality.

    --
    How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
  133. In Soviet Russia, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft sue you!

  134. Its all about control by LeFaux · · Score: 1

    I doubt even the Koreans care about the $32 Million. Microsoft sure as hell doesn't and has proven it by paying off everyone that even looks like they might have a case against them. This is a lesson to Microsoft, a lesson in control. What the Koreans are teaching them is the same lesson that the EU started. "You will comply with our laws and how we judge you or we will make you do things that you don't want to do in order to continue doing business here." I believe that South Korea won't be the last country to impose this sort of lesson on Microsoft if for no other reason than they can make themselves more important to a company that has ignored the intent (if not the letter) of their laws. The best that Microsoft can do to really make amends is to bend over and shout "Thank you Sir, May I have another?". Once the beating is over its back to the normal corruption and graft.

    --
    The lesser of two evils is still evil...
  135. Retarded by Filoviridae · · Score: 1

    This is retarded. If they make the OS then they can put whatever the hell they want on it. If people don't want to use the media player or IM then just freakin don't use it. MS should follow through with their threat to pull out of South Korea entirely.

    1. Re:Retarded by planetfinder · · Score: 1

      A retarded solution for a retarded problem.
      Without doing anything MS instant messenger will become the default instant messenger because
      it ships with Windows. This is a simple reality.

      At first Microsofts product will be a very nice tool because it has to compete a little. It will even be better
      than other services. MS will keep making it nicer with
      proprietary innovations until it is the obvious and natural choice for most users. Within 5-10 years you won't
      be able to communicate without using their instant messenger and you
      will have to use Windows to use it.

      Once all of the competition is dead then MS will be able to set the price and the quality
      will be whatever MS feels like delivering. Sort of like the way MS Office is now. A big expensive dysfunctional
      pile of steaming poo. It started out nice but now there is no competition and if anyone believes that
      Microsoft, or just about any company for that matter,
      will maintain a quality product without competition then they need to think again.

      The fact is the MS has a competitive advantage that stems from the fact that they are a monopoly
      and if no one does anything about it then we will all pay and pay dearly.

    2. Re:Retarded by chawly · · Score: 1

      "A big expensive dysfunctional pile of steaming poo." I can't agree - it has completely lost its steam.

      --
      How many beans make five, anyhow ? ... Charles Walmsley
  136. OK, I'll bite... by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

    As others have said (and you've probably ignored their wisdom too) bundling an app doesn't force anyone to use it.

    I'm happy to agree that nobody is forced to use a bundled app. I see no point in ignoring the obvious truth.

    What happens when you go to play an MP3 on Windows? Up pops Windows Media Player.
    Are you forced to use it? No.
    Are you given a choice to use something else? No.
    What do you do? You use it.

    Why not download RealPlayer or Winamp? Some people don't even know about these alternatives. Some can't be bothered downloading something else when the default is sufficient.

    In fact, as long as the default is sufficient, nobody is likely to 'consider' downloading an alternative.

    Furthermore, I would suggest reading my post here, concerning Microsoft's proprietary and patent-encumbered file formats, protocols and APIs.

    So looking deeper into this, rather than skimming the surface, the issue of whether or not you're 'forced' to use Microsoft's bundled applications is irrelevant.

  137. Apple bundles way more software... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait wait wait... EVERY Apple box EVER comes loaded with ALL Apple software, and because Microsoft includes IE and WMP they get sued?? Listen, I'm not a huge MS fan by any means - but this is the most obvious case of "attack the biggest target" I've ever seen. Geeks hate Microsoft because it's cool for geeks to hate Microsoft. Again: I'm not a fan of Microsoft either, but too many people hate them without thinking about why they hate them - kind of like little kids who grow up to be republicans because mommy and daddy are republicans, not because they really believe in republican values. Learn to think for yourselves, hey?

    In summary: it's ludicrous that Microsoft gets sued for bundling free software when they're not even the biggest culprets. They're just the biggest target, and since everyone loves to hate Microsoft, they get sued instead of Apple, everyone's favorite trendy company! YAY!!

    1. Re:Apple bundles way more software... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, yes, they ARE the biggest culprits in the OS market. Thats what 'monopoly' is about.

  138. I think there's a bigger issue here by hGMFliP · · Score: 1

    Ok, before I get railed with comments; I do NOT know much about internation trade law, so feel free to enlighten me.

    Let's look at IE as an example. IE has been part of Windows since Win95 whether we like it or not. I'm assuming that Windows made it to S. Korea by 1996ish, possibly 1997 at the latest. Obviously, these laws were created in Korea some time after 1996, but it takes them until 2005 to make a stand on it? US versus Microsoft started in 2000, which means that it was already being investigated in the late 1990s. Seems like a big gap IMHO

    But here's the real kicker to me... Windows is a product made in the US. The 2000 antitrust case was one where a US company broke a US law. This situation is a US company being fined on a foreign law. How is that possible? Do they have jurisdiction to do such things? My feeling is that if the Korean Fair Trade Commission found a US product to be out of compliance with their rules *AFTER* they've already permitted the sale of it, they should just ban it, and inform Microsoft of why they've been banned. If Microsoft chooses then to create a Windows version that is compliant, then so be it. Otherwise; sorry Bill. Where do they inherit the jurisdiction to impose a fine?

    To me, that's like the Korean government saying that they're going to impose a fine on GM for all Chevys that have seatbelts after the Korean Trade Commission cleard GM cars for sale in Korea. Regardless on how I feel about Microsuck Winblows, seems like a bad slippery slope to be travelling.

    --
    This message was posted using recycled electrons.
    1. Re:I think there's a bigger issue here by fymidos · · Score: 1

      >IE has been part of Windows since Win95 whether we like it or not.

      Win 98 actually.

      >This situation is a US company being fined on a foreign law. How is that possible?
      >Do they have jurisdiction to do such things?

      Yes, if the company sells products in Korea it has to respect korean laws. And i imagine that getting permission to sell your products does not imply that your business practises are legal.

      >they should just ban it, and inform Microsoft of why they've been banned

      They propably cannot do that. For once, USA would be rightfully pissed off and might just decide to ban korean cars from the US market. Besides i imagine that USA and S.Korea have signed many treaties dealing with trade over the years.

      --
      Washington bullets will simply be known as the "Bulle
  139. make software competitive by mathfeel · · Score: 1

    I think we should "ask" (or force?) OS maker (MS and other, but most Linux already doing what I am about to describe) to include an industry-standard package (presumably binary, but source can be available for techie whereever license allows) distribution tool. So when you install Windows, you have a choice of a list of software to install/uninstall/replace at will. These software includes both commericial/free. And Surely each software vendor can advertise the advantage (or even bash other equivalent software?) within the confine of this tool (so consumer only look at advertisement when they CHOOSE too). And software will be delivered over a the internet.

    I suppose the bottom line is, I have no problem with MS if I have the choice of removing (not merely not using, even 1MB of software I don't desire is unacceptable in my computer) their software and replacing them with what I prefer. I used IE over netscape by choice because netscape was getting big and slow, and now I am using firefox by choice. My main IM client is MSN messenger partly because 70% of my friends are on it, and partly because I actually like it. I am testing out GAIM-WIN32 now, looking good so far...

    --
    The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the 'social sciences' is: some do, some don't
  140. Re: MS Reply - they purchase N. Korea... by catmistake · · Score: 1

    and replace the 38th Parallel with Media Player.

  141. And yet, the point escapes us.. by Digitalmanwhore · · Score: 1

    Windows Media Player 10 series is available for free download to all Windows users. MSN Messenger 7.5 is available for free download to all Windows users. Hmm, lets see, I can pay for Korean company A's crappy beta media player, or download a polished late version one for free? The point of this entire endevour, then? 32 million free dollars.

  142. Attention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is a finite resource. Flood the 'tech media' with Microsoft news, and nobody will hear about anything else.

  143. Obligatory chair throwing by Sangbin · · Score: 1

    In South Korea, only old people throw chairs.

  144. Why not target Apple? by krunk4ever · · Score: 1

    Apple OSX bundles Safari, iChat and Quicktime, but I don't see government forcing them to strip that software and post competing links. Safari, iChat and Quicktime are all free and made by Apple just like IE, MSN Messenger, and WMP is made by Microsoft. I don't see why you guys complain about Microsoft in this issue when all other operating systems do the same. It's not like Microsoft forbids other software to be installed or making it really hard.

    Personally I think by providing these software gives the OS more worth, but many of you just tend to think it's anti-competition. Is it because Microsoft is easier to pick on? has more money to milk?

    1. Re:Why not target Apple? by John+Meacham · · Score: 1

      It is because apple doesn't have an effective monopoly and use it to obtain monopolies in other markets. The laws are not about bundling software, they are about unfair business practices.

      admittedly, those are subject to interpretation, as is the term monopoly but that is why they don't go after apple. Microsoft does have more money to milk, but this is a case of coorelation not causation, the monopoly holder is the one making the money off their unfair business practices. Some practices are only unfair if you hold a huge majority of the market as you are free to manipulate it unfairly in ways other companies cannot.

      --
      http://notanumber.net/
    2. Re:Why not target Apple? by krunk4ever · · Score: 1

      So in other words, this forces any company that holds a monopoly in a particular market to release lower quality product by not able to provide as many features as competitors, because by that law, competitors cand bundle anything they want giving their software more worth, while companies which hold monopolies can't making their software less attractive.

      Maybe that's the law, but I personally think this law needs to be thought out more. What ends up happening is the other extreme where the company who has a monopoly is at an unfair disadvantage.

  145. Just realized my link was wrong! Oops! by OwlWhacker · · Score: 1

    "Furthermore, I would suggest reading my post here, concerning Microsoft's proprietary and patent-encumbered file formats, protocols and APIs." -- Me

    The link is here.

    I accidentally put in one that shows SCO's stock, as I was laughing at it at the time. Sorry.

  146. Thank God for MS! by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

    Where would companies like Real Networks, Sun, AOL etc be today if they couldn't suck at MS's antitrust teat. I'll bet there's a lot of companies out there that would love for MS to bundle a clone of their non-profitable product in Windows so they could get some of that unearned cash.

  147. how come? by ZhuLien · · Score: 1

    why will it be that Koreans and Europeans can buy the better version of Windows without Media Player but us poor Australians cannot? :(

    1. Re:how come? by chawly · · Score: 1

      My cheery old Australian chum. If you're poor, you cannot afford to buy Microsoft - change to Linux.

      --
      How many beans make five, anyhow ? ... Charles Walmsley
  148. How does bundling this affect your coding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I call bullshit. The Windows API changes *how* when you unbundle Windows Messenger?

    Nil. Not a bit.

    I am also a Windows application developer, and you don't seem me crying about not having Windows Media Player there.

    Now if MSFT were to quit it with this WMP and MSN crap, and fix some file-sharing issues with their Windows Networking then that would be just swell. Why can't I copy my files from one machine to another without having to close the friggin Visual Studio window?

  149. More Bang For the Buck by BooneSaysHi · · Score: 1

    Now I will probally get modded down for this but... I believe that it is a good thing that M$ gives these programs (IM & MPlayer) away for free (bundled) as long as they do not require OEMs to only use there apps. When I buy a PC with MS I expect it to natively support certain functions like web browsing and playing music and videos. I personally do not want to buy additional software to do these things. I look at it as more bang for my hard earned buck. If a competing product is far superior and has features that I want not found in MS version then I will buy/use it. If not why should I want to pay more money on top of what I already payed. As an example M$ has MS Search (pretty crappy) that is free, but I choose to use a far superior product namely Google.

  150. I don't get... by Atario · · Score: 1

    ...how South Korea gets to tell an American company what it has to do and what fines to pay. Does the US government get to order Hyundai (or SAP, or Virgin Atlantic, or...) to do this or that, and fine them and whatnot?

    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt