Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Faces Fresh Antitrust Complaints
Rob wrote to mention a Computer Business Online review piece about new anti-trust action against Microsoft on both sides of the Atlantic. From the article: "Other examples of anticompetitive behavior cited by Tangent include bundling of Outlook with Office and Active Directory with Windows Server, as well as the bundling of Windows Media Player and Windows Media Server with its desktop and server operating system respectively. Microsoft did not respond to a request for comment on Tangent's complaint, other than to acknowledge that it was being reviewed, but was more forthcoming in responding to a fresh complaint lodged with the European Commission by the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS)."
can someone explain to me why people care about windows media player being bundled with windows? i could maybe understand internet explorer, maybe. but wmp? what?
if i'm not immortal, what's the point of living?
...te?
Don't you have to buy Office and, thus, buy an office suite? One that would, presumably, include email and calendar functionality?
Can't you purchase Office modules separately? I was sure I had seen boxes of Word, Excel, etc. a few years back.
Remember we started the present suit against M$ in 2001...5 years later we see no change!
Like any good slashdotter, I have my complaints with Microsoft too, but this is getting out of hand. Active Directory? WTF are they thinking?
1st post!
-- If we don't stand up for our rights, now, there will be no right to stand up for them later.
It's amazing how people critisize MSFT about having so many vista versions. Stuff like this makes it super obvious why they have to release so many versions.
What happend to Standard Oil? It was dismantled and each component was forced to compete with the others. This is how we got: Esso, Exxon, Mobil, etc. (some have remerged by now, this happened 100 years ago)
Microsoft could be shattered into seperate companies. A Windows OS company. An Office productivity software company. A media player company (which would last about a fortnight). This is a real possibility.
Bundling software isn't anti-competitive behaviour unless there's something else going on, like forcing computer manufacturers to bundle that software with their computers.
Nobody is forced to use Active Directory when they set up a Windows server, although most people do because it makes sense. Honestly, as someone who's not worked with large linux networks, I'm not sure what the alternative would be. However, lack of a viable alternative, or even lack of a popular alternative, doesn't make Microsoft wrong for packaging Active Directory with their product.
Bundling Outlook with Office may be slightly closer to anti-competitive behavior, but I still think it's a BS complaint. I know plenty of people that choose to use Netscape Navigator, Eudora, or Thunderbird for email, even though they own the Office suite. Wouldn't complaining about Outlook Express make a little more sense, since it's packaged with the OS?
This reminds me of people playing the race card... it's done even when that complaint isn't accurate, and as a result makes people less likely to believe when there's a REAL issue.
What's next... claiming that inclusion of MS Paint is anti-competitive?
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
How the hell can Microsoft be expected to sell it's OS without any extras while the other companies selling OSs bundle all sorts of shiat with them. OS X comes with Quicktime 7, Safari, Apple Mail, and the whole iLife thing. Those are all types of things that Microsoft has been threatened with a lawsuit because it includes them in Windows. Apple takes it a step further and bundles their hardware with their software. If Microsoft did something like that, they'd be driven out of the country by screaming zealots. Why can't people just leave them be for once?
*The most erroneous stories are those we think we know best - and therefore never scrutinize or question.*
out of hand to the point of sheer stupidity. Certain gripes I can see as far as the bundling of IE with Windows. To start a complaint about directory services being bundled with server software is lunacy. Outlook being bundled with M$ Office? Oh the humanity! I wouldn't expect to pay $500 for a full office suite without a fully functioning email client/calendering system. Enough is enough. Now that it has gotten to this point any further "legitimate" claims will be dismissed as frivolous and unjustified.
C'mon now? AD with server..??..??! M$ also bundles telnet with the OS as well! Oh noes!
Active directory and Media Server also just "make sense". If you're selling a server solution, shouldn't you build in server features?
I think there's some argument for Media Player, except that the success of iTunes as a WMP alternative shows that there is substantial competition in the market.
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
"This isn't 1989 ... you can't just bundle more and more with the OS and hope nobody notices in the name of the almighty dollar."
Seems to be working for them mighty well.
Would you kindly mod me +1 insightful?
Are you serious? Most people in the non 1337 haxor world prefer that when they get a computer it will already be able to do most of the things they need it to do. Thus an OS should come with a browser, media player, mail client, and some rudimentary text and image editing software. If they started selling Windows Media Player separately people would accuse them of being greedy and wanting money for something that should be free. I'm afraid you just don't get it. This isn't 1989....your computer should do things out of the box instead of just staring at you blankly blinking the cursor.
*The most erroneous stories are those we think we know best - and therefore never scrutinize or question.*
What are they going to do? Fine them? - it is already well known that you can not fine them enough to make it feasible for them to stop these practices. MS has moved above the law of any land. I feel the only hope is OSS as a groundswell, this the only way to solve the current software stagnation that is around today.
A splendid example of someone smoking the open source crackpipe. What are "these practices" you wish to stop? Selling an office suite, the components of which you can purchase separately? Or selling a server operating system with built-in directory services? I suppose you think OpenOffice.org shouldn't include different components, and that Open Directory must be a separate download when setting up a new server?
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
"you can't just bundle more and more with the OS and hope nobody notices in the name of the almighty dollar."
I think that is absolutely true. Consumers WILL notice bundles. And they are demading them. When a consumer buys a PC they want to be able to use it. What good is a PC that comes with an OS, but no internet browser, media player, networking services, or other commonly bundled software packages? To a hard core enthusiest with the time, knowledge and ability to select their own software, sure it's great to have a stripped down OS. But for the majority of consumers who want their $2,000 purchase to work immediately and perfectly (or atleast as perfectly as is expected in the current environment).
Debian and Ubuntu probrably have the best currently available blend of striped down OS's with a GUI based package retreival/installation process. It still requires someone with significantly more knowledge then most consumers to opperate, but significantly less then it would take to manually track down bins and compile/install them from the command line. Improving on this system to make it easier for consumers to select the packages they want (ie: better searching, links to home pages, community reviews and ratings, non-free as in beer software distrobution) will imporve their position.
But when it comes down to it, a consumer doesn't want to spend $2,000 on a machine that can't even play back a CD or check their email.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
The only valid point that I thought the article made had to do with Word documents. It's no secret that interpretting Word documents is haphazard at best (just look at OpenOffice) and that standards need to be documented more thoroughly. Almost everything else in that article seemed like nit picking, and for once I feel bad for Microsoft.
They can't win: if they include Windows Media Player with their OS they get sued, if they don't include it they get hundreds of thousands of complaints from users and even more Microsoft bashing than before. If they include Active Directory with their OS they get sued, if the don't include it they get thousands of complaints from administrators and even more Microsoft bashing than before. The list goes on and on. As for Outlook being bundled with Office, I think that since Office is a suite consumers pay for (either in retail channels or through OEMs), Microsoft should be able to include what it wants to. Outlook is part of the suite, plain and simple.
Next week's top story: "TextPad Sues Microsoft for Bundling Notepad with its Windows Operating System"
-William Brendel
The latest news is that, according to Yahoo! News and BBC News, a fresh anti-trust complaint has been filed with the EC against Microsoft by the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (composed of IBM, Oracle, RealNetworks, Sun & Nokia). Although the complaint was filed privately, ECIS hinted (see the links) that it related to MS Office.
The story here is about Tangent, a computer manufacturer who filed a federal suit against MS in a Northern Californian court on Valentine's Day. I've found two articles which go into more detail on this: Gameshout and ZDNet.
Basically, the complaints in this suit relate to:
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
Um no, cuz if Windows only came with enough to setup the computer it wouldn't cost four hundred fucking dollars. It'd be like 69.95$ or something. Then you can buy IE for 50$ if you want or WMP for 50$ and still be ahead of the game.
...)
Imagine if you could buy windows for 69.95$ then throw whatever you wanted on it (e.g. mozilla, mplayer, open fucking GL). *YOU* would be in control of what you used. *HAVE* you ever noticed that MSFT deviates from spec with every new technology? I can only wonder what *A* meeting with their execs must be like. "let's see how we can totally screw over the users so we can buy extensions on our homes...". You'd have *CHOICE* in the matter. Almost as if you were *FREE* to use the *MARKET* to your advantage.
(hint: read the bold words
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
I love this line from Tangent's site...
Tangent recommends Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional.
nothing
GM has been accused of bundling engines with transmissions, Pioneer has been accused of bundling speakers with stereo equipment and, Bob's big boy has been accused of bundling plates with silverware.
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
But seriously MSFT execs just don't fucking get it.
Dude, but they do effing get it! Gates is the richest man in the world. He may be an unethical, asshole, business bitch, but he's not stupid.
Stupid.
How can we simultaneously complain that tech smarts are going down and then support what Microsoft and the likes (e.g. dell, gateway, etc) do.
It's just plain wrong. PERIOD.
People should be forced to open their eyes. Install mozilla isn't that hard. Knowing their is a choice is a good thing. It makes them more powerful in that they don't have to bow before Bill gates and beg for innovation.
Besides, this isn't 1985. Any adult now 40 should have had some experience with a computer in the last 20 years. And frankly the people 30 now do. So fuck the older gen. How about we make a market that will be useful in the next 50 years?
Kids grow up with computers all the time now. They're not as stupid as Msft execs want us to believe.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
WHY does everybody keep talking about Microsoft monopolies, then talking about Explorer, Outlook, and... everything but the OS?
Nobody is forced to use Explorer (even if it is a part of the OS). Nobody is forced to use Outlook, Active Directory, or WMP.
What we ARE forced to put up with as software engineers (if we want to actually sell any units) is their OS! Mac users and some expert PC gurus running Linux aside, Microsoft has a monopoly on the OS market. If we in the US are so anti-monopoly (and there's a lot of precedent -- Standard Oil, Ma Bell etc), why haven't we broken up this one by making the OS open-source and allowing MS to continue as it pleases with its other products (which don't force anyone to use them.)
I can't be the only one to see this -- but I just don't get why people keep talking about the big, bad Microsoft monopoly -- then looking right PAST the one thing they *do* have a monopoly on. It's all very confusing to me.
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
Who cares about grandma? Their are more people (in a position to spend) sub-60 years old than over.
How many 65 yr olds do you think are in Best buys anyways?
Comments like that are why in 25 years you're going to be subserviant to some other master race.
"oh, who can figure out microwaves anyways. These things are too hard to program!!!"
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
I'd bet you a big toe that apple would not be required to remove safari, itunes, etc if this was them.
So let's see, we're complaining now because Windows comes with more programs for us to use? What the hell is wrong with these people? I've seen too many anti-trust suits like this.
I could rant, really; but I'll put this simply enough: It's nice when you get software bundled with the system; it's anticompetetive when the system is designed to detect competing software and prevent it from running properly. Until the second case is true, this is all bullshit and these lawyers need to find a new hobby.
Next week, Canonical gets sued for shipping Ubuntu with Firefox instead of Opera; Novell gets sued for shipping GNOME instead of KDE; and the XFCE guys sue everyone because nobody uses their desktop environment.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
I'm pretty sure they could do it, but why not make as much as possible in house if you can? They aren't a bunch of idealistic programmers communing to build a better tomorrow. They are a company that, successfully, makes a lot of money. When I am making money by the truckload, I am pretty certain I will ignore the complaints of small foundations telling me I need to adhere to their standards when they only have a small market share.
Well, I guess that rant was mostly about browsers, because thats where I usually see complaints. Active Directory and WMP though? This is getting down right stupid. Next people will sue them because they bundle Explorer with windows.
"We should be able to choose Litestep or BlackBox instead of Explorer when we install Windows! Boo! Why doesn't M$ make everything open and standard? That has to make it better right?"
1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
an anti-trust action for bundling outlook in a suite of office programs??? what next, an anti-trust action against adobe for bundling photoshop in its creative suite package? disclaimer: i haven't read the article in question :S
.. and that doesn't even include inline AV and Anti-Spyware. With Stats like that how can you avoid Anti-Trust Complaints?
Proof by very large bribes. QED.
You may no longer bundle radios or air conditioning in cars. Also, spare tires are illegal.
You may no longer bundle popsicle sticks in with popsicles.
You may no longer bundle instructions with any piece of equipment.
There has to be more to the story. IANAL, but "bundling" software is nothing new, and certainly shouldn't be considered wrong. How can you differentiate "bundling software" from including features? For instance Winamp can now do far more than just play media. Are the ripping features, the burning features, etc, now "bundled"? When did a law get passed saying software can only do one thing?
Maybe Microsoft should remove the branding. Word is no longer word. Excel is no longer excel. It is simply Microsoft Office, and the seperate executables are simply "features".....
IE is bundled with the OS. Does IE even remotely come close to wc3 compliance? How many sites use ActiveX or whatever else because it was there?
WMP is bundled as well. Right now it supports mpeg but I can see a time where that isn't the case in favour of WMA/WMV.
AD is RFC compliant? Is file sharing? etc...
Windows is designed largely not to interoperate with any other OS or toolset. Which you may argue is their right but the whole point of fair competition practices is to give *YOU* better choices.
I mean in the *NIX world my Linux NFS share can be mounted by a BSD OS just fine. Why do I have to reverse engineer windows file sharing to get samba? If Windows was forced to RFC all it's standards you'd have a choice on whether to be tied to a windows desktop for NT domain logins and MS exchange or a linux one.
I guess you don't like having choices. Maybe you like being Bills little bitch. That may be good for you but apparently it isn't for other people.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
No, it couldn't, and no, it isn't. MS has far too much power and (more importantly) far too much money for such a thing to EVER happen. The opportunity was lost back in the 90s when Clinton called off the justice department actions in exchange for an endorsement of the clipper chip.
The only vulnerability faced by MS are a voting public that tires of ever-increasing taxes and millages to pay for MS software in the schools and the government offices. The student/home edition of MS software was released to squash what little resistance remained in even that arena.
If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
"So fuck the older gen. "
Great business plan there, I can see why you are so much more successful then Bill Gates.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Maybe, but it still doesn't force you to install Outlook. I seem to recall that the installer allowed you to install, provisionally install, or not install each component separately. So you could by the cheaper version which included the programs you don't want and just unselect those components during the install.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
I can buy all three seperate, or I can save money and get the package. I fail to see a problem.
I don't see where this "grandma can't figure it out".
I know a lot of subserviant 30 yr old people. They just assume "learning bad" so they pick the path of least fucking resistance for their entire life.
If a 5 yr old kid can figure out how to use a Mac his mother brought home in 1987, why couldn't a 20 yr old adult do the same? I could hardly read properly before I was playing the piano and using a Mac (and vic-20).
Face it. The "it hard it bad" is just lazy and breeds contempt for the future.
Do you really want to see a day where people are so stupid that we can't figure out any technology (from programming to car maintenance, etc...). We'll be like that atlantis plantet in ST:TNG. Dying from their own ignorance.
I for one don't want to die in paradise from radiation poisoning. Do you?
tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Tell me how much fun it is to network to said setup from BSD or Linux distros. ...
Yeah, shut your gob.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
If MSFT wasn't bundled with shit you don't need it wouldn't cost 200$. It's really that simple.
... ?
...
You'd pay less than 100 for it and then choose the add-ons you want.
The problem is people like you are sheep and you think if you "go with the flow" you're being a good member of society. If you really want all the MSFT shit you should have a choice. but if all I want is the kernel why do I pay for IE or WMP or MSN or
The actual full version of Windows is more than 200$ in Canada anyways. 130$ buys the OEM HOME cd
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Rockefeller had more money than Microsoft evr had or ever will have. And his company was dismantled.
Hey hey hey-- bash the people, not the software they support. A lot of open source stuff is really good. GNOME is an amazing desktop environment, for example. . . .
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Yes and when I bring someone from Windows to Gentoo or Debian they go "WHAT THE FUCKING CRAP?!" because there's no software there, they have to figure out what to install, and they don't automatically know of Firefox and OpenOffice.org until someone tells them. They COULD get on IRC, but there's no IRC CLIENT and they don't know WHAT IRC is.
Drop them on Ubuntu, Fedora, or SuSE and they go "Wow. Linux is a lot easier than I thought."
Don't be a retarded prick.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
I don't see why this is flamebait. EU complaints against Microsoft seems to be a weekly, if not daily, occurance. So the phrase, "What else is new..." is accurate, IMO.
To small marketshare to be a "problem". But its a valid question, Apple are and have always been a very propitary and closed echo system, so if they grow and get a bigger market share they should be next in the anti-trust case line, they should enable users the choice of operating system on their boxes or a completly different hardware vendor for their OS. And dont get me started on Quicktime ;)
http://www.intellipool.se/ - Intellipool Network Monitor
Your post reads like a really bad movie plot. Seriously, picture "that guy" who does movie trailers reading your post. Hysterical.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
They can't win: if they include Windows Media Player with their OS they get sued, if they don't include it they get hundreds of thousands of complaints from users and even more Microsoft bashing than before. If they include Active Directory with their OS they get sued, if the don't include it they get thousands of complaints from administrators and even more Microsoft bashing than before. The list goes on and on.
Well, if they HADN'T INCLUDED all those nice add-ons in the beginning, NO ONE would have complained nor sued. Why? Because they built A GIGANTIC user base over those bundles. Precisely the amount of people's complaints will demonstrate how much they have cheated.
More like M$ will buy time, and then package it into M$ Office with their calendar. Now some will probably sue over the anti-trust issues with packaging time together with software that tracks it, but given their track record, I'm pretty sure M$ can get away with it.
You can get 15 minutes of fame, but you can go down in history for infamy.
Fuckity fuck fuck fuck fuckity fuck. Okay, I feel better, I needed to express my maturity.
Back to the subject at hand, MY opinion has nothing to do with this, CONSUMER'S options do.
Consumers want a machine that fulfills their needs. If the machine doesn't do so, they will look elsewhere. Yes, it is a relatively easy task to learn, but it takes time, energy, and effort, 3 things consumers aren't going to want to give any more of after dropping some decent money on a new PC.
Compare the analogy to Cars. A car comes with fluids, suspension, and a radio installed. Sure, the consumer has a choice on all of those if they want. They can use el cheap-o oil, or get full synthetic. They can use bargain basement shocks, or a set of fully adjustable coil overs. They can use a radio shack special $20 stereo, or a $5000 competition set up. But all cars come with these because the car is about worthless with out them. Except the stereo, which is an added feature that pretty much all consumers demand.
Same with a computer. Sure, you could get an OS that was just an OS. But if it requires the user to pick out a web browser, an office suite, an email client, a network system, a media player, a help viewer, a file explorer, a services manager, and all of the other handy tools that come bundled, user's would look else wheres. Sure, you could force Microsoft to stop bundling, but companies like Dell would increase their bundling to meet the needs and demands of consumers.
Take off your anti-(fill in the blank) rhetoric hat and put on your consumer hat. Imagine you didn't live in your mother's basement. Imagine you have a job, a house, and a family to take care of. Do you want to spend a few weeks of your precious spare time to learn how to install and configure an email client? Or do you want to be able to just check your email?
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
why should i want/be required to be an expert at cars, computers, vcrs, home building, etc? i shouldn't and i shouldn't be branded 'lazy' for not wanting to know. for each of those things there should be experts (surprise! there are) who enable me to use each of these things without any expertise whatsoever. in turn, i may be an expert for these people in another area (chiropractor, lawyer, farrier) that they can't/don't want to master.
if i don't need to use a computer for what i do, why should i have to know or even want to know how to use one. if you don't ride horses, do you need/want to know how to shoe one (and even if you do ride horses, you probably don't shoe them).
so get off your high horse and realize that you're not an expert in everything ('i could harly read properly before i was playing the piano and using a Mac' blah blah blah) and neither is anyone else. that, in itself, does not make someone lazy.
How would you treat your Certified Partner if they treated you worse than your enemies?
I loved this part:
"ECIS is a front for IBM and a few other competitors who constantly seek to use the regulatory process to their business advantage. When faced with innovation, they choose litigation,"
Which screams out the need for this obligatory quote from Inigo Montoya:
Microsoft: "INNOVATION!"
Rest of World: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
No matter where you go... there you are.
One of the good things about slashdot is that every time someone says "Microsoft!" you know there will be an abundance of words not suitable for use in public.
It's the only thing stable about the OS.
more bullshit.
Being half-way informed is not "being an expert". you can know about firefox without knowing how to program or build it. The point of this anti-competition "bs" is to allow consumers to have a choice.
You're just so used to being told what to eat, listen to, watch, do that you forgot you're an individual. You have the right to choose in a free market economy. Not to be shoveled whatever can make somone the most profit.
This applies to a lot of other aspects to life. What if 4/5 gas stations started only serving Ford cars? Would you then say "we must buy ford cars obviously". Or you could only drink Coca-Cola at the olympics (which is largely funded with public funds btw)? What if schools were forced to teach I.D. and that's "just the way it is".
Why is it hip to be knowledgeable about what they teach in schools but not about what MILLIONS of people use on their computers EVERYDAY to progress society from a conventional form to an immediate form?
SHEEP!
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Now where have I heard that name?
To carry on your analogy though it'd be like your car only runs fuel from Esso, can only use radios from Sony and the thing can only drive on toll roads.
...
MSFT doesn't want competition which is why they bundle non-compliant tools with their OS and then don't document the rest.
You bought Word why can't you know the file format? I mean in most of my jobs where I have a file or network protocol I must use ASN.1 and document it to the hilt (or if they don't ask I do it anyways because I'm professional).
Why can I buy a 800$ office suite and then not be able to write my own scripts to work with the files it produces?
You think IE is a web browser? It's not. (technically neither is firefox but at least it's closer and free to install or remove).
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
We are going to end up with one set of rules Microsoft will have to follow and another for everyone else.
Then anytime some company with connections wants to find an excuse for their piss poor software or lack of success in the marketplace they will turn to blaming Ms.
It is already approaching the point to where the consumer is suffering for the meddling. Either hold all companies, regardless of marketshare, to the same standards or get out of the regulation. (unfortunately the EU governing body will meddle in anything just because it can, talk about a body that serves no other purpose than to make laws to justify its existance. What it took 200+ years for the US Congress to morph in the EU did in a short 10 years)
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Somebody needs to put the lawyers & CXO's on a shorter leash and focus on what matters - being competive because your stuff works better.
The point is you *SHOULD* be free to *MAKE YOUR OWN* msft bundle.
Msft shouldn't be allowed to keep cramming shit in their (at the users expense).
And yes, for the record I'm an OSS developer. I'm the author of the LibTom* series of cryptographic libraries (though my domain got hi-jacked so right now I guess I'm not distributing it anymore).
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
*cough* knoppix *cough* ubuntu *cough* fedora *cough* SLES *cough* ...
...
....
Linux and BSD are different in that you can get the all in one bundles or
*cough* debian *cough* DSL *cough* gentoo *cough*
Get the "roll your own" distros.
Just because you're too lazy to spend the 5 mins it takes to look around doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Why can't I tell Dell to install fedora? Or at the very least NOT install anything?
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
open directory? been working with too much ms stuff have we?
then 4/5 of gas stations would go out of business.
IDIOT!
because this european complaint addresses the lack of documentation for Office formats.
About friggin' time, I'd say.
I was a relative newb to Linux when I moved to Gentoo from WinXP.
:-)
Not everyone is as stupid as your friend.
But as you pointed out other bundled OSes do exist. They're good "starter" distros
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
If MS did buy up SCO licenses to prop up SCO's legal fight against other Linux vendors that should count too. That they tried to quash Linux is enough in my view. They should be broken into a million tiny little parts.
We have to remember, it took the U.S. Government almost 50 years to get the Bell System to agree to the Kingsbury Consent. And they were hit again in the 50's and the final nail hit in the 80's. By then the company was a hundred years old.
But today we live in the information age. I suspect Microsofts demise will come much more quickly than it did for the reigning giant of the 20th century.
Ok, pretend this happened 50 years ago when cars were "newer". You're telling me all this msft behaviour is "really recent" and not just more of their behaviour from the VERY FUCKING BEGINNING?
"MS-DOS isn't ready until Lotus won't run" isn't just a joke.
If 50 years ago they only sold gas to Ford cars we'd all be in Ford cars and there would be a fringe biodiesel outfit of "geeks" (well more than their is now) running in cars made by amateurs who eventually got talented enough to turn pro.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Umm thats easy:'feeding at the legal trough'
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Is this product tying, or merely product bundling? Why should Microsoft be liable for antitrust complaints if they merely bundle products together for sale, but give you the choice of which components you actually want to install? This is in stark contrast to Windows/IE...
LRC, the best-read libertarian site on the web
Bundling Outlook with Office may be slightly closer to anti-competitive behavior, but I still think it's a BS complaint.
Not only that, it doesn't make sense. Outlook isn't bundled with Office, it is part of Office (some would say that it's the main part) and has been since Office 97. Complaining 9 years later about "bundling" Outlook with Office is akin to complaining that MS is "bundling" Excel with Office. This is stupid.
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
your analogy is ridiculous. what you're saying is that if the component that your car runs on (gas) becomes product specific (Ford) you could be screwed. let's move this to computers. the component that your car runs on (electricity) becomes product specific (Windows only) you could be screwed. ok. but what's that have to do with microsoft. oh. what you want to say is that a specific brand of car (Ford) comes with a sunroof that isn't very good. and you want to replace it with a better sunroof, but Ford won't let you. valid complaint. but MY POINT is that most people will say "it's got a sunroof. that works for me. so who cares if i could have a better sunroof, the one that's there does what i want it to."
P.S. the real reason that Lotus wouldn't run is that it just plain sucks.
Because the whole reason Media Player is packaged with windows is so microsoft can dominate digital audio/video formats. In other words, it's the audiovisual equivalent of their browser monopoly.
On the main article, don't forget South Korea. Microsoft is basically using the same anti-trust avoidance tactics that they've always used. They're taking advantage of the slowness of individual legal systems, so that when their tactics are ruled illegal in one place, they can continue to work toward dominance elsewhere.
First, in no way shape or form am I a Microsoft customer or sympathizer. I do not have a need for, nor do I like any of their software that I have used to date.
However, things like Outlook with Office and Active Directory with Windows Server, as well as the bundling of Windows Media Player and Windows Media Server with its desktop and server operating system respectively.
Outlook with office? Why can't I get an extra piece of email and calendar software with an office suite? By no means is anybody required to purchase Office. There are alternatives. Even if Office is bundled with a PC, it is always an option, not a requirement.
Active directory with Windows Server? OS X has directory services, to some degree so do Linux/UNIX systems ass well. I've heard that AD is actually the best of that type of thing, I just have never had the need to use it. What else does the exorbinate price of Windows Server come with, and what is it supposed to do? If its just sharing files, won't any CIFS or SMB solution suffice?
Windows Media Player and Windows Media Server coming with desktop and server OSs iTunes comes with OS X, and is freely available for Windows as well, along with Winamp, and a plenty of other media players. If in 2006 a computer does not come with a basic media player, that is a crime, including one is not. Media Server with a server? QuickTime Streaming Server comes with OS X server, and plenty of other similar products can be found for UNIX/Linux, etc.
Now, if the EC wants to complain about OEM muscling, the Windows tax, the vendor lockin, lack of standards compliance and/or making Microsoft "standards" and document formats known, and other valid monopoly complaints, that is fine by me, but including standard tools and services with their OSs is expected.
They have $40B+ in cash, that they are desperately trying to funnel into the pockets of their executives (since they are certainly not using it to improve their products). How best to do this? The anti-trust shuffle. You split the company; assets fly everywhere, expenses related to the re-organization generate more transactions than the IRS can check in 10 years, shareholder value adjustments are made (stock re-purchased, re-valued, re-issued), and by the time all is said and done, new golden parachutes for everyone! Surprisingly, the $40B+ cash reserve will have been "consumed" in the re-structuring.
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
That's funny. I got Apache to install just fine on my home machine (I am not a professional developer; I was just doing it to tinker). Apache competes with IIS, right?
I got MySQL to install on the same machine just fine. MySQL competes with a slew of MS DBMS's, does it not?
I got PHP5 to install on the same machine just fine. PHP competes with ASP and whatever else MS uses to do similar stuff, right?
It's in Microsoft's best interest to allow as much software to run on its systems as possible, even if some of that software competes with its own.
If Office doesn't provide what you need, then just don't fucking buy it. Don't force your decisions on the rest of the country via the government.
BS... the reason we have anti-trust laws in the united states is to keep companies who have "too much power" or money in check.
Standard Oil owned 88% of the oil refineries in this country at one point in time. Not too far off from the 98% marketshare M$ has in the operating system business.
I got nothin'
Windows is a blassing to some, a pain to others, and it's everywhere (often not by choice), but that by itself is not illegal (as I understand it). Microsoft can continue to have a monopoly on desktop operating systems and still operate within the law.
However, using that monopoly to leverage other products in other product areas *is* a violation of existing anti-trust laws, both in the US and in the EU (as well as many other places like Japan, South Korea, etc.).
That is why these stories keep on being brought up, and why these discussions exist. When MS is accused of doing something in violation of the law, it makes news, and it also has a fairly good chance of impacting common users (mainly by reducing choice).
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
- Logitech files an antitrust suit against Dell for packaging keyboards and mice with their computers.
- Goodyear files an antitrust suit against Ford for packaging tires with their vehicles.
- A tissue cloning lab files an antitrust suit against God for packaging internal organs with humans.
"You will pay for your lack of vision..." - Emperor Palpatine to Ray Charles
"You're just so used to being told what to eat, listen to, watch, do that you forgot you're an individual. You have the right to choose in a free market economy. Not to be shoveled whatever can make somone the most profit."
And yet you advocate bringing the government's wrath upon Microsoft. That's hardly "the right to choose".
"Or you could only drink Coca-Cola at the olympics (which is largely funded with public funds btw)? What if schools were forced to teach I.D. and that's "just the way it is"."
Straw man. We're not discussing how governments or public-type organizations (IOC) spend publicly collected money. We're discussing how a business conducts its operations.
The fact that Microsoft has been legally classified as a "monopoly" in the desktop OS space is absolutely critical to the criticisms and lawsuits that have subsequently been levelled at them.
If you fail to acknowledge this one simple fact, you'll NEVER understand the situation w.r.t. Microsoft and illegal bundling/leveraging.
Sorry for the tone, but this has been repeated ad Nauseum for YEARS and people still seem to be sticking their fingers in their ears about it. Whether you disagree or not simply isn't relevant in the eyes of the law. Don't like it? Vote folks in who will change the law.
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
In the basic tools that SHOULD be bundled department, when are they going to add ssh? at least the friggin' client!!
GM have been awarded the contract for building all roads.
All roads signs in the future will include a 'Designed for GM' logo.
It is believed that GM will license the new roads to the other car manufacturers, though technology insiders say it is unlikely that their competitors will be able to compete effectively with GM because of their closely guarded knowledge of the structure of the road surface.
All forms of public transport will be denied access to the new roads.
A government spokesman with a large bulging attache case and a broad smile announced the move at a press conference stating that 'this is a great day for the motorist'.
The move comes hot on the heels of recent share increases for the company as the markets reacted favourably to GM's 'inspired' cost savings stemming from the downsizing of their engineering and safety departments.
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
Actually you've just totally missed my point. You have a choice to install ubuntu or gentoo or debian or kboppix or fedora or suse or ...
...
You have a choice.
When the only effective place to get a computer is dell, gateway, toshiba, sony or lenovo and they all bundle only windows and only support windows and use hardware which isn't fully speced out or compliant and only runs in windows
That's when you have a monopoly. Which is one thing, but then to exploit it further by bundling non compliant tools is worse.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
"To carry on your analogy though it'd be like your car only runs fuel from Esso, can only use radios from Sony and the thing can only drive on toll roads."
.Net. If you are referring to their proprietary file format, I agree, it sucks, but it is getting replaced with an open XML standard (although not the same XML standard that OO uses). And if that is one of your requirements then you should have researched your options before dropping the money. I'm not going to drop $250,000 on a Ferrari then complain that it can't go rock crawling.
..."
Ahh, but my car only runs on 87-93 octane petrol based fuel. Can only run stereos that operate off of 12v DC that fit in a 1.5u slot, and can only drive on roads (which are paid for either by toll or tax). My PC can run IIS or Apache. It can run SQL Server or Oracle. It can run IE or FireFox.
"Why can I buy a 800$ office suite and then not be able to write my own scripts to work with the files it produces?"
Uh, MS Office does allow you to write your own scripts in VBA and
"You think IE is a web browser? It's not. (technically neither is FireFox but at least it's closer and free to install or remove).
Where the hell have I ever posted that IE is a better web browser?!?!?! I haven't, and I don't think it is. I use FF. I enjoy FF. I check my web designs in both FF and IE to ensure they look good to the majority of users. Having IE bound into the OS does allow for some nice features though.
You are letting your hatred of MS cloud your judgement. Yes, MS has some dubious marketing techniques and MS products are not perfect, but they are providing a service that consumers demand. Look at what happened in the EU. MS was forced to offer a stripped down, no IE/MP edition... and (almost)no one bought it! Because consumers want that functionality built in. And as long as consumers have demands, some company will strive to meet them and turn a profit doing so.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
This is such a tiresome subject.
Let them bundle whatever the hell they want.
If people want to install other software that they think is better, they can.
When microsoft starts denying users to install software, then I'll join in the outrage.
Less is more
Move sig!
nuf said
I posted this deep in a conversation, so I'll repost it. The matter at hand is not whether or not you thing its a legitimate business practice for Microsoft to bundle products. The legal issues are far more limited than that. Microsoft is a convicted monopolist, so its business practices are very, very tightly controlled under anti-trust regulations. The rules that apply to Microsoft are very different than the rules that apply to say, Apple, or Sun, or IBM. When you've been convicted of having an illegal monopoly, you have to abide by certain rules, or face legal action. If you disagree with this, the proper place to register complaints is with congress, not the courts. The courts have to make judgements on the existing legal framework, and under this framework Microsoft is not permitted certain business practices that would be perfectly fine for anyone else.
Bundling by a monopolist is considered "tying". Tying is illegal under the Sherman Anti-trust act.
Vertical tying is the practice of requiring customers to purchase related products or services from the same company. For example, a company's automobile only runs on its own proprietary gas and can only be serviced by its own dealers. In an effort to curb this, many jurisdictions require that warranties not be voided by outside servicing; for example see the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act in the United States. More recently, video game consoles run only software licensed by the console manufacturer and use lockout chips to enforce this.
Microsoft ties together Microsoft Windows, Internet Explorer, and Outlook Express.
Tying may be the action of several companies, as well as the work of just one firm.
It was first made potentially illegal in the United States by the Sherman Antitrust Act (section 1) if the firm has market power in the tying good, and a "non-trivial" amount of business is affected by the tying. See International Salt Co. v. United States, 332 U.S. 392 (1947).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying
At issue is not whether or not this is a reasonable law; but whether or not Microsoft has violated it.
A) Microsoft is a convicted monopolist.
B) Microsoft ties its products together.
C) Tying of its products affects a substantial number of businesses
D) The DoJ settlement did not measurably reduce Microsoft's market power.
Therefore, a new antitrust case is in order.
If you disagree, don't argue about the courts; they are just doing their job. Congress will have to pass some legislation either revoking the Sherman AntiTrust act, or specifically exempting Microsoft.
Regardless of whether or not you support Microsoft, you should support the rule of law. If you believe that Microsoft should be permitted to tie products together, you should be writing your congress man, not bitching about federal courts.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Monopolies are not illegal, wrong, or persecuted.
What is illegal, and wrong is abusing a monopoly position to obtain dominance in another area.
This is why Microsoft are being penalised (for example when they gave IE away for free in order to kill off Netscape) and Google, who are not abusing their monopoly are not being penalised.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
One word. Bullshit.
Ok, I happen to like Microsoft, and use 2K server. I see AD as a server, and wouldn't have purchased the OS and PC to go with it, if it was missing.
Ok, I bought the $300 office suite, because:
a) I like it
or
b) I've never heard of OO.o
? WHAT THE F**K!?!? IF YOU DONT F**King LIKE IT, DON'T F***King BUY IT! IF YOU DON'T F**KING LIKE IT, DONT F**KING USE IT! Ok, I'm done now. All these Anti-trust things are BS pitched by companies who are losing. Sucks for you.
You expect Microsoft to put Netscape in Windows? If you want Netscape, go download it. http://www.netscape.com/ Here. Go ahead. I've never seen Microsoft stop anybody. FF doesn't just stop working on my computer, with an ominous MS popup. I thought a monopoly stopped people. If MS sucks so much, how did they get on so many PCs? If you don't like Microsoft, use Debian. It's free
People who use Microsoft products either like them, or don't care. If you don't like it, you're not using it. And if you do use it, you're stupid. Just simple. So, you don't like something and don't want to use it, don't go out and buy it, install it, choose to install it (when you're given the choice), and then complain about it, and go so far to sue (!) about it. You know, you could choose "Uninstall", right? Or do you just want money?
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Nobody is saying MSFT shouldn't make the products.
They're saying they shouldn't come with the OS. There is a clear distinction.
Specially since they have actively developed software with vendor-lockin in mind. That's why MS word is not documented and changes enough from year to year. That's why samba had to reverse engineer the network protocol, why IE invented it's own CSS standard, etc...
If MSFT were truly innocent they'd say "this is the file format, if you can write an editor for cheaper go for it". They don't because they know that would spell the end of their stranglehold. Even their "open XML" spec will likely contain re-encoded (encoding armored) binary blobs or some other way of messing with others trying to compete.
Maybe I'm just odd but I don't live in this dreamworld where you can do anything you want to the client because they'll give you money anyways.
Even as a 20 yr old kid doing projects for companies I'd document everything. I knew that I wouldn't be at the location forever and I wanted them to get the most bang for their buck. Did I want to be unemployed? No. I just wanted to be right.
And honestly quite a few of my employers enjoyed that openness. That they knew they were paying for software that let them have choices. Often it included keeping me on longer than the project (e.g. to help pay for school) but often it was just that they got more benefit out of the project than if I made everything closed.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
For the record I think any other OS (e.g. SUSE or Redhat) that aligns with one technology or another (e.g. mysql or gnome or ...) should de-bundle as well. At least most distros (debian, gentoo, ...) are neutral and allow the USER to CHOOSE what they want to use.
Actually you've just totally missed my point. You have a choice to install ubuntu or gentoo or debian or kboppix or fedora or suse or ...
You must be John Kerry.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Why does anyone care what MS does or doesn't bundle with their OS? There's much more functionality embedded in any Linux distro than Windows; Ubuntu, for example, comes with an office suite, Outlook equivalent, media player(s), etc. etc.
The real problems with the MS monopoly are their complete disregard for standards, and thus, interoperability, and consumers' complete lack of choice of an OS when buying new PCs. If the government were to mandate some Goddamn interoparability standards/requirements for MS, and stop their insane arrangements with PC manufacturers. Then, manufacturers would then give customers a choice of OS when they were, say, customizing their new Dell, similar to the way they can presently save money by choosing less RAM, hard disk space, etc. Under these conditions, the monopoly would surely disintegrate. Joe Sixpack might see that getting Linux with his computer would be $100 cheaper; Linux itself, moreover, would be capable of enough interoperability to meet his needs; everyone's happy; MS is marginalized, as it is not able to provide comparable services to [F/OSS OS of your choice] at a comparable price.
Yay, capitalism.
It's not illegal to have a monopoly. Using it to hamper free competition is.
If you have an OS monopoly, bundling a web browser with it (raising the OS price accordingly) makes it impossible to compete for others who make web browsers (unless the product of the monopolist is absolute crap).
If you have a monopoly on office suites, bundling mail software with it (raising the price accordingly) makes it impossible for other mail software vendors to compete.
If you had a monopoly on cars, supplying free gas with a car ((raising the price accordingly) makes it impossible to compete.
Etcetcetc.
Last I checked you had a choice in most linux distros as to what you can use....
... or mysql or postgres ... etc.
:-)
Last I checked in Gentoo for instance I don't have to use gnome or kde
In certain cases there are anti-competitive issues like Redhat modifying the C++ libs so things like Synopsis won't run outside of Fedora. But for the most part you're free to install anything you like. Distros like Fedora support NFS, LDAP, etc.... you can make Fedora talk to Ubuntu fairly trivially, etc.
I don't see how I'm flip flopping. I never said Linux distros are anti-competitive. I said any distro that aligns itself with technology *should* de-bundle. I never said they shouldn't bundle software.
While Fedora comes with Gnome you're free to install icewm or KDE and it'll work just fine. In fact you can choose not to install a WM at all.
To put this in context, imagine Fedora had it's own window manager that wasn't X11 compliant and you could only run applications that use it with the OS. That'd be MSFT Windows. However, that's not the case as Fedora comes "out of the box default" with a X11 server and open source window manager.
Try installing windows without a WM.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
IMHO, bundling products is not Microsoft's most egregious anticompetitive behavior. Not by far.
Patenting the Office XML schema and the FAT file system have got to be up there.
Forcing people to buy a copy of Windows with every new computer is pretty bad too. Declaring that it's illegal to resell such a copy (because it's bound to the PC), and then saying you have to pay for it all over again if you upgrade the motherboard is the icing on the cake.
Why do all the antitrust suits focus on bundling?
Let me distill your argument.
Tom: Distributions like Fedora and SuSE that encourage GNOME over KDE need to be dismantled.
Direct quote: I think any other OS (e.g. SUSE or Redhat) that aligns with one technology or another (e.g. mysql or gnome or ...) should de-bundle as well.
Tom: No I said it's good because you have a choice to install SuSE or Gentoo, there's no need to dismantle Red Hat or SuSE!
Direct quote: Actually you've just totally missed my point. You have a choice to install ubuntu or gentoo or debian or kboppix or fedora or suse
First you claim that certain distros need to be taken apart; then you claim that you weren't saying that. The arguments are conflicting.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Assuming things haven't changed since then, there's definitely something wrong with that pricing model.
Not at all. Compare the price of a 20 oz soda bottle with a two liter. Typically, the two liter is the same price.
Why is having a choice such a scary proposition. You can still use your windows bundle. Why can't I choose to just have the kernel?
Stray from the centre a bit ok?
tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
"Specially since they have actively developed software with vendor-lockin in mind. That's why MS word is not documented and changes enough from year to year. That's why samba had to reverse engineer the network protocol, why IE invented it's own CSS standard, etc...
If MSFT were truly innocent they'd say "this is the file format, if you can write an editor for cheaper go for it". They don't because they know that would spell the end of their stranglehold. Even their "open XML" spec will likely contain re-encoded (encoding armored) binary blobs or some other way of messing with others trying to compete."
Why should MS be forced to (potentially) help their competition? It's their choice how they write their software. If you're not going to pay for it, who the hell are you to tell them what to do?
Given a choice between Microsoft possibly becoming a monopoly (which I believe very strongly that they're not) and the government dictating what and how I can write code (because if they dictate to Microsoft, they can dictate to anybody) I'll take Microsoft anyday. Microsoft only has the potential to be a monopoly. The government is undoubtedly a monopoly.
What kind of idiot are you giving them ideas like that!
As if things weren't expensive enough.
"Ah yes, you DID buy the Windows 2010 framework for only $50 retail! Now, in order to run the file explorer, you'll need the file explorer plugin--that's $2."
"You want to watch video files? $1 per codec."
etc etc etc.
Windows is aimed at the average user, not the guy who is going to recompile his own kernel because he doesn't need USB support.
In what way does Fedora stop you from installing KDE? There are likely RPMs for it!!!
... which PC producer only bundles fedora? Suppose Fedora was a total lockin. Which is bad. It's not as bad as MSFT which is in every PC and a lockin.
How does MSFT prevent the same? Oh let's see, non-documented file formats, network protocols and behaviours. Where is the RFC from microsoft on how their file network works?
There is a difference between "prefer" and "align". Align means you only support something and you work towards that goal. Prefer just means you'd use that by default.
Fedora defaults to Gnome but underneath it's just an X11 server. You can put icewm, wm, kde or whatever else you want. The tools will still run (most of which are CLI to start with anyways).
In fact quite a few fedora boxes I've setup don't even have monitors or keyboards and just use webmin to setup the services. So I don't even use the Fedora "gui tools" that it comes with. How's that for competition?
But that aside
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
On a Mac, or in Linux, you can swap out the parts. Don't like QT? it can be easily uninstalled. Ditto iTunes. Same with Safari, and Mail, and AppleWorks. You can uninstall all of those and replace them without problems. And they all have free alternatives.
I've replaced Mail and Safari and stuck them on a backup disk in case I change my mind. I like iTunes and QuickTime (but VLC is growing on me) and Appleworks is smaller/nimbler than NeoOffice (which I also have). Heck, one could replace the Dock if they felt like it, and I have replaced my Finder. You can do that on Linux too, although it probably takes a bit more work. Try doing that on Windows, and everything will either break, or you'll be called a pirate..
What's next... claiming that inclusion of MS Paint is anti-competitive?
Exactly. I see AD as an integral part of Windows Server, and although I usually opt to use other media players, I think it makes good sense to include WMP with Windows. True, it does put competing products at a disadvantage, but I as a customer wouldn't want to have to obtain third-party products just to do simple things like viewing images or web pages. As long as alternative products are able to work with the system to the same degree as Microsoft's offerings, I see no problem. Bundling small apps with the OS and increases the value of the system to the average user. If Microsoft is guilty of this, then how much moreso are *BSD and Linux distros?
Why should MS be forced to (potentially) help their competition? It's their choice how they write their software. If you're not going to pay for it, who the hell are you to tell them what to do?
Um? You're saying if I buy Word I can't look at the files it produces?
That's like Ford saying "you can't look under the hood". OH wait, they tried that and lost. Why is this any different?
It may help their competition? Are you kiddin me? Msft is nothing if not a total rip off. Name me one original idea from MSFT that is halfway successful today. Maybe Xbox Live but even that is a loss at this point so as a business it's a failure.
Why is it ok for them to ripoff ideas but then when we demand a bit of fair play that's "nonsense hippie share the world helping competition".
You ever think opening it up could help sell word? Look at the IBM PC. Anyone could write software for it and all of a sudden it was popular... imagine that. While you can write software with free compilers for MSFT a lot of its services are still closed up.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Rockfeller called his trust "Standard Oil" because that was what he sold:
a product so uniform and predictable your wife could light a lamp with perfect confidence it wouldn't blow up in her face. The problem for the trust-buster, then and now, is that ruthless entrepreneur, the robber baron, usually has a better understanding of what people really want.
/* begin sarcasm */ I was starting to worry about M$ for a bit there, they hadn't had any /. articles questioning something M$ related or other for a few weeks here - nice to know they haven't decided to do the proper thing and become a company that at least *tries* to stay out of lawsuits... /* end sarcasm */
I think ppl like Tangent have to realize that the users are not idiots and will use whatever the hell comes with thier computers. My computer came with Windows Media Player, IE and Outlook Express but guess what.. I use winamp, firefox and thunderbird.
I think these guys just wanna make a quick buck. Users have the opportunity to just buy Word and Excel seperately if they want to. They have an option NOT to include Outlook.
Additionally, what I don't get is that I did a search online for Tangnet Inc and I found this company: http://www.tangent.com/products/index.htm/ They are a MS Partner.
In a filing with the US District Court for the Northern District of California, Tangent claimed Microsoft continues to engage in anticompetitive conduct and has caused it damages by "increasing, maintaining or stabilizing the price [Tangent] paid for Microsoft's operating system software above competitive levels."
So what are they doing? Increasing or maintaining or stabilizing the price? Make up your minds.
Tangent claimed relief under the Sherman Act and cited recent US Department of Justice and European Commission criticism of Microsoft's failure to provide third parties with relevant technical documentation, as evidence that the company continues to prevent interoperability with non-Windows systems.
umm.. MS is a software company, and all its software runs on windows, why should it care about its products running on Linux? Its like saying GM is not providing enough tech info so that I can make my car inter operate with Toyota
... I want every microsoft product bundled for free with Windows. Am I alone in this? I don't want to have to install windows, download a browser, download or install an office suite, download or install an email client, download or install a chat client, download or install CD burning software or download or install streaming media software.
I remember the dark ages of streaming media, when I had to install that festering pile of stink called Real Player on my computer and every other computer I knew of, so that they could get the full web experience.
When Windows boots for the first time, there should be a full suite of "Good enough" software to at least operate in the short term until I can replace it with something I might like better.
As I see it I can either:
A) Boot up with no software, which forces me to download everything.
B) Boot up with crappy software that gets the job done.
I choose the latter. Knowing it doesn't matter what windows XP machine on earth I'm on, I'll have a media player and a chat client is a huge plus in my mind.
Fuck this. You're dancing around the entire argument. Every time I point out what you said you go "Oh what blahblahblah something else blahblahblah" instead of addressing the issue. You started up and said DIRECTLY that Red Hat and SuSE need to de-bundle; then you said that's not what you said; now you're trying to warp your words.
You want to make the distinction between "prefer" and "align," fine. That doesn't change that when you mentioned "aligning," you distinctly made parenthetical examles of SuSE and Red Hat.
Your entire argument is scattering across the board into irrelevance and self-conflicting garbage. This discussion is not worth having anymore, as there is neither intelligence nor direction coming from your end. Goodbye.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
I am intrigued by this idea. Can I download all of the required components for free, and distribute it (and copies of it) to anyone I wish? Please could you let me know the URL of such a marvellous invention?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Astute observation! OP is agitating not for the right to choose (since Windows doesn't really prevent you from using any competitor's product) but rather the requirement to choose, apparently oblivious to the fact that the decision not to choose is itself a choice; one he would take away.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
I singled out Suse and Redhat because they're commercial. If some guys PERSONAL distro is a monopoly that is in no way illegal.
I never said they should debundle I said distros that align should. Perhaps I phrased that wrong but I was trying to show my anger isn't unidirectional. It was trying to suggest a possible hypothetical course of action. I specifically mentioned the two distros because they're commercial not because they're aligned.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
...enough is enough. If you want to fight Microsoft go make a better distribution of Linux to compete with them and quit crying every time Microsoft bundless some software. Its called offering a competitive product. Microsoft has competition in the way of Apple and Linux. Its up to the industry to offer a better alternative, its not up to the government to beat Microsoft with the litigation stick every time they think Microsoft's stock is getting too valuable. You, yeah you, go and build a better product and then don't sell out when Bill knocks on your door.
Read my short stories - You won't regret it.
Microsoft Faces Fresh Antitrust Complaints
That's good, the other ones were getting stale.
It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
...because they haven't been legally found to be a monopoly, thus they get to play by different rules. That's the way the law works.
People seem to just look for an excuse to nark on Microsoft. When I install an OS, frankly I'd rather have my essentials right then. Any consumer wouldn't be in their right mind to say "No I'd rather go buy some from some website or something." - Sure, when I install Windows I go and pick up Firefox, then follow with Zoomplayer, but that's my personal preference. My sister would be content with Windows Media Player.
Microsoft gives a starting ground, and it's up to the user to decide "I want more." - If the user does this, he can go tell Windows to associate whatever formats to whatever media. He can tell Windows to use Firefox instead of Internet Explorer. If what Microsoft provides is enough for the average computer user, then maybe whoever is selling their software should rethink their position compared to Microsoft's.
Microsoft should not be punished for attempting to make the average computer user's life easier. Linux bundles pretty much everything that Microsoft does (respectively different programs of course) - and I don't see Linux distro's getting flak for it.
I realize the pro-MS spin makes the issue confusing, but other than that what's so hard to understand? It's not the bundling that's illegal, is the use of a monopoly in one market (the desktop) to create a new monopoly in another market (audio and video formats).
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
"We wanted to release our new World of Solitare game but Microsoft bundled their own version with the OS. We can't compete in a market like this."
-SA3Steve - Fake CEO of Blzzard
That's funny, I was able to get Outlook 2003 on its own and I have it running side by side with Office 2000. What breed of moron is making the claim that Outlook is bundled with Office? Sure, there are Office bundles but you can purchase every app on its own as well. You get a break by buying the bundle but what's anti-competitive about that?
I acutally use a PowerBook but I've always wondered why tying the iPod to the iTunes music store via Fairplay isn't a anti-trust violation too since they have the Windows market share in online music and MP3 players....Anyone smarter than me know why?? I have a Windows machine but can choose to use Outlook, Window Media Player etc, I am not forced to....Why isn't including QuickTime tied closely to OS X also the same thing.
This makes little sense to me.
--
Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
The problem isn't bundling directory services with the server. It's that the windows client comes pre-built with an Active Directory client. Because of the desktop monopoly, that client makes it easier to go with a Windows Server/AD combo than, say, a Novell Directory Server.
That's the kind of bundling that's illegal. They use their desktop monopoly to define a de-facto standard that only Microsoft Servers can work with. That's why the EU is demaning that they open up the protocols.
That's also why there's a problem with bundling Windows media codecs with the desktop OS. It's not a problem that they bundle a media player, it's a problem that the monopoly desktop system comes with codecs that nobody else can code to. Again, if they're going to bundle codecs with the monopoly desktop system, they should be required to publish how to work with them. No problem with their being there. Just the fact that nobody else's server systems can talk to them, and nobody else can build a competing client system that can support them (without often-imperfect reverse engineering).
It's really an easy issue. The EU has it (mostly) right. Just open up the client protocols and compete on the merits. Then there's no problem. Or unbundle. The only problem with the EU is if they'll allow MS to charge for the 'open' protocols and so exclude open source implementations. That wouldn't solve the problem, since open source is the only viable competitor out there.
And finally, if they hadn't broken the law, no government would likely be requiring them to open up anything. But they did. Grow up and face the punishment. Windows isn't going to go away because of a little competition. There are enough windows-only apps out there to keep Windows secure on a huge number of desktops for decades.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
C'mon now? AD with server..??..??! M$ also bundles telnet with the OS as well! Oh noes!,/i>
MS has a monopoly on desktop operating systems. MS is using that monopoly, illegally, to gain a monopoly on server operating systems. They do this by building proprietary, undocumented protocols and interfaces between the desktop OS and the server OS. This is illegal and they have already been convicted of this crime. Active Directory is one more proprietary, undocumented interface between the two that ties them and furthers this illegal action. Telnet is a documented, open standard. This is why the EU ordered MS to document all protocols and interfaces between these two products and that is why adding more undocumented interfaces is a concern.
Windows server is a pile of dog crap. Most sysadmins end up configuring a separate Windows server for each application they wish to serve and they have to buy more of them for the same task and at greater expense than the competition. Windows server, however, is the only first class citizen for interfacing with Windows desktop OS's. That is why people buy it and why it gains market share. It is also illegal because it leads to an inferior product dominating a market only because an existing monopoly is being leveraged.
I think there has only been one compliant in the EU before (which the court decided on in 2004 but MS still hasn't complied with the judgement).
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
NT
Comment of the year
Microsoft could be shattered into separate companies. A Windows OS company. An Office productivity software company. A media player company (which would last about a fortnight)
And every one of those companies would be a monopoly in their field. Windows would still have 90%+ market share, IE Corp would still have a monopoly on browsers, Office would still command it's share, and WMP? well, it's either that, real, or Apple. Real might as well be declared dead and Apple is gaining market share through Itunes anyway through Ipod sales even though WMP is bundled. So I guess that means we need to split it up down to word inc, excel inc, windows server Inc, WMA Audio Inc, ETC, OOPS! the're still monopolies...
In fact, Apple and Mozilla are shining examples of software that competes very well in the MS monopoly. Why? because they don't suck, spam you, or are owned by someone who doesn't know what to do with it. Most of the companies that screamed monopoly Either got bought out and flushed by whoever bought them out (Wordperfect and Lotus), Made a shoddy product (Netscape), started using their client for ad revenue to the point of becoming practially spyware (Real), or did a combination of the three. Meanwhile, Microsoft slowly surpassed them while they were screwing around.
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
No it doesn't force you to install outlook. But for some reason beyond me Windows update sure is persistant about wanting me to install updates for it despite it not being on my system in any form. I even went through and uninstalled outlook express and yet still it wants me to update it. [shrugs]
Before declaring Real dead, you should check out their video codecs.
...sample... some video and found these crazy "RMVB" reencodes.
I went to a popular bittorrent site to
They cut a 700MB movie down to about 430MB and the quality is still amazing.
Then again, I haven't used 'Real Player' in years, but somewhere along the line, they either bought or developed a fscking amazing video codec.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Where do you want to go today?
/. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
"Music Online" isn't really the market Apple's playing in, and they're only a few percent of the whole market.
I can take a Fairplay-protected song, burn it to a CD, rip it in Windows Media Player, and play it on a Rio. I can buy a CD with the music on it and rip it for any hardware. I can burn a song from Rhapsody and rip it for an iPod.
You're not locked in by music, at worst it's an inconvenience.
But I can't "rip" software from Windows and run it on UNIX or Mac OS, except by running Windows under emulation, or by emulating Windows (which is still far from practical for the average user, and enough of a moving target it probably will never be). THAT is why there's a difference - there's software you can't run at all without Windows, except through heroic measures. If you want to play music that's not available on Rhapsody on your Rio, you have dozens of easy options.
Windows Media Player bundled with Windows, and on the server as well, leaves the opportunity that someone would be less likely to download and install RealPlayer / Quicktime or some other media service/player.
I would rather see competition drive the needs instead of see lawyers making the choices for us.
Good answer. I'd mod you up if I could.
Move along, no sig to see here.
No. In the case of Mozilla, it's because it's free and has a sufficient number of additional features (not the least of which is that it's far more secure). If either of those things were not true, then it wouldn't be able to "compete".
When the nature of a market is such that the only way to "compete" against the dominant money-making player is to build your product using the freely-given labor of others and then turn around and give it away for free (source and all!), then the market itself isn't free at all: it's monopolized. In fact, it's monopolized to the point that only the monopolizer can make money in it, a far worse situation than most monopoly situations.
As for Apple, the only reason they are a player in the market is that they sell their own computer systems with their own OS and with the product in question bundled with it. Without that, they never would have gotten a foothold. Beyond that, they too give away the software in question (at least for Windows), so they're not really making any money in the market, either.
Microsoft's bundling of various products (e.g., media player) forces their competition to give away their products for free. A market in which the only company that can get away with charging (indirectly) for its product happens to be the monopolizer is no market at all.
It's only because of the unique nature of software that free alternatives exist at all: software has a low enough barrier to entry that people can produce it in their spare time, can easily be modified and improved upon by others, and can be replicated at will. That means that one needn't spend any more time or money to produce it than they would with any other hobby. If any of those conditions weren't true, free software as we know it would not exist at all, and the monopoly that Microsoft really has would be blindingly obvious.
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
Microsoft's general counsel said "Transparency is vitally important in what can be a very opaque process in Brussels. We've decided to open this up so people can understand the issues."
Also a ZDNet article, FSF berates apathy over Microsoft antitrust case , reports that the FSFE has criticised EU IT firms for not supporting the EC in its antitrust case against Microsoft.
ZDNet report that George Greve said in a blog entry that "[the] FSFE has been working on this case for many years, from the original investigation, over the 2004 decision, to the European Court case where it is now one of two [active] remaining third parties on the side of the European Commission. I only hope that more companies will help us defending their interests in this -- to this date, FSFE has received virtually no support for this case from the industry. Consequently, all the credit belongs to the free software community, including in particular the Fellows of the FSFE."
Greve also responds to the new EU complaint by ECIS applauding it, but pointing out that this may seem inconsistent as Microsoft has already reached individual settlements with ECIS members such as RealNetworks and Sun.
Also there is a good Guardian article from a few days ago which summarises and criticises recent rebuffs by MS to the EC's decision.
Also there is an entry on Tod Bishop's Microsoft Blog, Lessig advocates Microsoft , reporting that Lessig supports Microsoft's InfoCard project.
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
The Word document format is barely even documented within Microsoft. Its design is a mess. If Microsoft employees have almost no hope of having it documented the rest of the world has no hope at all.
Developers: We can use your help.
It's always good to have choice in the software you install *ON* your operating system.
About your analogy: that's a good one.
So tell me: if you *BUY* a house, you want to replace the ugly aluminium kitchen sink with a nice steel one, and you discover it's bolted to the walls and pieces of it are wrapped around your gas water and electricity pipes so you'd have to saw them through to tear the thing out; how do you feel about your analogy now?
I rest my case.
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
Lets face it, consumers will use whatever it is thats put in front of them most of the time. If you include a bare OS, they will complain nothing is being included and will go to an OS that does include everything they need. If you include the programs that do the functionality the consumer asks for, then businesses say it's unfair. Therefore lets blame the consumer for being lazy. Sound fair?
My Gawd WTF...
...the Firefox Downloader with the blue "e" icon?
It's danged hard to actually get rid of, as is that stupid virus flypaper which everyone extols the calendaring features of and then nobody actually uses those features. One of my pet hates is the difficulty in driving a stake through the heart of these two security risks -- many "security" updates bring them back to haunt you afresh.
Likewise, I think EBay should be anti-trusted into the ground over how they're essentially forcing sellers to use PayPal now that they've bought the company.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
for you maybe-- evey time I setup a computer, I type in the same 5 words, with a colon and a perioda ndalone+site%3Aapple.com
I always get they standalone pretty readily...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=quicktime+st
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
I don't want to embarass you, but...
the next time yer near an XP machine..
hit the button in the bottom right with a picture of the windows logo, and hit R
in the box that pops up, type in the word notepad, then hit the enter button
now hit Alt+o and look-- what is the last option listed?
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Anybody want to place bets on the number of lawsuits that will pop up after Vista has been out for say... 2-3 years?
Microsoft can prevent all anti-trust and anti-competitive lawsuits if they license source code along with their products.
"Transparency begets mutual trust and respect"
Slashdot = Sarcasm
"A) Microsoft is a convicted monopolist."
I have to assume you're talking about US v. Microsoft, the IE/Netscape thing.
If you'd bothered to read the judgement, they settled without finding fault. In other words, no they were not convicted.
"FINAL JUDGMENT
(November 12, 2002)
WHEREAS, plaintiffs United States of America ("United States") and the States of New York, Ohio, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina and Wisconsin and defendant Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft"), by their respective attorneys, have consented to the entry of this Final Judgment;
AND WHEREAS, this Final Judgment does not constitute any admission by any party regarding any issue of fact or law"
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f200400/200457.htm
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
i like the expert pc users running linux comment in there. Im almost retarded and ive been running linux for years!
So how do I get it to use two different fonts on a page? Maybe I was not really clear about what I meant.
Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence