Slashdot Mirror
EU Think Tank Urges Full Windows Unbundling
leffeman writes "An influential Brussels think tank is urging the European Commission to ban the bundling of operating systems with desktop and laptop computers. The Globalisation Institute's submission to the Commission says that bundling 'is not in the public interest' and that the dominance of Windows has 'slowed technical improvements and prevented new alternatives entering from the marketplace.' It says the Microsoft tax is a burden on EU businesses: the price of operating systems would be lower in a competitive market. This is the first time a major free-market think tank has published in favour of taking action against Microsoft's monopoly power."
My Little Opinion??
To create true competition in this sector, the way to handle it is to allow their base Win32 API's to be implemented or copied... (Meaning, complete legal protection) In short, legalize Wine and similar projects... Plain and simple.. If they were to officially protect the Wine project, and similar API projects, this would allow for huge amounts of investment into this sector. Within two years nearly ever version of linux would be able to run "cleanly" virtually any Win32 application. This would also force M$ to once again compete by trying to get people to buy windows because it is better rather than because they are simply doing it..
The real issue with banning the bundling of operating systems is that it will incur extra cost and frustration for non-geeks (i.e. mums and dads everywhere) who don't know how to install an OS. Picture this: a random person decides to buy a computer and take it home. They get home, plug in and boot up. They hit a black screen with or something similar on it. They complain, try to take it back only to find out that they need to spend another $x on labour costs. The consumer is unhappy, the vendor is unhappy because they have an unhappy customer. But at least M$ gets shafted!
Really, vendors should be forced to ask the consumer which operating system their client wants and give prices for them to their customer for every new PC sale. That would promote fair market better than "banning bundling".
Respectfully, I don't think this is their argument is towards or against free market. It appears to me that it's more oriented towards reducing MS domination without looking at the alternatives realistically. My brand new Ubuntu install (yes, I'm very happy now) was not without a few hiccups that required experience well beyond the average user's ability and/or patience. My intermediate Xenix exposure from almost 20 years ago and overall IT experience were the only things that got me up and running on a laptop with built-in wireless without having to seek assistance. My mom just bought a new Mac last week and I've already had multiple calls for help because most of her prior experience has been MS centric. I am all for the world moving towards MS alternatives but the fact of the matter is that most folks use MS and know it exclusively. It's not about free market as much as trying to reduce the stranglehold that MS possesses due to its already ubiquitous use.
I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
A market dominated by a single entity, whether it's the government or a corporation, is not a free market.
I wouldn't even mind MS-Windows pre-loaded but unusuable and unlicensed without a "key" that is purchased separately (or at the same time, optionally, with a line-item charge clearly visible).
I sell no computer where the consumer has no choice on what is to be installed. If they want linux they get linux. If they want windows they get windows. If they want Vista I advise against it with all my might. They 47 spying programs, the wgn/wga tools, the activation, the lack of privacy, the DRM, and more is enough to get people to wise up to the reality of what a monopoly provides to them, and to the monopoly.
But I never charge $50 for an install. I do all the drivers, the updates, give them free antivirus/adware protection, free productivity apps, etc. My cost is $85.00. I know others have higher costs and some lower. When you consider it takes at least 2 hours to just do the Microsoft updates/service packs (including the option software) -- after the OS has been installed with drivers -- before protection apps and then beautification you should be able to see why $85.00 is not out of line. It can take 4-8 hours just to complete the install with everything.
Bundling helps companies such as Dell, Sony, etc. It hurts consumer choice because they don't realize they have a choice of operating systems other than Microsoft. When people find out from me they are happy I told them and amazed they didn't know there were other choices. I've turned a lot of people onto the Macintosh and onto Linux. Almost everyone that comes into my store gets a demo of Linux with Beryl/Compiz.
Consumers need to know there's a choice!!!
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
Yes. Let me quote Wikipedia, the always 100% correct and unbiased online encyclopedia:
A government is a body that has the power to make and the authority to enforce rules and laws within a civil, corporate, religious, academic, or other organization or group.One could argue that someone with a nucular device is a body that is in power to enforce rules and laws within any group of people sufficiently close. This is what the government is, and has always been. Difference is that now we often chose the guy with the nuke, or at least are lead to believe to have a choice... :)
c++;