Slashdot Mirror
Windows Tax Shot Down In Italy
An anonymous reader writes Italy's High Court has struck a blow to the practice of forcing non-free software on buyers of PCs and laptops. According to La Repubblica, the court ruled on Thursday that a laptop buyer was entitled to receive a refund for the price of the Microsoft Windows license on his computer. The judges sharply criticised the practice of selling PCs only together with a non-free operating system as "a commercial policy of forced distribution". The court slammed this practice as "monopolistic in tendency." It also highlighted that the practice of bundling means that end users are forced into using additional non-free applications due to compatibility and interoperability issues, whether they wanted these programs or not. "This decision is both welcome and long overdue", said Karsten Gerloff, President of the Free Software Foundation Europe. "No vendor should be allowed to cram non-free software down the throats of users."
Since computing is moving to tablets and phones, can we get OS refunds for iDevices and Android tablets and phones also ?
Also, is this applicable to Macs?
This space for rent.
It is clearly an illegal product tie, but somehow they are allowed to do it.
How would this impact MacBooks, iMacs, etc? You can't really buy OS X separately, and upgrades have become free so I don't even know that there's anything to refund.
I don't care if it's free or not. If it's annoying or unnecessary, I don't want to have to spend two hours to rid my newly bought computer of crapware I don't want.
A law that forbids selling hardware and software together would increase innovation. Consumers would only be able to buy hardware and software separately. That way, hardware vendors are encouraged to document the hardware and software vendors will compete on quality. Installation procedures would become very easy very quickly due to market pressure.
DNA is the ultimate spaghetti code.
More than a legal precedent this needs solid regulations with teeth. I suspect that if you walk into whatever the Italian equivalent of Best Buy waving this judgement around and demanding a refund that they will just have security escort you out. But if refusal to even offer a Windows free machine was worthy of a fine, let alone not removing it, then windows free machines would be widely available.
Also the removal of Windows should have to be free and done in a timely manner (under an hour).
I would say the same of the "bundled" apps on mobile phones that have nothing to do with the OS but with the carriers wish to provide "extra" that nobody asked for.
Specially when that comes with the extra cost of inn-existent updates for the OS due to the "pre-baking" of it...
Wait, this is Italy. Give it two years and then another court will rule that the practice is legal and order a new trial. In the meantime the laptop will be held until the second trial outcome is known.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Simple: don't purchase from vendors that do that. No coercion is necessary.
The difference is that Apple sells the device and the OS together while Microsoft only sells (or rather gives a licence) for the OS. The vendor is a different party. Hence you cannot buy a "HP" or "Sony" or "Samsung" or "Asus" computer without Windows on it. The windows licence cost is hidden in the seller's price. So the OS and the hardware aren't a bundle by the same company and hence you can't demand back money for your iDevice.
However, I wonder how that is handled in the case of Android. Android is freely available for download. However hardware manufacturers haven agreements with Microsoft to actually pay royality fees for (allegeds) patents in Android. Would that mean, that you could also ask money back from Microsoft if you buy an Android?
What does MS sell their OEM OS for anyway? Probably not that much. No one will likely bother.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
The bios is software, and you aren't going to install an OS without a bios.
The microcode is also software and you aren't going to run a computer without that either.
You get the idea?
Yes the whole world should bend to your desires and ideas...
Are you aware that most people want Windows? Because important applications like MS Office, games and financial stuff just works on Windows.
Are you aware that most people don't know and don't want to know anything about computers? They want their computer to simply start and work without any installation of software.
Are you aware that changing to a model where some computers have Windows and some others not may _increase_ costs of computers? Think not only on the installation but also increasing costs for support and education of workers. Bulk costs for Windows are pretty low.
Right, and you can also avoid getting scammed by not dealing with scammers, and avoid getting raped by not associating with rapists. You can also avoid getting shot by staying away from people with guns.
Sorry, but your moronic and over simplified statement is meaningless free market drivel.
You're an idiot.
While sympathetic to the argument, it doesn't make sense entirely to me. If I buy a new car, and decide I want to put Pirelli tires on it, should the automaker or dealer be required to give me a refund for the Goodyears I didn't want?
I dont believe the manufacturer (Dell, etc) is being forced to include Windows? Surely you're not forced to by a Dell either. Furthermore, I have to imagine the costs (OEM OS) are included in the price of the PC.
How is this different from Mac? Or was MS just being used for the stereotype?
If it came preinstalled with Office, do I get a rebate for that as well? How about Turbotax?
I'm a stupid muppet and am offended by your
...
...
...
insulting words! Please cease and
...
...
...
desist!
I only wanted windows, can I get a refund for the hardware ?
Nullius in verba
Then sue the others as well: Apple, Samsung, Google... Man, this is not funny anymore, it's so XX century.
Well, according to the original article on La Repubblica (hint: I'm Italian), the judgement came from the Cassazione, so it is as definitive as it can be in Italy (I know, I know...).
The majority of people want to go into a store, buy a computer, and have it work. They don't know or care what an Operating System is, as long as it runs the store-bought software they want to run on it. Giving people a half-dozen different combinations of hardware and software is only going to confuse them, prompt them to buy the cheaper product with DistroOfTheWeek Linux on it, and return it because it doesn't work the way they're used to. I could be mistaken, but I thought Dell tried selling systems without operating systems a few years back and gave up on it because shockingly, nobody was interested.
I agree with the ruling that people who do not want to run Windows on a PC should be able to get a refund since the vast majority of PC makers do not sell bare systems, essentially creating a monopolistic market. If I remember right, it's like $20 back.
That being said, no one is being forced to buy a Windows PC or a PC from a particular vendor. As such, the rest of the comments about customers being forced to buy other non-free apps is just bull. It's like saying that because all cars come with tires that I'm being forced to accept one with a tow hitch that costs more. No, there are alternatives. It doesn't take much to google for MS Word alternatives.
Here is my question, if the Free Software Foundation and the open source guys believe so much in having free software on PCs, why not start up a company that only sells PCs and Laptops with free software installed? Why is it the established vendors problem to solve? Begin by launching a fund raising campaign on Kickstarter, find a hardware supplier on Alibaba, and open a web storefront. It's not that hard...
Am I the only one who thinks this is not a good thing?
Ultimately the distinction between hardware and software is an arbitrary one. Both mediums combine to provide the function required for a given product.
Let's pretend I am a hypothetical manufacturer of electronic devices. I am making some awesome hardware, and some equally awesome software to compliment it. They function beautifully together combining to make one truly cool product. Why should I be compelled to sell a variant of my product with have of it ripped out? That just harms the overall quality of the products my company is known for.
Would you ask a car manufacturer to sell an unpainted version of their vehicles because it's unfair to other paint manufacturers? Would you demand a watch ship without gears, so you can specifically choose what time keeping mechanism to use? Would you require lightbulbs to retail without gas inside, so you can choose to fill it with nitrogen or argon yourself?
Of course not! You choose to buy a car in the color you want. You buy a completed watch that you think keeps time the best. You purchase a lightbulb that already has the features your want.
Software made to compliment hardware and vice-versa can be awesome. I want to buy my hardware from a vendor that supports open source because they think it's worthwhile, not because they begrudgingly were obliged to make it.
Linux, BSD, other open source solutions are awesome, and if I am a hardware vendor I am going to build hardware that supports it because it's awesome. Not because I've been strong armed into it by a the courts.
I am inclined to think it has a problem with including non-gratis stuff and not necessarily non-libre stuff, which would spring something like "windows trial version" in such cases.
> The judges sharply criticised the practice of selling PCs only together with a non-free operating system as "a commercial policy of forced distribution".
All together now... YA THINK??
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
It's like this news is from some weird alternate universe where we don't throw all logic and reason under the profit bus.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
It should be obvious that a buyer cannot be compelled to purchase one thing 'bundled' with something else. Yet, Microsoft has done this for decades and has fought off numerous court challenges. Even when lower courts go against it, the higher court always reverses the lower court (as will happen in this case) and leaves the bundling intact. The problem for the courts is that this is not black and white. If you buy a microwave, you don't give much thought to the 'operating system' behind the keypad. You just want it to work. Similar for a television. So far, so good, it's black and white clear...and in Microsoft's favor. But...for a computer, there are truly alternative choices (even if not widely used or popular) to Windows and someone could legitimately want to use an alternative and not want to pay for the primary choice. The difference, for the courts, between the television and the computer is that 1) there are no real consumer alternatives for the os for the television, and 2) there is no significant additional cost for the tv os. In the case of the computer, though, there are real alternatives for the os and there is an additional cost for the os as the computer maker purchases the os from an outside source for a substantial per unit license fee. That makes it more of a grey area and allows for a pro-user result from the courts occasionally, as in this case.
PC sales took off like a rocket with the introduction of the OEM system install at the wholesale price.
The balanced and tested configuration of hardware and software that worked out of the box. --- and was sold as a mass retail product under a single - unified - warranty.
Not the kit of parts that appealed only to the hobbyist or the IT pro.
If it worked, it worked. If it didn't, it went back to the store. The buyer wasn't obliged to diagnose hardware and software conflicts or borked system installs --- or pay for the privilege of having these problems solved for him
I hate the keyboards that come with laptops. I have a perfectly good USB keyboard that I always use. Why do manufactures insist on bundligna crappy chicklet keyboard on the hardware? I want a refund for the keyboard, since I never use it.
My laptop is also plugged into an external monitor (the 11" display is useless), so why am I forced to pay for a display?
Why should the "I don't like part of what I'm buying so I want my money back" argument be limited to software?
#include "standard_disclaimer.h"
You adapt any GNU software and you will owe them the source code. They will send lawyers to force your compliance. GNU is not free - it has strings attached.
yes we now know how many retarded people in the world are and ironically they all use tablets and these "smart" phones....
Why could I not apply this same legal idea to everything else included with the computer? "I already have a perfectly good power supply!" "Let me swap in my old CPU chip!" "Stop including an LCD on my laptop! I'm never going to use it!" "Curse the forced purchase of LED power lights! That's a good three cents I could save!"
There are more than enough sources from which a computer can be procured that do not have Windows. If the manufacturer or store you want to buy from doesn't have any, don't buy from there!
... software down the users throat.
I don't care if it's free or not. If it's annoying or unnecessary, I don't want to have to spend two hours to rid my newly bought computer of crapware I don't want.
Then buy a Mac. Not one whit of "crapware". Macs used to come with "trial versions" of MS Office; but I don't think that has been true since they developed the iWork suite. They also had a "trial" version of that, too; but then started simply including the suite for "free" with new Macs.
This apologist perspective is clearly a protectionist view... Protecting the monopoly. This has nothing to do with mandating, its about providing an option for those astute enough to do so. Will it result in harm to Microsoft? Only in the light of making it easier to try alternate methods of connecting to the world. The value of local resources is paltry compared to whats on the Internet proper. Once a browser is maximized, it doesn't matter what OS is under it. Or.. shouldn't .
To get that $59 refund, people will spend 3.5 hours each and wait 6 months.
Oh... And most people won't bother. The court could have just paid the $300 which will actually get refunded from this instead of wasting what was probably tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands screwing with this.
So the buyer should be forced to buy and pay for windows, even when there is no need for it? Your examples are nothing like what this case is about.
How dare Intel bundle the microcode for their processors with the hardware! What if I want to apply my own? They should be legally required to separate the microcode and physical silicon so customers are given a choice!
In related news, the price of PCs in Italy just shot up by about 100 Euros.
This argument (software bundling) has been around since 1993. Slashdot has been taking notice of this argument (beginning with IE bundling antitrust debates) going back almost that far. This ruling is about Italian legal standards and technology confusion more than what any of the comments are about. In fact this ruling is about microsoft and it's legacy more than anything else. Every piece of data storing technology has 'software' on it. Most of them can be described as having an OS. Im talking about everything from a flash drive to a car, to computerized airplanes, to CNC routers, to MRI machines, etc. 1) There is no chance in hell even Italy will uphold all electronics be available sans software. 2) Even in a limited situation for computers, requiring a company to warrantee a computer to be run under 100 possible OS's places a high burden on the company and will only happen in nations with very low tax income from computer manufacturers. 3) You can always just build a computer... with any OS you desire. 4) Phone companies wont do it for the same reason they dont adopt Ubuntu PC's.... 6 million daily calls from grandpas who accidentally got the Ubuntu PC and cant get his AOL to work... and by the way, where is the spider solitaire? Not everyone wants to spend days getting everything to work, then still having to remember his "root" . Andyou still have the compatibility problem assuming you get Android on an Iphone and tweak it till it actually works. Now all the Apps in Appstore need to be compatible with all phones, or acknowledge they arent and which they arent... test for all, debug for all, multiple versions of every app, linked features, etc. This is before apple quality testing. Then apple loses their clean 'it just works' appearance (which is their best sales edge) which is exactly what went wrong with Windows and why everyone is disgusted with it. All things to all people=consistently frustratingly sort of compatible. 5) Im not sure cell phone providers would ever allow true open underlying software because they dont trust people with unfettered access to their networks.
Except when the customer has no choise, so how are you not forced to pay for the windows, if you need the computer and none of the stores will sell one without the windows and refuse to refund the windows license, even though you are supposed to accept or decline the license at first boot? How about i say that because a robber points a gun at you and you don't have any weapon, it's optional to give the wallet? Huh? Do you think it's a real option for 99,9999% of the world to not give the wallet?
LMOL that's why windows tablets and windows phones have done sooo well *eye roll*
Are you aware that changing to a model where some computers have Windows and some others not may _increase_ costs of computers? Think not only on the installation but also increasing costs for support and education of workers. Bulk costs for Windows are pretty low.
As has been mentioned elsewhere (by me and others), Microsoft's OEM licensing terms charges vendors a per unit sold fee for Windows, even if/when the customer doesn't want it. That's like making onboard GPS in a car mandatory, rather than optional. If you have your own GPS, you can use it, but you still have to pay for the built-in one.
This raises prices and reduces free market choices for the consumer. Why should I pay $50 or $75 more for my Linux PC so you can have Windows at a discount?
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
...one hundred percent.
Here is my question, if the Free Software Foundation and the open source guys believe so much in having free software on PCs, why not start up a company that only sells PCs and Laptops with free software installed? Why is it the established vendors problem to solve? Begin by launching a fund raising campaign on Kickstarter, find a hardware supplier on Alibaba, and open a web storefront. It's not that hard...
A href="http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=linux+pc+vendor">Here you go.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
Here is my question, if the Free Software Foundation and the open source guys believe so much in having free software on PCs, why not start up a company that only sells PCs and Laptops with free software installed? Why is it the established vendors problem to solve? Begin by launching a fund raising campaign on Kickstarter, find a hardware supplier on Alibaba, and open a web storefront. It's not that hard...
A href="http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=linux+pc+vendor">Here you go.
Let's try that again. Here you go.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
The buyer is not "forced" to do anything.
If the ice cream man only has chocolate, but I want vanilla. That does not make him a tyrant who is forcing chocolate upon me. He's just not interested in selling vanilla. As a private business he is under no obligation to sell vanilla if he doesn't want to. Similarly I as an consumer am not required to buy chocolate ice cream if it's not what I want.
A consumer can choose not to buy a computer from a vendor that chooses to sell it with Windows.
My point is simple, if you want Linux (or any open source), you are better off buying from a vendor who is interested in supporting Linux without a court order.
Linux, BSD, other open source solutions are awesome, and if I am a hardware vendor I am going to build hardware that supports it because it's awesome. Not because I've been strong armed into it by a the courts. Likewise, I don't want to have to sell Windows because I've been strong-armed into it via Microsoft's predatory OEM licensing agreements
There. FTFY.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
The reason you don't see more available from the likes of HP, Dell, Acer, and others is because it creates a support nightmare.
They don't see them cause most people on slashdot are from a wealthy western economy.
All those notebook/laptop makers have models made for and sold exclusively to customers in Eastern Europe.
And said models tend not to be found on their main site, but on the sites of their licensed distributors in Eastern European countries.
That's who gets the support calls. Which are usually settled with a "bring it around and we'll have a look at it".
Those models also tend to be labeled as "no OS" or "Linux OS"... but if the local distributor is also an OEM partner, they may put an OEM Windows installation on those machines if the customer wants it.
Usually for free.
Or maybe not.
Maybe it's illegal and they would NEVER think of doing that just to sell a laptop and accessories and future support and...
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
That is a different issue.
I agree it is not good that Microsoft is allowed to create predatory OEM licensing agreements. I would be in favor of regulations that would prevent MS from making such contracts.
And even sadder, is that in May 1999 Congress rejected a bill that would have set up a $40 million compensation payment for the familys of the victims of the Marine's EA-6B attack on Italy. I was a page for Boxer at the time so it was an embarassment for this country to allow the Republicans to get away with murdering twenty people in Italy. She was livid. She screamed for several hours a day for the next two weeks or so. That shows she is a leader and really cares about people.
In that case, the Republicans had no good reasons to go on a violence spree, but in this case they have a reason so expect even more deaths.
Yes the whole world should bend to your desires and ideas...
Where the fuck does the parent say anything even remotely resembling that? You're the idiot that wants to bend others to your will.:If you want Windows, feel free to buy it as many times as you like. The problem is an unnecessary tyranny of the majority since nothing stops the majority from getting whatever the fuck software they want if the minority that doesn't want it, is given the choice not to have it. However, consumers are not voters and companies are - at least in a capitalist system - obliged by their shareholders to shove as much down the throats of consumers as possible so it's not even a matter of not letting a minority cause an undue burden on a majority. It is only a matter of not letting a company use its dominance to practically steal money from consumers that want nothing to do with it. And what you're saying about "increasing" costs is bullshit. Such a cost increase only exists in MS lobbying. MS could perfectly well make it possible for vendors to have preinstalled Windows on all computers and then just disable the key if a customer doesn't pay for it when buying the PC and it would cost them practically nothing. Considering how the software industry doesn't have a fraction of the regulation that protect customers in other industries, it would be a good start to require such a benefit for consumers when it costs nothing (unlike regulatory requirements in manufacturing). Bringing up costs of support and education of workers is further proof that you completely fail at logic. Those concerns have nothing to do with whether it should be possible to buy a PC without an OS or not and what said PC costs. They do not fall within the same scope.
Frankly, what you said is so utterly moronic that as I was point by point addressing your horseshit, I became pretty convinced that you're just trolling. Really, what you said is some of the dumbest shit I've seen on slashdot for ages. So dumb that I'm surprised you don't accuse other people for making you feel stupid when you're reminded of your cognitive shortcomings in what must be practically every interaction you have. Unless Dunning-Kruger makes your life more bearable. And without a doubt, the Dunning-Kruger effect must be the norm and not the exception in your life.
That is a different issue. I agree it is not good that Microsoft is allowed to create predatory OEM licensing agreements. I would be in favor of regulations that would prevent MS from making such contracts.
But it's not a different issue, IMHO. In the absence of such OEM licensing agreements, vendors could have provided entree for a variety of alternative OS' (including some which were never developed because of the MS OEM lock-in),
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
Come on, installing Linux doesn't take that long.
thegodmovie.com - watch it
Once again, your example has nothing to do with the case here. Where does it say, that the shop needs to support linux? I want a machine without windows, i should have a machine without it or i should be able to get a refund for the windows, since i won't accept the license. Your way is forced monopoly in favour of microsoft and nothing else.
Does this mean that I can get a refund for the BIOS? Almost all machines license their BIOS from award or phoenix. What if I want to write my own? Can I ask for a refund since they don't sell a machine without a BIOS installed? What if I want a machine without a hard drive? I already have one. Can I force them to take the hard drive out and give me a refund? Or a case? I got a computer case. And the power supply. I have one of those. Don't need the motherboard. Heck, can I force them to remove the broadband cellular chip from my verizon only phone so I can tinker with it and maybe get a different one working? Can I have my car manufacturer remove the radio and get a refund since they don't offer one without a radio?
Italy is crazy.
None of those things is a GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER, you knob.
What monopoly? Is the Mac not a thing? Is it not an utterly trivial task to procure an OS-less PC in nearly any town bigger than a few hundred people in the civilized world?
Speaking for myself, while I can't buy one at Best Buy, there are any number of independent computer shops in my town that would be happy to build me one. Any town of any size at all has at least one of these places... I've been in some real downtrodden parts of BFE and even those towns usually have at least one computer shop. Most folks use it for repairs and local businesses use it for tech support, but they sell computers too.
It means having market dominance that is a detriment to the consumer.
No.
Most people are not software geeks. Most people do not dream of spending their weekends downloading a Linux ISO and installing it on their computers.
It could be QNX or plan9 or anything else, as long as they are able to to the things they know how to do.
And a lot of "the things they know how to do" are proprietary third-party applications that fail in Wine.
I don't see Xfce being laggy on the Atom N450 in my Dell Inspiron mini 1012. What's not "full-featured" about Xubuntu?
OS on a phone is more like BIOS on PC as far as this ruling is concerned.
So where does Coreboot fit into your analogy?
So tell me, since you want everything "the way you want", how many bespoke suits do you own? How many hand-sewn blue jeans, 'personalized' shirts, etc? Or do you buy most of your clothes at the store like the rest of us? Cuz here's the thing - most of the time I don't give a rat's rectum about the internals of the program, what I want is the output. If you want to spend extra money go ahead, nobody's stopping you. But FFS stop trying to force it down everybody else's throats! ...
Since you are clearly a master programmer maybe you can tell us how much time you spent on your last product sitting with the enduser of $YOUR_NEW_SHINY_PROGRAM and ensuring it "did what he wanted". I'll bet you spent a lot longer making sure it was "what your boss wanted" instead. Kids nowdays
I may not be able to go pick up a linux laptop from the local store but I can order one on the dell website.
If I order online, how can I verify before purchase that the keyboard and screen will fit my hands and eyes?
I can go to the local store and buy levi's jeans but not every fit and color levi's I have to order some of those online too.
How do you make sure you get the right size when buying clothes online?
I want to buy my hardware from a vendor that supports open source because they think it's worthwhile
So do I. But even if the vendor does support free software, a laptop with an unusable keyboard is still worthless to me. And big box stores tend not to have displays of hardware from vendors that support free software so that I can try them before buying them.
There are more than enough sources from which a computer can be procured that do not have Windows.
You say sources, plural, implying that there exist more than Apple.
If the manufacturer or store you want to buy from doesn't have any, don't buy from there!
So which store other than "there" should one patronize instead to try a laptop PC that does not come with Windows other than Apple before buying it?
PCs that came with Vista or XPSP3 installed are quite serviceable.
The extended support period for Windows XP Service Pack 3 expired five months ago. It has vulnerabilities that Microsoft will never fix.
who the fuck buys stuff in a store anymore?
People who want to buy a laptop without being stuck with an unusable keyboard.
So tell me, since you want everything "the way you want", how many bespoke suits do you own? How many hand-sewn blue jeans, 'personalized' shirts, etc?
You asked the wrong person. I buy some of my clothes, but I make my own too.
I'll bet you spent a lot longer making sure it was "what your boss wanted" instead.
Exactly my point. Free software gives my boss the flexibility to hire me to make a program do what he wants.
3) You can always just build a computer... with any OS you desire.
Which guide to building your own laptop do you recommend?
Yes, I understand where you are coming from, and in principal think these things are good. But for the same reasons I cannot force the grocery store to carry the brand of ice cream I like, I can't force Best Buy to carry a laptop with Linux (or BSD, or sans operating system, etc).
Actually a few years back my local Best Buy did carry some Dell Laptops with Ubuntu on it. This effort failed miserably, nobody wanted to buy them even though they were a little bit cheaper than the same machine with Windows. In terms of usability Linux, BSD, etc, just fails to measure up.
Did it ever occur to the people foaming at the mouth about the injustice of being "forced" to voluntarily buy a laptop with Windows on it, that perhaps Open Source fails to be in stores because it's not user friendly?
Most folks cannot be bothered to learn a new UI just to browse the web, write documents, and send email. Let's face it even the most polished of Open Source window managers is seriously lacking next to Windows and Mac.
It's no surprise to me many vendors aren't interested in carrying an unfinished product. It's great for code enthusiasts, but it's just unreasonable to expect general consumers have a serious interest in open source operating systems (at least as they are now).
Let's just say I got my Grandma a tux laptop purely out of principal. What window manager should I set her up on? Gnome? KDE? XFCE? Fluxbox? Which Kernel? Which Distro? Ubuntu? Xbuntu? Mandravia? Linux Mint? Fedora?
It would be hell trying to teach my grandma how to apt-get, or how to escalate permissions to super user.
My point is open source operating systems are a mess of inconsistent competing branches. It's a total headache. I see no compelling reasons to legislate that vendors go out of their way to support this mishmash of half-baked projects.
Most folks cannot be bothered to learn a new UI just to browse the web, write documents, and send email.
Let's face it. Windows 8 has been a failure. Even something like KDE Plasma Desktop or Xfce feels more like Windows 9x through 7 than Windows 8's Start Screen and "immersive" apps do.
Let's just say I got my Grandma a tux laptop purely out of principal. What window manager should I set her up on? Gnome? KDE? XFCE?
When my grandma's Windows XP got trashed by fake AV that I couldn't remove normally, I just rescued her files, put on Xubuntu, and called it a day.
It would be hell trying to teach my grandma how to apt-get
Which is why modern distributions include a GUI for package installation and updating.
or how to escalate permissions to super user.
You don't need to. Apple had the equivalent of sudo in OS X even before Microsoft taught people how to "Cancel or Allow" in Windows Vista.
Apple makes their money from selling hardware. MacOS and iOS move a lot of hardware. Licencing them out would be suicide.
Apple could have avoided their near-death experience back in the 1995, and having to accept a bailout to the tune of $150 million by Microsoft in 1997, if they had licensed out the Mac OS to all comers. The incremental cost of boxing and shipping a CD or DVD are a lot smaller than the incremental costs of manufacturing, boxing, and shipping a phone, tablet, or computer - and with Apple, you still have the costs of developing that software anyway.
Apple is losing market share to Android in both tablets and phones. And their newest "killer innovative product" is a watch? And copying the NFC functionality that many Android phones already have?
This is what happens as an industry matures and its' products become simple commodities. Competing on price becomes more important, since there's less core functionality to differentiate the offerings - especially the electronics, which all comes from the same few factories no matter whether it says Apple or Android or Microsoft or Dell or HP or Acer or Motorola or Lenovo on the box.
Software differentiates the products - not hardware. For example, the same pc hardware can run Windows, Linux, or OSX (remember the hackintosh?) if Apple wanted to sell OSX to the masses. They could still command a "brand premium" for their own hardware as "the gold standard", same as Dell gets extra bucks for Alienware-branded hardware. None of this would have prevented them from producing the iPod, or the iPhone, or the iPad, so the bottom line would have been net positive, and gotten their brand in front of a lot more people a lot earlier in the game.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Its extremely disheartening to realize that one must move to Italy in order to get some common sense justice from all the corruption and greed in corporate America.
This is how Windows got spread in the first place. What were they doing 25 years ago?
It would be better if: I want to buy a waffle cone to put vanilla ice cream in, however the shop will only sell me the waffle cone with chocolate ice cream in it (at extra cost), that I have to dump out to make room for my vanilla ice cream.
The license agreement that come on screen when you first boot up says you can decline the agreement and receive a refund - or at least it used to. But for years that was a lie because people couldn't get a refund from Dell or HP or Lenovo or MS. Seems to me the judge is saying that this fraud must stop. Seems reasonable to me.
So, instead of selling PCs, vendors should advertise their equipment as bundles:
-- "Behold! The new ASUS this-and-that PC plus Windows bundle!"
-- "Do you have ASUS this-and-that PC plus Linux?"
-- "Oh, we only sell PC-Windows bundles, sorry"
-- "Then I only want the PC."
-- "Then go to a PC vendor. This is a bundle vendor."
Problem solved.
Don't hold your breath, the U.S. in an Entrapanocracy; business interests have huge power in the U.S. Congress so it is unlikely that the monopoly Microsoft has with its OEM arrangement with PC Makers would result in a rebate if you refuse to Install Windows or scrub it with Linux or something else.
The case with Macs is a little different. Apple doesn't allow you to run OS X on other platforms and it makes no claim that non XS X will run on its systems or is supported on its systems. That is fair. PC Makers have no such claims which is why Microsoft's agreement is anti-competative unless they allow for a rebate for a customer who does not want to run Windows.
In all your examples, the part that you're suggesting should be left out is made by the same company that makes the rest of the item.
In the Microsoft/hardware manufacturer case, they're two different companies.
In the obligatory car analogy, rather than the paint removed, it would be more like every car manufacturer (except for some niche ones like TVR, Saleen, Koenigsegg, and Caterham, none of which you can afford) sold you a car, but required you to buy a Nokia cellphone along with it. You already have a perfectly functional Samsung cellphone and plan, but you can't buy a car without this extra Nokia phone and plan being forced on you.
The thing they're removing is the Nokia, not the paint on the car.
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
I understand what you are saying, and I'd almost agree with you, were it not for the issue of drivers. The OS & the hardware need to function well together, and drivers built into the OS have to facilitate that. I'm afraid that makes it rather harder to consider the two separately. Someone has to make those drivers for each OS that the system will support, that costs money. I see no reason to compel Apple to make their iPhone capable of running Android.
Most electronic devices are not made by one company. The origin of individual components shouldn't bug you.
My Nintendo Wii has an ATI graphics card in it. You might be surprised to know that many apple devices have Samsung manufactured chips on their main-boards.
Just because a component is made by a 3rd party that doesn't necessarily diminish the effort the vendor of the final product took in making a product intended to function a sum of it's specifically chosen parts.
i invite you to read http://yro.slashdot.org/submis... happy hacking pdb
I read you are here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and seeing you keep a TomHudson sockpuppet account http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... and this other of your many sockpuppets on slashdot too http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... also makes me believe you may be. Are you?
I read you are here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and seeing you keep a TomHudson sockpuppet account http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... and this other of your many sockpuppets on slashdot too http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... also makes me believe you may be. Are you?
I read you are here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and seeing you keep a TomHudson sockpuppet account http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... and this other of your many sockpuppets on slashdot too http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... also makes me believe you may be. Are you?
I read you are here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and seeing you keep a TomHudson sockpuppet account http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... and this other of your many sockpuppets on slashdot too http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... also makes me believe you may be. Are you?
I read you are here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and seeing you keep a TomHudson sockpuppet account http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... and this other of your many sockpuppets on slashdot too http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... also makes me believe you may be. Are you?
I read you are here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and seeing you keep a TomHudson sockpuppet account http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... and this other of your many sockpuppets on slashdot too http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... also makes me believe you may be. Are you?
I read you are here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and seeing you keep a TomHudson sockpuppet account http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... and this other of your many sockpuppets on slashdot too http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... also makes me believe you may be. Are you?
I read you are here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and seeing you keep a TomHudson sockpuppet account http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... and this other of your many sockpuppets on slashdot too http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... also makes me believe you may be. Are you?
I read you are here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and seeing you keep a TomHudson sockpuppet account http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... and this other of your many sockpuppets on slashdot too http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... also makes me believe you may be. Are you?
I read you are here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and seeing you keep a TomHudson sockpuppet account http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... and this other of your many sockpuppets on slashdot too http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... also makes me believe you may be. Are you?
Pretty much any independent computer shop will toss together an OS-less machine upon request. All but the tiniest towns have one. And, of course, there are any number of OEM's that will sell them via mail-order.
"His only "legend in his own mind" was that he claimed that "his" hosts file could completely secure a windows computer. " - by tomhudson (43916) on Saturday February 12, @11:19AM (#35186644) Homepage Journal FROM -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... in the YEAR 2011 years ago no less
I never claimed a HOSTS file can secure you completely... show me where I have? I want a quote, big talker... you'll never get it, because I never, EVER said that: HOSTS files are, however, a valuable layer of defense for the concept of "layered security".
* You couldn't produce proof THEN, & you certainly can't now (vainly *trying* to put words in my mouth I NEVER ONCE SAID!)
APK
P.S.=> Still @ your LIES, you transsexual weirdo? Ok, asking it again now nearly 5 yrs. later now in response to your bullshit lies again here quoted:
"APK - not only an expert on how the HOSTS file is the best way to secure your computer" - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Wednesday September 17, 2014 @07:06PM (#47932519) Homepage
Under your NEW sockpuppet account too no less: SEE my challenge to you above - where've I ever said they completely secure you? I never have, liar...
Of course, YOU ARE welcome to disprove my points on them after you said this lately too:
"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255) Homepage
Oh, really?
Then why'd you run from disproving my points on them giving users added speed, security, reliability & more here too then -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... ?
... apk
One of the 1st times "Barb" libeled me stating "APK is a know-nothing that's never worked in the industry" -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... in 1 of her numerous sockpuppet fake accounts kept active @ the same time here she uses to upmod herself & downmod opponents she can't get the better of (everyone's onto your games, freak).
Funny part is I've DONE FAR BETTER than ole' "cyclops Frank N. Furter" ever has shown in that exchange too http://slashdot.org/comments.p... , lol!
---
Later, he/she kept a journal on me & libeled me even more but worse -> http://slashdot.org/journal/25...
(Typical b.s. to *try* to 'put down' computer "geeks/nerds" saying "I live in a basement with my mommy" etc. when *ANYTHING BUT THAT* is true, considering I am a taxpaying homeowner!).
---
* From the dates you can SEE she's kept this up unceasingly since early to mid 2010 no less, & that's only scratching the surface (there's far more).
(Even TELLING OTHERS TO HARASS ME BY ANONYMOUS COWARD POSTS, calling me a "pedo" -> http://news.slashdot.org/comme... )
He/She left in May 2012 after being exposed for ALL OF THAT, but came back with this NEW account of hers, & what started up again (I did *NOT* bother "shim" even once before that)?
You guessed it (more harassment) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...
Where I challenged her for her usual CRAP she always runs from (to validly disprove my points on hosts, which she clearly, cannot):
"I tore apart your stupid hosts file crapola." - by BarbaraHudson (3785311) on Tuesday August 19, 2014 @10:46AM (#47703255) Homepage
Oh, really?
Then why'd you run from disproving my points on them giving users added speed, security, reliability & more here too then -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...
APK
P.S.=> Barb/Tom (whatever, with multiple sockpuppets too http://slashdot.org/~BarbaraHu... = http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson... + http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2... ) you've destroyed yourself yet again...
...apk
Have you seen Dan Rather Reports "No Thanks for Everything"? http://youtu.be/OeoBWzIRuic
It's about the how highly skilled Americans are impacted by foreign guest worker visa law, and discusses the MS 2009 layoff.
Echoing another person's comment - the more things change, the more they stay the same.