PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft takes another hit


flipnap
03-24-2004, 01:50 PM
The ruling

http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/index.html

Some Commentary

http://money.cnn.com/2004/03/24/technology/microsoft/index.htm?cnn=yes

and one of my favorite quotes from the commentary
"In the rest of the world's dollars, it's going to be significant, but in Microsoft's dollars it won't matter a whole lot,"

Cyborg Corp.
03-24-2004, 02:39 PM
It gave Microsoft 90 days to make available a European version of its Windows operating system to PC makers without a media player.

I'd like to get my hands on that OS

DaveW
03-24-2004, 03:25 PM
That is a pretty lame ruling. Remove a basic and expected feature of any OS released in the last 10 years? Next they can remove any built-in Internet connectivity so AOL can compete. This is like car manufacturers not being allowed to include a stereo in cars because 3rd parties don't sell as many car stereos.

TOPS
03-24-2004, 03:39 PM
-

sforsyth
03-24-2004, 03:44 PM
Not overly pleased by that either. Okay, so it opens things up for competition, which is always healthy. On the other hand, I absolutely hate the Real player (more ads than you can shake a stick at), and quicktime is no favourite either (nag screen, anyone? - plus a slow load time), the thing I don't understand is, if they're all free at the moment, how is it affecting their business? They're not selling anything anyway, so where's the competition? If this implies European owners of windows will have to buy a media player, that'd suck big time!

TOPS
03-24-2004, 03:46 PM
"In the rest of the world's dollars, it's going to be significant, but in Microsoft's dollars it won't matter a whole lot,"

That is one of the less-intelligent quotes I have ever saw.
What is wrong with Microsoft being a HUGE Company ?

EU should focus on creating better Companies/Products instead of applying penalties.
This is how the world goes...

TOPS

MadDuke
03-24-2004, 03:54 PM
I'm getting sick of governments going after Microsoft. This whole thing isn't about "fair competition" it's about MONEY. Everybody (the governments) in Europe and America are just looking for the next big hand out (aka settlement) from Microsoft.

I wonder what would happen if Microsoft threatened to not sell future versions of Windows to Europe. If they did that, I bet this whole issue would go away pretty fast.

UrbanFuturistic
03-24-2004, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by TOPS
EU should have to compete by creating better Companies/Products instead of applying penalties. You mean like Microsoft didn't?:rolleyes:

G Nilsson
03-24-2004, 04:29 PM
umm... why dont they make apple remove qt from osx aswell?
/G

Goon
03-24-2004, 04:30 PM
while I would have to agree that the WMP thing is a little petty, I have no problem with this
Microsoft was also given 120 days to give programming codes to rivals in the server market, so their products can have "full interoperability" with desktop computers running Windows.

While I'm not sure what compatability issues there are, clearing up existing issues cannot be a bad thing.

Spankspeople
03-24-2004, 04:35 PM
I absolutely hate the Real player (more ads than you can shake a stick at),

Did you ever use Realplayer before Microsoft started using their OS monopoly to push the smaller companies out of the market? When it was first released it was by far the superior player, but because MediaPlayer comes built into Windows people have no need to upgrade, so Real had to find other sources of revenue or just dissapear.

The same thing happened with Netscape. In the Windows 3.1 days it was THE browser. Then Win98 came with IE built into the OS(apparently the INTERNET BROWSER is so deeply coded into an operating system that used to work fine without it that it can't be removed without breaking the system, even if you don't want it) and all of a sudden Netscape just kinda dissapeared. They used to be THE browser to use, now they're no more than a joke. They're the free Mozilla project whenever they feel like actually trying to make money off of it.

As soon as people are actually able to compete again we'll start seeing more, and better products out there. Microsoft doesn't want to make the most money on these things, they're already making the most money on their operating system. They just want to make sure that nobody else can make money on them so that they can keep their monopoly.

umm... why dont they make apple remove qt from osx aswell?

Apple by no means has a monopoly on the computer industry. Apple is currently an alternative. If they had near complete market saturation I'm sure that the government would be stepping in to do the same, just as they should.

I'm not saying that Microsoft should be forced to stop selling Media Player all together, I just think that it should be an option rather than a must have. Why isn't it even a selectable option when installing Windows? I have something that works better for everything that Media Player does, yet I have to keep updating it to make sure that I'm safe from the security holes that it leaves open, and the bugs that it creates. I don't use it for anything whatsoever, why should I be forced to keep it around?

The same goes for IE, but they've managed to embed that into their filesystem browser(that's smart, making something as inherently insecure as the internet the core of your operating system) that there's no way I could remove it even if I wanted to, short of them going in and completely recoding the entire system.

What I want to see is something similar to how Linux(Oh, I've said it. Guess nobody will actually read anything I type past this point) works. It gives you the option to install a wide variety of media players, web browsers, e-mail clients, filesystem browsers, even the GUI. You're not stuck installing anything that you're not going to use. I don't see why the maisntream operating system market can't work this way.

*waits to be flagged as an tree hugging, Linux loving anti-Microsoft zealot*

flipnap
03-24-2004, 04:40 PM
What is wrong with Microsoft being a HUGE Company ?

were all going to find out in a few years... unfortunately.. Anyone who cannot see any inherent danger in ANY company gaining that much control worldwide needs to do some research. I have earned my bias against Microsoft honestly, through much research and study. Reading through 60 pages of the infamous US antitirust case thoroughly convinced me of their shady nature. Im fearful that this world is run on computers and 90 pecent of them are controlled by Microsoft.. thats scary.. the same kind of scary that I feel about Exxon, that I felt about Enron, etc.. I really wish I was wrong, but I have a feeling that the near future is going to be a very expensive and invasive place to live because of Microsoft. My opinion..

Saurus
03-24-2004, 05:07 PM
Does competitions mean having to pay for all them extra service or get bombarded with ads? Hope not. Isn’t Microsoft doing the same thing Apple is doing by having programs pre installed with proprietary programs? Why aren’t they penalizing Apple, let along warning them? If a company or organization doesn’t like how Window is run, they DO have other alternative OS out there. Yet, these people are the same people profiting by riding Microsoft back. And they also have the same intention as Microsoft and that is to be filthy rich and BIG. I guess when a company gets big, it’s fashionable to go after them, the same case for the IBM in the early years.

Saurus

Dennik
03-24-2004, 05:10 PM
Hehe, i find it so funny they are called to pay so much money for a player that could only compete as the worst media player around. To me anyway, its not about monopoly, its about this "all in one" philosophy that i hate. No one can do all and be the best, not even Microsoft, and they can't force you to use, or fill your drive with software you don't like using, needless to say paying about it.
I was so mad to find out that the uninstall procedure of windows components, consists of just removing their shortcuts from start menu and desktop.

UrbanFuturistic
03-24-2004, 05:35 PM
Oh for goodness sakes! Why is everyone so damn focussed on the Media Player issue when it's mainly about interoperability? And what's with all this 'why don't they go after Apple' crap? Apple's sales constitute a whol 3% of the market share, they don't count as a monopoly.

Firstly, saying they can't bundle Media Player with Windows is not the same as saying they can't have people access it at all; all this means is that people will have to download it (or not) same as any other media player putting it on the same footing as other media players.

Secondly: European regulators said that Microsoft broke EU law by abusing its "near monopoly" market power in the workgroup server and media player markets. (ZDNet)

Workgroup server? Ah yes, that'll be allowing other computer systems to interoperate with Windows in a network system rather than the current all-windows-or-not-at-all scenario faced by network admins. Personally, I don't see any evidence of Apple doing anything like this, I currently don't even have to use Samba to access a disk on an OS X based Mac, I just type fish://192.138.1.3/ into my filesystem browser and viola.

As for Quicktime on OS X, since when did Quicktime try to take over every single capability for media playing on the computer? It doesn't play mp3, divx or wma to name just three and in a positively unmonopolistic move by Apple, they altered the licensing terms for Quicktime to allow it to be used with Wine under Linux and to allow codecs to be used on an operating system other than the one they were designed for (which allows mplayer, now available for OSX, to play quicktime movies in Linux).

So cut the crap all you die hard 'save our corprate monolithic bully' whiners and face the fact that Microsoft has been hugely anti-competitive and should be smacked down for it.

Lockstar
03-24-2004, 05:51 PM
I'm getting sick of governments going after Microsoft. This whole thing isn't about "fair competition" it's about MONEY. Everybody (the governments) in Europe and America are just looking for the next big hand out (aka settlement) from Microsoft. I wonder what would happen if Microsoft threatened to not sell future versions of Windows to Europe. If they did that, I bet this whole issue would go away pretty fast.

I think you need to turn your argument around. I think the point being that MS implemented it's software at system level to prevent users adopting 3rd party software, and more importantly to eliminate choice. Users then over a time period become locked in to closed formats like WMA and consequently have to keep purchasing MS products in order for their purchases/ DL's to keep working.

The point is, a monopoly is a very dangerous thing, (the amount of viruses perpetually bringing down MS systems is evidence of this) the EU ruling is trying to balance the playing field so European citizens and business does not rely upon a single platform, consequently preventing chaos if MS fails, be it through viruses, terrorism, bugs or ineptitude.

With MS in such a dominant position it is becoming almost impossible for other companies to get a fair chance of succeeding (even if the product is superior). The opinion quoted is evidence that the situation certainly is not going to change without the intervention of power, i.e. governments.

How many people out of the 90% user base can actually can justify their purchase of Windows? a very small percentage. Why would the majority of people use an alternative to the product that is forced down their throat at work, at school etc. Most people either never heard of other platforms, software, are not really interested, or are basically too scared to try an alternative.

I don't think anyone wants MS to disintegrate, only for other platforms, software etc to stand a fair chance. Is the future a place where everyone will either be employed by MS or have some sort of connection with the company in order to function on this planet? I certainly hope not.

Spankspeople
03-24-2004, 06:08 PM
Considering that some BIOS manufacturers are starting to implement the bases of Microsoft's Palladium(sorry, I think it's got a friendlier sounding acronym now to throw the casual user off of all the negative hype that Palladium already has), I'm quite glad that SOMEBODY is trying to knock somebody down.

People will make fun of me for being overly paranoid, but I can't think of a single reason why it would be a good thing for Microsoft to be able to tell me what software I'm allowed to use with my own hardware. They already make it hard enough to use other software on their operating system(remember the time that Opera mysteriously stopped working properly after a major Windows update but was somehow fixed by renaming"opera.exe" to "oprah.exe"? Now THAT'S a bug), if peoples hardware suddenly starts "accidentally" locking out other operating systems like that, a LOT of people are going to be really really angry.

This isn't just an attempt to get Media Player out of Windows, they're trying to put a stop to this before it goes too far.

The next version of Windows(Longhorn) comes preloaded with free video editing software. No more need for Premier or After Effects folks, as well as Microsofts own take on Flash. Let's see people go along with this whole unfair monopoly thing once they start pushing Adobe and Macromedia out of those markets. Netscape was almost as big as either of those, and they dissapeared fairly quickly.

chadtheartist
03-24-2004, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by odubtaig
As for Quicktime on OS X, since when did Quicktime try to take over every single capability for media playing on the computer? It doesn't play mp3, divx or wma to name just three and in a positively unmonopolistic move by Apple, they altered the licensing terms for Quicktime to allow it to be used with Wine under Linux and to allow codecs to be used on an operating system other than the one they were designed for (which allows mplayer, now available for OSX, to play quicktime movies in Linux).


Quicktime right out of the box should be able to play mp3. At least it works on my system. Maybe I have a special Quicktime? :D

Divx can also be played in Quicktime. You just need the Divx plugins to get it to work. Although the frame by frame, and scrubbing capabilities of Quicktime don't work well with it.

And I also have Windows Media Player for OS X too. Although it doesn't play some .wma/v files. It does a decent job.

Anyway, I think it's silly to be suing Microsoft for integrating the WMP into their OS. Their are other movie player products available.

It really doesn't matter to me much anyway. Because I use Quicktime in OS X and XP. Best media player on the market IMO.

Claymation
03-24-2004, 07:36 PM
One thing people have forgotten was that the biggest problem with microsoft was that if ANY hardware vender tried to install 3rd party software microsoft did not aprove of Microsoft warned them that they would revoke the license for that company to install windows on any of its computers. This in effect would kill the company. HP, IBM and a few others went up against Microsoft because of this. They won that part of the case, which is why linux is now getting backed by IBM and the other hardware companies.

Microsoft is backing the SCO in an attempt to stifle Linux before it gets any bigger. So you see microsoft is still trying to stifle competition by unfair means instead of improving their software.

Then again no matter how much they improve their software everyone already has a copy of windows machine so there is no reason to buy it again. They also already own a huge part of the market so stiffling competitors isn't going to make any more people buy their product.




The media player part of the case is such a gray area how do you define what is evolution and what is anti-competitive practices.

Both Mac and PC have media players intergrated into their OS so I think this is just realplayer trying to get people to use their lousy software.


I work in the IT field and if you aren't in this field you are not aware of a big concern we are facing over here. Microsoft is trying to switch all of it's office software over to a licensing system. basically you rent it and pay yearly fees to access your software. Palladium to me seems to be a measure to make sure we pay for the software. Individual users wont feel this pinch, i'm sure, for a while yet. It's purely a company thing.

My biggest fear will be that everyone else will follow lead and also start subscription based price models. This way they are garrenteed a steady income reguardless of if a new product comes out. This is not something I look forward to.

They may claim piracy is to blame but the reality is that they want to make more money and there just arent enough buyers out there to meet their shareholder expectations.

Jay

Saurus
03-24-2004, 09:00 PM
Here’s a plan: How about people who hates Microsoft or doesn’t like how Microsoft do business, not buy Windows or switch to another OS, so people like me who have no issue with Microsoft business practice or the way Windows perform don’t have to argue with you people. Believe me… I really like the way Window runs!! One thing we got to remember is “We All Have Choice”.

Saurus

Jhonus
03-24-2004, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by DaveW
This is like car manufacturers not being allowed to include a stereo in cars because 3rd parties don't sell as many car stereos.

Hypothetically it would only be like car manufacturers if Microsoft made and sold 95% of all cars and supplied and manafactured their own stereo with every one of those cars.

flipnap
03-24-2004, 09:29 PM
One thing we got to remember is “We All Have Choice”.

unfortunately choices in the business world are limited. A local bank, federal building or airport cannot simply just switch operating systems, because they need windows in order to function. Im sure if ivory joe from cocomo gets tired of playing with windows in his bedroom he can change over to linux or whatever if hes on a "I hate windows" kick like you suggest, but situations are a little more complicated than that on a larger scale. Though I myself use windows, I am not happy about the fact that i might very soon have to pay bill gates for every email i send, report to him every time i log on to my computer, and retouch my photos in MS paint 2005, cuz adobe has been wiped clear off the face of the Earth because windows "Cant function without paint2005!!" .. the writing is on the walls. these lawsuits arent about windows "not working cool dude" its about global monopoly and all the implications. As I stated, familiarize yourself with the antitrust lawsuit that went down with MS and the US and trust me, youll have trouble sleeping at night.

Keiyentai
03-24-2004, 09:47 PM
Oye. Personaly I see it this way. Mircosoft is by far the most well known Company in the world and One of the most powerful if not the most powerful. They want to make an O/S that will have EVERYTHING in it. THen try to screw your system over if you use 3RD Parties things. WIndows is a good OS yes but I think Microsoft needs to get it threw there skulls that people want to try new things after 20 years. Widnows has been around for what about 16-17 years now? Not completly sure but In know it's been a while. Personaly I would like to see Linux with the ease of windows. (I dont know havent used linux so I dont know if there is one yet). ALso is Mac was SO EXPENSIVE I would be typing this on a Mac G5 with OSx. I love Macs.

The way thigns are going we will start seeing "Windows" Logos on resteruant menu's lol. There little way of letting you know THIS MENU WAS MADE ON A WINDOWS BASED PC. WHo knows maybe Lindows will become rampant and popular as windows is soon. All I know is All OS's have there ups and downs and it comes down to the end users opion. Microsoft is just trying to force theres. lol.

DaveW
03-25-2004, 01:31 AM
MS may be evil, though no more evil than most corporations out there. If they break the law or are being anti-competitive then they should be dealt with. But including Windows Media Player is not anti-competitive. They have been doing it for at least 10 years and a media player is a basic and expected feature of any OS.

The part that could be considered anti-competitive is their proprietary format that is only available on Windows and a half-assed version on Mac. They should be forced to allow Mac and Linux people to install a working wma/wmv codec and open it up to 3rd party players on Windows. Forcing MS to remove their player doesn't do any good, it just makes playing media on Windows more of a hassle.

bleeper
03-25-2004, 02:14 AM
The part that could be considered anti-competitive is their proprietary format that is only available on Windows and a half-assed version on Mac. They should be forced to allow Mac and Linux people to install a working wma/wmv codec and open it up to 3rd party players on Windows.
MS has submitted its codecs as an HD-DVD
why? If they want it that badly they should *gasp* license it.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/licensing/licensing.aspx
:thumbsup:

UrbanFuturistic
03-25-2004, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by Saurus
Here’s a plan: How about people who hates Microsoft or doesn’t like how Microsoft do business, not buy Windows or switch to another OS Because Microsoft won't allow other operating systems to directly interoperate with theirs (which is what half this judgement is about) so if youn want to do business in this world (or in my case pass my degree) you are forced to use Windows. The only reason I still use Windows is because AccessXP files and 3DStudio Max aren't usable without Windows (at least for the moment).

Microsoft hasn't got where it is today by producing superior software (although this is, admittedly, how they got on the first rung of the ladder) but by doing everything it can, with contracts or by its 'embrace and extend' philosophy, to lock out fair competition.

regards, Paul

Spankspeople
03-25-2004, 02:06 PM
Newly Released Documents Shed Light on Microsoft Tactics

"The plaintiffs contend the new documents show that Microsoft violated nondisclosure agreements with Go, and then used that information to build PenWindows, a competitor to Go's PenPoint operating system. The documents included Microsoft's internal e-mail messages showing that it had detailed knowledge of Go's product plans.

The documents also suggest that Microsoft sought to pressure Intel to cancel its plans to invest in Go. On June 28, 1990, Mr. Gates wrote a letter to Mr. Grove trying to convince the Intel executive that he should back a version of Windows for portable computers, then code-named Windows-H, rather than Go's PenPoint software.

"I guess I've made it very clear that we view an Intel investment in Go as an anti-Microsoft move, both because Go competes with our systems software and because we think it will weaken the 386 PC standard," Mr. Gates wrote.

Shortly after the letter was written, according to Mr. Kaplan, Intel reduced its planned investment in Go from $10 million to $2 million, and stipulated the investment be kept a secret.

Read the rest of the article here (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/24/technology/24soft.html)(I that it's free to register for the New York Times anyways, if not I'll just post the full article or something)

Rich Joyce
03-25-2004, 02:36 PM
The whole microsoft philosophy is to be an all singin all dancing OS that has everything included in it for your beginner, average and advanced user.

in reality all that actually happens (ever since the ME traversty) is that any users who felt quite happy with their computer ability are suddenly rounded up like sheep and forced to do things they dont want. Its the only system (because of its monopoly admittedly) that has such vast numbers of security holes, and even some of the patches have to be patched. the way of doing this is to have a standard sweeping statement of a description saying what patches do and then just leaving the user to trust them....

microsoft has always forced the small developer out of business and it has shot itself in the foot by doing so, not financially, but certainly as far as it's consumer opinion goes. the cg industry is certainly showing the initial movements of trying to switch to linux, so the best of their systems can become apparent. By making the microsoft monopoly more accesible for third party developers, the consumer has to benefit.

bentllama
03-25-2004, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by DaveW
Forcing MS to remove their player doesn't do any good, it just makes playing media on Windows more of a hassle.

bingo.

Spankspeople
03-25-2004, 03:26 PM
So playing media on Windows is more of a hassle for idiots. So what? Not using Media Player is already a hassle for people who want an alternative, why should they suffer?

Back when I used to buy pre-built systems, they used to come with a CD full of various software that I could install. Quicktime, Real Player, Netscape Navigator...

I haven't bought a pre-built system myself in years now, but my mother recently has. It came with Windows. That's it. No extra software, nothing. Just Windows.

Same goes with my ISP. IGS is a Tucows mirror, and each new customer would recieve a CD with various pieces of software on it. Most of this is now unecessary because Windows comes pre-loaded with alternatives to most of it already. That's a fair bit of licencing revenue(for distribution) that doesn't go to these companies because Microsoft is giving something away for free.

If a 15 year old who's barely used a computer in his life can figure out how to install Quicktime Player on his very first computer, how much of a hassle can it really be? Oh, it saves people about two minutes. I managed to walk my brother through installing an updated copy of Firefox the other day, and he's one of the most incompetent people that I know.

DaveW
03-25-2004, 03:39 PM
You're smart enough to know how to change file associations and use whatever media player you want. You may not like that a couple megabytes of your precious porn space is used up by a media player you don't use, but it's not really a big deal. Most computer users are complete idiots. If you think it only takes them a couple minutes to install a media player you are sadly mistaken. I used to do tech support for a living. Easily 95% of the people I dealt with couldn't even find the start button. That is no exaggeration. They are completely mystified by the magic box. A 15 year old is a different story, younger people tend to adapt much more quickly than older people.

Spankspeople
03-25-2004, 03:46 PM
I have no sympathy for people who try to do something without even taking the time to learn the very basics of how it works.

And if someone can't navigate a CD that comes up with a simple interface that takes your hand and walks you through your various options(No filesystem browsing, just "Which media player(s) do you wish to install?"), then they're probably not going to be able to figure out how to run anything in WMP anyways.

igorstshirts
03-25-2004, 04:29 PM
I want to send a compressed AVI to my grandma in Slovakia and I want for her to be able to double click the file and watch my movie... Damn it. I want to send my t-shirt commercials to kids so they can watch their t-shirt being airbrushed... Am I going to have to send five diff. formats every time?

People dissin' Msoft is bullshiz. Am I the only one who thinks that MS makes it very easy to do business with the kids and elderly? Okay fine, I'll send QT MPEG-4s from now and tell all of my customers to download Quicktime 6... YEAH RIGHT!!!!

Go ahead Mr. Gates, conquer the universe... So I can conquer My galaxy.:bowdown:

Spankspeople
03-25-2004, 05:00 PM
Soyou'd rather see these smaller companies pushed out of business just to avoid mildly inconveniencing yourself?

How incredibly selfish.

Maybe you'll be upset when Microsoft is airbrushing t-shirts for free and you can no longer justify selling yours.

igorstshirts
03-25-2004, 05:06 PM
We're talking about MS's O.S. here... Windows? Bonehead...:wavey:

I'm not stupid enough to open an airbrushing business in someone elses garage. Er... Wait... I am in someone elses garage but I have enough sense to know that this garage could close at any minute... And might.

Spankspeople
03-25-2004, 05:16 PM
Oh, I thought that we were talking about Microsoft's Media Player.

Why is a specific media player so integral to the operating of an OPERATING SYSTEM that it absolutely can't be removed? Because people would be inconvenienced? It's not even an option during installation! Even if it was enabled by default I still wouldn't mind if it was just an OPTION that I could uncheck. But it's not.

And if Microsoft thought that the t-shirt industry was a threat to its monopoly, you can bet your ass they'd start giving them out for free. If you've got a Microsoft t-shirt anyways, why bother getting a professionally done one that you need to pay for?

It's not going to happen, but it's an accurate comparison.

igorstshirts
03-25-2004, 05:19 PM
If it was not for Windows, all those cry baby 3rd party developers wouldn't even have a product... 3 rants over.

Saurus
03-25-2004, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by igorstshirts
Go ahead Mr. Gates, conquer the universe... So I can conquer My galaxy.:bowdown:


I’m with you dude and surprisingly a lot of people I work with also agrees with me. My dad just bought a laptop and he knows nothing about computer, I hate to think having him to deal with installing utilities…thank god for pre-installed warez.

Apple and Window both took different approach. Window concentrated on OS, and letting companies develop hardware to run it on while Apple took on both OS and hardware. If Window took the same plan as Apple, there wouldn’t be Dell, Gateway or them Generic Vendors. As bad as Window is, a lot of companies also benefited from Window. This is where Window gets into so much problem trying to get all these hardware to work together. On top of that, you got companies split on format they want to use or created their own format. This is where I feel its ok for Microsoft to develop one format that everybody has to abide to. Of course by going this course, you always don’t get the very best format. You win some you loose some. On the other side of the spectrum, Apple being both OS and hardware doesn’t have to deal with as much issue as Microsoft. Apple is able to change direction much faster than Microsoft, who has to consider all the hardwares it support it supported. You may not agree with me, but as a consumer, I just don’t like one company controlling both OS and the hardware you have to run it on. They did try to be exclusively OS, but Steve yanked that idea. I would had considered Apple if it stayed on that course.

I know Window is the not the best OS, but the benefit of having so much software (and games: Battlefield Vietnam Rocks!) and having so much hardware to choose from out weight any limitation or issue (and which other OS also possess) I have with Window.

Saurus

rudipooimf
03-25-2004, 05:32 PM
So many people miss the point of being in business. Going into business when you get down to it, is about making money. In most cases, lots of it. It's why everyone does it. People only complain about MS because they do it well. They make innovative product, ideas, and make boatloads of green off them. Microsoft may be the big boy on the block, monopoly, whatever. They're successful and everyone hates them for it. Jealousy runs deep. I'd much rather live in a world with MS, than one without it. _pixel

Iain McFadzen
03-25-2004, 05:59 PM
Firstly, you might want to respond to the existing thread rather than starting a new one.

Secondly, go ask a grown-up to explain why a complete monopoly in any market is ultimately bad for the consumer, and why every single developed nation on Earth have legal checks and balances in place to stop that from happening.

rudipooimf
03-25-2004, 06:03 PM
Well firstly i hit the wrong button when i posted....lol. Secondly, i know what a monopoly is and Windows Media player doesn't make Microsoft a monopoly. It's the basis for the case in question if you have read any of the materials. And it doesn't prevent anyone from downloading another media player. Since i was complaining about the EU ruling that's what i was talking about.

igorstshirts
03-25-2004, 06:04 PM
So true!!!!
This issue hits close to home for me. Am I going to have to encode to another type of .AVI or MPEG-4 to show a customer his/her product in France to the customer in the U.S?

If I operate the most efficient and profitable airbrush shop on the planet, start manufacturing my own airbrushes along with tips, cones and needles so those parts only work with my airbrush... I give this product away for a small fee along with a warranty for free upgradable parts... Do I have to allow other airbrush needle manufacturers to make parts for my gun that I invented?

:hmm:

PhantomDesign
03-25-2004, 06:40 PM
I just don't like the $600 million that gets taken from a US company and dropped off in Europe.

Spankspeople
03-25-2004, 06:42 PM
*smacks forehead* Ugh, I think I'm done with this... obviously people don't exactly understand what's going on, so discussing this further is just going to make my headache worse...

slaughters
03-25-2004, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by Spankspeople
Newly Released Documents Shed Light on Microsoft Tactics

"The plaintiffs contend...

The documents also suggest ...
Post the actual documents you/they are refering to instead of inferences.

Why should I beleive the statement of someone elses statements about a document written by yet a third party. (it's sad that this sums up the quality of news coverage the general public gets on *any* topic)

P.S.

Spankspeople, removing a huge chunk of code from any existing software product and then giving just 90 days for planing, development, QA testing, and distribution is a well nigh impossible to meet deadline. I believe that the judge is attempting to force a failure on Microsofts part.

Spankspeople
03-25-2004, 07:36 PM
Here you go: This here is the website for the trial (http://www.courts.state.mn.us/districts/fourth/), you can find the documents that you're looking for in the Plaintiff's Exhibits (http://www.courts.state.mn.us/districts/fourth/MicrosoftTrial/Plaintiff/). Took me all of five minutes to search for too.

Edit: In case you're too busy to find the specific files yourself, I went and found them for you.

- GO's NDA (http://www.courts.state.mn.us/districts/fourth/MicrosoftTrial/Plaintiff/PLEX0027_0001.tif)
- Microsoft tries to talk Intel out of investing in GO (http://www.courts.state.mn.us/districts/fourth/MicrosoftTrial/Plaintiff/PLEX0319_0001.TIF)
- Microsoft decides to make their own portable OS not to compete, but to show people that you don't NEED to move away from DOS (http://www.courts.state.mn.us/districts/fourth/MicrosoftTrial/Plaintiff/PLEX0355_0001.TIF)
- Oops... (http://www.courts.state.mn.us/districts/fourth/MicrosoftTrial/Plaintiff/PLEX0359_0001.TIF)
- "Our primary mission right now is to stop GO. We could do this by either..." (http://www.courts.state.mn.us/districts/fourth/MicrosoftTrial/Plaintiff/PLEX0443_0001.TIF)
- Microsoft denies having any confidential information on GO's OS or hardware (http://www.courts.state.mn.us/districts/fourth/MicrosoftTrial/Plaintiff/PLEX0718_0001.TIF)
- GO refutes claims that Microsoft had no confidential information on their products, or any interest in develloping their own handheld OS before entering into talks with GO (http://www.courts.state.mn.us/districts/fourth/MicrosoftTrial/Plaintiff/PLEX0733_0001.TIF)

Sorry, I have to leave now, but I'll be back later. Do you think that maybe you could find the rest on your own, or will you not believe me unless I hold your hand and find them for you?

annaleah
03-25-2004, 07:50 PM
The consumers are the ones that drive these monopolies and just like they are allowing the exporting of good american jobs by continuing to purchase these items that they used to manufacture for themselves making good wages.
Its all because the consumer lets these companies get away with being monoplies and also letting their very own jobs go over seas just so these companies can become more powerful,its not from governments controlling these companies or not controling them its beacause the consumer makes the desision to buy from these corrupt businesses that not only monoplise but also take jobs from the only people that can afford to buy them.
If you belive the governments,any of them are looking out for you you my good sir are the part of the problem.
Avoiding these products is the answer.
If you dont like the fact that MS owns then dont buy it.
The market will control these companies but it all starts with the consumer.











Annaleah

staticneuron
03-25-2004, 07:57 PM
I really don't see how having WMP installed on your computer stops anyone from dling and trying another program. For as long as I could remember real gave me trouble. But WMP and QT doesn't give me any trouble so until they do I don't mind using them. Microsoft doesn't stop anyone from selling thier products just MS stuff seem easier to get and or use. That isn't a crime nor needs to be punished.

Spankspeople
03-25-2004, 08:14 PM
Well, I'm a consumer who can't run 3D Studio Max under any other operating system, so maybe if you can go convince Microsoft to open up their libraries so that software can be easily ported to other operating systems I can get back to not using Microsoft software.

(Honest, that's currently the only reason why I haven't already switched over to Mac)

rudipooimf
03-25-2004, 08:16 PM
Well if you want to get back to not using Microsoft you could always go to MAC and Lightwave or something. If you have such a bone to pick with MS. If I developed an operating system i wouldn't open it up to the world to allow people to develop for other OS's either. Their my customers damnit! lol

iglow
03-25-2004, 08:29 PM
Monopoly my arse.

Mac, Linux, Lindows................ whatever

MS helped build the computer era to where it is today......period

If they cornered a large market this is to thier credit.

They employ people, and indirectly help keep the employment of many others.

They commit much to charity, and are leaders in many educational areas.

Don't like MS then don't use the products.

I for one am a happy MS user, and enjoy all the options I have at my use because of Windows and all the apps which work well with this OS.

BTW, monopoly indicates only one......... Mac and multi Linux versions, along with other oS's, defy this determination that MS is a monopoly..big time, like duh :banghead:

Just my humble opinion :)

slaughters
03-25-2004, 08:31 PM
[Edited out pointless drivel about politeness]

yog
03-25-2004, 08:35 PM
Originally posted by Spankspeople
Well, I'm a consumer who can't run 3D Studio Max under any other operating system, so maybe if you can go convince Microsoft to open up their libraries so that software can be easily ported to other operating systems I can get back to not using Microsoft software.

(Honest, that's currently the only reason why I haven't already switched over to Mac)

Heh heh, I think blaming MS because Discreet never ported MAX to Mac is stretching things a bit ;)

mastermesh
03-25-2004, 08:37 PM
with the SCO + MS thing going on that's not related to the E.U. you do realize that Linux was a stolen version of Unix, at least according to M$... All that a Mac is really is a modified version of Unix also... so... you can't really go with that line of thought as M$ is a monopoly and wants to kill all competition that is cheaper (linux)

Goon
03-25-2004, 08:50 PM
Microsoft's monopoly has been a good thing for computing. It has allowed developers to focus on supporting really only one platform, instead of the hundreds of competing OS's.

So in that sense Microsoft has been beneficial, however Microsoft is NOT where it is at today because it develops excellent or revolutionary products. (Admitedly, Windows does run well enough and I am pleased with it). Microsoft is a world dominating OS monopoly because it has succesfully crushed its competitors, using the same type of vicious tactics that made monopolies a hazard in the first place.
Do not equate this with good business sense either. Microsoft has played well as a normal business but it has also gone out of its way to subvert and harm its competitors, and has ended up in court several times for this.
This ruling isn't about MS having a media player, this is about MS unfairly harming the business of companies who aren't even competitors, and deliberately making interoperability impossible between different OS's.

rudipooimf
03-25-2004, 08:53 PM
Hey Goon, ever hear of DirectX? This isn't revolutionary to gaming? Plug and play? Wasn't that revolutionary to computing? Or would you rather still be trying to find a driver for your shiny new video card? To say MS doesn't innovate and revolutionize is absurd.

Goon
03-25-2004, 08:59 PM
That was not how i intended that sentence to be read, nor was it that important in comparison to the rest of the post, which you handily ignored.

zandoria
03-25-2004, 09:04 PM
I would like to see Bill Gates simply refuse to sell Windows to the EU. Take it off the market entirely. ( He should also refuse to sell to the US government too).

switch to Linux, you socialists, and then try to be competitive in a capitalist marketplace. Looters and Moochers... You should read "Atlas Shrugged", then you might see what kind of world you're wishing for.:bounce:

igorstshirts
03-25-2004, 09:06 PM
I'm constantly under pressure from competitors trying to "crush" Our business. Thank God that My landlord has been very cool but then again, He sort of needs Me to be here so money can turn around. Hell, sometimes I feel even My friends would like to see me fold. Business is super cut-throat...Period, especially that high up on the ladder.

DON'T HATE THE PLAYER... HATE THE GAME.:p

Beamtracer
03-25-2004, 09:45 PM
There's nothing illegal about being a monopoly (which Microsoft is). It only becomes illegal when the monopolist abuses that power to gain a stranglehold of another market (which Microsoft did).

If it wasn't for Microsoft, Java would have flourished. Java works on just about any hardware platform. Well, it would have if MS didn't release a tainted version of it to sabotage its adoption.

Originally posted by Goon
Microsoft's monopoly has been a good thing for computing. It has allowed developers to focus on supporting really only one platform, instead of the hundreds of competing OS's. Microsoft's monopoly has been the most destructive force in the computer industry, trampling over other companies' innovations like Godzilla.

It didn't benefit anyone that Microsoft crushed Netscape. The Internet Explorer browser (should that be Internet Exploiter?) doesn't adhere to industry and web standards. Microsoft wants to control the standards. That's what it's doing with the Media Player.

With Media Player, Microsoft wants to control the standards way beyond the personal computer. If MS controls all video devices, it can then charge a fee for every video device sold.

For moral reasons, I try to keep a Microsoft-Free existence. I make my software and hardware choices to avoid Microsoft products. It can easily be done.

Spankspeople
03-25-2004, 10:05 PM
If people would actually look into the SCO vs. Linux case they'd realise that just because Darl McBride says it's stolen doesn't mean that it actually is stolen, especially since every single piece of evidence used against SCO along with every single piece of evidence that they've tried so far kills their argument.

Don't make baseless claims unless you feel that you can back them up folks.

Edit:

*smacks head against wall* Why am I even bothering with this? Anyone who tries to use SCO to defend Microsoft's case is obviously completely and utterly nuts...

*wanders off to do something worthwhile*

Spankspeople
03-25-2004, 10:15 PM
I'm not being impolite, just impatient with people who are so quick to disagree with me that they don't even bother to check if my sources are legitimate or not before bashing them.

I wouldn't say something if I didn't think that I could back it up... I don't see why people need me to prove this every time I say anything, even if I'm already linking to a reputable source as is... *sigh*

chainsaw
03-25-2004, 10:29 PM
Tte year 2005, the place MS headquarters, the speaker a well know bald man.

SB - " ... the new windows release will have a full blown 3d app ... "

well that would be great news, right? well maybe not ...

MS sells millions of OS so the development of a 3d app would cost maybe one or two € per sale
alias, discreet or any other developer has a smaller number of sales therefore the price of a maya or 3ds seat

consequences
- needing or not a 3d app you would have to pay for it
- alias, discreet, etc would have a major drop on sales, the fewer seats sold the higher the cost of each seat, maya 20.000 again
- no more new kids on the block

so we would be forced to use notepad3D or pay a lot more cash than we do today for a license
this ruling is a line in the sand, windows is a good OS but ms cant use it for enforcing other products.

Cyborg Corp.
03-26-2004, 01:41 AM
Does anyone else find it ironic that the biggest competitor (and growing) of Microsoft is a free OS? (linux)

Spankspeople
03-26-2004, 01:59 AM
It's the only one that can afford to be right now. =P

Though arguably Mac is also one of Microsoft's biggest competitors, but Mac and PC's are almost completely different markets...

Dougs
03-26-2004, 03:50 AM
Well it seems like everyone has throne in their two cents on this so I thought I might as well go at it.

It may seem to alot of people that Microsoft has a monopoly on the computer market but I think they're forgetting who invented the market in the first place.

I'm sure if we wait long enough there will be others. I've already heard some good things about Linux and of coarse Apple. Okay so maybe they're still small and maybe one of them will completely disappear overnight?

The whole issue is the market. How big is it? I don't know does everybody have a computer? The answer is clearly No. I know people who have never touched a computer keyboard and probably never will. I know a guy at work who told me "He didn't know what he would do with it" believe me he was serious.

Now if we were talking about Cars the answer would be clearly a majority of people have them. Most people need and want to own one. And most people want theirs to be different from everybody else's. And that's it.

Even if Microsoft was more considerate to it's competitors I still don't see how they could be bigger since Microsoft clearly had a giant lead in the race from the outset and I don't think calling them a monopoly is really fair.

It will always be the same old cliche's, if you want to compete in any business you have to build a better mousetrap and of coarse finally my all time favorite, the early bird gets the worm.

elam
03-26-2004, 05:59 AM
Microsoft built it's monopoly on Office. It's that simple. If businesses can move to an alternative(which they are and will continue to do), Microsoft will continue to lose market share.

As smaller, network centric, standards compliant devices proliferate, the OS will become irrelivant methinks. All of this Microsoft hoohah will be forgotten in 10 years. That being said, it's unfortunate the EU feels the need to legislate what should be left to the free markets. OS's like Linux thrive because of free markets, not because of laws and bureaucracy.

bleeper
03-26-2004, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by chainsaw
Tte year 2005, the place MS headquarters, the speaker a well know bald man.

SB - " ... the new windows release will have a full blown 3d app ... "

well that would be great news, right? well maybe not ...

MS sells millions of OS so the development of a 3d app would cost maybe one or two € per sale
alias, discreet or any other developer has a smaller number of sales therefore the price of a maya or 3ds seat

consequences
- needing or not a 3d app you would have to pay for it
- alias, discreet, etc would have a major drop on sales, the fewer seats sold the higher the cost of each seat, maya 20.000 again
- no more new kids on the block

so we would be forced to use notepad3D or pay a lot more cash than we do today for a license
this ruling is a line in the sand, windows is a good OS but ms cant use it for enforcing other products.
Sweet a built in 3d app for the unwashed masses.:thumbsup:

how is this any different then on the HW side integrating what used to be stand alone products? We've seen motherboards with integrated ide controllers, scsi, cache, ethernet, sound, modem, processors and graphics. Or processors integrating fpu, L2 cache and now memory controller.

flipnap
03-26-2004, 12:59 PM
Hey Elam, what did the five fingers say to the face? SLAP!!LOL!!! "UNITY!!!!!"

elam
03-26-2004, 02:58 PM
:applause:

eevilmouse
03-26-2004, 04:57 PM
not going to bother with points about the mediaplayer issue (though there should be a CHOICE to install all the windows extras, if you wish. Package them, make them the default install, but make it so the DONT install if you wish)

My question is...do we really want a company that has enough power, when it was cought doing somthing wrong...CONVICTED by our Courts...then Mysterously let off...running 90% of all the computers in the US? The corperate policies of this company almost rival those of the companies featured in cyberpunk. This is SCARY! The whole point of all this penny anti bullshit with Medaplayer, and netscape, is to hopefully get microsoft to change its buisness practices so we can all breath a little eaiser. If a small OS company has the chance to grow, and get bigger before being bought out, and Dump by MS, then finally MS would have compitition, and Windows would become a Much better usefull, Bugless OS. The fact that they have no compatition means they can force whatever Shit they decide to release on us and we cant do Squat.

Personally I buy stock in Apple, I would use apple, but Windows Has my buisness by the balls as well, so I have to use it. Someone set me free.

PhilOsirus
03-26-2004, 05:06 PM
The first thing people will do when they try to download a video is being suggested by the MS OS that there is a "Windows Media Player, available for free, at microsoft.com" and people will download it.

I prefer using Apple's QT anyway, I never get any errors with it (even if the files are a bit larger).

Oh and the US media (CNN) likes to pretend that 600 000 000$ is a small amount of money to MS, but that's bull. They just want to give the impression that little whinny europe only managed to squeeze a little water drop from the Giant Godly and Marvlelous Super-Mega-Major Rich Microsoft.

Saurus
03-26-2004, 05:11 PM
PC makers hold Windows key

http://www.iht.com/articles/512098.html

Spankspeople
03-26-2004, 05:19 PM
So if these PC makers can already do it, why don't they tell the rest of us how to install Windows without Media Player? I'd sure love to know.

Removing the shortcut does not equal removing the software, by the way.

iglow
03-26-2004, 05:57 PM
I want Windows without the media player, yea, like whatever :rolleyes:

chainsaw
03-26-2004, 06:48 PM
bleeper, the question here is not the practice its the grasp MS has on the market,
apple for instance has much more agressive tactics than MS but only shake users complain.

when a company, MS or any other reaches a certain percentage of market share thats considered a monopoly
hence it has to play with a different set of rules, so competition is not crushed, its just that.

iglow
03-26-2004, 07:32 PM
Then all government's collecting taxes could be concidered monopolies, and should be stopped from doing so at once :D

Spankspeople
03-26-2004, 07:33 PM
If you're not going to say anything worthwhile, don't say anything at all.

izzylong
03-26-2004, 07:56 PM
Originally posted by DaveW
That is a pretty lame ruling. Remove a basic and expected feature of any OS released in the last 10 years? Next they can remove any built-in Internet connectivity so AOL can compete. This is like car manufacturers not being allowed to include a stereo in cars because 3rd parties don't sell as many car stereos.
My thoughts exactly.

It's like asking Apple to remove Quicktime from thier os so the rest of the formats can compete fairly on the MacOS and on the same platform.......

wait.... sorry, guess you cant do that either now can you.

I agree totaly with you man.

They seem to think that MS is somehow "opressive".

Whatever.

Heres a nifty idea, USE ANOTHER FRICKIN PLAYER YOU MORONS!!!!!

But nope, they just cant stand for having to get off their lazy arses and learn, so they have to be spoonfed.

You know, I want my next VW Jetta to come complete with WHORES!
And if they don't give it up, I'm gonna sue!

Retards...

chainsaw
03-26-2004, 08:24 PM
if whores is your thing i will try to give an example you can relate to

so you get your vw full of whores, but damn do they have bad breath
i am sure there are a lot of whores who brush their teeths regularly out there
but hey, the bad breath ones come built.

so you would be left cruising down the park with a nice vw full of bad breath whores smiling.

Xtrude
03-26-2004, 10:58 PM
Hey Spankspeople..... ever heard of humour ? Lighten up dude... wtf?

Rich Joyce
03-27-2004, 01:47 AM
oh my word. the amount of ignorance is incredible. it seems that people don't understand what consumerism is..... bless, i don't feel like it's my place to explain, i'll just let them continue in their ignorant bliss....

equally, anyone who can say microsoft has done well, so leave them to their profits and market share needs to open their eyes - monopolies protect consumers in this nasty consumerist society we live in - how people can actively support monopolies i dont know. seems 100% ludicrous to me. guess people just don't understand how markets work and exactly what their rights are..... :hmm:

igorstshirts
03-27-2004, 01:55 AM
A universal Media player is not the end of the planet dude. Some of us actually benefit from it.

BoydLake
03-27-2004, 09:09 AM
Lame case..... Lame ruling...... Lame thread.

Ya know I think I want to go into the mouse driver business... yeah, but since Microsoft already supplies mouse drivers with Windows, I can't make any money at it....... I think I'll sue..... 600 million smackers sounds right...... :/

Like I said.... Lame. Must be tough at the top.

KayosIII
03-27-2004, 11:01 AM
I think this is more to do with the server end of things -- I am pretty sure that Microsoft are tying things up so that only its streaming media server product will interoperate with Mediaplayer. That means that if you want to stream video to a the largest part of the market you will need to purchase Microsofts streaming server product - which means you will need a windows based server -- Yada Yada Yada.

Realnetworks has pioneered streaming servers and spent a lot of time developing that market. Microsoft is not doing this because it wants the mediaplayer market but because it wants the streaming media server market.

Having said that I think the ruling is pretty stupid. Forget the fines and do something that is actually going to make Microsoft think twice.

Anyways that was the impression I got from reading early articles on this case.
Likewise If anybody actually read the documents put forth by DOJ in the Microsoft VS Netscape case you would realise that Microsofts actions where more about making sure that Java didn't take off than owing the browser market.

CGTalk Moderation
01-17-2006, 08:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.