Microsoft Accepts EU Decision

[Samurai]

Microsoft announced today that it will not appeal against the European Union's court order compelling the company to remove Windows Media Player from the Windows XP operating system in Europe.

In a statement to the Associated Press, they announced the company had "decided to forego its right to appeal the Court of First Instance's...ruling of December 22, 2004. Rather than seeking to suspend the Commission's remedies, Microsoft's focus now is on working constructively with the Commission on their full and prompt implementation."

The software giant lost its bid in December to delay the sanctions any further. The original ruling in March 2004 involved a wopping £331m/$613m fine against the company. As well as stripping Windows Media Player from Windows XP, Microsoft has been ordered to reveal essential APIs to rival software companies like Apple and RealPlayer.

The company must now deliver a new version of Windows XP sans Windows Media Player. Microsoft has stated that the version will be available in "coming weeks" but it's still not clear just how they will remove it. A lot of elements native to Windows XP refer to Windows Media Player meaning that the removal task could be much more than taking out media player code, and could affect various user interfaces. Whatever happens in terms of the code, one can expect Microsoft to begin offering a Windows XP without WMP by March in Europe. The rest of Microsofts appeal against a previous EU ruling continues.

source @ http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?id=26824&category=main

[Arm]

Bah 600 million. Now a 60 billion fine would be better. :shifty:

[Biggles]

Bah 600 million. Now a 60 billion fine would be better. :shifty:


Ah! strict but fair I see. :shifty:

[Mïcrösöül°V³]

whats the big deal?!?!? Who cares if Media player is there or not? I dont get it.

[backlash]

yeah, I think it's good to have so there's always a way to play cds, mp3s, movies right away and not have to DL an application. Not that I use WMP, but it's good to have for the average user.

[Biggles]

I believe it was something to do with MS trying to freeze the competition out.

Although I have to say, Real Media seems as dodgy as WMP when it comes to spyware etc.,

[Snee]

I don't really use the windows media player anyway, nor do I use internet explorer.

It's good that they provide the basics for the noobies tho', I don't understand what the big deal is really.

As long as they release the codecs as open source or something I don't see why the OS has to be rebuilt.

[ziggyjuarez]

Question:what if people in that country dont have the internet,how will they play their music?

[Skillian]

Buy software so someone else gets a chance at making money?

[Busyman]

Ultimately this is bad for the consumer.

[ziggyjuarez]

Buy software so someone else gets a chance at making money?
so they will have to pay more money? :huh:

[TheDave]

long live the k-lite codec pack :01:

[lynx]

Ultimately this is bad for the consumer.How?
Monopoly is bad for the consumer, this simply enforces a level playing field and consequently promotes competition.

The main benefit is not the fact that XP will be offered without WMP (I doubt whether there will be a cost saving and it has always been available as a free download). The good point is that hidden API's (which give advantage due to more direct interface with the OS) will be available, allowing others to develop better solutions. The result could be much smoother video and audio reproduction, and surely that's good for everyone (except perhaps Microsoft).

[Busyman]

How?
Monopoly is bad for the consumer, this simply enforces a level playing field and consequently promotes competition.

The main benefit is not the fact that XP will be offered without WMP (I doubt whether there will be a cost saving and it has always been available as a free download). The good point is that hidden API's (which give advantage due to more direct interface with the OS) will be available, allowing others to develop better solutions. The result could be much smoother video and audio reproduction, and surely that's good for everyone (except perhaps Microsoft).
Well, the API's being is a good thing of course.

Unbundling WMP is bad. I got a free media player before. In the future I have to buy one. How is that good for me?

The US government told consumers that basically Microsoft was kicking us in the ass. It looked like other businesses were complaining not the consumer.

The way some governments and businesses would have it, MS would only be able to offer a core OS with no extras.

There are so many extras offered by competitors that it's ridiculous. After I buy the OS and then the extras, which I got free before, I'm left with a hole in my pocket.

Nice work. :dry:

[vidcc]

Question:what if people in that country dont have the internet,how will they play their music?

perhaps on their cd player.

[BigBank_Hank]

perhaps on their cd player.

No one likes a know it all :P

[BawA]

why the feck they want wmp to be removed from Xp?
why E Feckin U wont leave MS Alone :angry:

[manker]

Well, the API's being is a good thing of course.

Unbundling WMP is bad. I got a free media player before. In the future I have to buy one. How is that good for me?

The US government told consumers that basically Microsoft was kicking us in the ass. It looked like other businesses were complaining not the consumer.

The way some governments and businesses would have it, MS would only be able to offer a core OS with no extras.

There are so many extras offered by competitors that it's ridiculous. After I buy the OS and then the extras, which I got free before, I'm left with a hole in my pocket.

Nice work. :dry:Busy, you can download WMP for free :blink:

The point is that you choose which media player you want. There are many free ones that are better, vlc for example.

This is a huge step forward and a kick in the nuts for MS's monopolisation tendencies. The consumer isn't losing out in the slightest.

[Mïcrösöül°V³]

everyone quotes monopoly when referring to MS, but simply having a player built in doesnt mean you cant use something else. I do use WMP, cuz it works perfectly for playing vids. I use Musicmatch for music. People like to talk about other players being better than WMP. How much better can a player possibly be if they all play your vids? I tried quite a few in following the trends, and WMP plays just as well as all that i have tried.Granted, some folks may use thier players for some more advanced things, but I know Im not running a video editing studio. I think people just like to give MS a hard time, people love to take shots at the person standing on top of the hill. Game of smear the queer anyone? :P

[Busyman]

Busy, you can download WMP for free :blink:

The point is that you choose which media player you want. There are many free ones that are better, vlc for example.

This is a huge step forward and a kick in the nuts for MS's monopolisation tendencies. The consumer isn't losing out in the slightest.
Yup and you could still another media player without the unbundling.

If what you say is true and good for the consumer then there should be no bundling of any extras whatsoever.

I smell bullshit and now it's coming from the EU. :shit:

No one has yet said how it benefits the consumer. I'm just hearing what the EU says echoed by you all.

Explain it to me in layman's terms.

I do agree with MS disclosing the APIs though.

[manker]

Most of what gets bundled you can download for free from the MS site.

They do it so that you get familiar with the brand, it's all about marketing. Someone who uses IE for browsing, WMP for playing mp3s and vids, Outlook for mail, Windows defrag for uh, defragging, SP2 built in firewall for protection - I could go on here - will be loyal to the MS brand.

At least that's the thinking - 'all my software is MS so I'll buy MS products' - This means they'll buy stuff like Word, Office, etc.

Brand loyalty is a serious force in the world of marketing.

Other companies don't have their stuff bundled with an OS so they don't get that advantage.

Therefore if stuff isn't bundled and the customer is less loyal to MS one could say that other companies will be more of a force in the marketplace and price competition will become more fierce - driving prices down and encouraging innovation.

Monopolies, or monopolistic practice is bad for the consumer, mmkay.

[Busyman]

Most of what gets bundled you can download for free from the MS site.

They do it so that you get familiar with the brand, it's all about marketing. Someone who uses IE for browsing, WMP for playing mp3s and vids, Outlook for mail, Windows defrag for uh, defragging, SP2 built in firewall for protection - I could go on here - will be loyal to the MS brand.

At least that's the thinking - 'all my software is MS so I'll buy MS products' - This means they'll buy stuff like Word, Office, etc.

Brand loyalty is a serious force in the world of marketing.

Other companies don't have their stuff bundled with an OS so they don't get that advantage.

Therefore if stuff isn't bundled and the customer is less loyal to MS one could say that other companies will be more of a force in the marketplace and price competition will become more fierce - driving prices down and encouraging innovation.

Monopolies, or monopolistic practice is bad for the consumer, mmkay.
After all of what you said....you haven't told me how unbundling is good for the consumer.

The jist of it was....monopolies are bad. :dry: mmmkay?

[Illuminati]

Explain it to me in layman's terms.

ATM if you do not want a non-windows program taking up space, you are able to uninstall it. If you want to do the same for a program intergrated into Windows, there's no option to do so. Whether you want it or not, it'll stay there - If not used, with no purpose.

There's many who use WMP but there's also many that don't and don't want it on the system - This is a benefit for them. There's nothing saying that WMP cannot be put on computers but they can't be the only one if at all.

And my understanding is that the a new European version of XP would be released rather than doing it to all the Euro copies, just like they're doing for the 64-bit version in a few weeks - Not advertised as a new thing but there for those in the know. :)

[manker]

After all of what you said....you haven't told me how unbundling is good for the consumer.

The jist of it was....monopolies are bad. mmmkay?First you moan that it's going to cost you, then I explained that it won't, then you asked for it in layman's terms and asking how it benefits the consumer, so I explained it in layman's terms, culminating in why it's better for the consumer.

Now you're denying that I've done it.

Read the last but one sentence of my previous post. I've written exactly what you're asking for.

[Busyman]

ATM if you want to do not want a non-windows program taking up space, you are able to uninstall it. If you want to do the same for a program intergrated into Windows, there's no option to do so. Whether you want it or not, it'll stay there - If not used, with no purpose.

There's many who use WMP but there's also many that don't and don't want it on the system - This is a benefit for them. There's nothing saying that WMP cannot be put on computers but they can't be the only one if at all.

And my understanding is that the a new European version of XP would be released rather than doing it to all the Euro copies, just like they're doing for the 64-bit version in a few weeks - Not advertised as a new thing but there for those in the know. :)
Explain to me in layman's terms. I could not want many things that are on Windows. How does just not wanting it and removing it make it better for the consumer? :huh:

I have used other media programs besides WMP so what you said doesn't harm me. There are many that don't use IE. How are they harmed by it coming with Windows?

Saying a computer that comes with an added benefit, which doesn't have to be used, is harming the consumer is bullshit.

Come up with something else. Otherwise you are reciting a competitor's words. I bet if IE could simply be uninstalled after it's shipped, is also harming the consumer too.

Therefore if the consumer has to have it off the computer they can. Right?

[Busyman]

First you moan that it's going to cost you, then I explained that it won't, then you asked for it in layman's terms and asking how it benefits the consumer, so I explained it in layman's terms, culminating in why it's better for the consumer.

Now you're denying that I've done it.

Read the last but one sentence of my previous post. I've written exactly what you're asking for.
Well, you didn't. You explained the theories of not having a monopoly. I agree with it in theory. You also explained brand loyalty, which has nothing to do with harming the consumer. :blink:

Windows has been about the same price (it did jump only recently) for years.

Many get it with their computers and on an upgrade, do it every other upgrade including enterprise business.

When I say layman's terms I mean the average joe that buys a computer.

I didn't hear this commotion until American competitor's yelled foul. Public outcry was tumbleweed in a western town.

[Illuminati]

Explain to me in layman's terms. I could not want many things that are on Windows. How does just not wanting it and removing it make it better for the consumer? :huh:

I have used other media programs besides WMP so what you said doesn't harm me. There are many that don't use IE. How are they harmed by it coming with Windows?

Saying a computer that comes with an added benefit, which doesn't have to be used, is harming the consumer is bullshit.

Come up with something else. Otherwise you are reciting a competitor's words. I bet if IE could simply be uninstalled after it's shipped, is also harming the consumer too.

Therefore if the consumer has to have it off the computer they can. Right?

Well the fact is I can't say anything else because there isn't anything else to say.

Fact is that I haven't used WMP for almost two years because I've used another media player - That's two years the software hasn't had to be there. So to me, this news is a good thing in that I can have more control over my PC.

You say that this would harm normal consumers. On the same path, there are many people who use a retarded P2P network by using Kazaa because they're casual users and don't know other programs - where's your bleeding heart for them while we use alternatives?

In the end, news like this can only be interpreted in ways it's good for you and you alone. For me, it's good news because it means I'll have more say over my computer and what's on it. For you, it isn't a bother so it isn't good news if news at all.

I couldn't care less if IE, WMP or any other integrated software is or isn't shipped afterwards (I'd rather it would to help casual users actually) - I care about the option to be able to uninstall it and not have anything to do with it.

[Mïcrösöül°V³]

well what about the people who arent as PC literate as others? when they get there puter and pop in a disc....nothing will happen. They may not care about monopoly or anything else, they just want the puter to play the disc. Then they have to start asking about to find out how to make it work, then they find that they have to buy more software. The amount of space eaten up by WMP is negligable, especially on todays large HDDs. And as far as other companies not having the benefit of having their software bundled with an OS, maybe they should write their own OS. I look at it this way.......It's Microsofts software and OS, they should do with it whatever they want.

[manker]

Explain to me in layman's terms. I could not want many things that are on Windows. How does just not wanting it and removing it make it better for the consumer?I've explained that, if the bundling is not there and MS doesn't have this blind brand loyalty then it will improve innovation and drive prices down thro' increased competition.
I have used other media programs besides WMP so what you said doesn't harm me. There are many that don't use IE. How are they harmed by it coming with Windows?See above.
Saying a computer that comes with an added benefit, which doesn't have to be used, is harming the consumer is bullshit.No it isn't I've explained that already.
Come up with something else. Otherwise you are reciting a competitor's words. I bet if IE could simply be uninstalled after it's shipped, is also harming the consumer too.I already have come up with something else, you need to read it now. What do you mean about IE. You need that to upgrade your OS, another example of MS's technique for binding the customer to it's products.
Therefore if the consumer has to have it off the computer they can. Right?Wrong. MS ensure that you either need many of their products, or you simply cannot uninstall them, as is the case with WMP.

[manker]

Well, you didn't. You explained the theories of not having a monopoly. I agree with it in theory. You also explained brand loyalty, which has nothing to do with harming the consumer. :blink:

Windows has been about the same price (it did jump only recently) for years.

Many get it with their computers and on an upgrade, do it every other upgrade including enterprise business.

When I say layman's terms I mean the average joe that buys a computer.

I didn't hear this commotion until American competitor's yelled foul. Public outcry was tumbleweed in a western town.Yes, brand loyalty of the type MS instill into consumers is harming the consumer because it's causing a edging out the competition, can you not see that.

The average American Joe that buys a computer will see an more competitive market which will drive down the prices of software and make software more reliable.

Look at the hardware market and how much cheaper and more reliable it is now - and why? MS don't have a monopoly on that.

[Busyman]

I've explained that, if the bundling is not there and MS doesn't have this blind brand loyalty then it will improve innovation and drive prices down thro' increased competition. You fault MS for brand loyalty...what a joke!!! :lol: Tell Coca-Cola that!!! See above.No it isn't I've explained that already.I already have come up with something else, you need to read it now. What do you mean about IE. You need that to upgrade your OS, another example of MS's technique for binding the customer to it's products.Wrong. MS ensure that you either need many of their products, or you simply cannot uninstall them, as is the case with WMP.
You obviously missed the sentence before even though you quoted it. :blink: See below..

I bet if IE could simply be uninstalled after it's shipped, is also harming the consumer too.
The "I bet if" means I know it can't be uninstalled, wanker. :dry:

I would propose that but competitor's wouldn't have it.

[Mïcrösöül°V³]

Yes, brand loyalty of the type MS instill into consumers is harming the consumer because it's causing a edging out the competition, can you not see that.
Isnt WinDVD and other media player makers doing quite well? I would be more concerned about shit like Viewpoint media player being shoved into your pc without you knowing it, rather than thinking up ways to pick the OS apart. I agree competition is good, but i think this is plain stupid. but, if it makes some happy, they should just give an uninstall option i guess.

[manker]

You fault MS for brand loyalty...what a joke!!! Tell Coca-Cola that!!!Coca-Cola doesn't come bundled, ffs think it thro'.

Competitors would certainly prefer it if it could be installed, doesn't solve them cornering the market tho' as IE will still be the browser that comes bundled with your PC and therefore the first one people use, giving MS an unfair advantage.

[Busyman]

Well the fact is I can't say anything else because there isn't anything else to say.

Fact is that I haven't used WMP for almost two years because I've used another media player - That's two years the software hasn't had to be there. So to me, this news is a good thing in that I can have more control over my PC.

You say that this would harm normal consumers. On the same path, there are many people who use a retarded P2P network by using Kazaa because they're casual users and don't know other programs - where's your bleeding heart for them while we use alternatives?

In the end, news like this can only be interpreted in ways it's good for you and you alone. For me, it's good news because it means I'll have more say over my computer and what's on it. For you, it isn't a bother so it isn't good news if news at all.

I couldn't care less if IE, WMP or any other integrated software is or isn't shipped afterwards (I'd rather it would to help casual users actually) - I care about the option to be able to uninstall it and not have anything to do with it.
If your only argument is "WMP is there, even though I don't use it, so it's harming me" I guess because takes up alot of HD space or something then I would propose MS allow an uninstall.

You shouldn't have any complaints about that, right...or is the bundling still kicking you in the ass? (actually you answered that in your last sentence)

So then we're agreed. This action by the EU goes to far. :shifty:

[manker]

Isnt WinDVD and other media player makers doing quite well? I would be more concerned about shit like Viewpoint media player being shoved into your pc without you knowing it, rather than thinking up ways to pick the OS apart. I agree competition is good, but i think this is plain stupid. but, if it makes some happy, they should just give an uninstall option i guess.The ones that are doing well are doing so in spite of MS's unfair advantage. A level playing field would be nice - as in other industries. Heinz is huge but when you buy a cooker it doesn't come with Baked Beans.

The uninstall option would be great. Maybe the EU will push for this to be the next step, I'd like to think so :)

[Illuminati]

If your only argument is "WMP is there, even though I don't use it, so it's harming me" I guess because takes up alot of HD space or something then I would propose MS allow an uninstall.

You shouldn't have any complaints about that, right...or is the bundling still kicking you in the ass? (actually you answered that in your last sentence)

So then we're agreed. This action by the EU goes to far. :shifty:

I never said it was harming me - I said it was a nuisance for me.

If all you want to hear is someone say that the EU is bollocks, then say it to yourself - Because for me, the EU's actions were a good thing.

At least they had the balls to question Microsoft about their handling with Windows, unlike MS's home boys over the ocean :P

[Busyman]

Coca-Cola doesn't come bundled, ffs think it thro'.

Competitors would certainly prefer it if it could be installed, doesn't solve them cornering the market tho' as IE will still be the browser that comes bundled with your PC and therefore the first one people use, giving MS an unfair advantage.
I'll put it plainly.

Giving a user an extra then saying to them it is bad that you got that extra, is a competitor's words not a consumers.

ffs think it through. I wish MS Office came with Windows.

The EU and America are going about it the wrong way.

1. Make MS deliver those API's so competitor's software can work better with Windows. I'll love to see how much better.

2. Allow an uninstall of non-core extras for the tinkerer. It'll still be on the CD ffs.

Making MS release their source code and unbundling features that competitor's sell is bullshit and doesn't need to be done.

[manker]

I never said it was harming me - I said it was a nuisance for me.

If all you want to hear is someone say that the EU is bollocks, then say it to yourself - Because for me, the EU's actions were a good thing.

At least they had the balls to question Microsoft about their handling with Windows, unlike MS's home boys over the ocean :PYup, I think that's about the crux of the matter and why Mr Busy is all upset. The EU can stand up to MS, the most powerful company in the world, and the US cannot.

Well said, Scouser :D

[Busyman]

I never said it was harming me - I said it was a nuisance for me.

If all you want to hear is someone say that the EU is bollocks, then say it to yourself - Because for me, the EU's actions were a good thing.

At least they had the balls to question Microsoft about their handling with Windows, unlike MS's home boys over the ocean :P
I figured this was an EU was pissing contest. I notice their crap didn't get slung until America slung theirs.

If WMP is a nuisance, then again, the EU's actions go too far. I'm waiting for Norton to say something about MS antivirus protection. I know it's coming if it hasn't already.

[manker]

I'll put it plainly.

Giving a user an extra then saying to them it is bad that you got that extra, is a competitor's words not a consumers.

ffs think it through. I wish MS Office came with Windows.

The EU and America are going about it the wrong way.

1. Make MS deliver those API's so competitor's software can work better with Windows. I'll love to see how much better.

2. Allow an uninstall of non-core extras for the tinkerer. It'll still be on the CD ffs.

Making MS release their source code and unbundling features that competitor's sell is bullshit and doesn't need to be done.:lol:

You're living in a fantasy world. MS releasing OS source code!!

If you don't understand how economics works and can't see how this unfair advantage of inherent brand loyalty will detrimentally affect the consumer, despite my best efforts to explain it, then I can do no more.

[Busyman]

Yup, I think that's about the crux of the matter and why Mr Busy is all upset. The EU can stand up to MS, the most powerful company in the world, and the US cannot.

Well said, Scouser :D
That doesn't work with me, wanka.

Upset? That's over yonder. I disagree with logic is all.

The EU did so after the hoopla over here. Well done for the EU. :dry:

[manker]

Indeed, huzzah for the EU but I don't think you understand the subject.

Economics is all about logic.

[Busyman]

:lol:

You're living in a fantasy world. MS releasing OS source code!!

If you don't understand how economics works and can't see how this unfair advantage of inherent brand loyalty will detrimentally affect the consumer, despite my best efforts to explain it, then I can do no more.
I know how economics works, wank.

Btw, over here, offering a cooker with beans is called marketing.

Micro brought a good point about successful third party software companies.

[Busyman]

Indeed, huzzah for the EU but I don't think you understand the subject.

Economics is all about logic.
Then with that logic.....MS should come as a core OS and NOTHING ELSE.

The EU is half-steppin' then.

Any product a competitor makes is fair game to be removed from the OS. :huh:

[manker]

Ah, so you've thought about the economics. The EU is taking steps to a fairer market, which is a good thing for the consumer.

You said you don't want to pay - I showed you that you don't need to, you said you don't see how it benefits the consumer if WMP wasn't bundled, I've shown you how through simple economics. That's basically all I wanted to do, I'm not bothered about the EU - tbh I have little time for them.

The PC manufacturers should be allowed to put what components they want in their computers. Then it should be an option on installation to the consumer.

At the moment MS is cornering the market at a lot of levels thro' the unfair methods I've described, I want to see this stopped. I wouldn't mind if there were some products within the OS but these need to be uninstallable, non-essential and optional.

I don't want black, I don't want white, I want a nice shade of grey.

[sArA]

If the consumer is unaware of other choices then they cannot make informed decisions. If a consumer expects to have certain products bundled in with another product that is fine in theory because they can choose the whole package....or buy separate products from other suppliers.

Of course many people just can't be bothered to look for several products from several suppliers and find a bundled package more convenient and easier. They may have relatively simple requirements and find that the one on offer is up to the job and so have no concerns.

However, monopolies take the choice and expectations of consumers and gives them no choice. In this way, their expectations are as limited as their choices, and they can never be really sure that the product/s they are buying are really the most appropriate for what they need.

People want what they are told they want and expect what they are told to expect therefore consumer freedom is constrained, competition is limited and innovation is chilled...long term it is not good news for anyone.

[manker]

Great post, Sara. Well considered and I totally agree.

[Snee]

hmmm buuut

Won't ms lose customers if they lose some of their userfriendliness?
I mean, if they have to provide an os without any inbuilt media players or browsers, that means you have to work just to get out on the internet or listen to music.

And they can't really add an open source component like firefox or xmml I thought, since it might be seen as if they are profiting from someone else's work.

Making them deliver stripped operating systems might lead to a mass migration to linux or something, at least among people who just want to surf, do office work and listen to music. I'm surprised something like it hasn't happened already, but still, if MS are forced to mess up their os for the sake of the open market they stand to lose a hell of a whole lot more than just streaming media rights, almost certainly.

I can see how taking away streaming media stuff might be good, but the media player? Or IE?

[manker]

I don't want them to lose their friendly UI, just for them to render their software add-ons optional. Atm installing Windows is a process that you sit thro and wait for 15 minutes and everything goes on, I'd like it if you had a bunch of DVDs with all the extras on so that you didn't have to install all the crap - yes, I'm talking about WMP and IE too because I think they should be non-essential and uninstallable.

As I say, I don't want to harm MS's ability to compete, but just now they don't have to compete since each PC user is forced to use their bundled products so becomes familiar with the brand. I wish to limit their influence so that there is a fair market - for the reasons I posted earlier.

[Busyman]

If the consumer is unaware of other choices then they cannot make informed decisions. If a consumer expects to have certain products bundled in with another product that is fine in theory because they can choose the whole package....or buy separate products from other suppliers.

Of course many people just can't be bothered to look for several products from several suppliers and find a bundled package more convenient and easier. They may have relatively simple requirements and find that the one on offer is up to the job and so have no concerns.

However, monopolies take the choice and expectations of consumers and gives them no choice. In this way, their expectations are as limited as their choices, and they can never be really sure that the product/s they are buying are really the most appropriate for what they need.

People want what they are told they want and expect what they are told to expect therefore consumer freedom is constrained, competition is limited and innovation is chilled...long term it is not good news for anyone.

The train of thought is the same behind the McDonald's lawsuits.
If the consumer doesn't want to look for other products that is the consumer's fault. If a competitor doesn't market to that consumer that is the competitions fault.

If the consumer doesn't sift through the garbage to find that snazzy new product, how the hell is that MS's fault? :blink:

Think of it this way.......

Person 1 has been using WMP for years, they then find that through this lawsuit to help the consumer that there were other products out there.

How does person 1 blame MS for not using something else? :blink:

BULLSHIT!!

How many media players are out there?
How many antivirus programs do people know about? The market leader is Norton. I say blame Norton for this. They do market to the consumer, the consumer knows about them.

The consumer is so smart that if grandma saw a commercial for a rival media program....she just might buy it in lieu of the resident WMP.

You said monopolies give the consumer no choice. Guess what? You are referring to media players which are ubiquitous. The rest is marketing.

If any government had real balls they would address the real monopoly and that's OS itself...not the extras.

But you really don't want 5 OS's to choose from, now do you?

[Busyman]

I'd like it if you had a bunch of DVDs with all the extras on so that you didn't have to install all the crap - yes, I'm talking about WMP and IE too because I think they should be non-essential and uninstallable.

Well.....that's an entirely different remedy now isn't it? :dry:

[manker]

Well.....that's an entirely different remedy now isn't it? :dry:To what. That's the first time I'd posted a remedy as I was promted by SnnY. I've stated my intention in the thread:


You said you don't want to pay - I showed you that you don't need to, you said you don't see how it benefits the consumer if WMP wasn't bundled, I've shown you how through simple economics. That's basically all I wanted to do, I'm not bothered about the EU - tbh I have little time for them.To which you come up with bollocks like MS opening their source code.

There are lots of legal issues which I can't pretend to understand but in a perfect world I would like software companies to compete on an equal footing, to benefit the consumer.

[sArA]

The train of thought is the same behind the McDonald's lawsuits.
If the consumer doesn't want to look for other products that is the consumer's fault. If a competitor doesn't market to that consumer that is the competitions fault.

If the consumer doesn't sift through the garbage to find that snazzy new product, how the hell is that MS's fault? :blink:

Think of it this way.......

Person 1 has been using WMP for years, they then find that through this lawsuit to help the consumer that there were other products out there.

How does person 1 blame MS for not using something else? :blink:

I agree, the consumer is culpable in their laziness. However, just because someone doesn't actively seek something, doesn't mean that they should not have the choice. You could apply this to any 'thing' you could mention, different types of shoes, cookers, cups.

By agressively seeking to close off a market to competition an organisation is no longer considering 'product' 'service' 'quality' etc, it is merely profiteering. .

How many media players are out there?
How many antivirus programs do people know about? The market leader is Norton. I say blame Norton for this. They do market to the consumer, the consumer knows about them.

The consumer is so smart that if grandma saw a commercial for a rival media program....she just might buy it in lieu of the resident WMP.


Not if she already had one she was familiar with that came bundled together in one neat OS package...oh...which actually happens to have the single biggest market share in the world.

You said monopolies give the consumer no choice. Guess what? You are referring to media players which are ubiquitous. The rest is marketing.

I don't see that to be the point...there will always be differences, just as each car manufacturer makes differnt cars. They all however, make cars which are ubiquitous .

If any government had real balls they would address the real monopoly and that's OS itself...not the extras.

I agree entirely :)

But you really don't want 5 OS's to choose from, now do you?

Why not? I have substantially more cars to choose from


:) :lol:

[Busyman]

To what. That's the first time I'd posted a remedy as I was promted by SnnY. I've stated my intention in the thread:

To which you come up with bollocks like MS opening their source code.

There are lots of legal issues which I can't pretend to understand but in a perfect world I would like software companies to compete on an equal footing, to benefit the consumer.
I never came up with the source code thingie. It's been on the table on both sides of the Atlantic bubba.

I've stated that the EU's remedy is bullshit and goes too far. The remedy that I proposed, and you second, makes more logical sense in the scheme.

[Busyman]

Why not? I have substantially more cars to choose from


:) :lol:
Yup, remember OS2/Warp? :dry:

The rest of what you summed up isn't true. Consumers do have a choice as far as the extras.

You said it yourself....

I agree, the consumer is culpable in their laziness. However, just because someone doesn't actively seek something, doesn't mean that they should not have the choice.
The last sentence doesn't jibe though.

Again that ranges from consumer search to competitor marketing.

Can you blame Norton because they are the market leader in antivirus software? Many say they don't have the best product.

I remember the same with the Iomega Zip drives. They clearly weren't best but sold the most at that time.

[sArA]

I was not at any point ascribing blame....merely pointing out that monopolies are a bad thing and shouldn't be allowed.

Not allowing it to continue is the point. Making changes for the better. :)

An organisation cannot really be blamed for attempting monopoly as the driving force behind the market is to increase profits and market share. It is therefore inevitable that sometimes monopolies will emerge. This does not however mean that because they emerge, they should be allowed to continue in their market dominance un-challenged.

It could be argued that challenges such as the EU descision are just examples of competitive forces being exerted in different ways, and will ultimately open up the market. This may also have the effect of keeping microsoft on its toes in much the same way a realistic main competitor would in a less monopolistic environment.

[Busyman]

I was not at any point ascribing blame....merely pointing out that monopolies are a bad thing and shouldn't be allowed.

Not allowing it to continue is the point. Making changes for the better. :)

An organisation cannot really be blamed for attempting monopoly as the driving force behind the market is to increase profits and market share. It is therefore inevitable that sometimes monopolies will emerge. This does not however mean that because they emerge, they should be allowed to continue in their market dominance un-challenged.

It could be argued that challenges such as the EU descision are just examples of competitive forces being exerted in different ways, and will ultimately open up the market. This may also have the effect of keeping microsoft on its toes in much the same way a realistic main competitor would in a less monopolistic environment.
Yes but the very monopoly that the EU say exists, doesn't have the appropriate remedy.

The EU is blowing smoke about a media player when it's the OS that's the monopoly. :blink:

To further that, the claim that MS is using the OS monopoly to affect the media player market is small time.

If that's the case, the EU should strip Windows to the core.

Either the EU is half-steppin or applying inappropriate bullshit remedies.

If the issue is the media player, compel Windows to have an uninstall routine for it and still disclose the API's (which do give an advantage).

I know about monopolies since I work for Verizon formerly Bell Atlantic formerly C&P Telephone (when I came to the company) formerly AT&T.

How many phone companies are offered to you btw?

[Cheese]

It'll benefit the consumer because wmp is a piece of shit. I wouldn't run my dodgy german porn on that crap software.

Well done EU, one in the nuts for Bill Gates.

[Busyman]

It'll benefit the consumer because wmp is a piece of shit. I wouldn't run my dodgy german porn on that crap software.

Well done EU, one in the nuts for Bill Gates.
Well don't use it.

Better yet don't use Windows, and get off Bill Gates' nuts since that's what he actually makes money from. :dry:

[Cheese]

Well don't use it.

Better yet don't use Windows, and get off Bill Gates' nuts since that's what he actually makes money from. :dry:


I don't use it so what's your point?

Maybe you should try out some of the options, I know it can be a little frightening but there are better media players out there to use you don't have to use what Bill tells you to.

Try these links:

http://www.winamp.com/player/

http://www.bsplayer.org/

http://www.divx-digest.com/software/media_player_classic.html

These are just my personal choices I'm sure others can add to the list. Try each one out see if you like them.

You can go here (http://www.codecguide.com/) for a nice little bundle pack of all sorts of media players/codecs/etc. If you have trouble installing them feel free to PM me.


Next week we'll teach you how to change your screensaver.

[UKResident]

l fail to see how you can call Windows a monopoly. Windows is where it is because it has provided what customers want and they have bought it. There are other OS's out there, free ones too, and programs that will allow you to run Windows programs on them. If you don't like Windows don't use it. Windows has always been a bundled software, but nothing bundled has ever been the best at what it does, and Microsoft hasn't tried to make it so, with the possible exception of IE. Just look at Paint, Word Pad and the system tools. There is nothing to stop you using third party add-ons, and there never was, file associations see to that. Blaming Microsoft because stuff comes bundled is crap,

Those of us who were there pre-Windows appreciate what Microsoft has done over the past 15 years or so, and talking of prices, software was more expensive before Windows than it is now. Microsoft has done more than any other company to bring prices down for consumers. Not just software prices either, they are also responsible in a huge way for the drop in computer prices through the millions of people Windows has brought in, ask anyone who has used Edlin just how user friendly they once were.

[Busyman]

l fail to see how you can call Windows a monopoly. Windows is where it is because it has provided what customers want and they have bought it. There are other OS's out there, free ones too, and programs that will allow you to run Windows programs on them. If you don't like Windows don't use it. Windows has always been a bundled software, but nothing bundled has ever been the best at what it does, and Microsoft hasn't tried to make it so, with the possible exception of IE. Just look at Paint, Word Pad and the system tools. There is nothing to stop you using third party add-ons, and there never was, file associations see to that. Blaming Microsoft because stuff comes bundled is crap,

Those of us who were there pre-Windows appreciate what Microsoft has done over the past 15 years or so, and talking of prices, software was more expensive before Windows than it is now. Microsoft has done more than any other company to bring prices down for consumers. Not just software prices either, they are also responsible in a huge way for the drop in computer prices through the millions of people Windows has brought in, ask anyone who has used Edlin just how user friendly they once were.
No, no, no....you don't understand. People are spoiled brats and Windows is a CPOS. Through the years, since Windows inception from Xerox, there have always been better OS's and MS has never allowed anyone to see them. Linux is the future.

[Busyman]

I don't use it so what's your point?

Maybe you should try out some of the options, I know it can be a little frightening but there are better media players out there to use you don't have to use what Bill tells you to.

Try these links:

http://www.winamp.com/player/

http://www.bsplayer.org/

http://www.divx-digest.com/software/media_player_classic.html

These are just my personal choices I'm sure others can add to the list. Try each one out see if you like them.

You can go here (http://www.codecguide.com/) for a nice little bundle pack of all sorts of media players/codecs/etc. If you have trouble installing them feel free to PM me.


Next week we'll teach you how to change your screensaver.
I've got 'em all, CheeseWhiz, including MPC.

Maybe your post should go in the Guides Section. :dry:

Oh and what's "dodgy" about WMP? :huh:

edit: ...and wtf are you talking about...this screensaver thingie?

btw screensavers don't save your screen, genius.

[Cheese]

edit: ...and wtf are you talking about...this screensaver thingie?

btw screensavers don't save your screen, genius.

A screen saver is an image that is activated on a personal computer display when no user activity has been sensed for a certain time. The original purpose of a screen saver was to prevent burn-in (the burning of an image into the phosphor inside the cathode ray tube after hours of the same image being displayed). In fact, today's CRT/LCD display technology makes burn-in unlikely except under extreme conditions. The perfect screensaver is the black screen... a bit boring, huh? Many people get screen savers so that something interesting is on the screen when they make a pause.

If I have time I'll screen-grab some pictures to show you how you can change your screensaver later on. It's a little difficult for a computer novice like yourself but I think it's well worth the effort (though only for cosmetic reasons these days obviously).

[Busyman]

The prefect screensaver is the black screen
Exactly...save your typing genius.

Wtf does a prefect have to do with screensavers? STFU!! :ermm:

[UKResident]

Right you two, outside, fingernails at 10 paces. :lol:

[Cheese]

Exactly...save your typing genius.

Wtf does a prefect have to do with screensavers? STFU!! :ermm:

Good point. Sorry to have confused you so easily with my spelling mistake.

I, of course, meant 'perfect screensaver'. As mentioned, a black screen is the best to have but it is a little dull don't you think?

Personally I have a burning fire effect, like this one (http://www.soft32.com/download_21045.html). It's a tad frivolous but it does look pretty damn cool. Though I would experiement with easier screensavers first before attempting to utilize a more complictaed one like I use.

[4play]

nice to see the eu stepping up to microsoft since the states found them to be a monopoly and then sat back and did nothing about it. hell there punishment was to give away free software to the schools. somehow giving away free copies of software to children does not seem like a punishment since the kids now all use microsoft products.

intergrating media player/internet explorer into windows has lead to so many security problems that its not even funny and the simple fact is these products are not free we have to pay for them when you buy windows. the reason behind including these into the operating system has been proved in court to be killing of competition. netscape was given a huge payout recently for this.

another problem the eu had with microsoft was that it was telling pc retailers that they where not allowed to include certain competing products with windows(realplayer is a known product). this is a bit like buying your cooker and being told oh yeah you cant buy baked beans from heinz with this cooker but you can have this other brand. punishment for not following microsofts rules was being charged full price for windows which would completly kill alot of companies.

@busyman have you ever used any of the windows api's ? they are pretty terrible. when microsoft made the jump from the 9x kernel to the nt kernel they had to include alot of backward compatibility. often programs would be completly broken due to bad programming on the makers behalf but microsoft had to support them anyway. This lead to windows having often strange results when using documented features. unless certain code is made public this sorts of problems can never be dealt with. it will also give the wine team somehelp which would really help out linux.

microsoft have been using pretty much illegal business practices for years now and this well slap on the wrist probably is not going to stop it.

[UKResident]

Nice screensaver there WC, unfortunately you need a high spec machine to run it, P200 and 32mb RAM ... oh well, next time. :(

[Busyman]

Good point. Sorry to have confused you so easily with my spelling mistake.

I, of course, meant 'perfect screensaver'. As mentioned, a black screen is the best to have but it is a little dull don't you think?

Personally I have a burning fire effect, like this one (http://www.soft32.com/download_21045.html). It's a tad frivolous but it does look pretty damn cool. Though I would experiement with easier screensavers first before attempting to utilize a more complictaed one like I use.
Thanks anyway. I'll stick with my boring black screen.

If I want fire, I'll rub your sister's fat legs together.

[UKResident]

You know, l'm beginning to think Busyman is really Billy Dean, can you see the similarities? :blink: They both begin with B for a start, could that really be a coincidence? They both have a 'Y' too. Busy Man, Billy Dean. :dry:

[Cheese]

Thanks anyway. I'll stick with my boring black screen.



Your computer can't handle the fire screensaver either eh? :(

[Busyman]

You know, l'm beginning to think Busyman is really Billy Dean, can you see the similarities? :blink: They both begin with B for a start, could that really be a coincidence? They both have a 'Y' too. Busy Man, Billy Dean. :dry:
Hmmm, Billy Dean...white Australian

Busyman....black Washingtonian.

UKMan, you gotta do bedda dan dat. :dry:

[Cheese]

Hmmm, Billy Dean...white Australian

Busyman....black Washingtonian.

UKMan, you gotta do bedda dan dat. :dry:

Shut it, Billy.

[Busyman]

Your computer can't handle the fire screensaver either eh? :(
Screensavers are a waste of light on my monitor. Thanks again though. Heidi Ho!!! :clap:

[Cheese]

nice to see the eu stepping up to microsoft since the states found them to be a monopoly and then sat back and did nothing about it. hell there punishment was to give away free software to the schools. somehow giving away free copies of software to children does not seem like a punishment since the kids now all use microsoft products.

intergrating media player/internet explorer into windows has lead to so many security problems that its not even funny and the simple fact is these products are not free we have to pay for them when you buy windows. the reason behind including these into the operating system has been proved in court to be killing of competition. netscape was given a huge payout recently for this.

another problem the eu had with microsoft was that it was telling pc retailers that they where not allowed to include certain competing products with windows(realplayer is a known product). this is a bit like buying your cooker and being told oh yeah you cant buy baked beans from heinz with this cooker but you can have this other brand. punishment for not following microsofts rules was being charged full price for windows which would completly kill alot of companies.




Good point about M$'s bully boy techniques with companies wanting to bundle other software with pc's other than Microsofts pieces of crap. Hopefully this will go some way to stopping this practise.


@Billy Dean: Limited finances for electricity bill eh? :(

[Busyman]

Good point about M$'s bully boy techniques with companies wanting to bundle other software with pc's other than Microsofts pieces of crap. Hopefully this will go some way to stopping this practise.


@Billy Dean: Limited finances for electricity bill eh? :(
Yeah man, I'm trying to get another bathroom put in and a sun room.

If they want to stop the practice, strip Windows to it's core product. :dry:

[Cheese]

If they want to stop the practice, strip Windows to it's core product. :dry:

Good idea. I'd go for that, let the companies that sell the computers bundle up their own choice of software for their customers.

[lynx]

If they want to stop the practice, strip Windows to it's core product. :dry:We might get it to run efficiently in a reasonable amount of memory if they did that too.

[Busyman]

We might get it to run efficiently in a reasonable amount of memory if they did that too.
.......and that's we needs to be done, make Windows the way we want MS to make it.

[4play]

xp is a bloody good operating system for home users no matter what anyone says. the only mistake microsoft made was intergrating internet explorer into the os.

if they cut windows down to the core and just have the kernel and the window manager it would be completly useless for what it is designed for and that is for home users. imagine lusers having to figure out where to get a video player from let alone defragger, antivirus and everything else.

a suitable compromise would be having windows media player/internet explorer as an option to install with the os. they would not be forcing it on anyone like now and if they really are as bad as people say they can leave them out.

Opening up a few of the api's for xp and the upcoming longhorn to allow 3rd party applications to really use the inbuilt functions of the operating system would be a massive step forward in making it a more level playing field for everyone.

the nt kernel is pretty bulky since it has to support alot of hardware. a bit like standard linux kernels you get with distributions. they are designed to support everything so they will install on a wide range of machines. but with linux you can compile your own leaving out the modules you dont need. until the nt kernel is open source you will never be able to do this. thats why it has such a large memory footprint.

[Busyman]

xp is a bloody good operating system for home users no matter what anyone says. the only mistake microsoft made was intergrating internet explorer into the os.

if they cut windows down to the core and just have the kernel and the window manager it would be completly useless for what it is designed for and that is for home users. imagine lusers having to figure out where to get a video player from let alone defragger, antivirus and everything else.

a suitable compromise would be having windows media player/internet explorer as an option to install with the os. they would not be forcing it on anyone like now and if they really are as bad as people say they can leave them out.

Opening up a few of the api's for xp and the upcoming longhorn to allow 3rd party applications to really use the inbuilt functions of the operating system would be a massive step forward in making it a more level playing field for everyone.

the nt kernel is pretty bulky since it has to support alot of hardware. a bit like standard linux kernels you get with distributions. they are designed to support everything so they will install on a wide range of machines. but with linux you can compile your own leaving out the modules you dont need. until the nt kernel is open source you will never be able to do this. thats why it has such a large memory footprint.
A simple, suitable compromise is to allow an uninstall of IE, and WMP. Grandma won't have to figure out where to get it because it's there. If she doesn't like it, simply remove it.

It's funny you mentioned those 2 which are exactly what competitors, not consumers, were crying about.

Face it. Most folk who complain about IE are not the average user. The main complaint would be the active x security holes.

[lynx]

Face it. Most folk who complain about IE are not the average user. The main complaint would be the active x security holes.I agree to some extent, but let's not forget that most users don't know how to plug the gaping security holes either. The result is that they end up with infected systems which push out more crap onto the internet, slowing the whole thing down and unknowingly presenting other users (including us) with spam, viruses, spyware etc.

Eventually as their own PCs grind to a halt, they realise something is seriously wrong, and usually either have to spend yet more money having their system cleaned up, or if they invested in a total care package at the start the people who sold them the system have to clean it up - the vendors are the people who don't want the bundling, not just the competitors.

If the system wasn't such a security nightmare because of all the integration this wouldn't happen. Bug ridden Microsoft crap wouldn't get installed in the first place if vendors were allowed to bundle better products. This in turn might just give Microsoft an incentive to sort the problem out, their current half-baked attempts just don't cut it.

[clocker]

another problem the eu had with microsoft was that it was telling pc retailers that they where not allowed to include certain competing products with windows(realplayer is a known product). this is a bit like buying your cooker and being told oh yeah you cant buy baked beans from heinz with this cooker but you can have this other brand.
Not exactly an accurate comparison.
In our case the cooker doesn't come with Heinz beans, but we are free to use them post-purchase.
If I don't care for the beans included with the purchase I am free to donate them to the Goodwill.
How am I injured here?

Bug ridden Microsoft crap wouldn't get installed in the first place if vendors were allowed to bundle better products. This in turn might just give Microsoft an incentive to sort the problem out, their current half-baked attempts just don't cut it.
Anyone who has ever watched a brand new HP/Compaq PC boot up and load up all the crap that they add with the OS can't help but wonder exactly which vendors you think will be bundling in all the superior software you speak of.
Why the assumption that a 3rd party media player/browser will automatically be superior to that which MS offers?

[j2k4]

I find it interesting, when Microsoft's strategy (as well as the competition's) is quite rightfully geared toward the bottom line (it's just normal business, right?), that there are, on an absolute level, competitive, and in several cases, superior programs available for absolutely nothing.

Linux, Firefox/Thunderbird, Adaware, Spybot, AIDA, OpenOffice (I think)...

Amazing. :huh:

[4play]

Not exactly an accurate comparison.
In our case the cooker doesn't come with Heinz beans, but we are free to use them post-purchase.
If I don't care for the beans included with the purchase I am free to donate them to the Goodwill.
How am I injured here?


how can you donate wmp or internet explorer (products you have purchased) to goodwill?

there may not be superior products its all personal preference but telling people real player cannot be included with windows is downright illegal. microsoft deserve to be punished for this activity.

This may be a bit like charging al capone(a murderer) with tax evasion but at the end of the day they get what they deserve.

[UKResident]

Why should Windows have third party software bundled with it? What other industry is forced to do that? There is nothing to stop any computer company including as many CDs containing 3rd party apps as they wish. The problem was with the configuration of Windows on these machines, which Microsoft insisted should be clean, and why not?

[4play]

Why should Windows have third party software bundled with it? What other industry is forced to do that? There is nothing to stop any computer company including as many CDs containing 3rd party apps as they wish. The problem was with the configuration of Windows on these machines, which Microsoft insisted should be clean, and why not?

sorry mate you lost me a bit there.

microsoft insisted that real player or certain other competing products would not be included with any machine sold with windows on. if they bundled the cds with it you would be punished by being charged full price for windows.

microsoft have abused their position as a monopoly in the desktop market and are now being punished for it.

[UKResident]

Well my understanding was they didn't want other software loaded up on the machines, just the bare Windows. This was in relation to pre-loaded Windows, not sticking a Windows CD into the box. How can they insist on no other CDs being in the box?

[4play]

How can they insist on no other CDs being in the box?

they can insist on other cds that they dont want being shipped with windows because they are microsoft and if you screw with them they will put you out of business. :shifty: