Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Microsoft Windows XP N Flops

Posted by Zonk on Sat Nov 19, 2005 05:44 AM
from the bad-ideas-follow-bad-ideas dept.
Operating Systems Software Windows Government Politics
ChocLinux writes "Dell, Lenovo and Fujitsu Siemens have announced they have no plans to pre-install Windows XP N, the version of Windows without a bundled media player that Microsoft released to comply with the European Commission antitrust ruling. It is now almost six months since Microsoft released Windows XP N, and the fact that no-one wants to sell it suggests that this antitrust case may be going the way of the US one. Also, the article raises the question - now that RealNetworks has settled with Microsoft, will anyone bother to complain about this? Of course there's a chance that the EC might bring a new antitrust case against Microsoft, but how much more effective is that likely to be?"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Microsoft Windows XP N Flops 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • No wonder it failed. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nichotin (794369) on Saturday November 19 2005, @05:47AM (#14069808)
    Why didn't the European Union actually solve the problem, by forcing Microsoft to open up Windows Media Video? I think that would be fair instead of unbundling it like this. It does not solve anything, and people who get XP N, will end up installing WMP anyway.
    Oh, and what about the 'real monopoly' in Windows? It is also known as Internet Explorer, and only God knows why EU did not do anything about that when they were at it.

    • Re:No wonder it failed. (Score:5, Informative)

      by MathFox (686808) on Saturday November 19 2005, @05:53AM (#14069831)
      The EC verdict had several points:
      1. A fine of ~500 Million Euro
      2. Windows without media player
      3. Making available documentation for interfaces.

      Microsoft is appealing the verdict and dragging its feet with respect to point 3. We'll need to keep up the pressure on Microsoft, the EU and others to have Microsoft open its interfaces.
      • Windows without a media player and internet explorer solves nothing...hell, even Gnome comes with a built in media player and browser now. Just as the grandparent said, the real problem is the file formats. If WMP played all the open (ie...no charge to Microsoft besides implementing them) file formats right off the bat, and wasn't so obsessed with spreading WMA/V, then it wouldn't be as big a deal. The problem is that since so many Windows users never install new codecs or new players, all they can play bes

    • It is open (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Saturday November 19 2005, @06:24AM (#14069895)
      VC-1 is the name given collectively to the WMV/WMA 9 codecs and it's an open, licensed standard just like MPEG-4 or MPEG-2. It's controlled by SMPTE, so MS can't modify the standard without their approval, and license fees are fixed (same thing as MPEG).

      Also what's this IE monopoly you speak of? I'm using Firefox right now in Windows, works great. Windows seems to do nothing to stop it form working, and indeed will make it the default browser, if asked to.
      • You need to pay attention. It's impossible to install Windows, and nearly impossible to get the Microsoft published updates for their terribly secure OS, without Internet Explorer. It's also nearly impossible to take Internet Explorer out. And any hardware vendor that tried to install Netscape or now Firefox as their default browser or even include it on the desktop as an alternate to Internet Explorer suddenly finds its OEM license prices raised, and threatened by lawsuit if they reveal the predatory prici

        • Re:It is open (Score:4, Funny)

          by tshak (173364) on Saturday November 19 2005, @12:56PM (#14071170) Homepage
          It's impossible to install Windows, and nearly impossible to get the Microsoft published updates for their terribly secure OS, without Internet Explorer.

          It's an outrage. You can't update Microsoft's software on 3rd party platforms! To make things worse, Windows update only works on Windows! They force you to use their platform to update their platform! It doesn't even work on Linux!
      • Actually, VC-1 is just the name for the SMPTE-standardized version of the WMV9 and WMV9-Advanced Profile video codec. There isn't any standardized version of WMA (although open source implementations certainly exist).

        You're right on the license fees - one can get those from MPEG-LA without having to get approval, or write a check to, Microsoft directly.

        • Re:It is open (Score:5, Insightful)

          by 1u3hr (530656) on Saturday November 19 2005, @08:05AM (#14070095)
          you aren't forced to use Windows Media Player, or Internet Explorer, or MS Office,

          You are if people supplying or selling the data or entertainment media you want to access only supply it in these proprietary (I include IE here, we all know lots of sites only work in IE) formats. You can use various codecs etc, but when it comes to DRM you have no legal alternative. So this is handing MS a monopoly on downloadable media because they can tell all the vendors they only need to supply in one locked format, paying Bill his tithe for every download. Trying to forestall this is what the whole case is about, not the players per se.

  • Come on... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Inf0phreak (627499) on Saturday November 19 2005, @05:49AM (#14069816)
    Who didn't see that coming like a mile away? Windows XP N is a hard sell to say the least. Not only does it cost exactly the same amount of money as regular Windows XP, you will probably also get more support calls from angry costumers who say something along the lines of "why isn't video working".

    • Re:Come on... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by n0d3 (708403) on Saturday November 19 2005, @07:58AM (#14070075)
      Exactly, it costs the same. And for geeks who want a sleek fast gaming only OS, they most likley use Prof and then nLite to strip everything including IE and MediaPlayer. If it where cheaper, then things would surely be different. OEMS would be more interested (saving 20 bux on the OS for example would allready be ok for them) especially since they can put mediaplayers back optionally. Since their versions usualyl come bundled with a whole bunch anyhow. Now, with the same price, what really is the point?

  • This was software designed to satisfy bureaucracy (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bheer (633842) <rbheer.gmail@com> on Saturday November 19 2005, @05:53AM (#14069830)
    ... and it flopped. *Big* surprise.

  • Some fun facts (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2005, @05:54AM (#14069832)
    /. chose to ignore:
    MS having to offer a version of XP without the media player preinstalled isn't the only outcome of the antitrust case and certainly isn't the most important part, yet /. for the sake of starting a flamewar of course didn't mention anything else.

    First off, people should be aware that MS was also fined 500 million euros, quite a lot of money, wouldn't you agree.

    Second, and probably most important, the EU found that MS is on pupose hindering interoperability between its products and third party products. In essence, they use their monopoly on the desktop, to also sell server software. To counter this MS now has to disclose technical information to its competitors to enable them to compete on an equal footing.
    Now of course MS is trying to give out as little information as possible, but they don't seem to get by with this tactic, which is of course a good thing.

    Third, about the media player. I don't think it's that important if companies actually sell the version without the media player, what is important is the fact that it is now clear that bundling more and more desktop apps in order to utilize a monopoly in one area to get market share in an other one is a no-no.

    • Re:Some fun facts (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      First off, people should be aware that MS was also fined 500 million euros, quite a lot of money, wouldn't you agree.

      To you, me and the vast majority of people, yes, it's a lot of money. But to Microsoft it isn't.

      what is important is the fact that it is now clear that bundling more and more desktop apps in order to utilize a monopoly in one area to get market share in an other one is a no-no.

      And this will do what, exactly? Make them misbehave some other way? Dodge around this particular method of slimin

      • Microsoft knows, and has always been able to see, what is "right" and what isn't. But like all large commercial enterprises they don't give a flying fuck about right and wrong.

        Actually corporations are ment to place profit above all else. If the aditional profits likely to result from breaking a law are likely to be greater than the likely losses from fines and lawsuits then they could argue an "obligation" to break the law. Even to treat fines as a "cost of doing business". Note also that lawsuits agains
        • "Actually corporations are ment to place profit above all else. If the aditional profits likely to result from breaking a law are likely to be greater than the likely losses from fines and lawsuits then they could argue an "obligation" to break the law. Even to treat fines as a "cost of doing business"."

          Using this logic a drug dealer could claim an "obligation" to traffic drugs since if the risk of getting caught was outweighed by the potential profits from selling dope. Similarly, if an athlete thought st
    • First off, people should be aware that MS was also fined 500 million euros,

      The problem with fining a monopoly is that they can simply pass the costs onto their customers. Unless the fine is large enough to cause Microsoft immediate cash flow problems they are likely to laugh it off.
    • First off, people should be aware that MS was also fined 500 million euros, quite a lot of money, wouldn't you agree.

      I seem to remember a comment on the Daily Show the last MS go around that went somehting like "at that rate, Microsoft will run out of money just 100 years after the earth crashes into the sun."

  • barn door, horse... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by chub_mackerel (911522) on Saturday November 19 2005, @05:54AM (#14069833)

    I suppose there would be no appreciable mass market for a version of windows without IE either.

    It would be nice if one these courts acted with clue and actually addressed the problem and not the symptom. Can you imagine if the AT&T ruling had been "offer phone service without long distance"? Instead, a court with balls actually broke up the old company and prevented the "parent" from competing in the market they had abused.

    Yes, I know that's a gloss/simplification, but the point is that structural wrongs require structural remedies.

    • a court with balls actually broke up the old company

      Do you expect the EC to demand that Microsoft split itelf into smaller companies within Europe?

      Since this is an American company the best they can hope to do is annoy them and hope GWB doesn't retaliate by (say) increasing the import tarif on some european product.

    • Of course, if you look what happened to ATT, the breakup served to enormously increase the scope of the markets the new fragments of the company were in. They quickly grew to be as big as the original, and have since started merging back together into a company that will dominate far more of the industries.

      Breaking up a monopoly doesn't have the effect a lot of people seem to think -- it briefly opens up the market to greater competition, but a company that is in a monopoly position, unless granted it by th
      • Not to mention that IE/WMP are tied into Microsoft Update, along with Windows and Office. Yes, a few other companies offer automatic updating of everything (And OS X does the same with all Apple applications), but the fact that by default all the bundled apps are kept up to date without big dialogs going "New version! Update now!" is handy for stopping those bloody family members complaining.
      • A Microsoft breakup wouldn't be like AT&T. It was split into seven regional phone monopolies... it was so enormous, so vast, that breaking it up just made smaller monopolies. And the barriers to entry for competitors were very high, so the newly-freed subsidiaries were able to learn how to compete again without facing that much local pressure. Millions of miles of wire, built up over a hundred years or so, is a pretty powerful competitive advantage.

        Microsoft would become two monopolies if it was brok

  • Huh! and is MS to be blamed for that?? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cyberjessy (444290) on Saturday November 19 2005, @05:59AM (#14069847) Homepage
    Also, the article raises the question - now that RealNetworks has settled with Microsoft, will anyone bother to complain about this?

    Complain about what?? Is Microsoft to be blamed for companies refusing the carry Windows XP-N? Sometimes I wonder why submissions are worded just to make it through the Slashdot Editors.

    I have also wondered why a company should be penalized for including a web-browser and a multimedia player. Every modern OS has one built in. But then, it could be just my biased viewpoint.
    • They could complain to Dell, HP et al. and not necessarily Microsoft themselves since as you say, they don't really have much to do with this.

    • Re:Huh! and is MS to be blamed for that?? (Score:5, Informative)

      by DrSkwid (118965) on Saturday November 19 2005, @06:19AM (#14069880) Homepage Journal
      > Every modern OS has one built in.

      That's not true.

      Mac & Windows have them built in, but they are a minority.

      Which, pray, is the built in Web Browser for OpenBSD 3.8 ?

      How about Solaris 10 ?

      What Media Player does FreeBSD ship with ?

      • I can remove all of Safari and my Macs keep working just fine. To do the same with IE is difficult, if not impossible.

        • Re:Huh! and is MS to be blamed for that?? (Score:5, Informative)

          by macpeep (36699) on Saturday November 19 2005, @07:13AM (#14069988)
          Incorrect.

          The situations is exactly identical on Mac and on Windows. On Mac OS X, the web browser (HTML redering) functionality is WebKit and Safari is just a thin GUI shell around it. In the same way, IE is just a thin GUI shell around the web browser (HTML rendering) functionality embedded into the OS.

          If you remove the IE shell, nothing will break in Windows. However, if you remove the HTML rendering capability lots of things will break. In the same way, if you remove Safari nothing will break in OS X but if you remove WebKit, tons of things will break. There's a HUGE amount of applications that rely on WebKit!!

          Of course Slashdot readers often overlook this fact because they think it's cool to bitch about Microsoft.
          • I really didn't know that, thanks! So my comment is nonsense.

              • Apparently you need to speak with the judges of the US DC circuit court, because they don't understand the term 'monopoly' either. After you clear it up with them, maybe they'll help you explain it to the European Commission.

                The very fact that Apple exist and sell their own operating system means that Microsoft does not have a 'monopoly' on desktop operating systems.

                The courts disagree. You'd better straighten them out.

                Similarly, Microsoft were never convicted of being a 'monopoly', which in itsel

                • The courts disagree. You'd better straighten them out

                  The court held that Microsoft held a monopoly on x86 computer desktop operating systems. Apple was explicitely excluded from the market chosen for the DOJ lawsuit.

                  If your market is simply "desktop computer operating systems", then the court did not rule that Microsoft held a monopoly in that area.

                  The best thing that ever happened to Microsoft in the anti-trust department was Apple's decision to switch to Intel hardware.
    • What Microsoft should be penalized for with regards to the browser is that, historically, they wouldn't let any other browser be available as an icon on the desktop on a new system. They wouldn't let *anything* appear on the desktop except regular Windows icons. Breaking that agreement would cost a PC manufacturer their cheap Windows licensing deal.

      OK, so that's understandable from a support perspective. The Microsoft support desk wouldn't want to deal with any random crap loaded up by the manufacturer,

  • Capitalism (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2005, @06:15AM (#14069876)
    One small step of Europe towards capitalism one giant flame war for /.
  • They should attack contracts between Microsoft and manufacturors. All these contracts binding the PC maker to Microsoft OS should be banned.

    Then let the market decides which is the best OS. If it is still windows so be it. It simply means that the competitors aren't smarter than the competition from the 80's. When you have a competitive platform crippled with some many security flaws and PC maker free from any exclusivity, it must do the trick otherwise they are simply really bad at business.

    Nobody knows ho

  • Tax application (application) (Score:3, Informative)

    by owlstead (636356) on Saturday November 19 2005, @06:29AM (#14069908)
    If Microsoft is such a monopoly, why does my (NL) government only provide for a Windows application to fill in my tax forms? 2 years down the lane and they are finally building an Apple version as well. Why have I (and the company I work for) received many documents that can only be viewed by Microsoft software. Thank god most information folders are formatted using Adobe. To get back to the Media Player issue; you would have to install it anyway, since almost all the broadcasts of the (public) TV network are either Real or MS formatted, and Real is not a real option.

  • I didn't even know there was one (Score:3, Interesting)

    by borud (127730) on Saturday November 19 2005, @06:30AM (#14069911) Homepage
    I would certainly choose it if I were to buy an XP licence since I really do not want the Windows Media Player. Why? Well, because it just isn't any good. It is a sluggish resource hog and where I run Windows it has been replaced by alternatives that are much faster and less prone to crash.
    • Unless you are using mplayer or Real that third party player you installed is probably a wrapper around the windows media framework, Want to use Premiere? You're going to need WM. Want to use Zoom player? It's wrapped around DirectShow - no Windows Media player, no directshow. No directshow most third party players won't work nor will many games.

  • Small fines = big profits (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FishandChips (695645) on Saturday November 19 2005, @06:31AM (#14069914) Journal
    Do the arithmetic. A fine of 500 million euros sounds a lot, but it is a small price to pay when you are making $12 billion in net profits per year and can drag out a case for a good three years meanwhile doing exactly what you want to. Besides, when you make allowances for investment income and inflation, that 500 million shrinks to a smaller figure.

    The really important point is #3, interoperability with other platforms. Naturally MS are holding out on this one too. It's likely to become even more important if webservices take off because with their OS Microsoft can act as a choke point between every provider and every end-user.

    Microsoft are acting in a predictable way. They are a monolopy, and the way to continue with your monopoly rents is to fight every case with every method available right on until the bitter end. Do the arithmetic. It's a no-brainer. Only jail-time and billions in fines would make a difference.
    • You must be kidding, losing 4% of ones profit is not fun for a company.
      • Look at it this way: the cost of preserving monoply profits is 4% of those monopoly profits. Meanwhile you continue to run your monopoly the way you want and, hey, if the lawyers strike lucky you may pay less or nothing at all. It is hardly a heavy penalty considering the benefits. Even if you add up all the fines and settlements Microsoft has had to make, they still leave the company with its monopoly completely intact. Compare them to the financial benefits which have accrued to the company over the past

  • It's all about the price (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Jarnis (266190) on Saturday November 19 2005, @06:46AM (#14069946)
    Had they dropped the N version price even a few euros below the 'normal' OEM, it would've been a surefire hit. Nobody wants to pay for medial player.

    But since there was no price difference, this thing was DOA. Everyone knew it the moment it was announced.

  • Make it optional (Score:3, Insightful)

    by StoatBringer (552938) on Saturday November 19 2005, @06:56AM (#14069963)
    Why not just make it an optional part of the Windows installation process? Or for pre-built machines, allow the user to optionally install it when they first set up windows.

  • Does this mean that... (Score:3, Funny)

    by tsa (15680) on Saturday November 19 2005, @06:58AM (#14069966) Homepage
    We will see version 2 of Steve's monkeydance [ntk.net] soon?

  • Am I the only one (Score:4)

    by Kj0n (245572) on Saturday November 19 2005, @07:28AM (#14070013) Homepage
    who thought of megacomputers when he read the subject?

    Come on: when you read "N Flops", it is about floating point arithmetic, right?

  • The Fine (Score:3, Interesting)

    by oceanclub (654183) <paul_moloney&hotmail,com> on Saturday November 19 2005, @03:58PM (#14072070) Homepage
    Serious question: where does the 500 million go? P.

      • Re:Speaking as a mac user, it pains me to say this (Score:4, Insightful)

        by mytec (686565) * on Saturday November 19 2005, @09:19AM (#14070278) Journal
        Actually I'd say Apple should come under fire for locking users into MacOS. I bought a computer not an OS. I want to run whatever I want on my Mac.

        What can you not run? Where did you get the expectation that going outside the Apple Distortion Field would be a nice experience? As far as alternative operating systems go that can run on Mac Hardware, it's pretty easy to find out what will and will not run. YelloDog Linux is pretty clear.

        Point is, Apple is just as guilty as say Dell for forcing users to use one particular OS.

        What? Which particular OS are you forced to use? We've bought Dell's with Linux at the company I work for. As far as home use goes, I think I heard there is a FreeDOS version so you can put on whatever you wish. Regardless, Dell doesn't force you to do anything if you don't choose to purchase from them. If their selection doesn't suit you, go elsewhere.

        No, you bought a MacOS box from a niche company that provides a particular experience with their software/hardware.

      • But MacOS has far more than a BIOS. It has OpenFirmware. It's like a BIOS except it doesn't require your machine to start up as if it were a processor made in 1982, and its programmable (scriptable)!

        I'm a bit shocked you manged to make your Mini unbootable, even installing iffy software. I'm not completely up-to-date, but booting with command-option-N-V held down should have fixed you up. Or perhaps booting with command-option-O-F and typing "reset-nvram" at the prompt.

        I take it inserting a CD and holding d

    • It doesn't work for most (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19 2005, @09:28AM (#14070315)
      "GNU/Linux --works-for-me,"

      I like Linux, but here's the problem for most consumers:

      1) iTunes doesn't work. Please spare me the whine about how there are alternatives. Nobody cares about them. iTunes has to work.

      2) OpenOffice 2.0 is okay, although you'll have to twist some arms.

      3) All those cool utilities that come with people's camera won't work.

      4) Most printer drivers for those inexpensive new printers won't work.

      5) No consumer level photo editing software. And if you say "gimp", I'm going to drive to your house and poke you in the eye

      6) None of the millions of little special interest applications won't work.

      If all you're doing is browsing the web and writing letters, Linux is fine. But if you have an iPod, or use a digital camera/movie player, you're screwed.

      Sorry, but the bar moved for Linux. Office is no longer the hurdle for adoption.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.