Windows XP N a Bust 310
mushupork writes "CNN has an interesting article about the just-released Windows XP N.
From the article: 'Computer distributors and manufacturers are so far showing little interest in the new product, which compels consumers to choose their media player and download it from the Internet.' Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?" Similar to an earlier article about the same issue from the PC Makers end.
regurgitated (Score:3, Informative)
News.com.com.com.com vs. CNN (Score:2)
Cnet reported it the first time. I'll hazard a guess that the news here is that the news has spread to CNN, which has a more mainstream readership than Cnet.
Hmmm... (Score:5, Funny)
1. Browse old story at +5 Funny
2. Post +5 Funny comments here verbatim
3. Watch Karma go through the roof
4. ???
5. Profit!
Re:Hmmm... (Score:2, Informative)
Obviously your business plan is flawed a step sooner than most.
Re:Hmmm... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Hmmm... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Hmmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
I will take that over karma any day
Re:Hmmm... (Score:2)
I will take that over karma any day
Meh, one adds to your slashdot karma, one adds to your real karma...
Re:regurgitated (Score:4, Funny)
Re:regurgitated (Score:2)
Why would it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would it? I think it'll open their eyes to how much "good" Microsoft's bundling does for them.
Re:Why would it? (Score:2)
Msfts lawyers must have been laughing their heads off when this "punishment" was handed down.
Re:Why would it? (Score:5, Insightful)
"We'll continue to sell the old version because it's obviously better value for our customers,"
The 'N' version was released due to a poorly thought out EU lawsuit. It turns out that no-one wants the new version of XP. They'd rather have the old one that the EU tried so hard to get rid of.
Shows you how out of touch with reality the EU is.
Sorry, you can't use this as a poster child for open source.
Re:Why would it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Why would it? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why would it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course they should be allowed to. Mere inclusion isnt a problem. Sabotage of third party stuff is.
I doubt it (Score:3, Interesting)
Typical /. (Score:5, Funny)
New meme? (Score:5, Funny)
Humpty-dumpty sat on a wall and had a great fall. Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?
This could be the next slashdot meme.
Step 1. Repeat the headline
Step 2. Append "Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?".
Example: New Independent Lego Journal Launches. Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?
Re:I doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not surprised there is little interest in this. Many manufacturers realize what their customers care about - after all, that's why they're still in business.
You ask the average person whether they want Windows XP with or without Media Player to allow a free choice, and they'll probably look at you like you have two heads.
Why? They don't care! They hardly care what OS they have PERIOD. All they want is for their office applications to work, for their email application to work, and their web browser to work.
Not only do they not care, but the moment they try to listen to an audio file or watch a video, they're going to be pissed that their computer "can't do it" out of the box.
Re:I doubt it (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong, I'm not too hapy with Microsoft actions sometimes either and as a developer, I use Linux/OSS whenever I see it fit because of its technical and non-technical values but can we try not throw random irrelevant comments whenever a new piece of news is shared? I'm sure we can come up with a better way of letting people know of alternatives without appearing as brainless zealots.
Re:I doubt it (Score:2, Insightful)
It would influence your decision on the OS versions: N vs XP. I don't think anyone would want a degraded eXPerience when they can get the OS bundled with Media Player.
Re:I doubt it (Score:2)
What I would be interested into is XP Pro Lite - only the OS and core GUI/management stuff with no multimedia junk beyond volume controls... I hate the way XP's setup simply installs practically everything, no questions asked. (Who actually uses the 50MB Windows Movie Maker?)
Re:I doubt it (Score:2)
I know I gave Linux distros the cold sholder because they made it hard to play MP3's. Yes, you could get it to work, but heck - I'm lazy! Sometimes it can be something that mickey mouse....
Only alternative? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Only alternative? (Score:2)
answers.... (Score:2, Insightful)
No. Next question?
Re:answers.... (Score:2)
I've installed several distros on my Compaq Presario 900Z laptop, which anyone who's tried to install Linux on a laptop knows can be a nightmare. I did this because I enjoy working through problems like that. Normal people, say 95% of the population, would have given up after the first boot disk stalled.
I guess my point is this: until Linux is as easy to install and use as the computers that come with Windows, it can't compete in the broader market.
Media Player? (Score:4, Insightful)
I didn't think the media player was the onlything keeping users of Windows XP or any version. To me, it is compatability with current programs such as Office and Adobe products, and there are attractive alternatives. Media players? Eh, there are 100s of media players for all platforms, it's not that big of deal.
Re:Media Player? (Score:3, Insightful)
Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Huh? Why would the fact that people are not interested in choosing their software package push people towards linux, where that unwanted feature is commonplace!??!
Re:Huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
People wants the bundled stuff, they are just happy that they don't have to call their computer geek friends to read email or watch some porn^H^H^H^Hmovies. This is just a pain to normal users, and doesn't change windows. Tax payers money badly spent, again. Could have spent all that money on, let's say, universities that could have produced free software...
Weren't OEM's B*tching About This w/r/t Browsers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Did the OEMs suddenly lose all their imagination? Or are there not as many "partership" opportunities with media players?
Schwab
Re:Weren't OEM's B*tching About This w/r/t Browser (Score:2)
Re:Weren't OEM's B*tching About This w/r/t Browser (Score:3, Interesting)
What are the alternatives? Companies are going to pay Dell to be the default media player. Because they're paying to be a free product, you know there's a hook.
Would you rather have a free Microsoft media player, or a free RealPlayer that's going to remind you what a better experience you could be getting with the upgrade player every time you want to play some media?
At least, thanks to the amount of scrutiny Microsoft stuff gets, we know what we're getting.
ARGH! (Score:2, Insightful)
It's about The users HAVING TO CHOOSE which software they download.
And if they complain "hey, this doesn't include media player!", you can answer: "It's illegal for monopoly". Then they'll be FORCED to choose and download a product. Yes, sounds sad, but Microsoft FORCED them not to choose in the same way.
The XP N idea won't work if the old version is still available. Doh.
Re: and what of Ubuntu and OS X? (Score:2)
Gee, that's funny. In the same vein as which you speak, Ubuntu "forced" me to use Totem, and OS X "forced" me to use Quicktime.
How terribly awful. Let's take pitchforks to their respective HQs and demand action!
What does it matter that MS bundles Windows Media Player? I mean, seriously, for the love of god, who really cares? There are so many more things to worry about or to take a critical eye at than something as trivial as a bundled media player (as it's something that pretty much ALL OS distributors do).
Can someone provide me a sound rationale for why the EU decided that such action was necessary? Was it purely a matter of principle?
Re: and what of Ubuntu and OS X? (Score:2)
MS has a monopoly on desktop operating systems. That means that they are not allowed to use their monopoly to their advantage to get into other markets. By including WMP with XP, they are using their monopoly to push the Windows Media format, and their Media Player (with whatever THEY decide to support) onto the majority of computers, giving them a massively unfair advantage against Real and anybody else.
It's quite obvious why this has happened.
Re: and what of Ubuntu and OS X? (Score:2)
Windows users should be forced into buying an alternative media player? I'm sure you think Windows shouldn't have a web browser either.
Honestly as far as I'm concerned I think playback of data files should be a component of any modern OS. As for Real, if they hadn't lost my faith by forcing completely crappy products down my throat I might care. I personally have decided against viewing any Real files that aren't supported by Real alternative. I don't trust Real and their crappy products have caused me much grief in the past.
Why don't you look at how FireFox has achieved success and at how Opera has as well? In both cases you have a better product which people are going out of their way to download and use.
Re: and what of Ubuntu and OS X? (Score:2)
Depends what you mean by 'by default'. When you install Windows, or any other OS, it's pretty useless without some software to go with it, because an OS is merely a container for software. All I'm suggesting is that as well as installing for example Nero, the user should install a media player, or at least have WMP come on a seperate CD, and be fully uninstallable.
I'm sure you think Windows shouldn't have a web browser either.
No, it shouldn't. It's an OS. The supplier could give you a web browser to go with it, and the same with a media player, and both should be uninstallable. Firefox and Opera's success are merely a testament to how superior they are over IE.
The problem here is that Microsoft is forcing their software upon 90-95% of computers, and making it unremovable.
Re: and what of Ubuntu and OS X? (Score:2)
You are "forced" to use Windows Media Player. It's there at the beginning, and you can't uninstall it or its libraries, because they're tied in with various other components in the OS. Not to mention that MS is a monopoly and does this illegally. That's the differenced between being "forced" to have it and not.
The principle was necessary and meant for distributors to bundle their own media players, but this didn't seem to happen, ah well. At least it's a step in the right direction
Re: and what of Ubuntu and OS X? (Score:2)
Then what would make much more sense to me, is if the EU had forced MS to release a version of Windows in which WMP could be completely uninstalled while still maintaining a functioning system... that way, MS could still bundle WMP, but anyone who wanted it removed could do so.
btw, I'm not entirely sure you can remove QT with all of its libraries and still expect to have a fully functional systme in OS X (I guess it depends on what you call fully functional)..
Re:ARGH! (Score:2)
It's about The users HAVING TO CHOOSE which software they download.
And if they complain "hey, this doesn't include media player!", you can answer: "It's illegal for monopoly". Then they'll be FORCED to choose and download a product. Yes, sounds sad, but Microsoft FORCED them not to choose in the same way.
The XP N idea won't work if the old version is still available. Doh."
That is the dumbest thing I've heard in awhile. Lack of bundling only helps MS competitors and hurts consumers. If someone else can provide a media player that actually is significantly better than the MS one, people would download it. If not, then why hassle them? Unless you have an agenda to make life miserable for MS, which is what I suspect is your real motive. Given this is
Re:ARGH! (Score:2)
Helps competitors, YES. Hurts consumers, NO.
Monopolies don't help ANYONE, and DO hurt consumers. Want proof?
and the list goes on, and on...
Re:ARGH! (Score:2)
Re:ARGH! (Score:5, Insightful)
On the Windows front, there's a whole wackload of alternatives for Windows Media Player that goes on and on and on. In that respect, there's no decent photo viewer other than iPhoto (Picasa is there for PC), no decent consumer video editor other than iMovie (plenty for PC) and so on and so forth. No one has competed with Apple on this front. Why? Because it's their by default? Why isn't Apple getting sued?
Ya ya, because Apple is not a "monopoly" you say. But guess what? If Microsoft was *forced* to strip Windows Media Player/Internet Explorer/MSN Messenger and all their other additions, then why shouldn't Apple be forced to strip Quicktime/Safari/iChat/iPhoto/iMovie/iTunes from OS X? After all, it would give them an unfair advantage. They can start marketing that they have all these great features right out of the box while Windows only comes with Notepad.
Suffice to say Microsoft is doing absolutely nothing to stop others from installing other browsers/media players or whatever people want. So Real Player has every opportunity to gather attention, and in fact their player used to be quite popular. Then it started to be spyware ridden, over-bloated interface and horribly slow player, and they lost it.
Re:ARGH! (Score:2)
So how is MS DRM more of a monopoly?
No.... (Score:5, Insightful)
People like getting free stuff bundled with things that they buy. At worst, don't use WMP and download something else.
When you force the removal of the free media player as a court decision, it's the consumers who feel punished. Now they have to go out of their way to get a media player.
What would have been a better punishment for Microsoft would have been forcing them to open up their APIs and documentation, publish their source code, or split the company up into competing units, or revoke their license to do business.
Re:No.... (Score:2)
Fascist.
Re:No.... (Score:2)
You should have called him a communist.
Fascist is when individuals/corporations control government to the detriment of the general population which is the current situation in the US.
Re:No.... (Score:2)
They're really the same in practical terms. If govt. and industry are comingled, that's another way of saying govt. runs industry (or as you put it industry runs govt.). When govt. and industry comingle, those with govt. connections get their businesses and their special favors for their businesses, and those without suffer. So it's really the same as socialism, where govt. runs industry.
Re:No.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, how would the EU accomplish this, invade America? I think MS would abandon Europe's business before agreeing to split up their company or publish source. You might get an agreement on APIs?
Who will change their minds? (Score:4, Insightful)
It does a lot worse things.
Anyway, show me a linux distro aimed at home users whose default install doesn't have mp3/ogg/xmms etc.
Happy microsoft got slammed? Yes. Give a shit about the hole XP N thing? No.
Will it open people eyes? No, because form their perspective nothign has changed, unless you meant the distributors, who work on supply and demand, and will start taking space away from their m^2 floors as and when it will be profitable to do so.
Right now, they don't see it. Now the price of hardware is exacerbating the percentage of cost that goes to an OS, *that* might make a difference.
Tallyho.
Ubuntu (Score:2)
Red Herring (Score:3, Insightful)
I doubt that. The article says: "We'll continue to sell the old version because it's obviously better value for our customers," said Gina Jones, spokeswoman for PC World, Britain's leading PC retailer.. In other words, this is a battle between the new and old versions of XP. For the same price, which would you rather buy? The one that comes with the free media player or the one that does not have a media and forces to user to have an internet connection and download a player just to play CDs? I am guessing that most Europeans will look at the two products and choose conventional XP, without evening looking down the Mac aisle.
Just illustrates misguided courts (Score:2, Insightful)
Hey guys, I got a great idea. (Score:3, Interesting)
Wastes your time in mind. Why would anyone buy a product with less in it when there's already an established product with more, when the more is really shitty? Tell me. I want to know.
The EU's decision, let's face it, was really fucking stupid and will do no good for anyone. Perhaps, instead, they should've done something more crippling, like take out Media Player in EVERY version and force people to download it. But no, that would hurt Microsoft more than not at all.
Re:Hey guys, I got a great idea. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Hey guys, I got a great idea. (Score:2)
How the fuck would that benfit consumers? Im sick of morons getting modded up for anti-MS FUD. Oh my God, the world's going to collapse because MS can bundle a media player with their OS.
Re:Hey guys, I got a great idea. (Score:2)
Does this sound pathetic and wrong to you? Because it does to me. And this mindset is what we're running into here.
Parent, get off your high horse and see that this decision needed to be made because we've gone far too long acting as if MS is invincible to the court of law, and instead of making decisions that damage MS as much as MS damaged Netscape or Real by playing unfairly to get their standards out there.
It isn't fair to companies that came up with the winning formulas first that they get punished because all MS has to do to combat them is put their competing technology into a product that the consumer was going to buy whether or not the technology was in there.
Call it anti-MS FUD all you want, but the fact of the matter is, not holding feet to the fire and looking on as if what MS has done to get ahead was ethical is just motherfucking wrong. The consumer loses nothing by having to download a ten-meg program off the web instead of having it bundled and set as default through no action of theirs.
Re:Absolutely. (Score:2)
Re:Absolutely. (Score:2)
This is not about success; this is about abusing a monopoly to gain another monopoly.
You're either wholly ignorant of the case, or you're the idiot.
Surprise? (Score:2, Insightful)
This really was a pointless act by the EU (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know, maybe i have taken too many Econ classes, but this seems like it is a horribly inefficient punishment that will solve absolutely nothing -- hell it won't even give them those warm fuzzies you get from doing the right thing because it isn't the right thing.
The bottom line is that no rational consumer -- TFA mentioned like 2 people that this would not apply to -- would buy this version of windows. Sorry EU but you really missed the boat (or chunnel as it may be) on this one.
Vote with your dollars (Score:3, Interesting)
And let is encourage our windows using friends to do likewise.
Re:Vote with your dollars (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Vote with your dollars (Score:2)
Whether other people are buying a copy of XP that includes WMP at the same price is no concern of mine.
emotional attachment to operation systems? (Score:2)
Quite right. Corporations that delude themselves about profit are dangerously susceptible to more hard-headed competitors.
If there's going to be any delusional thinking about embracing Linux for warm and fuzzy reasons, it's up to motivated volunteers to delude themselves.
-kgj
It's all about the customers! (Score:2, Insightful)
* So now above someone is already mentioning a totalitarian and roughly monopolistic response of "make the choice between XPs illegal, make only the N- version available! Then customers can't buy it!"
* Yeah, we see involving the government in software is *all* about increasing freedom. meh.
* More to the point, if retailers aren't buying into -N, their customers aren't expressing much need.
What, this whole lawsuit business must have been about competitors's business, not about what the customer wanted! (Shock! Amazement!)
This is good for MS, not bad for them. (Score:2)
I seem to remember that MS was forced to offer a version without all the bundled goodies, and MS said that nobody would want it because customers want the free stuff.
The EU forces them to do it anyway, Microsoft complies, and then they're proven right because nobody wants to buy the stripped down version for the same price.
It's pointless, really. Just a technicality.
No reason to pick (Score:2)
It's standard procedure to download Real Media and websites help people through the process and let them know exactly what they want. Software packages come with QT and Real Player which adds to the convinience.
It's more of a pain not to be able to play media right out of the box.
Would these users benefit from a switch to Linux? Probably not for most of them as they'd find themselves in an unfamiliar environment which is likely to turn them away from future Linux exploration.
"compels" (Score:2)
Important release note: due to Windows Media Player being an integral part of the OS, choosing other media player may make your computer instable or unusable."
Make XP N mandatory: problem solved (Score:2)
Don't give distributors and consumers a choice. This is about unbundling Windows Media technology from Windows. If this is to be effective, it has to be mandatory.
Customers can still download all the media player software they want either from Microsoft, Real or QuickTime or whatever other sites.
Christian
Re:Make XP N mandatory: problem solved (Score:2)
Customers can still download all the media player software they want either from Microsoft, Real or QuickTime or whatever other sites.
Christian"
While we're at it, lets make Linux illegal. Clearly giving away software to get people hooked is an antitrust violation. It amazing how people who claim to believe in freedom turn into fascists the minute they get a little power against someone they don't like.
Re:Make XP N mandatory: customers screwed (Score:2)
Re:Make XP N mandatory: problem solved (Score:2)
Say that Microsoft just sell Windows, and don't bundle anything by default. Hooray! XP N was meant to help distributors bundle their own media player, instead of WMP. Now, Windows can ship PearBrowse and BananaPlayer, and people who want those can be all happy.
But all MS has to say is "Bundle IE and WMP, or we'll take away your Windows selling licence" and they have no choice but to comply to continue selling Windows. Remember, Windows generally makes the most profit, and Microsoft can (and has done in the past) stopped people from selling competitiors' products by threatening to take away the Windows licence. That, or add balloons that "Download this Media Player to enable advanced media playback facilities" that annoy you every now and then, and people would do so and ignore it.
Which is a shame, because if this doesn't happen, XP N would be a good idea.
Non-Sequitur Conclusion (Score:2)
How in the world can you come to this conclusion? If the OEMs won't bother shipping an OS that asks the consumer to select a media player and download it for the net, how in the world are you going to get the OEMs to push select your own OS, never mind media player? Someone is high again.
Quote from article sums it up nicely (Score:2)
"It's a militant act for a customer to buy the new version," he said.
Dumb Solution (Score:2, Insightful)
You want to crack the Windows monopoly (Score:2)
To hell with the bundle programs. On my XP box, I have real, windows media, and quicktime. I have both mozilla, netscape, and IE. The only thing that dictates what I use is the format of the file I am trying to open or the compatibility of the website I am trying to load. All those programs can be easily found and freely downloaded. So, this whole decision was pointless.
If governments want to crack the OS monopoly, they need to invest in companies working on alternatives (use the MS fines for that). They should create division within their standards bureaus that will develop and promote open file formats for ubiquitous file types that any OS can support. Most choose MS because they want to be compatible with everyone else. This would remedy that impulse decide their OS based on its merits. As a large consumer of software, they should invest more of the IT budget on alternatives. They need laws that force OEMs to offer alternative OS if the customers so requests. If they can force OEM to pay for recycling programs, they can do this.
Consumers need to be more informed about the technology they used. Its not going anywhere and is permanently apart of our lives. You can do a lot with just any OS with a little effort. They need to definitely evaluate alternatives. 90% of desktop running the same OS is not healthy for the economy or national security (a lot of Western nation should heed).
I am the only one. (Score:2, Funny)
"Windows XP busts a nut."
No, bad for us (Score:2)
Not in the least. Here's what the typical computer user will think:
Computer manufacturers (Dell, HP, and their equivalents over in Europe) know that full well, so of course they don't care for Windows XP Reduced-sales-edition.
The "also offer a crappy version" deal was a huge mistake on the part of the EU. All it does is further convince people that Microsoft is the good guy and government the bad guy.
A slightly better order would have been an "only offer a crappy version" order, in which case OEMs would have to find some other media player to package; they'd probably just roll their own or buy one from someone or something, but at least it wouldn't be MS-everywhere. People might still get cranky, but they'd be less cranky and less misguided in their crankiness.
(Of course, MS would then just license the WMA DRM format to all of those 3rd parties being bought by Dell et al and still have format monopoly. That's why we need to press the issue that *all* file formats that are not 100% open, unpatented, and DRM-free are inherently bad and should be avoided.)
Please stop citing CNN (Score:2)
Please stop linking to them. I can't stand seeing another damned story about a missing white woman while there are real news stories that go unreported.
It is a start, sort of. (Score:2)
For instance, the media player post 6.4 has been suckage of epic proportions, and yet all it is (my understanding) is a front-end to 6.4.
Gee, a polished turd covering an almost golden egg.
Not much diff, as I've XPlited my installs at work (thx to the boss) or use n-lite.
Use Media Player Classic, in its place.
Then there is Outlook Express (Outbreak Express, Look OUT! Express, etc.) that gets yanked pre/post install.
Gets replaced with Thunderbird (heck, it is taking over where I work slowly, usually with an "oooh, I like that...what program is it?" (SEG)).
Fluff services get turned off (themes diabled, messenger manual and all that), but the most annoying thing is that service packs put things back that I don't want.
But it boils down to making XP like 2000, and it gets harder each update/SP, by design or intentional idiocy on Microsoft's part: Like wireless services are needed *at all times* or networking service and config dies or acts wierd (that was an unplesant suprise).
Hollow victory, it seems to me, but at least Microsoft flinched and complied because it knows which side its bread is buttered on.
EU's Antitrust reasoning, and why it sucked (Score:3, Insightful)
Bundling is considered bad by most pre- and post-Chicago school economists is that it uses monopoly power in the tying product (in this case, the operating system) to attempt to gain monopoly power in the tied product (the media player). Microsoft's strategy, so the EU and Justice Department allege, is to force me to take their crappy Media Player along with their operating system, locking me into it and creating a second monopoly from which they could then profit further - by jacking up prices for song downloads, e.g.
There are a number of reasonable critiques of this analysis which I won't get into here. However, the EU decision obviously provides no remedy to Apple or Real or whoever if Microsoft is allowed to continue selling the goods as a bundle, especially since doing so imposes no additional cost to them other than packaging costs (the marginal cost of the Media Player code on an XP CD is zero). If they were out for anything other than Gotcha!ing a big American company, they would force MS to sell the two pieces of software separately, or at least make MP available as a free download.
Of course, Microsoft doesn't want people to pay just for the parts of Windows they actually use - it's 200 bucks for the whole kit and kaboodle. For that reason, they don't offer XP-N at a discount, even though they might make more money by doing so.
Re:EU's Antitrust reasoning, and why it stink-ed (Score:2)
How is it they make more money? From reselling the extra bits on the XP install CDs to pr0n providers?
This isn't like they were selling a horse and buggy. Removing Media Player doesn't mean they're keeping the buggy and selling the horse for the same price. If anything, the price of release-testing Windows in another configuration -- even one simply with a component removed -- means "N"'s release is an additional, nontrivial expense for MS. In other words, "the marginal cost of the Media Player code on an XP CD" is >>> (aka, not) zero if N is a given, or, more to the point, the marginal cost of removing the Media Player code on an XP CD is >>> zero.
Makes me feel like Ross Perot to say it (seems like it always came down to simple fiscal policy for him), but if the EU wanted people to consider N, as many have said, they should have forced its release and added an additional tax to XP with the player. The market would have sorta itself out.
I am interested to hear how the media player download utility works. Is it open-ended? Is it just Apple and Real, or can I, ur, I mean other minor 3rd parties get in on the providing? Does it feature MS Media Player more prominently? If I can use MediaPlayer's of Quicktime's ActiveX lib and build my own offering for users to install, well, now we're on to something.
where the EU screwed up in this (Score:2)
what the EU was arguing was that they had the right to require redress of the past sins of m$.
they didn't do it. to do it, they should have REQUIRED that m$ sell only windows nt n as the OS in the EU, and that media player XXXVII or whatever would be an extra-cost add-on, but not to be priced lower than any of the alternatives.
in that way, the PC builders could roll on all of the free media readers, and the user could decide on a by-case basis.
it ain't gonna work the way the EU did it, because they screwed the pooch on this case. like the US did in theirs.
The EU took on Microsoft... (Score:2)
I'm sure behind closed doors they admit it even in brussels.
Remedies... (Score:2)
The only thing I can think of that would have been able to do a decent job of enabling fair(er) competition is full, free and open disclosure of all APIs and significant file formats, effectively allowing anyone to write replacement components and compatibility layers/wrappers for all things Windows. Such a scenario is most likely among M$ exectives' worst nightmares since it is one of the few capable of causing significant mid/long-term damage. (I vaguely remember reading a story of that nature some years ago...)
I wonder what else legislator will try against M$ on the next round, after they realize they fundamentally lost the first.
Alternatives? What? (Score:2)
On top of that, what is the deal with people being pissed about MS bundling thier software like WMP and IE with their OS anymore. A few years ago this practice did seem scummy and that them doing this would give them unfair control over consumer software products, but as time goes on it seems less and less the case. Hell, everyone does that anyways; Apple bundles QuickTime/Safari, and Linux platforms bundle Firefox and then try and imitate the media platforms that are not avaible to Linux. Just seems that people don't have a problem with control as long as it is the popular product controling it.
paid downgrade is a bust, go figure... (Score:2)
The real story is that I can't find anyone selling XP-n. No idea what the price is, either. Anyone who's confused that XP-n isn't selling is a fool.
Re:Marketing (Score:2)
Don't let the door (Score:2)
Re:Why buy MSFT at all? (Score:2)
Re:Break Microsoft.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:No. (Score:2)
Owners of competing media players and fringe OS lunatics excepted.
Re:No. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:WHAT?!?! (Score:2)
Given the same price, would you take the car with stereo or car without stereo?"
Well if the factory stereo is impossible to remove without destroying parts of the car, then without. If for no other reason than so i can easily put an after market one in. Personally though, I wouldnt buy windows N on the off chance that 1) thats not all they took out and 2) the fact that they could have put something more buggy in. Its not open source so how can you know thats all they changed?
besides i switched back to win2k 4 months ago and have far fewer system instability problems, not to mention less random hangs and no more disks mysteriously chugging away in the middle of the night.
Re:Next to go (Score:2)
There's also this [forevergeek.com].
Re:Next to go (Score:2)