EU launches new Microsoft probes
-
Thunderbox666 wrote:
This one worked both ways. "They have a better product, what can we do to improve?" then the other company does exactly the same thing.. it is a never ending cycle.
And that's the way that innovations happen. Great isn't it?
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
Great isn't it?
Not for my wallet lol
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
-
Andre Buenger wrote:
My point was that IE isn't free, you pay for the component, it's just not costed out.
You're right - which was why I also said that it was unlikely that Microsoft would reduce the end cost, regardless.
Andre Buenger wrote:
But do you really want to say that MS was innovative after IE6
No - FireFox was the innovator, and this forced Microsoft to push things forward.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
You're right - which was why I also said that it was unlikely that Microsoft would reduce the end cost, regardless.
Actually there is already a Windows N edition in the EU without the Media Player. Same price as the standard edition and I've never seen it, but I'm sure that you can somehow get it.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
No - FireFox was the innovator, and this forced Microsoft to push things forward.
Without sponsors (I guess Google foremost) and contributors we wouldn't have Firefox. And Firefox only had a chance because it came for free. Opera had no chance, who would pay for a browser if a "good enough" one comes with Windows. If IE would be priced out the game would be a different one.
-
Ray Cassick wrote:
And I suppose you have the figures to back that up?
Of course not, that number is just a guess and maybe too high. But you can't disagree that a significant number of users never thought about alternatives because IE was just there.
-
a) Firefox is developed by the Mozilla Foundation and distributed for free. b) Internet Explorer is bundled with Windows and you pay the cost with your Windows license.
Thunderbox666 wrote:
Who do you think pays for the OEM's *Free* software that is bundled with it??
If the OEM puts Firefox on DVD that comes with your PC you only pay for the DVD, not Firefox. Probably $0.03, big deal.
Andre Buenger wrote:
b) Internet Explorer is bundled with Windows and you pay the cost with your Windows license.
We both know that you are extremly biased. If Internet explorer was the only free one on the market, and it didnt come bundled, you would probably have a cry about having to download one. Lets review the facts here: * It is bundled with the software * If it wasnt bundled windows would still cost the same amount * They dont force you to use it * It provides an easier way for you to download FF * If you are a home user, it is more then good enough for what you need * You are only whining about it because Microsoft make it. Sound about right?
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
-
Actually, I disagree with Andre's viewpoint but was just trying to help him out. :)
Kevin
lol... a closet MS supporter? :p
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
-
Andre Buenger wrote:
b) Internet Explorer is bundled with Windows and you pay the cost with your Windows license.
We both know that you are extremly biased. If Internet explorer was the only free one on the market, and it didnt come bundled, you would probably have a cry about having to download one. Lets review the facts here: * It is bundled with the software * If it wasnt bundled windows would still cost the same amount * They dont force you to use it * It provides an easier way for you to download FF * If you are a home user, it is more then good enough for what you need * You are only whining about it because Microsoft make it. Sound about right?
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
Thunderbox666 wrote:
Sound about right?
Nope.
Thunderbox666 wrote:
If it wasnt bundled windows would still cost the same amount
If IE would have to fund itself Windows could cost less.
Thunderbox666 wrote:
You are only whining about it because Microsoft make it.
Absolutely not. I just don't like anticompetive behaviour and monopolies, because they cause stagnation and overpriced products.
-
Bloody ridiculous. EU launches new Microsoft probes[^]
Kevin
-
Thunderbox666 wrote:
Sound about right?
Nope.
Thunderbox666 wrote:
If it wasnt bundled windows would still cost the same amount
If IE would have to fund itself Windows could cost less.
Thunderbox666 wrote:
You are only whining about it because Microsoft make it.
Absolutely not. I just don't like anticompetive behaviour and monopolies, because they cause stagnation and overpriced products.
Andre Buenger wrote:
If IE would have to fund itself Windows could cost less.
If microsoft thought they could charge more, they would. If microsoft thought they should charge less, they would think "Is this effecting our sales?" If the answer is no (which in most cases it would be) they would not lower their prices. It doesnt matter how many things you remove, they are still gready and will want the same ammount of money. Stop kidding yourself!! you know as well as I do, that (1) Users have a choice, and most of them choose convienience (eg, IE) and (2) No matter what you take out or put in to windows, MS will still try and get the most money from it.
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
-
Ray Cassick wrote:
And I suppose you have the figures to back that up?
Of course not, that number is just a guess and maybe too high. But you can't disagree that a significant number of users never thought about alternatives because IE was just there.
Andre Buenger wrote:
But you can't disagree that a significant number of users never thought about alternatives because IE was just there.
In this day and age of "instant gratification", most people who don't work in the software industry expect everything to "just work". Microsoft incorporates IE and WMP, which most of the time "just work". I qualify that with "most of the time" because nothing is perfect. I mention WMP because it was mentioned earlier and I really have to ask, just how popular is Windows N version in the Europe? I haven't seen any real sales figures but I hear that it's not flying off the shelf, not even in the European countries. Here's some XP N info, yes it's a bit stale however it reinforces my point: Windows XP N Sales Figures[^] You can search for more stuff, however everything I find says that the European Union's forcing of creating the N version of Windows was a phenominal flop because if anyone's buying it, it's a well kept secret. I did hear a rumor that the German government put the N version of Windows on their computers, but I suspect that's only because they're part of the European Union and had to some how validate the EU's decision to force this on a software manufacturing company. As far as I'm concerned, the EU's primary reason for doing this isn't to level the playing field as they claim, but to justify picking the pockets of Microsoft and anyone else they decide to rob to rebuild their coffers.
Mike Poz
-
Andre Buenger wrote:
And I also think that Opera is right, the Internet Explorer shouldn't be bundled with Windows. 90% of the IE users don't use it by choice but because it came preinstalled with Windows.
Question. What will the 90% use if it didn't come pre-installed? I assume that manufacturers would have to bear the cost of alternative browsers, and they would pass this cost onto users. Alternatively, it would be up to end users to download the browser. Precisely how would they do that? My mother can barely access google, I really wouldn't expect her to be able to use FTP from the command line to download the browser.
Andre Buenger wrote:
No, it's not. First and foremost is the EU comission only reacting to complaints by Microsoft competitors.
So - no vested interests there then. Interesting to note that the competitors all have paid for applications. They aren't exactly in the vanguard of open source software. Want Oracle - go on then, fork out a couple of million.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
to both you and christian ... it really wouldn't be hard to put a link on the desktop to download any of the available browsers with some info about the merits of each ... prolly most people would download all of them and choose later but IT IS possible to make it simple not that im agreeing with the lawsuit or anything
"mostly watching the human race is like watching dogs watch tv ... they see the pictures move but the meaning escapes them"
-
Andre Buenger wrote:
But you can't disagree that a significant number of users never thought about alternatives because IE was just there.
In this day and age of "instant gratification", most people who don't work in the software industry expect everything to "just work". Microsoft incorporates IE and WMP, which most of the time "just work". I qualify that with "most of the time" because nothing is perfect. I mention WMP because it was mentioned earlier and I really have to ask, just how popular is Windows N version in the Europe? I haven't seen any real sales figures but I hear that it's not flying off the shelf, not even in the European countries. Here's some XP N info, yes it's a bit stale however it reinforces my point: Windows XP N Sales Figures[^] You can search for more stuff, however everything I find says that the European Union's forcing of creating the N version of Windows was a phenominal flop because if anyone's buying it, it's a well kept secret. I did hear a rumor that the German government put the N version of Windows on their computers, but I suspect that's only because they're part of the European Union and had to some how validate the EU's decision to force this on a software manufacturing company. As far as I'm concerned, the EU's primary reason for doing this isn't to level the playing field as they claim, but to justify picking the pockets of Microsoft and anyone else they decide to rob to rebuild their coffers.
Mike Poz
Mike Poz wrote:
In this day and age of "instant gratification", most people who don't work in the software industry expect everything to "just work". Microsoft incorporates IE and WMP, which most of the time "just work". I qualify that with "most of the time" because nothing is perfect.
As a user I do have to agree. I just got an Asus Eee and it came prepackaged with Firefox, Open Office etc. and I really like that. But then again if I remember that it took Microsoft 5 years after IE6 to get us a new version competition is a must.
Mike Poz wrote:
I mention WMP because it was mentioned earlier and I really have to ask, just how popular is Windows N version in the Europe? I haven't seen any real sales figures but I hear that it's not flying off the shelf, not even in the European countries.
I think WMP is a good example of why software shouldn't be bundled with the OS. I don't really like WMP but I was too lazy so far to figure out which one is better. Yes, I could have, no one forces me to use WMP, but the media player is just not important enough for me to look for alternatives. So WMP does have an advantage over other players here. Also you have to draw a line somewhere. Today Windows comes with WMP and IE, in the next version they bundle it with Office for an extra $200 (just hypothetically). And I bet someone would than say that Office is free.
Mike Poz wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, the EU's primary reason for doing this isn't to level the playing field as they claim, but to justify picking the pockets of Microsoft and anyone else they decide to rob to rebuild their coffers.
Maybe. But don't forget that Microsoft has a 95% market share for desktop operating systems, so you need to keep an eye on them.
-
Getting rid of IE is a good idea, if people were given a real choice nobody would use it. However, I don't think they go far enough. They need to ban the secret restrictions that MS imposes on OEMs to prevent them from installing alternative browsers.
ed welch wrote:
They need to ban the secret restrictions that MS imposes on OEMs to prevent them from installing alternative browsers.
Um... if there's really a secret restriction, how come you know about it? If it's true and you're posting about it here, then it's not really a secret, right? Pray tell, what's your source? And if you point to something that's more than three four or five years old, then it's no longer a valid data source as from what I know, all of that "restrictive licensing" was done away with years ago and Microsoft is STILL being monitored for that kind of behavior. In fact, some of the states are trying to get it extended again (it's already been extended once).
Mike Poz
-
Mike Poz wrote:
In this day and age of "instant gratification", most people who don't work in the software industry expect everything to "just work". Microsoft incorporates IE and WMP, which most of the time "just work". I qualify that with "most of the time" because nothing is perfect.
As a user I do have to agree. I just got an Asus Eee and it came prepackaged with Firefox, Open Office etc. and I really like that. But then again if I remember that it took Microsoft 5 years after IE6 to get us a new version competition is a must.
Mike Poz wrote:
I mention WMP because it was mentioned earlier and I really have to ask, just how popular is Windows N version in the Europe? I haven't seen any real sales figures but I hear that it's not flying off the shelf, not even in the European countries.
I think WMP is a good example of why software shouldn't be bundled with the OS. I don't really like WMP but I was too lazy so far to figure out which one is better. Yes, I could have, no one forces me to use WMP, but the media player is just not important enough for me to look for alternatives. So WMP does have an advantage over other players here. Also you have to draw a line somewhere. Today Windows comes with WMP and IE, in the next version they bundle it with Office for an extra $200 (just hypothetically). And I bet someone would than say that Office is free.
Mike Poz wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, the EU's primary reason for doing this isn't to level the playing field as they claim, but to justify picking the pockets of Microsoft and anyone else they decide to rob to rebuild their coffers.
Maybe. But don't forget that Microsoft has a 95% market share for desktop operating systems, so you need to keep an eye on them.
Andre Buenger wrote:
I don't really like WMP but I was too lazy so far to figure out which one is better.
And so your justifying your self proclaimed laziness by blaming it on Microsoft for bundling WMP?
Andre Buenger wrote:
Today Windows comes with WMP and IE, in the next version they bundle it with Office for an extra $200 (just hypothetically).
Microsoft would never bundle a cash cow like Office with Windows. Design for, absolutely, but bundle with? That would be insane. First, they're on two different product cycles (two years for Office if I'm not mistaken, three to five years per OS version last I checked), and second, if they did bundle it with Windows, then all down-level Windows operating systems users would be forced to update to the latest Windows to get the latest Office. And the users and corporations would never go for that. Here's my point. User/system security and privacy aside, NO government should be telling a commercial enterprise how to design their software or what to include in it as "bundled". The only reason governments do is because of competitors and very loud alternative OS users (who by your own number for desktop market share are in the minority). Why is that right? Justify it to me please. Because unless you can come up with a seriously compelling reason that truly involves compromised world security or the loss human life, it's not. And even the loss of life isn't always a compelling reason because look at what car and motorcycle companies are allowed to create and market for street driving!
Mike Poz
-
to both you and christian ... it really wouldn't be hard to put a link on the desktop to download any of the available browsers with some info about the merits of each ... prolly most people would download all of them and choose later but IT IS possible to make it simple not that im agreeing with the lawsuit or anything
"mostly watching the human race is like watching dogs watch tv ... they see the pictures move but the meaning escapes them"
l a u r e n wrote:
it really wouldn't be hard to put a link on the desktop to download any of the available browsers
That already happens. I have to lock down a lot of new Dell laptops before they go out and they all come with a desktop link to install the Google toolbar, which has a big "Do you want to install Firefox" ad/link as a part of the process. Ironically it comes up in Internet Explorer, but still... :rolleyes: I have no idea is that is an EU thing (they are big on Firefox there, with the highest market share in the world. It is not so popular in the UK though).
Ðavid Wulff What kind of music should programmers listen to?
Join the Code Project Last.fm group | dwulff
I'm so gangsta I eat cereal without the milk -
Andre Buenger wrote:
I don't really like WMP but I was too lazy so far to figure out which one is better.
And so your justifying your self proclaimed laziness by blaming it on Microsoft for bundling WMP?
Andre Buenger wrote:
Today Windows comes with WMP and IE, in the next version they bundle it with Office for an extra $200 (just hypothetically).
Microsoft would never bundle a cash cow like Office with Windows. Design for, absolutely, but bundle with? That would be insane. First, they're on two different product cycles (two years for Office if I'm not mistaken, three to five years per OS version last I checked), and second, if they did bundle it with Windows, then all down-level Windows operating systems users would be forced to update to the latest Windows to get the latest Office. And the users and corporations would never go for that. Here's my point. User/system security and privacy aside, NO government should be telling a commercial enterprise how to design their software or what to include in it as "bundled". The only reason governments do is because of competitors and very loud alternative OS users (who by your own number for desktop market share are in the minority). Why is that right? Justify it to me please. Because unless you can come up with a seriously compelling reason that truly involves compromised world security or the loss human life, it's not. And even the loss of life isn't always a compelling reason because look at what car and motorcycle companies are allowed to create and market for street driving!
Mike Poz
Mike Poz wrote:
Why is that right? Justify it to me please. Because unless you can come up with a seriously compelling reason that truly involves compromised world security or the loss human life, it's not.
Some politicians thought the same when they privatized the electricity grid in Germany. Now it is owned by a oligopoly and we have 10% price increases every year and probably the highest prices in the world. That's why we have economic laws and the EU commission has an eye on that too. A non regulated market doesn't work. Same thing with the software / OS market.
-
to both you and christian ... it really wouldn't be hard to put a link on the desktop to download any of the available browsers with some info about the merits of each ... prolly most people would download all of them and choose later but IT IS possible to make it simple not that im agreeing with the lawsuit or anything
"mostly watching the human race is like watching dogs watch tv ... they see the pictures move but the meaning escapes them"
Hmm, I dislike all that crap Dell and co. put on the desktop. And once they start putting one browser alternative on because of a lawsuit they'll start having to put them all.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
-
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
You're right - which was why I also said that it was unlikely that Microsoft would reduce the end cost, regardless.
Actually there is already a Windows N edition in the EU without the Media Player. Same price as the standard edition and I've never seen it, but I'm sure that you can somehow get it.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
No - FireFox was the innovator, and this forced Microsoft to push things forward.
Without sponsors (I guess Google foremost) and contributors we wouldn't have Firefox. And Firefox only had a chance because it came for free. Opera had no chance, who would pay for a browser if a "good enough" one comes with Windows. If IE would be priced out the game would be a different one.
Andre Buenger wrote:
Without sponsors (I guess Google foremost) and contributors we wouldn't have Firefox. And Firefox only had a chance because it came for free. Opera had no chance, who would pay for a browser if a "good enough" one comes with Windows. If IE would be priced out the game would be a different one.
then why would microsoft do that? they are simply behaving in the same manner as all corporations operating in a capitalistic and "free" market
----------------------------------------------------------- Completion Deadline: two days before the day after tomorrow
-
Bloody ridiculous. EU launches new Microsoft probes[^]
Kevin
-
Ray Cassick wrote:
And I suppose you have the figures to back that up?
Of course not, that number is just a guess and maybe too high. But you can't disagree that a significant number of users never thought about alternatives because IE was just there.
Andre Buenger wrote:
But you can't disagree that a significant number of users never thought about alternatives because IE was just there.
I most certainly can. Everywhere you look I see banner adds for FireFox and Opera.... Microsoft has to be punished because people are lazy? Pffff Just think about this.. If MS did what the EU wanted we would be seeing this: Microsoft Windows Core Edition $300 (does nothing but boot up to a desktop) Microsoft Media Player (40 Mb download) Microsoft IE (200 Mb download) Microsoft Accessory Pack (40 Mb download) (Notepad, Word-pad, Calculator, Paint, Games) Microsoft Hyper-terminal (5 Mb download) Microsoft File Studio (20 Mb download) (Explorer, compressed folders) Get the idea? There are products that can replace each of these bundled accessories if you want them. Oh yeah, and all these would require WGA authentication :)
-
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
Bloody ridiculous.
No, it's not. First and foremost is the EU comission only reacting to complaints by Microsoft competitors. And I also think that Opera is right, the Internet Explorer shouldn't be bundled with Windows. 90% of the IE users don't use it by choice but because it came preinstalled with Windows.
Personally I like the fact that IE is bundled with the OS – you can browse the web “out of the box”. Secondly IE is componentised and many applications make use of the browsers engine to implement their application's UI. Next people will be complaining that Firefox is free!
Steve