Microsoft paying you to use their products
-
It seems to be regular marketing tactics, and I dont find it particularly immoral or monopolistic. :~ Nish
"I'm a bit bored at the moment so I'm thinking about writing a new programming language" - Colin Davies My book :- Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win] Review by Shog9 Click here for review[NW]
Ok, let's double-check : was giving IE freely and integrating it with the OS regular marketing or not ?
-
Erm... could you explain all that again so it makes more sense? I'm not following past the first sentance. :~
David Wulff
When you're through with life and all hope is lost Hold out your hand 'cos friends will be friends - right till the end - Queen
I have enough laughed about your pal this afternoon at silverstone. Now give me a break. You should not regard threads are exclusive sources of jokes or things worth laughing at.
-
Ok, let's double-check : was giving IE freely and integrating it with the OS regular marketing or not ?
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: was giving IE freely and integrating it with the OS regular marketing or not ? Yup, it was simply a very smart marketing tactic which worked quite well. Giving it away free was quite nice to be frank. Perhaps the integration with the OS must have been quite annoying for people who did not want to use IE. At the same time they "never" stopped anyone from running Netscape did they? If Netscape died a slow and slightly hilarious death it was their own fault for writing slow code that made it take 30 seconds to load on the fastest of machines. If giving something for free is irregular marketing then how about the whole fraternity of Linux based distributions? If you've used KDE you'll remember that their explorer equivalent can be used to browse both local folders and internet URLs. Isnt that just what Explorer does - it lets us browse our hard disk, our local network machines as well as the internet. A nice http/ftp/netbios client - all in one single nice fast slender package. Nish
"I'm a bit bored at the moment so I'm thinking about writing a new programming language" - Colin Davies My book :- Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win] Review by Shog9 Click here for review[NW]
-
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: was giving IE freely and integrating it with the OS regular marketing or not ? Yup, it was simply a very smart marketing tactic which worked quite well. Giving it away free was quite nice to be frank. Perhaps the integration with the OS must have been quite annoying for people who did not want to use IE. At the same time they "never" stopped anyone from running Netscape did they? If Netscape died a slow and slightly hilarious death it was their own fault for writing slow code that made it take 30 seconds to load on the fastest of machines. If giving something for free is irregular marketing then how about the whole fraternity of Linux based distributions? If you've used KDE you'll remember that their explorer equivalent can be used to browse both local folders and internet URLs. Isnt that just what Explorer does - it lets us browse our hard disk, our local network machines as well as the internet. A nice http/ftp/netbios client - all in one single nice fast slender package. Nish
"I'm a bit bored at the moment so I'm thinking about writing a new programming language" - Colin Davies My book :- Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win] Review by Shog9 Click here for review[NW]
Nishant S wrote: it was simply a very smart marketing tactic which worked quite well Indeed. No respectable and full of competitive features browser company has made any money ever since. Nishant S wrote: At the same time they "never" stopped anyone from running Netscape did they? I believe you are forgetting one thing, the corporate factor. Since IE came default with the OS, and corporate people were not inclined to install anything else, then IE became the dominant browser. That's the result of unfair marketing, and we can all only raise concern about what were FCC and other regulation organisations doing at that time ? Were they also bought by Microsoft ? Or they did nothing just because Microsoft was a US company ? Now that corporate people are even less inclined than ever to make a change, IE doesn't have to be upgraded with new features. Competition is completely drawn. How nice indeed. And how fair. In addition, what's terribly wrong about all this is that people (mass consumers and corporate people) have been used to have products freely over the web, and it is impossible to get them to pay for a product now. Oh sorry, as soon as MS comes up with palladium-enabled PC in 2005, Microsoft will allow PC users to buy the stuff they use. Unfortunately, like music monopolies, you know where all the money will be going. Do you also know that Microsoft has recently settled a lawsuit [^]in California only by giving away enough money. What kind of justice is this ?
-
Nishant S wrote: it was simply a very smart marketing tactic which worked quite well Indeed. No respectable and full of competitive features browser company has made any money ever since. Nishant S wrote: At the same time they "never" stopped anyone from running Netscape did they? I believe you are forgetting one thing, the corporate factor. Since IE came default with the OS, and corporate people were not inclined to install anything else, then IE became the dominant browser. That's the result of unfair marketing, and we can all only raise concern about what were FCC and other regulation organisations doing at that time ? Were they also bought by Microsoft ? Or they did nothing just because Microsoft was a US company ? Now that corporate people are even less inclined than ever to make a change, IE doesn't have to be upgraded with new features. Competition is completely drawn. How nice indeed. And how fair. In addition, what's terribly wrong about all this is that people (mass consumers and corporate people) have been used to have products freely over the web, and it is impossible to get them to pay for a product now. Oh sorry, as soon as MS comes up with palladium-enabled PC in 2005, Microsoft will allow PC users to buy the stuff they use. Unfortunately, like music monopolies, you know where all the money will be going. Do you also know that Microsoft has recently settled a lawsuit [^]in California only by giving away enough money. What kind of justice is this ?
Steph I do see the political correctness in your points, but political correctness and corporate marketing are totally unconnected issues. There is no god or St Peter waiting to judge these people – there are only banks where you can deposit money and more money. If I had an OS and a browser and I wanted to kill every other browser I’d prolly do exactly what they did too. I am pretty sure Netscape would have done the same had they had their own OS. If a cell phone can come with an Mp3 player, then shouldn’t mp3 player companies be complaining “foul”? Today we have probably reached a point or at least are very close to attaining a point where there is nothing that can be termed wrong based on ethical factors. To say that something is wrong, you gotta prove it in a court of law – preferably a US court of law as that’ll prolly convince the rest of the world as well. Nish
"I'm a bit bored at the moment so I'm thinking about writing a new programming language" - Colin Davies My book :- Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win] Review by Shog9 Click here for review[NW]
-
CNN[^] "MSN, which is expected to release the finalized version of its MSN Messenger 6.0 program on Thursday, will run a promotion offering $1,000 in cash to 10 users each Friday, starting July 25." I mean, does this company have no pride at all ? This, only to gain market share! This proves how unfair is the price of their OS and other products.
It's a fairly common way to promote a product or service. Yeah, it sucks for competitors, but what can you do? MS wants the market & they have the resources to take it. Nothing to see here, move along...
Shog9
Let your mercy spill / On all these burning hearts in hell If it be your will / To make us well...
-
I have enough laughed about your pal this afternoon at silverstone. Now give me a break. You should not regard threads are exclusive sources of jokes or things worth laughing at.
I think you have misunderstood what I meant by my question - I was simply saying that I was not able to understand your reply to me. Yep, I actualyl meant exactly what I said. I assumed it was because of the language difference which is why I tried to be as direct as possible in my reply. You should not have interpreetted it as any attemt to poke fun at you (if it was it would have been indicated as such). I would appreciate it if you could explain it. :~ Also - who or what was my pal at Silverstone? I didn't get time to catch the race today and haven't seen any news since. :( I hope they'll run some highlights.
David Wulff
When you're through with life and all hope is lost Hold out your hand 'cos friends will be friends - right till the end - Queen
-
Nishant S wrote: it was simply a very smart marketing tactic which worked quite well Indeed. No respectable and full of competitive features browser company has made any money ever since. Nishant S wrote: At the same time they "never" stopped anyone from running Netscape did they? I believe you are forgetting one thing, the corporate factor. Since IE came default with the OS, and corporate people were not inclined to install anything else, then IE became the dominant browser. That's the result of unfair marketing, and we can all only raise concern about what were FCC and other regulation organisations doing at that time ? Were they also bought by Microsoft ? Or they did nothing just because Microsoft was a US company ? Now that corporate people are even less inclined than ever to make a change, IE doesn't have to be upgraded with new features. Competition is completely drawn. How nice indeed. And how fair. In addition, what's terribly wrong about all this is that people (mass consumers and corporate people) have been used to have products freely over the web, and it is impossible to get them to pay for a product now. Oh sorry, as soon as MS comes up with palladium-enabled PC in 2005, Microsoft will allow PC users to buy the stuff they use. Unfortunately, like music monopolies, you know where all the money will be going. Do you also know that Microsoft has recently settled a lawsuit [^]in California only by giving away enough money. What kind of justice is this ?
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: No respectable and full of competitive features browser company has made any money ever since What about Opera? I thought they made their money (on the PC market anyway) from out-innovating Internet Explorer?
David Wulff
When you're through with life and all hope is lost Hold out your hand 'cos friends will be friends - right till the end - Queen
-
CNN[^] "MSN, which is expected to release the finalized version of its MSN Messenger 6.0 program on Thursday, will run a promotion offering $1,000 in cash to 10 users each Friday, starting July 25." I mean, does this company have no pride at all ? This, only to gain market share! This proves how unfair is the price of their OS and other products.
I have been reading the whole thread now. The problem is that you just plain hate MS, and you always sound that way... Ever thought about posting that kinda stuff at /., people agree with you there ;P - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
I have been reading the whole thread now. The problem is that you just plain hate MS, and you always sound that way... Ever thought about posting that kinda stuff at /., people agree with you there ;P - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
:)
David Wulff
When you're through with life and all hope is lost Hold out your hand 'cos friends will be friends - right till the end - Queen
-
Ok, let's double-check : was giving IE freely and integrating it with the OS regular marketing or not ?
I'm pretty sure Netscape dropped its pricing first.
-
Anytime MS or other monopoly does this, a whole sector of companies simply bankrupt. Regarding software, I believe that's the first time I see this happen. It's true that it's quite common for "real" products, especially when providers/manufacturers want you to subscribe yearly or so. There has to be something to wet your appetite. The problem I have is that MSN Messenger articulates around a few MS strategies, including .NET alerts, or other passport-related products. People are free to decide what they'd like to use for IM, etc. but when you know what we are really talking about, and the stake thereof, may be a few should warn.
AOL Instant Messenger, the leading IM software, already had a price of $0 when MSN Messenger entered the market. Microsoft's pricing seems normal.
-
I have been reading the whole thread now. The problem is that you just plain hate MS, and you always sound that way... Ever thought about posting that kinda stuff at /., people agree with you there ;P - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
Anders Molin wrote: The problem is that you just plain hate MS, and you always sound that way... Yes, I hate them because they tend to do all possible things just because with their money they can afford it. They are burning everyone else's money, and stifling innovation from the ground. In addition, they are constantly threatening small software companies with NDA, patents and the like. Have you heard of laws regarding software patents in Europe, that are to pass on September? To remind you a few things, check out this site[^]. Now tell me if there is any reason to fight monopolies. Monopolies would be, regarding software patents in Europe, the ones benefiting from that new law. Anders Molin wrote: posting that kinda stuff at /., OT. This takes courage to do this on a MS site. Why say "MS sucks" on a site where it's already said a hundred times a day?
-
Steph I do see the political correctness in your points, but political correctness and corporate marketing are totally unconnected issues. There is no god or St Peter waiting to judge these people – there are only banks where you can deposit money and more money. If I had an OS and a browser and I wanted to kill every other browser I’d prolly do exactly what they did too. I am pretty sure Netscape would have done the same had they had their own OS. If a cell phone can come with an Mp3 player, then shouldn’t mp3 player companies be complaining “foul”? Today we have probably reached a point or at least are very close to attaining a point where there is nothing that can be termed wrong based on ethical factors. To say that something is wrong, you gotta prove it in a court of law – preferably a US court of law as that’ll prolly convince the rest of the world as well. Nish
"I'm a bit bored at the moment so I'm thinking about writing a new programming language" - Colin Davies My book :- Summer Love and Some more Cricket [New Win] Review by Shog9 Click here for review[NW]
1. Software patents in Europe[^]. 2. "To say that something is wrong, you gotta prove it in a court of law ". That's a highly negative way of seeing things, since only ones with a good bunch of money can afford this. What you implies is that software programming is not that good when it comes to selling the stuff, competing with others, making trenches in some niche markets, etc. It's only good when it's about personal projects, when no monopoly, patent or whatever lousy thing won't be harmed. This is plain lame and saying a lot about where we are going. Also, don't get me started on MS fundings, government participations.
-
Anders Molin wrote: The problem is that you just plain hate MS, and you always sound that way... Yes, I hate them because they tend to do all possible things just because with their money they can afford it. They are burning everyone else's money, and stifling innovation from the ground. In addition, they are constantly threatening small software companies with NDA, patents and the like. Have you heard of laws regarding software patents in Europe, that are to pass on September? To remind you a few things, check out this site[^]. Now tell me if there is any reason to fight monopolies. Monopolies would be, regarding software patents in Europe, the ones benefiting from that new law. Anders Molin wrote: posting that kinda stuff at /., OT. This takes courage to do this on a MS site. Why say "MS sucks" on a site where it's already said a hundred times a day?
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: Why say "MS sucks" on a site where it's already said a hundred times a day? Because then you dont bore me with it ;) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
Nishant S wrote: it was simply a very smart marketing tactic which worked quite well Indeed. No respectable and full of competitive features browser company has made any money ever since. Nishant S wrote: At the same time they "never" stopped anyone from running Netscape did they? I believe you are forgetting one thing, the corporate factor. Since IE came default with the OS, and corporate people were not inclined to install anything else, then IE became the dominant browser. That's the result of unfair marketing, and we can all only raise concern about what were FCC and other regulation organisations doing at that time ? Were they also bought by Microsoft ? Or they did nothing just because Microsoft was a US company ? Now that corporate people are even less inclined than ever to make a change, IE doesn't have to be upgraded with new features. Competition is completely drawn. How nice indeed. And how fair. In addition, what's terribly wrong about all this is that people (mass consumers and corporate people) have been used to have products freely over the web, and it is impossible to get them to pay for a product now. Oh sorry, as soon as MS comes up with palladium-enabled PC in 2005, Microsoft will allow PC users to buy the stuff they use. Unfortunately, like music monopolies, you know where all the money will be going. Do you also know that Microsoft has recently settled a lawsuit [^]in California only by giving away enough money. What kind of justice is this ?
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: I believe you are forgetting one thing, the corporate factor. Since IE came default with the OS, and corporate people were not inclined to install anything else, then IE became the dominant browser. I had to step in here for a moment. Having IE as a default in the OS had nothing to do with it becoming the dominant browser. It simple became a better browser than the competition and from a price/performance ratio, Netscape died. Many people that like to bash Microsoft squawk about Microsoft always crushing competition and some how removing everyone's brain so there is no room for inovation. That is not the case. Back in the early days, CP/M was the OS of choice and was on the majority of machines sold. They even had a plug in card to run CP/M on the old Commodore VIC-20 and C-64 (boy am I showing my age here). At that time, IBM was planning on putting out their new PC and wanted a CP/M built for it. After being treated like some old dog, they ended up getting an OS from a little company known as Microsoft. The MS-DOS age was born. In my personal opinion, I think MS did a little dirty dealing with IBM over the OS2 and Windows market, but business is business and I am sure IBM thought for sure Windows would be crushed by OS2. MS kept pushing Windows and finally took the market. MS later found themselves lost without a clue of the Internet age. So, they decided to jump right in and try to take a lead in something they knew little about. The got IE up and running (licensed the core from another company, like they did for MS-DOS) and everyone laughed. They were so far away from the mark, it was hardly even usable. I am sure that Netscape officials thought they had nothing to worry about. The secret to MS though is you do not count on version 1 of anything from Microsoft. It is usually several versions before their get serious (.NET seems to have been an exception to this, can hardly wait to see .NET V5.0). Who cared if IE was free, it was a peice of junk and hardly no one used it. A few versions down the road, MS started taking the market. It was not that they drove others out of business, they just keep increasing the functionality of their product while the market leader, Netscape sat back and continued to pump out the same old stuff. They did not want to change, there were sure they would hold the market. MS nailed them to the wall and they still did nothing. When MS gets invovled in an area it means only one thi
-
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: I believe you are forgetting one thing, the corporate factor. Since IE came default with the OS, and corporate people were not inclined to install anything else, then IE became the dominant browser. I had to step in here for a moment. Having IE as a default in the OS had nothing to do with it becoming the dominant browser. It simple became a better browser than the competition and from a price/performance ratio, Netscape died. Many people that like to bash Microsoft squawk about Microsoft always crushing competition and some how removing everyone's brain so there is no room for inovation. That is not the case. Back in the early days, CP/M was the OS of choice and was on the majority of machines sold. They even had a plug in card to run CP/M on the old Commodore VIC-20 and C-64 (boy am I showing my age here). At that time, IBM was planning on putting out their new PC and wanted a CP/M built for it. After being treated like some old dog, they ended up getting an OS from a little company known as Microsoft. The MS-DOS age was born. In my personal opinion, I think MS did a little dirty dealing with IBM over the OS2 and Windows market, but business is business and I am sure IBM thought for sure Windows would be crushed by OS2. MS kept pushing Windows and finally took the market. MS later found themselves lost without a clue of the Internet age. So, they decided to jump right in and try to take a lead in something they knew little about. The got IE up and running (licensed the core from another company, like they did for MS-DOS) and everyone laughed. They were so far away from the mark, it was hardly even usable. I am sure that Netscape officials thought they had nothing to worry about. The secret to MS though is you do not count on version 1 of anything from Microsoft. It is usually several versions before their get serious (.NET seems to have been an exception to this, can hardly wait to see .NET V5.0). Who cared if IE was free, it was a peice of junk and hardly no one used it. A few versions down the road, MS started taking the market. It was not that they drove others out of business, they just keep increasing the functionality of their product while the market leader, Netscape sat back and continued to pump out the same old stuff. They did not want to change, there were sure they would hold the market. MS nailed them to the wall and they still did nothing. When MS gets invovled in an area it means only one thi
Rocky Moore wrote: Having IE as a default in the OS had nothing to do with it becoming the dominant browser. Not sure everyone agrees with this. Even MS people admit it. Rocky Moore wrote: Many people that like to bash Microsoft squawk about Microsoft always crushing competition and some how removing everyone's brain so there is no room for inovation. That is not the case. Please make sure the Microsoft memos back in early 90s. I can provide a few of them. Here is one[^]. You have to put this in perspective with innovation versus NDAs versus patents. In addition, this is more of importance these days as for the law expected to pass on September in Europe.
-
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: Why say "MS sucks" on a site where it's already said a hundred times a day? Because then you dont bore me with it ;) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
Actually that's the problem with discussions. The prequisite from a discussion is that two people agree on something. Otherwise they are like to yell one at another. But then, if they agree on something, there is not much to learn about. Tricky eh. ;)
-
Actually that's the problem with discussions. The prequisite from a discussion is that two people agree on something. Otherwise they are like to yell one at another. But then, if they agree on something, there is not much to learn about. Tricky eh. ;)
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: But then, if they agree on something, there is not much to learn about. In this discussion, I have no intentions of learniong anything from you, I know where I stand it those matters. Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: Tricky eh. Not really - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: But then, if they agree on something, there is not much to learn about. In this discussion, I have no intentions of learniong anything from you, I know where I stand it those matters. Stephane Rodriguez. wrote: Tricky eh. Not really - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
Not even in software patents, in Europe, and how much it relates to innovation ? You don't have to take what I say for granted, just follow the link. ;)