RSSPC Makers in Middle of Desktop Bounty Hunt
By Nate Mook | Published July 31, 2001, 7:36 AM
Microsoft changes the rules as AOL offers OEMs up to $125 per registration in its war for desktop real estate.
When new computers ship with Microsoft's Windows XP this Fall, desktop space will go to the highest bidder - and AOL is willing to pay handsomely. In a letter sent to partner OEMs, AOL looks to extend upon current agreements to secure exclusive desktop rights. Adding a new twist to the saga, Microsoft responded to AOL's moves late Monday, revealing that PCs shipping with any desktop icons must include one for MSN Internet as well.
Microsoft initially decided to ship Windows XP with only the Recycle Bin on the desktop, citing usability studies that found too many icons confusing and obtrusive. Even My Computer and Network Places would lie in a newly expanded Start menu. But after repeated complaints, the software giant modified its policy to return control over lucrative desktop real estate to PC manufacturers.
It is no surprise that AOL is quickly taking advantage of this concession by brokering deals directly with OEMs.
As first reported by BetaNews, the threat posed by a clean desktop was immediately evident to AOL, as the company heavily relies on the exposure for signups. America Online service has shipped with Windows since 1995, but after talks to renew a deal with Microsoft disintegrated last month the Internet giant was forced to explore other options.
AOL's OEM program involves a "bounty" for registration, and sometimes an additional revenue share if the user continues on with the service.
While only recently publicized, this tactic is nothing new to neither AOL nor competitor MSN. AOL has long focused on the out of box experience, and for years has paid to be the primary Internet provider in Windows. Changes in the once cordial relationship AOL enjoyed with Microsoft, however, have brought about an "either or" requirement imposed on PC vendors.
Microsoft spokesperson Vivek Varma downplayed Redmond's involvement in such exclusionary practices, telling BetaNews that "Like AOL, we may enter into co-marketing deals with OEMs to promote MSN to mutual customers. Unlike AOL we will not pay OEMs to exclude competing Internet access offers."
No matter how it's accomplished, AOL has demonstrated the desire to preserve its place on new PCs.
Contrary to Washington Post reports, AOL deals with each OEM individually, making for a wide array of bounty offerings and convoluted agreements.
According to internal documents viewed by BetaNews, the amount AOL pays its partners largely depends, and is occasionally tiered, on registration volume. The higher the number of signups, the more money PC makers receive.
Budget computer manufacturer eMachines is involved in such a tiered bounty with AOL. If monthly registrations lie between 5000 and 7500, eMachines receives $35 at 240 days, and an additional $10 for each 2500 monthly increase thereafter.
Bounties are also based on the length of the included AOL service. For example, a new PC with 3 months of AOL demands a higher payout than that with 6 months, because there is less incentive to continue past 90 days.
The documents additionally detail revenue splits with certain partners, which kick in at a specified date and survive until user cancellation.
Compaq recently confirmed a decision made last year to provide AOL prime placement on the Windows XP desktop while relegating MSN to the Start Menu. But as of early this summer, AOL's deal with Compaq involved no up front bounty, only a $4.25 monthly revenue share beginning at 120 days.
Dell seemingly holds the largest deal, with an immediate $70 bonus upon registration and $3.50 per month once the 120 day mark is reached. In exchange for the hefty bounty, Dell guarantees a minimum commitment of 200,000 signups. Similarly, Toshiba receives a lesser $65 initial bounty and $1.50 revenue share.
Despite assuring the Associated Press it has not settled on a partner for XP, Hewlett-Packard currently receives up to $110 at 360 days for AOL registrations and a $2.50 revenue share if the company surpasses 265,000. Users who sign up through HP's Direct Shopping Channel net the computer maker $100 at month 13.
Apple's deal with AOL is on a monthly basis with no revenue share, but pays a lump sum of $125 at the 90 day mark. IBM and Sony have struck similar terms, but for a much smaller $35 and $25 bounty, respectively.
Gateway has taken a different approach, working solely on a 50 percent profit share with the Internet giant. Because Gateway includes 12 months of AOL, the profit share does not begin until month 19. But with AOL service priced at almost $24, Gateway takes away $12 per registration, per month.
Deal structures are likely to change with AOL and Microsoft upping the ante as Windows XP nears its October release. No matter what the outcome, it is clear both companies feel they are in the right. AOL contends Microsoft is squelching competition by forcing the display of MSN. Microsoft on the other hand, claims AOL is limiting consumer choice by paying OEMs to hide certain features.
Seeking neutral ground, a few PC makers have promised to feature both Internet services simultaneously, but exact placement will undoubtedly revolve around expected revenues. After all, this is business and money talks.
AOL did not return repeated requests for comment by press time.
Craig Newell contributed to this report.
I nternet
S oul
P rovider
Damit this means down the line BANNERS will be on our desktops..... like a four color flag... opps
SOMEONE PLEASE MAKE A GOOD `Linux` DESKTOP...
Score: 0
|Ok... I see your point.
I guess the best solution to the "problem" with the courts and XP is to have the OPTION to install the extra software (and not remove them totaly). You can make them removable with WinXP installed by modifing a single file:
Open DRIVE:\Windows\INF\sysoc.inf
and remove all the "HIDE" tags. then various software can be removed/added to the add/remove programs menu
OK here is the SOLTUION to the dlema... This will allow MS to bundle the software they want and just have the option to add/remove them.
Durring the system setup you are given a dialog box
"Passport Intergration"
[x] .NET Passports (Choose Intergration)
[x] AOL Magic Carpet Passport (Choose Intergration)
"Internet Browsers" "Default?"
[x] Internet Explorer 6 (GUI) [x]
[x] Netscame Navigator 6.1 [ ]
"Internet Service Clients"
[x] MSN Internet Access [x]
[ ] AOL 7.0 [ ]
[ ] Other [ ] (configure DUN)
"Internet Instant Messaging" "Load On startup?"
[x] MSN Messenger [x]
[ ] AOL Instant Messenger 4.7 [x]
[x] ICQ [ ]
[ ] Yahoo Messenger [ ]
"Media Players" "formats"
[x] Real Player 8 (Choose Formats)
[x] Windows Media Player 8 (Choose Formats)
[ ] --------------- (Choose Formats)
Please can some one make a mock up of this?
The reason I mention Internet Explorer 6 GUI is because the internet Explorer engine will remain in the OS yet the GUI will be installed to be able to use it as a standard Internet browser.
This is the dialog box that may solve most of MS's battles with the courts.
Insted of Breaking MS apart this should be the main goal. If MS is to be punnished why not it be in this fassion. This will allow MS to contune to opperate and make all the software they wish yet just give the end user more options.
Score: 0
|Darn post script... it made a hickup
Score: 0
|Thanks for removing my 2nd post.
Score: 0
|Score: 0
|You know what?
When I was a beta tester for AOL I suddenly lost access to the beta areas when I commented on AOL's problems with XP and other stuff.
I was imeaditly banned.
Score: 0
|The stinky cheese to this is not the services provided by either vendor, its of course the method of their approach onto Your desktop. Those of us who have skills, and experience will, as always, protect ourselves and customize our desktop and it's 'real-estate'. Makes me laugh, msn has their own avenue, and so does aol, which people need to remember is a 'content provider'. While most computer enthusiasts and hard core users would not be caught dead infecting their pc with aol software, it still has a purpose for the lazy, inexperienced, or even dolt's. Let me explain it this way .. lets say you have a house, a yard .. 'real-estate', and your favorite candidate is running for office. Now, my favorite candidate is someone else, yet I'm going to place a big friggin sign in your yard, advertiseing my candidate. Now if you take down my sign, I'm going to place my candidates cd's into your children's cereal box's .. because of course you won't mind,.. right? Yeah I'll get right on that.
Score: 0
|b****
Score: 0
|Gimme a break. Just exactly how much longer do we really thing AOL, MSN, Compuserve, Earthlink and all these countless dial up providers will last? What the hell is AOL going to do when the world has a cable modem, or ADSL, or wireless, LAN connections? ARe we going to buy 'bring-your-own-service' plans? Is aol going to buy out the local cable or phone company? Heck no. Revenue in the home based dial-up assistance business is a few years from disintegrating, the internet will be a new breed of users, who will no longer need or want a staple program for their internet experience. Home pc's will be as common as TV and radio, and soon people will not have common sense without a knowledge of them. It was an awesome idea earlier, but soon, no one will use helper apps or services to use the internet. I suggest AOL, Compuserve, and Earthlink make new plans for the next ten years, because even my kid cousins won't need you.
Score: 0
|they will move to the UK where it looks like we will never have the luxury of any kind of broadband outside of the biggest cities.
Score: 0
|I hate to tell you, but they already own the cable along with more content that any other company could every provide. I hate AOL as much as the next guy but they own Bugs Bunny, Tony Soprano, and Madonna right now (actually I hate Madonna too but she is a money maker).
Score: 0
|AOL _Time Warner_ (emphasis on Time Warner) already owns a broadband service known as Road Runner.... and in my experiance (a few years now), they totally suck, horrible support, bandwidth could be better, and a few other things.
Score: 0
|Nice thought, but you know as well as I that phone lines are the most widespread means to connect to the net.. Compaq/Gateway/Dell/etc.'s target audience are people that are new to computers or don't have the knowledge to design or tailor their own machine.
As such, dial-up Internet is a common avenue. People outgrow it and extend to broadband, but you can get a dialtone in many places where it may be years before they have ADSL. Also especially here in Maine, they don't have Cable in many areas. A lot of people aren't going to commit to a 1-year with Starband for 70 a month (and 600 for equipment).
Phone is great, because phone is everywhere including Hotels, Motels, etc. So I think you'll find it'll be longer than you think before it gets phased out.
PAN would be the ultimate. Getting Cable, Phone, and Net all via the electromagnetic field on the power line (www.mediafusionllc.net I think). But that's in trials to a point, and a long ways away. But keep in mind, some 80% of the world has electricity (or something like that), less than that has phone, but even less has broadband..
--D
Score: 0
|Strange, Road Runner from TWMaine.com is 200K+ both ways.. It's been the best Cable Internet company in New England for a long while (they've been around over 4 years).
Unfortunately I have Adelphia, which is DOCSIS. So that means I feel the blues of 11K/s up and 200k/s down... As they cram more people on it's likely to get worse.
But I think you'll find the vast majority of NON-DOCSIS TW users are happy.. Unfortunately they too are making the move to a DOCSIS-based network.
You'll find the most unhappy people are @Home *US* subscribers. At least @Home Canada gets 32k/s upstream so I've heard. Their netnews feeds are a lot better too.
--D
Score: 0
|AOL!!! What a joke. The only reason AOL exists, is because people didn't know any better 4 years ago. They are so behind the times it's not even funny! However, their CD's make cool coasters. If people don't like MS, and prefer Linux great. Install Linux and shutup! If there's a better OS out there than MS, then let the company make it, market it, and persuade OEM's to install instead of MS OS's. Until then, this "anti" this and that is crap.
As far as Linux...bullsh#t! I've tried every flavor of Linux, from Redhat, to Caldera. They all suck. As far as booting faster; again Bullsh#t! I've timed loads on Linux and Win2k on a PIII-800 w/256MB RAM, and a 32MB Vid card. If Linux loads 2 seconds faster, it's because the wind is blowing...
Score: 0
|And WindowsXP boots, on my system, in about 10-15secs.
Score: 0
|Man, shutup .. When I see you on the street hungry because "It's not windows, and I don't understand it, so it sucks" I'll just snicker and walk on by ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|stop it! im in pain from the laughter!
Score: 0
|Does XP load in 10-15 seconds from boot? or 10-15 seconds from the "Windows is now loading screen"?
Im curious because i do not have XP
thx
Score: 0
|It loads from the power switching on to a fully loaded and working desktop in about 10-12 seconds for me.
Score: 0
|holy piss, that rocks
Score: 0
|Guess I'm slightly slower than that.. My dual Win2K Server takes forever (5-10 minutes) to load, because of Active Directory.
I will tell you this though, runs a hell of a lot faster if AD isn't installed.. We're talking
Score: 0
|Pay attention to the hard drive. The boot may appear to be 10 seconds, but it is largely due to shuffling the UI events sooner than some support events. If the hard drive is still thrashing, it is not really finished loading, it just looks that way.
Score: 0
|ummm 'people didn't know any better 4 years ago'....what makes you think people know any better now? AOL exists and is as big as it is and will keep on growing due to their business plan of capitalising on human laziness, ignorance and at times stupidity. Any other company could have and still can do exactly the same thing. If you're after money and success you're not going to target the minority now are you?
Score: 0
|Yeah, this is assuming I have no applications loading at boot. ICQ slows down the boot time immensly. But from the time I press power to the time I can launch Internet Explorer via QuickLaunch is usually my measurement and is usually around 10 seconds. But I have my bios setup to immediately boot to the hard drive with no memory check, so I shave off a few seconds there. The logon process also slows it when enabled, same with an ethernet controller.
Score: 0
|I'm doing it from the Windows is now starting screen...
My POST process is a little longer b/c I have to wait for my ATA/100 detection, which takes way too long, and it's something it really shouldn't have to do.
Score: 0
|.Net server (I can hapily say) boots SOOOOO much faster now, it took forever to boot up Win2k Server with AD, I'd say .Net is at least 1/2 that.
Score: 0
|Ok, for one thing, a main reason you see no difference between Win2k and Linux loading on a P3 is because, well, you run a P3.
no offence, they suck.
Just as AOL needs to rethink things, as does Intel, AMD is beating intel on every line, every corner. AMD is faster, and much more reliable, and dont tell me *no it is not, lier, intel hater*
Hate to say this
but Intel knows they are slower than AMD, due to the new slogan
*Dont believe the benchmarks, Pentium has a lot of power to spare!*
well, exactly, it is to spare, it is not there.
When AOL knows dialup goes away, they will take over broadband, and the such, because they have billions of dollars and can do so.
Untill then, let the beginners use AOL, and all the other crappy services, while we slowely go around and fix them up with something faster. So instead of rambling on about how bad this and that is, go ahead and make it something to do to go around and make money off these poor souls and fix them up with DSL/Cable.
And for Intel, sucks sucks sucks.
you intel lovers will complain about that line, but hey, have you ever tried an AMD T-Bird 1.4ghz system? It beats the newest Pentium system by far.
G'Day all
--SubFreeze
Score: 0
|Well I have some time.. so I'll put my remarks into this.
MSN should be treated as a separate entity entirely. After all, MSN would be classified as an 'online service'. Microsoft is a 'software developer'. In business, companies are classed based on what they do as far as I know.
The OEM should have control as to what goes on the desktop. The best option would be a stripped (clean) OS to start with, and a menu that comes up during serializing to ask you what you want. You can make a Compaq, HP, Dell, etc. run really nice (2 or 3 times faster) by wiping it and putting a clean OS on it. That is great for business though, because if it's slow as hell then you will buy a new one.
Since the OEM should have control over the desktop, then companies should be able to pay for real estate in the shell. Since MSN is an online service, they have the option of paying for that real estate. People that buy computers watch TV too, so they know what's out there. Admittedly, if someone bought an HP and doesn't have an ISP, they will probably sign up with the handy AOL icon on the desktop. But then again, AOL knows this and is opting to PAY to make this so. How is this different from Cellular Companies paying to stick a flag that says "Free phone with activation" on demo cars at the new car dealer?
Windows Media Player is not a MSN service. Admittedly it offers services like Realplayer does for content. But it is still a usable and 'nice product to have', regardless of its net content. Realplayer regularly crashes on me, and has a lot more JUNK (I.e. Realplayer Plus ads) associated with it.
The requirement that Windows XP has to have a Passport is absurd. I'm on the beta team and it nagged me about signing into Passport in order to 'get the most out of the XP experience' (or some such nonsense). It's nice to assume that I am going to use this computer on the net, but I like to have my OS NOT tied to machines outside of my intranet. What happens when a storm take down my Internet connection, am I suddenly not having the XPerience?
That's about all I have to say, I guess. It just seems that with Product Activation, Passport for the XPerience, and free MSN Real Estate, XP is going to be something people dread. People know what's out there, and if they don't and opt to use the 'only ISP icon on the desktop', then Caveat Emptor (Let the buyer beware). After all, noone is sticking you with contracts. You can always switch to another service when you become better informed of your options.
That's just my opinion. Microsoft stumbled upon creating a product that a majority of people use. In turn, they should treat it as a portion of what they do and leave it that way. I don't see icons about "Double Click to order Microsoft Office". If you want something, you will talk to someone who will inform you what you need. We all started as uninformed computer users at one time or another.
Take care.
Score: 0
|You do NOT have to sign up with passport to have full use of the OS (well, you gotta have a passport for Windows Messenger, but that's something that's always been true).
Score: 0
|*cough* Remote Assistance, Windows Messenger, Netmeeting's Phone Call Service (I think)... It lists like 5 things.. What bugs me is I'm nagged about it.. Windows 9598ME2000 don't even know what a Passport is, when it comes to the OS layer.
It's irritating that's all. Thanks for clearing that up though, you are right.. There is no definitive need to have a Passport to use the OS, but you will have less of an XPerience if you don't. SO the warning says anyway.
--D
Score: 0
|But none of those are at the OS layer. The core WinXP OS does NOT require a Passport. It is NOT integrated into the OS.
Score: 0
|I was nagged by a taskbar icon informing me that in order to have full benefits of Windows XP I needed to sign in with my passport.
How is that 'NOT' part of the OS layer?
Remember, I'm not saying you HAVE to have a Passport.. I'm saying it informs you you SHOULD have one, or else you're not 'reaping the full benefits'.. there is a difference.
Score: 0
|If I write you a small program which loads itself into the system tray, sets itself up as a service or just another scheduled task (as I believe the passport thing is) which nags you every 5 minutes by displaying a message saying "For a more enjoyable XPerience, sign up as a member of BetaNews"........will you consider this part of the OS layer too?
No, it'll just be a seperate application that in this instance does not ship with the OS.
Score: 0
|Yes but the passport nag DOES ship with XP. Hence it would be considered part of the OS layer..
It's limiting functionality of the OS components unless you have Passport... I'd prefer to have a checkmark during Custom Install that says "Passport Required Apps" or something like that.
That's just my opinion.
Score: 0
|That's Windows Messenger displaying that message, not Windows XP. If you tell Messenger not to load at startup, no prompt.
Score: 0
|Microsoft once said during the trial: "If we included a ham sandwich with Windows 98, you'd have to consider it part of the operating system..." They didn't win on this, though, because it's obviously drivel. The operating system operates the systems. Everything else is applications. what part of the hardware does IE or Windows Messenger interface with? They don't. They talk to the operating system, which then does what it needs to to run the app. Just because Microsoft can tie together unrelated files doesn't mean that those files have anything to do with operating the system.
I would prefer a completely stripped Windows OS (well, I'd prefer the new Amiga, if it actually comes out, but I won't go there) to the bloated nightmare that Windows has become.
Interestingly, I've got Windows XP RC1 and I can't help actually liking it. It's fun as heck to play with, Windows Messenger, Passport or no. I look at Passport this way: I have one MSN e-mail account for the purposes of Microsoft beta news, etc. I use MSN Messenger when I need to access my account. I use Netscape 6.1 (PR1) mostly (this version has a -turbo option that, when set, lets you preload Netscape just like IE is preloaded, resulting in speeds comparable to IE in loading time) as my default, and yes I get hounded by Windows telling me some nonsense like "Can't find a default browser" when I try to access hotmail through Windows, but other than that, everything works a-okay. I definitely think XP is a step up from Win98. They finally made NT usable, and so we can finally lay the hideous DOS toy kernel of the 9x/ME days to rest. I just wish I could strip it down and really customize it to my needs. The install of Windows XP doesn't let you deselect much. It's the lack of choice that bugs me.
You know, that would be the perfect remedy for this trial: Microsoft MUST ship a clean version of Windows and reduce the cost by the amount of code that's removed. That way, people have the choice to use the clean version. I would certainly use it. I bet most buyers would. I think that's why Microsoft doesn't offer the choice. They're scared people will take it.
James
Score: 0
|why not give the money to the consumer, not the OEM?! obviously you'd need to add some clauses to make sure that one person didn't sign up 100 times, but if you paid them $20 if they continued using it for 1 month, and more if they stayed on for longer.
also they could have affiliates, a proven method of successful internet advertising, giving the person who gave the reference $10 if they stay on for a month.
i reckon this would get AOL more signups than bombarding people with clutter.
pyro
Score: 0
|There is a big difference, AOL pays for real estate versus Microsoft demanding the real estate. People should understand this, when you sign-up for AOL you agree to all the crap they force on you. You agree to using RealPlayer and soon to using Netscape. Those are conditions of the AOL service. Microsoft seems to think that just because you use Windows, you have to agree to use Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player and MSN. If they forced these products as a condition of using MSN, the government would leave them alone. But Microsoft is using its monopoly to force everyone to use their products. That's not fair. They should also be forced to pay for the real estate.
Score: 0
|Why is it that Microsoft CANT put anything that it wants on there??!!? I still don't understand the anti-trust thing. Without Microsoft we would all be living in the world of Macs most likely. I hate it when OEMs ship me crap. When I recently bought an HP laptop it had Windows ME on it and tons of stuff i didn't want. I wanted a computer, not junk. After booting it once I formatted it and did a clean load of Win2K and Linux.
Why couldn't Microsoft make MSN standard installed on the systems or just make Netscape somehow "incompatable" with their OS? I would hate it, BUT you bought it. No one forces anyone to use an OS. If you want to use a program for that OS... well, use that OS. But I can't use Mac programs (the Protools plugins that I wish were on NT), do I say that Microsoft it bad because of it? No. I just don't complain about Microsoft. I personally think that Microsoft should be able to make their desktops clean.
If you don't like it use another OS. There is always an older version of Windows, or Xenix, Unix, Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, etc...
Not a single person forces you to use an OS. This whole thing is BS.
TibbonZero
Score: 0
|Agreed.
Microsoft encouraged the development of the x86 computer... w/o the competition we may be using a 68k mack right now. Microsoft made the OS why cant they include the internet services with it...
NO ONE OWNS THE INTERNET so why are they saying MS can't put the clients they have on it? The internet is a vast place and no one owns it....so therefore you cant stop people form using it or providing clients for it.
All MSN's client software can be used w/o being charged if you have a different ISP to use. AOL only offers AIM for the users who decide not to pay for the service... In addition, AOL causes a lot of problems with many many computers so I do not see why we are even thinking about protecting AOL... we should help MS stop AOL from ruining the internet for the rest of us.
Score: 0
|You miss the point entirely. Microsoft is a monopoly, period. The vast majority of people have no choice but to use Windows. How Many could install Linux, Unix or even the Be OS? Mac is an alternative? Aren't they still forced to use Internet Explorer and Outlook Express?
OEM's are required to pay a license to Microsoft, regardless of what OS ships with any PC. There is no alternative. Microsoft may not use its monopoly position to enter new markets by leveraging its exisitng products. This exactly what it has done.
With .Net, Microsoft will leverage its monpolies in Windows, Office and Internet Explorer to take over the Internet. That is why they have to destroy everything and anything that stands in their way. Alternative OS's gone, Netscape gone, RealPlayer/QuickTime are next. Not through superior technology or products but by leveraging monopolies.
But I do agree that OEM's put way to much crap into computers. They do that because any competitor of Microsoft has to pay for that real estate. Microsoft thinks it should not.
Score: 0
|Everyone has a choice, wether it's a viable choice or not is a seperate point.
Alternative OS' aren't gone.... just ask Aitvo regarding Linux. And no-one is forced to use IE on a Mac. Netscape isn't gone.... once Mozilla get to v1.0 or whatever the stable version will be it'll be fine once again (let's be honest, 4.x wasn't anything to celebrate about!). As for RealPlayer (could that be bloated anymore???), no tears here.
As for leveraging it's monopoly...yeah of course it is...then again which large corporation doesn't? and which large corporation wouldn't if they were in Microsoft's position?
Score: 0
|Let's go through the list Browser, E-mail, Vedio Imaging, Instant Messenger, and now with XP firewalls, picture imaging, CD burning, MP3's, the desktop, StartMenu, plus where you go on the Internet, what you buy on the Internet, and how you pay on the Internet must be through Microsoft. And yes you have a choice of browsers, Internet Explorer or MSN Explorer. Folks, realize what Microsoft is truly trying to do and why.
So if the people can't be intelligent enough to install an alternative OS, they must just surrender any independence to Microsoft. Is this exactly "where do you want to go today?"
Score: 0
|Alternatives to Pre-Installed Software (at least one or 2 example);
Browser: Netscape 6.1, Mozilla etc
E-mail: Eudora etc
Vedio Imaging: Your Fav Program from Adobe etc
Instant Messanger: ICQ etc
Firewalls: Norton's, BlackIce Defender etc
Picture Imaging: Adobe once again etc
CD Burning: Nero, CloneCD etc
MP3's: I'm not quite sure what you mean here, if you mean ripping MP3's there are many programs to do that, if you're talking about encoding there's lots of programs to do that (e.g. LAME) and if you're talking about playing them then WinAmp etc
Desktop: huh???
StartMenu: huh???
Where You Go on the Internet: up to you really, i can't see anyone forcing you to go to particular sites (unless you're using AOL)
What You Buy on the Internet: same again...who is telling you what you should buy?
How You Pay on the Internet: umm Visa etc
So you have plenty of choices for everything. Of course if you're lazy and cannot be bothered making a choice then you can only blame yourself.
Like I said, you've always got plenty of choices, they may not always be viable choices, but you still have them.
Score: 0
|Um so its microsofts fault that they have continually developed products that suit its target users needs well?
- Windows killed OS2 because IBM put very little effort into OS2
- When Word 6 came out it killed WP because it was revolutionary in its power and ease of use.
- When Excel 5 came out, it did major damage to lotus again because of its power and ease of use.
Microsoft got where it is due mainly to the software it developed along the way and the way it constantly improved by significant margins the ease of use in every aspect of PCs. A few dodgy business deals helped it admittedly, but the basic fact is, they made software that PEOPLE WANTED.
For people that still find it hard to use Office, they can easily go down to their local college and take an evening course in it. Could they take a course in KOffice if they wanted at their local college? no? why is that? because microsoft has paid the college to not offer it? I dont think so. Its because the college offers courses that people WANT.
Average users dont WANT linux. People WANT products that they can sit down and do their work, without need to know about recompiling kernals, all the protocols they are using, how to make changes to script files when things dont work quite as expected with their hardware. People WANT to be able to get help easily, hell microsoft is so standard now (oh the linux guys hate to hear how microsoft is a standard!) that most people around the world can go to their neighbours if they have a problem, they can go to their computer store and choose from hundreds of books on the products, they can go to college and pick a course on the products.
Microsoft products are popular because they suit the majority of peoples needs. LINUX DOESNT. instead of b1tchin linux people, why dont you load up vi and get to work on making linux easier to use for the average user. yeah you can say how you can do stuff so simply, but believe me, what you think is easy/simple is a million miles away from what the average user can comprehend still.
In my opinion linuxs problem is of having so many distributions. Colleges will never run courses on installing linux because every single distribution uses a different installer. hell there isnt even a standard desktop among all distributions, people with no clue would buy a book or take a course on using KDE, install the distribution they just picked up and find it installs gnome by default then they are stuffed again!
Microsofts products ARENT everywhere because of anti-trust dealings. They are there simply because there are no products out their that can compete for average users.
Score: 0
|Have you ever used a modern linux? You don't need the CLI anymore, you don't need to "recompile your kernel every month" you don't need to do any of the things you claim to .. Maybe you should at least try it before you knock it .. Sure you can recompile any application that's source is open, and you can likely benefit it too, but you don't *NEED* to do it .. And on your comment about KDE, you can use both .. In fact when I did the RH 7.1 install on my laptop it said hey do you want gnome, kde, or do you want to choose your packages yourself? .. .. .. As I stated before maybe you should try it before you attempt to discredit it, all you are doing is making yourself look like a fool ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|There are lots of choices out there ..
Browser: Netscape 3.x - 6.x, Mozilla, opera, konqueror, IE 5.01(wine) Lynx (yes it's still very usefull, I use it constantly in scripts ..)
E-mail: Evolution, kmail, balsa, pine, +hundreds more
Video Imaging: unknown
Instant Messenger: jabber, aim, gaim, licu, gnomeicu, yahoo + tons more
Firewalls: internal
Picture Imaging: gimp, gphoto, photoshop(wine) + tons more
CD Burning: xcdroast, cdburn, ksoncd + tons more
MP3's: xmms, + tons more
Desktop: sawfish, kwm, xfce, windowmaker, blackbox, afterstep + tons more
StartMenu: gnome, kde, cde, xfce + tons more
Office: Office 97/2000(wine), StarOffice, OpenOffice, WordPerfect Office, koffice, gnome office, siag office, andrew, applixware + more
.. .. .. I dunno about video editing software, but maya, lightwave, etc are all available now .. .. ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|Yeah, no one else is smart enough to innovate (Like they ever did, the pc clone manufacturers started the computer revolution ..) .. so we'd all be stuck using a mac .. HMMM I wonder if commodore would have lost their ability to innovate if they couldn't have licensed their basic o/s from Microsoft .. NO they would have just licensed it from some one else ..
Do you see how ignorant your comment was LOL
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|Iv tried redhat 7 and mandrake 8 thanks and in my opinion my comments are still valid.
like I said, what you consider to be easy to use is still a million miles away from what someone who is scared of a mouse would think when they first bring their new computer home.
As for being able to choose between kde and gnome... well i can imagine a huge majority of the "average home user" group would say... "well Iv heard of kde, Iv got this book on kde.... but what is gnome? why does it want me to choose between them? Im scared! quick where is my windows setup disk!"
Score: 0
|oh yeah, they are afraid of a mouse, but they are going to setup windows alright HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
wtf are you smoking?? *IF THEY MANAGE TO GET IT INSTALLED* Where did my colors go, why doesn't my internet button work, why are my fonts so big, where's my cdrom drive ..
yeah ok bud .. .. ..
Funny few months ago both my mother and my father in law sat infront of my linux computer, commented on how good my desktop looked, opened netscape, and started looking for a new car without any troubles what so ever .. the only push they needed was that there was no start menu, and they just needed to right click to find their programs .. They LOVED IT .. ..
Windows is far more intimidating than people realize, I know as I supported it for over 5 years .. Why do you think Microsoft is dumbing down XP so much? Give the average user a configured WindowMaker, GNOME, or KDE desktop, then give them a windows desktop, and see which they prefer .. The result is even better if they haven't *REALLY* used computers before ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|I was just giving an example (not every example) of alternative programs for Windows, but thank you for telling us all the alternatives for Linux. I gave Windows examples as jlopez's opinion was 'How Many could install Linux, Unix or even the Be OS?'
Score: 0
|hmm a "configured" linux desktop or an out of the box windows one? hardly a fair comparison.
Whoever "configured" the linux desktop, could also have set up a few simple policies on the windows desktop to remove the start menu, hide a few other things, ask the user what programs they would want to use and put those icons on the desktop.
then there would be no comparison.
Out of the box is another matter.
Score: 0
|Where did I say out of the box? I said "Windows desktop" .. Configure it all you want, the WindowMaker desktop will still win .. It's far more "Useable" than explorer is ..
Score: 0
|NP :-)
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|care to explain WHY you think it is far more usable?
Score: 0
|What do you define as a modern linux? Anything based on the 2.2 kernel? 2.4 perhaps?
As for not needing the CLI, I will admit that I have not run any distributions in the last 6 months, but I doubt they have evolved THAT much that I don't need to use the CLI. Not that I'm complaining about the CLI as more often that not I prefer to use it (as I do in windows), just mentioning that you do need to use it, the amount you need to use it depends on how much you do on your computer (i.e. if you use a mainly gui distro where you only surf the net etc then yes you can get away without using the CLI, however as soon as you need to do certain configurations, patch programs, re-compile them etc...you're fairly much stuck with it). As a side note, I went to the Ximian Gnome site to have a look at the progress that's been made. I'm quite impressed, especially with their 'Red Carpet'?? program. That's definetely a step in the right direction if Linux is to become widely used by your 'average' users.
As for your comment regarding not having to recompile your kernel and other applications. Yes you're right, you can always download a binary for your particular distro. And you may not even have to get a new kernel each time a new one is released, but you might have to (for whatever reason). But of course once you get to this stage you'll meet the next level of Linux users who will call you all sorts of names because you run a pre-compiled kernel or X. I used to hang out in #linuxwarez on efnet (there was little warez but i knew a few people there) and I saw it happening every day. I used to wonder why people bothered getting into linux given that unless they're running the leet distro and have hand-compiled each of their applications they're 'newbies'. But that's a side issue.
Then there's all the patches that you may or may not need to patch exploits and other security issues, where more than likely you will need to know how to patch and re-compile a particular application. So I don't think you can get away with NOT knowing how to patch and re-compile. These aren't particularly difficult things to learn, but things that may have to be known.
Score: 0
|#1, 2MB footprint
#2, http://www.bensinclair.com/dockapp/
#3, You'd have to feel it to understand it, but it's far more fluid
#4, http://www.windowmaker.org/features.html
#5, http://wm.themes.org
Try it .. Out of the box, it's rough around the edges, but apply a theme, and turn all the options on in WPrefs ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|Yeah, and it took 5 days to load up Netscape too (takes only 2 on Windows).
The installation of WindowsXP is actually quite a bit easier than any previous version of Windows, I mean, in Pro, you pop in the CD, choose your partitioning (on a clean install), it asks if you want a full format, quick format, NTFS or FAT32, and it starts... later on, you get a dialog asking about your local info (time zone, your name, etc...) and then it comes up asking about your TCP/IP info... and that's on Pro, I've not run Home Edition in quite some time (before Beta2), but I can probably gaurentee you that you have to do even less than that.
Score: 0
|what the hell has a 2mb footprint got to do with being more usable for average users?!?
you're so much a typical linux user! (ie living on a different planet to average (home?) computer users)
Score: 0
|if you are adding additional programs, then www.stardock.com products more than cover all of your points (apart from the humourous 2mb footprint one - like the average user wouldnt go "huh....." if you said "hey you really need to use linux because its got awesome usability, like only a 2mb footprint". lol)
Score: 0
|Those are wanna-be products that imitate unix desktop features, but they lack most real features that people use, like right click ..
I've used products like that (litestep, windowblinds) they define software that sucks ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|um no, they dont want to be like unix. hell until a couple of years ago unix had the most ugly desktop of all OSs. well actually... it probably still does!
windowblinds in no way at all sucks. DesktopX is following on from microsofts Cairo plans from years ago. (nothing at all to do with unix).
Score: 0
|Oh, I don't know, maybe it's great in the fact that it helps them continue to use a computer they already own instead of having to buy a new one for the latest Windows release?
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|my celeron 266 machine is hmmm 3 years old now? and runs XP fine thanx.
Score: 0
|Microsoft is a monopoly, it has been proven! Blah! Blah! Blah! It was proven that they had monopolistic practices, not that they were a monopoly. While it may be hard for the legally challenged to understand, even a small company can engage in monopolistic practices.
I am not defending MS on this. I think a lot of what they have done is deplorable. If they push out XP early, I think I will puke. Found another security hole the other day. Definitely not ready for prime time.
--GB
Score: 0
|You guys still miss the point...lol
Microsoft leverages its monopoly to introduce products therefore, it "cuts off the air supply" of competitors. That is why Netscape is now Mozilla, RealPlayer (Eudora, Opera, AIM, ICQ) is(are) full of adds, and Windows is such a crappy product (including Win200/XP)
Microsoft uses Window$ to give away its products therefore forcing its competitors in an economically inferior position. When competitors don't have air($), they are forced to cut R&D. Microsoft can continue because of Window$.
That money should be used to develop Window$ into a much better product than it is. This is not a battle against the "evial empire" nor I am I a Linux nut (I am an MSCE working on Cisco). It just an observation of how innovation is being stifled. No one can develop a better product as long as Microsoft can tie its product to Window$.
XP will charge users to use MP3 according to an article on CNET.
P.S. Thank you all for all the comments.
Score: 0
|oops...Cisco certification
Score: 0
|If you waited until all the security holes were patched up we'd either never see any released OS or an OS released with very old applications.
Score: 0
|I had to respond to your post because I've used WindowMaker and I totally disagree that it is more usable that 'Explorer', it may very well be more configurable, but it is definetely not more usable. Anyways, the reasons you listed:
#1. 2MB Footprint - What does this have to do with usability? It may be more optimal but it definetely has nothing to do with usability!
#2. http://www.bensinclair.com/dockapp/ - Ahh yes those little boxes that can be used for just about anything, usually to monitor some sort of system performance. Norton Utilities comes with similar monitors - of course you cannot configure nearly as much nor create your own. However, I would too argue that this has little to do with usability as in most cases these are used as monitors. On a personal note I cannot stand a 'relatively large' proportion of my desktop being overtaken by a whole list of monitors. On a separate virtual desktop - fine, but otherwise they shouldn't be there!
#3. You'd have to feel it to understand it, but it's far more fluid - I have 'felt it' as you say and I did not like it. Althought I have not used the latest KDE nor Ximian Gnome, I believe these two are much better examples of a usable window manager. But each to their own.
#4. http://www.windowmaker.org/features.html - Yes, it's ugly and boring in it's default configuration. As for features - is there anything there that makes it stand out from KDE or Ximian Gnome? Definetely not a list of features that make it more usable than 'Explorer'.
#5. http://wm.themes.org - Yes there are themes for every window manager and for 'Explorer' you can get DesktopX or WindowBlinds and the thousands of themes for that. However....do these things make it more usable? Do themes make an application more usable? Was WinAmp LESS useable before you skinned/themed it? Is Netscape more USABLE as a result of using different themes? I honestly believe the answer is NO. Sure it improves the application's aesthetics, but what does it have to do with usability?
So if you're comparing configurability, aesthetics etc state that, as none of the examples you gave show why WindowMaker is more USABLE.
Score: 0
|Ahh yes CDE and the Motif Widgets. Heheheh, I actually had a lot of fun with Motif, even if it is ugly.
Score: 0
|WOW Good for them. How proud you must be!!! The way they did that was soooo much easier than WIndows...I know when I'm in Windows and need to go to a Web site, I have to doubleclick on an icon and it's so difficult. If the rest of your family is anything like you they're all LLLOOOSSSERRRSS!!!
Score: 0
|Bull if XP isn't right for primetime. In its beta state its already more stable than any other operating system including Linux.
Score: 0
|"You miss the point entirely. Microsoft is a monopoly, period. The vast majority of people have no choice but to use Windows. How Many could install Linux, Unix or even the Be OS? Mac is an alternative? Aren't they still forced to use Internet Explorer and Outlook Express?"
Bull if they are a monopoly. A monopoly only comes from a business being the only one providing a service in a certain area. There is NOTHING to stop anyone from installing anything they want, and you know that. Your claiming Microsoft is a monopoly because people aren't able to figure out how to install Linux???? That is LINSUX's fault, not Microsoft.
I am so dang sick of the Linux lovers crap that is spread everywhere.
Even Dell computers is removing Linux from their desktop computers because it doesn't sell... jeez, I wonder why.
Score: 0
|Yeah and you install Home Edition and realize it doesn't support Domains.... Then you beat your head off the desk. Kinda too bad considering 95-98-ME support Domains..
They've ruined Server in favor of making people use Advanced Server too.. Too bad that Advanced Server is bloatware as far as Win2000 goes, I have yet to try it on this dual processing beast though.
I must say though, XP Home is decent, but it won't work here since this is a testbed and it doesn't do Domains... I need to be able to do Policies and such.
--D
Score: 0
|Eudora is adware if you opt not to pay for it... Personally it's worth the 40 bucks to me.. It's a great product, and they weren't stupid enough to put MACROS in it..
Moreso, it's standards based. They make QPOP (Popper) for UN*X, and they also read RFC's and match those.. Microsoft makes proprietary nonsense into their software, just like AOL does.
--D
Score: 0
|And they did that for one simple reason.... cheap companies buying the cheaper software that wasn't really meant for them.
Advanced Server bloated? Are you nuts? It's almost exactly the same as regular Server except it supports clusters, more RAM, and more processors.
Score: 0
|Funny that you mention Netscape in AOL. I cheered when the talks between AOL and Microsoft broke down: it meant that AOL can now do anything they want with Netscape. AOL has hinted before about a Netscape Online service (not that cheesy free ISP in the UK). Think about it: AOL targets Dummies, Compuserve targets geeks. What's in between? Everyday Internet-savvy users like myself, who don't fit into either category.
Anyhow, I'm beta testing AOL 7.0 right now, and Netscape is NOT present. However, that isn't to say the next major beta release won't include it, but my thought is that AOL 7.0 may well ship with IE. Barry Schuler said recently that AOL would use Gecko soon - it would save the company money - but that currently Gecko needed some more bugtesting. He seemed to hint that the new version of Compuserve was the testing ground for Netscape. I think they may wait until Mozilla 1.0 is done, but then again, .9.3 is out now so 1.0 is not far off. I'm just not sure that Netscape will in fact be in AOL 7.0, at least not at release time. I hope I don't have to wait until AOL 8.0 though. I want Netscape to have that market share back.
What I think, actually, is that soon AOL, Netscape, and Compuserve will all share the same codebase. AOL can then tweak the code for new online services that all work the same but are targeted at different demographics. Think of it: three online services with one major engineering team!
Still, this is all speculation based on what reports have surfaced so far (the Komodo memos, etc.). I know all this is a bit off your point, but I thought I'd digress a bit. I may get laughed at, but damned if I'm not excited to see Netscape come back. I literally think AOL is waiting out the trial to some degree, though, playing Netscape as the piteous dead dog and hoping the government will kill Microsoft for them.
James
Score: 0
|Ha! More stable than Linux, eh? I'm running both on the same system, and I've been running Windows XP for like three days and it's already locked up more times than Linux EVER has, and I've been using Linux for well over a year now. Sorry, XP may be light years past Windows 98, but it still doesn't touch Linux for stability.
Score: 0
|Just a note that Mozilla.org says that Mozilla .9.3 is already more stable than Communicator 4.78, according to Talkback statistics. Netscape 6.1 is going to finally be more stable and a better product than Communicator was (and you're right, 4.x wasn't great, not when you see what 6.1 can do). Note that 6.1 includes a Quick Launch option so that you can preload Netscape just like IE is preloaded, resulting in launch speeds that are comparable to IE.
James
Score: 0
|Linus is only stable AND usable if you spend three months deciding on how to configure it. I want an OS that is stable, boots quickly and lets me get on with what I need to do... XP does that, Linux doesn't.
Linux has it's merits, for those who wish to enlessly tinker with their Desktop system, or for servers - but it does not, nor never will, replace Windows.
Score: 0
|Well... there are one of three things wrong here....
1) Cnet incorrectly reported something
2) You didn't read the article
3) You are too stupid to understand the article
Take your choice....
What you will be paying for is a plug-in to Windows Media Player, provided by a 3rd party, so you can encode in MP3 within WMP, so MS isn't charging everyone the licensing costs of MP3 (Yes, their are costs to it, and it IS a proprietary standard). And I'm sure there will be free plug-ins somehwere out there on the vast world of the internet.
You will still be able to use any program that you have used before to encode mp3's, even if it was free.
Score: 0
|Soon you may not be able to customize or do any darn stuff you want with your desktop....
Score: 0
|Sure you can ..
The world is full of choices, here are a few :-)
http://www.kde.org
http://www.ximian.com
http://www.themes.org
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|This is totaly dumb... what the fudge do they want?
Do they want MS to take everything out of the OS? Media Player, MSN, MSN messenger, and even Internet Explorer?
or
Do they want every Internet browser and instant messenging system in the CD so consumers "can have a choice" in their own words?
There are only two solutions in their minds
"Take it all out" or "Put it all in"
-Take it all out creates a situation where when a user installes the OS they cant even use the internet and/or play any type of media file.
-Put it all in would possibly create a situation where the CD is FULL of every piece of software for every ISP. (the main big deal is with AOL).
The senator points out that it "will devastate the hardworking little-guy competitors on whose behalf he apparently battles tirelessly."
What is he nuts? If you say that then you are saying that AOL and MSN are to blame and all the little ISPs like (MPI.net) for florida users should be added.
My take(the only one that the courts would accept).
This would solve (most) of the problems.
WinXP comes out with 3 CDs
1. Windows XP, and Internet Explorer (no GUI)
2. Media Player, MSN, MSN messenger, Windows Messenger and .net passport intergration, and Internet Explorer (the GUI)
3. Real Player, AOL, AOL instant Messenger, Netscape, and AOL "passport access"
The setup process would ask to either use a CD for additioal files or connect to the internet for additioal data. The .net passport access intergration of XP would be opened up to also include AOL's passport access "side by side".
This would "stop AOL from crying" and also leave open another window for other services.
AOL believes that they deserve take on the internet yet all they have done is ruined the internet for everyone. They have horrible service and PAY to see advertisements. If AOL was included in the Windows XP deal then the courts may back down. Yet... Whp would want a VIRUS like AOL in the OS? At least MSN is COMPATIBLE with the OS and runs nicely.... and you may use all the services for free if you allready have an ISP *now that is freedom*
Stupid AOL....
Score: 0
|*now that is freedom*
sooo I can use MSN with my FreeBSD box? how about BeOS? Linux? Amiga?
hmm sounds more like discrimination to me ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|and i can use kde/gnome etc on win2k? no? im calling a lawyer right now! how DARE they not develop kde for win2k!!!!
just shut the f up. companies can develop what they want for what OSs they want. geeesh! what is it with americans wanting to turn the computer industry into a dictatorship???
Score: 0
|Who says MS is raping anyone? The only people who have any chance to being "raped" by Microsoft are the people who are too stupid to go out on the net and make their own decisions instead of being a slave to the purdy icons that came installed on their PC.
I could care less if MS adds more and more stuff and pushes out the "little guy." Most of the programs MS makes are at the top in their category. IE - A lot better than any other browser thats out there now, although Mozilla will be a good alternative...at some point in the future. OE - Not the best email/news client in the world, but it does everything most people would want. WMP - A helluva lot better than a POS like Realplayer.
The built in .zip , cd burning, dvd playing ability is fine by me too. Saves me from throwing away money on buying the overpriced programs, most of which have UI's that look like they were designed by 5 year olds(especailly Cd burning software).
Score: 0
|You can also format DVD's with FAT32 and use it as a storage device.
Score: 0
|Umm you can... all the services except for the MSN client are HTML based.
Score: 0
|'I could care less if MS adds more and more stuff and pushes out the "little guy."'
You know, it's people like you that have fscked up america ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|lol
Score: 0
|ah so you're an insensitive git as well then?
Score: 0
|No, what you do is force Microsoft to ship a clean version of Windows alongside the bloated version. If customers want prepacked software, their OEM can make deals for that. If they want a clean OS, they can have that, too. That's the version I'd buy, certainly.
James
Score: 0
|It IS a f cking dictatorship: THAT'S THE POINT. Microsoft dictates that I can't buy JUST the operating system, and they're shipping more and more apps with each release and calling them "part of the OS." If your cereal comes with AOL software, you can easily choose another cereal. If you want to be able to run most industry-standard software, you CAN'T use anything but Windows or, in some cases, Mac.
Score: 0
|This whole process is disgusting. Every other ISP in the country should get together and pay the OEM's NOT to include AOL or MSN on the desktop. Microsoft should have stuck to their guns and kept the desktop empty.
Score: 0
|It's not Microsoft's call, once the product is sold to the OEM the OEM should have the right to install anything that they want on it, without Microsoft strong arming them not to .. Would you buy a car that you could only put a bumper sticker on if you put the car companies sticker on it too?
...
-8vO
--
Go ahead moderate this post, see how busy I can make you, I know more cuss words than your filter does .. heh :-P
Score: 0
|To stop OEM's from developing their own desktop shell interface, MS said that OEM's could no longer change it, which the letter of it was that they could change very very little of it... now MS is opening up the field a little, and letting them place things on the very clean desktop of XP.
Score: 0
|The issue is not the end user putting bumper stickers on the car but the dealership putting several bumper stickers on. I don't want any bumper stickers. It's funny that you chose a car analogy since manufacturers control almost everything the dealership does.
Score: 0
|Also remember that Microsoft has agreements with each of these computer manufacturers in which they receive significant discounts. Joe Schmoe computer builder can put whatever he wants on the computer before he sells it.
Score: 0
|What? I have to pay retail prices? oh .. hmmm *think think* how many other o/s's are out there? Welp, cancel that order, thanks!!
That was sooo damn hard to figure out wasn't it .. A few OEM's get together, it can happen just like that ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|opening it up is good, but opening it up then later saying no, wait I want what aol paid you for, and you are going to give it to me for I am mighty, and will make it hurt if you don't is anti-competitive ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|But Couldn't they just make it so they only the end user could install software? Kinda like those tags on pillow that say "Only to be removed by end user". I am SURE that with programming Antipiracy options that MS could put in AntiOEM options. Make FULL unique registration required BEFORE you can install anything? Might work. I think it's bad that they force MS to do things.
TibbonZero
Score: 0
|When you buy a car or just about any product for that matter you are actually buying the car/product. With software (wether you like it or not, wether you accept it or not, whether you think it's right or not, wether you know/knew about it or not) you're not buying the software but rather a license to run that software. You do not own the software, what you own is a license to run it. Not this may not apply to every single piece of software on the planet but it does apply to some/many/most of them.
Score: 0
|yep and those oems would soon hit financial problems when they realized no one wanted their wonderful alternative OSs.
Score: 0
|Ya know, you remind me of a guy I used to work with .. The company went through hard times, and most of IT was laid off, I'm now working for one of the largest companies in the world now, and he is still looking for work .. He had the same attitude you have unfortunately, he's a decent guy, but he put all of his eggs into one basket ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|not like me at all then. I have strong experience of all windows versions, all netware versions, basic experience of (admin level, not engineer kinda level) of linux, aix, sco blah blah blah.
Im not putting my eggs in one basket, i just know what products users like and want.
Score: 0
|main:
while ( =~/fred/gi)
{
open (comments,">/dev/null");
print comments;
close (comments);
}
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|"Adding a new twist to the saga, Microsoft responded to AOL's moves late Monday, revealing that PCs shipping with any desktop icons must include one for MSN Internet as well."
Nope, they aren't leveraging their monopoly power, ught uhh .. no way .. If I were a retailer (Compaq Dell IBM) and Microsoft came to me with this I would laugh in their face, and forward it to my state representative .. Talk about anti-competitive ..
-8vO
--
Go ahead moderate this post, see how busy I can make you, I know more cuss words than your filter does .. heh :-P
Score: 0
|I'm confused, wouldn't it be anticompetitive if their were only ONE option for ISP on the desktop as apposed to TWO. You want to talk about anti-comptetitive look in the dictionary under "A" for AOL. This is the company that was going to outright lie to customers about XP in order to damage Microsoft. They had a memo of ways to bipass the OEM agreements and how they could make up propaganda about XP being incompatible with AOL. Then MS folds and lets the OEM's have what they're asking for and suddenly THAT is anticompetitive?!
Score: 0
|No, forcing them to include your icon too is anticompetitive .. Now if they made an offer to OEMS just like AOL did then it would be competitive .. They are strongarming OEMS with this move so they can have the same exposure others are paying for ..
-8vO
--
Go ahead moderate this post, see how busy I can make you, I know more cuss words than your filter does .. heh :-P
Score: 0
|lol (as usual)
you argument ignores the fact that ms are saying UNLIKE AOL they will NOT be paying oems to EXCLUDE other peoples icons.
its AOL that is being anticompetative. you're a really bitter sad person if you think ms is being anticompetative for merely putting icons for its products in its own software products. lol maybe you would like them to ship windows without ANYTHING in the programs groups????
Score: 0
|>lol (as usual)
>
>you argument ignores the fact that ms are saying UNLIKE AOL they
>will NOT be paying oems to EXCLUDE other peoples icons.
>
>its AOL that is being anticompetative. you're a really bitter sad
>person if you think ms is being anticompetative for merely putting
>icons for its products in its own software products. lol maybe you
>would like them to ship windows without ANYTHING in the programs
>groups????
Actually it sounds like both of them are engageing in anti-competitive behaviour. AOL by paying OEMs to not advertise for any rival companies and Micro$oft by saying if you put AOL's icons on the desktop you'll have to put ours on as well (for free mind you) even though AOL have payed for the privledge.
Both of them should get a spanking.
Score: 0
|Ok, so I am a bitter sad person because I feel that it's wrong for them to say "No icons on the desktop" oh wait "OEM's can put icons on the desktop" AOL says to Compaq, "hey I'll pay you to put my icons on the desktop", so microsoft says "If you put any icons on the desktop you are *REQUIRED* to put mine there too" .. no it doesn't work that way, it is anti competitive .. if they said, hey I'll give you $$ per desktop to put my icons there too, or I'll give you $$ more to only put mine there, then fine .. that's not what the article said though is it .. You laugh at me LOL, idiot .. Did you finish high school? They teach that stuff there you know ..
-8vO
--
Go ahead, delete this post .. I have more cuss words, and email domains than your filters can keep up with .. ;-)
Score: 0
|Why should Microsoft be required to pay for adding their icon to their OS? Besides, the larger OEMs already get price breaks on the cost of Windows and other MS products. Why should MS shell out more money for additions to their own product.
As another poster said, AOL is the anticompetitive one. Why do they feel they must do anything they can (even making false claims against Microsoft) not just to get on the desktop, but to OWN the desktop. Do they believe that people are so stupid that they cant just pop in one of the many unsolicited AOL CDs they get in the mail every year, and install the software. Most new computer buyers already think AOL IS the internet. All AOL does is help make the system unstable (Why did they try to get exempt from the Windows Logo requirements instead of improving their crappy software?). AOL has consistently shown that it is afraid of competition of any kind. They even spread FUD about DSL and satellite in their AOLTW cable commercials. Not to mention restricting local ISPs from advertising on their cable networks. One can only hope they don't acquire AT&T cable.
Score: 0
|I think government involvement in this is completely ludicrous. I don't understand why the Senator thinks AOL is one of the "little guys" he is fighting for. This entire ordeal is as rediculous as when parents formed organizations to stop Pokemon from making children addicted to it and it's merchandise. All the parents in the group mispronounced Pokemon as Pokeman. It's astonishing that they were fighting for soemthing they culdn't even pronounce. Tell me i'm not the only person who saw that on the news?
Score: 0
|Now if MS would start sending unsolicited CD's of XP, wouldn't that be nice?
Score: 0
|You know I think that MS could GIVE AWAY it's OSes actually , not server systems, and just sell the "products" like Office for users and then they wouldn't be "forcing" you to use something. they just mail them out! They would still be rolling in money
Tibbonzero
Score: 0
|they frickin developed the OS, they should be able to demand whatever they want. as you often say there are enough alternatives out there... oh wait! the people that buy from the top tier OEMS dont WANT linux etc do they!
Score: 0
|btw, microsoft are basicly paying the OEMS a little anyway in the huge discounts they offer them. so you could say that microsoft pays the oems and only says "ok if you are going to put any crap on the desktop, then we would like you to put this icon there as well" where as aol are saying "if you refuse to let anyone else put anything else on this before you ship it to the customer you can have this load of cash" which is more fair? the one saying "if you are cluttering the desktop then add my icon too" or the one saying "you can only have this money if you dont put any one elses icons on the desktop" ?
Score: 0
|Yes they do .. Just go look at the numbers, there isn't a major manufacturer out there that doesn't offer it now due to it's demand in the enterprise .. Do you know how much demand it takes to get an OEM to spend unreal amounts of money on a new product line?
I really feel sorry for all of you people that don't see past your noses .. It'll bite you in the a** one of these days, and I'm going to continue to laugh all the way to the bank ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|lol hmmm and how many people go into high street (shopping malls to you americans) stores and say they want a PC with linux on?? one a year maybe?
Most enterprises are putting NT/2k on the desktop (desktop IS where most of the OEMs sales are afterall). period.
and home users (the market most OEMS and software developers are working most at now) - there is no way the average home user would
And in the home intentionally go out and ask for linux instead of windows.
Score: 0
|speaking of money/banks etc, most linux software projects will fail sooner or later anyway due to running out of funds for the project. Even programmers need money to live ya know! and with close to no money from advertising, people not interested in paying for support now, generally the most open source developers are either sponging off their government or VCs - both of which will realize sooner or later what is going on.
Score: 0
|microsoft owes them nothing. if microsoft stopped producing windows today, people wouldnt want the oems pcs anyway.
Score: 0
|Damn man, you must not work on computers for a living .. Or you live in a closet .. Linux is quickly becoming a top selling O/S .. it's growth in both the desktop and the server market is huge ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah/commentid" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|Now you are saying that no one writes commercial software for or makes money off of commercial software for Linux?!
again, wtf are you smoking?
http://www.corel.com
http://www.borland.com
http://www.applix.com
http://www.lokigames.com
http://www.idsoftware.com
http://www.opera.com
http://www.ibm.com
http://www.oracle.com
These guys look like they are paying their programmers to me ..
Should I go on ??
Score: 0
|You have proven your ignorance with that comment .. Without the OEM's Microsoft would never have sealed the contracts that pushed GEOS, OS/2, PC DOS, DR DOS, and other alternatives off of the desktop, and would have failed as a company long ago .. They owe the OEM their existance, If OEM's stopped pushing Microsoft products, then Microsoft would go out of business PERIOD ..
-8vO
--
lynx --source "http://blah blah blah" | grep 8vO || /bin/cuss.pl
Score: 0
|lol oh sure its out selling windows in the desktop..... hmm sure... lol
you're the one in the closet !
Score: 0
|um yeah.. but most of the above companies linux is not their main market (apart from maybe ibm, but then again they do seem to be rapidly losing the plot).
Score: 0
|Although that would be a great idea from MS (although many users own OSes illegally in the first place), why would they need to? Their other "products" force you to use the latest versions of Windows in the first place, and many people would just as well dish out more cash to MS than take the time to learn another OS. Office XP, if I'm not mistaken, does not have support for Windows 98. I wouldn't be surprised if the next version of Office only runs on NT (NT 4, Windows 2000, Windows XP).
I'm running the Windows XP RC-2 release, and don't get me wrong, Windows is a great operating system. And quite frankly, I don't see why Microsoft even needs to offer OEMs the option to put other things on their desktop. It's their product, they can have it packaged the way they want it to. OEMs load so much crap into Windows as it is now, I don't think this is making a huge difference.
Microsoft isn't a monopoly. They're trying to be the best, and everyone is crying out "Monopoly!". It sounds like a nine-year-old crying because they lost in a game, so they say the other person is cheating. People are using Microsoft because Microsoft managed to get it in their hands. Apple had the same chance, as did many other products. Users get a choice, Microsoft could have Windows not run Netscape - but Netscape runs on Windows. Any user can visit www.netscape.com and download a free browser, and yet they opt to keep with Internet Explorer.
Personally, I hate AOL. But due to their product positioning to the ignorant, lazy population, many people assume that when you say you're using "the internet" you're using AOL. AOL is just trying to grab as many new ignorant new computer users as possible. Please. I have too many of their CDs in the first place, I really don't want their software pre-installed on my computer when I get it.
If you order a new computer, do what I do. Reformat the hard drive. Install Windows fresh, without the OEM crap. You'll have a much better XPerience.
Score: 0
|I have a B.S. computer science and economics at George Mason University in D.C and am currently working on my M.D.
First of all- AOL HQ is located in that Senator's district. AOL is giving him campagne contributions to push for XPs delay. Nuff said.
Second- Microsoft is not a monopoly. This is because all antitrust laws are totally arbitrary in the U.S. and are direct violations of the constitution. I have studied under numerous nobel prize winning economists and nominated-NP professors who preach this everyday in government and economy classes. Antitrust laws are politicians' weapons for attacking companies who compete with their campagne backers. AOL is fundamentally in trouble as a company because rather than competing with better software(which they've proven they are incapable of) they have to compete by using policians as barking dogs to attack MS.
I dont always agree with MS and some of their moves but, damnit, Windows is their sole creation. There are alternatives out there- do not blame Windows for doing what they want with their own product. Do not blame Microsoft for consumers failing to choose alternative OSes. If you dont like Windows. Dont use it. If AOL wants desktop space- make your own damn OS(you think Windows is buggy? Would you like AOS- America Operating System?).
Microsoft products are powerful and provide a multitude of features for the average user. Hard core power users might not like this but- unfortunatly- not everyone has the same compassion for PCs as we do. We cannot force them into it. As a side effect most power users- in order to remain compatible with all applications and to use specialty cutting edge programs(Games come to mind)- Windows is our only option. So you cant customize it as much? Big deal. Get into litestep. IF you are so big on custimzeability then you shouldnt be lazy enough to not code litestep(IE- opting out to go for Linux instead because of all the Linux Cult members out there to help you). Personally I dont like to spent my offtime writing drivers for hardware that isnt supported by Linux.
8vo- Dont bother ranting. Ive already passed judgment on you within my own mind- you're just another mindless Antitrust(arbitrary socialist law), Anti-Microsft, Arrogant(to casual users), Linux conformist. You're rants/hot air fall on deaf ear when it comes to me.
Tuz
B.S in CS
B.S.in EC
M.D in CS in progress.
Not anything certified(waste of time).
Strong "true democracy/capitalist" supporter(Not the hidden socialist society that American law has turned into)
Score: 0
|Oh and one more thing- as for Linux being shipped by all major OEMs due to "growing" demand for it? Stop spreading lies and read:
http://news.cnet.com/new...-6757216.html?tag=mn_hd
Here is a brief summary:
"Dell Computer has ceased shipping Linux on its desktop and notebook PCs.
Citing slow demand for the operating system on client PCs over the last several quarters, a Dell spokesman said the PC maker chose to stop preinstalling RedHat Linux on desktop and notebook models.
"
...
"With Linux, the productivity suites just aren't there," London said. As a result, she added, "you're fighting a pretty big uphill battle" to establish the operating system on the desktop.
By John G. Spooner
Special to CNET® News.com
August 2, 2001, 8:35 a.m. PT
Copyright CNET. All rights reserved.
Score: 0
|Maybe you should go read the article about Dell deciding that linux isnt cutting it in the desktop market and will no longer offer it as an option... now who is the ignorant one? hmm?
Score: 0
|GEOS was a serious alternative?...lol
Score: 0
|