SuperBlue Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 As you may know, there was a case against Microsoft, which claims that Microsoft abused their market dominance by having bundled Windows with certain software comportments. It smells like the commission acted in their own interests to me, and disregarded the rights of the individual company. It was not like Microsoft blocked the installation of other browsers or media players. Which may raise the question, what will we see next? Notepad alternatives making case against Microsoft for bundling notepad? Advertising for competitors? If you read the Wikipedia article on the case, then it should be obvious that some injustice toke place, (unless its been manipulated). Mainly around the bundling of software, where i personally find the argumentation to be totally flawed. Windows has been like that traditionally after all, and basically everyone is free to create their own OS if they don't like it. Who is to interfere when the system fails like that? Its also rather disturbing how the EU can fine whomever they seem fit, just because they have a proprietary business model, which they happen to dislike. In that regard, many open source fanatics seem to be careless crocks, who disrespect the right of ownership, and the right to make your own rules around what you own. Requiring licensing fees of technologies, is perhaps a tad over the top. But nothing can change, that its up to the individual company how they want to distribute their software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperBlue Posted March 21, 2011 Author Share Posted March 21, 2011 The only thing i really dislike about such cases, is when companies intentionally force people to use their solutions. So its not that i dislike open source, (far from). But bundling software can hardly be considered that. What i would personally like to see improved about Windows, rather then removing otherwise good components like WMP and IE, is Windows Update. This is where Microsoft could learn a lot from the package feature in linux. Basically they should have an integrated feature in Windows, which includes a list of free, and commercial software for Windows! Anyway, what are your thoughts on the whole Microsoft case? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nudd Posted March 30, 2011 Share Posted March 30, 2011 Being a fairly recent convert to libertarianism, I find most forms of government do-gooding is thinly veiled interference that's almost always preceded by a fairly loud public outcry from folks demanding protection from random boogeymen. I'm still shocked that this is even an issue... every operating system and environment I've ever used since the mid 80's has come bundled with some additional software that had third party alternatives. How come governments didn't skewer Microsoft in the early 90's for bundling DOS Shell with their money maker of the day, or suckerpunch Apple for bundling all those lovely proprietary apps in their early Macintoshes. I'm definitely in agreement about the package listing feature for Windows though, I'm surprised they haven't stol...er... introduced one yet. How did I (and countless others) return to legitimate PC gaming? The rise of Steam, which makes it absurdly simple to buy and install games. We should have this for our Windows programs. Microsoft has the connections, were it not for their inherent fear of competing, they'd be the ideal candidates to create this service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.