Microsoft and EU agree name for Windows


narco

macrumors 65816
Dec 9, 2003
1,155
0
California.
MacBytes said:
Category: Microsoft
Link: Microsoft and EU agree name for Windows
Posted on MacBytes.com

Approved by Mudbug
Yeah, that name sucks. But at least it's not something like "FTMD-2304G" like most tech companies use.

Also, couldn't Apple have the same problems with releasing their OS with Quicktime as a default? I know the market isn't as large, but they're still doing the same thing in a sense -- right?

Fishes,
narco.
 

sworthy

macrumors regular
Nov 8, 2002
104
0
I'd say it's better than the previous "Microsoft XP Reduced Media Edition" -- I still can't believe they thought they'd get away with that.
 

hob

macrumors 68020
Oct 4, 2003
2,023
0
London, UK
The N stands for "Nooooooooooo!"

This is so ridiculous, the same ruling could be applied to OS X, with it's promotion of iPhoto, iTunes, Quicktime, GarageBand (to some extent) and in indeed iChat.

So people like me who prefer to use MSN to iChat ('cos all my friends are on MSN mainly) use MSN... All my windows user friends with an ounce of sense use iTunes, the rest use WMP for ease-of-use :rolleyes: (if only they knew)

I feel the EU is pushing this just 'cos they can...
 

kiwi-in-uk

macrumors 6502a
Sep 22, 2004
735
0
AU
This is a cop-out.
Where are the requirements that oblige MS to sell this alongside standard Windows, or at a reduced price?
Where are the requirements that oblige MS to offer this to Tier 1 vendors and OEMs at a more attractive price?
What makes me think the MS world will not change AT ALL because of this?
 

akb

macrumors member
Feb 16, 2004
58
50
UK
There's a whole world of difference between Windows and Mac OS when it comes to bundling software.

Microsoft has a monopoly in the OS space. It is being accused of using its monopoly in this area to leverage itself into a position of power in another market, that of digital media on the desktop.

That's what the EU is fighting - and good on them, no matter how petty this specific exercise is. They are showing Microsoft that they aren't going to have things all their own way in Europe, that unlike the US government, the authorities in Europe are prepared to do something about their abuse of their market position. I anticipate this is but a first step, the drawing of the battle lines.

Were Apple in the same position as Microsoft, I'd expect no different from the EU.
 

Beeblebrox

macrumors member
Mar 27, 2005
42
0
akb said:
Microsoft has a monopoly in the OS space. It is being accused of using its monopoly in this area to leverage itself into a position of power in another market, that of digital media on the desktop.
I agree, although it makes me question the Mac bragging rights to Ilife when the fact is that Windows CAN'T create a software suite like that even if they wanted to. They faced a huge anti-trust suit just for including a browser. A browser! And now they're going through all of this over a media player.

I actually wish the OS was even more stripped down, both of them. If I want a browser or music player, I'll get them from the site. If I want all this other crap, I'll download it from the site. But give me that choice.

Were Apple in the same position as Microsoft, I'd expect no different from the EU.
I actually hope Apple faces this over their dominant market share of the Ipod and ITMS and the incompatibility with the rest of the market. If you want to buy an Ipod, the most popular music player on the market, then you have to use ITMS. No other music store will work. And if you want to use ITMS, you have to use an Ipod, no other music player will work. Clearly Apple is using its dominant market share to increase market share and squeeze out competition. Ultimately, consumers lose.
 

Nermal

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 7, 2002
18,678
1,183
New Zealand
Beeblebrox said:
If you want to buy an Ipod, the most popular music player on the market, then you have to use ITMS.
That's not entirely correct. Here in NZ, there is an iPod-compatible WMA store. I'm not exactly sure how it works, but you need to have WiMP and iTunes installed on the system. I believe it transcodes the WMA to AAC then copies it to your iPod.
 

mtscott

macrumors member
Feb 7, 2005
46
0
it makes me question the Mac bragging rights to Ilife when the fact is that Windows CAN'T create a software suite like that even if they wanted to. They faced a huge anti-trust suit just for including a browser.
Not accurate really. Microsoft FORCED computer producers to REMOVE all other competitor's products from the computers they were shipping if they wanted to be able to sell computers pre-installed with Windows. Microsoft thereby killed Netscape by keeping either the entire product itself, or just a desktop shortcut, from being installed, and forcing customers to use their browser. Netscape/Mozilla is the better browser, and most relatively experienced users know this. However, to the average user who just went out and bought a computer that the clerk at the store told them to buy, they have no idea.

They did the same thing with Windows Media Player, forcing computer producers to remove/not install RealPlayer, QuickTime, etc. If you don't, say goodbye to your OEM licence, or hello to drastically marked-up prices for copies of Windows. Most computer users aren't going to go and find, download, install other programs unless they're forced to (ie-you need RealPlayer to view certain videos, QuickTime for trailers, etc).

Not to mention the fact that EVERY currently shipping Apple computer, except for the Mac Mini and eMac, comes with a preinstalled evaluation copy of Office 2004. And, EVERY SINGLE Mac ships with a copy of Internet Explorer. Besides, any serious office suite user would most likely buy a copy of Office for the functions that are missing in iWork (full function spreadsheets anyone?).

If you want to buy an Ipod, the most popular music player on the market, then you have to use ITMS. No other music store will work. And if you want to use ITMS, you have to use an Ipod, no other music player will work. Clearly Apple is using its dominant market share to increase market share and squeeze out competition.
Yeah, not really either. You can put music from multiple sources on your iPod. CD's, Kazaa, LimeWire, etc (I'm not advocating using Kazaa/LimeWire, just stating fact). If you want to purchase music online, then yes, you need to use iTMS for iPod compatibility. If you want to use iTMS you don't need an iPod either. You can listen on your computer, stereo, burn CD's, etc. Apple had the majority market share on hard drive personal music players BEFORE they launched iTMS. If other companies had a BETTER platform, people would be using them, since Apple had faced an uphill battle getting people to use an iPod. They WON the market share with the superior experience.

Beeblebrox, do you even own a Mac?
 

Timelessblur

macrumors 65816
Jun 26, 2004
1,086
0
mtscott said:
They did the same thing with Windows Media Player, forcing computer producers to remove/not install RealPlayer, QuickTime, etc. If you don't, say goodbye to your OEM licence, or hello to drastically marked-up prices for copies of Windows. Most computer users aren't going to go and find, download, install other programs unless they're forced to (ie-you need RealPlayer to view certain videos, QuickTime for trailers, etc).

You are right on MS doing a little unhand to force all that to happen but given the choise of those 3 players I would have to say WMP is the best on the PCs

Real player is crap and I would not touch it.
Quick time on the PC is annoying has hell and it really pretty poor. Good for play video though the web browser but that is about it. The free verson of has that stupid adverisment everything you open up a quick time file (not though the web) asking you to upgraded to QT pro. For the upteen time I DONT ****** want to up graded and I never will so stop ****** asking me. That alone was the reason I cracked it and I installed the crack codec on my computer so I dont have to put up with it. Also it pretty sad that you can not full screen in the free verson. The free verson needs an update, Full screen included and a way to turn off the stupid asking because I dont want the movie tools that it adds I just want full screen and no asking to upgraded. Remeber this is for the PC. Find me a PC user who uses quicktime )non-pro verson)to play all their video media and I will show you a idoit/lier

WMP out of the box has full screen no stupid adversentments and works really well for video files heck it even works really well for movies. Music it better than the other 2 but there are free players out there that I like a lot more (itunes, winamp, music jute box ect). For video files WMP is one of the best out their.

Their is a reason I have set up on my PC for WMP to handle all video files, WinDVD (when I get around to reinstalling it) to handle DVDs, itunes for musics, winamp for internet TV and radio
 

Beeblebrox

macrumors member
Mar 27, 2005
42
0
mtscott said:
Yeah, not really either. You can put music from multiple sources on your iPod. CD's, Kazaa, LimeWire, etc (I'm not advocating using Kazaa/LimeWire, just stating fact).
Considering the music industry are trying to shut those programs down and Jobs feels that using those programs makes you a thief, I'd hardly call those legitimate alternatives to ITMS.

If you want to purchase music online, then yes, you need to use iTMS for iPod compatibility. If you want to use iTMS you don't need an iPod either. You can listen on your computer, stereo, burn CD's, etc.
We're talking about the portable music player market and online music stores. Couldn't I just say the same thing about Windows and WMP? And I'm sure I could come up with all kinds of similar excuses why M$'s behavior in your browser example were perfectly fair as well. After all, there was never anything to stop you from downloading alternative browsers or Real Player/QT to replace WMP.

The problem isn't availability of alternatives, but rather M$ and Apple's using tactics that make alternatives either cumbersome or difficult to get.

They WON the market share with the superior experience.
Just like M$/IBM won marketshare with its superior experience? M$/IBM, after all, wrested market share dominance away from Apple in the PC market. Since taking over, however, M$ has used dubious tactics to retain that market share. Apple is doing the same thing with portable music players.

Beeblebrox, do you even own a Mac?
I used to have a G3 box with OS9 that I have since replaced with the Mac mini. Why? Does my lack of devotion to everything Apple mean I must not own one? Admitedly, I'm not part of the cult of Mac that allows me to apologize and explain away whatever Apple does. The majority of my work is on a PC, which I use for my work in animation and film production. I use the mini (and Macs owned by others) for editing and some animation work.

I don't mind recommending Apple products that I like, but I'm not going to act like an Apple sycophant unless they hire me for their PR dept (which obviously isn't likely).
 

~loserman~

macrumors 6502a
Beeblebrox said:
I don't mind recommending Apple products that I like, but I'm not going to act like an Apple sycophant unless they hire me for their PR dept (which obviously isn't likely).
Nor are they likely to hire me for their PR/Marketing dept relating to their Server OS.
I find OS X wonderful as a desktop... a true pleasure to use.
I also find it severly restricting and a poor performer as a server OS.
It's thread management and memory management are way less than steller.
I mean come on now haven't they ever even heard of thread affinity.

I will admit that OS X has come a long way from it's initial release but it still has a long way to go.

Back on topic....
The EU's restriction on Windows is just as silly as the U.S.'s
Since they have found Microsoft as a monopoly just like any sane person knows they are, why can't these bodies do what should have been done and break the freaking company up?
 

Maedus

macrumors regular
Dec 4, 2004
137
0
Indiana
Beeblebrox said:
I agree, although it makes me question the Mac bragging rights to Ilife when the fact is that Windows CAN'T create a software suite like that even if they wanted to. They faced a huge anti-trust suit just for including a browser. A browser! And now they're going through all of this over a media player.
Microsoft could create their own version of iLife (lets call it mLife). But with the recent EU ruling, they would probably be kept from including it with their OS. And this is the subtle difference between a PC with Windows and a Mac. Windows can't include mLife with Windows because that is abusing their monopoly. Now if a computer manufacturer bought mLife bundles and installed them on their machines as extra, bundled software, then its conscious choice by the manufacturer. Apple, being the manufacturer of their computers, is doing just that. Apple's iLife is just bundled software. Much like the included version of Quicken and WorldBook. Its one of the advantages of building both the software and the hardware.
 

Beeblebrox

macrumors member
Mar 27, 2005
42
0
Maedus said:
Microsoft could create their own version of iLife (lets call it mLife). But with the recent EU ruling, they would probably be kept from including it with their OS. And this is the subtle difference between a PC with Windows and a Mac. Windows can't include mLife with Windows because that is abusing their monopoly.
I totally agree, that was exactly my point.

If Apple gains any more market share with the Ipod, I would hope the same thing might be done to disengage it from ITMS. It would be nice to use one without being forced to use the other.
 

mtscott

macrumors member
Feb 7, 2005
46
0
Considering the music industry are trying to shut those programs down and Jobs feels that using those programs makes you a thief, I'd hardly call those legitimate alternatives to ITMS.
So, in your entire lifetime you've never purchased any form of music before? You don't have a pile of CDs that you could transfer to your iPod? You've stopped buying CDs altogether? I wasn't saying that using peer to peer services is a legit alternative, which I said in my first post. I would have a problem with iTMS if Apple was marking up the prices to $2 a song, and $20 an album, but they aren't. Their prices are in line with other online music stores. Microsoft, on the other hand, is a whole other story. Back in the days of DOS 6/Win 3, Microsoft FORCED computer manufacturers to purchases DOS if they wanted a copy of Windows, even though there were better and cheaper alternatives to MS-DOS from Digital and others.

After all, there was never anything to stop you from downloading alternative browsers or Real Player/QT to replace WMP.
How about the fact that a 5-15 MB download on dialup for say RealPlayer, or QT would be out of the question for the average user. Are you going to wait for that program to download, tying up your phone line, or are you just going to use the Microsoft version that they conveniently installed on your computer for you?

Apple isn't removing the competition through strong arm tactics. If you don't want to use the iTMS, don't use it. Don't want an iPod because you can't use it with other music stores online? Go buy a Dell DJ, or an iRiver, or Creative Zen, or one of the tonnes of other players out there that do work with all the online stores.

Just like M$/IBM won marketshare with its superior experience? M$/IBM, after all, wrested market share dominance away from Apple in the PC market. Since taking over, however, M$ has used dubious tactics to retain that market share. Apple is doing the same thing with portable music players.
Really? How so? Does Apple force you to use an iPod instead of any other player on the market? Does Apple force you to use iTMS? Microsoft forced the removal of competitor's products from computers shipping with Windows. Apple installs Microsoft products as the default installation upon shipping. So Apple hasn't opened the iTMS to other players, upon which they would have to add support for other devices, and they've kept the iPod closed as well. The only company that has expressed interest in the iPod has been Real. If all the other online music stores were knocking down Apple's door, I'm sure it would be a different story. But, the question you must ask yourself is, "Has Microsoft told personal media player producers, that if you want a licence to use say Janus, that you must sign an agreement stating you will NEVER use a competitor's product?" Ex. the iPod.

but I'm not going to act like an Apple sycophant
That's pretty weak, even by usual Apple sycophant standards.
You're basically saying: "I'm not a sycophant... I am a sycophant."
it's like criticizing M$ for a trend of anti-competitive practices when only one a small portion of what they've done is actually illegal.
Hmmm, DOS/Win 3, Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player. Sounds like a trend to me.

sycophant
NOUN:
One who flatters another excessively: adulator, courtier, flatterer, toady.
 

Beeblebrox

macrumors member
Mar 27, 2005
42
0
mtscott said:
Really? How so? Does Apple force you to use an iPod instead of any other player on the market? Does Apple force you to use iTMS? Microsoft forced the removal of competitor's products from computers shipping with Windows.
Does M$ force you to use Windows instead of another OS? Does M$ force you to use IE?

You're applying two different standards, one to Apple and one to M$. Those hardware vendors didn't have to put Windows on their machines, after all. They could have used alternative OS's and they still can. Some vendors are pre-installing Linux.

But IF you want to use the most dominant product (Windows for M$ and Ipods for Apple) both companies are making alternatives more difficult to come by. The tactics are the same and the goal (a monopoly in the market) is the same.

One who flatters another excessively: adulator, courtier, flatterer, toady.
Oh, toady. That's a pretty good one. Apple toadies.

Meh, I still prefer sycophant.
 

Nermal

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 7, 2002
18,678
1,183
New Zealand
Beeblebrox said:
Those hardware vendors didn't have to put Windows on their machines, after all. They could have used alternative OS's and they still can.
Microsoft charges something like 3x the price per copy of Windows, if the hardware vendor also sells non-MS operating systems :eek:

Therefore, many vendors could not afford to sell non-Windows systems.
 

mtscott

macrumors member
Feb 7, 2005
46
0
Does M$ force you to use Windows instead of another OS? Does M$ force you to use IE?
Well, since Microsoft charges more for it's product if the vendor sells computers with different operating systems, forces or has forced vendors to remove Netscape, and other browsers, as well as RealPlayer, QuickTime, then yeah, clearly they're forcing customers to use Windows. Phone Dell right now and see if you can order a computer without Windows. Hell, for that matter, see if you can buy a computer from Dell without an OS period. If you can't then you're being forced to pay more for your computer to pay for the "Windows Tax" as it's been referred to. Dell, like any business, strives to reduce costs. If it costs them $X to sell Windows to say 2 million people a year, and they want to offer Linux to only 250,000 of their customers, their costs for Windows would then go up by $X*3. So, is Dell going to start selling computers with another OS, or are they going to force the customer to buy a copy of Windows, which they don't need and may not even want?

Apple is different in this regard, because no other business manufactures Apple hardware, and Apple doesn't licence the OS.

But IF you want to use the most dominant product (Windows for M$ and Ipods for Apple) both companies are making alternatives more difficult to come by. The tactics are the same and the goal (a monopoly in the market) is the same.
Well, since you voluntarily purchase an iPod your arguement makes no sense. You NEVER have to use the iTMS to enjoy your iPod, ever. And, how is Apple making other music players more difficult to come by? Did they tell BestBuy or any other retailers that they can't sell Dell DJ's, or iRivers, or Creative Zens? Did they charge more for the iPod becuase vendors sell competing products? Nope. If they did, I'd agree with you.

And, quite frankly, why would you want to use the iTMS with a player other than the iPod? If you like the iTMS so much, buy an iPod. Music stores are music stores, some offer more, and some offer less. But they all pretty much charge the same amount per song.
 

Timelessblur

macrumors 65816
Jun 26, 2004
1,086
0
mtscott said:
Well, since you voluntarily purchase an iPod your arguement makes no sense. You NEVER have to use the iTMS to enjoy your iPod, ever. And, how is Apple making other music players more difficult to come by? Did they tell BestBuy or any other retailers that they can't sell Dell DJ's, or iRivers, or Creative Zens? Did they charge more for the iPod becuase vendors sell competing products? Nope. If they did, I'd agree with you.

And, quite frankly, why would you want to use the iTMS with a player other than the iPod? If you like the iTMS so much, buy an iPod. Music stores are music stores, some offer more, and some offer less. But they all pretty much charge the same amount per song.
I have to poke one hole in it. If apple is so sure that you will buy an ipod if you like the iTMS why does stuff boughten from the iTMS only work on the iPod. the iPod does not play WMA files and the only way to load music on the iPod is though iTunes (other players I know you can just drop the stuff into a certain forlder and it plays it from their) iTunes only really sinks with the iPod no other player. Some people like the other players a lot more or think they are a better deal but they want to buy music from the iTMS store but find out that the other players can not play them. Also the iPod will not play songs from other music stores so the number one player and number one Music store on the market only play nice with eachother but no else that does it make it hard for another compainy to get in the market.
 

mtscott

macrumors member
Feb 7, 2005
46
0
Some people like the other players a lot more or think they are a better deal but they want to buy music from the iTMS store but find out that the other players can not play them. Also the iPod will not play songs from other music stores so the number one player and number one Music store on the market only play nice with eachother but no else that does it make it hard for another compainy to get in the market.
I agree 100% about the fact that the iPod or iTMS should be opened up, but I just don't see Apple doing that until they're forced to do so. The only thing I have to question is, why would someone want to buy music from iTMS to play on a non-iPod music player? The same songs are available from plenty other online music stores for the same/similar price.

I also agree with your comments (Timelessblur) about WMP being better than RealPlayer & QT. I just don't feel that Microsoft should dictate to computer vendors what they can and can't install on their own machines. Some people like WMP others RealPlayer, QT, WinAmp, etc. It's just typical of Microsoft, that instead of inovating, they force out competitors using unethical business policies.

I hope more governments force Microsoft to either remove their versions of media players/browsers, etc if they are going to insist on vendors removing competitor's products. If they want to still include IE or WMP, allow vendors to include QT or RealPlayer. If your product is that great, most likely people will use it. Just look at what's happening with Firefox. Once IE was dominant, it languished. Now that Firefox is putting SERIOUS pressure on Microsoft, they announce "Oh, well we're working right now on a great new version of IE." Yeah, and I've got an RV in my ass.
 

dotdotdot

macrumors 68020
Jan 23, 2005
2,381
31
When you get an OS...

Windows | Mac OSX
----------------------------------------------------
Internet Explorer | iTunes
Windows Media Player | QuickTime
----------------------------------------------------

Every OS 'forces' you to use something. There are alternatives, however.

Windows
------------------------
Allows you to turn Windows Media Player 'off.' I forgot about it until this morning when I needed to rip a CD outside of iTunes

OSX
-------------------------
Allows you to use a different media player and different jukebox software

If you think about it, we use things daily the OS makes you use. Windows - have a network? Thats Windows. Apple - have a network? Thats apple. Every OS is different.

The EU does this because they CAN, not because its mandatory. There is no point in this as Windows, while people don't like it (here, a Mac site) it is still a good, stable OS. And it uses their own coding and technology, even if it resembles OSX. (My thread on Longhorn matching OSX... that is true but Windows didn't COPY OSX, they added a technology from another company which OSX took from another company as well.) A windows box doesn't need to have software removed from it. It shouldn't.