Quote:
|
Originally Posted by towny
But it is a very narrow-minded view of what is good for the consumer. It is also short-sighted.
Allowing Microsoft to abuse its effective monopoly in this way harms the ability of competing products to get into the market. It won't wash to say that the best will win; history is littered with examples of how that is not the case. So for short-term gain, the consumer risks being forced to put up with products that are less good than they could be in the longer term.
I'm glad you added 'for a price', because nothing that is bundled with Windows is free. The developers who made the media player have to have their wages paid from somewhere. That cost is passed on to the consumer in the price of windows itself - so you pay for Windows media player whether you want it or not. Since when was forcing someone to pay for something they don't want and have no intention of using, considered good for them?
Frankly, I think the regulated competition of Europe is a far more equitable way to do business than the American style.
|
So your saying Microsoft should not be allowed to add software into there own system
If you dont like it get Linux.