[merged] Realplayer 10

Originally Posted by Defiant

Er your forgetting something here aren't you. That copy of Windows your using now is not yours. Its Microsoft's you have just paid for the licence and that's all. What they put in there software should be there business and only there business. No court should have the right to tell them otherwise. The only thing I would like to see on the next version of windows is a choice when installing like the 95/98 days

Why? It's their product, surely they know it best and should be left to decide what is installed on your machine?

[downquark1]

Originally Posted by Defiant

Er your forgetting something here aren't you. That copy of Windows your using now is not yours. Its Microsoft's you have just paid for the licence and that's all. What they put in there software should be there business and only there business. No court should have the right to tell them otherwise. The only thing I would like to see on the next version of windows is a choice when installing like the 95/98 days

In that case your giving your personal information to a machine that you legally have no control over.

[Defiant]

Originally Posted by downquark1

In that case your giving your personal information to a machine that you legally have no control over.

But atleast at this present time I don't have any third parties forcing Microsoft to put there rubbish on the OS. I have what I need on there now and that doe's me. I wouldn't like to have x-amount of players,browser's,picture editors etc. Christ the operating system would need to come with a new 120GB hdd

[Lew]

Originally Posted by Defiant

But atleast at this present time I don't have any third parties forcing Microsoft to put there rubbish on the OS. I have what I need on there now and that doe's me. I wouldn't like to have x-amount of players,browser's,picture editors etc. Christ the operating system would need to come with a new 120GB hdd

It's not about forcing MS to put stuff in the OS. I was referring to OEMs pre-installing stuff on their computers (like the way Compaq machines pre-install "Compaq Disgnostics for Windows"). No-one's talking about making MS put anything extra in the retail boxes of Windows.

HP are due to release their own MP3/MP4 player based on Apple's iPod. This will require their machines to have QuickTime/iTunes pre-installed. Under MS' previous licensing scheme (which I think has been stopped by the DoJ) they would not have been allowed to do this. Seeing as how OEMs aren't allowed to supply a Windows install CD with their machines (they have to provide a "system restore" CD that installs a pre-set Windows installation) this would not affect what MS would have to put on the standard WinXP CD.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Mimizuku no Lew

Seeing as how OEMs aren't allowed to supply a Windows install CD with their machines (they have to provide a "system restore" CD that installs a pre-set Windows installation) this would not affect what MS would have to put on the standard WinXP CD.

Bizarre as my Dell came with a full copy of windows, its on a dell printed CD but its still a full copy

[Defiant]

Originally Posted by dellwear

Bizarre as my Dell came with a full copy of windows, its on a dell printed CD but its still a full copy

Yep the place I worked at used to have Dell computers. Of course they had corp licence's but every box with a pc inside has a cd

[Lew]

Yeah, I just noticed that some of our HP machines come with a WinXP SP1 CD along with a restore CD (you have to use the 2 together). I'm sure I read a while back about OEMs not giving Windows CDs away (although maybe that's another thing they weren't allowed to do in Europe).

Originally Posted by Mimizuku no Lew

Yeah, I just noticed that some of our HP machines come with a WinXP SP1 CD along with a restore CD (you have to use the 2 together). I'm sure I read a while back about OEMs not giving Windows CDs away (although maybe that's another thing they weren't allowed to do in Europe).

I have a full Win XP CD at home - it came with Connectix Virtual PC. The box contains two discs. The first installs Virtual PC for Mac OSX, the second is the guest operating system you have chosen to buy, in my case Windows XP, although I could have chosen from a range of x86 compatible OSes. The documentation names Connectix Corp. as the OEM.

[Lew]

Now that's interesting. My copy of VPC (version 5) didn't come with a Win98 CD. The VPC setup program installed a pre-set disk image with Win98 preinstalled. It just came with a Win98 manual with the licence stuck to the back.

[Jarandco]

I actually got this last week - thanks for the link though! I find Realoneplayer perfectly fine to use i use it and windows media player?!

[Defiant]

Originally Posted by Mimizuku no Lew

Now that's interesting. My copy of VPC (version 5) didn't come with a Win98 CD. The VPC setup program installed a pre-set disk image with Win98 preinstalled. It just came with a Win98 manual with the licence stuck to the back.

Most likely just different deals on offer from Microsoft

[Jerrek]

Originally Posted by towny

I'm not sure what you mean by 'improve their products'?

Bundling extra functionality with Windows for free. Or even for a price. That is improving the product.

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Bundling extra functionality with Windows for free. Or even for a price. That is improving the product.

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.

[downquark1]

If hoover suddenly decided to make vacuum cleaners with built in coffee makers, would that be a anti-competition, since a customer usually buys a vacuum cleaner before a coffee maker?

[Defiant]

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.