I may be wrong, I've not read up in great detail, but when they were forced to release Windows-N without Media Player I don't believe they were also forced to remove the versions of windows with it in from European shelves, just it had to be an option.Originally Posted by menthel
I think you will find their multi hundreds of millions of dollars fines tell them otherwise! They could bundle it all together BUT then get the EU fine them again. What would you choose?
I don't think I missed the point at all. See my previous post (to this) about upgrade licence versus installing over an existing version.Saracen, you miss the point on the upgrade editions. These can be installed as clean install, you just have to enter your vista key. Same thing went for the XP to Vista editions. It was more of a way to reward loyality I guess, but seems to have been halted.
Also, we will see vendors putting their own choice of browser on but what are we supposed to do when we install our new OS? (Ps this is a flippant comment, I do actually know what to do!)
I actually quite like the idea of a completely decluttered install with options on what to install. I guess that is why I found putting ubuntu onto my netbook sucha breath of fresh air!
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, or you're reading me wrong, but what the article said seemed to be about not physically installing over the top, and having to do a clean install, not about whether upgrade licences will be available, or just full copies.
I can't see MS being stupid enough to try to force everyone to buy full copies. The resentment that would cause, and probably even the increase in piracy from users with legit copies would be counter-productive. Of course, I may be wrong, but that's how I read it.
That was because it was already in the market. They now have the precedence of the previous ruling and further legal action from the EU to contend with. I don't think they had too much of a choice.
Not around too often!
You could be right!
Not around too often!
Just a facetious comment on my behalf (hence the) as I'd be surprised if there weren't some little 'Download IE' link tucked away somewhere or other.*
Not exactly environmentally friendly though if they're expecting all Europeans to effectively need two lots of media now (Windows 7 dvd + IEx cd) when they would've needed just one.
I'm experiencing something I never thought possible.. I feel.. sympathy.. for Microsoft.. I need to lie down...
I'm a Firefox/Chrome user anyway but this measure strikes me as plain dumb.. maybe Microsoft are just playing awkward to get a bit of payback on the E.U...? Oooh, there goes that sympathy feeling.. ahh.. much better...
*other browsers are available.
I can understand! What would suit me would be IE installed so that I can download what I need and then obliterate it completely from my system. Something that can be difficult! However (being contriversial here!) I don't mind IE8 at all!I can understand them being cautious, however I still think they are being overly awkward to make a point. Might just be me though
Not around too often!
CountStex is making the same point I did.
MS and the EU have been knocking heads in courtrooms for years over this. As I (and he, it seems) understand it, the EU required MS to make versions that didn't have the browswer installed by default available. So MS could have made it an option the user had to select at install time or it didn't get installed. As I understand the EU ruling, that would have sufficed, and it was it being installed as default that was deemed to be anti-competitive and abusing the market dominance of Windows to lock down the browser market.
MS, however, seem to have taken it quite a large step further than that by not providing them in the version at all. Unless I'm wrong in that that's taking it further than the EU actually required, then MS seem to be poking the EU in the eye. And that's the point we were making .... do MS actually need to go that far, or are they being bloody-minded for the sake it it? Dunno. I'm sceptical and suspicious though.
CountStex (12-06-2009)
Now that I would go for! However I couldn't see microsoft allowing all any sundry to include there software!
Not around too often!
CountStex (12-06-2009)
CountStex is making the same point I did.
MS and the EU have been knocking heads in courtrooms for years over this. As I (and he, it seems) understand it, the EU required MS to make versions that didn't have the browswer installed by default available. So MS could have made it an option the user had to select at install time or it didn't get installed. As I understand the EU ruling, that would have sufficed, and it was it being installed as default that was deemed to be anti-competitive and abusing the market dominance of Windows to lock down the browser market.
MS, however, seem to have taken it quite a large step further than that by not providing them in the version at all. Unless I'm wrong in that that's taking it further than the EU actually required, then MS seem to be poking the EU in the eye. And that's the point we were making .... do MS actually need to go that far, or are they being bloody-minded for the sake it it? Dunno. I'm sceptical and suspicious though.
Good point. However I tend to think that they do need to go that far. The EU really do seem to have something against microsoft and I think they be making an example of them. However, that is my interpretation of the current situation. Again, I think we will have to wait to see what the Eu has up its sleeve. I do find it strange that they go after microsoft like this but leave apple alone. Now that is a real software monopoly!
(Ps I am a happy user of windows, osx and linux, so I am hopefully not biased!)
Oops, I have just noticed the multiquote button!!!
Not around too often!
Oh for the love of god. I wish the EU would stop meddling with Microsoft. Leave them be.
Why don't they hassle Apple for including Safari in their OS? They see Microsoft as a cash cow.
And now the Russians are at it too, they've just started a case against Microsoft for taking XP off the market.
Indeed. Even if that story is dead right about what MS intend now, it may have changed by the time W7 actually gets shipped.You could be right!
I also wouldn't put it past MSs PR people to put out a story about these versions with the explicit intent of stirring up anti-EU rants. It also, of course, keeps the publicity pot boiling over Win7 itself, and might even manage to make news headlines .... and MS can then retreat, later, to a more rational position, or can "respond to public pressure" and do it the way they'd been intending to do it from day 1, having milked the publicity in the meantime.
Cynic? Me? Dunno what you mean??
Don't forget why this all happened in the first place. Microsoft were using their market dominance to force all competition out of business, in every arena they could, by fair means or foul. Now they can only use fair means, which is good for all of us in the long run.
Then going by that you would have to force all competitors to run in a fair market and force Apple and all Linux distro's to strip out the browsers in their OS's to. Can't have one rule for MS and one rule for the rest.
Personally I think all they need to do is strip out IE and Media player and put links on the start menu or allow you to select at installation of the OS if you want to install these two programs. They already do it on Vista with links to download MSN (Windows Live Messenger)
WHAT THE HELL?
So by taking an obsolete product off the market, i could be sued?
But its my product, not yours... its outside of the product cycle, surely its down to the product designer to decide what to do with their product
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Steam: (