 |
|
yavoon
|
|
Asher u kill every MS thread ever posted. u ever feel like just giving it a rest? I don't think anyone on the forum is as radical about anything as u r about MS.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by dv8ed
Which is why it's an absurd little metaphor...don't blame me when your metaphor breaks. |
I think you're just having a pretty huge brainfart here.
Car manufacturer = MS.
Dealership = OEM.
MS would bundle a basic internet browser, the manufacturer would bundle a muffler. You would agree that a computer without an internet browser and a car without a muffler is pretty absurd these days, right?
Now, would it be fair to consumers for the car manufacturer to ship no muffler with their cars (after all, doing so would hurt the aftermarket muffler makers), and an OS to come without a basic web browser?
You're right, it is absurd -- that's the point of the analogy. To illustrate just how absurd it is to stop including fundamental parts of products to protect "aftermarket industries" rather than what the consumers ought to be getting.
quote:
But, if the manufacturer prohibited dealerships from replacing their original mufflers with aftermarket mufflers (maybe the dealership gets kickbacks from the aftermarket, I don't know, like I said, it's your metaphor) then it would be illegal. Much as IE/Win tying was. |
I agree that the OEM licensing **** was wrong, as I've said before, but that has nothing to do with MS bundling IE. OEMs could ship Netscape with their products as well if they want. 
quote:
I'd suggest you abandon the bad metaphor and try thinking about the problem as it actually exists. |
I'd suggest you understand the metaphor before further making an ass out of yourself.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
I don't think it's very radical -- the US government agrees with me, and 90%+ of users seem to use it anyway.
The radical people here are UR and dv8ed, which insist you get no browser and acquire a "free download" through telekensis. |
the judge doesn't agree w/ u. but its completely beyond the point. I actually like discussion about MS and its monopoly and how we should handle it or other monopolies in the future.
BUT EVERY THREAD u just blow up into this huge flame war where its all asher posts and asher replies. I wouldn't mind some other form of discussion. maybe u can sit em out for a while? ur relentless.
I hope MS is paying u to murder all these threads.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Koyaanisqatsi
|
 |
of Maine paupers.
May 1999
time: 00:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
Now, would it be fair to consumers for the car manufacturer to ship no muffler with their cars (after all, doing so would hurt the aftermarket muffler makers), and an OS to come without a basic web browser? |
MS had a couple of options for doing this legally. They could have either allowed IE to be removed by OEMs, which they didn't, or allowed OEMs to install another browser alongside IE...which they also didn't do. The reason the metaphor is absurd is because it assumes that the OEM is not capable of installing a web browser of their own without MS bundling it with Windows. If the OEM installed a web browser, then the consumer gets the same thing in the end. Only then the OEM has a choice, and competition to become the OEM's default browser remains.
quote:
I agree that the OEM licensing **** was wrong, as I've said before, but that has nothing to do with MS bundling IE. OEMs could ship Netscape with their products as well if they want. |
No, they couldn't. That was the OEM licensing ****. See previous quotes from Jackson.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by dv8ed
MS had a couple of options for doing this legally. They could have either allowed IE to be removed by OEMs, which they didn't |
Which would've been stupid -- IE is a component of Windows, any application can just call the IE .dll and have an embedded web browser in their program. This is a very useful feature, at least to developers, and provides a standardized and guaranteed basic browser on every system.
quote:
or allowed OEMs to install another browser alongside IE...which they also didn't do. |
Stop living in the past -- this has been remedied now, and the Judge has even expressed satisfaction with MS' compliance.
quote:
The reason the metaphor is absurd is because it assumes that the OEM is not capable of installing a web browser of their own without MS bundling it with Windows. |
Again, you're living in the past -- it's true this wasn't possible years ago, I agree, but now it is.
quote:
No, they couldn't. That was the OEM licensing ****. See previous quotes from Jackson. |
I know they couldn't, and I know that was the OEM licensing ****, but that has been remedied now. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Koyaanisqatsi
|
|
of Maine paupers.
May 1999
time: 00:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
Which would've been stupid -- IE is a component of Windows, any application can just call the IE .dll and have an embedded web browser in their program. This is a very useful feature, at least to developers, and provides a standardized and guaranteed basic browser on every system. |
And MS did not have to build it that way. They did so to illegal leverage their OS monopoly.
quote:
Stop living in the past -- this has been remedied now, and the Judge has even expressed satisfaction with MS' compliance.
Again, you're living in the past -- it's true this wasn't possible years ago, I agree, but now it is.
I know they couldn't, and I know that was the OEM licensing ****, but that has been remedied now. |
And the discussion was on what killed Netscape, and what relevance that may have to bundling/tying AV products, remember? The thread is about the past.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Koyaanisqatsi
|
|
of Maine paupers.
May 1999
time: 00:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
What other way do you include a free webbrowser engine without bundling it, Einstein?  |
vbrunxxx.dll ring a bell?
But that wasn't what I was referring to. I was saying that IE did not need to be tied to Windows, including the "free webbrowser engine".
quote:
The thread is about the future, with Service Pack 2. It's only about the past if you don't have any real complaints about the issue, and want to throw red herrings in the ring and try your luck. |
So the past is of no relevance to the future? We can learn nothing by looking at our history?
Fascinating.
quote:
Here's the questions:
1) Do you believe anti-virus software is necessary for Windows computers?
2) Why do you believe consumers should have to pay and acquire these separate, from companies such as Symantec which basically force you to buy a new copy for $50 every year. |
Curious, I haven't seen an OEM machine sold in the last few years that doesn't have a virus scanner preinstalled. What do you believe is wrong with the current system? Consumers are getting AV software and there is competition to make a better product.
The question that was being raised was, will MS bundling AV software lead to a decline in the quality of AV software due to a lack of competition in the area? The discussion on IE/Netscape was relevant to that question. Frankly, MS has never shown itself overly competent in making security products that automagically work (as it would have to do should it bundle AV with Windows due to the fact that it won't be effective for end-users otherwise). I mean, look at how wonderful XP's built-in firewall is........ do you really want a company that can't produce good security software killing off the rest of the players in the area?
(And no, XP's firewall has not killed off other firewall software. From what I've seen though, that's more because end-users don't even know that the MS firewall exists, so when they're told they need a firewall, they go find one.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by dv8ed
vbrunxxx.dll ring a bell?
But that wasn't what I was referring to. I was saying that IE did not need to be tied to Windows, including the "free webbrowser engine". |
Ah, I get it -- MS could have just included the DLL and not given anyone a web browser.
This is, obviously, benefits consumers. 
Kudos, chap.
quote:
So the past is of no relevance to the future? We can learn nothing by looking at our history?
Fascinating. |
Fine, let's look at the history:
1) MS releases IE for free, Netscape follows suit --> Consumers benefit.
2) Since the OSes come with a free web browser, they can use this to download alternate webbrowsers such as Opera and Mozilla, and even set them to be their default browser if they so choose --> Consumers benefit.
3) Mozilla/Netscape is still around, KHTML and Opera are also around, giving consumers more internet browser choices now than ever before --> Consumers benefit.
So now that we've dealt with the past, why don't you explain to everyone why consumers shouldn't get basic anti-virus support for an OS that demands it? Why should they pay extra for it?
quote:
Curious, I haven't seen an OEM machine sold in the last few years that doesn't have a virus scanner preinstalled. |
Why, funny you mention that -- not four days ago I got a new laptop, with no anti-virus software installed. And it wasn't a cheap one, an IBM ThinkPad T40.
Whoosh goes your argument, huh. 
quote:
What do you believe is wrong with the current system? Consumers are getting AV software and there is competition to make a better product. |
So by MS building a basic antivirus software, adding another program to the mix, this somehow decreases competition?
Look: MS has said it'd be a basic anti-virus scanner, much like the basic firewall built into XP -- I don't see the firewall makers going out of business. Boo hoo.
And you blatantly ignored both of my questions, obviously because you know a simple answer would totally destroy your case.
quote:
I asked nice, u respond antagonistically. I don't think life is ever any clearer than that. |
Get a clue man -- you tell someone to shut up about a topic "nicely" and you don't call that antagonistically?
Why don't you fess up and admit the reason you don't actually engage in these debates is you've got the intellectual capacity of a retarded circus midget? 
Last edited by Asher on 18-08-2003 at 08:29
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
yavoon
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
It's hard to bait a fish that's too stupid to recognize what's food and what's not. |
=D
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Koyaanisqatsi
|
|
of Maine paupers.
May 1999
time: 00:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
Ah, I get it -- MS could have just included the DLL and not given anyone a web browser.
This is, obviously, benefits consumers. |
No, seriously, tell me why releasing it to developers and just giving away the runtime dll, like vbrun, would have been bad. Developers can still put out something like MyIE in that circumstance. MyIE being a better browser than IE, that would benefit consumers.
quote:
Fine, let's look at the history:
1) MS releases IE for free, Netscape follows suit --> Consumers benefit. |
Um. Um. Um. Want to try that the other way? And there is a difference between the short-term benefit of getting free stuff and the long term benefit of getting a better product.
quote:
2) Since the OSes come with a free web browser, they can use this to download alternate webbrowsers such as Opera and Mozilla, and even set them to be their default browser if they so choose --> Consumers benefit. |
*sigh* See above. Product tying, lack of choice at the OEM level, anticompetitive, etc.
quote:
3) Mozilla/Netscape is still around, KHTML and Opera are also around, giving consumers more internet browser choices now than ever before --> Consumers benefit. |
None of which have any impact on the PC browser market as a whole, and therefore create no pressure to make IE better. Have you perhaps noticed IE stagnating lately?
quote:
So now that we've dealt with the past, why don't you explain to everyone why consumers shouldn't get basic anti-virus support for an OS that demands it? Why should they pay extra for it? |
If, perhaps, MS put the effort of writing an AV package into, I don't know, debugging Windows, it might not demand AV support quite so much.
quote:
Why, funny you mention that -- not four days ago I got a new laptop, with no anti-virus software installed. And it wasn't a cheap one, an IBM ThinkPad T40. |
This is certainly an exception, not a rule. Go down to Best Buy or Circuit City or something.
quote:
So by MS building a basic antivirus software, adding another program to the mix, this somehow decreases competition?
Look: MS has said it'd be a basic anti-virus scanner, much like the basic firewall built into XP -- I don't see the firewall makers going out of business. Boo hoo.
And you blatantly ignored both of my questions, obviously because you know a simple answer would totally destroy your case. |
I ignored your questions because I already answered them. AV software is necessary. If MS wants to release a free AV scanner for download, go right for it. The question was product tying, which is bad for the overall quality of the software in that sector.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-08-2003 00:34
|
|