Micosoft in legal case - shock

[kingandy]

Guh.

Microsoft is accused of "abusing its dominant market position" by bundling Windows Media Player with the OS.  Their defence?

Linda Averett of Microsoft told the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg on Friday that many websites and software products would not work without the Windows Media Player.

She said that without the player, customers who buy computers with Windows "are very likely to feel deceived when they find that websites don't work".

Yeah.  No shit.  Well maybe you shouldn't be encouraging people to build websites that are wholly reliant on your software then, eh?  That's abuse of your market position, right there.

Comments

[kermix.livejournal.com]

Yeah, Internet Explorer, which is bundled with Windows, and likely operates under the assumption that it can download and install any Microsoft components it damn well pleases.

That just makes her statement even more bunk.

[gowhonker.livejournal.com]

But you get those Microsoft components for free!

Adjust your settings if it enrages you. Really, it's not like Bill Gates is putting a gun to your heads.

If you want to get annoyed at gross injustice and abuse of human rights, get involved in amnesty international.

[gowhonker.livejournal.com]

Yeah, i've just read the article - to me, it reads as "We, Real Networks, want people to buy our player. However, Microsoft give a functional and versatile player away free with Windows. We want the consumer to pay money for an operating system, and then pay more money for a player. As an extension of this, we want the consumer to install additional components which, the court has ruled, will not be 100% compatible with Microsoft's O/S. But we don't care, because we want money."

Admittedly, i've read between the lines, but as a consumer, i feel that there is sufficient choice in the market, and i enjoy having an O/S that gives me internet access, player, compatability with 99% of games on the market and additional bells and whistles which i don't actually care about.

[kermix.livejournal.com]

Actually, I'm not so much trying to express an opinion as to point out flawed logic in the woman's statement (as much of it as I see here, anyway). She argues that without WMP, people will think websites are "broken", but anyone who is likely to think that would probably be using IE (since it's included with Windows), and I see no reason for them to think that.

Believe me, I've seen the Microsoft lawsuit drama play out many times; it's about as pointless as the next U.S. election.

Oops! Did I say that? ^^;

[gowhonker.livejournal.com]

Most people are not computer informed. If they buy Windows that does include IE but does not include WMP then they will have problems with websites, and unless windows informs them they need additional components, then they will think the site is broken.

Plus it's frustrating, have to download something new every time you want to look at porn.