Microsoft: Asia not playing fair over OS

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by steve, Sep 6, 2003.

  1. steve

    steve Guest

    You have to laugh about this one.

    Monpolist Microsoft is reacting to 3 Asian governments deciding they need to
    jointly develop a freely available open source operating system in order to
    provide themselves with a choice.

    Microsoft - a convicted illegal monopolist in the US and Europe - says this
    is "unfair".

    ......the irony clearly escapes Microsoft....

    "The market" includes governments tired of having no choice....

    http://news.com.com/2100-1016-5072069.html?part=dtx&tag=ntop
     
    steve, Sep 6, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. steve

    Peter Guest

    this quote is from steve of Sat, 06 Sep 2003 15:31 :
    > You have to laugh about this one.
    >
    > Monpolist Microsoft is reacting to 3 Asian governments deciding they need
    > to jointly develop a freely available open source operating system in
    > order to provide themselves with a choice.
    >
    > Microsoft - a convicted illegal monopolist in the US and Europe - says
    > this is "unfair".
    >
    > .....the irony clearly escapes Microsoft....
    >
    > "The market" includes governments tired of having no choice....
    > http://news.com.com/2100-1016-5072069.html?part=dtx&tag=ntop


    Yes - interesting.

    The article says MS say governments should keep out of it. Yet MS gets the
    government involved when it suits them, for example, in Peru ...
    http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,54141,00.html

    Of course, this is simply another case where MS seeks to deny customers any
    choice. The sad part is that they may succeed. It is possible that MS
    will lobby the US government (recipient of MS generous bribes / political
    donations) to pressure those Asian governments to change their minds, as
    part of some trade deal, perhaps?


    Peter
     
    Peter, Sep 6, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. steve

    Howard Guest

    Peter wrote:

    > Of course, this is simply another case where MS seeks to deny
    > customers any choice. The sad part is that they may succeed. It is
    > possible that MS will lobby the US government (recipient of MS
    > generous bribes / political donations) to pressure those Asian
    > governments to change their minds, as part of some trade deal,
    > perhaps?


    Or equally likely is the WTO will rule that it's a breach of existing trade
    rules.

    But, what if tose governments were to require open _data_ formats, that
    would not be a breach of WTO rules, and would achieve much the the same
    effect as requiring open _source_ .
     
    Howard, Sep 6, 2003
    #3
  4. steve

    Rupert Guest

    arguably this is unfair only if those countries legislate that this new
    operating system is the standard for the country and should be the only
    option selected, if that is the case then it's clearly anticompetitive and
    should be challenged.

    unlike MS and the browser war - MS just gave away the software, it did not
    stop people from using Netscape or others but the masses decided that IE was
    good enough and couldn't be bothered downloading anything else....



    "steve" <> wrote in message
    news:9yc6b.4666$...
    > You have to laugh about this one.
    >
    > Monpolist Microsoft is reacting to 3 Asian governments deciding they need

    to
    > jointly develop a freely available open source operating system in order

    to
    > provide themselves with a choice.
    >
    > Microsoft - a convicted illegal monopolist in the US and Europe - says

    this
    > is "unfair".
    >
    > .....the irony clearly escapes Microsoft....
    >
    > "The market" includes governments tired of having no choice....
    >
    > http://news.com.com/2100-1016-5072069.html?part=dtx&tag=ntop
     
    Rupert, Sep 8, 2003
    #4
  5. steve

    steve Guest

    Rupert allegedly said:

    > unlike MS and the browser war - MS just gave away the software, it did not
    > stop people from using Netscape or others but the masses decided that IE
    > was good enough and couldn't be bothered downloading anything else....


    The masses didn't know there was anything else.

    My non-PC-literate neighbours all confirm this. :)
     
    steve, Sep 8, 2003
    #5
  6. steve

    T.N.O. Guest

    "steve" wrote
    > The masses didn't know there was anything else.
    > My non-PC-literate neighbours all confirm this. :)


    so Microsoft is at fault for the masses lack of education... right.
     
    T.N.O., Sep 8, 2003
    #6
  7. "T.N.O." <> wrote in message news:3f5bda4e$...
    > "steve" wrote
    > > The masses didn't know there was anything else.
    > > My non-PC-literate neighbours all confirm this. :)

    >
    > so Microsoft is at fault for the masses lack of education... right.
    >


    Did you know that MS is being sued for anti-competitive practices for not promoting
    Linux with their Windows XP product?

    Tony.
     
    Anthony Neville, Sep 8, 2003
    #7
  8. steve

    Lennier Guest

    On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:27:57 +1200, Anthony Neville wrote:

    > Did you know that MS is being sued for anti-competitive practices for not
    > promoting Linux with their Windows XP product?



    Good!

    Didn't know that... but am pleased to hear it!

    Lennier
     
    Lennier, Sep 8, 2003
    #8
  9. steve

    Lennier Guest

    On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 00:04:19 +1200, Anthony Neville wrote:

    > Yet
    > somehow I believe given enough resources, you'd stoop low enough to be the
    > flag bearer for any company that tried it.


    I think that I'd "fly the flag" for any company which was honest,
    reputable, and encouraged cooperation and openness. And I'd put the
    boot into any company which discouraged the same.

    Micro$oft has not exhibited any of those qualities - certainly not in
    recent years as it has tried to obfuscate the faults of it's software and
    throw FUD around about non-Micro$oft programmes and systems.

    Lennier
     
    Lennier, Sep 8, 2003
    #9
  10. steve

    Lennier Guest

    On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 23:19:59 +1200, Anthony Neville wrote:

    >> > Did you know that MS is being sued for anti-competitive practices for
    >> > not

    >> promoting Linux with their Windows XP product?
    >>
    >> nope... post the link.

    >
    > I made it up... Western justice has become so riddled with corruption
    > such a scenario would be quite believable.


    NZ's judicial system is NOT "so riddled with corruption"!

    Lennier
     
    Lennier, Sep 8, 2003
    #10
  11. steve

    T.N.O. Guest

    "Anthony Neville" wrote
    > > > Did you know that MS is being sued for anti-competitive practices for

    not
    > > promoting Linux with their Windows XP product?


    > > nope... post the link.


    > I made it up... Western justice has become so riddled with corruption

    such a scenario
    > would be quite believable.


    well I fell for it... wasn't there something about Netscape during the
    browser wars that MS had to mention them in windows 95?
     
    T.N.O., Sep 8, 2003
    #11
  12. steve

    T.N.O. Guest

    "Lennier" wrote
    > > I made it up... Western justice has become so riddled with corruption
    > > such a scenario would be quite believable.

    >
    > NZ's judicial system is NOT "so riddled with corruption"!


    really... you live in an ideal world Lennier....
     
    T.N.O., Sep 8, 2003
    #12
  13. steve

    Gavin Tunney Guest

    On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 21:27:57 +1200, "Anthony Neville"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"T.N.O." <> wrote in message news:3f5bda4e$...
    >> "steve" wrote
    >> > The masses didn't know there was anything else.
    >> > My non-PC-literate neighbours all confirm this. :)

    >>
    >> so Microsoft is at fault for the masses lack of education... right.
    >>

    >
    >Did you know that MS is being sued for anti-competitive practices for not promoting
    >Linux with their Windows XP product?
    >


    Heh, good one Tony.

    The one that always cranked my handle was MS's use of the desktop to
    promote their other business activities, in particular the Microsoft
    Network.

    Any advertising guru will confirm that the Windows desktop is the most
    valuable piece of real estate in the world, an advertising billboard
    like no-one has ever seen before. Same applies to other practices like
    setting msn as the home page on internet explorer. The likes of our
    Commerce Commission are so effing useless & clueless they completely
    failed to notice that MS were gaining a monstrously unfair competitive
    advantage there, and nothing was ever done about it. Every new PC I
    came across or set up I used to delete all references to MS stuff,
    because I knew most newbies would sooner or later click on the links.

    About the only good was the MS Network was so ridiculously overpriced,
    at about $18 per hour when Win95 came out, that few people ever used
    it past the free trial period. But I know for a fact that a lot of
    people did sign up for it, could always tell because the desktop icon
    changed once you'd connected to msn.

    Gavin
     
    Gavin Tunney, Sep 8, 2003
    #13
  14. steve

    T.N.O. Guest

    "Bret" wrote
    > >> > I made it up... Western justice has become so riddled with

    corruption
    > >> > such a scenario would be quite believable.
    > >>
    > >> NZ's judicial system is NOT "so riddled with corruption"!

    > >
    > >really... you live in an ideal world Lennier....
    > >

    > I would describe it as a fantasy world after a statement like that.


    heh, yeah, but I don't like using the word "fantasy" in this group... Roger
    seems to think we are all little boys who play with playstations... kinda
    worrying.
     
    T.N.O., Sep 8, 2003
    #14
  15. "Lennier" <> wrote in message
    news:pan.2003.09.08.12.58.54.937544@TRACKER...
    > On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 00:04:19 +1200, Anthony Neville wrote:
    >
    > > Yet
    > > somehow I believe given enough resources, you'd stoop low enough to be the
    > > flag bearer for any company that tried it.

    >
    > I think that I'd "fly the flag" for any company which was honest,
    > reputable, and encouraged cooperation and openness. And I'd put the
    > boot into any company which discouraged the same.


    Oh, you are ~for~ honest and reputable companies. Cobblers. Your hatred of
    Microsoft is so intense, you'd back any louse of a company which having failed
    to gain market share in the free market uses the government to grab some of it
    from Microsoft. That you responded by saying "Good" when I said Microsoft was
    being sued for not promoting Linux alongside WinXP proves you would wave
    the flag for a company that lacked honesty and reputation so long as the boot
    of government gets put into Microsoft. With regards to your idea of cooperation
    and openness, well, from a fanatical Linux bot and open-source advocate it could
    mean that companies which make it clear they prefer closed-source as opposed
    to open-source are the unclean, the enemy, or have "gone bad". It is possible
    that if the open-source concept ever becomes mainstream, we would begin
    seeing people crawling out of the woodwork demanding that governments
    legislate against the remaining companies wanting to keep their source code
    private property.

    > Micro$oft has not exhibited any of those qualities - certainly not in
    > recent years as it has tried to obfuscate the faults of it's software and
    > throw FUD around about non-Micro$oft programmes and systems.


    So Microsoft fights to keep its property closed sourced, and publically denounces
    open-source because it is a threat to them commercially. I don't care! That's
    business. You know who has the monopoly on FUD, Lennier? Our politicians
    and political lobby groups do. Not Microsoft. Microsoft doesn't even rate
    against them. I do care about any security holes in Microsoft's software known
    to Microsoft which it has kept tight lipped about but has neglected to fix. That ~is~
    a good reason to stick the boot in.

    Tony.
     
    Anthony Neville, Sep 9, 2003
    #15
  16. "Gavin Tunney" <> wrote in message news:...
    > On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 21:27:57 +1200, "Anthony Neville"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >"T.N.O." <> wrote in message news:3f5bda4e$...
    > >> "steve" wrote
    > >> > The masses didn't know there was anything else.
    > >> > My non-PC-literate neighbours all confirm this. :)
    > >>
    > >> so Microsoft is at fault for the masses lack of education... right.
    > >>

    > >
    > >Did you know that MS is being sued for anti-competitive practices for not promoting
    > >Linux with their Windows XP product?
    > >

    >
    > Heh, good one Tony.
    >
    > The one that always cranked my handle was MS's use of the desktop to
    > promote their other business activities, in particular the Microsoft
    > Network.
    >
    > Any advertising guru will confirm that the Windows desktop is the most
    > valuable piece of real estate in the world, an advertising billboard
    > like no-one has ever seen before. Same applies to other practices like
    > setting msn as the home page on internet explorer. The likes of our
    > Commerce Commission are so effing useless & clueless they completely
    > failed to notice that MS were gaining a monstrously unfair competitive
    > advantage there, and nothing was ever done about it. Every new PC I
    > came across or set up I used to delete all references to MS stuff,
    > because I knew most newbies would sooner or later click on the links.
    >
    > About the only good was the MS Network was so ridiculously overpriced,
    > at about $18 per hour when Win95 came out, that few people ever used
    > it past the free trial period. But I know for a fact that a lot of
    > people did sign up for it, could always tell because the desktop icon
    > changed once you'd connected to msn.


    Screw the Commerse Commission! The Windows OS is Microsoft's
    baby. If it chose to plaster Wall-mart icons over the desktop, implant
    AOL services into Internet Explorer, or advertised Chicken McNuggets
    in the Start menu, well that is Microsoft's prerogative. We may curse MS
    for doing it, but MS owns MS Windows, and I would NEVER propose
    violating anyone's private property rights no matter what the size of
    their business.

    Tony.
     
    Anthony Neville, Sep 9, 2003
    #16
  17. "Gavin Tunney" <> wrote in message news:...
    > On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 21:27:57 +1200, "Anthony Neville"
    > <> wrote:
    > >
    > >Did you know that MS is being sued for anti-competitive practices for not promoting
    > >Linux with their Windows XP product?
    > >

    >
    > Heh, good one Tony.
    >
    > The one that always cranked my handle was MS's use of the desktop to
    > promote their other business activities, in particular the Microsoft
    > Network.
    >
    > Any advertising guru will confirm that the Windows desktop is the most
    > valuable piece of real estate in the world, an advertising billboard
    > like no-one has ever seen before. Same applies to other practices like
    > setting msn as the home page on internet explorer. The likes of our
    > Commerce Commission are so effing useless & clueless they completely
    > failed to notice that MS were gaining a monstrously unfair competitive
    > advantage there, and nothing was ever done about it. Every new PC I
    > came across or set up I used to delete all references to MS stuff,
    > because I knew most newbies would sooner or later click on the links.
    >
    > About the only good was the MS Network was so ridiculously overpriced,
    > at about $18 per hour when Win95 came out, that few people ever used
    > it past the free trial period. But I know for a fact that a lot of
    > people did sign up for it, could always tell because the desktop icon
    > changed once you'd connected to msn.


    Screw the Commerse Commission! The Windows OS is Microsoft's
    baby. If it chose to plaster Wall-mart icons over the desktop, implant
    AOL services into Internet Explorer, or advertised Chicken McNuggets
    in the Start menu, well that is Microsoft's prerogative. We may curse MS
    for doing it, but MS owns MS Windows, and I would NEVER propose
    violating anyone's private property rights no matter what the size of
    their business.

    Tony.
     
    Anthony Neville, Sep 9, 2003
    #17
  18. "Olson Johnson" <> wrote in message news:p...
    > On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:20:15 +1200, Anthony Neville wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > Think about this. If you want to people to know about a product you have got to
    > > advertise it. This is so rudimentary I should not have to even mention it to a grown
    > > man. Radio, TV, mainstream newpapers and magazines are the places
    > > to advertise to the masses,

    >
    > Something like this ?
    >
    > http://koobox.com/
    >
    > or this
    >
    >

    http://www.walmart.com/catalog/sear...ndows&Continue.x=0&Continue.y=0&Continue=Find
    >
    > Its not my personal cup of tea, but I assume its the type of thing you are
    > talking about.


    Yeah, Lindows has the right idea.

    > All the stuff is there, different vendors are selling to different
    > markets.
    > Redhat Suse Mandrake etc are geared up to sell for business use.
    > Packaging for the home consumer is different, and thats what Lindows is
    > doing.


    What Lindows is doing is good, but who else is doing it? Lindows is a tiny
    company. What about Redhat and Mandrake, or the so called United Linux
    organisation. Are they not interest in marketing a desktop OS to the masses?
    Microsoft is a natural monopoly, yet every man and his dog knows about
    Apple computers because Apple Corp knows how to market a product. But
    we see little or no advertising on Radio, TV, in papers and mainstream
    magazines about computers running Suse, Debian, Redhat or Mandrake.
    The real reason why Linux is an utter loser in the market place of desktop
    OSes is because a user friendly Linux desktop OS that even your momma
    can use was never taken seriously by any Linux company, except Lindows.
    That's why the masses have never heard of Linux even though it has been
    around for what must be close to a decade.

    Tony.
     
    Anthony Neville, Sep 9, 2003
    #18
  19. On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 17:47:35 +1200, Anthony Neville wrote:

    >
    > "Olson Johnson" <> wrote in message news:p...
    >> On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:20:15 +1200, Anthony Neville wrote:
    >>
    >> >
    >> > Think about this. If you want to people to know about a product you have got to
    >> > advertise it. This is so rudimentary I should not have to even mention it to a grown
    >> > man. Radio, TV, mainstream newpapers and magazines are the places
    >> > to advertise to the masses,

    >>
    >> Something like this ?
    >>
    >> http://koobox.com/
    >>
    >> or this
    >>
    >>

    > http://www.walmart.com/catalog/sear...ndows&Continue.x=0&Continue.y=0&Continue=Find
    >>
    >> Its not my personal cup of tea, but I assume its the type of thing you are
    >> talking about.

    >
    > Yeah, Lindows has the right idea.
    >
    >> All the stuff is there, different vendors are selling to different
    >> markets.
    >> Redhat Suse Mandrake etc are geared up to sell for business use.
    >> Packaging for the home consumer is different, and thats what Lindows is
    >> doing.

    >
    > What Lindows is doing is good, but who else is doing it? Lindows is a tiny
    > company. What about Redhat and Mandrake, or the so called United Linux
    > organisation. Are they not interest in marketing a desktop OS to the masses?
    > Microsoft is a natural monopoly, yet every man and his dog knows about
    > Apple computers because Apple Corp knows how to market a product. But
    > we see little or no advertising on Radio, TV, in papers and mainstream
    > magazines about computers running Suse, Debian, Redhat or Mandrake.
    > The real reason why Linux is an utter loser in the market place of desktop
    > OSes is because a user friendly Linux desktop OS that even your momma
    > can use was never taken seriously by any Linux company, except Lindows.
    > That's why the masses have never heard of Linux even though it has been
    > around for what must be close to a decade.
    >
    > Tony.



    Because no one has a monopoly in Linux, companies are free to focus on
    particular user groups. Its not a good idea for everyone in the bazaar to
    sell the same thing.
    Redhat and Mandrake are distributions but their core business is not the
    home user.
    Thats the niche that Lindows has chosen because this is the time at which
    home computer users are starting to become aware of Linux.
    Redhat Debian Suse and Mandrake have helped develop the body of software
    that has made Lindows possible, so all Lindows has had to do is develop a
    sort of a home user interface layer.

    Lindows is KDE on Debian with that home user interface layer.
    Its pretty much how I build my own desktop straight off the debian
    archives, without Click n Go, because everything is already available that
    I need. Lindows is the convenience food version.
    The learning curve for Linux is quite steep at the start, and then it
    rapidly becomes quite easy. There has not yet been a big payoff for
    smoothing out that curve, and Lindows is the first Linux product to make
    that its sole purpose.

    The masses have heard of Unix, its known to be scary and its been around
    forever.
    Most people who know what Linux is but haven't used it are aware that it
    is related to Unix and therefore scary.
    It will be interesting to see what a few more years of exposure to
    products like Lindows does to change that public perception.
     
    Olson Johnson, Sep 9, 2003
    #19
  20. steve

    Gavin Tunney Guest

    On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 12:33:07 +1200, "Anthony Neville"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"Gavin Tunney" <> wrote in message news:...
    >> On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 21:27:57 +1200, "Anthony Neville"
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >> >
    >> >"T.N.O." <> wrote in message news:3f5bda4e$...
    >> >> "steve" wrote
    >> >> > The masses didn't know there was anything else.
    >> >> > My non-PC-literate neighbours all confirm this. :)
    >> >>
    >> >> so Microsoft is at fault for the masses lack of education... right.
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> >Did you know that MS is being sued for anti-competitive practices for not promoting
    >> >Linux with their Windows XP product?
    >> >

    >>
    >> Heh, good one Tony.
    >>
    >> The one that always cranked my handle was MS's use of the desktop to
    >> promote their other business activities, in particular the Microsoft
    >> Network.
    >>
    >> Any advertising guru will confirm that the Windows desktop is the most
    >> valuable piece of real estate in the world, an advertising billboard
    >> like no-one has ever seen before. Same applies to other practices like
    >> setting msn as the home page on internet explorer. The likes of our
    >> Commerce Commission are so effing useless & clueless they completely
    >> failed to notice that MS were gaining a monstrously unfair competitive
    >> advantage there, and nothing was ever done about it. Every new PC I
    >> came across or set up I used to delete all references to MS stuff,
    >> because I knew most newbies would sooner or later click on the links.
    >>
    >> About the only good was the MS Network was so ridiculously overpriced,
    >> at about $18 per hour when Win95 came out, that few people ever used
    >> it past the free trial period. But I know for a fact that a lot of
    >> people did sign up for it, could always tell because the desktop icon
    >> changed once you'd connected to msn.

    >
    >Screw the Commerse Commission! The Windows OS is Microsoft's
    >baby. If it chose to plaster Wall-mart icons over the desktop, implant
    >AOL services into Internet Explorer, or advertised Chicken McNuggets
    >in the Start menu, well that is Microsoft's prerogative. We may curse MS
    >for doing it, but MS owns MS Windows, and I would NEVER propose
    >violating anyone's private property rights no matter what the size of
    >their business.
    >


    Get a grip Anthony, the major activity of government is to 'violate'
    private property rights.

    If you have a read of the Commerce Act you'll find a section in it
    somewhere covering 'misuse of a dominant position in the market'.
    Using a virtual monopoly in one market to (unfairly) gain commercial
    advantage in another market would qualify for that I think. There's
    quite sound reasons our govt made that illegal, competition is an
    economic benefit and allowing a large multi-national player to
    dominate our markets thru economic might is not in our interests.

    It's all academic now anyway, MSN got their free advertising while
    every other ISP had to pay for theirs. They just didn't get any free
    advertising via me, I always deleted it.......which of course was MY
    prerogative ;-)

    Gavin
     
    Gavin Tunney, Sep 9, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. SnowMan
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    488
    Cindy Winegarden
    Feb 17, 2004
  2. NFL fan
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    420
    Bret81C
    Dec 11, 2004
  3. Photo

    Asia and South East Asia digital Photo galleries

    Photo, Aug 28, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    341
    Clyde Torres
    Aug 28, 2004
  4. E. Scrooge

    You're Not Wrong Fair Go.

    E. Scrooge, Oct 29, 2003, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    354
  5. Theo Markettos

    VOIP over VPN over TCP over WAP over 3G

    Theo Markettos, Feb 3, 2008, in forum: UK VOIP
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    924
    Theo Markettos
    Feb 14, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page