Software bundling (was Re: [hblug] Windoze & The docx problem)

[Rene Bartosh]

Replies inline:

On 16/04/2008, Perry Spiller <p.spiller at xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
>  Interesting viewpoints.
>
>  ----------------Earlier, Tony commented--------------------
>
> How is bundling IE (A free product) with Windows, any different from
> bundling Firefox with Ubuntu?
>  Really? How valid is such a comparison, eh?
>  I'd always understood 'bundling' to be different
>  to being a critical component of an OS.
>
>  IE.  (pun intended)
>
>  Try removing IE from windoze (if you can) and
>  let us know how you get on, afterwards.

Personally I think part of the problem lies with the OEMs rather than
with Microsoft. While it is not practically possible to remove IE from
Windows, it is certainly possible to remove it as the default browser
and remove any and all shortcuts pointing at it. I think a lot of
users have no idea that alternatives to IE exist because OEM's never
bundle any other browsers. The same arguement applies to Office and
any other software that is generally exclusively pre-loaded.

Don't get me started on the amount of other useless crap brand-name
OEMs include on retail-line PCs, and their practices of shipping
systems with software whose requirements far exceed the hardware they
are shipped with (XP on 128mb ram, Vista on 512mb etc).

Some food for though, let the flamewar continue :P

kirjava (wearing his cheeky flameware hat, and no other hat)



>  Then we can compare how that relates to uninstalling
>  firefox on Ubuntu.
>
>  Can one get a modern windoze OS to work without IE?
>
>  If not, where's the consumer choice?
>
>
> I don't know why you drag Telecom into it - they are offering their services
> on a level playing field right now. Opening it up as fast as they can within
> reason (ie. not allowing full access for everyone to everything at one time,
> as things would just collapse and degenerate) - they were set targets for
> opening up exchanges, and have massively exceeded that target, several ISPs
> publicly saying they are extremely happy with the extra rate at which
> Telecom is ramping things up for them. They are certainly not locking
> anybody out of anything at the moment.
>  Drag?
>
>  It seemed like a valid comparison, to me.
>  And the history of Telecom and Clear and
>  traipsing through the Courts? Are you saying
>  that you're unfamiliar with this?
>
>  Besides, they're cunning bastards. While
>  keeping the pollies distracted with all sorts
>  of smoke and mirrors issues, they've been
>  quietly building the NGN, which will almost
>  completely outflank all the local loop unbundling
>  posturing that's going on.
>
>  ADSL stuff in every cabinet for every ISP?
>  I doubt they could afford it.
>
>
> So, just because less than 50% of a disputed organisation think MS is
> anti-competitive, doesn't necessarily make it so.
>  Agreed. So what? The EC is quite a nasty
>  organisation, but at least they're largely free
>  of unsavoury campaign donations and like
>  manipulations that go on in USA.
>
>  Perry
>  ________________________________
>
>
>
>  On 16/04/2008, at 4:31 PM, Perry Spiller wrote:
>
>
> There is another perspective, too.
>
>  Earlier, it was suggested that certain criticisms of MS
>  are unjustified, on the basis that it's just 'business.'
>
>  I demur.
>
>  For MS (like Telecon NZ) it's not just doing business
>  on the fabled level playing field." I.e. it's not anything
>  like offering products and services in an open-to-all
>  business environment, where all compete on a more
>  or less equal footing. No.
>
>  It's all about structuring and engineering things in any
>  way that locks out competitors from competing on the
>  basis of service, price and features. Would the act of
>  incorporating IE in the OS, (rather than an add-on, like
>  Word or Office), be an example?
>
>  It's called anti-competitive behaviour, in the same way
>  the Telecon NZ fought competition in the law courts,
>  rather than in the marketplace. That MS got whacked
>  with a hefty fine by the European Commission (play
>  lunch money, really, to MS) does seem to show that
>  the HBLUG list members' criticisms of MS have some
>  allies with a common perspective on such things.
>
>  Perry
>
>  ----------------Earlier, you commented--------------------
>
> I guess some of the key things that come through this thread are the
> following:
>
>  - Love it or hate it, MS has the biggest slice of the office suite pie.
>  - Vista with trial versions of Office/Word is a reality
>  - Most C level execs or managers with their new laptops supplied by the
> corner computer store don't understand that if they make a document in Word
> 07 that Word 03 users wont be able to read it.
>  - This incompatibility between versions floats to the top quickly in an
> office environment with different OEM copies installed, but in a single user
> environment sometimes only comes when the send files externally.
>  - There is a compatibility toolkit from MS for this, you can find it here:
> http://www.microsoft.com/nz/office/preview/beta/converter.mspx
>  - It would be nice when this happens (as has happened before with MS
> Office), that the version that makes the departure saves by default using
> format n-1 (i.e. .doc) while making version n available for selection
> (.docx)  Then in the next release, with the new format being more widely
> adopted, perhaps then make it the default.
>
>  >From a personal perspective, our business has been running on staroffice
> and openoffice for the last 8 years, so it can be done.  Some core MS
> functionality is missing from OOo that would be nice (text to columns in OOo
> Calc anyone?), and some MS Word formatting that doesn't always work out
> tight, but overall, a very accomplished package.
> _______________________________________________
>  HBLUG mailing list
>  HBLUG at linux.net.nz
>  http://www.linux.net.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hblug
>
>


-- 
>From Rene Bartosh (Gmail account) <kirjava at gmail.com>
Personal: http://kirjava.net.nz/
Work: http://eksion.net/