Microsoft trying to push its way into DVD (1 Viewer)

[Anthony_J]

My question really revolves around the end-user and the actual market implications.

I know the business drawbacks of a monopoly, but in this case, aren't the end users getting a great product at a reasonable price? There's absolutely no way that MS could force a substandard product on the public, is there?

Case in point is Windows - sure Unix or Linux are more stable and more flexible operating systems, but how much would the average consumer benefit from having a machine running those system? Windows (and before that, DOS) was accepted because it works well without an understanding of what's going on behind the scenes, even if it does have it's problems.

Changes in standards...I assume that we won't be moving backwards no matter what happens (although I'm not sure-footed in technology areas by any means), so what's wrong with an "all-in-one" set top box or any other technological change that Microsoft releases? It makes technology available to everybody, regardless of education, background, or ability, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

The real problem comes when the uneducated, etc. start dictating the advancements that we do see come to market or when those in power get lazy about product development because the public has to buy what they're pushing.

In this day and age, however, I really don't think that a substandard product would be blindly accepted by the public simply because there's no other choice. Standards become standards because they work well for a given task, not because a huge corporation forced them on people.

To me, it still seems to be a matter of principle.

And one more point - please, please do not take this to mean that I in any way sympathize with the "America haters" in the Middle East. I know this is an international board, but I'm writing from the American point of view, because that's what I know.

A lot of countries hate the US because, in their view, we are trying to force our way of life down their throats and are trying to get them assimilated into the American way of life. (Ironically, they often say this while eating in a McDonalds, or wearing American clothes.)

We, as Americans, think that they're totally off their rockers. We give them financial and humanitarian aid, and export our products, etc. to them that ultimately make their lives better.

This sounds strangely similar to the Microsoft situation, doesn't it? We complain and bitch about their power and tactics while using Windows or playing our Xboxes.

Sorry if the example upset anyone, it just seemed to be the clearest example of my point. I do respect everyone on this board and believe this to be one of the best boards on the net for it's maturity, atmospere, and insight.

 

[Ryan Spaight]

You can, however, buy a PC, and install Linux, BSD, or any other OS's on it yourself.

True, but you can't get one *without* Windows. That's my beef. If I want to use Linux, why should I pay for an XP license?

I don't necessarily want Linux pre-loaded, but I'd sure like the option of getting a machine with a blank hard drive and saving $100 or so.

(This is fun. I'm defending MS and bashing MS in the same thread. Time to change my medication.)

Ryan

 

[Joseph S]

Dell has since stopped preloading Linux. You can, however, buy a PC, and install Linux, BSD, or any other OS's on it yourself.

Yeah, but who needs preloaded. They no longer offer Linux and force you to buy Windows even if you have absolutely no use for it. What prevents them from selling you a machine with a bare hard drive?? M$!

 

[Anthony_J]

Who forces me to use Dell?

If I know enough to want Linux, I'll probably know enough to build my own machine, or find a non-national chain to build my machine for me without software preloaded. It should cost less than going through Dell or Gateway for a comparable machine, too.

Windows is the standard for the uneducated/uninterested public who just want to buy a computer and be done with it. It's user friendly, and fully functional (for their purposes, at least)

 

[Michael St. Clair]

You can buy a PC without Windows. It is called a Mac. And it is a 'Personal Computer'. You won't see Apple porting OSX to Intel, because Jobs tried that before with NEXT and he knows that the demand for alternative OSes on Intel hardware just isn't there.

Or you can buy a PC from a smaller 'whitebox' company, or build your own.

Bitching about Dell only selling Windows workstations is like bitching about McDonalds only selling Coke soft drinks. You don't have to eat at McDonalds, and you don't have to buy from Dell. If the average American is too stupid or too lazy to pursue alternatives, maybe the problem is the Great Society that has developed and not the fault of Microsoft.

You know, without Microsoft's competition, do you think we'd have iPods yet? Or the latest PalmOS? Competition is alive and well in the United States!

 

[Ryan Wright]

Windows is the standard for the uneducated/uninterested public who just want to buy a computer and be done with it.

What about people like my father, who don't know enough to build their own PC but already own a copy of Windows? Why should they be forced to buy another one? He doesn't use his old computer. It's OLD. It's sitting in a closet, collecting dust. Yet he had to buy another copy of Windows with his new computer. It's BS.

 

[Lance Nichols]

Dell has since stopped preloading Linux. You can, however, buy a PC, and install Linux, BSD, or any other OS's on it yourself.

-Joshua

You are correct, but I am STILL paing M$ for an OS I am not using. This is the crux of the matter. They levy a tax, essentially, on every IBM compatible PC on the market, if you want the OS or not, you HAVE to buy a liscense.

 

[Lance Nichols]

There's absolutely no way that MS could force a substandard product on the public, is there?
Anthony_J

Have you ever used Office? Word? Any version of Windows from Windows 1.0 onward (If you want I have archived versions of 1.0, 286, 386, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, etc)?
Technically the codec is great, however M$ past still speaks for itself. They muscle in, use unfair/illegal tactics then control the market.
I would prefer to deal with the devil I know, and the devil that knows the market - MPAA.

 

[Lance Nichols]

I would like to keep this as focused as possible on the issue of M$ trying to muscle into the DVD feild. Lets please try to keep the Linux, BSD, Windows flames down.
This includeds me

 

[Philip Hamm]

Let's keep politics out of this discussion.
Microsoft has a great track record in home theater, heck, everyone has a Madrigal, right?

 

[Anthony_J]

Sorry to get off topic for a while. :b

I'll finish my thoughts on the whole M$ issue, and it does relate to the thread topic (I hope).

As of yet, Microsoft dominance in the computer field has not caused me to accept and use a product that does not meet my needs simply because there are no other choices.

Nor do I feel that technological growth has slowed as a result of MS's involvement in the market. If anything, they've helped to make technology more accessible and useable for everybody, which in the end could actually give creedence and significance to "homebrewed" advancements.

The forcing of a subpar products upon end users without any alternative in the marketplace, a stagnation of any advancement in a given field, and the setting of higher prices than a free market would bear are the key end results of a monopoly.

Would Microsoft's involvement in DVD cause any of this to happen, or are people against the principle of their involvement due to history and business practices?

That's it, I'm ready to be friends again.

 

[Brian Bunn]

Uh oh! Another Microsoft bashing thread!?
It always irritates me that so many people take it upon themsleves to bash Microsoft. If you ask me, Microsoft should be revered as one of the most successful, inovative companies in history. It practically changed the way the world works starting back in the early 80's. Bill Gates should be celebrated as one of the greatest entrepreneurs in American history as well. He started Microsoft from scratch and developed it into what it is today. I'm sorry, I can't bash a man that is the epitome of success.
As humans I really believe it is our nature to secretly "enjoy" watching others fail...and lash out at those that succeed greatly as well. Microsoft and Bill Gates are poster boys for this quirk of human nature.
Yeah, some of Microsofts tactics may have been harsh and calculated over the years, maybe even somewhat questionable, but that is just doing business in a competitive free market economy. As long as they are not found to have broken the law. And so far I don't think anyone has shown that they have. Microsoft has succeeded by putting out good products that people wanted to buy. Plain and simple. Other companies have every opportunity to step up and compete. It ain't easy, but who says it should be?
Blockbuster is another company that many on this forum just love to bash. Again, a very successful company that has risen to the top of the heap in the movie rental business. Why? Because people like going to Blockbuster to rent movies more than other places. Congratulations to the Blockbuster marketing department. Nice job. You have taken on all comers and have come out on top. Does that make Blockbuster a company that people should bash and insult? I don't think so. It should be praised as the best managed company in the movie rental business. Again , there is every opportunity for other companies to compete, despite the fact that there is a Blockbuster on nearly every corner of every decent sized city in America! It will not be easy, but succeeding in business never has been. Which is further reason to revere companies like MS and BB that have been able to do what they have done.
I'm sorry. I just can't bash companies like MS and BB. No , I don't like the fact that BB is practically the only place in my city to rent a DVD. But I don't blame BB for that. No sir. There is much room for other companies to operate alongside BB, with good marketing and management the likes of which BB apparently has succeeded with.
It is the American way. Unless someone can convince me otherwise, it seems to me that other companies have every opportunity to step up to the plate with the likes of MS and BB and be successful enough to stay in business and be a money making entity. And who knows, maybe even dethrone MS and BB from there lofty perches.
But keep bashing if it makes you feel better!
I just can't bring myself to do it.

 

[Joseph S]

As long as they are not found to have broken the law.

They have already been found to have broken the law, committed perjury, and deemed a monopoly utilizing uncompetitive business practices. That's the problem. It's not a misconception, they actually did they stuff people complain about and have been found guilty in court.
As for being "inovative," they also don't even know how to spell it let alone actually innovate.

 

[MickeS]

I have nothing against Microsoft or Blockbuster, but the problem is that, like Spider-Man says, "With great powers come great responsibility" (probably mangled that quote), and these two companies don't live up to the "responsibility" part.

But I really don't care much if MS has a finger in the DVD industry...

/Mike

 

[Don Black]

I completely admire Microsoft. The goal of every company should be to have a monopoly over their industry. Do I agree with everything they do? No. Would I have done the same if I was in their shoes? Absolutely.

 

[Brian Bunn]

As for doing "they" stuff people complain about, and breaking the law, sometimes the federal government doesn't even know how to spell "the", nor know what the definition of the word "is" is. (Nice Job Joseph, pointing out a typo of mine. Thanks! Geez.)
As far as proving MS has broken the law, that is still very much debatable. Plus, most any company that is held under a microscope like MS has been will reveal some imperfections.

 

[Joseph S]

In a scathing 45-page opinion, Jackson said Microsoft msft (nasdaq: msft - news - people) smothered competition by bullying computer makers and Internet service providers to protect its Windows software, which is used on 90% of the world's personal computers. Specifically, the world's largest software maker broke the law by threatening to charge PC makers higher prices for Windows if they included competing programs like Lotus Notes, the judge said. The decision, a major victory for the government, could ultimately lead to the breakup of Microsoft.

 

[Don Black]

And Jackson was a model of fairness....

 

[Todd H]

I always laugh when Microsoft screams "innovation." All Microsoft does is steal ideas from someone else, bundle their own inferior version with Windows, then force companies making competing products out of business. And before people start screaming "Microsoft isn't stopping anybody from buying the competing products" just remember...the vast majority of Windows users are J6Ps. They don't care that Microsoft's version is inferior. All they know is that it does the job and it's free.

And as far as Microsoft breaking the law, it's a fact that has been proven in a court of law. If you think they haven't then you're fooling yourself. I have no respect for a company that is found guilty of purgery in a court of law.

And finally, I have yet to find anybody that can name an actual Microsoft "innovation." Of course, maybe some people consider buggy code with security holes the size of Texas an "innovation."

 

[CharlesD]

I am not aware of a single thing Microsft has innovated. Every "new" feature they have introduced was either bought, stolen or copied from someone else. This has been their pattern right from the start. Some of their software is very good, some isn't, but very little of it is "innovative".
Gates & co are ruthless business people, they are the best at exploiting a situation and maintaining their market dominance, but don't tell me they are epitome of all thats good about the free market, in fact I think they are the opposite. They did not create the home computer market, they exploited it.
I firmly beleive that if it were not for Microsoft, computers today would better, easier to use, more flexible and the software cheaper.