A report in today’s Wall Street Journal suggests Microsoft has fiddled with the registry in its stripped-down Windows offerings and the result is that video clips embedded into Microsoft Word documents don’t run properly, for example. The Journal quotes Jonathan Todd, a spokesman for European antitrust chief Neelie Kroes, as saying: ‘The commission is still in the process of assessing … whether Microsoft is complying properly with the requirement to offer a fully functioning version of Windows without Media Player.’
oh microsoft wouldn’t do that… those are the actions of a convictted monopolist… oh, wait a minute…
LOL @ M$
Either Windows has too many features or not enough… I get so sick of these whiny governments and their collective mob of idiots.
Microsoft makes Windows, so they are free to limit or enhance it as much as they want, and consumers are free to purchase it or not.
ms REALLY doesnt want this version of windows to take off. just look at their DRM plans, they obviously want to start making deals with the industry for apple-like deals. if mediaplayer isnt there by default, its a level playing field with apple, real, etc. i say good for the eu on actually taking the offensive against them for once, instead of waiting for them to use their monopoly to screw people over.
although, this quote struck me as rather funny
“the commission has to verify the requirement that Microsoft refrain from using any commercial, technological or contractual terms that would have the effect of rendering the unbundled version of Windows less attractive or less functional.”
isnt a version of windows without wma support or windows media player “less attractive and less functional” by definition?
IMHO this phrase “fully functioning version of Windows without Media Player” is nonsense per se, because playing media is one of the main functions of MS Windows.
Looking at MS site – Media Player is 7th reason from top 10 to use XPHE, one of the 6 most important features of XPHE and so on – Media Player is noted everywhere.
Although I understand (and agree with) EU reasons to sue MS and require strip off Media Player, statements like one quoted above seem kinda weird to me.
—– isnt a version of windows without wma support or windows media player “less attractive and less functional” by definition? —
Not necessarily.
I have downloaded WMP, do I use it? yes…probably once avery 15 days :p
Just because you are getting one less package in your system, it doest mean that it is less functional. To people like me who dont use the function, the responce is “who cares if WMP is not included?”
“although, this quote struck me as rather funny
“the commission has to verify the requirement that Microsoft refrain from using any commercial, technological or contractual terms that would have the effect of rendering the unbundled version of Windows less attractive or less functional.”
isnt a version of windows without wma support or windows media player “less attractive and less functional” by definition?”
This just illustrates how many fools there are in government. Most of them probably could survive in the private sector.
Most of them probably couldn’t survive in the private sector.
LOL
You are a poor troll. As in, not good at it.
Looks like the EC isnt pleased again… What a surprise! I would find it quite funny to see the Reduced Media Edition of Windows be a complete failure in the market place. If so, maybe that would prove to the EC that Microsoft dominates the media world because its a GOOD product. Seriously, does anyone remember the old versions of Windows Media Player? It was laughable at best and hardly anyone used it. It wasnt until it cought up to its competition that anyone started to use it seriously. Speaking of its competition, there really arent many quality choices. Winamp is the only good alternative out there to Media Player. The stuff from Real Networks is just plain old crap, period. Their player is one of the most feared programs in the Windows world! Its no wonder why they are failing, but good thing we have old evil Microsoft to take the heat for companies failing due to a lack of decent product!
Well, there always is VLC player for Windows.
I don’t believe that people use WMP simply because it is an amazing product. It’s probably most likely because it is just there at the time it is needed.
MS does not play fair but i don’t think the answer is more regulation. Just make sure that their boot loader license is corrected and support alternatives such as apple and Linux.
That is the best thing. Get local, federal, and national EU governments, schools, etc. to use linux or any other alternative. Regulating MS is not going to work especially when you punish them by slapping them on the wrist.
…that the EU should develop their own OS
Man, imagine a state sponsored OS – FROM SCRATCH!
I think the poorest of trolls are those who make unsabstantiated remarks about others being poor trolls!
Microsoft is ordered to strip out the media player. Now someone is complaining that the media files don’t play? WTF?
i am not being a troll, i am just being practicle, as the other poster after you suggested too, it does not make any sence to punish microsoft, just quit using their products, thats what people do when they are not satisfied with a product = they dont buy or use the product, enough said…
I think the poorest of trolls are those who make unsabstantiated remarks about people being the poorest of trolls which would be those who make others out to be poor trolls!
Boy this is a fun game, huh? Aren’t you guys clever.
for Suse/Novell and TurboLinux to start marketing their wares more aggressively.
“[…] that video clips embedded into Microsoft Word documents don’t run properly”
Who the hell wants to have a video clip in a written document? I expect such things just not to be possible. It is far more better to use a static picture of one frame of the video clip instead.
Either Windows has too many features or not enough… I get so sick of these whiny governments and their collective mob of idiots.
Microsoft makes Windows, so they are free to limit or enhance it as much as they want, and consumers are free to purchase it or not.
The same could be said of the drug business. Pharmaceuticals or even cocaine producers are free to do with their products what they want and consumers are free to purchase it or not. But if imagine we were talking about prohibited drugs, then the governments are flip-flopping, sometimes depending on who’s throwing enough money.
It is very similar to a ‘ why cannot MS offer a fully functioning version of Windows without Internet Explorer’ question. They just could not browse local files without it. Same as with Media Player, no player (plus the whole architechture behind) no video playback in Word docs. But come on, embed movies in Word docs?
Do you know anyone who purposely wants to buy a stripped down version of windows? What a bunch of crap! I personally want MS to place every good software package they possibly can inside windows b/c that’s good for the consumer. In this case, Real Player has been suffering b/c of WMP. Who cares?! In other cases, I like the fact that MS wants to place an emphasis on higher security by doing their own firewall, spyware, malware, and intrusion detection software. Who cares if Symantec will lose out big, the consumer is more important. Power to the consumer!!!
“It wasnt until it cought up to its competition that anyone started to use it seriously.”
No, it wasn’t until large amounts of news sites started providing their streaming media in WMV format and it started popping up every time you put a sodding CD in the drive that anyone started to use it seriously. It’s STILL a crappy product (although Apple’s and Real’s Windows offerings are equally crappy, bloated and ad-ridden).
“[…] that video clips embedded into Microsoft Word documents don’t run properly”
Who the hell wants to have a video clip in a written document? I expect such things just not to be possible. It is far more better to use a static picture of one frame of the video clip instead.
I think the above comment sums it up. WTF is wrong with people? Embeded video inside a document? Sorry, I just don’t see absolutely _any_ usefulness in this.
It is very similar to a ‘why cannot MS offer a fully functioning version of Windows without Internet Explorer’ question.
Tell me how you would download a browser (Firefox/Opera) if IE wouldn’t be bundled with Windows.
My $20 says you don’t know and won’t find the answer with google.
Even if you are bored enough to look this up, tell me if you really expect an average user to go through this.
Why european governments are doing this?
Because there isn’t any operating system made by europeans (only opensource linux), so they want to battle with U.S. companys technologies that is what makes U.S. economy.
Opensource and linux itself was and is a gun to software developping company’s, including europeans company’s.
Europeans will pay the same for less technology… I mean, that they will pay the same price as U.S. but without media player, europeans, will loose with this story.
As european, I will buy my future windows versions directly from U.S., because we are free to buy where we want.
This was crap from the start. I tend to side with MS removeal of a imbedded product would cause problems such as these. All ms products that use WMP features probably look in the same portion of the registry for how to handle WMP content. So do you think that Microsoft would change their entire product line just to accomidate the few European morons that insisted WMP be removed from Windows in the first place?
Not to get all political and stuff, but… I am Europian myself and I just don’t see the point in this besides fucking with a US company. If they violated any laws they should make them pay, but not be removing 1 out of 3 things XP needs to work and then still come up with complaints like these.
They demand M$ takes out media player, then are shocked that embedded video in Word doesn’t work? What are they @#$%ing STUPID?!?!? OF COURSE IT DOESN’T WORK YOU MADE THEM TAKE MEDIA PLAYER OUT!!!
You know, at that point if I was in charge of M$ I’d be tempted to cut my losses and run. See how they like it if they just stop selling the damned thing altogether. Refuse to deal with EU countries at all.
Tell me how you would download a browser (Firefox/Opera) if IE wouldn’t be bundled with Windows.
My $20 says you don’t know and won’t find the answer with google.
Even if you are bored enough to look this up, tell me if you really expect an average user to go through this.
————–
Easy, type ftp at the command prompt then type help to get a list of commands thus even the most green user can download their browser via ftp.
And this is standard across mostly every OS that has a shell thus nobody with a brain will complain that Windows does it.
Tell me how you would download a browser (Firefox/Opera) if IE wouldn’t be bundled with Windows.
My $20 says you don’t know and won’t find the answer with google.
Even if you are bored enough to look this up, tell me if you really expect an average user to go through this.
ftp:// It’s been in the command prompt since the very beginning.
Now, you are correct about the average user part. I would be surprised if the average user used/knew about the command prompt to begin with.
When do I get my $20? 😉
I had to do this (downloading a browser via ftp) the other day, as I had clicked ‘Windows update’ on a computer and it caused internet explorer to self destruct.
Luckily there was another computer in the room I could get the url for the firefox ftp site from.
Next ruling: Windows must be shipped without device drivers. These should be provided by the hardware manufacturer to prevent MS’s monopoly on device drivers. Especially, a clean installation of Windows must not include disk, cd-rom, network , USB, mouse, and keyboard drivers since this could effectively control how the drivers from the hardware manufacturers are installed, and *which* drivers are installed.
Sometimes i wish stupidity would hurt…
RE: Anonymous (Downloading browers without IE)
> Easy, type ftp at the command prompt then type help to get
> a list of commands thus even the most green user can
> download their browser via ftp.
I still wonder in what kind of fantasy world people like you live. I suggest you get in contact with some “green users” before telling about their behaviour.
I still wonder in what kind of fantasy world people like you live. I suggest you get in contact with some “green users” before telling about their behaviour.
It is easier to teach newbies command line, as with the desktop it would be, search through your start menu and look for your ftp program and it might not be there then you them double clicking when they were suppose to single click or single when they were suppose to double or clicking the wrong buttion.
That is why I teach newbies how to do everything from the shell just like how I was tought on Unix back in High School this way when they call me about a problem I just tell them to enter a command and tell me what the shell spits back.
I don’t want to have to hold a newbies hand for ever so I teach them to be computer gurus, knowing how to use their computer with only the keyboard and how to solve their own problems.
So they force the company to remove media player and then they think its sabatoge that an embedded video in a word document might not play correctly ?
LOL. Thats rich. WTF do they think removing media player will do ? If the software isn’t in the OS anymore the video aren’t going to play out of the box.
What a bunch of idiots.
Who the hell wants to have a video clip in a written document? I expect such things just not to be possible. It is far more better to use a static picture of one frame of the video clip instead.
You probably are power user or more. No offence:)
Video clip in Word is pretty useful. If you’re using Word as your default mail editor (some Windows/Office default configurations are set up this way), you’re writing mail to your mom, you include movie clip of your little daughter – and your moms Word doesn’t play it!
More seriously – possibility to include media files as objects into documents is windows functionality and removing Media Player does break it.
Do the readers of OSNews know what an O.S. is? (hint: it’s not an application like a media player or web browser.)
Windows did not always have these applications imbedded. They were not added as a convience for users, but so Microsoft could expand and dominate in other areas.
Why aren’t you complaining that Windows doesn’t include a database, spreadsheet, PDF viewer, DVD software, etc.? Most people need these? I guess Windows is crippled, unlike most Linux distributions which include these and more.
If you’re using Word as your default mail editor […]
Seems you are talking about converted Emacs users. I really can’t believe it.
Easy, type ftp at the command prompt then type help to get a list of commands thus even the most green user can download their browser via ftp.
And where is one supposed to get the URL to the frp on where to download a browser?
When do I get my $20? 😉
Download Maxthon through cmd/ftp
I had to do this (downloading a browser via ftp) the other day, as I had clicked ‘Windows update’ on a computer and it caused internet explorer to self destruct.
Luckily there was another computer in the room I could get the url for the firefox ftp site from.
Bingo! Now imagine there was no computer in that room. How would you (an experienced user I assume) download Firefox without knowing the URL.
That is why I teach newbies how to do everything from the shell just like how I was tought on Unix back in High School this way when they call me about a problem I just tell them to enter a command and tell me what the shell spits back.
Those were the 70’s we’re much further now
Some things (maybe ‘most’ to some users) are easier through a shell/cmd line than by GUI, but how do you expect a novice user to (just an example) cut/paste 10 images from one folder to another, filenames starting with the letter ‘M’, extension .jpeg? In GUI (XP) that’s 4 “clicks”; sort by filename, press M and select, CTRL+X, change focus on destination folder and CTRL+V.
Windows did not always have these applications imbedded. They were not added as a convience for users, but so Microsoft could expand and dominate in other areas.
AFAIK only 3.11 didn’t have a media player. Yes, they are dominating the media player market by including a player that can freely be disabled to be the default mplayer.
Why aren’t you complaining that Windows doesn’t include a database, spreadsheet, PDF viewer, DVD software, etc.? Most people need these?
No, most people don’t need (most of) these. An average user needs a database? What are you dreaming? It is expected from any modern OS to have at least the basic applications needed for work/multimedia. Let’s ship an OS wihtout a media player or an email client, browser,.. How useful would that be.
Microsoft should just ship Longhorn without a text editor, explorer, browser,… because third party applications exist who make those.
I guess Windows is crippled, unlike most Linux distributions which include these and more.
I guess Mac OS X is also crippled, because it doesn’t include a database, spreadsheet,… Yes, some Linux distros include all of these. That’s why they come on 2 DVDs with 5 different web browsers, 18 different text editors, 6 versions of the shell and 4 different desktops.
I think it’s time we started wholesale mailing Peter Mandelson and started explaining exactly how ignorant this nonsense is getting…
http://europa.eu.int/comm/commission_barroso/mandelson/contacts_en….
I mean what’s next, force apple to remove quicktime from Macs or make it so you cannot distribute Linux with any bundled applications at all?
Just an idea.
While I consider this case a little strange, I’d like to disagree with some of you. For one thing, a media player is certainly not a crucial component of an operating system. Nor is a web browser. Both might be convenient for some people, but they are not critical. Explorer worked just fine for managing drives long before Internet Explorer even existed. I waste a lot of time on newer windows systems trying to get the file manager back to behaving like a file manager…
Similarly, I have to work pretty hard to make sure WMP never runs either. If it were not embedded into the OS, then applications (like Word, for whatever bizarre reason) could use a standard system call to use the media player of choice for playback (MPC, Core, etc…) rather than breaking because they assumed they could use an in-place crutch.
Food for thought: I dislike WMP because all of it’s recent versions (starting with 7?) have a bad habit of frequently phoning home whenever they play a clip. Even if you disable all of the “check” and “update” features, it still tries to contact MS every time it opens a clip — according to Zone Alarm. Now – put on your tinfoil hat – what happens when you’re using MS firewall and MS anti-spyware? Will they tell you that your media player is behaving in ways that you might not like? Or will they simply ignore it as “trusted computing?”
Windows did not always have these applications imbedded. They were not added as a convience for users, but so Microsoft could expand and dominate in other areas.
AFAIK only 3.11 didn’t have a media player. Yes, they are dominating the media player market by including a player that can freely be disabled to be the default mplayer.
They dominate by including a player that plays their propriety format (wma/wmv), then sell licenses to encode in these formats (why bother encoding in another format when 90% of the users will have ours, says MS. This format also uses the same extension for our DRM version, so after a while, you can switch to DRM and no body will notice.) They are dominating now the streaming and audio/video media on web sites!
Yes, mplayer can play wma/wmv with a downloaded codec, but I doubt it will be able to play the DRM versions.
Windows Media player removal can have three meanings:
– removing the icons
– removing the user interface
– removing the user interface and the codecs.
Removing only icons and user interfaces, the cosmetic removal, isn’t enough.
I think it’s important that the codecs are removed too, for fairness: every Real, DivX or Quicktime movie online gets the complaint that it’s not “universally supported” on Windows machines.
This removal shows the user, that wmv does not work without downloading and installing some software.
The battle over the universal video codec is taking place right now, and it’s to the benefit of Real, Apple, DivX and XviD that the EU has forced this. Without this, my dream of universal acceptance of (open-source) XviD compression in avi wrappers (one of Microsoft’s rare, truly open standards) is doomed. (I’m not holding my breath.)
And it is to the benefit of bigwig managers, who should get a clue before complaining about the videos embedded in their Word documents.
Bingo! Now imagine there was no computer in that room. How would you (an experienced user I assume) download Firefox without knowing the URL.
Use links or lynx text browsers to google for it, I have done it when I was setting up Linux/Unix boxes with no X11 to be used as servers. Yet for some reason Windows does not comes with a simple text browser out of the box so in the times Windows crashes to CLI I had to run to Linux to repair Windows.
Those were the 70’s we’re much further now
Some things (maybe ‘most’ to some users) are easier through a shell/cmd line than by GUI, but how do you expect a novice user to (just an example) cut/paste 10 images from one folder to another, filenames starting with the letter ‘M’, extension .jpeg? In GUI (XP) that’s 4 “clicks”; sort by filename, press M and select, CTRL+X, change focus on destination folder and CTRL+V.
if it just files starting with M it is from the directory of the files: move M*.jpeg then their destination (in dos) also a text based file manager also is better as the point is to get the newbie to see the keyboard as the primary input device and the mouse as just a luxury.
The issue is about tying things into the OS vs including things _with_ the OS.
MS likes to tie apps to Windows so that you can’t fully replace their version with someone elses.
For example. The Windows update shouldn’t be part of IE. It should be a totally separate program. You should then be able to wipe IE off of Windows after installing FireFox (or whatever is your favorite browser). Currently you can’t do that.
Telling MS they have to ship without a media player is forcing MS to not be able to tie it into the OS like IE. This way people will be able to use RealPlayer, VLC, or whatever they want as the default no matter what.
Imagine if the tied MS Office with Windows?
Use links or lynx text browsers to google for it, I have done it when I was setting up Linux/Unix boxes with no X11 to be used as servers. Yet for some reason Windows does not comes with a simple text browser out of the box so in the times Windows crashes to CLI I had to run to Linux to repair Windows.
But we are talking about a non browser Windows, because it seems everyone wants one so much. And yes, Windows doesn’t come with a text browser, because it has IE.
if it just files starting with M it is from the directory of the files: move M*.jpeg then their destination (in dos) also a text based file manager also is better as the point is to get the newbie to see the keyboard as the primary input device and the mouse as just a luxury.
My bad. I forgot about the ‘*’. Same task, instead of copying, resizing them. Sure it can be done through in bash Python or Perl scripts, but I don’t believe learning Perl is easier for a novice than taking 15 minutes to learn a GUI. I can do right click – resize. Note that I’m not saying the CLI is useless, but I don’t think users should learn more about the shell than the GUI.
You use TAB to browse through links?
This way people will be able to use RealPlayer, VLC, or whatever they want as the default no matter what.
Control Panel – Add/Remove – Set program access and defaults, uncheck WMP.
I can’t believe you guys missed the most obvious solution: wait for an AOL (or other provider) CD to arrive in your mailbox, or pick one up at a store! Chances are, you won’t even have to pay for the CD: they’re just itching to get you signed up, and the cost of the media is meaningless to them, once they’ve got you signed up. Those I’ve seen here in the US have trial periods where you can cancel after a month for free; this is plenty of time to get what you need and then get out.
Has it been that long that everyone forgot that Windows didn’t always have a web browser, and you had to go and get one without using a web browser (or even an internet account) and do things in a reasonable way?
At this rate, people will forget how to play media on their computers, because they can’t remember that there were other ways to play back media before Windows incorporated the ability to do so, and how to find it!
Now, shouldn’t someone pay me $20, or even more, for describing the old school way of getting software that doesn’t need to be integrated in your OS of choice such that even newbies can install it???
Imagine if the[y] tied MS Office with Windows?
All the blind simpletons, who are defending MS here, would cheer and celebrate it for two weeks. It would mean MS Windows would triple in price, but you get Office functionality “for free”.
Besides, you buy Windows at reduced price with your “3 year throw-away” computer, so you don’t notice the price anyhow. The price increase is neatly tucked away with the declining prices on hardware.
Why should you think for yourself and decide what you like to use, if MS can pour it luke-warm down your throat? Letting MS dictate computing means that everything works the same for everyone. It absolves everybody of their duty to think and decide for themselves. MS IS the computer, so what can you change or do about it? It’ll be better in the next version. Besides, if it sucks, it’s not like it only sucks for you.
In a Unified MS world without competition, we are all the same and we can feel the warm fuzzies about the fact that we are all in the same boat. Sheep mentality, but it doesn’t matter. The masses will follow MS off the cliffs like lemmings. Those that can think for themselves will free themselves of their shackles and find computing bliss elsewhere.
Elitist view? Yep, it sure is, but once you start to see the shallow mental depth of the average human being, you’ll eventually arive at this viewpoint.
But we are talking about a non browser Windows, because it seems everyone wants one so much.
The difference is browsers like Lynx is they just sit there till you run them and you if you remove them they don’t effect other parts of the system.
[/i]
And yes, Windows doesn’t come with a text browser, because it has IE.[/i]
So what you suppose to do if you can’t bring up the Windows desktop? Windows has a emergency mode that gives you dos yet the don’t give you the tools to go onto internet and fix the problem through dos while most Linux and Unix distros do.
My bad. I forgot about the ‘*’. Same task, instead of copying, resizing them. Sure it can be done through in bash Python or Perl scripts, but I don’t believe learning Perl is easier for a novice than taking 15 minutes to learn a GUI. I can do right click – resize. Note that I’m not saying the CLI is useless, but I don’t think users should learn more about the shell than the GUI.
Sure but what if the mouse hangs? So now they can’t use the mouse and their first thought is to reboot losing all their work when if they know their hot keys they can save their work.
I have no problem with GUIs but teaching should start with navigating the desktop and apps with only the keyboard then after they know that then teach them how to use the mouse.
“…that the EU should develop their own OS
Man, imagine a state sponsored OS – FROM SCRATCH!
“
Yeah, and it would cost twice as much to make, take twice as long, and suck worse than anything made privately.
I seldom have any faith in things made or provided by the government.
I can’t believe you guys missed the most obvious solution: wait for an AOL (or other provider) CD to arrive in your mailbox, or pick one up at a store!
Expect AOL to go broke if Longhorn arrives without a preinstalled browser
The difference is browsers like Lynx is they just sit there till you run them and you if you remove them they don’t effect other parts of the system.
I know this, but my point is that most of these losers screaming “remove IE from Windows!!!” don’t have a clue on how they would download a browser, let alone an average user who doesn’t know or care what ftp is.
So what you suppose to do if you can’t bring up the Windows desktop? Windows has a emergency mode that gives you dos yet the don’t give you the tools to go onto internet and fix the problem through dos while most Linux and Unix distros do.
Not sure what you mean here, but you can pretty easily do a reinstall of Windows on top of the “screwed” one and it will keep all your settings etc.
Sure but what if the mouse hangs? So now they can’t use the mouse and their first thought is to reboot losing all their work when if they know their hot keys they can save their work.
I have no problem with GUIs but teaching should start with navigating the desktop and apps with only the keyboard then after they know that then teach them how to use the mouse.
Sure that’s another story. Keyboard shortcuts are good for making something quick – I suppose every secreatary should know at least the basics of Word (ctrl+b/i/u/z,…) and the likes. But I was more pointing towards CLI. Frommy experience average and new users are scared of the CLI, because that’s what they think computers are like (this goes especially for older people) and are scared to having to learn some “wierd looking words” that you type into a black box. IMO new users should start with a GUI until they are perfectly OK with it and are capable of figuring out where to look for a specific function/setting. Then they should at least get to know the basics of the CLI but I don’t know how useful that would be in a Windows enviornment.
<italics>Use links or lynx text browsers to google for it, I have done it when I was setting up Linux/Unix boxes with no X11 to be used as servers. Yet for some reason Windows does not comes with a simple text browser out of the box so in the times Windows crashes to CLI I had to run to Linux to repair Windows.</italics>
Erm, this still doesn’t answer the question about where you would you get Links/Lynx from, considering we were (originally) talking about a Windows machine without IE installed, not one with a convenient Linux box next door?
(please excuse the mixture of quotes here)
> It is easier to teach newbies command line, as with the
> desktop it would be, search through your start menu and
> look for your ftp program and it might not be there then
> you them double clicking when they were suppose to single
> click or single when they were suppose to double or
> clicking the wrong buttion.
So your point is, a bad designed GUI is worse than a well designed command line. I fully agree.
> That is why I teach newbies how to do everything from the shell (…)
Actually, you never mentioned that downloading the browser via FTP needs special training first.
Why not make the FTP client so simple that it doesn’t need training? Yes, programs can be that simple. The command-line ftp is not one of them.
And why not include the browser with the OS in the first place?
> The difference is browsers like Lynx is they just sit
> there till you run them
… just like IE does. It’s code, it doesn’t have a life of its own!
> and you if you remove them they don’t effect other parts
> of the system.
Oh yes, the solution to the “dependency hell” – include libraries and everything into the application. I leave it to the Linux camp to list the disadvantages of that approach.
Great, I never new that brain damage was the norm among osnews readers (well those who post).
Now, repeat after me, slowly:
a) The version without media player is meant for OEMs. You’ll get a media player but the OEM will have the chance to choose which one. More competition, good. Noone forces you to buy the edition without WMP, it’s not like they outlawed it. Additionally I think that a browser should be shipped with every PC but similarily there should be a Windows without IE so OEMs can use alternative browsers. Even more important you could finally remove the IE security holes you can’t now, because IE still gets used even if you replaced it as standard browser.
b) A movie player is not, I repeat is not, an essential part of the OS. I’d argue that the PDF-viewer someone proposed is much more important because many manuals are shipped as pdfs. You want a movie player? Download one (see (a)).
c) This is not “The Revenge of the European Commucrats”. Microsoft has been convicted of having abused its monopoly in the US and Europe. Hadn’t there been a convenient change of government (before even more trolls come out of their holes. I’m not implying MS had anything to do with that, it was convenient but coincidential) MS would have been in even deeper shit in the US.
d) Real is no longer as crappy as it’s been. I’d rank Quicktime, WMP and Real all as 9s on the crappiness scale.
I know this, but my point is that most of these losers screaming “remove IE from Windows!!!” don’t have a clue on how they would download a browser, let alone an average user who doesn’t know or care what ftp is.
I don’t care if IE comes on the CD but I want the option to be able to replace it so even if I use IE to download Mozilla I can then get Mozilla to replace all functions IE does.
Not sure what you mean here, but you can pretty easily do a reinstall of Windows on top of the “screwed” one and it will keep all your settings etcBut what if it a server (Hey MS says Windows makes a good server OS)? Re-installing could mean driving to a remote site with a CD drive (as the server doesn’t have one installed), hooking the CD drive up and popping the Windows CD in.
Sure that’s another story. Keyboard shortcuts are good for making something quick – I suppose every secreatary should know at least the basics of Word (ctrl+b/i/u/z,…) and the likes. But I was more pointing towards CLI. Frommy experience average and new users are scared of the CLI, because that’s what they think computers are like (this goes especially for older people) and are scared to having to learn some “wierd looking words” that you type into a black box. IMO new users should start with a GUI until they are perfectly OK with it and are capable of figuring out where to look for a specific function/setting. Then they should at least get to know the basics of the CLI but I don’t know how useful that would be in a Windows enviornment.
But with CLI they can quickly write down what to type where most people don’t want to write down how to do something on the desktop as it takes to long.
Also with CLI I can ask them for a copy of what they did by getting them just saving their session and I can look at what they tried to do and where they failed where with the desktop it is more harder to record what the newbie is doing.
So your point is, a bad designed GUI is worse than a well designed command line. I fully agree
No a badly designed GUI is worse then a badly designed CLI
Oh yes, the solution to the “dependency hell” – include libraries and everything into the application. I leave it to the Linux camp to list the disadvantages of that approach.
I’m not talking about libraries, I’m talking about binaries and if you remove the binaries of konqueror will only effect that part of your system while if you remove the binaries of IE alot of the functions of Windows comes crashing down.
Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
C:Documents and Settingsmetro305>ftp
ftp> open
To http://ftp.mozilla.org
Connected to http://ftp.mozilla.org.
220-c1
220-
220 FTP server ready.
User (ftp.mozilla.org:(none)): anonymous
331 Guest login ok, send your complete e-mail address as password.
Password:
230 Guest login ok, access restrictions apply.
ftp> cd pub
ftp> cd mozilla.org
ftp> cd firefox
ftp> cd releases
ftp> cd 1.0.2
ftp> cd win32
ftp> cd en-US
ftp> bin
200 Type set to I.
ftp> hash
Hash mark printing On ftp: (2048 bytes/hash mark) .
ftp> get “Firefox Setup 1.0.2.exe”
200 PORT command successful.
150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for Firefox Setup 1.0.2.exe (4826536 byt
es).
226 Transfer complete.
ftp: 4826536 bytes received in 8.27Seconds 583.90Kbytes/sec.
ftp>
When I’m forced to use Windows, I strip out IE, Media player, “help,” and search. Instead,I use Opera, Coolplayer, ZoomPlayer, and AgentRansack. These are all much smaller, and substantially superior products. Also, windows runs faster, smoother, and crashes less without the extra crap . . .
I think the article is not necessarily about the fact that WMP being removed breaks the ability view media files. It’s that you can’t even install another media player to resurrect this functionality. Not because other media player doesn’t have the capability but because MS “sabotaged” the OS to prevent it.
Either that or this a media beat up about nothing at all.
Not that media ever does things like that.
The OS wasn’t sabotaged. Word, like most Windows applications, use functionality provided by other aplicatons.
Most Microsoft applications are developer frameworks first and applications second. The Windows Media Player is not just a media player. It provides a media framework that other developers can also use to create apps w/ similar functionality without having to reinvent what MS already provides. The player is also exposed as a control so that developers can host the player in their own applications rather than having to create that functionality from scratch. Word hosts WMP to provide media playback functionality. IE uses this same functionality for allowing the WMP UI to be embedded in a webpage. Many third-party apps also use this functionality for similar purposes.
If WMP is not installed, neither is the framework to support these scenarios. Thus, you get the behvior the EU had. For them to complain about this suggests they really don’t have a clear technical understanding of the situation.
You sir/madam, win the “Most Rational Person and Common Sense in Thread” award.
Thanks, n4cer, for putting my intended response in better words than i could do
… meant in this sense:
> I’m not talking about libraries, I’m talking about binaries
> and if you remove the binaries of konqueror will only effect
> that part of your system while if you remove the binaries of
> IE alot of the functions of Windows comes crashing down.
I was also talking about binaries, and especially the binaries of the dynamic-link libraries. If I remove libc.so, I will see very soon that “breaking only that part of the system” includes “everything that depends on it”. Since IE in windows is used as a component (don’t know if the actual mechanism to link the code is a DLL, but I’d guess so) for HTML rendering, removing IE will break everything that uses it for HTML rendering.
Most Microsoft applications are developer frameworks first and applications second. The Windows Media Player is not just a media player. It provides a media framework that other developers can also use to create apps w/ similar functionality without having to reinvent what MS already provides. The player is also exposed as a control so that developers can host the player in their own applications rather than having to create that functionality from scratch. Word hosts WMP to provide media playback functionality. IE uses this same functionality for allowing the WMP UI to be embedded in a webpage. Many third-party apps also use this functionality for similar purposes.
But this goes aginst interchangeability you should be able to easily replace WMP without having to worry the media frame work and be able to replace the media frame work without having to worry about WMP.
I was also talking about binaries, and especially the binaries of the dynamic-link libraries. If I remove libc.so, I will see very soon that “breaking only that part of the system” includes “everything that depends on it”. Since IE in windows is used as a component (don’t know if the actual mechanism to link the code is a DLL, but I’d guess so) for HTML rendering, removing IE will break everything that uses it for HTML rendering.
yes but libc.so is a library, you can replace libc.so and even rewrite it from scratch. Are you going to tell me you can rewrite the parts of IE that is needed for other functions in Windows?
>>>But this goes aginst interchangeability you should be able to easily replace WMP without having to worry the media frame work and be able to replace the media frame work without having to worry about WMP.
But most companies don’t want to pay the extra cost to replace what’s already been here in the first place.
For example, Microsoft actually paid Fraunhofer to include a real high quality Fraunhofer mp3 encoder in WMP10. Other companies don’t want to pay Fraunhofer for this encoder, so they “borrow” Microsoft’s Fraunhofer encoder.
http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_l3codec.php
Legally it’s quite in the grey zone. They are giving you instructions on how to do something that is probably illegal.
For example, Microsoft actually paid Fraunhofer to include a real high quality Fraunhofer mp3 encoder in WMP10. Other companies don’t want to pay Fraunhofer for this encoder, so they “borrow” Microsoft’s Fraunhofer encoder.
http://www.looprecorder.de/tut_l3codec.php
Legally it’s quite in the grey zone. They are giving you instructions on how to do something that is probably illegal.
But selling a product of value for free in order to hurt compedition is aginst US law therefore for WMP to be legally given away for free the consumer in no way can be locked into to using WMP.
Therefore for WMP to be legal you must be able to use its encoders without having WMP installed.
Funny.. Linus is from europe. So is Jean-Louis Gassee.
Now. Of course the Governments in europe use linux and beos, and so does the US govt. However, the market disparity created by microsoft tactics, such as forced inbedding, and shared protocols liscensce problems go a long way to keep these alternative operating systems fairly marginalized. Just use and support beos/haiku or linux/bsd. (of course, I play at everything…)
I use beos. I just don’t do windows.
> But this goes aginst interchangeability you should be able
> to easily replace WMP without having to worry the media
> frame work and be able to replace the media frame work
> without having to worry about WMP.
If you argue that the required specs to replace WMP or the media framework should be available to those who want to do it, I completely agree with you. Apart from the closedness of the specs, I don’t see a problem with interchangeability.
> yes but libc.so is a library, you can replace libc.so and
> even rewrite it from scratch. Are you going to tell me you
> can rewrite the parts of IE that is needed for other
> functions in Windows?
Yes you can, if you know how to do it. After all, you just have to write a piece of code that behaves identically. The problem is that MS won’t tell you how, NOT the modular structure per se. You would not be able to rewrite libc either without knowing how it should behave.
Yes you can, if you know how to do it. After all, you just have to write a piece of code that behaves identically. The problem is that MS won’t tell you how, NOT the modular structure per se. You would not be able to rewrite libc either without knowing how it should behave.
That is the problem, Micrsoft has always feared its OS getting cloned, a non-MS OS that could run Windows programs. When OS/2 got near perfect Windows 95 compatiblity before 95 even launched, Microsoft changed 95 to prevent OS/2 from having such perfect Windows 95 compatiblity. Not hard to think Microsoft would probably do the same if wine every got near perfect Long Horn compatiblity before Long Horn even got released.
This is the only reason MS keeps such information secret as Microsoft has always been feared having to compete without their advantage of a large software library.