“Microsoft wants us to believe that Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player are tied so deeply in the OS that they cannot be removed. As middleware they are good things, but so is DirectX, and Microsoft doesn’t say that can’t be removed from the operating system. Windows is far more modular than Microsoft wants to admit to the court. Microsoft has grown to the point that they no longer need to compete, and the only way for them to survive as a company is to stop competing and start sharing. If something doesn’t happen to change Microsoft’s behavior, the backlash against them and other corporate giants will send proprietary software and countless tech jobs into obsolescence.” Read the editorial at Kuro5hin.
Microsoft: Bundling vs. Modularity
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
*sighs* Jesus Christ … do people really hate IE and Media Player so much as to get THIS bent out of shape about it? If merely having these programs on your computer bothers you THAT much, then do us all a favor – go buy a friggin’ Mac and stop your constant bitching and whinning.
If MS wants to bundle IE and WMP so deep into the OS that you couldn’t remove them with a pair of pliers, then let them. If you don’t like it, then use something else for crying out loud!!
“If something doesn’t happen to change Microsoft’s behavior, the backlash against them and other corporate giants will send proprietary software and countless tech jobs into obsolescence”
Hmm I think I’ve heard that one before …
Hmm I don’t think it’s ever going to happen cause …
Hmm The people who give a shit are not the people who can make a difference
Again, MS has never said that it couldn’t be done…. NEVER, heck, Bill Gates said that it could be done on the stand. All they have said is that it would fragment the market, make it hard to develop for, and cost an exhorbitant amount of money due to regression testing.
The article does have some good points – but…
Microsoft (or any large corporation or me) is like a four year old child. They will continue doing what they’re doing untill they learn everyting the hard way. Be it an equivilent of a 2×4 across the forhead from the legal system or a total and complete backlash from the users. I read a very interesting analogy somewhere – can’t remember where and I cant remember how it goes…
“Microsoft is like the people who had total control of the watter in the wild-west. Although it worked for a while, and they made some money off of it, the people would sooner or later revolt because they didn’t like one authority controling such a vital neccesity”
told you I’d butcher it…. but it fits very well. Information Technoloy is so pervasive in our society that for a company to try and control all of it is foolish at best. This is why I think that MS will go the way of AT&T. They will likely remain a large company with some pull, but the market will be dictated mostly by the community along with companies like Sun, SGI and other companies who base their bussiness on open standards and operate in such a way as NOT to piss off %97 of the market….
…Just another uneducated opinion…
IMO overall a very insightful article, although I believe there should also be a rationally priced, bare bones version of monopolistic OSes available to OEMs also. They should have to be able to choose their own Middleware solutions. Clear protocols and standard should be defined by independent experts and not dictated by the OS monopolists. Compatibility between as many different solutions is in the best interest of the consumer as well as a competitive market.
Anti-competitiveness or other abusive behaviours should be swiftly punished by an international organ. Currently it is unbelievable to me that companies with too much money in their hands can extend their trials for many years. (Same goes for murder cases, at least in the US, people with money seem to get away with just about anything and the people without (good) lawyers don’t stand a fair chance.)
SOME MICROSOFT MORON ON THE STAND SAID WHAT? OH MY GOD! I SWEAR EVEN THOUGH I’VE HEARD THIS SAME ARGUEMENT BEING REHASHED FOR 3 YEARS AND THEN SEEING EVERY LITTLE INSIGNIFICANT GEEK WITNESS REHASH THEIR OWN STUPIDITY IT DOESN’T GET TIRING TO HEAR IT ON THE LOCAL NEWS, CNN, HEADLINE NEWS, TECH TV, SLASHDOT, KURO5HIN, AND OSNEWS.
I’m so tired of this trial, I wonder what the cost to the public has been. Every remedy that has been proposed just looks like a stupid attempt to hurt billionaires and the industry as a whole. I guess now we’re going to get a new story for what every little lackey says. The judge probably doesn’t know the difference between a computer and a calculator. Why don’t you just put a big huge banner on the front page saying “THIRD HAND MICROSOFT TRIAL NEWS HERE!” and post all the stories under it so the majority of us can ignore it.
Go eat a dick, cock-holster.
MS was probably the first major OS vendor to provide a widespread component architecture. I’ve heard that COM and the rest of the lineage until .NET was a pain to program for, but they were working components all the same.
They really toot their horns about it too. About why components are so great. Then why the hell don’t they apply those ‘revolutionary’ ideas to their own programming? There’s no reason that IE, WMP and whatever else can’t just be regular applications with a COM/COM+/ActiveX/COM.NET++X server making the needed resources available. Stupid MS.
Its a simple fact that Microsoft has Internet Explorer extremely embeded into its operating system… Windows explorer is a blend of IE, MS Help etc all have the IE engine built in hell many program’s such as gnucleus and other third part software use the OCX for the MS Internet Explorer interface in there software. Do you see those developers complaining? NOT A BIT! I know for a fact because i am one of them. As it stands i see no reason for monopoly in fact none exists because of microsoft. Microsoft is not at fault because over 80-95% of the market loves or uses there os. The fact is other operating systems exist many, hundreds even and there are many main stream systems such as Macintosh, and Linux and for a time beos even gave it a shot. The fact is the public wants Windows Bill gates and the Execs at microsoft arent forcing anyone to use IE, netscape WMP or windows it self if you dont want it erase the icons and set it to not load its that simple just install netscape if you would like. The fact is just like C# vs Java. MS products are written by the OS developer and in fact are faster and much more reliable than could be achieved by a third party vendor. Its not because Microsoft holds back any information if you want proof go to MSDN site and check out everything you want hell a detailed explanation is there to even help memory management for developers i know 2 os’s that are in development that are half developed using the MSDN literature as a referance. This entire case is just a bunch of people arguing over issues that are no more than irrelivant facts. MS is not open source and that is what seems to have people so pissed but the fact is atleast microsoft makes headway, 94% of projects especially OS’s fail in the open source market for one reason or another while microsft every 2 – 3 years releases a new major OS that the world loves (or atleast quite a deal of it) I didnt hear much complaining then. I mean its a patern get used to it 3.1 to 95 was a generational leap… 95-98 Were some basic fixes, 98-me was a catastrophy (sorry but ME Sucks in most opinions i have seen) and even if it was worth the update it was just user update but then we had another generational jump from me to 2k and then a regular update from 2k to xp with a user interface change… whats next for .net generation jump or just update? Look forward and stop bikering
If MS wants to bundle IE and WMP so deep into the OS that you couldn’t remove them with a pair of pliers, then let them. If you don’t like it, then use something else for crying out loud!!
I think that’s the point of this whole exercise. There are many people who would like to use OS/2, BeOS, and a great number of other products. However, because of Microsoft’s illegal monopoly, many great products and companies have been killed.
It is one thing to compete and quite another to smother the market with your monopoly. That is what is illegal. That is what is detestable. That is what needs to be fixed.
To have any other opinion about it just shows you lack the necessary information to form a valid opinion. It’s like saying the sun doesn’t exist. The fact is that it does, and any opinion that opposes that simply demonstrates a lack of understanding on the part of the holder of that opinion.
Also an opinion of a normal user here, Dont continue reading if You dont want to hear NON technical babbling!!
Darius:
Most of the population uses Windows as a primary os, Mainly because it has the best support from the masses… (i.e. drivers, new games, hardware comapatibility… etc etc) Hence the lawsuit (no supported software, hardware, NO COMPETITION)
This is why they continue to moan that the “nag screens” continue without the ability for MOST to have no means of CANCELING (Hmm what a novel idea) while others simply remove all traces of it or simply remove the according lines that fire something up. Unlike a billion other program fnctions from dozens of OS’s, It seems that Microsoft couldn’t set up some of it’s programs such MSN Messanger and (the most anoying thing I hate) that update manager, that no matter what You do, You cannot choose to NEVER BUG ME AGAIN!!!!
Just fires up & you repeat the process over again from scratch, Watch I bet I can resite the activity from work on an NT system, right click (*no menu just opens the window to continue) click cancel (*are You sure You want to close this? This will open again at startup) click yes reboot system repeat process… (petty but MY CHOICE, I dont want this chewing up even more resources)
paddyponchero: Here Here, Couldnt agree with You more!
Mike Bouma:
As to what You say, I beleive You are hitting the nail about as direct as possible, Read this article I beleive this to be the best resolution to the ENTIRE PROBLEM:
http://www.mandrakeforum.com/article.php?sid=2105&lang=en
No OS included……. No grounds to bitch once You make Your decision on which OS to use……. No need for us to pay MILLIONS & MILLIONS of Our tax money for court costs against 1 of the Wealthiest individuals in the world who if He wanted to, could drown our legal system with unruley lawyers tactics!!!
“There are many people who would like to use OS/2, BeOS, and a great number of other products. However, because of Microsoft’s illegal monopoly, many great products and companies have been killed.”
Well, you’re absolutely right. This kind of activity (MS strong-arming OEMs and trying to control the boot sector) probably has hurt compeition and should be dealt with accordingly, but still the question remains … what (if anything) does MS bullying OEMs have to do with whether or not they bundle Internet Explorer into Windows???
What we’re dealing with is two COMPLETELY different issues here. The first part, which is illegal (the MS relationship with OEMs) and the second part is not (MS bundling IE).
“It seems that Microsoft couldn’t set up some of it’s programs such MSN Messanger and (the most anoying thing I hate) that update manager, that no matter what You do, You cannot choose to NEVER BUG ME AGAIN!!!!”
Since you’re a non-technical user, I’ll give you a non-technical answer. If you’re using Windows XP (the only MS OS I’m aware of that Messenger is built-in to nag you), do the following:
1) Right click the Messenger icon on the task tray and close it (if its running)
2) Double click on My Computer
3) Double click on the C drive
4) Double click on Program Files
5) Double click on the Messenger folder
6) Delete the icon that looks like the Messenger icon.
There, problem solved – Messenger will never bother you again. Now, was that so hard?
“No OS included……. No grounds to bitch once You make Your decision on which OS to use……. ”
Yes, I agree. I had a friend who recently went down to Fry’s Electronics and bought a computer for $250 (750mhz) that came with LINUX pre-installed (which, btw she asked me to remove and put Win2k on), so it’s not like getting a PC with an alternate OS is that damn hard in the first place.
You can open windowsinfsysoc.inf and modify this line under [Components]:
msmsgs=msgrocm.dll,OcEntry,msmsgs.inf,HIDE,7
Delete HIDE:
msmsgs=msgrocm.dll,OcEntry,msmsgs.inf,,7
Then in the Windows Components section of Add/Remove programs you’ll see Messanger listed for removal. You can do this for other components too. I haven’t had any problems running third party apps. Though I read somewhere that you need Messanger for some Remote support feature?
.live without it
Windows NT4 workstation and Windows 95 OSR 2 are both pretty compliant with modern Microsoft coding.. install opera or mozilla, winamp or quicktime, trillian or ICQ.. and away you go
You’l have to live without Firewire and USB ( USB works to an extent in 95, not on NT ), and without Active Desktop and browser integration.. but it’ll work….
“What we’re dealing with is two COMPLETELY different issues here. The first part, which is illegal (the MS relationship with
OEMs) and the second part is not (MS bundling IE). ”
This is the same issue – Microsoft competing not by offering a better
product, but by making it difficult to buy or use the competing
products. This has been their regular strategy for many years.
Sometimes their products _are_ better – one could reasonably argue
that IE is the best current browser and XP the best desktop OS. But
they sell them with improper OEM contracts and compulsory purchase
(you can’t buy Windows without also buying IE).
Merging IE into Windows was done, not because it makes technical sense
(it doesn’t) but as a way to kill off Netscape (it did). The OEM
contracts are designed to kill off Be and others (it did).
It is the equivalent of firebombing a competing restaurant instead of
serving better food.
This is all one issue.
It’s like you are saying that Microsoft should build the programs for the masses and the rest of the software industry should handle the niche markets.
There are many people who would like to use OS/2, BeOS, and a great number of other products. However, because of Microsoft’s illegal monopoly, many great products and companies have been killed.
Exactly. This is modern communism : a single authoritative company, providing one product, that should be the same for everyone.
“But they sell them with improper OEM contracts and compulsory purchase (you can’t buy Windows without also buying IE).
Merging IE into Windows was done, not because it makes technical sense (it doesn’t) but as a way to kill off Netscape (it did). The OEM contracts are designed to kill off Be and others (it did).”
So do you have a problem with Windows shipping with a file manager? What about with built in TCP/IP?
Why would the average user want to buy an OS without a browser? Why should the government determine what can and can’t be included as part of an OS?
Don Cox: No it’s is NOT the same issue.
I hate to tell you, but there is NOTHING MS could do to force those OEM’s to sign those contracts, not a single thing, but they did, because they got Windows for cheaper. They could ALWAYS say “No, we don’t like these contracts” and offer up terms that the particular OEM would prefer. Heck, if all the OEMs did that, or just a couple, such as Dell, Compaq, and HP, then MS would be forced to comply.
Merging IE made a LOT of technical sense. I don’t know about you, but I love the fact that I can browse my folders the same exact way I can browse the internet, or that I can type in a web address into a folder and it suddenly goes to that website, or perhaps the HTML help systems which have added a great deal to finding information on your own, especially in XP’s help system which is just phenominal. Or how about those apps that have IE emebedded in them so they can custom design a rich tool for use in the application.
I am wondering if you have any technical sense at all, because you obviously don’t have enough to understand this issue, and definatly shouldn’t be giving opinions on weather things make technical sense.
Can’t you stop hating Microsoft ?
Don’t use Windows. Simple.
Let ALL OTHER computer users have IE for free if it works better and faster by being tied to tne inners of the Windows OS. It is an ORIGINAL, and brilliant, IDEIA from Microsoft and a superb OS/Program Desiging solution.
Don’t forget you use IE engine on the windows help, on third party ‘preview’ feature, etc. That’s why the gecko engine from Mozilla is being watched ! (for use in windows, obviously, not in Linux).
If IE is out of WindowsOS the only benefit for end-users will be NOT to use the BEST Designed solution. Everyone would go back in time in OS usage.
“Can’t you stop hating Microsoft ? ”
Not until the company is broken up and the top management are in jail
where they belong.
Just out of curiosity: how many of the people here arguing about whether the Windows OS is the best design actually know anything about the subject of software engineering?
“This is the same issue – Microsoft competing not by offering a better
product, but by making it difficult to buy or use the competing
products. This has been their regular strategy for many years.
This is all one issue.”
Still, I don’t think so. Though it is quite true that MS makes it harder than it should be to buy computers with alternative operating systems, I hardly see how bundling IE into windows makes it harder to use the competition’s products.
For example, according to Opera pundets, Opera runs faster than on Windows than IE does. So, what is the problem? Real Networks (the Great Satan of Crashware) may claim that MS has somehow sabotaged things so that Real Player doesn’t run as well as it could, but Real Player runs horribly in EVERY version of Windows I’ve tried it on, so I honestly don’t hink this is a valid argument.
You could surely make a case that having IE built-in makes it easier for lazy or inept computer users to stick with whatever comes with the OS, but I’d hardly say that such a thing is ‘forcing’ people to do anything.
Don, It only gets more obvious that you really have no clue what you are talkin about everytime you post.
Breaking up Microsoft will do absolutley nothing. Using abmer’s own ammunition against them (they say that it is a fact that MS is a monopoly because it was upheld in the appellate court), the court of appeals has said that breaking up Microsoft will do no good.
All I can say is get a life, and maybe actually learn something on the way, and then maybe you will be able to form an opinion of your own that isn’t just beyond stupid.
Just a thought, for those who know more about software coding than I do….
Would it be possible to write a single applicatio/installer which would:
remove MSIE, Outlook Express and Active Desktop from any version of Windows and install Mozilla, replace MSN Messenger with jabber or Trillian, Notepad with Editpad or equiv, WMP with Winamp or Coolplayer, Wordpad with AbiWord, Paint with GIMP – Win32, include the Cygwin POSIX command line environment as an option….
…. if it were possible for find OSS equivalent for everything , maybe even market it as the GNU Service Pack 1 for Windows?
Might just be a way of getting more people interested in Freeware and Opensource software as well as improving their computing environments… it could be used to make a “Free” version of windows where, Explorer besides, the entire Middleware experience is non-commercial and Open.. Making Microsofts “standard” configuration into something more interesting in the same way that Linux distributions provide more variety by bundling other OSS software.. could be an interesting experiment.
Why bothering aboout how windows looks and feels. just use it. it’s great in a way. lets say.. if MS did not do like it is now. there should be a lot more ppl without a job… think about that..
and stop whining about windows and microsoft, and be more happy.