A major UK retail store and three of the largest PC vendors worldwide still have no plans to sell the version of Microsoft Windows that does not contain its media player, five months after the version was released. Microsoft started offering Windows XP N, a version of Windows without a bundled media player, in June of this year to comply with last year’s antitrust ruling by the European Commission.
Well… from the beginning, it wasn’t about “demand”, it was about options!
Well, even with I don’t want WMP, I want my Windows to come with it (why? well, because it’s part of Windows, something I know will be included in the package… like iTunes with MacOS X).
…But what’s REALLY important, is giving the user the option the uninstall everything he/she doesn’t want. Be it the windows media player, or Internet Explorer, or Outlook Express, or whatever… And let the users actually use their programs of choice and, more important, combat vendor lock-in!
…and in the end, has this court ruling really helped the user’s right? well, yeah, but not significantly… It looked more like simple politics instead of a smart ruling…
I hope they concentrate in vendor lock-in from now on.
Vendor lock in is not the problem.
It was the fact that they use their illegally acquired monopoly in Windows and illegally extended that monopoly to all the other areas that they dominate.
Doesn’t “vendor lock in” constitute monopoly?
“Doesn’t “vendor lock in” constitute monopoly?”
not at all.
It was the fact that they use their illegally acquired monopoly in Windows
I was never forced by the government, mafia, bad guys from the ‘hood, or anyone else to buy Windows.
Were you?
What a “penalty!” Usually corporate evildoers can expect to fork over big bucks. Instead, MS got to cripple a version of XP, sell it at the same price (!), and wait for the orders to pour in. I wonder whether they pressed a batch of CD’s, or if they’ve got a secretary burning them to order.
Whatever idiot at the EU agreed to this should be fired, for simple incompetence if nothing else. Anyone should have realized that a huge fine (which the governments/lawyers get to keep) made more sense from everyone’s point of view.
People won’t ask for a product they don’t know about. What’s Windows XP N ? Ask the less computer-savvy people around. Consider yourself lucky if they answer “That’s Windows XP NITRO !” They’ve got to simply offer it. If I had to need to buy a new WinXP machine, I’d CERTAINLY go for a WMP-less version of Windows.
Also, it might be interesting to look at the discounts Microsoft offers to OEM vendors. If the discount – and thus, the profit – they get from XP is greater than XP N… guess which one gets dumped ?
If I had to need to buy a new WinXP machine, I’d CERTAINLY go for a WMP-less version of Windows.
Curious … with no WMP codes on the machine, how would you view videos encoded in the WMP format?
VLC and a codec package.
The only demand for a WMP-less Windows came from Microsoft’s compeitors, such as Real Networks. Perhaps if these companies would’ve concentrated on building a decent player instead of whining to the courts, perhaps more people would be using their products.
I fully agree. I think the only players that can fight on WMP’s turf are the free, non-commercial ones. For instance, the built in media player in Shareaza is nice for playing music and videos and making playlists. Musikcube is an awesome music player, with a nice CD ripper built in. Real Player is just awful, the only reason I have it installed is because I watch real streams.
Ok, now really. XP is almost 4 years old. Almost all new PCs come with XP preinstalled. How many people are actuall going out and buying a retail version of windows these days? I’d imagine there is very little ‘demand’ for windows itself these days.
If I were going out and buying a retail version of WinXP, I would demand Media player be removed but I guess that doesn’t count.
There’s no need to be demand for that version of Windows. A court ordered them to do so, so that’s it. It either that or the door.
imho, if I’m a customer and I want a feature or an option to not have a feature, it’s best to ask the company making the product. Market demand is the most powerful force in the market, period.
As far as unfair competition, this type of product and market (OS software) is different than others. For example, wordpad & notepad could be seen as unfair competition in the word processing market. Sure it’s not as featured but it is included for free and probably does affect the market for basic word processing or text editing. Many web sites have ‘made with notepad’ icons for example. Should Macromedia sue MS for this unfair advantage?
I remember back when memory management software wasn’t included in DOS, then when MS included himem.sys, QEMM and other memory management companies may have been affected financially as a result.
My point is that operating systems continually evolve and include more and more software that wasn’t included in previous generations. Even the Mac OSX has a web browser by default. Should Netscape sue Apple for doing it? Apple has a virtual monopoly on Macintosh computers for the MacOS segment.
Lets face it, Operating systems evolve and have included more and more software over the years. That has been a good thing, imho. Freedom of choice also includes the freedom to choose an OS with a lot of included software.
Of course, my opinion is just one of 6 billion others.
Exactly right. Back in the day, TCP/IP networking was an add-on to most operating systems. Now you wouldn’t dream of using an operating system that didn’t have it. Most people would say “that’s just part of the OS.”
The same is becoming true with web browsers, media players, CD burning software, and so forth.
Good or bad? You decide. But that’s just the way things are going, and have been going for a while now.
Great points. Most of this boils down to bitterness, not vendor lock-in not to mention you can chose to have WMP removed in Windows XP or you can use the ‘Set Program Access and Defaults’ utility to set a default media player which is found right under the ‘Add and Remove Windows Components’ utility that allows you to remove WMP. Both of these utilities can be found within the ‘Add/Remove Programs’ utility in the control panel.
Of course, at least one of these (Set Program Access and Defaults) utilities requires an update, and maybe the other as well, but if you can download a media player you can get the updates too.
But in all reality, why complain about getting more for your money?
Edited 2005-11-18 22:46
Users were always free to use the media player of their choice. Want to use iTunes or Real? Just download and install the software you want to use. How is anyone locked in to using WMP?
Lockin by lazyness. Microsoft knows damned well most people cannot be arsed to find a better player, for all they know, Media Player is the only one, and a lot of sites will then only provide media content in the WMV format, since “everyone” uses Windows, which brings the rest in if they want access to that content. Especially in places where using the codec is illegal if you don’t have a valid license.
This argument can swing two ways. I’m sure a lot of consumers are happy to be ‘locked in.’ The bring home their box, open it up and it plays media files… no work involved. I bet there are a lot of computers out there running ‘as is’ from the OEM, possibly never even updated for security patches and using expired anti-virus software.
“I’m sure a lot of consumers are happy to be ‘locked in.’ The bring home their box, open it up and it plays media files… no work involved.”
Yeah, basically. Why do you think that :inux isn’t more popular with them?
“what? I need to find a plugin (and dance through how many hoops!?!?!) to get *mp3* support in my media player?! What about all those WMV files out there?”
Removing WMP as a punishment for MS is a stupid idea, that only causes trouble for the average Joe computer user. Forcing them to allow royalty free use of their protocols and APIs on the other hand, would have done a world of good.
Well, the problem is that in effect this gives MS the right to tax your Internet access. Do you remember MSN? It was meant to *replace* the Internet. It was a miserable failure and continues to be a money-sink, however, when they failed to monopolize the net by replacing it, they went another way, by proprieretizing the content so you have to use their software to actually get any content. This is the deal with the broken html. Now that seems to have failed, so they are trying with media files instead, but it’s the same story.
You want to access those wmv-files the city hall put online that shows how the new library is going to look like? Sorry, you have to pay microsoft first. Wanna access material you already have paid for with taxmoney? Gotta pay ms-first. There is a term, “useful idiots”, which refers to someone running someone elses errands without even knowing it. MS are masters of using this to their benefit.
Media Player has come with Windows since Win3x. More advanced versions in Win95 and up. It wasn’t a problem until WindowsXP came out. Why is that?
Agreed, but people were less inclined to choose what might be regarded as the best option because a default option was chosen for them. In effect, they allowed their illegally acquired monopoly in Windows to be extended to other markets.
No matter what you think of the law, its the law and Microsoft should have obeyed it. Now, every company that doesn’t have illegally acquired monopoly can not compete as effectively.
Agreed, but people were less inclined to choose what might be regarded as the best option because a default option was chosen for them. In effect, they allowed their illegally acquired monopoly in Windows to be extended to other markets.
Tell me again, Kelly McNeil, why is it that QuickTime’s market share more often than not been increasing? I didn’t know Quicktime was included, by default as the default option in Windows.
RealPlayer sued because their product sucked and hardly anyone wants to use it other than to play something using their propreitory codecs. Real lost the content makers to Microsoft and Apple so they decided to cry boo-hoo-hoo to the courts. Only thing is that suing Apple – which includes Quicktime libraries in OS X, with Quicktime Player installed as the default media player, is not quite as profitable.
But I suppose that is what how you see antitrust laws should do – preventing big, successful companies from doing what their competitors are doing, hoping that just maybe that it would lower its competitive edge and thus, just maybe, loose its monopoly. Consumers? Who cares about the majority of them.
No matter what you think of the law, its the law and Microsoft should have obeyed it.
Read a book on antitrust laws – it isn’t quite as simple as that. Or better yet, read all relevant competition laws, both American and European, and tell the rest of us what monopolies should and should not do as based clearly on the law, plus when a company should know it is legally a monopoly.
“Tell me again, Kelly McNeil, why is it that QuickTime’s market share more often than not been increasing? I didn’t know Quicktime was included, by default as the default option in Windows. “”
Economists will tell you… any product that increases its share in the face of an established monopoly is at LEAST 130% better than the monopoly standard. Apple isn’t just competing against any old run of the mill monopoly… but one that extends its monopoly… one that has a proverbial license to break the law by the US government. Any company whos product can increase its share in the face of THAT type of competition… is leaps and bouds better.
“I suppose that is what how you see antitrust laws should do – preventing big, successful companies from doing what their competitors are doing”
You’re assuming that Microsoft achieved dominance in all its market through fair and competitive means. All I want is for Microsoft to play by the same rules that everyone else in business must follow.
“tell the rest of us what monopolies should and should not do as based clearly on the law”
Simple. Don’t use one monopoly on one market to gain dominance in another.
Why does anyone care if WMP is installed or not? Just install your media player of choice and make it the default. What am I missing?
The EU are a bunch of clueless whiners is what you’re missing.
If given a choice, I don’t know why anyone would choose a WMP-less Windows. Sure, you might not use WMP itself, but you sure as hell have made use of the codecs. Players like VLC still can’t play the latest iteration of WMV, in which many .wmv files come encoded in.
Strange, I don’t remember the EU whining. I remember Microsoft concurrents complaining for unfair competition and asking the EU to have a look at it.
You are missing a brain. See the wizard.
Problem is, they didn’t require complete install/dispose capability for each app. The EU probably thought (IMO correctly) that the media player was an unusable and ugly piece of adware/spyware. Integrated apps can be downloaded from the MS site, but can’t be removed without some kind of system restore process going on. OEM’s figure their customers are dimwits who won’t know or care, so they don’t bother informing them. Alot of people smoke tobacco and never figure that it’s potentially harmful to them. No one bothered to tell them either, until the harmful effects started to manifest, after which it’s too late. That will likely be the case here as well. The EU politically got itself off the hook already.
The thing would be OK if the price was lower for the N version. I would really love to buy XP without WMP, IE and OE. And let’s not forget about MSN Messenger (or whatever they call it now). If such a thing cost some 40 bucks…
Why bother buying the N version if the prices are the same?
Rather than sell an N version, I think Microsoft would have had better luck selling a version of Windows that comes with FireFox, Thunderbird and MPlayer with GUI in place of IE, Lookout Express and Windows Media player. Although surely Microsoft would never do such a thing, instead they’d rather strip the programs out when forced to and still charge the very same price for the OS so no one wants to buy it.
“Players like VLC still can’t play the latest iteration of WMV, in which many .wmv files come encoded in.”
By all means, show us an example of one of these files that supposedly can’t be played.
You’re not doing anything but trolling for Microsoft just like you always do.
That’s the whole problem here why does all these media files have to be ancoded in some proprietary codec that you need WMP or RealPlayer in order to enjoy them?This becomes a real problem when you use an alternative OS like Linux or BeOS,and VLC is pretty much the only game in town,Yes there is a RealPlayer for BeOS but it’s so outdated ,it hardly works for anything at all(same goes for their Quicktime support).I can’t see what the advantage is to encoding video files with the wmv or Real formats,I don’t see where the files are signifigantly smaller or clearer than Mpeg or Avi,maybe MS pays the porno merchants to use their codecs or something LOL
The lack of common file formats means you have to have multiple media players to handle them all. Why can’t the software industry just agree on one standard file format for videos, one for sound, etc? And just when you think you’ve got them all, here comes divx. But no. Microsoft, Apple and Real all seem to think they should have a lock on which format to use. Makes you wonder how the computer industry with so many supposedly smart people can still be one of the most half-assed around.
LOL that’s a terrible arguement though it sounds fine at first. That’s like, why don’t we all drive the same car or watch the same TV shows or whatever. Or even take computer games, why don’t we all just play Wolf3D and be fine with that. Our modern society isn’t content with just one standard, and that’s not just with computers either. Take TV, there are a lot of standards, even before HTDV there was PAL and NTSC. This list is endless.
“Media Player has come with Windows since Win3x. More advanced versions in Win95 and up. It wasn’t a problem until WindowsXP came out. Why is that?”
It’s because of whining by people who don’t even use Windows.
and _you_ are a trolling and whining windows user who can’t handle that people might use and even like something that is beyond your meager skills.
This is just Microsoft cocking an arrogant snub towards the EU. Microsoft would never admit to any demand for XP sans Media Player and have gone out of their way by using pricing to ensure that there isn’t any. Microsoft are also arguing with an EU compliance order about opening file formats to make cross-platform file sharing easier. Expect news shortly that there is no demand for that one, either. Retailers and tame experts will be wheeled out to back up the FUD, as usual, though my understanding is that Microsoft’s legal workaround is to require such astronomically large royalty fees that no one will touch coding anything up on Microsoft’s terms.
I hope justice departments take note and next time they cross swords with Microsoft increase the fine by a factor of, say, ten times. Then it might get too big to ignore.
They are under the thumb of Microsoft, Offering customers what they want?, what about a choice called Linux or dont back handers stretch that far!
i have many legit windows key’s but i dont use them,
i often use cracked windows xp with sp2 and such instead of installing old copies with legit keys.
if i could go to a stor and buy wmp less windows cheaper i would but i havent ben able to find any i think they only sell them to oem wich is not intressed if it was offerd in stores i think they would sell more of it.
This issue with MS is ridiculous. I’m not a fan of many of their business practices, but this is what we focus on? They bundle a media player? That didn’t harm Real. Real harmed Real. The older version of Real Player was awful, often unstable and embedded itself into Windows. It was spyware before we had a name for applications that hid in the background and reported over the internet. They bundled applications that you didn’t necessarily want, and didn’t originally offer a way to NOT install them. They had a monopoly position at the time and as I recall, they charged pretty hefty fees for their streaming software as well. THEY abused their dominant position, and MS humbled them. It’s like arguing which is the lesser of two evils. Besides, the anti-trust charges originated with the fact they were preventing OEMs from bundling alternative third-party software, not the bundling of their own apps. THAT was an abusive practise.
And we claim that because Media Player is included now, nobody can compete. People are sheep and will only use the app that comes with the OS. Well, duh. The popular
perception with all things Windows is that it’s flaky, unstable and/or privacy violating. Not quite. The reality is for most people, Joe Average user, it works well enough. A perfectly apt description for Media Player. If a company wants to build a business on selling media players, they should focus on building one that aspires to be more than good enough and market it as such. MS shouldn’t be crippled just so other companies can compete. That just lowers the bar for the quality other companies should develop to.
Standards? Sure, MS is trying to lock the market with media formats, they’re even creeping into our homes now by cutting deals with cable companies. If they don’t, Apple will. And if they don’t, Sony, God help us all, will. They’re succeeding because there’s demand. Don’t like it? Don’t use it. Don’t buy WMA formatted music. Don’t buy WMA centric media players. Don’t use web services that require media player. If your local gov’t uses MS formats, complain to them that they’re restricting your ability to access information. Tell your friends, tell your family. Show them there are alternatives. Show them how to use them.
But the problem is, as much as people like to complain about MS, it’s too inconvenient to choose alternatives. They exist. You can use ogg or mp3 for your media files, you’re just limited in your choice of players or the download services that will support them. Some sites only work with IE, so avoid those sites. OpenOffice is a viable alternative of Office for most people, if they’d give it half an effort to learn and use regularly. Linux and BSD exist as alternatives to Windows, but it means giving up some hardware compatibility and gaming, and maybe having to learn something new. Or go to Apple, though that’s simply jumping from one fire into another.
But alternatives exist. Sure, people are sheep and that’s what MS is banking on. But if things are going to change, it should be from compelling alternatives that entice people to make the effort to change. Not by ranting and wishful thinking for the government to intercede. I think if we keep hiding behind this whole MS is evil and an illegal monopoly, we’ll run the risk of using that as an excuse to quit trying to improve. There was a time when people had to make an effort to learn Word and Excel instead of WordPerfect or Lotus 123, but they eventually did. And they’ll learn something new again, if properly motivated.
I only use XP at work, but the odd time I receive a media file, I’m content to use media player to listen to it. Not because I’m forced to, but because frankly I’m too lazy to search out an alternative for the little bit that I use XP. Sure I know they exist, I just can’t be bothered. Media Player is “good enough” for me, and I’d find it a PITA if I had download and install apps for the things I take for granted now. Given a choice, I would not choose XP N. Makes no sense to me personally.
On the other hand, with Linux as my primary desktop, I can live with the extra effort it sometimes takes for those “simple” things you take for granted on Windows, because for the main things I do, Linux works better for me. Much better than most people would think, unless they gave it a serious try. I’m technical in nature which maybe gives me a bit of an edge, but at the end of the day I had to make an effort to learn to use Linux. It wasn’t *that* difficult, and it was worth it for me because I truly wanted an alternative to Windows. But I’m also realistic enough to know that Linux still has some way to go before it will reach a threshold where Joe Average is willing to learn it as an alternative to Windows. Which is important to me, because it means that Linux has to keep striving to improve (and it is by leaps and bounds) if it is going to earn that bigger marketshare.
XP N was a perfect example of what’s wrong with this process. MS (aside from having paid a hefty fine) can now exhonerate themselves by saying “See? We made an unbundled version available and nobody wanted it! The market has spoken!” If we’re going to try and attack MS on legal fronts, let’s instead look at the way they set contracts with OEMs, or their pricing, or the corporate extortion scheme they call Software Assurance. There are many other areas I’m sure could be looked at much more closely, if we’re going to get the government involved. But I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for the governments to tell consumers they need to look at alternatives, that’s the market’s job. And ours. To say otherwise is just resigning to failure.
Anyways, just my 2c to try and add a different perspective.
Nobody wanted Windows N because vendors and there sales people dont sell it or sell it incorrect. Why would a vendor want to sell Windows without WMP when they can sell it with?
The damage is done now and since the EU is the only people willing to TRY do something about it (unlike the US govenment which are funded by big business), Microsoft can sit pretty and take the flak and does NOTHING to there reputation or monopoly.
Oops, that was me ^, sorry
What Microsoft is trying to show is compliance , the reality is there not complying theyve been clearly told that from now on every single Windows XP product that they ship with there old tie-in will go in record as them not complying , what there saying is that no one whant to buy this version ( the store already have tons of older box they cant sale ) , hence there not the one creating the problem.
What Microsoft whas ordered to do is in Europe is to discontinue all its found Illegal ti-in product and replace them on all product shipping Windows XP included ( wich is illegal too in most European Country )with Windows XP N.
Microsoft will not comply and drag this in the court as long as they can , this days they even figured out that its better to settle for punitive damage then go all the way and face a real punitive measure , so most likely they will offer settlement all along and one will be good enough for the government at some point.
Would you really care if you dont get jail time for breaking the law , you dont get punishment or restriction you said you would comply with but dont at all and you make 1 billion time the money the fines are asking for.
Its the same in almsot all corporation illegal proceding they make 10 billion and are asked to say publicaly there sorry and pay 500 million in damage with 100 million in repaymnent to some charity.
For the clueless :
10 000 000 000 – 500 000 000 – 100 000 000 =
9 400 000 000 in profit.
Thief will always say they never did anything wrong and have tons of excuses and always offer to give back whats left or only what seem fair to them …
Its just another example of why people feel delusionned in believeing the law is equal to all.
Its just another example of why people feel delusionned in believeing the law is equal to all.
I will believe that the law is equal to all when I can buy Apple OS X N without media player.
Windows Media player dont come default with Apple OS X , I dont think that you respect law at all or have an objective opinion on this subject.
Microsoft broke the law and whas convicted and received a punishment that they are suppose to follow this whas part of there punishment , they did not ask for a new product or to sale it , its suppose to replace all there existing products and ship this way as default.
Apple as far as I know is the only company not breaking the European tie-in law , Its there software on there hardware.
Even Apple sells Mac OS X with QuickTime player. Heck they even have a chess game and other things. Thats also vendor (lock in) in a way.
It’s NOT that it comes with Windows that is the problem. It’s that it’s EMBEDDED in Windows, uses secret APIs, and is virtually impossible to COMPLETELY remove that is the problem.
Look at your typical linux distro – it comes with a TON of stuff. In the install procedure, you can tell it to install something else, none of it, or all of it. Nothing is embedded, and it’s all simple to add or remove. If it were the same with all the different “extras” in Windows, there wouldn’t be any complaints.
Instead, Windows components are hard to remove, and the first time you update, it’s put back and made the default again. THAT is what gets people like Real or Mozilla mad at MS.
But are there any real alternatives out there? If not then no wonder that Windows XP N doesn’t sell.
One problem is that most web pages offer a choice between 2 formats and one of them is WindowsMediaPlayer.
And it boils down to the exact same problem as with Office suites.
Proprietary file formats.
My bet is that OpenDocument will take off – in time.
Next, we just need the same for multimedia – an OpenMedia format.
Content providers can then save the wastefull process of producing in more than one format.
And software providers will then have to start working like everybody else in competition to improve their software rather than freeloading off of undocumented file formats.
For video one hope is Dirac by BBC
http://dirac.sourceforge.net/
> My bet is that OpenDocument will take off – in time.
In Poland, there’s a law that public institutions have to
use OpenDocument file format for data exchange.
Windows is garbage with media player or without. Windows is software for imbeciles by imbeciles, dump it and see your life change for the better…
What do you use? Linux with totem? Wow, after fumbling with codecs for thirty minutes, you might be able to watch 20% of porn you’re trying to view. Sooooooooo much better than windows!!!!
I think having MS release a version of XP without WMP is stupid, for a number of reasons. MS should be able to bundle whatever they want with their OS. If people want it, it will remain there. Otherwise it will disappear. That’s the basis of capitalism.
The only thing that the European Comission accomplished was making themselves look like fools.
Instead, they should have looked at how difficult it is to install software that replaces MS’s products. For example, I download VLC and want to associate it with all movie files on my computer. I choose to associate all of them during the installation. If I then click on a .avi or .mpg, the butt-ugly and uber-slow WMP9 pops up on my screen. I have to look in the settings of WMP9, and uncheck all the associations.
This is anti-competitive behaviour.
Browser: ELinks/0.10.6 (textmode; Linux 2.4.27-2-586tsc i586; 111×41-2)
I’d love to see when Mplayer and Media Player Classic get more popular and all those crappy media players like Realplayer, Quicktime and Window Media Player disappear from our earth.
Let us get rid of these sucky windows, real or quicktime codecs.
Yes, I also believe in Santa Claus. These hardware companies are being forced to do this because there are hidden contracts between them and MS.
Windows with WMP should be forbidden to be sold in Europe (and other countres too).
First of all, it doesn’t surprise me one bit that there is “no demand” from “consumers” for the cut-down Windows XP – I bet most “consumers” don’t even know of its existence. Consequently, lazy vendors can just sing along to Microsoft’s tune and laugh at the EU’s half-hearted attempt at market regulation.
Of course, we shouldn’t be surprised that the whole media player squabble failed to do anything about the dysfunctional relationships between Microsoft and vendors – the whole affair was just a corporate lobbying exercise by Apple and Real Networks with a “consumer protection” façade. I don’t doubt that Microsoft bundling a media player cut into Apple and Real’s market, but by choosing to just look into that, and then to levy ridiculous fines without addressing Microsoft’s secret contracts and unethical business practices, only serves to demonstrate how ineffectively the EU has dealt with the entire problem.
And then there’s the issue of open standards. So far, the EU hasn’t dealt properly with that issue, either. But I wouldn’t expect Apple and Real Networks with their hateful proprietary codecs to lobby for that particular investigation…
It is very difficult to find a place a buy these Windows XP N versions. I have been looking around in several European countries. The only place I found was at Amazon in Britain. The ruling was that XP N must be sold at no more than the same price as the XP/Media player. But if you check the prices at Amazon.co.uk that is not the case. MS and Amazon are cheating here.
Windows XP Home Edition with Service Pack 2 GBP 176.99
Windows XP Home N (without Media Player) GBP 184.99
Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2 GBP 285.99
Windows XP Pro N (without Media Player) GBP 269.99
Windows XP Home Edition Upgrade with Service Pack 2 GBP 94.99
Windows XP Home N Upgrade (without Media Player) GBP 97.99
Windows XP Professional Upgrade with Service Pack 2 GBP 165.97
Windows XP Pro N Upgrade (without Media Player) GBP 181.99
Only the price for XP pro full (non upgrade) follows the ruling.
I was actually looking for something like XP Pro System Builder edition, which you can get for about EUR 139 for XP pro full, but the system builder XP N versions are nowhere to be found.
Where can one get official price list from Microsoft where we can see all available Win XP products? In this price list all XP product should also exist in an XP N version.