Topic: Microsoft: Don't sell PCs without operating systems

[Mr_Tricorder]

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39261437,00.htm

[Dracho]

You know, Microsoft is dam*ed close to contempt of court with regard to their anti-trust settlement,  IMHO.

[Nemesis]

That campaign is beginning again?

Don't you know that each such illegal sale steals money from Microsoft?  Money that they have a right to.

Link to full article below:

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla.—In a rare discussion about the severity of the Windows malware scourge, a Microsoft security official said businesses should consider investing in an automated process to wipe hard drives and reinstall operating systems as a practical way to recover from malware infestation.

Add that unless you have a site license according to MS you only have a limited number of reinstalls before you have to buy a new copy of Windows. 

So the Microsoft story is now:

1/ You must buy Windows with your computer
2/ You will need to reinstall Windows each time it is infested because Microsoft lacks the competence to make the OS secure or create a tool to restore it once infected.
3/ You can only reinstall Windows a limited (but publicly unspecified) number of times
4/ Microsoft makes money no matter what you do.

My Story:
1/ I'm switching to Linux slowly
2/ I won't buy any more Microsoft software until they become tolerable again
3/ Microsoft will have to survive without me.

[Bonk]

I'm sure this is geared for the Dell crowd and well it should be. Most pre-built PCs are so cheap and nasty that they are only capable of running windows anyway. Think "Vista Capable"... ridiculous levels of software drivers and hardware virtualisation. Very little real hardware, only the absolute minimum so that the customer can get a "better deal"... 

This will not affect any future PC's I build for myself which always support multiple real operating systems for genuine hardware that actually functions; ONX, FreeBSD, Slackware...

Just another push for manufacturers to pander to the "same numbers but $50 bucks cheaper - so it must be a better deal" crowd. Uninformed consumers get what they deserve. Like the saying goes: buyer beware.

Anti-trust - schmanti trust - the governement should stay out of business, they haven't got the first clue.

[Nemesis]

I'm sure this is geared for the Dell crowd and well it should be.

Last time they were pushing it (that I was aware of) was in the U.S. and they were trying to get it made illegal to sell a computer without an OS.  Which is why when a company like Dell does make an attempt to sell OS free computers they toss a FreeDOS CD in the box.  That makes it a computer with an OS for a minimal cost and keeps Microsoft somewhat in check.

[Bonk]

That would be easy enough to get around anyway, legislation will never be able to keep up with technology, it is silly for it to try. Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated! 

I would hope that eventually the consuming public will tire of cheap and nasty hardware with buggy, cheap and nasty drivers that will only run on windows... (the winmodem being the classic example).

[Nemesis]

the winmodem

My opinion of them.

[Just plain old Punisher]

Eh, I'm happy with microsoft.

[Nemesis]

Eh, I'm happy with microsoft.

But then you are head of your own evil empire and like attracts like.

[Just plain old Punisher]

Eh, I'm happy with microsoft.

But then you are head of your own evil empire and like attracts like.

I've learned two things are necessary in order to be successfull in the evil empire business.

1) Bribe republicans
2) Don't mess with Microsoft.

[Nemesis]

I've learned two things are necessary in order to be successfull in the evil empire business.

1) Bribe republicans
2) Don't mess with Microsoft.

I see your problem with Imperial growth.  It should be.

1) Bribe Honest^1/ Politicians
2) Get Microsoft to bribe you.

1/ Honest politicians mean that once bought they stay bought for the purpose you bought them for.

[Just plain old Punisher]

If you can buy them, that would me that they aren't honest.

It's sort of a catch 22. You want a criminal in that position to see to your interests, but often as criminals do, they end up screwing you too.

[Commander Maxillius]

The first purpose of any evil empire would be to screw Microsoft in such a way that they comply totally and willingly and most of all blindly.  Bonus points for making them think it's for the best.

[Nemesis]

If you can buy them, that would me that they aren't honest.

It's sort of a catch 22. You want a criminal in that position to see to your interests, but often as criminals do, they end up screwing you too.

Its the politician definition of honest.  How could you possibly expect it to be the same as the definition used by real people?  Like the lawyers version of the term "not guilty", it doesn't mean "my client didn't do it", it means I think that I can persuade the judge/jury that the evidence does not prove my client did it or at least make it tough enough that you negotiate a lower sentence to end the case.

[Dracho]

My fear at splitting up Microsoft under the anti-trust act would be that it would turn out like Standard Oil, or Ma Bell.  None of the pieces would die and they'd all grow up bigger than the original, and start merging again.  It's like a water elemental.

[Just plain old Punisher]

If you can buy them, that would me that they aren't honest.

It's sort of a catch 22. You want a criminal in that position to see to your interests, but often as criminals do, they end up screwing you too.

Its the politician definition of honest.  How could you possibly expect it to be the same as the definition used by real people?  Like the lawyers version of the term "not guilty", it doesn't mean "my client didn't do it", it means I think that I can persuade the judge/jury that the evidence does not prove my client did it or at least make it tough enough that you negotiate a lower sentence to end the case.

It still comes down to the fact that a bought public official never stays bought for long.

[Nemesis]

My fear at splitting up Microsoft under the anti-trust act would be that it would turn out like Standard Oil, or Ma Bell.  None of the pieces would die and they'd all grow up bigger than the original, and start merging again.  It's like a water elemental.

But I don't want to see Microsoft broken up.  I want to see widespread adoption of standard file formats.  Then the end user can use whatever application under whatever OS without the current MS DOC style lockin.  Those who want to use Windows and MS Office could freely do so.  Mac users and Linux users could also use their chosen OS and App without worry of problems exchanging files.

I'll give you an example of what is wrong with the current system.  A guy I knew along with some friends had a little company with one secretary.  They used Corel Perfect Office because that is what the secretary knew.  They had a chance at a big contract with GM.  The only snag was GM insisted on Word and Excel files created by a specific version of MS Office.  They naturally chose to drop Corel and switch to MS not because it was better or because they wanted to but because that was the only way they could be sure of data compatibility with GM.  With a standard set of file formats universally acceptable and supported by any application that wished to support it they wouldn't have been forced to make the choice between a major contract and staying with their chosen Office software.

Currently MS-Office is the dominant file format and no one can be fully compatible as it is not a documented public standard unlike ODF and seems to change every 18 months or so.  The situation gives Microsoft too much power and blocks direct competition.  That needs to change and seems to be changing.

Should your company or governments files be locked in a format that is in the control of a single private company?  Should your personal data be so locked in?  I'm switching to ODF formats.