Microsoft trying to squeeze others out?

[Joliet Jake]

From Custom PC...

Microsoft betas its OneCare Live antivirus software 5:58PM
Microsoft has unleashed a public beta of its first consumer security suite in the US - and it's not compatible with the two biggest antivirus products.

Any suggestion that Microsoft's plans for consumer security software were to play happy families with the rest of the antivirus industry has been exploded as, on unveiling a beta of its first rival product, it says it is not compatible with either Symantec or McAfee. It also says Trend Micro products are incompatible.

Windows OneCare Live includes antivirus software, developed through technologies acquired when it bought Romanian security firm GeCAD. As with other av products it uses both signature and heuristic or behavioural approaches for identifying and swatting nasty code.

It also includes the OneCare firewall, offering bi-directional monitoring and blocking, keeping tabs both on attempts to get into the system as well as unusual attempts to access the Internet by files already installed.

The Performance Plus component essentially schedules a monthly service for the system, performing a full virus scan, defragmenting and cleaning up the hard disk, and checking for updates and any files that need to be backed up. Most of this is already available in Windows.

Finally Backup and Restore tracks changes in files and backs them up either to an external hard disk or a CD or DVD.

Microsoft has said it will charge for OneCare Live as part of its Live online strategy, but this goes against its past performance. The Microsoft version of its Sybari acquisition is to include the antivirus engine free - and although customers often plug in multiple engines into the product, having one for free means it will likely be chosen over a second. The Windows firewall is also supplied free of charge.

So it seems that the game may be up for consumer security software. While Microsoft may stay the right side of anticompetitive practices by charging a fee, its aim of securing the 70 per cent or so antivirus-free computers means that the fee will have to be pretty low.

Symantec has already announced it is pulling its Sygate personal firewall products, although Zone Labs says it remains committed to providing consumer firewall products.

[RejZoR]

And here we go with exactly what i predicted. And OneCare Live isn't the best example either...
God i hote those ass***** that constantly complain about MS tring to get rid of competition. There ARE and WILL ALWAYS BE good, worse or much better alterantives. But no lets ditch out Windows Media Player just to satisfy their ego. Morons ::) Why no one complains over Symantec/McAfee/Trend Micro because of massive AV preloading on all PCs? No, no one complains about that no...

[Happy Bytes]

-{ Quote: "Why no one complains over Symantec/McAfee/Trend Micro because of massive AV preloading on all PCs? No, no one complains about that no..." }-

Of course, i do ;D

[Joliet Jake]

-{ Quote: "And here we go with exactly what i predicted. And OneCare Live isn't the best example either...
God i hote those ass***** that constantly complain about MS tring to get rid of competition. There ARE and WILL ALWAYS BE good, worse or much better alterantives. But no lets ditch out Windows Media Player just to satisfy their ego. Morons ::) Why no one complains over Symantec/McAfee/Trend Micro because of massive AV preloading on all PCs? No, no one complains about that no..." }-


Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you, but you must be one of the few who don't seem to care about anti-competitive business practices.
The fact that Microsoft have had multiple court cases against them at home and abroad for precisely this sort of thing suggests you may be in the minority.
They have been proven in the past to have abused their monopoly, they are currently in court in various places around the globe for the same practices so it isn't a big leap of the imagination to think that this may be more of the same.

What do they say about leopards and spots??

[VikingStorm]

I thought it was standard practice for consumer oriented anti-virus programs to not allow you to install if there are other programs already installed.
I know Trend Micro didn't let me install at all, as well as Kaspersky 2006, when I had another AV installed first.
I've also seen non-tech people "ignore" the warnings, and pick "Install anyway" when they had no idea what they were doing. Would save companies a lot of support costs. Most normal consumers also do not intentionally want multiple AVs.
Frankly, I don't see why you would subscribe to OneCare, if you aren't using the AV. All its other services are things you can buy at a one-time price elsewhere.

[jim_k]

-{ Quote: "From Custom PC...

Microsoft betas its OneCare Live antivirus software 5:58PM
Microsoft has unleashed a public beta of its first consumer security suite in the US - and it's not compatible with the two biggest antivirus products.

Any suggestion that Microsoft's plans for consumer security software were to play happy families with the rest of the antivirus industry has been exploded as, on unveiling a beta of its first rival product, it says it is not compatible with either Symantec or McAfee. It also says Trend Micro products are incompatible." }-

I hope this isn't surprising. While Microsoft isn't known for playing well as others, how can you expect for multiple virus scanners to work together if they have real time monitoring? Sometimes, it may work, but bad things will usually happen.

Have you ever seen both McAfee VirusScan and Symantec Norton AntiVirus running at the same time on a computer? Trust me, it doesn't work at all... usually, the computer will run real slow and one or both programs will crash or not start at all.

-{ Quote: "Windows OneCare Live includes antivirus software, developed through technologies acquired when it bought Romanian security firm GeCAD. As with other av products it uses both signature and heuristic or behavioural approaches for identifying and swatting nasty code." }-

Personally, I'll continue to use third party software. I don't trust Microsoft for security. If they aren't patching 6 month old flaws in IE, how can one trust them for antivirus software? I know different teams work on the products, but the powers that be at Microsoft could force their divisions to do a better job on stuff like this.

-{ Quote: "It also includes the OneCare firewall, offering bi-directional monitoring and blocking, keeping tabs both on attempts to get into the system as well as unusual attempts to access the Internet by files already installed." }-

Many people who understand security like the idea of firewalls that monitor both directions, but most home users do not know what to let in and what to let out. This results in disallowing things that are important and allowing things that shouldn't go out, putting the user in the same place as before. This could make technical support interesting to say the least.

-{ Quote: "The Performance Plus component essentially schedules a monthly service for the system, performing a full virus scan, defragmenting and cleaning up the hard disk, and checking for updates and any files that need to be backed up. Most of this is already available in Windows." }-

That is a good idea.

-{ Quote: "Finally Backup and Restore tracks changes in files and backs them up either to an external hard disk or a CD or DVD." }-

Backup software has been built into Windows for a while. Previous versions weren't the most user-friendly. Unlike security software, the market for backup software for home users is quite small right now in relation to other software. Hopefully, this will make more people backup their files on personal computers.


-{ Quote: "So it seems that the game may be up for consumer security software. While Microsoft may stay the right side of anticompetitive practices by charging a fee, its aim of securing the 70 per cent or so antivirus-free computers means that the fee will have to be pretty low." }-

You don't have to be cheap to be the leader. Look at MS Office for example: It is way overpriced and much more popular to alternatives such as WordPerfect Office, OpenOffice.org, and StarOffice. Many regular people trust the Microsoft name because they have heard of it and don't know about anything else.

-{ Quote: "Symantec has already announced it is pulling its Sygate personal firewall products, although Zone Labs says it remains committed to providing consumer firewall products." }-

My personal opinion is that Symantec bought Sygate just to shut it down and reduce competition. Their decision to end Sygate had nothing to do with Microsoft, especially since they knew what Microsoft was up to before even deciding to buy Sygate.

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "Why no one complains over Symantec/McAfee/Trend Micro because of massive AV preloading on all PCs? No, no one complains about that no..." }-

I do, I groan and moan every time I have to uninstall that on brand new PCs...because that's one of the first things to get uninstalled before I set up the PC for a client.

[Detox]

-{ Quote: "Why no one complains over Symantec/McAfee/Trend Micro because of massive AV preloading on all PCs? No, no one complains about that no..." }-

Me too - although I admit I am not real vocal about it here most of the time. Honestly, I think it's because I participate less in discussion since the board has gotten so busy and I have gotten busier as well; leaving me less time on the board which is taken up by reading and moderating.

Anyway I hate pre-loaded Avs etc but I also suppose that lots of PCs would go without any AV without that... Even on my IBMs I spent a while cleaning off pre-loaded stuff and those had nothing compared to the HP I had before.

I also wouldn't bet against MS making this stuff "mandatory" for running XP and up in the future, the way they're doing with this auto-update and verification stuff now.

[IBK]

-{ Quote: "Have you ever seen both McAfee VirusScan and Symantec Norton AntiVirus running at the same time on a computer? Trust me, it doesn't work at all... usually, the computer will run real slow and one or both programs will crash or not start at all." }-

McAfee, Symantec, Kaspersky and sometimes TrendMicro are not compatible with most other AV. So for me it is not a surprise that also MS is not compatible with them. I do not know peoples that have e.g. installed 2 of those mentioned on the same machine. But I guess that MS is compatible with most other AVs.

[Peter2150]

-{ Quote: "I do, I groan and moan every time I have to uninstall that on brand new PCs...because that's one of the first things to get uninstalled before I set up the PC for a client." }-

I've stopped moaning and groaning about it, I just won't be a PC from a manufacturer that does this.

I've bought two computers from Velocity Micro, and love the fact that they don't do this, that they give you a full windows cd as well as standard recovery, and that they give you a fantastic freeUlead package(not 30d trial) , that is optional. System comes clean out of the box.

Love it.

[Alec]

-{ Quote: "I thought it was standard practice for consumer oriented anti-virus programs to not allow you to install if there are other programs already installed." }-Yes, it is. Most AV programs install resident scanners that, while they might theoretically be made compatible, would nevertheless almost certainly create unnecessary inefficiencies and instabilities. So, of course this rush to pronounce Microsoft once again guilty of anti-competitive practices smacks of intellectual dishonesty to me. I find it to be sort of like saying that you want to have two video drivers running simultaneously or two thread schedulers running simultaneously. Even if it were somehow possible, why? Maybe the solution is that all AV vendors should be required to ship their products in a default, on-demand only mode so that there wouldn't be resident code incompatibilities. But then you would have to add detection for when people tried to activate resident scanners for more than one AV product. I just get tired of the trumped-up Microsoft bashing. It's actually counterproductive if you ask me, since comments such as these about AV incompatibilies take away from the more serious and valid complaints about Microsoft.

[Ailric]

I just recently purchased an HP and WOW there was a lot of garbage to remove. I spent over an hour getting rid of the many trial/useless programs.

Custom PC should have mentioned that it is unadvisable to install ANY two resident AV's on the same PC. I believe that they were being intentionally misleading.

If Microsoft has a monopoly, what do you call MacOSX and Linux... chopped liver?

Can we be completely honest here? The courts are after Microsoft for their MONEY, PERIOD. The EU fined Microsoft for over 1/2 BILLION dollars. Why? Because Microsoft had the audacity to include a Media Player with it's OS. That is a farce. Who was harmed? Who lost money? Realplayer? Boo Hoo.

[The Hammer]

For the Av companies it will come down to customer service or lack of same. If they want to give automated answers to our questions or ignore our questions or farm out tech support to the lowest bidder or insult the customer, then they will be squeezed out. Like I said once before the 800 pound gorilla is about to enter the room and may be the best thing that ever happened in the AV industry if it means they radically improve tech support and initial product quality.

[masqueofhastur]

It doesn't have any compatibility issues with either Ewido or Nod32 that I've found, so MS certainly isn't going out of their way to create incompatibility.

[bellgamin]

Am I the only one who finds it *odd* that the company that builds & sells an OS with security weaknesses also builds & sells a security suite to deal with those weaknesses?:o

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "Can we be completely honest here? The courts are after Microsoft for their MONEY, PERIOD. The EU fined Microsoft for over 1/2 BILLION dollars. Why? Because Microsoft had the audacity to include a Media Player with it's OS. That is a farce. Who was harmed? Who lost money? Realplayer? Boo Hoo." }-Microsoft is being fined for denying consumers a choice - while you can certainly argue that fining is insufficient for MS (after all, they have not changed their behaviour), the harm they have done is certainly visible.

In the case of MS Media Player, the EU correctly identified this as an attempt to gain an advantage in the digital music download market. Since most users are given the ability to playback DRM-ed WMV files, this not only gives MS an advantage in licensing this format to online music stores but it also makes it far harder for other formats to compete. This in turn puts off other companies from offering similar licensing which strengthens MS's hand further. When Joe Consumer tries to buy music online, the vast majority of the stores will only offer WMV format which means he is limited to players that can handle it (allowing MS in turn to make more money from licensing WMV to portable player manufacturers).

Yes, Apple are doing the same with iTunes - and more successfully in many ways - but they have had to sell iPods at almost break-even prices in order to overcome MS's market advantage. As for any other company hoping to break into the market with a new format - forget it (RealNetworks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealNetworks) don't count since they have been around since 1993 - and even with that head start they have been blocked from making real headway by both Microsoft and Apple). This is where consumers suffer because it removes competition and cripples innovation.

As for MS anti-virus, it would be trivial for MS to change the terms of the Windows OEM licence to require that it be bundled with all new PCs which would then greatly harm other companies. Uninstalling Norton may be a chore - but uninstalling MS's own product could become far harder (think about how hard they've made it to remove Internet Explorer). This may also harm security if future Windows vulnerabilities are dealt with via a signature update rather than developing and testing a security update to fix the cause of the problem.

[Ailric]

"Am I the only one who finds it *odd* that the company that builds & sells an OS with security weaknesses also builds & sells a security suite to deal with those weaknesses?"

Car manufacturers also sell parts. Same thing.

"Microsoft is being fined for denying consumers a choice - while you can certainly argue that fining is insufficient for MS (after all, they have not changed their behaviour)"

They made a version especially to please the Gestapo, but nobody wants it.

"the harm they have done is certainly visible."
What harm? To who?

"In the case of MS Media Player, the EU correctly identified this as an attempt to gain an advantage in the digital music download market."

Windows included a media player before there ever was an Ipod or any kind of digital download player. Years before.

"As for MS anti-virus, it would be trivial for MS to change the terms of the Windows OEM licence to require that it be bundled with all new PCs..."

Microsoft PC's are pre-bundled with Norton, Trend, McAfee but you would not allow them to use their own AV? What is allowed? Notepad? Calculator? A browser? Again, follow the money.

[RejZoR]

Sorry but the entire Windows Media Player fiasco is a total ******** (i had to put entire word here). They don't give us choice? Hm, should i use the most dumb player called RealPlayer? Or some fat buggy QuickTime? Media Player Classic and BS Player are irelevant since they're free. Still no choice of selection? I don't think so. I'm using WMP10 with FFdShow filters to decode anything from DivX to MPEG-2 (DVD's) and even QuickTime and RealVideo/Audio (using seperate filters). No why on earth would i ever need or want other two eh? What about Apple forcing you to install QuickTime along iTunes? Hm no one is loud now eh?
So i'm using WMP10 for pretty much any kind of video source. For audio it's another story. I use musikCube and WinAMP. Ok, stop here. i actually use to players that aren't related to MS at all? Wow a real magic i must say. ::)
When you associate other players with their supported filetypes they just push away the WMP10. WMP10 never ever bothered me when i clicked any audio format. Even Windows Media Audio (WMA) format is perfectly playable in both audio players of my choice. WMV is MS's exclusive codec so i don't wonder but it can be still decoded using FFdShow up to WMV8...
Ok so we got to point that users HAVE the choice of selection. I found WMP10 to be very nice player and i keep on using it although i know there is many other video players. I also found it's not the best for music handling so i got myself alternative programs. Big deal in today's internet era. Just few clicks away...

It's the same with Internet Explorer ******** (yeah again).
I was using it in the beginning too. It was ok for my first browsing needs when i just got to know the internet. But later i found that it's limiting me, windows in taskbar cluttered my taskbar fast and i missed this and that.
I found Opera. It was cool but had ads. Not long after i found Mozilla Suite and day later Firefox. I found it to be very flexible and had everything i needed. Now Opera has removed ads anyway... Linux users also have Conqueror although entire selection isn't that big compared to media players or AV scene...

Now lets return so this post won't be entirely offtopic...
There are well known and well established AV companies in the world.
MS comeback after almost 2 decades. Most of users don't even know MS already entered AV segment years ago but trashed it later. No one was loud back then. Now it comes back when all users have their own favorite AV. Wait most of users use Symantec. What about aggressive preloading on new PC's?
Now this is the topic where we could REALLY discuss freedom of choice...::)
Sure there are few of us that are loud about this but hey it's like shouting at the wall. Now lets return back to Media Players... So much noise and i could easily install any other media player and assign it to be the main to play this and that. No problems, MS's WMP stayed there and didn't bugged me at all. I don't even know it's there. Now try to do the same with Norton AV.
Not that i'm bashing Symantec but sometimes i ask myself if they code it that bad to prevent complete removal from preloaded PC's and to create conflicts if you remove it and install other AV. Sure we the power users/experts have no problem completely removing it. But how on earth could some random average user do that? It's forced to use Norton almost in any way.
And also since there is many AV rip-offs and scams users might burn themself even faster when searching for alternatives...

And last but not least, this security suite (OneCare Live) will be a paying service. Sure we can expect ad or two here and there (it's natural that they want to make profit out of it) but in the end USER will select it and pay $$$. No one else.
And if OneCare Live will be good, then why the heck not?
People are becoming such an assholes that i sometimes really wonder where this world is going (and here i get few snippets in my mind from "too" hot coffee case in McDonalds lawsuite)...
Most of people treat MS like the biggest evil on earth just because they want to sound cool and to get some attention (word "attention whores" is just the right one for such idiots). Now i recommend such users to sit down and rethink the whole situation. Everything is not just black and white...

PS: I apologize for any bad words in above text, but sometimes they are the only way to describe certain "class" of people:-X

[Ailric]

Well said RejZoR. It's all about choice. The day Microsoft installs a program that I cannot replace, then I'll be ticked. I can use any media player, browser, email client, antispyware, or any other program with no problems.

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "They made a version especially to please the Gestapo, but nobody wants it." }-Care to point out any PC vendors offering this version? Unless it is made widely available, and with a discount to reflect the product removal (no, you can't say Media Player is free when it's bundled in a US$250 copy of Windows) it is not possible to judge likely consumer demand.-{ Quote: ""the harm they have done is certainly visible."
What harm? To who?" }-You really haven't noticed the dearth of companies offering competing products? OS/2, Desqview, Desqview/X, GEM, DR-DOS, BeOS all failed due to Microsoft's hold on PC suppliers preventing them from being bundled like Windows was. In many cases they were superior to Windows (Desqview offered multitasking before Windows 3.x, OS/2 virtualized DOS applications better, GEM had better resource utilisation, DR-DOS included more utilities, BeOS was even offered for free if PC makers would install it to run on startup). Consumers suffered due to lack of choice and an inferior alternative (Windows), companies suffered due to lack of sales.

Ditto with office suites (only Lotus was able to make any headway with preloaded software), browsers (think Netscape - and the problems with IE should make it quick obvious who suffered in the end) and handheld computers (MS's WindowsCE had a truly mediocre start but they kept throwing money at it until the competition slipped up - as a result you have a lineup of lookalike PocketPCs, all with the same hugely limited design - compared to the choice that was available with Palm/Handspring/Clie and Psion/Geofox/Ericsson).-{ Quote: "Windows included a media player before there ever was an Ipod or any kind of digital download player. Years before." }-It didn't offer DRM'ed WMV until recently and wasn't made a compulsory part of Windows until ME/2000 (in Win98 you had a *choice* of whether to install it or not).-{ Quote: "Microsoft PC's are pre-bundled with Norton, Trend, McAfee but you would not allow them to use their own AV? What is allowed? Notepad? Calculator? A browser? Again, follow the money." }-As the previous posts above should make clear, only one AV can be running with realtime scanning at a time. If MS make the install of their AV a requirement, then none of the others can be installed which then means loss of consumers. Isn't that blindingly obvious?-{ Quote: "For audio it's another story. I use musikCube and WinAMP. Ok, stop here. i actually use to players that aren't related to MS at all? Wow a real magic i must say." }-Yes, because you've actually gone out and looked for alternatives. If you had had to download MS Media Player in the same way you had the others, then there would have a fair playing field - when a product is bundled however, there is not.

As for calling the free players irrelevant, shouldn't the fact that the only competition is free be ringing alarm bells? It is an indication that commercial software cannot compete - not a sign of a healthy marketplace.-{ Quote: "(and here i get few snippets in my mind from "too" hot coffee case in McDonalds lawsuite)." }-Have a look at McFacts about the McDonalds Coffee Lawsuit (http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm) - it wasn't as frivolous as most people seem to think.

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "I can use any media player, browser, email client, antispyware, or any other program with no problems." }-Not been keeping up with MS's EULA's then? Have a look at Windows Media Player DRM: The Plot Thickens (http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/000478.php). If you check the current EULA (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/trial/eula.mspx), you will find the sentence:

"Portions of this Software and third party applications such as media players use WM-DRM to play Secure Content ("WM-DRM Software"). If the WM-DRM Software's security has been compromised, owners of Secure Content ("Secure Content Owners") may request that Microsoft revoke the WM-DRM Software's right to copy, display and/or play Secure Content."

i.e. MS can disable any software using WM-DRM if it wishes to. Now this may not affect unprotected media, but if you purchase any WM-DRMed music, then your player, whichever one you use, is firmly under MS's thumb if you wish to play it.

As for your browser, well dearie me! Haven't you noticed how the "Set Program Access and Defaults" option in Add/Remove Programs will revert your default browser to IE and email client to Outlook Express? Haven't you noticed the lack of an option to uninstall IE/OE and how Windows' File Protection tries to stop you from removing them manually? Haven't you noticed that MS requires you to use IE to access Windows Update and will deliver broken pages to browsers like Opera when you try to access their knowledgebase pages? (the current versions of Opera have to mis-identify themselves to get around this). I could go on further but I think the point has been made...

[RejZoR]

@Paranoid2000
-{ Quote: "Yes, because you've actually gone out and looked for alternatives. If you had had to download MS Media Player in the same way you had the others, then there would have a fair playing field - when a product is bundled however, there is not.

As for calling the free players irrelevant, shouldn't the fact that the only competition is free be ringing alarm bells? It is an indication that commercial software cannot compete - not a sign of a healthy marketplace." }-

I don't think so. I'd certanly download WMP10 for video if that'd be the case.
I tried many video players and i always returned to WMP10. I especially like it's taskbar docking feature so i can watch videos while browsing or working other things. No other player offered me such innovative feature.

As for free players... no thats certanly not the case. Who would want adware crap from Real Networks a? Or not that great and sometimes very buggy and "fat" QuickTime player? They both have paybale versions. WinAMP is also payable although you can use free version too. It has nothing to do with price or being paid or free. It's about features and entire design.
musikCube is quiet similar to iTunes with many differences. It doesn't force me to install some crap video player that i don't want it, it's way faster it uses way less memory and it posseses similar interface. Not to mention i can add other audio types via plugins. Why would i want iTunes eh? Pay atention to the fact that MS player never really entered the "competiotion" of my favorite player. I was using WinAMP player ever since i started working with PC...
WMP10 has at least for me the most pefect design i've ever seen in any video player. Nice default skin, excellent controls placement, cool option to dock at taskbar, support for any DirectShow filters. I simply don't want anything else.
But if users can't type "free audio player" or "free video player" into google then it's purely their fault. But no they will probably go bashing MS of monopoly instead of typing 3 short words in Google... so basic searching is a real rocket science indeed ::)

[YeOldeStonecat]

Bravo on a good speech RejZor.

I always wondered the same thing. I don't believe I've ever seen Microsoft holding a gun to anyones head forcing them to use their products. You have your choice. If MS wants to bundle their OS with functional products like media player and a browser...so be it. I don't HAVE to use it.

I also think it's a good thing that they offer the service of integrated antivirus and firewall. It appears to be...very..."handholding"...which is good for the majority of users out there who don't know any better, who would be the users that didn't know that the 90 day trial of Norton or McGrufee expired 9 months ago.

With the explosion of broadband happening across the internet, and still many ISPs shipping only broadband modems so the end users sits on a public IP address (instead of the better setup some of the better ISPs are doing lately....shipping modem/router devices)..it's good to have some easy handholding self maintaining offerings like this One Trust. KISS for the average Joe user out there.

Don't knock Microsoft...it's better than nothing! A healthier internet means less headaches for the rest of us. The more PCs that have at least 1/2way decent protection for the average Joe user out there...the better.

[RejZoR]

-{ Quote: "Well said RejZoR. It's all about choice. The day Microsoft installs a program that I cannot replace, then I'll be ticked. I can use any media player, browser, email client, antispyware, or any other program with no problems." }-

Exactly. You want another media player? Sure, anything from QuickTime, iTunes, WinAMP, musikCube, Foobar, BSPlayer to PowerDVD and WinDVD will work just fine as main player on system. WMP10 will be installed but not used. Browser? I'm using Firefox and Opera (yeah both installed on same system). I see IE6 only when i launch Windows Update. IE never bugs me while i browse with Firefox. Don't like Outlook Express? Hey, you can always use Thunderbird, The Bat! or any other 3rd party email client. Don't like MS Anti-Spyware? Hey you don't even install it in the first place. So users DO have a choice. Saying they don't have it, is a very big (huge actually) lie.

[ErikAlbert]

MS Windows comes with alot of applications, which is necessary to give a newbie a good start to use his new computer and M$ may add any kind of application of their choice without any limit, including security softwares.

Each application that comes with Windows MUST have its own UNINSTALLER and that's not true.
I don't see any of these MS applications in the "Add/Remove Programs Window".
If I like a MS Application, I will keep it.
If I don't like a MS Application, I want to uninstall it and replace it with a third-party application.
And this rule counts for EVERY MS Application and every third-party application, without any exception, because the user is entitled to replace any application.

For instance :
If I don't like MSIE, I want to uninstall it and replace it with Firefox, because I like it.
If I don't like MS Outlook Express, I want to uninstall it and replace it with Thunderbird, because I like it.
M$ doesn't allow me to uninstall MSIE and I can't find any uninstaller for MS Outlook Express and that's WRONG, because M$ forces me to keep them both and all the rest of the MS Applications.
I can't uninstall Windows Explorer, Notepad, Wordpad, etc. etc. etc., but I can uninstall any third-part software.
Why am I not able to uninstall MS applications in the same userfriendly way, like I do with any third-party application in order to make SPACE on my harddisk for other applications ?
Why don't I get that freedom from M$ to decide which software is on my harddisk ?

This is not about Windows only, any other OS must have the same rules.
It's quite SIMPLE, why make it so complicated.
Each time, I see something odd or unlogical (even at work), it's always for the same reason : MONEY.

[bigc73542]

All of the programs you mentioned are part of the Windows operating system not add ons. Which makes it very hard if not impossible to uninstall because all of the windows apps interact and are interdependent.

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "All of the programs you mentioned are part of the Windows operating system not add ons. Which makes it very hard if not impossible to uninstall because all of the windows apps interact and are interdependent." }-
It doesn't need to be that way, it's only programmed that way, because M$ wanted this to happen.
MSIE is a good example. Why didn't M$ separate MSIE from their OS Windows.
Firefox can be installed and uninstalled, why isn't that possible with MSIE ?

[bigc73542]

-{ Quote: "It doesn't need to be that way, it's only programmed that way, because M$ wanted this to happen.
MSIE is a good example. Why didn't M$ separate MSIE from their OS Windows.
Firefox can be installed and uninstalled, why isn't that possible with MSIE ?" }-


Well as I see it, it is there product and they can do with it as they please and we can use it as is or find an alternative. I have looked for an alternative and have not found one I would trade windows for. Maybe some day.:-\

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "All of the programs you mentioned are part of the Windows operating system not add ons." }-In IE's case this is because Microsoft decided to integrate it into Windows, starting with Win98, in order to give it an "installed user base" advantage over Netscape (which was then being bundled with various ISPs). Outlook Express can certainly be removed with no ill effect (once you get around WFP's attempt to ressurect it) and Notepad/Wordpad are standalone applications - just delete the .exe file and away they go.

You can have debate what should be an add-on and what should be built-in to an OS, but "content viewers" (such as web browsers, email clients, video/audio players) should be up to individual choice, with a couple of alternatives included to start with. This is the case with Linux distributions (which may have several alternatives) but not with Microsoft - this allows MS to claim a greater user-base, to impose de-facto standards (as with its implementation, or lack thereof, of W3 web standards) and to use user-inertia (most won't bother to even search for the existence of alternatives) to gain advantage in other markets (the example of Media Player bundling giving them a major advantage in pushing WM-DRM to online stores and portable player manufacturers given above).

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Well as I see it, it is there product and they can do with it as they please and we can use it as is or find an alternative. I have looked for an alternative and have not found one I would trade windows for. Maybe some day.:-\" }-
Very right. M$ rules. End of discussion. :)

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "In IE's case this is because Microsoft decided to integrate it into Windows, starting with Win98, in order to give it an "installed user base" advantage over Netscape (which was then being bundled with various ISPs). Outlook Express can certainly be removed with no ill effect (once you get around WFP's attempt to ressurect it) and Notepad/Wordpad are standalone applications - just delete the .exe file and away they go.

You can have debate what should be an add-on and what should be built-in to an OS, but "content viewers" (such as web browsers, email clients, video/audio players) should be up to individual choice, with a couple of alternatives included to start with. This is the case with Linux distributions (which may have several alternatives) but not with Microsoft - this allows MS to claim a greater user-base, to impose de-facto standards (as with its implementation, or lack thereof, of W3 web standards) and to use user-inertia (most won't bother to even search for the existence of alternatives) to gain advantage in other markets (the example of Media Player bundling giving them a major advantage in pushing WM-DRM to online stores and portable player manufacturers given above)." }-
OK, but which less-knowledgeable user is going to delete NotePad/WordPad or any other MS Application without being worried.
These users won't do that, unless there is an uninstaller.

[RejZoR]

Or lets say why would anyone want to remove ~120KB big application called Notepad? Or you prefer waiting Office/OpenOffice (usually takes far longer than Notepad) to open/edit some most basic plaintext? Or Wordpad? Don't say MS is trying to get rid of OpenOffice by leaving Wordpad in Windows!?
MS is corporation. And as such company they have ALL rights to enter ANY product segment they want. Just look at Hyundai. They're making cars, memory modules (RAM), ships etc... So if MS decides to sell candies and cakes under Microsoft brand, why not. It's their decision (even though it may sound funny).

[mata7]

-{ Quote: "Well as I see it, it is there product and they can do with it as they please and we can use it as is or find an alternative. I have looked for an alternative and have not found one I would trade windows for. Maybe some day.:-\" }-

i agree Whit you

in my case i just love MS OS, i can care lees if come bundle Whit 5 different Internet explorer or 5 different media player, MS Give me the choice of use it if i want to, and you know what i love WMP :) To, but i use also winamp itunes for music, for DVD zoom player, TheaterTek, so you see i got the choose to use what i like to use, same goes for IE, i can use firefox, opera, Netscape, blablabla, same goes for Outlook i can use any mail client that i want to,they don't force me to use IE, but then again i love IE Also

you can get XPLite and remove alot of MS Product

[Joliet Jake]

-{ Quote: "OK, but which less-knowledgeable user is going to delete NotePad/WordPad or any other MS Application without being worried.
These users won't do that, unless there is an uninstaller." }-

That's the arguement, MS is taking advantage of peoples lack of knowledge.

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "It doesn't need to be that way, it's only programmed that way, because M$ wanted this to happen.
MSIE is a good example. Why didn't M$ separate MSIE from their OS Windows.
Firefox can be installed and uninstalled, why isn't that possible with MSIE ?" }-

"explorer" is part of Windows. Open up Windows Explorer...browse your C drive so you have "C:\Program Files" or something in the address bar.

Now in that same Windows Explorer address bar, type in http://www.wilderssecurity.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=625228 or some website.

It's a full featured operating system. To stay ahead of other OS's, it needs options and features. That is what Windows has become. If you don't like all those features...well, there's always CrApple or something like Ubuntu for you (a recent full featured distro of *nix). (whoops..maybe a different "less full featured" distro would be better for those who don't want full features OS's)

It comes with THIS, if you choose to use something else, you're perfectly entitled to add that something else and use it instead.

Now if Microsoft coded the OS to prevent you from installing say..another brorwser, or another media player..then you'd have a point.

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "Now if Microsoft coded the OS to prevent you from installing say..another brorwser, or another media player..then you'd have a point." }-No-one's going to object to an operating system offering features and options - but it should be application neutral, providing those features regardless of whatever programs you choose to you. The examples given above of how Windows defaults to Internet Explorer and prevents its removal (which should I have an insecure, buggy application on my system if I don't use it?), whether another browser is used or not, should indicate that it fails on this.

As for the media player, please read my previous posts regarding WS-DRM and Microsoft's EULA-given ability to disable any player using it. Pause also to consider how many online music stores are offering WS-DRM compared to alternative systems. Consider yourself in the shoes of an online music store manager considering what formats to offer - should they pay a premium for WS-DRM (which most Windows users can play, due to Media Player bundling) or another format (requiring a download of another player)?

If you decided that paying the WS-DRM premium was the most sensible business decision, even with cheaper alternatives available, then congratulations! You've just demonstrated an example of Microsoft leveraging its monopoly to gain an advantage in other markets! This is what the US/EU anti-trust actions have been about, and kudos to the EU for continuing, even though the US Justice Department dropped out (muzzled by the current administration perhaps...).

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Or lets say why would anyone want to remove ~120KB big application called Notepad? Or you prefer waiting Office/OpenOffice (usually takes far longer than Notepad) to open/edit some most basic plaintext? Or Wordpad? Don't say MS is trying to get rid of OpenOffice by leaving Wordpad in Windows!?
MS is corporation. And as such company they have ALL rights to enter ANY product segment they want. Just look at Hyundai. They're making cars, memory modules (RAM), ships etc... So if MS decides to sell candies and cakes under Microsoft brand, why not. It's their decision (even though it may sound funny)." }-
Notepad/Wordpad, were just examples and I also said ANY OTHER application.
Paranoid2000 gave much better examples and I fully agree with what he said in all his other posts, because that's the only way to do it right.

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "You do not need to uninstall Windows Firewall, which is a component of the Windows operating system and
cannot be removed. " }-
Source : http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=620767#post620767
This is another typical example of M$ policy.
If I don't like Windows Firewall, I can't uninstall it. Why not ?.
Maybe I can deactivate it, but that's not the same as removing it. I need that space to install Agnitum Outpost Firewall.

If it goes on like that, my harddisk will be full of double applications :
- MS Applications, I don't like, but can't remove AND
- my choosen third-party applications to replace these MS Applications.
Is that a clever solution ? For M$ yes, not for the user.
I'm looking forward to the unremovable Windows Anti-Virus. Pfffft

[metallicakid15]

i doubt microsoft will make much money of this...

[Notok]

The thing is that MS has literally BILLIONS of people telling them that if they don't make the OS their way, then they won't buy it. Windows 95 didn't have all that stuff, and everyone complained (loudly) about "Why doesn't it just WORK?" Users demanded all this stuff, and now that they've done it, everyone complains (loudly) that they did so. What would you propose they do? Seriously ponder, if you will, just how you please billions of people all at once.. XP has actually come pretty close, if you ask me.

As for IE being integrated in the OS.. When I worked tech support for Earthlink, I spent a LOT of time trying to explain that Windows is not the internet, and that My Computer is not a web browser, and that "No, it shouldn't be" before MS went and actually did it. I hated the idea.. but.. people started understanding how to use their computers more easily, freeing up my time to deal with the real issues.

Yes, MS did all of this for money, but sales require demand. If there wasn't demand (in every sense of the word), those features wouldn't be there. User education may be one way to change the tide, but the majority of users don't have the time, and legitimately so. Computers and the internet have allowed science to accellerate at an unprecidented rate because of the facilitated mass communication among peers. Scientists spend much more time working than most people do.. and personally, I would rather they continue to do so, rather than pour the amount of time that I do into learning computers. The way that I see it is that I spend the time learning what I do so that they don't have to. Just as they spend the time researching all of the issues that plague our world so that we don't have to. It pretty much works out.. but to facilitate that, their computers need to "Just work", and that can even include things like media players and antivirus programs.

Personally, it took me quite a while to even realize that Windows came bundled with a media player. I use Winamp whenever I can, and when something doesn't work in Winamp, I use WMP because it "Just Works". If something else came along that "Just Worked" better, and offered sufficient innovation, I would gladly pay for it.. and I know that I'm not alone on that. XP can burn CDs, too, but Ahead and Roxio seem to be doing just fine.. and there are plenty of other examples just the same.


-{ Quote: "As for the media player, please read my previous posts regarding WS-DRM and Microsoft's EULA-given ability to disable any player using it. Pause also to consider how many online music stores are offering WS-DRM compared to alternative systems. Consider yourself in the shoes of an online music store manager considering what formats to offer - should they pay a premium for WS-DRM (which most Windows users can play, due to Media Player bundling) or another format (requiring a download of another player)?" }-
MS isn't the only one.. http://www.reckon.co.uk/open/iTunes

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "The thing is that MS has literally BILLIONS of people telling them that if they don't make the OS their way, then they won't buy it. Windows 95 didn't have all that stuff, and everyone complained (loudly) about "Why doesn't it just WORK?"" }-Your memory of Win95 differs from mine then - most people I remember seemed to regard it as a great improvement over 3.1 both in terms of interface and functionality (Plug'n'Play, WinG, etc).-{ Quote: "Users demanded all this stuff, and now that they've done it, everyone complains (loudly) that they did so. What would you propose they do? Seriously ponder, if you will, just how you please billions of people all at once.. XP has actually come pretty close, if you ask me." }-Nobody demanded the integration of IE4 into Win98 - indeed when IE4 was released many considered it a disaster, causing system conflicts and severe slowdowns (Active Desktop still does slow things down, but not so noticeably on modern systems). Since Win98, you can argue that many of the additions are there to suit Microsoft or to damage competition (Product Activation, WS-DRM, a Media Player that, from version 8, started reporting back to Microsoft (http://www.computerbytesman.com/privacy/wmp8dvd.htm)). Finally, since Windows is pre-loaded on most systems, MS's "customers" are really the PC suppliers, not the end-user - and you can consider the skyrocketing hardware requirements of subsequent Windows versions as one consequence of this.-{ Quote: "Yes, MS did all of this for money, but sales require demand. If there wasn't demand (in every sense of the word), those features wouldn't be there." }-Well, demand in this case is largely fueled by the fact that computers can't do much without an OS - and that Microsoft is very quick to withdraw old versions from sale. In addition, requiring PC vendors to preload Windows on all PCs inflates "demand" further by ensuring that people pay for multiple licences - I have 3 - Win95, WinME and Win2K, even though I'm only using one!-{ Quote: "Scientists spend much more time working than most people do.. and personally, I would rather they continue to do so, rather than pour the amount of time that I do into learning computers. The way that I see it is that I spend the time learning what I do so that they don't have to. Just as they spend the time researching all of the issues that plague our world so that we don't have to. It pretty much works out.. but to facilitate that, their computers need to "Just work", and that can even include things like media players and antivirus programs." }-Things were "just working" in the pre-MS days of Unix systems - if anything, university IT support has to work far harder now trying to recover from the effects of the latest IE security vulnerability.-{ Quote: "Personally, it took me quite a while to even realize that Windows came bundled with a media player." }-Well, you must have missed the version of Win2K I got, with a WMP entry on the Quick Launch Bar, Start Menu and desktop - and just in case you decide to get rid of it, Windows File Protection resurrects it for you...a courtesy lacking for other media players.-{ Quote: "I use Winamp whenever I can, and when something doesn't work in Winamp, I use WMP because it "Just Works". If something else came along that "Just Worked" better, and offered sufficient innovation, I would gladly pay for it.. and I know that I'm not alone on that. XP can burn CDs, too, but Ahead and Roxio seem to be doing just fine.. and there are plenty of other examples just the same." }-And that is one key point here - you, and most others, would use WMP and other bundled applications "by default". If something else did "Just Work" better, the only chance that you would bother looking for it, let alone downloading and using it, would be if you encountered a problem with WMP serious enough to spur a change. And the longer most people use a piece of software, the more reluctant they are to consider alternatives.

Nowhere is this more apparent than with IE. Despite that fact that other alternatives are available for free, despite the fact that they are technically superior at webpage rendering, despite the fact that they offer usability enhancements and better security - 90% of web users are still using IE. What better example of the effects of bundling a program - despite it being inferior on so many grounds - can you have than that? And how much more damaging to consumers, when you consider how IE has fuelled the spyware epidemic - which also affects non-IE users who get hit by spam and worms from hijacked systems - can this be?-{ Quote: "MS isn't the only one.. http://www.reckon.co.uk/open/iTunes" }-And how does Apple behaving in a monopolistic fashion somehow justify MS doing the same? As far as I am concerned, it is an abuse (which the EU is investigating) but since Apple is a minority player, the spotlight should go on MS first.

[Nick Rhodes]

Does any remember the farce of trying to shoehorn active desktop onto NT4 ?!?

You needed to install sp3 but not higher or else you will loose the option to install active desktop, then install ie4, then you have to remember to install sp4 if you need the option pack stuff, then finally you can install sp6a, but if you install sp6 at any time your machines dies.

[RejZoR]

Hehe Notok i totaly forgot about CD burning ;D It's there but i never used it.
Except to erase CD-RW's since it's just right click away and twice to burn some MP3's directly from Windows Media Player 10 (this actually works pretty well).
Btw engine used in WinXP to burn CD's is actually Roxio in very limited edition ;)
I'm using Nero and CDBurnerXP but it's nice to know you have a backup always waiting there in case Nero fails from some weird reason...

[Joliet Jake]

Paranoid, the statistic you quoted of 90% of people using IE just shows what Microsoft rely on and take advantage of-the dumb majority.

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Paranoid, the statistic you quoted of 90% of people using IE just shows what Microsoft rely on and take advantage of-the dumb majority." }-
That's normal. People buy a new computer with winXP and all the mediocre MS Applications pre-installed. Why would they look for other softwares, they don't even know there are better alternatives.
Once they are familiar with MS Applications, they don't want to change anymore, because people are usually afraid of new things.

At work, each time when we try to install a new version of a software, users complain, just because the GUI has changed a bit.
If we try to replace a software with a total different one, they are angry.

[YeOldeStonecat]

And what's wrong with the "average Joe computer user" expecting a bundled system? A lot of IT people fail to remove the blinders they have, they can't see outside the box and think about the average home user. That average home user is a bigger chunk of sales in MS's pocket than use in the IT profession are. A bunded OS works better for those people, they don't want to go purchase a plain desktop OS, then have to go out and find, and purchase, a browser.

Lets stop here for a minute, nobody in their right mind could think that if MS didn't include IE in Windows, that alternative browser would be free, do you? LOL. They're only free now because they're trying to squeeze into the percentage, what is is, 14% so for for FF, slowly falling as Opera rises past..what, 5% now?

Then they'd have to go choose which media player to go out and purchase. Because, again, I doubt that alternative media players would remain free.

And why stop there? Damned those Microsoft people for including a built in Calculator...3rd party companies should have the right to sell end users that too. Oh...and that freebie Disk Defragmenter (that Microsoft did indeed pay Executive Software for), and..wait..gotta get rid of Microsoft Backup also (which they paid Veritas for). Lets see...what other programs can we get rid of, ...Wordpad, Notepad, ahh...yes....Windows XP Remote Desktop client and Host...people should have to purchase that directly from Citrix themselves (God forbid...anyone here know how expensive Citrix software is? ) Because the Remote Desktop that Microsoft paid Citrix for..well...that shouldn't be bundled for free. We should all have to purchase from Citrix, or Symantec PcAnywhere, or Netopia Timbuktu, or Compaqs CarbonCopy, ..in that non-free market I have my doubts UNC flavors would remain free. Lets see..what else can we get rid of...Hilgraeve's HyerTerminal?

Where are the lines drawed. Because once you start removing the very first thing....the ball will get rolling. Once the precident it set, where does it stop?

Some people, when they go shopping for a car, they'd like it to include the engine, the wheels the doors, the steeringwheel, the windshield. In other words.....the whole thing so they can immediately hop in..and get full use of it.

A small percentage of people like to customize, have them custom built..and that's great. Similar to computer users...there are alternatives here too. Is someone holding a gun to your head forcing you to use Windows? Will you be arrested if you walk home with a CrApple computer? Or install SuSe? Sure...you're now limited....because the reality of the computer world is...there HAS TO BE a majority company out there. It simply wouldn't work if we had 88 different brands of OS's to choose from. There has to be a compatiblity.

And the vulnerabilities....whoever is in the spotlight will be the targeted one. Microsoft is the big bad guy, if it wasn't them, it would be someone else. When Firefox first gained in popularity...everyone saying how safe and secure it was...I kept saying "Just watch...as they grow in popularity..just watch". Sure enough, now that there are a lot of FF users out there...we now have vulnerabilities coming out. Opera will probably follow. (BTW, I'm an Opera user, and used FF a lot. Currently using IE from my home PCs because I'm fiddling around with running my home LAN on ISA 2004...but otherwise, I'm FF and Opera)

I don't see why it's such a big deal as to wether you must be able to remove a component or not. It's not like most of us are still trying to run on 2.1 gig hard drives and must save every precious meg. If you don't want to use part of the OS for one function...fine...go download an alternative product. I've yet to see Microsoft prevent you from installing a competitors product. I have not seen Windows do something like de-activate itself if I try to install Winamp, or Opera, or Cobian Backup, or a Reflections terminal (glorified Hyperterminal), or use some 3rd party calculator, or install VNC or PcAnywhere.

OS updates and fixes are free from MS. Did you know that a few versions back, when vulnerabities were found in Apples OS, they didn't even offer updates? They flipped users the bird and told them "Go purchase the newer version".

Regardless, main point is...It's Microsofts product...they have the right to make it as they see fit. The point is not wether it's better or worse than alternatives out there...because quite frankly, as mentioned, if it wasn't Microsoft, it would be the next guy getting heat, compliants, etc. There will always "be something better" no matter who is in the spotlight. That's the reality of it.

The other reality is, yes Microsoft has the market share...by a huge margin. But again, no one is holding a gun to your forehead. At least I've never seen this happen where I am. If you're calling yourself an educated consumer, compared to the blind sheep out there, then you know there are alternatives like the various distro's of *nix.





-{ Quote: "And that is one key point here - you, and most others, would use WMP and other bundled applications "by default". If something else did "Just Work" better, the only chance that you would bother looking for it, let alone downloading and using it, would be if you encountered a problem with WMP serious enough to spur a change. And the longer most people use a piece of software, the more reluctant they are to consider alternatives.

Nowhere is this more apparent than with IE. Despite that fact that other alternatives are available for free, despite the fact that they are technically superior at webpage rendering, despite the fact that they offer usability enhancements and better security - 90% of web users are still using IE. What better example of the effects of bundling a program - despite it being inferior on so many grounds - can you have than that? And how much more damaging to consumers, when you consider how IE has fuelled the spyware epidemic - which also affects non-IE users who get hit by spam and worms from hijacked systems - can this be?And how does Apple behaving in a monopolistic fashion somehow justify MS doing the same? As far as I am concerned, it is an abuse (which the EU is investigating) but since Apple is a minority player, the spotlight should go on MS first." }-

[ErikAlbert]

Well as long M$ doesn't force me to use their applications, I can live with them, but nothing more than that.

I sincerely hope I never get these messages from Windows :
"You can't install ZoneAlarm Free, because you have already a firewall : the unremovable MS Windows Firewall.".
"You can't install Firefox, because you have already a browser : the unremovable MS Internet Explorer."
"You can't install KAV, because you have already an AV : the unremovable MS Windows Anti-Virus."

[Notok]

-{ Quote: "Your memory of Win95 differs from mine then - most people I remember seemed to regard it as a great improvement over 3.1 both in terms of interface and functionality (Plug'n'Play, WinG, etc)" }-Probably not a difference in memory as much as a difference in experiences. The people I'm speaking of were the new users, that couldn't use a command line if their lives had depended on it. I don't mean that as an insult, they were just very new. Again, I'm speaking of tech support for one of the nation's largest ISPs.. my experience combined with my peers equated to thousands of calls per day of pretty much the same thing.


-{ Quote: "Nobody demanded the integration of IE4 into Win98 - indeed when IE4 was released many considered it a disaster, causing system conflicts and severe slowdowns (Active Desktop still does slow things down, but not so noticeably on modern systems). Since Win98, you can argue that many of the additions are there to suit Microsoft or to damage competition (Product Activation, WS-DRM, a Media Player that, from version 8, started reporting back to Microsoft). Finally, since Windows is pre-loaded on most systems, MS's "customers" are really the PC suppliers, not the end-user - and you can consider the skyrocketing hardware requirements of subsequent Windows versions as one consequence of this." }-Nobody demanded integration, that's correct. They demanded easier use, and they very frequenly confused the internet for their computer. That was the whole premise of that kind of integration, was to make the whole experience more seamless. I remember MS spouting about how it would make it easier, as their OS itself would be a portal to the internet, and they were right. People understood IE better than they understood My Computer. There were pleny of people that you would tell them to go to a certain directory, and they'd be looking at IE asking where to click, or vice versa (using explorer in place of IE for the internet).. you'd spend 5 mins trying to figure out that the "Not Found" error they're talking about is actually a 404 error.. once the integration happened, it didn't matter as much.

Of course it was a disaster to us tech types. To the new users, though, it was a great thing. Maybe there wasn't a lot of demand for integration specifically, but there was a lot of demand to include everything a user would need. There was a lot of people thought that the purchase price of Windows should include everything they'll ever need and more, without having to find and install anything else.. they thought it wasn't right that they have to pay so much for an OS, then have to pay $500 on more software just to use it.. that idea was absurd. Not only that, but they wanted it to all work seamlessly, it should all be the same.. "why should I have to learn all this extra stuff? I don't have time! Why can't it Just Work?" Not to mention developing countries where the OS can still cost a full year's income.. seriously, I emplore you to think on the scale of millions and billions of people.. I can't even fathom that kind of number, nevermind trying to please them all at the same time. There were as many different demands as there were users, now that's calmed down.. no, instead the demand is that MS take out the things the users wanted in there in the first place.

Stonecat said it perfectly in the first paragraph of his post (great points, YeOldStonecat :) )


-{ Quote: "Well, demand in this case is largely fueled by the fact that computers can't do much without an OS - and that Microsoft is very quick to withdraw old versions from sale. In addition, requiring PC vendors to preload Windows on all PCs inflates "demand" further by ensuring that people pay for multiple licences - I have 3 - Win95, WinME and Win2K, even though I'm only using one!" }-Shh.. I'd prefer that we not encourage MS to go on a subscription model like they've been talking about forever...


-{ Quote: "And that is one key point here - you, and most others, would use WMP and other bundled applications "by default". If something else did "Just Work" better, the only chance that you would bother looking for it, let alone downloading and using it, would be if you encountered a problem with WMP serious enough to spur a change. And the longer most people use a piece of software, the more reluctant they are to consider alternatives." }-You'd be surprised. I've seen plenty of people with money go to a store, or a tech, and ask for "the best", once they get a grip on how to use the system and realize that there's more they can do with their computer. My favorite client now has bought every version of Photoshop since v3, because the techs told him it was the best.. and all he does is import phots, resize/crop, and maybe tweak the color settings a bit, then puts them into his storybook.. all of this stuff could be done with what came bundled with his custom built PC for free, but he chose to buy hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars of software instead. I think a lot of people migrate to other apps once they get a handle on downloading and installing.. the bundled components are mainly there for new users and those that don't have time.

-{ Quote: "Nowhere is this more apparent than with IE. Despite that fact that other alternatives are available for free, despite the fact that they are technically superior at webpage rendering, despite the fact that they offer usability enhancements and better security - 90% of web users are still using IE. What better example of the effects of bundling a program - despite it being inferior on so many grounds - can you have than that? And how much more damaging to consumers, when you consider how IE has fuelled the spyware epidemic - which also affects non-IE users who get hit by spam and worms from hijacked systems - can this be?" }-Except that now that Firefox is doing more advertising, more people are migrating. More are migrating to Opera now, as well, now that the ads are being removed. My father sticks with Firefox with no extensions and apps that are readily available, because he's too busy working on his own software to go searching for new stuff. Get more advertising and people will use it. It's just the same as AVs, where most people think their choices are limited to Norton and McAfee. Most average users aren't as addicted to searching out good software as we are. They also don't know about technical superiority, just how easy it is to use the app. Usability enhancements? Takes time to learn.. Security? "I've got Symantec" Plenty of users of IE shells, too, and many of them do know about Firefox and Opera. As things become more common knowledge, the majority behavior will change.. but the majority still needs their hand held, they need things there and ready to use.

You don't really think that malware writers only started writing malware because of IE, do you? There's plenty of malware that doesn't rely solely on IE, and there's more and more coming out that exploit other programs as well (like Java), to get those that aren't running IE. Real security will come when developers start coding securely.. that's not just limited to MS. And then they'll still find ways around it.

-{ Quote: "And how does Apple behaving in a monopolistic fashion somehow justify MS doing the same? " }-It doesn't, it illustrates that MS is not the only player there. Apple does pretty much own the MP3 world. iTunes is not a small thing, and many people believe that Apple invented the MP3 player.

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "And what's wrong with the "average Joe computer user" expecting a bundled system?" }-Nothing - where the problem occurs is when the "bundler" (MS in this case) uses this tactic to drive competitors out of business (and there are plenty of examples of MS doing this over the last decade) or to gain an unfair advantage in other markets (see posts above for examples).-{ Quote: "Lets stop here for a minute, nobody in their right mind could think that if MS didn't include IE in Windows, that alternative browser would be free, do you? LOL." }-Well Opera isn't free in the sense that the "free" copies are being paid for by Google. However it is an example of commercial software that is having to compete in an unfair market - not only due to IE being subsidised by Windows but also due to some websites being IE-only. As for Firefox, that has always been free in every sense of the word and would be regardless of IE - this also applies to other open source browsers (Lynx, Konqueror, Mozilla, Galeon, Epiphany, etc).-{ Quote: "And why stop there?...Calculator...Disk Defragmenter ...Microsoft Backup...Wordpad, Notepad....Windows XP Remote Desktop client and Host......Hilgraeve's HyerTerminal?" }-There are two issues being raised here - the ability to gain influence in other markets by product bundling (e.g. MS bundling a browser gives them the ability to create proprietary features for their web server software, bundling a media player does ditto for their DRM and WMV licencing). This obviously does not apply to standalone products like backup software or calculators.

The second is the ability to harm competitors by including a "free" version of their software. This does not apply where MS is paying to licence such software, but there have been many cases where they have not (the most notable example being Stacker (http://www.base.com/software-patents/articles/stac.html) disk compression). The result? A commercial software industry that is generally now afraid to release anything that may compete with an MS product - consumers may benefit from bundled (not free) software in the short term, but the long-term harm should be obvious.-{ Quote: "Some people, when they go shopping for a car, they'd like it to include the engine, the wheels the doors, the steeringwheel, the windshield. In other words.....the whole thing so they can immediately hop in..and get full use of it." }-A poor analogy IMHO - a car cannot function without the items you list, while an OS can function without bundled applications. A better one would be to consider a car which included non-standard components making it difficult for you to go to third parties for replacement tires, oil or car stereos - this is in a sense happening with proprietary engine management systems locking out independent servicing and the harm to Joe Consumer (having to pay more for "official" mechanics) should be clear here.-{ Quote: "Is someone holding a gun to your head forcing you to use Windows?" }-Try buying a PC without Windows - a point that has been made above.-{ Quote: "there HAS TO BE a majority company out there." }-Why? This does not apply to other industries so why should the computer industry be any different?-{ Quote: "It simply wouldn't work if we had 88 different brands of OS's to choose from. There has to be a compatiblity." }-Well things did work when other OSes were around and, if you jog your memory a little, this was when Microsoft put most effort into improving Windows (e.g. Win95 to counter OS/2). And the Linux world seems to do pretty well having dozens of distributions available.-{ Quote: "..I kept saying "Just watch...as they grow in popularity..just watch". Sure enough, now that there are a lot of FF users out there...we now have vulnerabilities coming out. Opera will probably follow." }-Yeesh - go look at the vulnerability lists for IE (http://secunia.com/product/11/), Firefox (http://secunia.com/product/4227/) and Opera (http://secunia.com/product/4932/) first would you? The gulf between IE and the others isn't going to close because the others "get more users", there are several reasons why IE has more holes and while continue to do so (larger code base, non-browser functionality and Windows integration for starters).-{ Quote: "Currently using IE from my home PCs because I'm fiddling around with running my home LAN on ISA 2004...but otherwise, I'm FF and Opera)" }-And there you have it - someone having to use one Microsoft product they (presumably) don't favour because of another one on their setup. Another clear example of market leverage.-{ Quote: "I don't see why it's such a big deal as to wether you must be able to remove a component or not." }-To improve system security (especially in IE's case), to improve system performance (IE again), to save wasted resources (IE again - you do know about parts of it being preloaded during Windows startup don't you?). Shouldn't this be obvious?-{ Quote: "OS updates and fixes are free from MS." }-Fixes are, updates aren't. Try asking for a free "update" from Windows NT to XP.-{ Quote: "Did you know that a few versions back, when vulnerabities were found in Apples OS, they didn't even offer updates? They flipped users the bird and told them "Go purchase the newer version"." }-As with Notok's iTunes comment above - this thread is about Microsoft, not Apple, and Apple doing wrong does not justify Microsoft doing likewise. Now can we please ditch the Apple comments? When/if they control 90% of the market, all the comments made above will apply to them but they do not do so currently.-{ Quote: "Shh.. I'd prefer that we not encourage MS to go on a subscription model like they've been talking about forever..." }-Well this has been an option for businesses for a while now and one of the possibilities of WinXP's Product Activation is that MS can more effectively "obsolete" WinXP by closing down the activation service, thereby preventing any new (legitimate) installs, making a full subscription service (with DRM enforcement) the next logical step.-{ Quote: "I've seen plenty of people with money go to a store, or a tech, and ask for "the best", once they get a grip on how to use the system and realize that there's more they can do with their computer." }-Yes, but this example is more to do with getting new software rather than searching for alternatives to bundled programs (unless you wish to argue that MS Paint is a competitor to Photoshop ;D) - and it also sounds like the techs in this case may be doing a disservice since the likes of Paintshop Pro would have sufficed with less cost and learning needed.-{ Quote: "Except that now that Firefox is doing more advertising, more people are migrating." }-Which should illustrate how ridiculous the situation is. You have a free product with a number of advantages over a bundled one - you have repeated warnings against using the bundled product (including from the Computer Emergency Readiness Team (http://www.internetnews.com/security/article.php/3374931)) and yet the Mozilla Foundation has to spend money on advertising and still can't get a level playing field with IE?

The proper solution here is to either require MS to bundle alternative products for every one they include with Windows - or to make the bundled a chargeable extra. If consumers are given a choice between say, Windows-Basic at U$100 without any bundled software (save possibly for free/trial versions - especially those items needed online like firewalls and browsers), and Windows-Home at $150-200 (with media player, etc) then there would be a level-playing field for competitors, both commercial and non-commercial. The current setup where you have to pay extra to remove (http://www.litepc.com/) unwanted programs is so clearly wrong that I cannot see how anyone here would try to justify it.

[beetlejuice69]

A lot of good points made here but I think P2K is winning this. :)

[RejZoR]

I don't think so. People just don't understand the position of accesories bundled with OS. But from what i see they obviosuly prefer just kernel without anything around it. Also let's get rid of the nice GUI because this way MS is trying to squeez out TGTSoft and Stardock. MS Paint is most obviosly squezing out Adobe Photoshop and Jasc Paintshop Pro, not to mention Wordpad squeezing out OpenOffice. Disk cleanup tool is also squeezing out System Mechanic/Norton SystemWorks and not to mention Disk Defragmenter!
Ahead also cannot live well since Windows XP integrated CD burning is eating their market share. C'mon get real. If people can't find all the goodies in these days then they shouldn't use PC's at all. Sorry but thats my point.
Search engines usage is the base to even use internet properly::)
There is no other way to find other things.

Here are pure examples that ANYONE could search for them.

Google:
You search for other browsers? Type "browser" in it and press ENTER.
Well well well. First link is Mozilla, second is Netscape and third is Opera.
MS Internet Explorer is only 6th!
Really hard i must say...

Wanna find other media players? Type "player"...
First result is RealPlayer,QuickTime is third and WinAMP is 4th.
Windows Media Player is 5th!

Need new antivirus? Type in "antivirus". Tada!
First result is Symantec, second is McAfee, third is AVG, 4th Trend Micro and 5th Panda. avast! and AntiVir are 6th and 7th.

Need firewall? Type "firewall".
First is ZoneAlarm, second is Symantec, 3rd Sygate and then 4th Checkpoint and 5th Tiny.

ANd i can go the same for anything else people want to complain.

Now look back and you'll see i used the most basic terms.
I could use "audio player" instead of just "player" to get even precise results.
Same could do to dig out just video players. You don't need any complex syntaxes to search, just the most basic terms we use every day.
Thats why i'm so pissed of when people start to compalin about it instead actually typing those god damn few letters in any search engine.
I'm sure Yahoo and lets say Altavista would produce quiet similar results.
But no it's easier to fill a lawsuit against MS than just TRY to type those terms in search engine. God, where is this world going!?
Sue anyone just to satisfy our ego and feeling we did something for the "majority"? Damn majority doesn't complain about integrated media players and instant messagers...

[beetlejuice69]

I guess they did to PsP...it`s now owned by Corel. Oh oh they`re next. :)

[FastGame]

I have to agree with RejZoR, his points prove there's no real argument ;)

[Upasaka]

What ever Microsoft and Bill Gates are "supposed" to have done one thing should be remembered...someone had the vision,determination and courage to go out there and give the world the means to use computers,something that was once the preserve of the "gifted" few.

Millions of people now have access to information,help,health and wealth that they could never have dreamed of.People aged 2 to 102 can use these things now and plenty of others have jumped on the wagon and made fortunes that without BG and MS they would never have seen.

I am not the biggest fan of MS or BG but prople love to knock those that succeed,.would they be complaining if they had found a cure for all major illnesses? Would they say that this is unfair,probably they would get accused of exploiting the sick!

[Joliet Jake]

-{ Quote: "Well as long M$ doesn't force me to use their applications, I can live with them, but nothing more than that.

I sincerely hope I never get these messages from Windows :
"You can't install ZoneAlarm Free, because you have already a firewall : the unremovable MS Windows Firewall.".
"You can't install Firefox, because you have already a browser : the unremovable MS Internet Explorer."
"You can't install KAV, because you have already an AV : the unremovable MS Windows Anti-Virus."" }-


There is only one thing stopping that from becoming a reality.....the lawsuits from the EU and elsewhere.

[Joliet Jake]

To everyone who doesn't believe that Microsoft are abusing their power/position, get real.
To everyone who believes that the result of this pursuit is a better deal for consumers, get real.

[tuatara]

The fact is that Windows is by far the most used OS.
and there is no real competition left in this end-user OS market part.
All other OS-es (payed or unpayed) can't be compared on that.
So therefor it must be clear that MS has a monopoly.
It is very naive to think that Internet Explorer,
wasn't built-in the OS since v4.0 without an uninstall option
without a reason, ask the people who worked at Netscape that time
what happened.

The same for the other apps that are mentioned in this thread.

I've been around for a very long time here, and i have seen companies come and go.
Nice companies taken over, and products stopped that way.
the speed that this industry was developing, has dramatically slowed down
because of this monopoly.

And lot's of new idea's and applications have died out because of the larger companies that killed those.

You can't go to the shop and say give me the other OS on the shelf,
and have just as much software available for it.
or that has about the same market share.

So yes, competition has died out.
----------------------------------------------
That is why it can take 6 years before a new OS comes out
that will have a market share > 30%
Let's be honest, XP needs 20 Security programs, for it can be used
in a safe way, and there is no other OS that the end-user can buy.

That is like having one brand of car that has a market share of
90% with enormous safety problems.
And you need to take 20 sets of tools every day for each trip you
make otherwise it will brake down.

6 years for a new OS, just think what would have happened if there
were just 5 companies like MS, that where competing in a normal way,
trying to bring out new products, for other would do.

There is a story that if MS would decide to go sell Televisions,
with their PR /marketing budget they could give every one in the US
a Television set for 5$, and if all other brands are dead,
sell them for a very high price.

What is the price of XP PROF with Office ?
I don't think that if so many copies are sold this is a normal price.

and i know that there are people that think that MS is very clever
to come so far with this monopoly

For those be happy, and donate some more money to the richest
company of the world.

for me, i live of computer support, and with MS, there is a lot of work
to do.
But i would have had a better feeling, if end-users could
choose which brand of OS they wanted.
Again, in the end the all have to select the same one.

Except a few insiders, or people with more OS-es knowledge.

I understand that if you choose a product, and go for it,
then you don't like others being negative about it.

But working with computers for more then 30 years now,
and working with lots of OS-es all those years.
I am not happy with this monopoly.

Hewlett Packard and Sun Microsystems etc. had REAL FULL 64bits OS-es
Fiber-optic disks,already 8 years ago, multi-threading, multi-tasking.

but how long, before we see this at MS?

[Notok]

-{ Quote: "Now look back and you'll see i used the most basic terms.
I could use "audio player" instead of just "player" to get even precise results.
Same could do to dig out just video players. You don't need any complex syntaxes to search, just the most basic terms we use every day.
Thats why i'm so pissed of when people start to compalin about it instead actually typing those god damn few letters in any search engine.
I'm sure Yahoo and lets say Altavista would produce quiet similar results.
But no it's easier to fill a lawsuit against MS than just TRY to type those terms in search engine. God, where is this world going!?
Sue anyone just to satisfy our ego and feeling we did something for the "majority"? Damn majority doesn't complain about integrated media players and instant messagers..." }-...And for the new computer users that haven't gotten that far, that don't yet know how to download and install a program, they have the bundled apps to start them off, to whet their appetites for more. Then they're free to find alternatives, and usually do, or continue using the bundled apps at least knowing of alternatives.

Bundled software provides a baseline. It gives the new users what they need to get started. It frees up resources (think tech support), for MS and for companies that provide services (like ISPs), for other things.

I ask again, how you appease literally billions of people all at once? Make sure to include the brand new users for whom downloading and installing may not be an option, as well as all of the business customers and developing countries? You'll also need to keep tech support in mind, both for your own as well as other companies. Sorry, but we techy types are the minority. Anyone that's dealt with the masses (offline) knows how irrational they can be about computer stuff, and knows about the hand-holding that's required, and how much of a pain it can be to try to get them to install stuff and get it set up. That's not always a bad thing, there are lots of people that legitimately do not have time to learn all that we know about computers, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't have access to the same resources that we do.. in some cases, they may even have more legitimate needs for such communication and convenience without spending as much time as we do learning.

I partially agree with the idea of having a separate CD full of other apps, but then you run into issues of what to include without crushing out even more small guys in favor of a few select companies, as it would effectively be advertisement. Maybe if they had a one-click software store along the lines of what Linspire does, but then you'll still have plenty of companies crying foul, and it would incur more costs to build and maintain.. and guess who that buck would be passed down to. Sounds to me like that's a better job for the OEMs, leave the basics in the OS itself.. just enough to do everything you need without a lot of perks ;)

-{ Quote: "The current setup where you have to pay extra to remove unwanted programs " }-nLite is free, and XPLite has a limited freeware version. If MS let you remove everything, like they did in 9x, their support lines get clogged with people needing help when things don't work right because they removed the necessary components. Reduce support costs and you can reduce prices (or make more free offerings). An advanced user that wants to remove things that shouldn't be removed in the first place, cognizant of the fact that MS won't help them, can hunt down apps like nLite or XPLite.

-{ Quote: "Which should illustrate how ridiculous the situation is. You have a free product with a number of advantages over a bundled one - you have repeated warnings against using the bundled product (including from the Computer Emergency Readiness Team) and yet the Mozilla Foundation has to spend money on advertising and still can't get a level playing field with IE?" }-It seems to me that this illustrates how rediculous our society has become about needing the media to guide them, more than it says anything about MS at all. It's just a fact of life that without advertising, most people will never know a product exists, and the more advertising a company does, the more likely they are to succeed, regardless of the product's own merits (or lack thereof).

-{ Quote: "As with Notok's iTunes comment above - this thread is about Microsoft, not Apple, and Apple doing wrong does not justify Microsoft doing likewise." }-By this reasoning, DRM should have never entered this thread in the first place.. the thread is about MS trying to crush security software vendors by making their AV incompatible with other AVs. Again, my point was not to jusify MS' actions, but rather to illustrate that they do not have a monopoly on DRM, and do not deserve 100% blame. As far as that goes, companies like Sony and Universal have done worse with their rootkit that reports what you're playing when you play it, makes it so you can ONLY use their player to listen to the CD, serves up ads, potentially disables your CDROM from being used any other way, and made it impossible to remove (before Mark Russinovich found it). There are more productive ways to approach these issues that could stop this kind of behavior across the board, than just pointing the finger at MS. I'm sure they will happen, but it's going to take some technically saavy politicians to come up with some sound laws on the matter, and it will require a greater overall view of the issue.

I'm not going to argue that MS didn't do some pretty sleazy things in the past, but MS has been cleaning up their act. Yes, it has taken some lawsuits, but very few corporations are intrinsically altruistic.. that's the nature of business to begin with (that's not a justification either, it's a fact of life). Lets not loose the forest for the trees here (which is starting to happen), the point being made is that MS bashing has become popular for nearly anything anyone is unhappy about regarding computers, and a lot of the MS bashing is not justified, necessary, balanced, or productive, and you don't see the same kind of bashing elsewhere, even when another company does the same things or worse. MS had reasons for bundling in these things, and it wasn't just greed - neither is OneCare - it's a response to criticizm that they don't care about customers' security. They didn't just bundle in this stuff because they wanted to kill off everyone else, otherwise they would have done a lot more. I used to be an MS basher as well, then I learned a little more about business, and one day I tried to look at it from their view; being responsible for the computing experience of literally billions of people and the foundation for millions of other software apps. When you do that, it's not that hard to see why some of this stuff is the way it is.

Conclusion: Past behavior, and behavior in other markets, aside, it is not correct, fair, justified, balanced, or productive to claim that MS is trying to kill off other AV companies just because their AV isn't compatible with a handful of others. That's just the way antivirus programs are. Past behavior in other markets, real or percieved, does not justify that claim.

[tuatara]

-{ Quote: "Conclusion: Past behavior, and behavior in other markets, aside, it is not correct, fair, justified, balanced, or productive to claim that MS is trying to kill off other AV companies just because their AV isn't compatible with a handful of others. That's just the way antivirus programs are. Past behavior in other markets, real or percieved, does not justify that claim" }-.
I think your are correct, IF microsoft releases it's AntiVirus separate from the OS, and makes a normal deinstall possible.
And would sell it as an extra product in another box on the shelf.
That would be a honest way to do business.

If it is built in the future in Service Packs, or the OS,
and can't be De-installed like other progs or AV's can,
then of course you also must conclude that they are trying to kill
other AV's of the market.

We'll wait and see, i hope you are correct,
and that MS learned about the fact that they have lost to many
cases in court regarding their monopoly.

It is not only about winning or not, and is also about doing business in
a decent, fair way.

I still think it is strange that AT&T had to split up in the 70's-80's because of their monopoly, and that MS doesn't have to do that.

[RejZoR]

MS Antivirus WILL be sold separetelly. But sometimes they're forced to do that step. Anyone remeber windows without firewall? Most of people didn't even know what firewall is and so milions of Windows OS were unprotected.
Sure XP's have the firewall but it's very very basic. Even if they'd add simple outbound program control that would just check if app wants to connect regardless of what it will be sent (packets) and that would be still ok.
This is still very limited compared to advanced features of other firewalls.
But on other hand there are some users taht actually prefer simplicity over advanced stuff. I know there are loads of firewalls, yet i prefer WinXP SP2 firewall. It does it job well and doesn't slow down anything or bug me for each packet i get/send.

[Joliet Jake]

Conclusion: Past behavior, and behavior in other markets, aside, it is not correct, fair, justified, balanced, or productive to claim that MS is trying to kill off other AV companies just because their AV isn't compatible with a handful of others. That's just the way antivirus programs are. Past behavior in other markets, real or percieved, does not justify that claim." }-

Pardon me while I wet myself laughing...past behaviour???
Microsoft will be in court again before long, and for people saying that it's easier to make lawsuits well that's nonsense.
Microsoft have the resourses to buy the best legal team to represent themselves in the courts, yet they still lose.

[RejZoR]

Nonsense? How come thats happening over and over again?
I have nothing against true lawsuites ut not garbage ones like this crap regarding integrated media player, IM's and other software.
Why no one complains because some car manufacturers integrate stereo players, air conditioning, electric driven windows, car alarm and extra winter tyres for same price like others offer just plain car without extra goodies? No lawsuites. Isn't that weird? But they are pushing away possible competition from competitive audio manufacturers, tyre copmpanies, alarm vendors and air conditioning companies? This example might have nothing in common but describes it the best. Just don't say you can always change tyres, car stereo, alarm and other stuff, coz you CAN do the same in Windows.

[ErikAlbert]

-{ Quote: "Just don't say you can always change tyres, car stereo, alarm and other stuff, coz you CAN do the same in Windows." }-
If you can change the tyres of your car, your old tyres are gone and replaced by new ones.
If you install another browser under Windows, your old browser (MSIE) is still there, because you can't remove it.

[RejZoR]

Why would you want to? To get your Windows Update broken maybe? Sure go for it. I always god damn wonder why people want to remove everything if other programs will work EXACTLY the same whether that app is somewhere on the HDD or not. It's just a matter of dumb principals and i hate that.

[Smokey]

-{ Quote: "Conclusion: Past behavior, and behavior in other markets, aside, it is not correct, fair, justified, balanced, or productive to claim that MS is trying to kill off other AV companies just because their AV isn't compatible with a handful of others. That's just the way antivirus programs are. Past behavior in other markets, real or percieved, does not justify that claim." }-
IMHO your conclusion is right:)

[Smokey]

-{ Quote: "To everyone who doesn't believe that Microsoft are abusing their power/position, get real.
" }-
In earlier days i was thinking exact the same direction.;)

Now not anymore.

At this time i have a more balanced opinion then before, i admit, M$ concerning i was always thinking black-white, but in fact it wasn't fair to think that way.

And for those people who are thinking the way i did before what concerns M$: there is no law which tell us to buy M$-products, when the people don't like M$ why not a switch to f.e. Linux?8)

[tuatara]

-{ Quote: "Why would you want to? To get your Windows Update broken maybe? Sure go for it. I always god damn wonder why people want to remove everything if other programs will work EXACTLY the same whether that app is somewhere on the HDD or not. It's just a matter of dumb principals and i hate that." }-

Please don't get angry because others have a different opinion.
Complete wars have started that way.

I respect your feelings and idea's about this, but for me there is
a logical reason for this.

I've been working with Internet browsers since Mosaic, on several
platforms.
And have the worst experiences with IE.
without talking about security issues, which is for me the main
reason not to want IE, it is also regarding performance.

If you visit a lot of websites and built up the diskcache this way, this will slow down your complete system, because of the intergration with the OS.

Also the idea that a webbrowser is used to update your system,
is really a nighmare for me.

And the fact that IE is not w3c compatible (only) is a thing
what i also dislike.

The fact that your startpages is altered by MS itself and can be done by others, etc. etc. also are make me prefer others.

But the main reason, to get back on topic here, is that others (platforms/browsers) have better browser implementations, and experiences with those make me unhappy with IE.

I think that is the reason why some of us here are not so positive
regarding MS, not only their indecent way to do business only
(fact: lost many court cases regarding this.)
but the experience with other OS-es en software, and know who they work under de hood, and how they are designed, against the poor implementation of MS.
And the fact that every new OS version or product version is the same as the previous one,
plus 10 times extra overhead and diskspace

Instead of selling a Antivirus product, it would be better that they really would improve their OS-design regarding security.

Like using a MMU, use multiple authorisation levels for applications.
and processe,so they can't harm each other.
Dump the whole idea of a (very unsafe) registry.
Dump the idea that applications can write in system directories,
or even worse overwrite systemfiles. etc. etc.

And the strange part of it all, this all has been done lots of times,
there are lots of OS-es that have solved this problems.
So they really don't have to re-invent the wheel.

I hope that MS gets a normal marketshare with their AV,
and that it will not squeeze out the others.
But history proofs that people not always buy the best, but
prefer to buy well-known.

[controler]

I am sure most of you by now have tried Knoppix's CD. There is way more apps on that cd then you ever would need. I mean it includes two browsers, StarOffice, GAIM for instant messenging, Ethereal, ect ect ect.
Almost every good program built today includes a version for Linux.
I am just not so sure Linux can be sold to the normal household user at this time.

One thing to remember!!!
If those of that frequent this forum were to stop using Windows, would we be happy? I think we are addicted to testing software and finding bugs and know it helps the world in some small way. WOuld we still do this if we completly switched to Linux? LOL

controler

[tuatara]

-{ Quote: " One thing to remember!!!
If those of that frequent this forum were to stop using Windows, would we be happy? I think we are addicted to testing software and finding bugs and know it helps the world in some small way. WOuld we still do this if we completly switched to Linux? LOL" }-

you are correct, that is why i run more os-es
and XP included ( a few pc's with a KVM switch)

Windows Security is still work and hobby for me,
and i think there is no end in sight yet.

lol

;D

[Joliet Jake]

-{ Quote: "In earlier days i was thinking exact the same direction.;)

Now not anymore.

At this time i have a more balanced opinion then before, i admit, M$ concerning i was always thinking black-white, but in fact it wasn't fair to think that way.

And for those people who are thinking the way i did before what concerns M$: there is no law which tell us to buy M$-products, when the people don't like M$ why not a switch to f.e. Linux?8)" }-

They have just lost another case, this time in South Korea.

[Joliet Jake]

Tuatara hit the nail on the head with the most important point in the whole debate...

"Instead of selling a Antivirus product, it would be better that they really would improve their OS-design regarding security."

Instead, Microsoft, are going to charge US money to secure THEIR poorly designed OS (which we also pay for).
If this fact alone doesn't alert you to Microsoft's priorities (profit and not customer safety) then nothing will.

[RejZoR]

And you people think something as complex as OS can be re-build over night!?::)
Just see how much developement requres one simple thing like antivirus (ALONE!). And you dare (yes dare) to say they should fix the OS?
Sure no problem just replace few lines of code. Sure::)
OS consists thousand of thousands lines of code, very low level, high level, incredible amounts of dependencies on subsystems, strandards that MUST be followed, maintaining user friendlyness, speed and compatibility.
I'm not saying it will never be done but you can't say they should do it in few days. It's impossible. It may take years to rebuild the core and everything around it, send all software and hardware vendors the specs, SDK's etc to recode their drivers, send all of them back to MS to verify them etc etc etc...
The list is just going on and on...
And all this involves massive amounts of resources ($$$), manpower and time.
As you know Vista will be significanzly improved but who knows more...
Also MS is building OS from scratch if you don't know yet, but thats probably still years away...

[bigc73542]

I have read this thread and understand the frustration with Microsofts business practices. I have read where a lot of you think Microsoft is a monoply. MS is not a monoply, not with dozens of other operating systems available. Many of them free, although the Linux Os's aren't anywhere as user friendly they are out there to use which lets MS off the hook as a monoply.

I am still in the mindset that if you don't like Microsofts way of doing business or you have issues with their OS you don't have to use it. But to be able to do the things on your computer with Linux that you take for granted with windows you had better be a decent programer to get linux to do anything near what a six year old can do with windows. Even though you might not like the way MS conducts itself there is no equal alternative available.

[Notok]

-{ Quote: "And you people think something as complex as OS can be re-build over night!?
Just see how much developement requres one simple thing like antivirus (ALONE!). And you dare (yes dare) to say they should fix the OS?
Sure no problem just replace few lines of code. Sure
OS consists thousand of thousands lines of code, very low level, high level, incredible amounts of dependencies on subsystems, strandards that MUST be followed, maintaining user friendlyness, speed and compatibility.
I'm not saying it will never be done but you can't say they should do it in few days. It's impossible. It may take years to rebuild the core and everything around it, send all software and hardware vendors the specs, SDK's etc to recode their drivers, send all of them back to MS to verify them etc etc etc...
The list is just going on and on...
And all this involves massive amounts of resources ($$$), manpower and time.
As you know Vista will be significanzly improved but who knows more...
Also MS is building OS from scratch if you don't know yet, but thats probably still years away..." }-Not to mention all the other programmers that will be mad because they will have to start everything over from scratch. Like you say, there's a lot that goes into it. One thing they are doing, that I forgot to mention, is implementing a lot of new standards with the 64bit operating system. They've basically said that from here on forward, we are all going to be more security conscious about our programming. They are making steps, but as you say; it's not going to happen overnight. :)

[tuatara]

No, the don't have to rebuild is in a day.

But 6 years !!!! for a new OS, for the richest company in the world,
who can pay more porgrammers and have more resources then there
where ever available for any computer company in the last 20 years.

Yes, they had to decide not to built further on the old design,
but completely built a new OS.

There are lots of other OS-es that are built with less man-hours.

So it is not a matter of time, or manpower, it is about
do they have the guts to make a new OS, which is perhaps
not downwards compatible, but works better and safer.

Or are they working for 6 years now, on a os that
is based on XP plus 10 times more program-lines ?

-{ Quote: "
I am still in the mindset that if you don't like Microsofts way of doing business or you have issues with their OS you don't have to use it. But to be able to do the things on your computer with Linux that you take for granted with windows you had better be a decent programer to get linux to do anything near what a six year old can do with windows. Even though you might not like the way MS conducts itself there is no equal alternative available." }-

You are totally right Bigc, and there is not another company left,
that is able to create a OS that is just as simple for a six years old.

So sadly for simple users, there is no alternative because of their monopoly.
Again it was better, if you could choose between 5 other companies that
where making a simular OS.
But those companies are gone, died out and have completely lost
market share on this field.

[YeOldeStonecat]

One of my points was...due to the nature of "computers"..in how they're used, both home, and business, etc....IMO there has to be one big popular one. Wether it's Microsoft, or whoever...I think the nature of this industry forces things to be where there is only one big player.

That reason is..."Compatibility". Think about it....lets first look at home users. Lets take it to the example of..say...a computer game. Whatever game, your favorite game, my current favorites are Battlefield 1942, Battlefield Vietnam, Battlefield 2, etc. Whatever game, if you like the Quake series, or some flight sim like Combat Flight Simulator, or some role playing game like Everquest. They can write the game for Windows...and that's all they need to do.

Just think of the impact on game software companies if they had to support a dozen different operating sytems. (And I don't mean counting Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows 2000, and Windows XP as 4x operating systems, I'm talking about totall different..such as Windows, CrApple, *nix, BeOS, etc)

Just think of the nightmare for ISPs..to support a dozen different operating systems.

Printers...drivers for your favorite HP Printer
While on the subject of drivers...wow...I mean, for most new games now, venders like ATI and nVidia do monthly rollouts of updated drivers for Windows. I can't imagine the burden, well, they simply wouldn't be there.

Lets flip over to the business world. The IT department. Not long ago, for the more common business networks, you had Novell, Artisoft LANtastic, and Windows as 3 of the popular networking types. Now things have gotten fairly focused around Windows networks. But wow...to have this allowed to run nilly willy with no standard platform...I can't picture the horror. Not to mention trying to find your main business application, choices would seem so limited if there was no universal operating system.

[controler]

Almost 20 years ago they taught two OS's in school. They taught IBM in collage and MAC in highschool.
I don't know, maybe they were teaching Linux also at some point but since kids have become way more educated, They choose their own ways.

I just tried out the new DSL ( damn small linux ) it is a 50 meg download and works fast and efficient. I guess it works off USB stick also. Includes firefox for a browser, some games an editor, FTP server ect. How easy is it to put a CD in your computer and turn it on ? LOL

You need to remember some OS were made for buisness and NOT home to begin with. Sun Microsystems played in the buisness section for years. At present I see only 4 possabilities. Sun, Apple, Linux or Windows.
Has anyone mentioned Apple yet? I think an Apple version is made now that works on Windows LOL and from what I heard it has some awesome video editing qualities.

In the early 80's it was impossiable for home users to JUST reformat their HD.
way too complicated. In 2006, every 6 year old can as you say. That is if they know what time zone they are in ;)

controler

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "Almost 20 years ago they taught two OS's in school. They taught IBM in collage and MAC in highschool.

" }-

BASIC. ;D I took that for a few years before Fortran and Watfive.

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "Yeesh - go look at the vulnerability lists for IE (http://secunia.com/product/11/), Firefox (http://secunia.com/product/4227/) and Opera (http://secunia.com/product/4932/) first would you? The gulf between IE and the others isn't going to close because the others "get more users", there are several reasons why IE has more holes and while continue to do so (larger code base, non-browser functionality and Windows integration for starters).[" }-


Was well aware of the differences before posting. It's not THAT big of a gulf. What's the big browser threat of 2005? Java. Any java based browser, which includes FF, is not immune to this. IST.bar was one of the big ones to hit this. FF users would still infect Windows with IST.bar if they came across it on the web.

This shows my main point..of exploits finding other vehicles into the system that don't HAVE to be Microsoft based. MS gets the heat because it's in the spotlight...but as other avenues become popular, the exploits will adapt/change. People are so quick to hop on the "Bash Microsoft bus" because it's so trendy. But in reality, whoever is in the spotlight will get it. The malware writers out there wish to do damage, they will always adapt.

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "Fixes are, updates aren't. Try asking for a free "update" from Windows NT to XP." }-

I forgot to simply the statement...when I mentioned "updates", I thought people could follow what I meant...not the OS itself, but components. Lets take Internet Explorer...over the years, you've gotten upgrades...from 3.02..to 4.0...to 4.1...to 5.0...to 5.1...to 5.5....to 6.0 (I'm sure I missed a few versions in there). How about Windows Media Player? How about the firewall in Windows XP....from original, to sp1...to the vastly improved firewall in SP2? How about MS Antispyware? On the what...3rd program version now?

[Paranoid2000]

There's been a lot posted in this thread so I will try to make my answers brief...yeah right. ;)-{ Quote: "Thats why i'm so pissed of when people start to compalin about it instead actually typing those god damn few letters in any search engine." }-Well first thing, most people are not going to search for alternatives unless they have a problem with what they currently have - this applies to products and services generally, not just computer software.

So if Firefox offers tabbed browsing, fast search engine access, a shedload of extensions and faster page display, this means nothing for most users until they encounter a problem with IE (which will most likely be spyware related). So what is the harm in this? It means that IE has a marketshare which is gained on inertia rather than product quality - it means that Microsoft can dictate web standards (and their neglect of CSS2 support in IE6 effectively froze the use of this standard since most webmasters had to restrict themselves to the lowest common denominator). Ditto with Media Player and DRM.

And if MS bundles an AV with Windows, even if it is a pile of horse dung, it will still get 90% market share because the vast majority of users won't take the effort to research alternatives (and some of the threads in here going on about "heuristics", "unpacker support", "proactive defense" would likely be too technically intimidating for many casual users looking for advice).-{ Quote: "What ever Microsoft and Bill Gates are "supposed" to have done one thing should be remembered...someone had the vision,determination and courage to go out there and give the world the means to use computers,something that was once the preserve of the "gifted" few." }-Eh? You never heard of the Apple Macintosh - the first consumer computer whose interface included windows, icons and a mouse? You never heard of the Acorn Archimedes which was the first to offer a taskbar and anti-aliased fonts? The Atari ST and Commodore Amiga which both provided far cheaper (and more usable) alternatives to the PC, with fully fledged GUIs when Microsoft was still working on Windows 1.0?

Microsoft's role has been to take ideas and implement them on hardware that became the most accessible - however their innovation is scant (try naming one part of the Windows UI that is original aside from the Start button - and even in XP they seem to have messed that up). In terms of cost, Windows has to be considered grossly overpriced (especially so for developing countries), being the only part of a system to have continually risen in price over the last decade.-{ Quote: "By this reasoning, DRM should have never entered this thread in the first place.. the thread is about MS trying to crush security software vendors by making their AV incompatible with other AVs. Again, my point was not to jusify MS' actions, but rather to illustrate that they do not have a monopoly on DRM, and do not deserve 100% blame." }-Yes, this thread has gone beyond discussion of AV products - but in the context of discussing the harm that can arise from bundling, which is a very real likelihood with MS-AV, especially if included with their One-Care service (which new users would doubtless receive multiple popup reminders of, just as XP users do for Microsoft Passport).-{ Quote: "Why no one complains because some car manufacturers integrate stereo players, air conditioning, electric driven windows, car alarm and extra winter tyres for same price like others offer just plain car without extra goodies? No lawsuites. Isn't that weird? But they are pushing away possible competition from competitive audio manufacturers, tyre copmpanies, alarm vendors and air conditioning companies? This example might have nothing in common but describes it the best. Just don't say you can always change tyres, car stereo, alarm and other stuff, coz you CAN do the same in Windows." }-Because you always have the choice of doing without the bundle, removing the stereo, alarm, sun-roof and air conditioning and receiving a discount. With Windows, not only do you have no such option but in the vast majority of cases, you have no choice but to pay for a copy of Windows with a new machine regardless of whether you use it or not! If every car came with an AT&T mobile phone (plus contract) and you had no option to exclude it, this would be considered an outrageous example of monopolistic behaviour so why are some posters seemingly so happy to ignore similar conduct in the computer world?-{ Quote: "Why would you want to? To get your Windows Update broken maybe? Sure go for it." }-More to the point - why should you be required to have a specific browser to access Windows Updates? It is unnecessary and done solely to force people to use IE - and you seem to consider it a benefit?-{ Quote: "And you people think something as complex as OS can be re-build over night!?" }-Well in Windows' case it wouldn't require a great many changes to increase its security: Autorun on CD/DVDs could be disabled by default - or the users at least prompted about whether to run a program when a disc is inserted. File extension hiding should be disabled, preventing malware writers from disguising their .jpg.exe's as .jpg files. XP Home should create new users with Limited Accounts by default, not Owners/Administrators. Internet Explorer and other network accessing applications should be run with minimum privilege, regardless of the account used. Windows Services that can receive incoming unsolicited connections (DCOM, UPnP, etc) should be disabled by default. The Windows Registry should use fewer locations for storing startup programs.These sort of changes would make Windows far more secure and would require little change. The problem isn't Windows' core security, it is the careless and sloppy handling of applications running on top (IE notably) plus the emphasis on ease of use over security (particularly inappropriate in the file extension hiding).-{ Quote: "I am still in the mindset that if you don't like Microsofts way of doing business or you have issues with their OS you don't have to use it. But to be able to do the things on your computer with Linux that you take for granted with windows you had better be a decent programer to get linux to do anything near what a six year old can do with windows. Even though you might not like the way MS conducts itself there is no equal alternative available." }-As mentioned above, have you been able to buy a new computer without a copy of Windows included? Until this is possible from major manufacturers, people can't be said to have a real choice in dealing with MS.

Linux has come a long way on the desktop in recent years though. As long as you don't have hardware made by a manufacturer that obstructs Linux support, there should be almost no problems (certainly no need to write your own programs!) and in terms of applications, the only general area that Windows can claim supremacy is in games. That is the only reason I am still using it and I don't expect this to continue indefinitely - neither, seemingly, does MS with their determined efforts to create a separate console platform.-{ Quote: "What's the big browser threat of 2005? Java. Any java based browser, which includes FF, is not immune to this. IST.bar was one of the big ones to hit this. FF users would still infect Windows with IST.bar if they came across it on the web." }-Since Java is a separate application offered by Sun (with JRE's available from other sources too), it seems a little unfair to consider it a "browser" problem. Furthermore it is an option for Firefox/Opera, unlike IE's ActiveX equivalent. However even if you add the Java vulnerabilities (http://secunia.com/product/4228/) to Firefox and Opera, they still score far lower than IE.-{ Quote: "I thought people could follow what I meant...not the OS itself, but components. Lets take Internet Explorer...over the years, you've gotten upgrades...from 3.02..to 4.0...to 4.1...to 5.0...to 5.1...to 5.5....to 6.0 (I'm sure I missed a few versions in there). How about Windows Media Player? How about the firewall in Windows XP....from original, to sp1...to the vastly improved firewall in SP2? How about MS Antispyware? On the what...3rd program version now?" }-IE was only offered free in an attempt to crush Netscape and development stopped (with IE6) when this was complete. IE7 appears to be offered more as an "upgrade" incentive though since it is WinXP only (amazing how Opera and Firefox can support Windows back to Win98 yet MS can't...). As for the firewall and other features in XP SP2, yes they are improvements but they also are not available to Win2000 or NT users. MS Antispyware is still in beta so regular updates are to be expected.

[bigc73542]

-{ Quote: "As mentioned above, have you been able to buy a new computer without a copy of Windows included? Until this is possible from major manufacturers, people can't be said to have a real choice in dealing with MS" }-.



here is just one of many computers that can be purchased with linux installed here (http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product_listing.gsp?cat=231793&path=0%3A3944%3A3951%3A41937%3A231785%3A231793)

HP and Dell are supposed to start offering alternative Os's to windows if they haven't already.

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "HP and Dell are supposed to start offering alternative Os's to windows if they haven't already." }-Dell don't seem to be unless you are a business customer as also seems to be the case for HP (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1731094,00.asp). While Walmart is a singular exception (and one which may break the stranglehold MS has elsewhere), could they really be considered a computer manufacturer when they are reselling Microtel PCs?

[bigc73542]

you don't have to buy Microtel from wal-mart you can buy from Microtel direct Here (http://www.microtelinc.com/index.aspx?catID=1)

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "Since Java is a separate application offered by Sun (with JRE's available from other sources too), it seems a little unfair to consider it a "browser" problem." }-

My clarification still flew over you... I clearly stated "This shows my main point..of exploits finding other vehicles into the system that don't HAVE to be Microsoft based." thusly did not direct this towards any browser, I was illustrating how threats evolve to still get to people.

The gulf of threats between IE and FF, as of October this year, was 86 for IT, 25 towards FF. (Taken from PCMagazine Dec 2005 issue, referencing Secunia) That so called "gulf" will narrow, just watch. Reason? Other browsers such as FF will start to share that spotlight. The bad guys still need to do damage..they will find alternative ways, such as the Java example illustrates.

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "IE was only offered free in an attempt to crush Netscape and development stopped (with IE6) when this was complete. IE7 appears to be offered more as an "upgrade" incentive though since it is WinXP only (amazing how Opera and Firefox can support Windows back to Win98 yet MS can't...). As for the firewall and other features in XP SP2, yes they are improvements but they also are not available to Win2000 or NT users. MS Antispyware is still in beta so regular updates are to be expected." }-

It doesn't matter "why" it was offered, I was illustrating that it was indeed offered. In a prior reply, you tried to state that Microsoft did not offer upgrades for free, I countered that with examples that yes you did some "upgrades..by your definition". I along with millions of people got new versions of Internet Explorer without paying extra money to Microsoft. I, along with millions of other people, downloaded new versions of Media Player without paying extra money to Microsoft. Etc etc.

Windows XP SP2 features should not have to be available for Windows 2000 or NT 4.0 or NT 3.51 (I'm assuming you meant NT 4.0 when you simply stated NT..more on that later)...as it's a service pack for WinXP. Windows 2000 is still Windows NT..it's just NT version 5. Windows XP is still Windows NT..I'll let you find out what version it is. The firewall was not developed for 2K because 2K was meant to be a business grade OS, as they didn't get the multimedia API fully compatible for the home users..hence the miserable last minute rush of Windows ME. However XP was designed for both markets...hence both flavors of it.

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "My clarification still flew over you... " }-My point was that "other browsers" give you more opportunity to reduce related vulnerabilities. The Firefox download (at 5.0 MB for Windows) does not include Java by default so users have to install it separately (http://www.mozilla.org/support/firefox/faq.html#q2.2).-{ Quote: "The gulf of threats between IE and FF, as of October this year, was 86 for IT, 25 towards FF. (Taken from PCMagazine Dec 2005 issue, referencing Secunia) That so called "gulf" will narrow, just watch." }-If IE has less than double the vulnerabilities of Firefox in a years' time, I will concede this point. However do also note the seriousness of the vulnerabilities - 15% Extremely and 28% Highly critical for IE compared to 4% and 23% for Firefox. Unless and until MS "unbundle" IE from Windows, I don't see any likelihood of it coming close to Firefox's levels, let alone Opera's.

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "I along with millions of people got new versions of Internet Explorer without paying extra money to Microsoft. I, along with millions of other people, downloaded new versions of Media Player without paying extra money to Microsoft. Etc etc." }-Not paying directly no - but you would have paid via your Windows licence, most likely several times over. This raises another issue with bundling which is the ability to obscure product costs and to cross-subsidise with a guaranteed revenue stream. If Microsoft is allowed to throw money from Windows sales into other products, regardless of whether they make a profit or not, then this is also unfair competition which will harm consumers in the long term (due to the removal of choice) even if they seem to benefit in the short term.

[tuatara]

-{ Quote: "but you would have paid via your Windows licence" }-

P2K, as you know i am not a member of the MS fanclub,
but one thing POSITIVE i must say regarding this , is that
there wasn't one OS-release in history that you had to pay for,
that had such a long lifetime as XP has, it is now 6 years old,
and it can perhaps live another 4 years before a new RELEASE is out.
Even a car is replaced faster then a MS OS now.
So $400 for XP PRO in 10 years is $40 per year.

Oops that is still very expensive... certainly when you know
that there are still people buying this old model for the new price...

;D

[nod32.9]

Basic AV and FW should come with the OS, and good for the lifetime of the product. This is the best way to control baddies over the internet. Those who wish to add bells and whistles can purchase their own AV and FW.

The best defense against baddies is the USER. No layered system is going to stop all malware. You wouldn't take the family sedan to go off-roading. Unfortunately, most people pay no attention to the websites that they are clicking.

[tuatara]

-{ Quote: "Basic AV and FW should come with the OS, and good for the lifetime of the product. This is the best way to control baddies over the internet. Those who wish to add bells and whistles can purchase their own AV and FW." }-

No changing the OS would be better.

-{ Quote: "The best defense against baddies is the USER. No layered system is going to stop all malware. You wouldn't take the family sedan to go off-roading. Unfortunately, most people pay no attention to the websites that they are clicking." }-

It shouldn't be possible for malware to be installed via your browser
in the first place. The browser should not have the permissions to do that.
This was whe way the browsers and OS-es where developed
in the first place, before MS came in this field.

And as a matter of fact, every normal installed Unix or Linux version
still works that way.

That was in the time when Sun Microsystems advertised
with 'the network is the computer' and Bill Gates told us
that the Internet had no real value for the future...

;)

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "Not paying directly no - but you would have paid via your Windows licence, " }-

Well no kidding, duh? Now your issue is...you somehow expect Windows to be free? Unless you're a non-profit....that's highly unlikely.

You see...you keep back peddling here. You tried to state that Microsoft gives you program upgrades. I countered saying the yes, in some cases you do indeed get that. Not always full programs or suites, but some components/programs..yes.

Now you go saying in a gruff under the breath manner..."well..yeah...well..you...uhm...yeah..you paid for it several times over...rofl rofl rofl".

Comon..stand firm.

[YeOldeStonecat]

Yes IE still has quite a few more. And a while ago Microsoft stopped doing their Java...so new computers, no matter what browser they use, have to go to Java.com and go download the latest Java. And hopefully pay attention to the "Java update notification" just like everyone should pay attention to the "Windows Update notification", and ...oh yes....the "Firefox Update notification".

Active X will be an achilles heel, I'll beat ya to that one. The people wanted more functionality over the web...Microsoft delivered...and it got abused.

Now we have AJAX (basically dynamic HTML...go checkout Office Live and MOOL) we'll see if that gets abused.

-{ Quote: "My point was that "other browsers" give you more opportunity to reduce related vulnerabilities. The Firefox download (at 5.0 MB for Windows) does not include Java by default so users have to install it separately (http://www.mozilla.org/support/firefox/faq.html#q2.2).If IE has less than double the vulnerabilities of Firefox in a years' time, I will concede this point. However do also note the seriousness of the vulnerabilities - 15% Extremely and 28% Highly critical for IE compared to 4% and 23% for Firefox. Unless and until MS "unbundle" IE from Windows, I don't see any likelihood of it coming close to Firefox's levels, let alone Opera's." }-

[tuatara]

-{ Quote: "Well no kidding, duh? Now your issue is...you somehow expect Windows to be free? Unless you're a non-profit....that's highly unlikely." }-

It is more expensive then any other OS out there,
including those used for Supercomputers.

The price for XP and MS office are extreme high,
compared to other products.

And that is the reason why lots of people are switching to
Openoffice, Staroffice or others.

But in the near future this problem will soon be solved,
you'll use the office software of your ISP.
Which is of course more logical, that way you can select
the applications you need at your ISP and only need a thin client,
with a webbrowser, almost any application can run at your ISP.

They (ISP's) will take care for the updates etc.
Just like it happens in a lot of large companies.

And it doesn't matter which kind of client you use,
MAC/Windows/Linux/FreeBSD etc. etc.

If your computer is broken, you can go to any other computer
in the world and go further with your work.

Google will be an interessting party in this.

A lot of the above is already in use now, lots of companies, have all there business software already running at their ISP,
And are only using webmail, a remote word processor, spreadsheet,
games etc. etc.
So they don't have to worry about virusses or malware,
they can run their own OS from a rom, cdrom etc.

If you think about what you really HAVE to run on your system,
and can't be on a server it isn't that much.

For serious applications, this is a reliable system,
for hobby there still will be your old fashion Windows system.

[Paranoid2000]

-{ Quote: "Now you go saying in a gruff under the breath manner..."well..yeah...well..you...uhm...yeah..you paid for it several times over...rofl rofl rofl".

Comon..stand firm." }-I agree. My previous statements were vague and didn't address the point - the point being your original "OS updates and fixes are free from MS." statement. Assuming we both agree that neither IE nor Media Player are part of Windows, then both your statement about application upgrades being free and mine about OS upgrades being charged for are correct. Happy?-{ Quote: "The people wanted more functionality over the web...Microsoft delivered...and it got abused." }-Java delivered before ActiveX and with far more robust security. The real reason for ActiveX was that MS wanted something to compete with Java that was also tied to Windows itself (to counter the possibility of "thin" Internet workstations not running Windows, as was being evangelised by Oracle and Sun).-{ Quote: "Now we have AJAX (basically dynamic HTML...go checkout Office Live and MOOL) we'll see if that gets abused." }-Since AJAX is based on Javascript, it should have all its strengths and weaknesses. However even in cases where a browser can be hijacked, the damage done will be limited to what access it has to the rest of the system - so as long as IE is integrated into Windows (rather than being a separate application like all the others), the consequences - and the seriousness of any vulnerabilities - will continue to be higher.

[YeOldeStonecat]

-{ Quote: "It is more expensive then any other OS out there,
including those used for Supercomputers.

The price for XP and MS office are extreme high,
compared to other products.

And that is the reason why lots of people are switching to
Openoffice, Staroffice or others.

But in the near future this problem will soon be solved,
you'll use the office software of your ISP.
Which is of course more logical, that way you can select
the applications you need at your ISP and only need a thin client,
with a webbrowser, almost any application can run at your ISP." }-

It's my opinion that any company that becomes the mainstream OS...would do that. If it wasn't Microsoft, it'd be someone else.

Apple isnt' all that much cheaper (what...50 - 60% the price of Windows, something like that..eh whatver..I don't like to think about Apple)..and they're far from a majority player.

The open source *nix distros are free-to-very cheap...because it's based on the rebelious crowd against MS. If MS wasn't in the picture, I'd wager most distros would cost some money...not expensive I'm sure, but we wouldn't find them as freely...free as we do now. And I run it on my laptop...before someone tries to chime in that I bash *nix or I'm anti-*nix.

Agreed....Office is expensive (for regular businesses). But then again most businesses that have been around for a while using computers, are used to paying 3-4-ish thousand (US) per workstation setup, for the past 6-8 years or so. Computers have come down sooo much...that cost is still down below that. Things wash off.

I'm not sure about the online applications. Agree that they're coming, well, they've been here. I have quite a few business clients that Remote Desktop to a TS or Citrix box to run some specialized business application. And Microsoft jumping into this with fury this year with Office live, and MOOL, etc. It's a nice alternative...works for some businesses who don't want to deal with a lot of servers, and worrying about maint and backups on the servers. However there's still a rise in cost in putting in a solid high availability internet connection like a flavor of T. Or they can gamble with broadband..cable or DSL, however when there's an outage...business stops. And over the long haul, you'll end up paying more.

For the home user? Eh. Gaming I don't see doing that, I don't see how mainstream popular FPS games like Battlefield 2 or Quake 4 or whatever could run well on a thin client.

[Joliet Jake]

-{ Quote: "It's my opinion that any company that becomes the mainstream OS...would do that. If it wasn't Microsoft, it'd be someone else. " }-

It's the opinion of others that this would not necessarily be the case.
You seem to have a low opinion of big business if you think they all would act like Microsoft.:P

[Paranoid2000]

A recent article in the Inquirer that covers many of the points discussed here:

What's wrong with Windows XP N, and how to put it right (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28892)

[iceni60]

-{ Quote: "Can we be completely honest here? The courts are after Microsoft for their MONEY, PERIOD. The EU fined Microsoft for over 1/2 BILLION dollars. Why? Because Microsoft had the audacity to include a Media Player with it's OS. That is a farce. Who was harmed? Who lost money? Realplayer? Boo Hoo." }-
it has nothing to do with anything but filling their own pockets! incase anyone don't know the "EU Court of Auditors declined last November to approve the EU's budget for the eighth year running, admitting it can only guarantee that 5 percent of taxpayers' money is being spent properly" that means for years only a very, very tiny amount of money (about 5%) can be accounted for. that's the way the EU is and will always be. there are countless incidents of the MEPs stealing money. like the way they steal travel money.

read this:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/europe/story/0,11363,710411,00.html

[Joliet Jake]

Great article Paranoid.

Laughs out load at the idea Microsoft isn't after our money.
There is a law that you can't 'sell' things at a loss and what Microsoft do by bundling things is make it nigh on impossible for third party vendors to compete.