WinXP SP2 delayed; anti-trust issues to arise?

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Originally posted by Asher
Which would've been stupid -- IE is a component of Windows, any application can just call the IE .dll and have an embedded web browser in their program. This is a very useful feature, at least to developers, and provides a standardized and guaranteed basic browser on every system.

And MS did not have to build it that way. They did so to illegal leverage their OS monopoly.

Stop living in the past -- this has been remedied now, and the Judge has even expressed satisfaction with MS' compliance.

Again, you're living in the past -- it's true this wasn't possible years ago, I agree, but now it is.

I know they couldn't, and I know that was the OEM licensing ****, but that has been remedied now.

And the discussion was on what killed Netscape, and what relevance that may have to bundling/tying AV products, remember? The thread is about the past.

[Asher]

Originally posted by dv8ed
And MS did not have to build it that way. They did so to illegal leverage their OS monopoly.

What other way do you include a free webbrowser engine without bundling it, Einstein?

And the discussion was on what killed Netscape, and what relevance that may have to bundling/tying AV products, remember? The thread is about the past.

The thread is about the future, with Service Pack 2. It's only about the past if you don't have any real complaints about the issue, and want to throw red herrings in the ring and try your luck.

Here's the questions:
1) Do you believe anti-virus software is necessary for Windows computers?
2) Why do you believe consumers should have to pay and acquire these separate, from companies such as Symantec which basically force you to buy a new copy for $50 every year.

I find it amusing, for one, that UR -- which is considerably left wing -- seems to be caring more for the well-being of companies rather than consumers.

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Originally posted by Asher
What other way do you include a free webbrowser engine without bundling it, Einstein?

vbrunxxx.dll ring a bell?

But that wasn't what I was referring to. I was saying that IE did not need to be tied to Windows, including the "free webbrowser engine".

The thread is about the future, with Service Pack 2. It's only about the past if you don't have any real complaints about the issue, and want to throw red herrings in the ring and try your luck.

So the past is of no relevance to the future? We can learn nothing by looking at our history?

Fascinating.

Here's the questions:
1) Do you believe anti-virus software is necessary for Windows computers?
2) Why do you believe consumers should have to pay and acquire these separate, from companies such as Symantec which basically force you to buy a new copy for $50 every year.

Curious, I haven't seen an OEM machine sold in the last few years that doesn't have a virus scanner preinstalled. What do you believe is wrong with the current system? Consumers are getting AV software and there is competition to make a better product.

The question that was being raised was, will MS bundling AV software lead to a decline in the quality of AV software due to a lack of competition in the area? The discussion on IE/Netscape was relevant to that question. Frankly, MS has never shown itself overly competent in making security products that automagically work (as it would have to do should it bundle AV with Windows due to the fact that it won't be effective for end-users otherwise). I mean, look at how wonderful XP's built-in firewall is........ do you really want a company that can't produce good security software killing off the rest of the players in the area?

(And no, XP's firewall has not killed off other firewall software. From what I've seen though, that's more because end-users don't even know that the MS firewall exists, so when they're told they need a firewall, they go find one.)

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Asher

Again, you're not getting out that easy.

If you say the Judge doesn't agree with me, tell us where we disagree. Okay? Simple stuff ,man.


So don't read them -- add me to your ignore list and post away.

Ignorance is bliss.


You're being an ******* -- not contributing to the thread whatsoever but attacking the character of one of the posters.

I'm not going to sit it out while dv8ed and UR spread bull**** out of either ignorance or as part of some agenda.

I asked nice, u respond antagonistically. I don't think life is ever any clearer than that.

[Verto]

Microsoft adds a free anti-virus program, they are just bullying other companies.

Microsoft doesn't add a free anti-virus program, they are forcing inferior products onto us.

Some of you are acting as if you are FORCED to buy Windows and other Microsoft programs. This is not the case. Some of you act as if you are FORCED to use IE and Windows Media Player. This is not the case. Some of you act as if Windows does not allow you to add third party software to use. This is not the case.

[Asher]

Originally posted by dv8ed
vbrunxxx.dll ring a bell?

But that wasn't what I was referring to. I was saying that IE did not need to be tied to Windows, including the "free webbrowser engine".

Ah, I get it -- MS could have just included the DLL and not given anyone a web browser.

This is, obviously, benefits consumers.

Kudos, chap.

So the past is of no relevance to the future? We can learn nothing by looking at our history?

Fascinating.

Fine, let's look at the history:
1) MS releases IE for free, Netscape follows suit --> Consumers benefit.
2) Since the OSes come with a free web browser, they can use this to download alternate webbrowsers such as Opera and Mozilla, and even set them to be their default browser if they so choose --> Consumers benefit.
3) Mozilla/Netscape is still around, KHTML and Opera are also around, giving consumers more internet browser choices now than ever before --> Consumers benefit.

So now that we've dealt with the past, why don't you explain to everyone why consumers shouldn't get basic anti-virus support for an OS that demands it? Why should they pay extra for it?

Curious, I haven't seen an OEM machine sold in the last few years that doesn't have a virus scanner preinstalled.

Why, funny you mention that -- not four days ago I got a new laptop, with no anti-virus software installed. And it wasn't a cheap one, an IBM ThinkPad T40.

Whoosh goes your argument, huh.

What do you believe is wrong with the current system? Consumers are getting AV software and there is competition to make a better product.

So by MS building a basic antivirus software, adding another program to the mix, this somehow decreases competition?

Look: MS has said it'd be a basic anti-virus scanner, much like the basic firewall built into XP -- I don't see the firewall makers going out of business. Boo hoo.

And you blatantly ignored both of my questions, obviously because you know a simple answer would totally destroy your case.

I asked nice, u respond antagonistically. I don't think life is ever any clearer than that.

Get a clue man -- you tell someone to shut up about a topic "nicely" and you don't call that antagonistically?

Why don't you fess up and admit the reason you don't actually engage in these debates is you've got the intellectual capacity of a retarded circus midget?

[Verto]

Why don't you fess up and admit the reason you don't actually engage in these debates is you've got the intellectual capacity of a retarded circus midget?

Leave the circus midgets out of this!!

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Asher

Get a clue man -- you tell someone to shut up about a topic "nicely" and you don't call that antagonistically?

Why don't you fess up and admit the reason you don't actually engage in these debates is you've got the intellectual capacity of a retarded circus midget?

u wont get me that easy=D.

[Asher]

It's hard to bait a fish that's too stupid to recognize what's food and what's not.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Asher
It's hard to bait a fish that's too stupid to recognize what's food and what's not.

=D

[Ted Striker]

Anyone want muffins?

I just baked them.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Anyone want muffins?

I just baked them.

I want some cookies. got ne of those?

[Verto]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Anyone want muffins?

I just baked them.

I LOVE English muffins.

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Originally posted by Asher
Ah, I get it -- MS could have just included the DLL and not given anyone a web browser.

This is, obviously, benefits consumers.

No, seriously, tell me why releasing it to developers and just giving away the runtime dll, like vbrun, would have been bad. Developers can still put out something like MyIE in that circumstance. MyIE being a better browser than IE, that would benefit consumers.

Fine, let's look at the history:
1) MS releases IE for free, Netscape follows suit --> Consumers benefit.

Um. Um. Um. Want to try that the other way? And there is a difference between the short-term benefit of getting free stuff and the long term benefit of getting a better product.

2) Since the OSes come with a free web browser, they can use this to download alternate webbrowsers such as Opera and Mozilla, and even set them to be their default browser if they so choose --> Consumers benefit.

*sigh* See above. Product tying, lack of choice at the OEM level, anticompetitive, etc.

3) Mozilla/Netscape is still around, KHTML and Opera are also around, giving consumers more internet browser choices now than ever before --> Consumers benefit.

None of which have any impact on the PC browser market as a whole, and therefore create no pressure to make IE better. Have you perhaps noticed IE stagnating lately?

So now that we've dealt with the past, why don't you explain to everyone why consumers shouldn't get basic anti-virus support for an OS that demands it? Why should they pay extra for it?

If, perhaps, MS put the effort of writing an AV package into, I don't know, debugging Windows, it might not demand AV support quite so much.

Why, funny you mention that -- not four days ago I got a new laptop, with no anti-virus software installed. And it wasn't a cheap one, an IBM ThinkPad T40.

This is certainly an exception, not a rule. Go down to Best Buy or Circuit City or something.

So by MS building a basic antivirus software, adding another program to the mix, this somehow decreases competition?

Look: MS has said it'd be a basic anti-virus scanner, much like the basic firewall built into XP -- I don't see the firewall makers going out of business. Boo hoo.

And you blatantly ignored both of my questions, obviously because you know a simple answer would totally destroy your case.

I ignored your questions because I already answered them. AV software is necessary. If MS wants to release a free AV scanner for download, go right for it. The question was product tying, which is bad for the overall quality of the software in that sector.

[Verto]

The question was product tying, which is bad for the overall quality of the software in that sector.

Because you think no one is going to go out of their way to get another AV program, if they get one with their computer?