Important Message

You are browsing the archived Lancers Reactor forums. You cannot register or login.
The content may be outdated and links may not be functional.


To get the latest in Freelancer news, mods, modding and downloads, go to
The-Starport

A New Version of XP?

This is where you can discuss your homework, family, just about anything, make strange sounds and otherwise discuss things which are really not related to the Lancer-series. Yes that means you can discuss other games.

Post Fri Feb 27, 2004 12:31 pm

Hehe, Windows. I made a joke about making Doors a few years back. Everyone thought it was funny but I'm seriously considering it now.

Post Fri Feb 27, 2004 3:57 pm

Chips - I read through your post (without giving up! ), and I can see that we understand each other, and each other's point of view. You must remember that I have been using Windows both at home and in a professional capacity, and it is only now that Linux has acquired a large enough following that it can challenge MS. Who knows, in five years we could be complaining about the cost of Linux!

Post Fri Feb 27, 2004 4:42 pm

lol - i will complain about the cost of anything . Must admit - IE is on everything - i know that, but I use AOL - and although i am no techy about stuff - I know that when i get one of those sites which shows off info about you, it tells me i am with mozzila! hehe - so i assume I don't use IE........I only use it for posting on Frostworks cause for some reason mine doesn't work on their forums (oh yes, and the updates). well - I know now about their dealings - and i can see that they are dodgy - but at the same time, i still think most buisnesses would have done that at some point

Have to say i know someone who knows alot about Linux - and he spits in windows general direction - so if he is correct about how much better it is for somethings - then maybe your right, and in a few years I will be moaning / defending linux. Put it this way, if i had to buy another version of windows cause they suddenly announced that another virus was killing comps and nothing could be done about it.................then i would moan louder than anyone else - its just at the moment, from MS, i have nothing to moan about! lol - it works good, and i haven't upgraded until the old version were phased out! (trust me - i didn't use it for much other than playing really really old games and typing ...erm by old i mean civilisation 2!!

Post Fri Feb 27, 2004 4:51 pm

@Chips there is a program, Ghost Surf that will let you surf without being spied on. Review It does help as well as the newest windowwasher. I got both, to see how they did. Surf has to be disabled when you need yo use cookies, but can be left too just surf

Finalday

Habaq Mot / Aspazomai Thanatos / Capere Obitus... /Keith Green\ (1953-1983)

Post Mon Mar 15, 2004 7:16 am

*Creak. Groan. Slam. Kabump-bump.*

<Drags musty old chest up from basement and opens it to a flock of moths
that flit out of the trunk>

This "just" in, sort of, from the NYTimes.


BRUSSELS, March 15 &#8212; Top antitrust regulators from the 15 nations in the European Union gave unanimous backing today to a draft ruling by the European Commission that officials say finds that Microsoft abused its dominance in operating software.

A European Commission spokeswoman, Amelia Torres, said after a closed-door session:

"The member states have unanimously backed the commission's draft decision." She did not elaborate.

With today's backing, the clock on the five-year-old antitrust case against Microsoft begins to run down. In less than two weeks, barring a last-minute settlement, the European Commission is expected to declare Microsoft an abusive monopolist, impose a fine of $100 million to $1 billion and order the company to make fundamental changes to the way it sells software in Europe.

Such a ruling would be a significant setback for Microsoft after it overcame its most serious legal challenge by settling a sweeping antitrust case in the United States in 2001. And it would be the defining moment in the five-year tenure of Mario Monti, Europe's top antitrust regulator, whose term ends in the fall.

Microsoft has lobbied national governments in an effort to persuade regulators to tone down the ruling of the European Commission, the year-round administrative arm of the European Union.

But Microsoft's political influence is limited in Europe. The company employs 12,000 people in Europe, the Middle East and Africa &#8212; less than a quarter of the 55,000 that General Electric employed in the European Union when it was trying to win regulatory approval of its planned acquisition of Honeywell International for $45 billion. That deal was blocked by the commission in July 2001.

"G.E. didn't manage to win over the national regulators, so I doubt Microsoft can," said Thomas Vinje, a competition and intellectual property lawyer in Brussels and a vocal critic of Microsoft. His clients include the Computer and Communications Industry Association, which has played a prominent role in antitrust cases against Microsoft on both sides of the Atlantic.

Even if Microsoft does find a sympathetic audience among the national regulators, they are highly unlikely to demand changes to the commission's proposed ruling, said Jacques Bourgeois, a longtime competition lawyer in Brussels. "In my experience, I have never seen a fundamental change to a draft ruling after one of these meetings," he said. Mr. Bourgeois has no direct involvement in the Microsoft case.

Microsoft officials declined to comment on Monday's meeting. The company has repeatedly said that it wants to reach an amicable solution with European regulators. A settlement is possible any time before the commission issues its final ruling, which could come as soon as March 24.

The greatest effect of a ruling against Microsoft would be evident in the way the company sells its music and video-playing software program Media Player. Instead of bundling the program into its Windows operating system as Microsoft does now, the European Commission is expected to demand that Microsoft sell two versions of Windows to manufacturers of personal computers &#8212; one of them with Media Player stripped out.

The commission has contended that by bundling Media Player into Windows, Microsoft is abusing the dominance of the operating system to the detriment of competitors like RealNetworks and QuickTime.

"Media Player is an integral part in Microsoft's longer-term strategy for Windows," a recent Goldman, Sachs research note said. Microsoft, it said, "may refuse to settle, electing to challenge this in court."

But a legal challenge, an appeal at the European Court of First Instance in Luxembourg, would take at least three years to conclude. In the meantime, the court may turn down a request to suspend the changes ordered by the commission until after the appeal, forcing the company to alter the way it does business in Europe.

Windows software generated sales of $3.4 billion in Western Europe in 2002, nearly 30 percent of worldwide sales, according to an estimate by a research company, the International Data Corporation. (Microsoft does not break out sales figures by region.)

Microsoft lawyers have said that any legal remedy imposed on its operations in Europe might be extended to all Windows programs in all regions, including the United States. Yet some analysts point to recent indications that Microsoft could tailor a version of its software for Europe.

Dan Kusnetzky of International Data said Microsoft recently introduced a version of Windows specifically for the Thai market.

"Microsoft may be trying to gain expertise in building a granular version of Windows ahead of the European ruling," he said. "The impact of the European ruling could be limited to Europe until the rest of the world demands something similar."


Edited by - Indy11 on 3/15/2004 11:01:49 AM

Post Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:59 am

lol - couldn't they just do what other buisnesses do, and include an extra CD featuring the Bonus Free Microsoft media player instead? They could do that with the cheaper version and easily get round it. I can see a company complaining that its not fair, but to be honest, they make a piece of software, and the fact that they give you extra things with it for free is fine with me. Competitors of stuff might not like it, but doesn't all buisness do this to?

Post Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:01 pm

Let me tell you my experience with MS and with Linux

I like MS, although there's a point in time when I though Linux was a better alternative.

Linux: Stable?
Bah, bs. It's not stable. The OS itself might be, but NOT the programs.

Linux programs are prone to bugs, slow in comparison, less professional, and lacks polish. Think of it as a comparison between X2 and Freelancer. One is very polished the other, does not only have less feature, but is too unrefined for my taste.

Also with Windows XP the 2 OS seem to be as stable one as the other.

What else sometimes I need to go to command line mode to set up stuff, add drivers and etc from the shell.

User interface is way, I mean way more unfriendly than Windows.

Besides coming to think about it, programming takes a LOT of resources, efforts and commitment. Why should programs be FREE, or even cheap? May be open-source, to a limited degree. Look no business is supposed to tell everyone about their trade secrets. That'd be foolish. So while some degree of open source is good, I don't agree with 100% open source. Is Microsoft a monopolist? They are. But at least they make one fine product and I like it. If you don't like it go ahead and use Linux, none is stopping you. It's free and you could always download the latest kernel. But for me, I have been there, done that (for almost 1 year), and no way am I going back, not in near future aniways.

The only thing good about Linux is that it's cheap, and tons of freeware, though like I said programmers need to be paid, and paid well too coz it's not an easy job. However they have the responsibility to deliver a good, well polished product out to the people. I think I like MS policies better in that sense.

So give it a rest guys.

Edited by - Visconti on 3/15/2004 12:16:37 PM

Edited by - Visconti on 3/15/2004 12:33:03 PM

Post Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:08 pm

@Chips

Other businesses dream of being able to do what MS does. Most other businesses, however, cannot do this because they don't own the railroad, so to speak. Meaning, the way in which Standard Oil, for example, got to be such a huge monopoly is because they owned the means of delivering oil so that it didn't matter how much oil you could produce. If you didn't have your own pipeline to get it market (and most didn't and/or couldn't afford it) the only other way was to go through Standard Oil to get it there.

In MS's case, they own Windows. No one else does. It doesn't matter how good your application may be or your PC hardware may be. If you don't get MS's blessings, you are s-o-l. If MS is not competing by making a product like yours, you're safe. As soon as MS decides that it too will make a product like yours, you have to say your prayers because your days are numbered.

Windows Media Player is the new Internet Explorer. By the way, Real Player is for free as is WinAmp and many others. As it stands, being for free does not make them competitive with Media Player when Media Player comes pre-loaded as part of a Windows' install.

Post Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Now on to media players.

Man Windows is nice enough to "bundle" their software with Windows. Honestly how many alternative to WMP is out there?

Real player. They started out good. But now meh Have you seen their site yet? Oh and I need to take out my credit card to download their player!? What's up with that? And I need to fill up a form that takes 30minutes to complete!? Of course if I forget to cancel their subscription in 14-days... uh oh... So they're not exactly generous either huh? I'd love to use their player coz it was good back then. But sorry, not anymore now. Is it MS' fault? Doubt it, they made the wrong business decision and got left behind.

Netscape. Eh, even teh latest version is still not as good as IE. It's still slow, user interface a bit clumsy, and counter intuitive. Ya it might have features that IE doesn't, but it's simply not fast enough. Although if you think they're as good, one as the other, I certainly won't argue with that, but please note: they've only achieved that after years and years of transformation, when it's been the same IE was already there years ago. ie. they're way behind.

I use Firefox Mozilla browser btw. Has all the friendliness of IE interface, more rock solid, well implemented features, and fewer freeze ups. So you see I'm not exactly MS fan boy. I just think they make excellent product and they should darn well be paid for their efforts.

I also use I-tunes more than WMP, coz they offer services that Windows doesn't. And such. So I wouldn't say it's impossible to get around Windows dominance or monopoly, you just have to come up with something new and attractive. Problem is most don't and they blame Windows for it, which to a degree I can agree, but should correct their business practices first to make it more lucrative. They themselves are anti-competitive. Instead of creating something new, they point fingers at MS.


Edited by - Visconti on 3/15/2004 12:26:10 PM

Post Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:53 pm

@Vis

There also is a free download of Real Player if you REALLY have to have it. It's just not put out on the site as the attention grabber. They'd rather take your money for the full version download

Post Mon Mar 15, 2004 1:50 pm

Indy - *Dodges moths, and then sidesteps dust-bunnies* That particular pot has been on the boil for weeks. I'm just glad (and surprised) that they actually rules against MS. But then, Europe has always been against "anti-competitive" behaviour, and has been sympathetic to Linux. I think that it was in Germany that they were thinking of getting rid of Windows and implementing Linux.

Vis - Linux programs are usually very stable. I don't know what you've been doing. While studying Linux between 2002 and 2003, I experienced only three crashes, and that was due to misconfiguration of files, such as those concerning LILO. Not to be rude old chum, but just because you have an opinion, it does not invalidate everyone else's. Why am I saying this? Because your statement "So give it a rest guys", seems to imply that because you have stated your opinion (which you feel is unequivocal), then we should accept your point of view immediately, and stop discussing the benefits of Windows vs. Linux. It's not going to happen, old chum. It's too big an issue to ignore. Besides, we never really got into it in any serious way.

Post Fri Mar 19, 2004 10:00 am

Hey this guy Mario Monti's got some cojones! Of course, it helps that all 15 Finance Ministries in the EU agree with his position on the current Micrsoft Monopoly case but.. still.

Interesting to see how this pans out. If Monti sticks to his guns and if the EU appeal system doesnt' lift the sanction during the period of appeal that Microsofot is sure to mount, it will reopen all of the issues here in the US and also may cast a shadow over the stuff that SCO is doing against the Linux community.

Interesting stuff!

Post Fri Mar 19, 2004 3:12 pm

Have you been at the wacky tobaccy, Indy? What are you going on about? Gimme a linl, I don't know who that "Mario" guy is!

Post Fri Mar 19, 2004 6:02 pm

@Esqy

Mario Monti is the current head of the EU fair competition administration. After the findings against Microsoft were announced but not yet officially made into a judgment, negotiations began. Many areas of agreement appear to have been reached until Monti stepped in and demanded a promise by Microsoft never again to use the Windows OS as a the leverage to bind other applications to it as it had done in the Media Player case and before that, IE.

Essentially, Monti demanded that Microsoft promise not to use that unfair advantage as a means to push other appications designers out of a particular area of programming by making yet another thing that was new an integral part of the OS. Remember that neither browsers or media players were originally part of Windows nor were either something that MS thought was viable. Microsoft refused .... Steve Ballmer is leading the negotiation team. And discussions came to an end.

@Chips..... (historical minutiae)
Once MS saw Netscape take off and Real Player take off, MS decided to kill them off by making their own versions as automatically a part of the OS.

When you consider that both Netscape and Real Player are designed practically to replace the Windows OS Desktop, I suppose you can understand MS's paranoia but MS used to require any PC seller to agree not to feature any other browser if they wished to sell their PCs with a Windows OS installed. I've read that the same goes with Media Player now.


Edited by - Indy11 on 3/19/2004 6:48:46 PM

Post Fri Mar 19, 2004 7:13 pm

@Esqy,

Here's a cut and paste. Links to the NY Times don't last very long.

Microsoft's Bid to Settle Case in Europe Fails
By PAUL MELLER and JOHN MARKOFF

Published: March 19, 2004

BRUSSELS, March 18 — European regulators announced on Thursday that settlement talks with Microsoft had collapsed, leaving it virtually certain that an antitrust ruling would be issued against the company that could limit its ability to add new features to its software in one of the largest and richest markets in the world.

The end of the talks came after three days of face-to-face meetings between Microsoft's chief executive, Steven A. Ballmer, and the European Union's antitrust chief, Mario Monti. A formal ruling is not expected until Wednesday, but Mr. Monti unexpectedly appeared at the European Commission's noon briefing to announce that "a settlement on the Microsoft case has not been possible."

The five-year-old European case accusing Microsoft of abusing its dominance in operating software — in particular, its bundling of Media Player, the video- and music-playing software, into Windows — has been the last major legal challenge dogging the company since the landmark settlement of the Justice Department's antitrust lawsuit in 2001.

The case also contended that Microsoft unfairly withheld technical information from competitors, making it difficult for them to create software for business servers that would work well with Windows.

A ruling against the company, if upheld in court, could mean a fine of as much as $3 billion. More important, it could force the company to make fundamental changes in the way that it sells software in the European Union, the world's largest trading bloc, where Microsoft now generates about a third of its $11 billion in annual global sales from Windows.

More generally, Microsoft would face new obstacles in its efforts to expand its business to consumer video and audio services and to incorporate additional features, like searching the Web, directly into its operating systems.

The ruling could also become a reference point for future antitrust litigation against the company.

Microsoft said on Thursday that it would appeal in the European courts and file a motion to halt the imposition of sanctions while an appeal proceeds.

The appeal process itself could take four to five years, unless the two sides choose to settle. Both regulators and the company said on Thursday that they had made significant strides toward a settlement before the negotiations broke down.

"I believe we reached agreement on the issues of the case," Mr. Ballmer said in a statement.

But the two sides were unable to agree on a new demand Mr. Monti added in the final days of negotiations.

Emboldened by the unanimous support of national regulators from the 15 member nations of the European Union, Mr. Monti wanted Microsoft to sign a pledge not to bundle other software programs into Windows to the detriment of competitors, one person involved in the talks said.

If Microsoft refused to make a legal commitment not to abuse the dominance of Windows by adding in other software, Mr. Monti said, then "the public and competition would be better served by a decision setting a strong legal precedent which establishes clear principles for a company that is so dominant in the market."

Donald M. Falk, an antitrust lawyer for Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw in Palo Alto, Calif., said that the European Commission "appears set on breaking the cycle of investigations and enforcement actions against Microsoft that have had little or no practical effect on Microsoft's conduct or on the markets it dominates."

Beyond any penalty it faces in Europe, a ruling exposes Microsoft to the risk that its strategy of bundling software applications with Windows will once again make it a legal target in the United States. Microsoft's power and financial success derive in part from its ability to integrate applications - including those in competition with the products of other software companies - as free features of the Windows operating system.

During its bitter seven-year legal fight with the Justice Department and state attorneys general over bundling features like Web browsers, Microsoft successfully held firm on its principle of being able to add any feature to its products, and it was that insistence that led Mr. Monti and Mr. Ballmer to acknowledge they had failed to reach a settlement.

Although Microsoft has paid about $2 billion to settle class-action lawsuits derived from the federal antitrust case, the European ruling could have a direct effect both on the civil antitrust lawsuits brought by RealNetworks, which competes with Microsoft's Media Player, and Sun Microsystems, as well as future claims.

Return to Off Topic