Dreams-Visions said:
But that's not because of anti-competitive behavior. It's because people chose Google over Yahoo!, Alta-Vista, Ask, Live/Bing, and everyone else.
Remember, the reason MS got slapped over the head by the US and EU was because they were doing things to deliberately disable or depress the ability of competitors to compete. Hell, you couldn't even uninstall IE back then. It would destroy the system.
No, your browser can go to whatever search engine you wish. Just type it in.
Or is it ?
Google is trying to force Bing out of preinstalled phone releases of andriod
Whether it can be argued that at some point Apple was behaving anti-competitively with the DRM music issue (which to some degree was actually the fault of the RIAA, not Apple or MS), the fact today is that Apple sells DRM-free mp3's now and has for the last few years. Not sure what else they can do about that. Thoughts?
At this point the only thing that can be done about it is if a court says that ipods /iphones/ipads can't just be locked to itunes. or they all have to use a diffrent platform.
I don't disagree. I just don't think they are acting in an anti-competitive fashion, which was the issue with Microsoft.
oh i believe they are , apple has had people locked into itunes for almost a decade at this point with lots of music and video already bought and invested its very costly for someone to move on to a new platform.
The very fact that they had this huge advantage from abusing another market is anti competetive .
I think you've forgotten how MS fucked Netscape.
I don't. They've simply failed to innovate. They've been late to the punch over and over again, as we've all seen. Tablet PCs? Poorly executed. Zune? Too late to the punch. WinMo? Too slow to improve. IE? We were stuck on IE6 for what? 4 or 5 years? They let Firefox and Chrome lap them. Hotmail? Lack of innovation allowed GMail to replace it for many people. Windows Media Player? Horribly mismanaged, later to compete with Zune Software. Clusterfucked.
How have tablet Pcs been poorly executed ? MS has been in the market meeting users needs for years. The fact is that 7-10 inch multi touch capactive glass wasn't cost effective until 2010 and even then it normaly cost 1/3rd the total price of these new breads of tablet.
Not to mention that while an ipad might make people who want a bigger phone happy , it does nothing from those who need a laptop or actualy need windows featuers in the field. I use a tablet every day at work and without the pen input or the x86-64 capatibility i'd be sunk.
The zune was really late and i wont disagree , at that point Apple was able to use its drm to keep anyone from switching anyway.
WinMo was and still is a great product , i actually had a tear when my touch pro 2 died. Its support for the exchange and other programs i used to use was epic and the pen allowed me to write emails faster than i can on a touch screen phone .
I still don't know why they didn't continue with win mo for busniess and moved windows phone 7 for the consumer.
IE is still a great platform . I used ie6 and then ie7 /8 and now 9 and they are all fast. I liked firefox but can't stand chrome.
Zune software , i can't blame you with , it should have replaced windows media player. I think you wil lsee that happen with windows 8
I don't think you can blame anyone but MS for those products not being good enough for people to *choose* them over the competition.
Even when MS makes good products people are anti ms. Its the cool thing right now to do , anti ms and be in love with apple and google. It will change at some point
MS can create the second coming today and apple can crap in a box and people will be more excited about apple.
Windows 7 , zune , xbox 360 , ie 9 now 10 all these are great products but either don't get the respect they deserve or are attacked cause they are made by ms .
You mean built into the OS replacing Paint and Windows Movie Maker? I don't know. For what it's worth, those are applications that come on a separate disc for MacOS (iLife). If MS allowed them to be optional installs like they do with Live Essentials, nobody would have a place to complain.
I dunno the imacs came preinstalled for us as part of apple care ( i love the fact that i don't have to work in the apple labs cause the video teacher is constantly calling apple care)
My Mac did not come with Final Cut Express, so I can't speak with that. Perhaps Apple installed them for your school? Either way, Apple can do what it wants to some degree because they represent 15% of the market.
apple is a 100% of the market for osx machines.
They control a 100% of supply chain also , from hardware to os .
I don't recall seeing an option box when I've ever installed Windows 7. Just IE on my taskbar. Besides, one company has a monopoly. The other has 15% of the market. As such it's pretty silly to compare them. Safari doesn't impact the browser industry.
http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-03-09/business/17213922_1_internet-explorer-windows-vista-browser
once again apple has a 100% of the osx market.
Its very simple , if you want to develop software to compete with an apple product your SOL
now you're just being silly.
Its a 100% correct.
Apple has a 100% market share of OSX products. Apple currently can put any program they want on the disc when people buy their mac.
The fact is , if you created a video chat program and apple wanted that action they can put thier own verison on there and drive you out of busniess.
This was the complaint against microsoft.
Right now apple can put any application they want on OSX and have it come with all the hardware they sell. MS can't do that and competing companys can't do that.
People choose Premiere/After Effects and/or Autodesk Smoke over Final Cut Express/Pro all the time. What are you talking about?
And you speak as though you know something about the music industry when you clearly do not. Most in the audio production industry use ProTools, Logic Pro, Ableton Live, Cuebase. Garage band is cute, but it's not what pros use.
Big companys do , not the average mac user. That is what I'm talking about.
You really think that IT managers couldn't load out windows to all their clients with firefox installed ?
The first thing we do when we get a new model in is wipe the drives and install a single pc set it up with what we want and then ghost it . Deploy it through the network to the new machines and then deep freeze them.
If i was a company sure i'd go out and put whatever my desingers and workers wanted on the machine.
But do you think an average computer user will ?
ON the pc we have sony vegas , cyberlink power director , nero and a few other video editing programs aimed at consumers. They are all availble under $100
MSE won't come preinstalled because it would be anticompetitive for them to do so. MS can either pay manufacturers like McAfee, Norton and others do to get the product pre-installed on systems...or continue to compete fairly as a separate download.
So as you say , MS can't secure their software by adding a basic component to their software. Do you think it would be anticompetetive to apple to preinstall an antivirus program ?
Do you think ms can compete if they can't install a simple software addition while others can ?
That is the point
It's better for them to be *chosen* by people than for them to be forced into using it. It would be like petitioning the US Government to force out foreign car manufacturers because US brands aren't selling well. As it turns out, American autos will sell just fine if the product is of good quality and competes on its own merits. Microsoft will find success if their products are BETTER than the competition. They don't need the unfair advantage of a default installation. Not when they control 90% of the market. They don't need to do anything of the sort. They simply need to continue to compete.
If I buy an iphone i'm forced to use itunes and a number of other apple products. If i buy osx , it has safari and other programs preinstalled.
It makes sense for ms to be able to preinstall these things also.
These things actually impeed ms's chances of competeting. Apple had a huge marketing campain against MS for years about them having tons of viruses , moving an antivirus program into windows would have made this moot. But their hands are tied and so ar etheir ability to compete .
Did you read about how the skype purchase conincides with the end of the anti trust regulations placed on ms
