|
Microsoft to stop bundling Media Player (pg. 10)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| TranceXtasy |
| quote: | Originally posted by TranceXtasy
I was wondering how the new Winamp is like, since Winamp 3.0 was a terrible resource hog that took forever to open up, forcing me to go back to the 2.xx series. |
|
|
|
| Durafei |
| I use Winamp 5.. and it's pretty damn fast :D |
|
|
| Your Mother |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Please refer me to an applicable Act, Section, and Clause, otherwise I'm going to have to go out on a limb and say you're full of .
These decisions are notoriously based on flawed and biased interpretations of antiquated laws that were never meant to be applied to modern technology. Just look at the RIAA nonsense. |
Its all their buddy (the fair compeition law. Article 81 & 82):
http://europa.eu.int/comm/competiti...st/legislation/
I'll let you in on a little secret while I'm at it. That law degree you pulled out of a kracker-jack box doesn't mean .
-Your Mother |
|
|
| Your Mother |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
You guessed it, AOL, Microsoft's direct competitor in that market! Who's being monopolistic now!?[/URL]
|
I love how you contradict yourself about what a monopoly really is.
And regarding the arguments that IE/MSN/... are free. They're only free to download but not free to use. Unless of course you want to write a decompiler for them and port them to other OS's that are free to use. Only if you do the latter will they not have a cost associated with them.
-Your Mother |
|
|
| ++ EGO ++ |
| Microsoft is a bad word. |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
I know that Your mother already posted this, but anyway:
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Please refer me to an applicable Act, Section, and Clause, otherwise I'm going to have to go out on a limb and say you're full of .
These decisions are notoriously based on flawed and biased interpretations of antiquated laws that were never meant to be applied to modern technology. Just look at the RIAA nonsense. |
| quote: | Originally posted by St_Andrew
EU's anti trust laws actually says that firms in a dominant position may not abuse that position. And it has a lot of definitions of what that is (i find MS quilty for loads of them), if interested read Article 82 of the EC Treaty. |
Perhaps you should stop whine about other people not reading posts and start read others posts yourself :) |
|
|
| Cyrus King |
| quote: | Originally posted by Your Mother
Its all their buddy (the fair compeition law. Article 81 & 82):
http://europa.eu.int/comm/competiti...st/legislation/
I'll let you in on a little secret while I'm at it. That law degree you pulled out of a kracker-jack box doesn't mean .
-Your Mother |
Diginut just got owned once again. |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| In Soviet Russia, Microsoft unbundles you. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Durafei
I'm tired of this argument. You refuse to understand the difference between MSN and other free software NOT produced by Microsoft. When you pay for Windows, you pay for MSN - it's included with Windows.
The fact that you can download it for free means absolutely nothing, because you can't actualy use it unless you paid for Windows. This is different from other free software NOT produced by Microsoft, because those companies DID NOT get paid when you purchased Windows. How is that unclear ? |
Because thousands of software titles are also free and only run on Windows!
Holy man, you're just repeating the same stale point over and over again. "You're" tired of this argument? It's free, anybody can download it, and unless you can find a specific clause in the Windows licensing agreement that states that a certain part of the cost is for MSN Messenger, you have no argument here! Shouting your unsupported assertion louder and more frequently does NOT make it any more correct.
ing commies. |
|
|
| Durafei |
| quote: | | Holy man, you're just repeating the same stale point over and over again. "You're" tired of this argument? It's free, anybody can download it, and unless you can find a specific clause in the Windows licensing agreement that states that a certain part of the cost is for MSN Messenger, you have no argument here! Shouting your unsupported assertion louder and more frequently does NOT make it any more correct. |
Don't you think that the team that develops MSN gets paid partially due to sales of Windows ?? They could be volunteers, though I doubt it.. They get paid. And where does the money come from ? From consumers who pay for Windows.
Do you see any connection here at all ?? |
|
|
| Durafei |
Whenever you have a product - somebody HAS to pay for it (unless it's a freeware product, done by programmers who did it for free and did not get paid for it - see www.sourcforge.net)
Even gmail is not free. It's free for the user, but it's paid for by advertisers. |
|
|
| Your Mother |
| quote: | Originally posted by Durafei
Don't you think that the team that develops MSN gets paid partially due to sales of Windows ?? They could be volunteers, though I doubt it.. They get paid. And where does the money come from ? From consumers who pay for Windows.
Do you see any connection here at all ?? |
I know of 2 people personally that worked on messenger and they were both paid (the software is the biggest piece of btw)... I guess that means it wasn't free to produce. Kinda hard to imagine M$ ever producing a product that doesn't indirectly make them money. Products like messenger are called OS accessories. They provide incentive for people to buy windows so in the end they make M$ money. It may be free to download upgrades, but that version that comes loaded with Windows has an associated cost to the user.
-Your Mother |
|
|
|
|
