On CBS MoneyWatch: Report: Tiger to Pay Wife $60 Million
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 9 of 38:
Next »
« Previous
Nice try Mr WindowsZealot
>>> Since the beginning of home computer OSs people have had the choice of many OSs. Didn't stop MS from being sued because they "forced" everyone to use Windows. >>>

No, MS was sued because of it's underhanded, sleazy and corrupt business practices, much of which was exposed during the anti-trust trial (a past indiscretion being the strong-arming of OEMs to include MS software on each computer sold, whether it was wanted or not). Other lawsuits have also shown MS also deserves almost every court challenge it receives.

>>> The definition of "choice" seems to be up to the courts. We will see if the courts decide that no one has any choices with iTunes in the same way a court decided that no one had any choices with Windows. >>>

Again, you're spouting revisionist history.

MS held the threat of higher Windows prices or no Windows at all if OEMs didn't bend to MS's will and include the "MS tax" (actually, originally DOS but then Windows) and Explorer (before MS tied it to the OS) on each computer out the door, plus other favoured treatment and placement of MS apps over competitors. One example, Compaq faced a major threat when it wanted to include/distribute Quicktime on their machines... MS said "no way" (only MS "solutions" allowed) and Compaq capitulated. MS 1, consumers (and easy, convenient choice) 0.

OEMs basically had no choice (if they wanted to stay in business) and the consumer was stuck with what the OEMs presented.

>>> Steve Jobs: "You can have any music choice (or software choice: OSX) as long as it is Apple owned, backed, and/or controlled." >>>

Nice try and weak but it's Bill Gates' mantra of "Windows (and MS) everywhere".

>>> I don't want iTunes but I'm FORCED to install it because some people distribute quicktime videos that I want to see. Where is my CHOICE? >>>

The same "choice" users have when they purchase a PC and have MS rammed down their throats?

>>> Apple hasn't been formally convicted of a major federal offense yet.>>>

Care to elaborate? Care to make any legitimate accusations?

If you're referring to "monopoly" positioning by Apple, as tic and others have pointed out, a monopoly is not in and of itself illegal. It's how you obtain and maintain it that leads to trouble and that's where MS has received the attention of the courts and others.

Re Apple and DRM... DRM is a necessary evil to gain acceptance of the music industry and (many) artists for on-line music. The AAC format can be re-ripped and used in other ways and formats so it's not as draconian as many make it out to be.

Why should Apple use, distribute or promote the rival WMA? The 800lb gorilla has enough clout and deals going on without Apple's involvement plus, IMO and that of many others, we don't need an MS monopoly in another market (part of the EU's reasoning in it's MS challenge and court case?).

But it's no worse or better than MS's DRM. The major difference is one is controlled by a company that generally tries to play nice with others (ie, uses open standards) vs another with a history of deceit, back stabbing, threats, illegal activity, proprietary game playing and a sick (stated) obsession with owning and controlling everything computer technology related.

To cut you off at the pass... Apple is the first company above, Microsoft the second happy
Posted by: MacCanuck   Posted on: 02/15/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

I wonder how Apple will fare  rpmyers1 | 02/14/05
DRM can be removed..  d_jedi | 02/14/05
It was only a matter of time  htotten | 02/14/05
Following ZDNet poster logic...  NonZealot | 02/14/05
I would say that is true. Every company wants  bjbrock | 02/14/05
Monopolies are perfectly legal  tic swayback | 02/14/05
It speaks of frivolous...  MacCanuck | 02/14/05
This is frivolous, like all anti-MS suits  NonZealot | 02/14/05
Nice try Mr WindowsZealot  MacCanuck | 02/15/05
Now now  FilledOut | 02/15/05
I'm here  dave95 | 02/14/05
Interesting  ParadigmOdyssey | 02/14/05
If you go to Wal-Mart's music store, they state  bjbrock | 02/14/05
AMEN for the HEADLINE  Update victim | 02/14/05
deceitful?  JakAttak | 02/14/05
Good point, but...  Fred Fredrickson | 02/14/05
Perhaps  TWRX | 02/14/05
It's still $10,000  rpmyers1 | 02/14/05
Plenty of free music out there  tic swayback | 02/14/05
Wrong  olePigeon | 02/14/05
Correction  tic swayback | 02/14/05
Excactly...  olePigeon | 02/14/05
How much?  rpmyers1 | 02/14/05
So you'd rather pay $1400...  olePigeon | 02/14/05
You and Napster.......  dave95 | 02/14/05
$15 a month, or free?  tic swayback | 02/14/05
Oooch - that was fast  dave95 | 02/14/05
Significant Restraint?  AC_MA | 02/14/05
Not the point  NonZealot | 02/14/05
More than one  tic swayback | 02/14/05
Apple may be very restrictive  voska | 02/14/05
This has zero chance of succeeding  tic swayback | 02/14/05
Agreed... Not worth a post. (nt)  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/14/05
Okay, this is getting weird  tic swayback | 02/14/05
IDIOTS! ARGH! You don't see me suing Valve!  olePigeon | 02/14/05
Is allofmp3.com a legal alternative?  tic swayback | 02/14/05
This is a poodle barking  osreinstall | 02/14/05
Don't blame the whole country  tic swayback | 02/14/05

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here