neo1980 Posted May 8, 2002 Share Posted May 8, 2002 Its amazing that Apple doesnt sell many computers as Microsoft based systems and it puts all the software and OS of its own like iPhoto, iWhatever and its not called a monopoly just because its market base is less while when Microsoft puts in some of its own featured its called breach of monopolism just because so many people buy it and its big Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timan Veteran Posted May 8, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 8, 2002 think of it this way. apple is the only one that makes apple computers windows based machines can get made by. dell compaq. hp, aw, sony, lalalalla you name it thats why plus for the macs there isnt that much of a market for all of that stuff and in osx isn't IE the default browser yes. so that goes back to ms. hope that made sense :s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickedkitten Veteran Posted May 8, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 8, 2002 Originally posted by neo1980 Its amazing that Apple doesnt sell many computers as Microsoft based systems and it puts all the software and OS of its own like iPhoto, iWhatever and its not called a monopoly just because its market base is less while when Microsoft puts in some of its own featured its called breach of monopolism just because so many people buy it and its big First of all market share means nothing. Anytime the word market share is used it is used in relation to the sales of new computers in the US. That says nothing about the amount of Macs that are still in use, or the ones that are sold in the UK and Japan which happens to be the biggest Apple sales market. Apple isn't a monopoly simply by the fact that if you don't like iTunes or iPhoto (which by the way doesn't come with the OS) you can simply drag it off to the trash and away it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzla Veteran Posted May 8, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 8, 2002 Originally posted by Wickedkitten Apple isn't a monopoly simply by the fact that if you don't like iTunes or iPhoto (which by the way doesn't come with the OS) you can simply drag it off to the trash and away it goes. I'd like to see you remove IE6 or OE6. Go on, I'll wait............... ... can't do it? Oh right, that would be where the term monopoly comes in then :roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcidBurN Posted May 8, 2002 Share Posted May 8, 2002 LOL HEHEHE :D :D :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroChaos Veteran Posted May 8, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 8, 2002 i dunno, i'm still a little confused by all of this. so what if you can't remove them, you can still easily install moz or opera or whatever if you don't like IE. if you don't like WMP, there are tons of other choices that you'll have no problem installing. isn't a monoply illegal when you make it impossible for anyone to sell their own product of a similar nature? so if they take out IE, then AOL/Netscape is going to be just as big of a monopoly, won't it? :ponder: :paranoid: anyone care to shed some light on my confusion? :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timan Veteran Posted May 8, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 8, 2002 yea but... if u install moz. or something ie will still try to take over like AOL DOES!!!! when u insert one of their cds' i'd just like to have 1 min with steve case ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzla Veteran Posted May 8, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 8, 2002 Originally posted by BroChaos i dunno, i'm still a little confused by all of this. so what if you can't remove them, you can still easily install moz or opera or whatever if you don't like IE. if you don't like WMP, there are tons of other choices that you'll have no problem installing. isn't a monoply illegal when you make it impossible for anyone to sell their own product of a similar nature? so if they take out IE, then AOL/Netscape is going to be just as big of a monopoly, won't it? :ponder: :paranoid: anyone care to shed some light on my confusion? :D The fact that you can't remove it and that it is preinstalled forever to be there is the sticking point. Companies such as netscape want to see their software put alongside IE6 equally. What average user is going to bother downloading Netscape 6 if IE 6 is sat there on the desktop never to be removed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiNZ Posted May 8, 2002 Share Posted May 8, 2002 This has been gone over 5667398765354764878 times . It has didly squat to do with "consumer" choice . All Software Cos want to dominate with their "everyone wants" peice of cyber magic. If Netscape could dominate and remove your choice they would , the same goes with Real , Apple , IBM .etc etc etc Wasnt Oracle quoted once as wanting to dominate the World , the cyber World that is . MS got there first to the "dominate" position. If IBM had got there with OS2 they would be facing the same action now . And I beleive that this whole thing will be repeated at some time in the Future. Maybe IBM in court over say OS/29 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miran Posted May 8, 2002 Share Posted May 8, 2002 So Netscape wants both installed, Netscape and IE. Hey wait a minute! What about Opera, Mozilla, Eudora, Pocomail, The Bat, etc, etc, etc shouldn't they all be installed with windows too? This is the 21st century. I personally consider browsing the internet an extension of browsing your computer. So, by that notion, MS should remove the ability to browse your computer files too, since other companies who make file browsers should have fair competition! That's not even to mention all the card-game companies suffering since MS included Solitaire with windows. Lol. Also... If MS DOES remove Internet Explorer... Ummm.. How would you get on the internet to go download Netscape or something in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzla Veteran Posted May 8, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 8, 2002 Originally posted by Knoxca Also... If MS DOES remove Internet Explorer... Ummm.. How would you get on the internet to go download Netscape or something in the first place? I never said anything about removing IE6 from the start, I said the ability to remove IE6. At the present time, the courts aren't simply satisfied with removing the IE shortcuts, which MS say that's all they can do because IE6 is so intertwined into XP. Two very, very different cookies. *drools* mmmmm, sweet sweet cookies :ditsy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted May 8, 2002 Share Posted May 8, 2002 I'd like 2 Add, that i have now Moved From IE6 to Netscape as my Default Web Browser! well, Mozilla, 2 Be Exact! i can their POV, but to a user with moderate internet "know how" they will explore (no pun intended) the competion and Judge for themselves! ... the only thing that Bugs me, How u get Incompatibilities with ANything other than IE! ... GRRR, stupid monopolies! ... ANYHOW, i'd like 2 Recommend Mozilla 2 Any XP Users, or OS X with Slight Curiousity! its a Good Browser! ;) :D >> NeYo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzla Veteran Posted May 8, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 8, 2002 Yeah, I use Moz on OS X, I've also given Chimera a go as well. Not bad for a browser which is only a few months old... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1759 Posted May 8, 2002 Share Posted May 8, 2002 They can remove the intergrated bits of IE, OE, WMP and it will work fine, your Windows experience will be similar to running 95 again, although more stable. Which actually wouldn't be bad at times, it would make your pc run a tad faster and save up some hd space. All MS would have to do is sell IE, OE, WMP as a separate piece of software, either as a Plus! or Service Pack. The govt. would be happy and MS could still make money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiNZ Posted May 8, 2002 Share Posted May 8, 2002 And of course with these having to be sold seperately guess who will be paying more to precisely what we have now . You me and all as consumers which the US DOJ is helping HUH!! And we win how ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
username Posted May 8, 2002 Share Posted May 8, 2002 if Apple did not make the extra iwhatevers in the OS, nobody would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzla Veteran Posted May 8, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 8, 2002 Originally posted by username if Apple did not make the extra iwhatevers in the OS, nobody would. Yeah, that's right :right: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damoss34 Posted May 8, 2002 Share Posted May 8, 2002 What does it matter if Microsoft puts IE and only IE in there cuz after all Windows is THEIR product, not Microsoft's. If Netscape made an OS of their own then they can put it in their own. Microsoft shouldn't have to cater to other people's software. It would be just as easy for someone to make a better product that more people will use then IE so why don't they. It's lack of competetion and not on MIcrosoft's part either. Let them integrate whatever the need into the code if it makes it run better, and they shouldn't have to make their applications be uninstallable if they don't want to. Just my 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzla Veteran Posted May 8, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 8, 2002 Originally posted by damoss34 ...and they shouldn't have to make their applications be uninstallable if they don't want to. Just my 2 cents. Shame the courts don't agree with you :roll: And this: What does it matter if Microsoft puts IE and only IE in there cuz after all Windows is THEIR product, not Microsoft's huh? shouldn't that read "What does it matter if Microsoft puts IE and only IE in there cuz after all Windows is THEIR product, not Netscape's" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp00nman Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Originally posted by damoss34 What does it matter if Microsoft puts IE and only IE in there cuz after all Windows is THEIR product, not Microsoft's. If Netscape made an OS of their own then they can put it in their own. Microsoft shouldn't have to cater to other people's software. It would be just as easy for someone to make a better product that more people will use then IE so why don't they. It's lack of competetion and not on MIcrosoft's part either. Let them integrate whatever the need into the code if it makes it run better, and they shouldn't have to make their applications be uninstallable if they don't want to. Just my 2 cents. I agree with you man. If Microsoft makes their own OS and supports their programs to go along with it, then it's totally fine. I mean, there ARE alternatives to Microsoft products. Linux, Mac OS, Adobe products, Corel products, etc... It's not like Microsoft owns the whole technology industry. But it didn't really help when they released the XBOX.... That just makes them look like they're trying to capitalize on every technology department, a BIG No-no during a time like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroChaos Veteran Posted May 9, 2002 Veteran Share Posted May 9, 2002 i kind of agree with the last couple too. i'd like to see aol make an os (perhaps with redhat?) and then NOT include AOL instant messanger, winamp, ICQ, Netscape, and whatever else they own. or let MS put in their alternatives..., that would never happen. i see XP as micrsofts own product, and they can put whatever they want in it. there is no monopoly in their own product. now these products, the OS, can cause monopolies between them, but i don't see how there can be one INSIDE them. can MS sue linux and make them include MS products as alternatives? right now, linux isn't capable of running IE, so isn't that a monopoly according to this court case? that was just an example by the way ;) i think MS can make their OS however they want ON THE INSIDE. i think linux is doing just fine their own way too. if people want to ***** about what's included, they can go ahead and make their own OS and put whatever THEY want on it. am i making any sense? basically my point is the separation between the actual OS, and whats INSIDE the OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangesOfCourse Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Originally posted by BroChaos i kind of agree with the last couple too. i'd like to see aol make an os (perhaps with redhat?) and then NOT include AOL instant messanger, winamp, ICQ, Netscape, and whatever else they own. or let MS put in their alternatives..., that would never happen. i see XP as micrsofts own product, and they can put whatever they want in it. there is no monopoly in their own product. now these products, the OS, can cause monopolies between them, but i don't see how there can be one INSIDE them. can MS sue linux and make them include MS products as alternatives? right now, linux isn't capable of running IE, so isn't that a monopoly according to this court case? that was just an example by the way ;) i think MS can make their OS however they want ON THE INSIDE. i think linux is doing just fine their own way too. if people want to ***** about what's included, they can go ahead and make their own OS and put whatever THEY want on it. am i making any sense? basically my point is the separation between the actual OS, and whats INSIDE the OS. agreed :) I mean.. whats their prob?! its M$ product.. they made it.. they sell it.. whats you prob.. if AOHELL wants to make one.. and then include all they want.. be my guest.. but no.. they just want to sue.. :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarik Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Hey guys, whos the riche$t man in the world ? Hey guys, who sells the most OS's ? What Company Makes the most money in the Software industry ? Who cares, they make money and people buy, people can't get enough of it. Trust me, we can talk, talk talk, but the monopoly is always going to be there. And Bill is one smart guy, he manages to make alot of money, and so what u can't uninstall IE6, who cares, u dont like it, u dont make it ur default Browser, and u install Netscape, or anyother Browser, trust me u may look at my name ( xpexpert ) & think, oh he's just sayin this bc he loves M$ or sumthin, lol, nah its just a cool name, but thats besides the point, u dont like WMP, u instal Real Player, and trust me, it can be ur default, so why ***** about MS, they manage to make a lot of money, not from me ;) or U, but they make it, people have been talkin bout MS, for such a long time being a Monoply, listen they makin the dough, and they gettin away with it, so why spend our time talkin bout M$, and why dont we start makin Ap's to remove IE, and Messenger, WMP, etc.. bc weathere we like it or not they still gonne do it, so lets change it :p Just my opinion, u dont like it, :dead: ::..xpexpert..:: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvorgold Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 i'm a huge fan of mozilla, faaaaaast speed, ie like rendering, and i might as well make it my default now :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted May 9, 2002 Share Posted May 9, 2002 Originally posted by BroChaos i see XP as micrsofts own product, and they can put whatever they want in it. there is no monopoly in their own product. now these products, the OS, can cause monopolies between them, but i don't see how there can be one INSIDE them. can MS sue linux and make them include MS products as alternatives? right now, linux isn't capable of running IE, so isn't that a monopoly according to this court case? I agree with you, but MS is not interested in porting some of their applications to *nix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts