Posted on 08/10/2002 10:30:07 AM PDT by HAL9000
When the person who supposedly broke the rules and brought so much bad publicity to the company does not get fired it means that the person was following orders. The apology is meaningless.
My way a lot of places sell 'upgrade bundles' which give you everything except the hard drive, monitor and keyboard and you can get it all for a pretty high powered system for about $300 bucks.
Total nonsense. They can sell good stable Linux systems preinstalled just like they do with Windows - probably more stable too. Instead they have been selling win 98 OS's with Office XP which messes everything up.
BS. It means that their filter is a work in progress and we helped calibrate it. Period.
The proposed settlement would prevent Microsoft from prohibiting PC manufacturers from selling computers with competing operating systems pre-installed.
This latest action is slightly different. Microsoft is looking for a loophole that would allow them to prohibit manufacturers from selling "naked PCs".
Perhaps this matter will be brought to the attention of Judge Kollar-Kotelly, and she will close this loophole.
Microsoft should not be dictating terms to the manufacturers about sales to which Microsoft is not a party. If the manufacturers want to sell computers with a blank disk drive, it's none of Microsoft's business.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/legal/mar02/03-26ntranscriptam.asp
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
STATE OF NEW YORK, et al., .
.
Plaintiffs, .
.
v. . CA No. 98-1233(CKK)
. Washington, D.C.
MICROSOFT CORPORATION, . March 26, 2002
. 9:03 a.m.
Defendant. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
VOLUME 6
MORNING SESSION
TRANSCRIPT OF TRIAL RECORD
BEFORE THE HONORABLE COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
[snip]
19 Q. But my questions for you -- I wanted to clarify, and you
20 did clarify it, that your testimony is not that Microsoft
21 requires Gateway to include a license for a Windows operating
22 system with every PC. And that is correct?
23 A. That's correct. In section -- in paragraph 96, it says
24 must have an operating system or a license for an operating
25 system.
1275
1 Q. And what Microsoft attempts to provide OEMs an incentive to
2 do, through section 3(d) of the MDP, is not ship so-called
3 naked machines with no operating system; correct?
4 A. Yes. Again, and section 3(d) is one of the quote/unquote
5 prerequisites under the market development program, which means
6 if you don't achieve that prerequisite you lose -- you stand to
7 lose the entire market -- royalty discount available under the
8 MDP.
9 Q. And Microsoft's concern is that if Gateway's -- if OEMs
10 ship PCs without any operating system, that a pirated copy of
11 Windows may be installed on that PC; correct?
12 A. I don't know what Microsoft's concern is other than just
13 general software piracy.
14 Q. Do you know what percentage of naked PCs end up with a
15 pirated copy of Windows installed on it?
16 A. No, sir.
Strange that I should read this over and over.
This makes sense if you choose the absolutely cheapest parts available.
If one even marginally recognizes the value of quality, documentation, drivers and reliability, this becomes a "no brainer" in a whole different direction.
Microsoft offers to sell OEMs like Dell Windows at below the market price, provided they agree to a set of terms (such as buying one copy for every machine they ship, to cut down on piracy). If Dell doesn't like those terms, it's perfectly free not to sign that OEM deal, and simply pay the market price for its copies of Windows the same as you or I would. Since Dell isn't doing that and is instead complying with the agreement, presumably the money it saves by getting cheap copies of Windows more than makes up for the sales it expects to lose by not offering OS-free machines.
Offering companies a discount on your OS is known as "predatory pricing" and is a "monopolistic practice." Note that giving away your OS for free [Linux] is not predatory pricing, and refusing to sell copies of your OS to OEMs at all [Apple] is not a monopolistic practice. I hope this clears things up for you.
When I ordered my first Dell from them back in 1997, they refused to sell "naked pc's" (that is, pc's without an operating system. They said at the time they couldn't support the pc since a requirement by Dell was to have an OS that was capable of running their diagnostics utilities - which were ironically all Windows based.
Last year when I ordered my second Dell -- same story.
Now, I've ordered from Dell out of convenience. I can easily build my own pc to spec, but because I lack the time to do it, I order them from Dell. The last PC I bought "in pieces" was 3 years ago - the parts are all still in their boxes and it's a worthless system now.
Since when is Dell anti gun ? I planned to make my next computer a Dell and not a Gateway for the very reason that Gateway is anti gun. I seem to remember in that incident that Dell apologized to the gunsmith and gave him a free computer. It was some low level anti in the Dell offices that refused to sell to him.
It is a shame that M$ feels that they have to do this kind of thing. Its their paranoia that turns everybody against them. The M$ agrument appears to be that a PC manufacturer can't distribute a "naked box" because they (in their infinite paranoia) believe the customer will install a pirated copy of Windows on it? Pretty bent logic, if you ask me.
There are lots of other OSs other than Windows that can be installed on a "naked box" -- Linux, Darwin, Solaris, NetBSD, ....
True to an extent, Sam, but the point is that you definitely pay for that OS that you're wiping off. Trust me.
I work for the workstation division of ......ahem.......a very large computer company. :) We've dealt with this issue, and frankly.........this is 100% about the contract that is negotiated with Microsoft based upon the pricing that a company wants from Microsoft. IOW, you want their absolute, best, rock-bottom price.......then you install a Microsoft OS on every machine. It's really that simple.
They're not nearly as unreasonable as many think.
In our case, we agreed that every system shipped will have an OS, but it does NOT have to be a Microsoft OS. We, therefore, have the leeway to sell whatever the heck our customer needs on their workstations.
This also means our customers aren't paying for a Microsoft OS that they're going to "toss" if they plan to do their own Linux preload/image.
Oh come now. You should understand that an individual's first reaction is usually the one truest to his nature. The same is true of corporations. There was a policy in place. The apology and free computer were damage-control measures, taken only when the whole ugly matter blew up in their face.
Just as I will never again buy a S&W (I don't care who bought them), I will never buy a Dell. They were caught doing what came naturally; that is enough for me.
--Boris
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.