Viewing Thread:
"Microsoft Targets the Low End of the Market, X-box and More"

Has anyone been wondering what Microsoft is up to lately, I think they’re trying to take over the Internet once again. We all know that they’re the big boys who brought us the (love it or hate it Windows operating system), but why the moves of late such as:

The X-box ????
The £93 million pounds paid for a 24.6% voting share in Corel????
Microsoft’s ".net" project???
Investment in NTL (can’t substantiate this one, the guy installing my NTL connection told me by word of mouth)????

Well Im just beginning to see what a clever man Gates is, some people think that buying shares in Corel is a way of Microsoft protecting itself from the US Governments Anti-Trust Lawsuit...
Which really is a disgrace, lets be honest OK you like having Internet Explorer free as Standard with Windows. But look at Netscape ... before Microsoft came along abusing its Monopoly, they were kings of the world...their web browser was the standard, then Microsoft made its own version Internet Explorer and Netscape’s Value plummeted overnight. Now of course if Internet Explorer was not free with windows this would not have happened.??? If you worked hard for Netscape you would be rightly annoyed with Microsoft.
Meanwhile around this time Microsoft gave Apple a large sum of money, to drop their Lawsuit (Apple were suing Microsoft for similarities between the Apple and Microsoft’s new OS Windows). The bribe only had the condition that Internet Explorer was part of Apples new OS.

The Big picture, do you see it yet, well when I tell you that Corel’s version of Linux, is arguably the most similar to Windows in use and appearance, and that as a result of Microsoft 24.6% shares Corel now has to work with Microsoft on Microsoft’s .Net Project.

Well it seems its all healthy competition, not likely. Why would Microsoft buy shares in a company that had set itself up as a direct competitor to its OS, a company that believes in a free OS for all??? Bare in mind if Microsoft Sold its shares in the Company it will go bust....Not healthy competition???
One reason is possible Protection from the US Governments lawsuit. But in my opinion it’s more likely that Microsoft are now setting up to take control of the low end of the Market. Now I use NTL, its free and a good service no complaints there...but then the Americans have had free Internet access for years, in this case its just BT being evil....so I don’t mind that. I recommend NTL to anyone, it takes a while to get your NTL disc, but I have got no reason to complain about the service.

The low end of the Market is the Key, Microsoft wants control of the internet be it on your Dreamcast (Why do you think Sonic the Blue Hedgehog was seen lately on an X-Box Demo), on your cheap PC running Linux (i.e. Corel), Your Apple Macintosh, Or your Powerful PC running The Latest version of Windows, or your set top box Connected to your Television (i.e. NTL).
As long as Microsoft’s Software connects you to the Internet you see its content, its vision.

Microsoft has stated that in the Future it expects all OS and software upgrades to be downloaded, at a one off payment or on a pay as you use basis...
This is what .net is you download only the software package you want to use, i.e. Excel with the latest version of Windows but nothing else... No doubt there will be a discount for buying lots of software together. This is a clever vision, how can you be anti-competitive if Microsoft give you the option of only downloading the software you want, nothing will be bundled together in one package, you choose.

Microsoft is in effect with .net blurring the definition of Application software with the OS software.... Hopefully then they won’t get split into 2 mini companies.

Its unlikely to get split up if BUSH becomes president.

Anyway to the point, what browser are you using, does it keep asking for the latest downloads of Microsoft Virtual Machine??? Do you play your MP3s on Windows Media Player, and more importantly did it change the file associations to make it the default MP3 player when you installed it, without asking you??? Somebody out there must know what Im talking about, Come on Sony protect the Low end of the Market...sell PS2 games cheap NOW.. or in a years time the X-box will come out with the ability to play cheap PC games, and X-box will eat you alive...

We all love computers and Games, but I don’t want one company controlling the whole picture, once USB modems are cheap enough for everyone Microsoft will dominate because of .net. Microsoft’s Vision will download to your machine in minutes not hours, and it will be hard to stop.

A final point once you control the software most people use to view the internet the Website designers will have to use your software to make their websites look good with your browser. I like some of the thing Microsoft has done, I like my cheap Internet access with NTL. But I don’t want them controlling everything...

Buy Nintendo or Sony Gamers, Use Winamp to play your MP3's. Competition is Good, when its fair, I hope the X-box drops the price of Console Games but I don’t want Microsoft dominating the low end of the market, What do you think?????

Well put, and I'm glad we can both agree on what you have written. What can we debate about next, do you know anything about the new Pentium 4's? I haven't a clue about chip architecture, it's all microns to me. Do you think they will be a major leap forward or a stop gap whilst the next chips are in the design stage?
And do chips hang around long enough for software developers to make the most out of them?

Well aslong as you werent all under the impression that Microsoft Created the Internet. Hopefully the internet will continue to grow, but in the direction that we the users want, and not directed by any big company.

Your point about the size of the OS is partially valid, However with Microsoft I think you'll find that the problem is not due to the size of the OS. All an OS should need to function correctly is a few startup files, to allow all the Peripherals to interface correctly together and present a nice Graphical User Interface to the end user. The old OSs on Ataris and Amigas etc... didnt look as nice as Windows does today, however they did everything that was required to allow all the peripherals and computer components to communicate with each other. This is the core job of an OS...its what it is designed to do. If you want the OS to be fancy and look nice, and have Songs every time your PC boots then by some add on programs to do this. ...The problem with Windows 95 was that it was rushed out, it had too much emphasis on looking nice, without really being able to do its job properly. It was also built up on an already 2nd rate Dos system..as a result it was bug ridden, and so crashes alot. In short, because Windows 95 just built on top of what was already there, it was big, clumsy and prone to crash. Microsoft should ideally have programmed a completely new OS from scratch.
However past Faults aside, each new release of Windows has tried to get rid of all the old bugs, aswell as optimising the code of the OS. This is exemplified by the new Windows OS ME, no longer do we have Dos running at Startup, its a very good, stable and efficient OS. This OS is what Windows 95 Should have been.

My point is that the new versions of Windows are Great, a vast improvement on past OS`s in particular Windows 95. However as Microsoft really has no Competition in the OS market they can force us to wait for a good, stable OS, if the Market was Competative, Microsoft would have to fix all the bugs before they released their OS, or face slumping sales due to a stable Competitors OS. I would recommend a new version of Windows to anyone, I just dont like the fact that were forced to use an unstable OS for 5 years because a company has a Monopoly.
Remember, its not the OS people really care about, its the Software that runs on it, that includes games and application software. Do you really think that if there was a free stable OS that ran all the software your PC already runs, including games...that People wouldnt use it, and companies wouldnt bundle it with their machines (Saving the Consumer the Price of the latest version of Windows???).

In Short, I believe Competition would be good, if only to make Microsoft a better company

ooooh! Forgot, while we are on the subject, it was ARPA's 43rd birthday on 21/11/00 (yesterday) and it is MY
34th birthday on 22/11/00 (today). So Happy Birthday to the internet!

Spooky how numbers work, isn't it?

Sorry if my post was a bit misleading there, Jimmy, perhaps I should have said 'Microsoft's standardisations "facilitated" the "growth" of the internet into the WWW'. I agree, they did not create it, the 'internet' was initially military, then military and academic, then everyone got in. Then the WWW pages sprang up to what we have today.

I think the important thing here is the end user, you and I. I still believe, no matter how naive, in the original ethos that the WWW should be a worldwide resource of free information and applications, although there is growing commercial pressure to change that. If our community of users sticks together on this, though, we can keep it the way it is. And no matter what MS try to do in the future, we will still always have a choice of how we access the web. I can nip across and download Netscape anytime should I wish to do so, or get Linux; I think that choice will always be there.

I think we'll see MS split up, and it's a shame, I've always admired Gates for what he's done for us, but I don't worship him.

Your point about Ataris, Acorns and Amigas not crashing as often is 'interesting'. Compare the number of lines of code that the respective OS's use, and you'll find Windows has exponentially more, and therefore many more chances of having bugs. It does seem, as I said earlier, that this has always been a problem with MS product, but overall I can live with it as my applications are not critical.

And yes, competition is good, they just need to be better at their marketing.

Point Taken, hopefully X-box will be a true Console and not just a machine for Cheap PC ports.

You are also right, if I owned Microsoft I too would have Bundled IE with Windows...because its a smart move that gets rid of the competition. Perhaps that makes me a hypocrit..so be it. When PCs were 1st being developed in the 80's microsoft did standardise the IBM PC and compatible operating system.

MICROSOFT DID NOT CREATE, OR HAVE ANY PART IN CREATING THE WWW. , ALTHOUGH THEY DID STEAL THE WEBROWSER, AND MANY OTHER IDEAS FROM NETSCAPE.

So, do not give Microsoft any credit for allowing communication across different platforms, they are by no means the pioneers of this technology. They did not invent Java script, or the internet or HTML...they are not pioneers in this arena. However they have tried to reverse-engeneer, and impose their alternatives, such as the failed microsoft J-script (but Java survives).

Microsoft has a choice, release its source code to allow development of an alternative OS. Or Get Split up.
Or Pay the BUSH campaigne large sums of money to get DUBYA into office...so they get it nice and easy with a slap on the wrist.

How many other Machines have you used in your days, Ataris, Acorns, Amigas..did they crash as often??? I for one hope Microsoft never has complete control over the Console Market (as they do with the OS market).

As for standardisation, we have Microsoft to thank for files such as Bitmaps(.BMP), well thanks but no thanks Ill stick to using Jpegs and Giffs Thanks very much. If Microsoft invented the internet it would probably take me 5 hours to download this page.

Competition is the way to make the internet, PCs and Consoles better and more efficient.

I still think your last paragraph is a bit doom laden. For me, games are played on consoles and I use my PC for work (plus the odd bit of Diablo II now and again). As long as consoles remain dominant for gaming, the PC's will always have their niche.

With the advent of the X-Box, I think we can look at this as an entirely seperate entity to the rest of MS product, they wouldn't dare unleash such a powerful console onto the market if it had as many bugs as Windows software OS does, it would just work against Gates.

So the games market, in my view, wrong or not, is safe for now from a MS monopoly bid.

Going back to bundling IE with OS, if it were my company, I'd have done the same, I still consider it to be a great business move and don't thing MS should have been penalised for it. Remember when PC's were first being developed in the 80's? Standardisation was the biggest problem, and we have Microsoft to thank for initiating some of the greatest software standardisations, making communication across different platforms a reality, and resulting in the WWW that we all can use today, whether using Apple, IBM or PC. That is how MS became so big in the marketplace. They had good product. The problem is now that OS and other programs are becoming so huge, more bugs are inevitable, so MS gets the backlash because so many of its customers use its products and hence find the bugs and hence complain.

Something needs to be done about the bugs, yes, but I don't think penalising MS will help much. I'd prefer them to be dominant in the marketplace, all of us using the same standards, but perhaps having an independant body (e.g. a quango, not a political watchdog prone to kickbacks) governing how and when new OS should be released. MS have too much control in that respect I agree, but the government in my view made a wrong call, they should have gone for more supervision over MS rather than try to downsize them.

In Response to FantasyMeister
Yesterday 8.43PM

First Thanks For the Answer to The Sonic Question, I hope Sega Keep their Mascot and Continue to develop him in the way only they can
.
Thanks for your comments FantasyMeister, its nice to see some intelligent debate going on. Gates isnt all good or bad, infact when I think about Microsoft and how much its worth... it is very good for the American Economy, by dominating the OS market Microsoft ensures that the control of the Computer industry lies in the USA. It Provides a Stable OS enviroment( "Stable" in the sense that the OS is Microsoft based, not in the sense Windows wont crash) under which many other software companies software will run, even together at the same Time (multitasking is a useful Thing). It may even be seen as a good thing for the Global Economy.

But in my opinion when Microsoft abuses its monopoly in the OS market to try and Destroy competitors in the Software Market...such as Netscape...this can only be seen as wrong and Bad for Business and Software Development.

This is why the US Government want to Split Microsoft up. What Microsoft did was use its OS profits to subsidise software like Internet Explorer, by splitting up the company this would not happen. So the US Government want to stop Microsoft abusing its monopoly, which in my mind is fair. Dont get me wrong I like Windows and Office Programs, Im using word right now. But The Software and OS should not be bundled Together.

The Problem perhaps is that there is no viable alternative OS for IBM PCs at present, if this was resolved then Microsoft would not have a monopoly. Linux is a good system, but at present out of Reach of the Home User, and the Various versions do not help its cause?? One viable alternative therefore to splitting up Microsoft would be to make another/alternative OS that would run Windows Programs....of course in order to do this Microsoft would have to let other competitors see its Windows Source code....If this happens then you may someday see a free OS...which would be nice. This is why I am sceptical of Microsofts intentions with Corel. No doubt now their is a Free Corel Linux being Developed that will run some Basic Windows Software ie... Office Programs (For immediate release should the worst happen to Microsoft and the Source code is made Public). In short Microsoft are trying to keep hold of their power as long as they can, you cant blame them.. Internet Explorer would then be free on Corel Linux... allowing control of the Internet, and the internet should definately not be run by Microsoft.

You make up your own mind if these sort of actions are a good thing for the Consumer, In the short term it may have advantages like a free web-browser, but it also means that Microsoft can continue to publish Bug ridden Software and a Force a New OS on us every few years. If the Market was competative perhaps the Bugs would be taken out before the Software was released.
Or Perhaps we would get PC games that pushed a system to its limits, how many times have PC owner seen a console game That looks amazing such as Tekken Tag Tournament on the Playstation2, knowing your system is just as fast but can only Dream of That sort of Quality. This is but one Reason I dont want Microsoft Trying to Destroy the Console Market, I dont want to have to by a new Graphics card for my Console every Year in order to play the Latest Games.

Here you go, the response from one poster on the X-Box forum. I quote directly:

"no that character in the demo was not sonic. microsoft clearly stated so. it seems to be a character from a game called Malice."
hmm55

Does that help?

LOL!! I posted your question on the USA X-Box discussion forum (URL witheld due to sensitivity of SR) and couldn't believe it. They are arguing over the merits of the PS2 vs Gamecube vs X-Box. The X-Box is winning, they can pre-order over there for a $10 deposit. Wow.

The funniest thing though, they are complaining that the price of the PS2 is too high and they want it reduced to $150. They think THEY've got it hard?

I'll post info. on Sonic when they reply to my post over there.

> However, when did Sonic appear on a X-Box demo? I don't think he
> has. Point me to the page where it said he does, and I will
> aploigise.


I recall reading somethng about this. Sonic appeared in some video trailer for X-Box on the web or something, but it was taken down pretty sharpish when someone noticed. Can't remember the whole story though.