bundling thoughts
Marcel Kunath
kunathma@pilot.msu.edu
Tue, 14 Aug 2001 14:12:24 -0400 (EDT)
I still don't see where I am a hypcrit. I said I don't like bundling and if
anything comes bundled it should be on CD and the user decides if to install
it. (not sure if I said that somewhere....I am losing track in this debate)
Then I said the courts said bundling is legal and if that is so we should use
it to our advantage. Enforce a bundling of free software if one wishes to do so
and level the playing field in regards to users and what they see on their
desktop. (BTW I don't believe every user should be a Linux user. So I don't
see anything wrong with promoting free software on the Windows platform.)
At the end you asked if we got that kind of cash to make those deals. As I
wrote before companies make deals according to the expectation of
profits. They than share those profits in cross licensing whatever bundle
agreements. Since free software makes no profits does this mean we should ask
for free software to be included for free and do we have a right for this to
happen? It would still be a sharing of profits because 1/3 of zero profits is
still zero. The profit sharing idea simply doesn't work anyhow since Microsoft
gets free IE installs on XP and even if it shared profits it would share them
with itself. Hence my above reasoning that applications belong separate from OS
on a CD, not the harddrive, or else you end up with a powerful monopoly.
mk
> > All I am saying is you are perpetuating the whole problem which to me
is > hypocrital, if M$ didnt have 90% of the desktop marketshare this wouldnt
> even be an issue. Thus by bringing good software to the Windows platform
> by bundling it. M$ will keep its 90% monopoly and may in fact increase it,
> because now they have the good tools that made another platform better.
>
> Two examples, and I will use the MacOS as examples only because they were
> the first examples i could think of.
>
> First.
> MacOS was the kick ass platform for graphic arts for years,
> because they had kick-ass software comapnies like Adobe, which was
> Mac-only for a very long time. When Adobe ported it gave people an excuse
> to leave the Mac platform not because the software ran better on Windows,
> and in fact it doesnt run as well, but because people could use Windows,
> thus you saw a huge shift in the platform people used for the task.
>
> Second and more appropriate example.
>
> Apple gets paid by M$ to include IE as the default web browser.
> In otherwords, M$ is paying themselves to include IE with their OS to gain
> customers in another market as you pointed out with the passport example.
> So M$ is making money on the deal, it just doesnt come in direct sales.
>
> M$ will happily bundle free software with their product, provided it is
> bug-free by their testing labs (costs money for testing, costs money for
> the dev tools, etc etc, all payable to M$) and you PAY them to bundle it.
>
> How much would it cost? well lets see.. M$ paid Apple 150 million dollars
> to bundle IE with the MacOS, as part of a deal, that included M$ promising
> M$ Office support for the platform and like a 250 million dollar
> investment in the company.
>
> Got that kind of cash? =)
>
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Marcel Kunath wrote:
>
> > Woah,
> >
> > I don't think so. All I did was analyze what the situation is and say I thin
k
> > the bundling the way it is done is unfair and IF we bundle THEN bundle fairl
y.
> > I can't change the law and the courts said bundling is legal. So then lets u
se
> > the laws to our advantage and bundle as well.
> >
> > I didn't say Microsoft acts badly but let's extend this so we are on common
> > ground. I said I had thoughts and ideas and this needs fixing.
> >
> > I don't think this is a terrible idea. I hadn't even talked about the cost.
> > Bundling costs money. The computer builder has to do it or Microsoft or
> > somebody has to do the work. So AOL pays some builder 35 dollars for each
> > gained customer. I suspect that these 35 dollars are a share of the profits
AOL
> > expects from this future customer. So I like to ask if free software is free
> > and we make no profit do we have the right to ask builders to include our fr
ee
> > software for 0 dollars since its a fair share of our profits?
> >
> > And I am asking and not saying I am right. Hmmm maybe I should create a
> > standard disclaimer to my emails that all of my words are ideas and I want t
hem
> > to be questioned...
> >
> > I think if some software is included for free then other software should be
> > included for free. Otherwise a general fee may be useful. I mean Microsoft
> > includes IE for free. There is no doubt that there is a _sub group of IE use
rs_
> > which lets itself define as follows:
> >
> > Windows users
> > become IE users
> > become msn.com users
> > become hotmail users
> > become passport users
> > become .net CUSTOMERS
> >
> > So who does Microsoft pay for gaining these customers? Nobody.
> >
> > mk
> >
> > > > I would call
> > you a hypocrit, you bitch about how bad
> > M$'s business > practices are then in the next breath proclaim supporting th
eir
> > > business practices by wanting to bundle software for it.
> > >
> > > It boils down to economics, this isnt very hard economics. If you _use_
> > > (yes this includes warez) anything that only works on Windows, then in
> > > fact you are supporting M$ in their endeavers, If you cannot find what you
> > > _need_ on another platform then you aren't looking hard enough.
> > >
> > > This includes helping people install Windows, fixing their machine,
> > > proclaiming a M$ only game is the greatest, etc. You basically are giving
> > > the green light to M$.
> > >
> > > It really isnt that hard to live without M$. It really isnt hard to say no
> > > i can't fix your machine, or no I haven't played quake22 for windows, or
> > > no I don't have a copy of Window XP you can borrow to install on your
> > > machine. And it really isnt hard to find the software you need to be a
> > > productive.
> > >
> > > Sean
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Marcel Kunath wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I was just reading this:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.thestreet.com/tech/software/1517338.html
> > > >
> > > > and I am having thoughts.
> > > >
> > > > First of all I agree that Microsoft is violating laws by bundling its so
ftwa
> > re
> > > > products with its operating system. It builds an anti-competitive advant
age
> > for
> > > > them. The only way this should be allowed is if competitors are as well
allo
> > wed
> > > > to deliver their products pre-installed or even pre-delivered (on the MS
> > > > install CD).
> > > >
> > > > Overall I think this is not manageable and MS should not be allowed to b
undl
> > e
> > > > anything but just sell their cut down OS and deliver any additional soft
ware
> > on
> > > > extra CD to be installed by the user.
> > > >
> > > > Here is why. Now Kodak is powerful and has the ability to force Microsof
t to
> >
> > > > the above concession. And now AOL and Real want in on the deal. Then it
is
> > > > Norton and then McAfee and then god knows whatever company. And who do y
ou s
> > ee
> > > > left out? FSF.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know if this becomes general practice I would hope the FSF files
a
> > > > lawsuit and demands free software developers are as well given a piece o
f th
> > e
> > > > pie and be allowed to put their programs on a users desktop. I could thi
nk o
> > f
> > > > programs like NTEmacs and isn't there a vi for Windows? And this would p
rove
> >
> > > > how stupid the bundling argument really is.
> > > >
> > > > Case in point.....non-OS software may be bundled but only by delivery on
CD.
> > I
> > > > figure all free software developers could organize and put together a CD
whi
> > ch
> > > > the user then uses to install free software and this CD is bundled with
ever
> > y
> > > > PC sold which comes with Windows.
> > > >
> > > > I am curious to see what would happen if Jabber or so would ask for its
IM
> > > > client to be bundled with XP. I am sure Microsoft would get a laugh out
of i
> > t.
> > > >
> > > > Hmmmm this makes me wonder if I should write this whole idea up and post
it
> > on
> > > > linuxtoday.com and raise some awareness to the ludicriousness of this wh
ole
> > > > ordeal and see if maybe free software can get in on the deal....
> > > >
> > > > I know people hate my crazy ideas but heck you live only once. What do y
ou
> > > > think?
> > > >
> > > > -- Marcel
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > linux-user mailing list
> > > > linux-user@egr.msu.edu
> > > > http://www.egr.msu.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux-user
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > linux-user mailing list
> > > linux-user@egr.msu.edu
> > > http://www.egr.msu.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux-user
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Marcel Kunath
> >
> > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
> >
> > Montie House Network Greater Lansing Linux Users Group
> > http://www.montiehouse.com http://www.gllug.org
> >
> > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-user mailing list
> > linux-user@egr.msu.edu
> > http://www.egr.msu.edu/mailman/listinfo/linux-user
> >
>
>
>
--
Marcel Kunath
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Montie House Network Greater Lansing Linux Users Group
http://www.montiehouse.com http://www.gllug.org
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*