bundling thoughts
Marcel Kunath
kunathma@pilot.msu.edu
Wed, 15 Aug 2001 07:58:48 -0400 (EDT)
I disagree. We always hear Windows people bitch how the interface of free
software programs on other OS' are totally unlike the Windows ones. Then we
see things being created like KDE which to me seem totally like a Windows
retro. If we had more free software available on the Windows platform which
are a port from the free OS then people were more likely to use that free
software and get accostumed to it. It would certainely make a switch a lot
easier. If people grew up with NTEmacs it would certainely be a simple task to
switch to Emacs.
Just because one uses Gimp on Windows doesn't mean they support Windows. People
always talk about how they want Windows users to convert but if you even
alienate those few people who use free software on that platform who do you
expect to switch? A Gimp user on Windows is bad, a Gimp user on OS X is good
and a Gimp user on Linux is God? I'd be curious to see a study done if it hurts
free software to have people get accustomed to it on the Windows platform. I
think it helps people convert.
And yes I learned my lesson from the Kodak event and I will not fund their work
again but it doesn't mean somebody else should be stopped to spend their money
on their products. I was just talking about business rules and how they should
be equal for all including free software. If one gets an icon on the desktop
for free all should get it for free. If one shares profit gain with the OS
company for product placement anybody should be able to do it.
mk
>
> By bringing software over to Windows actually hurts Free Software because
> you havent supported a company that does spend money developing software
> in the public domain. And at the same time you give people less of a
> reason to switch platforms and less reasons for people to develop for it.
>
> And in the same breath you bitch because they don't support your platform.
> *boggles* I don't understand how you could even have that kind of logic.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Marcel Kunath wrote:
>
> > Ok now I know where you are coming from. I get your point.
> >
> > But I still don't feel guilty. I am past the stage where I even try to
> > convince anybody to use my OS because my OS is (fill in the void). It just
> > doesn't work or I am not convincing enough. So just because I propose leveli
ng
> > the playing field by cleaning up the bundle mess in the Windows domain doesn
't
> > mean I am a supporter of the Windows operating system. I just care about equ
al
> > and fair treatment when it comes to competiton in a market and that is why I
> > raised this subject. I had no intention to talk down Apple by discussing
> > Windows and bundling.
> >
> > That is also why I gave up on my Kodak webcam. I cannot convince Kodak to
> > release the specs for it. I got to eat the 150 bucks (back then) and in the
> > future if I ever buy some webcam I make sure first I use one which does/is
> > support/ed /by Linux. So you are right, but I didn't have the intention to d
iss
> > Apple but only discuss an issue.
> >
> > Sorry,
> >
> > mk
> >
> >
> > >
> > > What you propose has already been done, Apple bundles Apache, php, perl,
> > > tcl, gcc, etc etc with MacOS X along side IE and a few others which they
> > > get paid for.
> > >
> > > So when I say you are a hypocrit, it is because you are supporting a
> > > company M$ that doesnt bundle free software, instead of a company like
> > > Apple who does.
> > >
> > > And in fact you are promoting M$ by creating a Free software bundle
> > > instead of promoting a company that already does what you want.
> > >
> > > Matter of fact I know the _next_ argument is you don't like Apple
> > > hardware, well Apple's core is Open Source and some people are working on
> > > an X86 port and I am sure they would be more than willing to have some
> > > help getting it ported. All in the spirit of Free software of course.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Marcel Kunath wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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 ins
tall
> >
> > > > it. (not sure if I said that somewhere....I am losing track in this deba
te)
> > > >
> > > > Then I said the courts said bundling is legal and if that is so we shoul
d us
> > e
> > > > it to our advantage. Enforce a bundling of free software if one wishes t
o do
> > so
> > > > and level the playing field in regards to users and what they see on the
ir
> > > > desktop. (BTW I don't believe every user should be a Linux user. So I do
n'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 bundl
e
> > > > agreements. Since free software makes no profits does this mean we shoul
d as
> > k
> > > > for free software to be included for free and do we have a right for thi
s to
> >
> > > > happen? It would still be a sharing of profits because 1/3 of zero profi
ts i
> > s
> > > > still zero. The profit sharing idea simply doesn't work anyhow since Mic
roso
> > ft
> > > > gets free IE installs on XP and even if it shared profits it would share
the
> > m
> > > > 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 m
e
> > > > is > hypocrital, if M$ didnt have 90% of the desktop marketshare this wo
uldn
> > t
> > > > > even be an issue. Thus by bringing good software to the Windows platfo
rm
> > > > > 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 w
ere
> > > > > 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 exc
use
> > > > > to leave the Mac platform not because the software ran better on Windo
ws,
> > > > > and in fact it doesnt run as well, but because people could use Window
s,
> > > > > 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 examp
le.
> > > > > 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 i
s
> > > > > bug-free by their testing labs (costs money for testing, costs money f
or
> > > > > 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 doll
ars
> > > > > to bundle IE with the MacOS, as part of a deal, that included M$ promi
sing
> >
> > > > > 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 sa
y I
> > thin
> > > > k
> > > > > > the bundling the way it is done is unfair and IF we bundle THEN bund
le f
> > airl
> > > > y.
> > > > > > I can't change the law and the courts said bundling is legal. So the
n le
> > ts 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
com
> > mon
> > > > > > 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 th
e co
> > st.
> > > > > > 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
eac
> > h
> > > > > > gained customer. I suspect that these 35 dollars are a share of the
prof
> > its
> > > > 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 includ
e ou
> > r 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 creat
e a
> > > > > > standard disclaimer to my emails that all of my words are ideas and
I wa
> > nt t
> > > > hem
> > > > > > to be questioned...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think if some software is included for free then other software sh
ould
> > be
> > > > > > included for free. Otherwise a general fee may be useful. I mean Mic
roso
> > ft
> > > > > > includes IE for free. There is no doubt that there is a _sub group o
f 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$'s business > practices are then in the next breath proclaim suppo
rtin
> > g th
> > > > eir
> > > > > > > business practices by wanting to bundle software for it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It boils down to economics, this isnt very hard economics. If you
_us
> > e_
> > > > > > > (yes this includes warez) anything that only works on Windows, the
n in
> >
> > > > > > > fact you are supporting M$ 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
giv
> > ing
> > > > > > > the green light to M$.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It really isnt that hard to live without M$. It really isnt hard t
o sa
> > y no
> > > >
> > > > > > > i can't fix your machine, or no I haven't played quake22 for windo
ws,
> > or
> > > > > > > no I don't have a copy of Window XP you can borrow to install on y
our
> > > > > > > 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 bundlin
g it
> > s so
> > > > ftwa
> > > > > > re
> > > > > > > > products with its operating system. It builds an anti-competitiv
e ad
> > vant
> > > > age
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > them. The only way this should be allowed is if competitors are
as w
> > ell
> > > > allo
> > > > > > wed
> > > > > > > > to deliver their products pre-installed or even pre-delivered (o
n th
> > e MS
> > > >
> > > > > > > > install CD).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Overall I think this is not manageable and MS should not be allo
wed
> > to b
> > > > undl
> > > > > > e
> > > > > > > > anything but just sell their cut down OS and deliver any additio
nal
> > soft
> > > > ware
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > extra CD to be installed by the user.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Here is why. Now Kodak is powerful and has the ability to force
Micr
> > osof
> > > > 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 F
SF f
> > iles
> > > > a
> > > > > > > > lawsuit and demands free software developers are as well given a
pie
> > ce o
> > > > f th
> > > > > > e
> > > > > > > > pie and be allowed to put their programs on a users desktop. I c
ould
> > thi
> > > > nk o
> > > > > > f
> > > > > > > > programs like NTEmacs and isn't there a vi for Windows? And this
wou
> > ld p
> > > > rove
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > how stupid the bundling argument really is.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Case in point.....non-OS software may be bundled but only by del
iver
> > y on
> > > > CD.
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > figure all free software developers could organize and put toget
her
> > a CD
> > > > whi
> > > > > > ch
> > > > > > > > the user then uses to install free software and this CD is bundl
ed w
> > ith
> > > > 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 la
ugh
> > 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
thi
> > s 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. W
hat
> > 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
> > > >
> > > > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*