Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Where Should Vendors Stick Their Services?
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Wondering if you noticed the news over at Microsoft Watch this week
> | that Microsoft has done what many considered inevitable: Started
> | using Windows as a way to hawk Windows Live Services?
> |
> | It's not too surprising to me that Microsoft is splashing all over
> | its Welcome to Vista screen (at least in one of the latest Vista test
> | builds, No. 5506) promotional links, inviting users to download WindowsL
> | ive Messenger, Windows Live OneCare, Windows Live Mail Desktop, and
> | more. But I was surprised the Redmondians would be so bold as to
> | actually embed Windows Live Messenger into Vista. After all the
> | antitrust lawsuits Microsoft has been slapped with here, there and
> | everywhere ? many of which have focused on its "innovative integration"
> | (a k a, bundling) strategies, you'd think they'd be a little more
> | cautious.
> |
> | With the actual Windows Live Messenger code (not just a download link)
> | being integrated right into Vista, I think Microsoft might be really
> | going out on a limb. When backed into a corner before about itsi
> | ntegration strategy, Microsoft's defense was that removing any of
> | the integrated components (Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player,
> | etc.) would break the OS. But if Vista test builds have been working
> | just fine (well, middling, maybe, based on some not-so-happy tester
> | comments) without Windows Live Messenger, how can Microsoft make a
> | case for it being part of Windows?
> `----
That's easy, they'll do what they do best... LIE...
>
>
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,1995,2005413,00.asp?kc=MWRSS02129TX1K0000535
--
Jerry McBride
|
|
