On Jul 13, 12:12 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> [Just seen this one comment. The article itself is a good read too.]
>
> Ballmer wears Kick Me Anti-Trust
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Microsoft API's for software developers is food for anti-trust lawyers. Now
> | they are requiring Microsoft payments for third party software developers.
> `----
It's pretty clear that Gonzales won't be doing anything about it. On
the other hand, this tactic, along with other anti-linux, anti-
competition, anti-3rd party tactics have pretty much sealed Vista's
fate. This is Microsoft's "third strike". First was Windows NT 3.x,
second was Windows ME, third is Vista.
Especially corporate customers and web order customers, are saying NO
VISTA, and ordering their machines with XP instead, then installing
Linux at home. Retail customers are switching to Macs. Poor Gateway,
which is almost a pure Vista play, is really hurting bad.
Vista is to Microsoft what MVS 4.0 was to IBM.
For those who don't remember. IBM released MVS 4.0 and assumed that
all of the customers would automatically upgrade. The problem was
that you needed new versions of EVERYTHING, including CICS, IMS,
development libraries, applications, databases, and so on, because IBM
assumed that "If we build it they will buy". They didn't buy, and
John Akers was replaced by an outsider named Lou Gerstner, who taught
the elephant to dance to the customer's tune.
In this case, it's not Microsoft who is focusing on the needs of the
end users, it's Dell, HP, Apple, and Lennovo. These companies have
already figured out that a huge percentage of their customers who buy
machines with XP - are installing Linux once they get the machines.
They have designed certain machines to be "Linux Ready" even though
they are sold with Windows.
These companies are negotiating with Microsoft, and nearly all of them
will have contracts at the end of July. These vendors are being more
aggressive about being able to tout the ability of their machines to
run LInux, the ability to install Linux and Windows on the same
machine at the same time, the ability to install Windows as a Linux
VM, and the ability to sell XP instead of/in addition to Vista in all
markets.
How much they will actually GET will be the big question. The thing
is that the discounts on licenses in exchange for additional
restrictions, using "Vista Only" hardware, and Vista licenses, is not
so attractive these days. Remember, even at "full price", Vista is
about $30/copy to the big OEMs who make minimum commitments to buy 1
million or more windows licenses per year. And this is with none of
the additional restrictions.
The average Vista machine has already dropped in price by as much as
$500, and some "high end" models have dropped as much as $1000 per
machine. Many models are already selling below cost less than 6
months after the release of Vista - BECAUSE they are "Vista Only"
machines. They are just trying to get rid of them before they are
completely obsolete.
Microsoft's offers of discounts of $5/license if you use a DirectX-10
card, $5/license for advertizing Co-Op (giving Microsoft control over
content and placement of ads), and $5/license for exclusive control
over the boot sequence - don't seem so attractive when you realize
that accepting that $15 discount could cost you $500/machine in
profits.
Of course, in the short term, if the OEMs don't take these discounts,
and pay a premium of $2/machine for the option of offering XP for
another year, then Microsoft will actually get more revenue per
machine. It could be Microsoft's best year ever.
> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=249363&cid=19841655
|
|
