Buy PC Without an OS... Get a Visit From MSFT? 639
sebFlyte writes "'Don't sell PCs without operating systems or we'll send the boys round.' That seems to be the general message coming out of microsoft's antipiracy unit, according to ZDNet. While MS seems to accept that people might want to get hold of PCs without Windows so they can put Linux on them, they don't think that's a good enough excuse. "We want to urge all system builders -- indeed, all Partners -- not to supply naked PCs. It is a risk to your customers and a risk to your business," says Microsoft. The FSF has given this policy short shrift, saying: "It looks like a private sniffing service which is supposed to spy on these who do not want to pay the Microsoft tax anymore. It is an incredible piece of impudence.""
Volume licensing (Score:0, Informative)
Where to buy a PC without windows (Score:2, Informative)
You can get stuff here [usefree.org]
Old News (Score:2, Informative)
Oh, this again? (Score:2, Informative)
I'm more concerned about still paying the Windows tax. If it comes with a copy of Windows because it's more effecient for the OEM to produce it that way, I'm not going to sell it on the black market, I'm just going to erase it.
Sheesh.
Re:Volume licensing (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Here we go again (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Ummm.... (Score:3, Informative)
This is getting old (Score:3, Informative)
I wouldn't put it past them, but this looks like a straw man that we have predictably knocked over. Congratulations, Slashdot, for another brilliant victory.
Re:Ummm.... (Score:5, Informative)
Before anyone tries to complain about the findings of fact, remember that the appeals court never disagreed with the facts Judge Jackson found, only the remedies he demanded. So that the original practice was an abuse of monopoly power still stands. As would the present case of strong-arming people into always including Windows.
Fuck Dell (Score:3, Informative)
MSDS (Score:4, Informative)
Are you daft? (Score:1, Informative)
They are not asking that mom and pop shops stop selling blank PC's they are saying hey, we give you a deal on our OS, we give you special treatment with regard to pre-installs, we would rather you not sell blank PC's because research has shown that 73% of blank PCs (PC's that need NOTHING but an OS) get a pirated version of windows installed on them.
Re:Ummm.... (Score:4, Informative)
Oh, it is, but they were convicted in a US court, which doesn't have jurisdiction in the UK (much to the consternation of the RIAA and MPAA). Even then, they got off lightly enough that they don't seem to be terribly concerned with risking a repeat.
Re:Here we go again (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Scraping away the FUD... (Score:3, Informative)
If you ever read the volume license agreement, its an upgrade to your existing windows license. Basically you should already have a license for the PC you are installing the volume licensing version on. You more pay for the connection access license (CAL) and various other 'use' licenses per user.
From Microsoft's Website
Only Windows Client upgrades can be acquired through Volume Licensing; the full operating system license must be acquired as FPP or be pre-installed by an OEM or System Builder.
Its under Licensing Basics [microsoft.com] but also comes with your VLA and sometimes as a reminder in your VL Software Packs.
Re:Ummm.... (Score:3, Informative)
So Microsoft cannot "give away" product "I" by "including it free" with product "W". That is an illegal tieing.
Re:Fuck Dell (Score:2, Informative)
Most people I talk to say to buy from Dell Business, not Home.
Re:Microsoft engages in foul play even here on /. (Score:3, Informative)
First of all, the 'movie' you are referring to is a documentary which has won two dozen international awards since its release at the 2004 Sundance Film Festival.
Secondly, why does my providing reference to a body of research, like the above mentioned doucmentary, automatically make the scenario it supports far-fetched?
Do you feel the same way about books? Or journal articles? Or anything which cannot be fully quoted in 50 lines or less in an original Slashdot post for your sound-biten reading pleasure?
There is a lot more randomness and herd mentality in play on
I'm really not following you here. How exactly does pointing out that the standard bias on Slashdot is anti-Windows, help support your argument in even the smallest way?
-FL
Re:Ummm.... (Score:3, Informative)
My boss at the time actually downloaded and printed the whole thing
One thing I remember from back then was how MS screwed over IBM. They sold IBM Windows at a higher price because they had a competing operating system, OS/2, and strongarmed them into trying to not let them let out the secret that there were other OSes besides Windows. Also, they double screwed IBM by delaying their OEM licenses until after the "back to school" sales rush.
I actually forgot about that crap. No wonder I quit that job, and quit using MS products soon after that.
What a lowpoint in my life. More info about that wonderful company and the "findings of fact" here:
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Articles/Index.cfm?Ar
Re:Microsoft engages in foul play even here on /. (Score:3, Informative)
IMO your friend's post was not worded that well, not enough that I'd mod it down, but I wouldn't mod it up either unless I knew that the statement accusing Daniel Lyons was true (and I don't know whether it is).
Plus, there are many Slashdot readers that either work with very closely with Microsoft or directly are Microsoft employees (for example http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/30/13212
I would be surprised if at least some of them didn't have mod points (just reading regularly and being reasonable when posting seems to give you some).
That only leaves the timing to explain, but I guess they would naturally be attracted to a Microsoft story.
Of course, your explanation might be true as well, I definitely hope it isn't so (the implications would certainly be disturbing).
BTW which of these explanations fails Occam's Razor?
Re:Drivers (Score:2, Informative)
Unless your definition of cheap starts at the bottom of the professional scanner range, you're really off track here. My scanner, for example, is an Epson, and it's supported out of the box by SANE and was when I bought it. I paid about 50 bucks for it. So are most other scanners, especially consumer-grade scanners. SANE supports hundreds of scanners. SANE support is so broad that before I bought my scanner, I didn't even bother specifically checking to see it it was supported or not. All I had to do was bring it home and plug it in. None of this BS like having to install a driver from CD first, like with certain legacy operating systems. In fact, the level at which hardware "just works" on many distros these days is getting more and more Mac-like all the time.
Scanner software, on the other hand, is something else again. Kooka is not bad but doesn't have a Copy function (astonishing; if you're a Kooka developer, please add that), and X-Sane is pretty clunky but at least it has a copy function. Scanning into GIMP is fairly well-supported, but a Windows user (and even more so, a Mac user) will find scanning on Linux to be tedious.
Anyway, scanners aren't even a good choice of example IMO. Most people don't want a scanner bundled with a computer system because they either don't want/need a scanner, or if they want one, they usually already have one. Scanners aren't something people upgrade very often. Heck, I don't even want a printer bundled with a system. My HP Photosmart 7350 serves my needs just as well now as it did two years ago when I bought it. I see no point in replacing it.
Of course, if I did want a bundled one, no problem. You'd have to look a long time to find a printer that wasn't supported on Linux these days.
Where is Linux hardware support not generally up to the level of Windows? 3-D accelerated graphics, something you didn't touch on. For most people that's not a huge problem, because there aren't many games for Linux that really take advantage of it, either. If you're a gamer, you need a console and/or a Windows box, that's just a fact on the ground. But for most people, who just need a computer for Internet access, light word processing, managing digital photos, etc., Linux is ready. Right now. Today. Desktop-oriented distros are as easy to use as Windows, they're more reliable, there's more software available than anyone fitting the above profile could ever need, and that software is easier to install than it is on Windows (honest; if you haven't used Synaptic or Adept (on Ubuntu), you need to try it. Puts Windows Update to shame).
Linux has been my desktop OS since the late nineties. Back then, there were real challenges in doing a lot of stuff. Now, things are so easy it's almost not fun anymore