A little more on the Media Player Issue

Published Mon, May 3 2004 20:20 | William

So far this has been a pretty cool issue b/c everyone that seems to disagree with me at least presents a good argument.  I just received this in the feedback section and I'd like to comment on it:

<<Hi Bill,

I want to try to answer your question about bundling media player hurting consumers. I don't know how it hurts consumers but I can see how it hurts the smaller companies that are trying to make media players of their own.

95% of the people who use computers at home are running a MS OS. Of those, probably 90% of them don't know that you can use 3rd party media players and don't have to use the MS media player that comes with Windows. They just use the MS media player because it's there. If the MS media player wasn't bundled with Windows then those 90% of people would be in the market for a media player, and that's a lot of people! MS could ship Wnidows with a link on the desktop where a user could download and install their media player, and other companies could work out deals with vendors to do the same for their media players, that way users could have a choice. Yes, most users would choose the MS media player because it would be free (I know I would!) and most of the other media players cost money. But in doing this MS would not be misusing it's huge market share to take advantage of the typical users, and the fact that they don't know that they have a choice for the media player that they want to use.

The media player is not an integral part of the OS, and that's why MS is getting in trouble for bundling it with their OS, and not allowing 3rd party companies to make deals with vendors of PC's to put their media player on Windows machines when they are built and sold. I also don't believe that you can remove the MS media player from Windows, so even if someone wants to use a 3rd party media player on their PC, MS media player is still there.

Just some thoughts,
skicow >>

Ok, I totally agree that it hurts smaller companies on the aggregate.  But that's doesn't mean that it necessarily hurts them across the board.  Moreoever, I'd posit that the 'consumers' is really what matters b/c the benefits of the free market are precisely derived by companies hurting each other.  If CompanyA and CompanyB get in a price war, they both suffer to some degree, hopefully one will benefit at some point but that's not necessarily so.  In the interim, consumers will benefit by the price reductions.

The idea of a link is valid, but there are still a LOT of people that are computer phobic and don't want to be burdened with downloading stuff.  I know that most everyone has broadband so this distinction is less progressively less important, but not everyone does.  And not everyone wants to download stuff.  I personally would love it if I never had to install anything, but that's not going to happen.

But most importantly, MS's stuff tends to be easy to use, pleasant to use and Consistent.  They use the tallent that they've built to win in other markets.  Asking them not to, or punishing them for doing so in an arbitrary fashion doesn't benefit anyone except the politicians and MS's competitors.  There are tons of people smarter than me out there, and I would certianly derive some benefit if I could stop them from using their smarts if and when we got in a competition.  It would be even cooler if I could 'level the playing field' whenever anyone had an advantage over me.  But it would only benefit me.  Lot's of other people would get screwed in the process.  Some people might be rich, smart and good looking.  That's essentially the place MS is in this metaphor.  Making them uglier, dummer or poorer certainly benefits me, but if you were the girl getting asked out (the consumer), which world would you rather be in? 

Finally, Microsoft having the OS doesn't guarantee them success.  Where do you go to search for stuff, Google or MSN?  I got to Google and to be honest, I use Google exclusively when I want data on MSDN b/c Microsoft's search stuff leaves something to be desired.  Having control of the OS did nothign in this battle.  And it's hard to see how it could.  Similarly, Money hasn't killed Quicken.  SQL Server hasn't killed Oracle.  IIS Hasn't killed Apache.  But you can be sure MS as well as each competitor named above has run a lot of small guys right out of the market.  And I just can't see how any of them pulling their punches would help me, as a developer or a consumer.

What do you think?

Comments

# William said on May 5, 2004 8:06 AM:

Hi,

You have some valid points here and I'd like to reply to each one on it's own.

I agree that consumers benefit when two companies compete with each other by lowering prices and such, but if one company has the advantage of having their product (MS media player) already given to the consumer, how are other companies supposed to compete with that? How is there supposed to be a 'price war' when MS is not selling their media player, but giving it away for free?

I also agree with you 100% about the downloading phobia that some people have, and I would also love it if I didn't have to download and install anything.

MS has lots of great talent, and I agree that their products are nice as well, but I would like to also say that there are 3rd party apps that are better than some MS apps. ZoomPlayer is, IMHO, a much better media player than MS's media player. MS also has the benefit of knowing their Windows code and how it runs so that they can write apps that will out perform other 3rd party apps with ease, not because MS programmers are better than the 3rd party programmers, but because the 3rd party doesn't have access to the OS code, and can't 'tune' their code in ways that MS programmers know they should. Please note that I am in no way 'slamming' MS programmers, this is not the intent of the previous sentence, I just wanted to state that MS programmer have an edge over other 3rd party programmers when programming for the Windows OS. This is the main reason that I feel the 'playing field' is not level between MS and 3rd party programmers.

As for your final statement, I too use Google, and always have, they are the best search engine out there IMO. I think that the other instances that you provide are not part of what we are talking about, or at least what I'm talking about, the 90% of users who use their PC's for email, writing documents, and listening to music. They don't use IIS/Apache, etc. or even Quicken/Money on their computers. I believe that the reason that MS has not killed Apache/Quicken/Oracle, is because the people who use these are people who know that they have a choice of what to use, they know that there is something else out there other than IIS or SQL Server. The regular PC users don't know that there is another media player out there that may be better for them. I'm not saying that it's MS's responsibility to educate the normal user of their choices when it comes to media players, but I do think that MS should let 3rd party apps be installed on new PC's by vendors.

I love Windows, and I don't think other OS's like Linux are any better for the home desktop PC. I'm a big MS user, I can't believe how amazing VS 2003 is for programming VB, it’s a work of art. But I want to ask this question: How does MS being sued benefit the government? I don't think that the government hates MS and is judging unfairly against them for any reason. What reason would the government have to do this? And in the end, it's the judges that decide if MS is in the wrong.

skicow

# William said on May 5, 2004 11:36 AM:

Your comment about MS letting other vendors install stuff on new PC's, well, I totally concur. MS shouldn't interfere here if they want to claim it's all about competition. And hardware without software isn't worth a whole lot, particularly the OS, so ms can defintitely throw some weight around unfairly in this regard. And to that end, I agree with the vast majority of your points with a few small exceptions

As far as the price war... nothing is really free. Value is the metric here. A thrid party vendor could make a much better product than Microsoft's Product X and even at say $40.00 for instance, still provide a better value. Think of it this way, if I spend $0.00 and get something that provides $20.00 worth of value to me, or I spend $1,000,0000 to get something that provides $1,000,000,000,000,000 I'm much better off in the second case (i know, asssuming you had the million bucks in the first place, but you can use any numbers you want, just make the ratio larger on the one side).

Since nothing is really 'free' the ratio isn't really 20/0 vs 1,000,000,000,000,000/1,000,000 it's more like 20/0001 or some other non zero number. And the math works out. I'll agree though that it's darn hard to fight battles like this because it's hard to often create value like that .

As far as the source code issue. Look at Infragistics UltraWinGrid vs. DataGrid. Light years ahead of it. Look at how many third party controls there are out there. Even with a late start, they can kick butt in many segments. Other ones are a lot different, but having an Advantage doesn't mean a guaranteed win and there are a lot of examples that bear this out. the fact MS has lost some battles pretty much proves this don't you think?

As far as the government. They get fines and revenues. They get free publicity. Look at the Celebrity David Boies for instance got from the MS trial here in the US. Joe Klien etc. They used litigation to further their careers and in this instance, they are the government. There's an Anti-Spitzer law that congress put in place just to stop the abuses of Attorneys General like NY's Spitzer. He wasn't this aggressive without getting something in return.

As far as the judges go... well, they work for the government. It is common practice in law to "judge shop' wherein you find one friendly to your cause. Moreover, being a judge doesn't inherently do anything to make you less susceptible to outside influences. Every supreme court justice out there got there by voting record. And every aspiring judge knows this. Sure many of them keep it real. Many don't.. But siding with the govt all the time will surely have some benefits.

Thanks Skicow, I really appreciate having a pleasant dialog on stuff like this. Too often it gets really hostile in public forums and it's nice to hear an intelligent opposing option (although we probably agree more than disagree) expresed politely!

Bill

Search

This Blog

Tags

Community

Archives

News

My other sites

Cool Stuff

Book Stuff

Security

ORM

Data Access

Funny Stuff

Compact Framework Stuff

Web Casts

My KnowledgeBase Articles

My MVP Profile

Design Patterns

Performance

Debugging

Remoting

My Fellow Authors

My Books

LINQ

Misc

Speech

Syndication

Email Notifications