While a cheap tactic I see nothing anticompetitive about it.
It looks more than a bit like using their Windows (PC) monopoly, to leverage themselves into the tablet (iPad) market and suppress competition there. On the other hand, the Windows monopoly is a little creaky these days, and this will probably more have the effect of suppressing Windows 8 sales than iPad sales. But, I think this is more just Microsoft's was of milking their customers for every penny they can, than any real hope of taking over the tablet market. Eventually, Windows will become so expensive to use that no one will.
By the time any large corp has to contend with the new pricing it will be looking at Windows 9 (or whatever) as no IT department would be evaluating a move to Windows/Server 8 anytime soon. The only people moving to windows 8 are your average punters and the guys in the boardroom who like the new shiny shiny. IT departments dont care about the average joes but have to deal with the eejits from the boardroom... 'Yes Sir, you dont know how to use your new ultrabook with windows 8...let me upgrade that to windows 7 for you" lol
IT depts wont move to windows 8 anytime soon BUT A TON of depts will move to windows server 2012 because there are some HUGE changes to hyper-v that are very important.
Here we go again. MSFT using their market dominance to try to crush competition. Up to their old, anti-competitive tricks. We'll give it to you for free, but for someone else's OS we are going to charge you out your butt! When you can't compete on your own merits, fk the other guy.
While a cheap tactic I see nothing anticompetitive about it.
There may be an illegal anticompetitive tie-in -- like the case in the 1960s where IBM was sued for requiring that only IBM punched cards be used in IBM Accounting machines.
This isn't about RDPing into your desktop PC. The license is for accessing entirely additional copy of Windows running on a server somewhere. Or single applications running on a server displaying on a tablet (I refuse to use this stupid 'Virtual Desktop Infrastructure' and 'Virtual App' or 'App Streaming' terminology). It also seems to cover this 'Windows To Go' thing which is simply yet another copy of Windows locked down with whatever your corporate IT department want to lock down and booted off a USB key. What they are saying is that if you buy a Windows RT tablet you get rights to do this anyway, if you have an iPad you have to buy one 'Companion Device License' for each user and each user can have 4 devices.
If course the cheap way to do this is to not drink the 'Virtual Desktop' KoolAid and provide a VPN + Firewall mechanism which allows the user to connect to their PC and only their PC via one of the many RDP clients available.
With any luck, this will apply more pressure to get people to switch to server operating systems that don't have extortionate client access fees.
A number of years ago, we bought an xServe which came with unlimited client licenses for less money than just the Windows licensing cost alone would have been (not even counting the hardware to run Windows Server). If you have to pay for tablets to access your server, as well, the Windows cost gets even higher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGNR8
This will be a problem for MS, additional tax for the privilege to use an OS that is not geared for corporate environments.
Every company I work with has zero plans to migrate from 7.
They now have there desktops now fully functional with 7 and users finally trained.
There is no huge benefit for a company to spend the license fees and the training expense for the new OS they do not want, AGAIN!!!!!, in such a short period.
I have been beta testing the 8 and I can tell you right now this is not going to work in corporate unless they turn off tiles.
I see a terrible adoption rate for this version.
Windows 9 will fix Windows 8 like Windows 7 fixed Windows Vista.
I am not a Windows basher at all, I actually like Windows 7.
It is a most stable version of Windows since Windows 2000.
However Windows 8 is the biggest mistake MS has made since Windows ME.
They are trying to compete with Apple and Android to go after consumer market, tisk tisk … Big Mistake.
I won't even go into there numerous mistakes they have made in virtualization and the way they have tried to punish enviros using Citrix or VMWare
Re the bolded:
I can just imagine the difficulty of teaching millions of computerphobes a new UI.
Fortunately, it's not hard for IT to turn it off and I expect they will do so before delivering new PCs to their users' desks. Of course, after having done that, there's little (if any) advantage to Windows 8 vis a vis Windows 7.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I seem to recall Ballmer saying that Windows 8 could be their last version of Windows if people don't take to it.
If he actually said that, it's just one more example of why you shouldn't pay attention to anything Ballmer says. There's absolutely no way they would stop upgrading Windows.
Rather, if it doesn't do well, I can picture MS doing 2 things:
1. Offering a 'downgrade' license to purchasers of new PCs which come with Windows 8. They've done that before.
2. Immediately start with the promises about how great Windows 9 will be. There's also precedent for that. They seem to have a pretty solid history of alternating 'good' and 'lousy' releases. After every lousy release, they get their act together and the next one is usually significantly improved.
I can just imagine the difficulty of teaching millions of computerphobes a new UI.
Fortunately, it's not hard for IT to turn it off and I expect they will do so before delivering new PCs to their users' desks. Of course, after having done that, there's little (if any) advantage to Windows 8 vis a vis Windows 7.
You /cannot/ turn off the Metro UI. You could in the Developer Preview with a little registry tweak but Consumer Preview (and newer) have you stuck with it.
I did read somewhere ages ago that MS Will allow Metro to be turned off for business users.
The catch? Buy the enterprise version. $$$ cha-ching!
Then, within the same article, someone from MS said "then it would only be a minor update to Windows 7".
I wish I bookmarked that article. My face when reading it was priceless.
Microsoft do some brilliant products that can't be ignored; SQLServer and .NET are more than enough reason to keep MS around.
The only thing MS (and Oracle) has over open source solutions (like MySQL, Hadoop, MongoDB, etc.) is that they provide enterprise-level support. Many people may not realize just how much that support costs in terms of the license and renewal fee...it would be cheaper for them to bring staff in to deal with all issues and save a bundle.
SQL Server is a great product. But it's among a field of great products, not a stand-out.
There may be an illegal anticompetitive tie-in -- like the case in the 1960s where IBM was sued for requiring that only IBM punched cards be used in IBM Accounting machines.
It's not illegal in any way unless they treat Windows 8 tablets differently than iPads. As long as their remote access rules apply the same regardless of the type of client, there's nothing at all illegal or uncompetitive about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89
You /cannot/ turn off the Metro UI. You could in the Developer Preview with a little registry tweak but Consumer Preview (and newer) have you stuck with it.
I did read somewhere ages ago that MS Will allow Metro to be turned off for business users.
The catch? Buy the enterprise version. $$$ cha-ching!
Then, within the same article, someone from MS said "then it would only be a minor update to Windows 7".
I wish I bookmarked that article. My face when reading it was priceless.
?_?
You can easily turn off tiles - which is what I was referring to.
The rest of the UI may also be a problem. As I've said, I suspect that MS will have to offer a downgrade to Windows 8 on request.
if we assume that the new iPad sets the baseline price for tablets, the Win8 tablets will have to be more expensive because Microsoft "has-to-get-paid" for their OS! they don't make the hardware, so that licence/os what-ever-it-costs will have to be applied on top of the cost of the WIN8 tablet. Otherwise someone does not make a profit... and it won't be Microsoft.
of course if they have a version of WIN8 RT for the iPad that would render the license fee Moot... Jail-break your tablet to run WIN8 RT...
There may be an illegal anticompetitive tie-in -- like the case in the 1960s where IBM was sued for requiring that only IBM punched cards be used in IBM Accounting machines.
It's not illegal in any way unless they treat Windows 8 tablets differently than iPads. As long as their remote access rules apply the same regardless of the type of client, there's nothing at all illegal or uncompetitive about it.
?_?
<
But Microsoft is treating other tablets differently, hence the additional license fee for non-WIN8RT tablets... Did you(jragosta) read the article for comprehension?
It is just M$ trying to persevere their revenue stream. I know my company last year moved off Outlook for mail and save the company $10M in licensing and maintenance fees, we use gmail for corporations which is not as nice to use as outlook but it save the company money. They are also moving away from anything M$ based where it required ongoing licensing and other fees. Only those companies which are so intrench with the M$ way will be stuck.
My wife company is in the process or rewriting their entire product which in the past was based solely on M$ product and Flash. They gave gotten so many complaints form their customers to make their product work with OSX and iOS they are making the switch to a non-M$ solution and HTML5 so that is will be cross platform compatible.
It is kind of funny how M$ converted the business world from IBM Mainframe and almost killed the company and M$ is now turning into a IBM themselves. Eventually companies will reduces their reliance on M$ in the future.
It is just M$ trying to persevere their revenue stream. I know my company last year moved off Outlook for mail and save the company $10M in licensing and maintains fees, we use gmail for corporations which is not as nice to use as outlook but it save the company money. They are also moving away from anything M$ based where it required ongoing licensing and other fees. Only those companies which are so intrench with the M$ way will be stuck.
My wife company is in the process or rewriting their entire product which in the past was based solely on M$ product and Flash. They gave gotten so many complaints form their customers to make their product work with OSX and iOS they are making the switch to a non-M$ solution and HTML5 so that is will be cross platform compatible.
It is kind of funny how M$ converted the business world from IBM Mainframe and almost killed the company and M$ is now turning into a IBM themselves. Eventually companies will reduces their reliance on M$ in the future.
Wow! Can you disclose how many accounts/employees are covered by that $10M?
There may be an illegal anticompetitive tie-in -- like the case in the 1960s where IBM was sued for requiring that only IBM punched cards be used in IBM Accounting machines.
There may be an illegal anticompetitive tie-in -- like the case in the 1960s where IBM was sued for requiring that only IBM punched cards be used in IBM Accounting machines.
While certainly good counter-arguments I'm looking at this more like Apple v. Psystar, where Apple has the right to choose how and who to license their OS too. as Jargosta states, this only becomes tricky if they don't make it consistent but I think there might be ways to account for the licensing fees being included in every Win8 tablet to get around legal matters.
I certainly can't imagine MS made this decision lightly or without getting a team of lawyers in on it.
While certainly good counter-arguments I'm looking at this more like Apple v. Psystar, where Apple has the right to choose how and who to license their OS too. as Jargosta states, this only becomes tricky if they don't make it consistent but I think there might be ways to account for the licensing fees being included in every Win8 tablet to get around legal matters.
I certainly can't imagine MS made this decision lightly or without getting a team of lawyers in on it.
That's a logical view...
But MS is a monopoly and their actions are viewed from a different perspective. AIR, MS ran into similar difficulties with IE.
I suspect that DOJ and the EU will watch this with interest.
Of course, W8 OS may fail of its own accord -- on both the desktop and tablets.
Wow! Can you disclose how many accounts/employees are covered by that $10M?
Yes, we had about 40K employees world wide with multiply locations and servers which were replicated many times over the world wide locations and you pay licensing fees for each server and user. Also the $10M include more than just outlook there were other M$ services which were terminated at the time, but this information was shared as part of the reason of moving away from M$. The other interesting part of this was the fact M$ plan to increase the licensing fees due to the companies plans to stop development future products base on other M$ products. It was tit for tat action on M$ part, so the company terminated the entire account with M$.
But MS is a monopoly and their actions are viewed from a different perspective. AIR, MS ran into similar difficulties with IE.
I suspect that DOJ and the EU will watch this with interest.
Of course, W8 OS may fail of its own accord -- on both the desktop and tablets.
Still waiting for you to explain what's illegal about it.
They currently require that all computers accessing a server be properly licensed. The above simply says that Windows 8 tablets will be treated the same way. As long as other clients are treated the same way, there's nothing there to get the DOJ interested. Even a monopolist is allowed to increase their sales as long as they do it by legal means.
Yes, we had about 40K employees world wide with multiply locations and servers which were replicated many times over the world wide locations and you pay licensing fees for each server and user. Also the $10M include more than just outlook there were other M$ services which were terminated at the time, but this information was shared as part of the reason of moving away from M$. The other interesting part of this was the fact M$ plan to increase the licensing fees due to the companies plans to stop development future products base on other M$ products. It was tit for tat action on M$ part, so the company terminated the entire account with M$.
Curiouser and curiouser...
That MS really knows how to do "customer service"!
It's too bad that Apple doesn't have any server hardware (and enterprise support infrastructure) -- as their server OS is free with unlimited seats.
Will your company go Linux to replace the Windows Servers?
<p> </p><div class="quote-container"> <span>Quote:</span> <div class="quote-block"> Originally Posted by <strong>Dick Applebaum</strong> <a href="/t/149553/microsoft-raises-tablet-virtualization-licenses-to-stave-off-ipad-threat/40#post_2100054"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /> <br /> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> That's a logical view...</p> <p> </p> <p> But MS is a monopoly and their actions are viewed from a different perspective. AIR, MS ran into similar difficulties with IE. </p> <p> </p> <p> I suspect that DOJ and the EU will watch this with interest.</p> <p> </p> <p> Of course, W8 OS may fail of its own accord -- on both the desktop and tablets.</p> </div></div><p> </p><p> Still waiting for you to explain what's illegal about it.</p><p> </p><p> They currently require that all computers accessing a server be properly licensed. The above simply says that Windows 8 tablets will be treated the same way. As long as other clients are treated the same way, there's nothing there to get the DOJ interested. Even a monopolist is allowed to increase their sales as long as they do it by legal means.</p><p> <br /> So please explain what's illegal about it.</p>
The article says that non-Windows tablets will need to pay a fee and that Windows tablets will be free.
That may be an illegal use of a monopoly position to restrain trade or suppress competition.
If you are too dense/stubborn to understand that, then do a web search for
"ms ie eu lawsuit".
As to the tone of your recent responses to my posts... It is unfortunate that my posts don't meet with your satisfaction !
I have as much a right to post here as anyone... and do not seek your approval -- now, get off my back!
I hope you enjoy the company of zither and gator on my block list!l.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
While a cheap tactic I see nothing anticompetitive about it.
It looks more than a bit like using their Windows (PC) monopoly, to leverage themselves into the tablet (iPad) market and suppress competition there. On the other hand, the Windows monopoly is a little creaky these days, and this will probably more have the effect of suppressing Windows 8 sales than iPad sales. But, I think this is more just Microsoft's was of milking their customers for every penny they can, than any real hope of taking over the tablet market. Eventually, Windows will become so expensive to use that no one will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz
By the time any large corp has to contend with the new pricing it will be looking at Windows 9 (or whatever) as no IT department would be evaluating a move to Windows/Server 8 anytime soon. The only people moving to windows 8 are your average punters and the guys in the boardroom who like the new shiny shiny. IT departments dont care about the average joes but have to deal with the eejits from the boardroom... 'Yes Sir, you dont know how to use your new ultrabook with windows 8...let me upgrade that to windows 7 for you" lol
IT depts wont move to windows 8 anytime soon BUT A TON of depts will move to windows server 2012 because there are some HUGE changes to hyper-v that are very important.
There may be an illegal anticompetitive tie-in -- like the case in the 1960s where IBM was sued for requiring that only IBM punched cards be used in IBM Accounting machines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chelgrian
This isn't about RDPing into your desktop PC. The license is for accessing entirely additional copy of Windows running on a server somewhere. Or single applications running on a server displaying on a tablet (I refuse to use this stupid 'Virtual Desktop Infrastructure' and 'Virtual App' or 'App Streaming' terminology). It also seems to cover this 'Windows To Go' thing which is simply yet another copy of Windows locked down with whatever your corporate IT department want to lock down and booted off a USB key. What they are saying is that if you buy a Windows RT tablet you get rights to do this anyway, if you have an iPad you have to buy one 'Companion Device License' for each user and each user can have 4 devices.
If course the cheap way to do this is to not drink the 'Virtual Desktop' KoolAid and provide a VPN + Firewall mechanism which allows the user to connect to their PC and only their PC via one of the many RDP clients available.
With any luck, this will apply more pressure to get people to switch to server operating systems that don't have extortionate client access fees.
A number of years ago, we bought an xServe which came with unlimited client licenses for less money than just the Windows licensing cost alone would have been (not even counting the hardware to run Windows Server). If you have to pay for tablets to access your server, as well, the Windows cost gets even higher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGNR8
This will be a problem for MS, additional tax for the privilege to use an OS that is not geared for corporate environments.
Every company I work with has zero plans to migrate from 7.
They now have there desktops now fully functional with 7 and users finally trained.
There is no huge benefit for a company to spend the license fees and the training expense for the new OS they do not want, AGAIN!!!!!, in such a short period.
I have been beta testing the 8 and I can tell you right now this is not going to work in corporate unless they turn off tiles.
I see a terrible adoption rate for this version.
Windows 9 will fix Windows 8 like Windows 7 fixed Windows Vista.
I am not a Windows basher at all, I actually like Windows 7.
It is a most stable version of Windows since Windows 2000.
However Windows 8 is the biggest mistake MS has made since Windows ME.
They are trying to compete with Apple and Android to go after consumer market, tisk tisk … Big Mistake.
I won't even go into there numerous mistakes they have made in virtualization and the way they have tried to punish enviros using Citrix or VMWare
Re the bolded:
I can just imagine the difficulty of teaching millions of computerphobes a new UI.
Fortunately, it's not hard for IT to turn it off and I expect they will do so before delivering new PCs to their users' desks. Of course, after having done that, there's little (if any) advantage to Windows 8 vis a vis Windows 7.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I seem to recall Ballmer saying that Windows 8 could be their last version of Windows if people don't take to it.
If he actually said that, it's just one more example of why you shouldn't pay attention to anything Ballmer says. There's absolutely no way they would stop upgrading Windows.
Rather, if it doesn't do well, I can picture MS doing 2 things:
1. Offering a 'downgrade' license to purchasers of new PCs which come with Windows 8. They've done that before.
2. Immediately start with the promises about how great Windows 9 will be. There's also precedent for that. They seem to have a pretty solid history of alternating 'good' and 'lousy' releases. After every lousy release, they get their act together and the next one is usually significantly improved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by radwansk
Hey, if you can't out innnovate, This, right here, is why Microsoft needs to go down.
Cool your jets there, buddy.
Microsoft do some brilliant products that can't be ignored; SQLServer and .NET are more than enough reason to keep MS around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Re the bolded:
I can just imagine the difficulty of teaching millions of computerphobes a new UI.
Fortunately, it's not hard for IT to turn it off and I expect they will do so before delivering new PCs to their users' desks. Of course, after having done that, there's little (if any) advantage to Windows 8 vis a vis Windows 7.
You /cannot/ turn off the Metro UI. You could in the Developer Preview with a little registry tweak but Consumer Preview (and newer) have you stuck with it.
I did read somewhere ages ago that MS Will allow Metro to be turned off for business users.
The catch? Buy the enterprise version. $$$ cha-ching!
Then, within the same article, someone from MS said "then it would only be a minor update to Windows 7".
I wish I bookmarked that article. My face when reading it was priceless.
?_?
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89
Cool your jets there, buddy.
Microsoft do some brilliant products that can't be ignored; SQLServer and .NET are more than enough reason to keep MS around.
The only thing MS (and Oracle) has over open source solutions (like MySQL, Hadoop, MongoDB, etc.) is that they provide enterprise-level support. Many people may not realize just how much that support costs in terms of the license and renewal fee...it would be cheaper for them to bring staff in to deal with all issues and save a bundle.
SQL Server is a great product. But it's among a field of great products, not a stand-out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
There may be an illegal anticompetitive tie-in -- like the case in the 1960s where IBM was sued for requiring that only IBM punched cards be used in IBM Accounting machines.
It's not illegal in any way unless they treat Windows 8 tablets differently than iPads. As long as their remote access rules apply the same regardless of the type of client, there's nothing at all illegal or uncompetitive about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89
You /cannot/ turn off the Metro UI. You could in the Developer Preview with a little registry tweak but Consumer Preview (and newer) have you stuck with it.
I did read somewhere ages ago that MS Will allow Metro to be turned off for business users.
The catch? Buy the enterprise version. $$$ cha-ching!
Then, within the same article, someone from MS said "then it would only be a minor update to Windows 7".
I wish I bookmarked that article. My face when reading it was priceless.
?_?
You can easily turn off tiles - which is what I was referring to.
The rest of the UI may also be a problem. As I've said, I suspect that MS will have to offer a downgrade to Windows 8 on request.
of course if they have a version of WIN8 RT for the iPad that would render the license fee Moot... Jail-break your tablet to run WIN8 RT...
There may be an illegal anticompetitive tie-in -- like the case in the 1960s where IBM was sued for requiring that only IBM punched cards be used in IBM Accounting machines.
It's not illegal in any way unless they treat Windows 8 tablets differently than iPads. As long as their remote access rules apply the same regardless of the type of client, there's nothing at all illegal or uncompetitive about it.
?_?
<But Microsoft is treating other tablets differently, hence the additional license fee for non-WIN8RT tablets... Did you(jragosta) read the article for comprehension?
It is just M$ trying to persevere their revenue stream. I know my company last year moved off Outlook for mail and save the company $10M in licensing and maintenance fees, we use gmail for corporations which is not as nice to use as outlook but it save the company money. They are also moving away from anything M$ based where it required ongoing licensing and other fees. Only those companies which are so intrench with the M$ way will be stuck.
My wife company is in the process or rewriting their entire product which in the past was based solely on M$ product and Flash. They gave gotten so many complaints form their customers to make their product work with OSX and iOS they are making the switch to a non-M$ solution and HTML5 so that is will be cross platform compatible.
It is kind of funny how M$ converted the business world from IBM Mainframe and almost killed the company and M$ is now turning into a IBM themselves. Eventually companies will reduces their reliance on M$ in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullhead
What a surprise, Microsoft leveraging their illegally obtained monopoly to stifle innovation and force their overpriced crap software on everyone.
Stupid, isn't this more likely to hurt adoption of Windows 8?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64
It is just M$ trying to persevere their revenue stream. I know my company last year moved off Outlook for mail and save the company $10M in licensing and maintains fees, we use gmail for corporations which is not as nice to use as outlook but it save the company money. They are also moving away from anything M$ based where it required ongoing licensing and other fees. Only those companies which are so intrench with the M$ way will be stuck.
My wife company is in the process or rewriting their entire product which in the past was based solely on M$ product and Flash. They gave gotten so many complaints form their customers to make their product work with OSX and iOS they are making the switch to a non-M$ solution and HTML5 so that is will be cross platform compatible.
It is kind of funny how M$ converted the business world from IBM Mainframe and almost killed the company and M$ is now turning into a IBM themselves. Eventually companies will reduces their reliance on M$ in the future.
Wow! Can you disclose how many accounts/employees are covered by that $10M?
While certainly good counter-arguments I'm looking at this more like Apple v. Psystar, where Apple has the right to choose how and who to license their OS too. as Jargosta states, this only becomes tricky if they don't make it consistent but I think there might be ways to account for the licensing fees being included in every Win8 tablet to get around legal matters.
I certainly can't imagine MS made this decision lightly or without getting a team of lawyers in on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
While certainly good counter-arguments I'm looking at this more like Apple v. Psystar, where Apple has the right to choose how and who to license their OS too. as Jargosta states, this only becomes tricky if they don't make it consistent but I think there might be ways to account for the licensing fees being included in every Win8 tablet to get around legal matters.
I certainly can't imagine MS made this decision lightly or without getting a team of lawyers in on it.
That's a logical view...
But MS is a monopoly and their actions are viewed from a different perspective. AIR, MS ran into similar difficulties with IE.
I suspect that DOJ and the EU will watch this with interest.
Of course, W8 OS may fail of its own accord -- on both the desktop and tablets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Wow! Can you disclose how many accounts/employees are covered by that $10M?
Yes, we had about 40K employees world wide with multiply locations and servers which were replicated many times over the world wide locations and you pay licensing fees for each server and user. Also the $10M include more than just outlook there were other M$ services which were terminated at the time, but this information was shared as part of the reason of moving away from M$. The other interesting part of this was the fact M$ plan to increase the licensing fees due to the companies plans to stop development future products base on other M$ products. It was tit for tat action on M$ part, so the company terminated the entire account with M$.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
That's a logical view...
But MS is a monopoly and their actions are viewed from a different perspective. AIR, MS ran into similar difficulties with IE.
I suspect that DOJ and the EU will watch this with interest.
Of course, W8 OS may fail of its own accord -- on both the desktop and tablets.
Still waiting for you to explain what's illegal about it.
They currently require that all computers accessing a server be properly licensed. The above simply says that Windows 8 tablets will be treated the same way. As long as other clients are treated the same way, there's nothing there to get the DOJ interested. Even a monopolist is allowed to increase their sales as long as they do it by legal means.
So please explain what's illegal about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64
Yes, we had about 40K employees world wide with multiply locations and servers which were replicated many times over the world wide locations and you pay licensing fees for each server and user. Also the $10M include more than just outlook there were other M$ services which were terminated at the time, but this information was shared as part of the reason of moving away from M$. The other interesting part of this was the fact M$ plan to increase the licensing fees due to the companies plans to stop development future products base on other M$ products. It was tit for tat action on M$ part, so the company terminated the entire account with M$.
Curiouser and curiouser...
That MS really knows how to do "customer service"!
It's too bad that Apple doesn't have any server hardware (and enterprise support infrastructure) -- as their server OS is free with unlimited seats.
Will your company go Linux to replace the Windows Servers?
The article says that non-Windows tablets will need to pay a fee and that Windows tablets will be free.
That may be an illegal use of a monopoly position to restrain trade or suppress competition.
If you are too dense/stubborn to understand that, then do a web search for
"ms ie eu lawsuit".
As to the tone of your recent responses to my posts... It is unfortunate that my posts don't meet with your satisfaction !
I have as much a right to post here as anyone... and do not seek your approval -- now, get off my back!
I hope you enjoy the company of zither and gator on my block list!l.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyberzombie
... SQL Server is a great product. But it's among a field of great products, not a stand-out.
Besides, Microsoft stole SQL Server from Sybase. Remember Sybase? No? I guess that's what happens to you when someone gets away with stealing your IP.