Toshiba Ends Format War

I don't think he's angry because anyone forced him to buy anything. It sounds like he's ultra pissed because he opened up a sony receiver and saw the shitty layout and shitty caps etc. and then found out what someone had paid for it. I can voucher for this as i had a sony surround system that sucked ass. I opened it up and VIOLA! I made the same observation. Sony seems to be at the top of the consumer electronics pile but a lot of their stuff is a just a pile of shit. There is no argument there to be had. But like i said, I'm thoroughly impressed with the PS3. It's a good system that happens to have a Blu-ray player. I'm not hating sony and i don't think the intent is to flame them but to point out that the last time sony made a decently priced, honest to god, above the bar product, it was 1989.

I'm not angry with sony but to turn a blind eye to a lot of their shit is being a geese like someone pointed out earlier. There are a lot of other consumer electronics companies out there and some of the more decent ones (panasonic, pioneer, LG) could be bashed for sub-par stereo equipment etc, or the more shitty companies (coby comes to mind) but what's the point at the Coby price point? Sony could survive off their name and that's the point many are trying to make. That and their consumer electronics stuff is by large construed of over priced, stylized electronics with cheap internals that survives off of marketing, the sony name, and stylization. Before you reply with "God damned Anti-Sony Fan Club!!!" remember I'm getting a PS3 when the price point get's more to my satisfaction because i think it's a great system.



Snowdog said:
And you are angry because they somehow forced you to buy this crap? I don't own a single sony product and last I checked, no one is forcing anyone to buy Sony products so why sit in your bile hating them. There are dozens of companies that make crap, do you sit around hating on them as well?

Just like with the "They make proprietary stuff" argument. Last I checked no one was forcing you to buy their stuff. So I really have to wonder about the psychology of wasting effort hating on Sony.
Click to expand...
 
Warn3rv3 said:
I don't think he's angry because anyone forced him to buy anything. It sounds like he's ultra pissed because he opened up a sony receiver and saw the shitty layout and shitty caps etc. and then found out what someone had paid for it. I can voucher for this as i had a sony surround system that sucked ass. I opened it up and VIOLA! I made the same observation. Sony seems to be at the top of the consumer electronics pile but a lot of their stuff is a just a pile of shit. There is no argument there to be had. But like i said, I'm thoroughly impressed with the PS3. It's a good system that happens to have a Blu-ray player. I'm not hating sony and i don't think the intent is to flame them but to point out that the last time sony made a decently priced, honest to god, above the bar product, it was 1989.

I'm not angry with sony but to turn a blind eye to a lot of their shit is being a geese like someone pointed out earlier. There are a lot of other consumer electronics companies out there and some of the more decent ones (panasonic, pioneer, LG) could be bashed for sub-par stereo equipment etc, or the more shitty companies (coby comes to mind) but what's the point at the Coby price point? Sony could survive off their name and that's the point many are trying to make. That and their consumer electronics stuff is by large construed of over priced, stylized electronics with cheap internals that survives off of marketing, the sony name, and stylization. Before you reply with "God damned Anti-Sony Fan Club!!!" remember I'm getting a PS3 when the price point get's more to my satisfaction because i think it's a great system.
Click to expand...

Actually I would say the PS3 is a good blu-ray player that happens to play video games... lol. But Sony does have a lot of reasonably priced, decent performing product today. The PS3 is a shining example, and it's first models have a reported failure rate of like 3-5% (versus %30 on the first slew of Xbox 360's). The Sony A-series SLR is also quite good, especially since it was their first foray into the digital SLR market with partner Minolta. The newest generation has improved and is even more of a contender. And guess what - it uses compact flash. You actually have to buy a special adapter (not included) to get it to use memory sticks!

Oh, and I forgot to ask, who makes CCD's for Nikon's fine SLR's? Oh wait SONY does. I don't know how you can say they haven't released a decently priced above par product since 1989... Find a cheaper blu-ray player that's actually "better" than the PS3 or Sony's own standalone product which also retails for $400 and works very well.

Another example is the new A700 SLR. DPReview had good things to say about it:

"Overall then the A700 is a good performer with good overall image quality with a nice range of features - even if on the negative side there are some quirky design decisions which may or may not affect you. Best of all though is the fact that it weighs in at the lower end of the price band for this category of DSLR, that makes it about $400 less than the Nikon D300 and $300 less than the Olympus E-3."

It received their "highly recommended" mark, all while costing several hundred less than competing models. It met or exceeded expectations and brought a lot of good competition to the table, all while using universal compact flash memory. Let's see, when was it released ... oh right! Not 1989, 2008!!!

I agree that they make a lot of crap, but I hate stupid broad all-encompassing generalizations. Sony makes some crappy products, but so does Samsung, LG, Whirlpool, GE, Ford, Dodge, Chevy, (even Honda has made some blunders), and every other major manufacturer out there I can think of. I don't buy the crappy products they make, but if they release something I'm in the market for, and it really delivers, I have no problem buying a Sony, and I give that chance to every brand when I shop. To exclude Sony from the pool just because you think they sell everything based on their name is foolish. And if a customer just buys a Sony product thinking, "Oh it's Sony, so it must be good!" then that customer is a dinglefritz too. With the wealth of research tools on the net, why would you just blindly cling to ANY brand?

Sony won't survive by their name only. They still have to be competitive too. I don't believe that consumers, no matter how much like sheep we are sometimes, will continue to get burned by repeated crap from any brand. Sooner or later they will have to produce something that will actually earn our dollars, and they surely have. I just listed a couple major examples.
 
I agree with you up to a point.

"Sony won't survive by their name only. They still have to be competitive too. I don't believe that consumers, no matter how much like sheep we are sometimes, will continue to get burned by repeated crap from any brand. Sooner or later they will have to produce something that will actually earn our dollars, and they surely have. I just listed a couple major examples."

and what about Microsoft? Surely they're earning our dollars! I would say the general public has been burned continuously by MSFT and most if not all would agree with me. This is neither a msft or sony flame. Up to a point anything is worth buying but it's all about the price. Sony has a tendency to have higher mark ups than most of their competitors because of their name. Sony does make some good products (LCD's and Blu-ray) but a lot of their consumer electronics is overpriced just because it's SONY. It's not that i won't buy sony because that's not the case. I do in-depth research before i buy anything. But your average shmoe will walk into a store and by a product because it's got the Sony mark on it.



SirKronan said:
Actually I would say the PS3 is a good blu-ray player that happens to play video games... lol. But Sony does have a lot of reasonably priced, decent performing product today. The PS3 is a shining example, and it's first models have a reported failure rate of like 3-5% (versus %30 on the first slew of Xbox 360's). The Sony A-series SLR is also quite good, especially since it was their first foray into the digital SLR market with partner Minolta. The newest generation has improved and is even more of a contender. And guess what - it uses compact flash. You actually have to buy a special adapter (not included) to get it to use memory sticks!

Oh, and I forgot to ask, who makes CCD's for Nikon's fine SLR's? Oh wait SONY does. I don't know how you can say they haven't released a decently priced above par product since 1989... Find a cheaper blu-ray player that's actually "better" than the PS3 or Sony's own standalone product which also retails for $400 and works very well.

Another example is the new A700 SLR. DPReview had good things to say about it:

"Overall then the A700 is a good performer with good overall image quality with a nice range of features - even if on the negative side there are some quirky design decisions which may or may not affect you. Best of all though is the fact that it weighs in at the lower end of the price band for this category of DSLR, that makes it about $400 less than the Nikon D300 and $300 less than the Olympus E-3."

It received their "highly recommended" mark, all while costing several hundred less than competing models. It met or exceeded expectations and brought a lot of good competition to the table, all while using universal compact flash memory. Let's see, when was it released ... oh right! Not 1989, 2008!!!

I agree that they make a lot of crap, but I hate stupid broad all-encompassing generalizations. Sony makes some crappy products, but so does Samsung, LG, Whirlpool, GE, Ford, Dodge, Chevy, (even Honda has made some blunders), and every other major manufacturer out there I can think of. I don't buy the crappy products they make, but if they release something I'm in the market for, and it really delivers, I have no problem buying a Sony, and I give that chance to every brand when I shop. To exclude Sony from the pool just because you think they sell everything based on their name is foolish. And if a customer just buys a Sony product thinking, "Oh it's Sony, so it must be good!" then that customer is a dinglefritz too. With the wealth of research tools on the net, why would you just blindly cling to ANY brand?

Sony won't survive by their name only. They still have to be competitive too. I don't believe that consumers, no matter how much like sheep we are sometimes, will continue to get burned by repeated crap from any brand. Sooner or later they will have to produce something that will actually earn our dollars, and they surely have. I just listed a couple major examples.
Click to expand...
 
I would say some of Sony's bargain leaders, expecially in home Audio and Lower Cost Bravia LCD TVs are a fairly high quality product for the price point. They do make some pretty good products and they take a lot of risks. the problem is, when they fail, they fail in spectacular fashion..
 
Warn3rv3 said:
I agree with you up to a point.

and what about Microsoft? Surely they're earning our dollars! I would say the general public has been burned continuously by MSFT and most if not all would agree with me. This is neither a msft or sony flame. Up to a point anything is worth buying but it's all about the price. Sony has a tendency to have higher mark ups than most of their competitors because of their name..
Click to expand...

The huge difference I see is that Sony has lots of competition and I can simply choose from about 12 different vendors for my Cameras (I have a Canon), Stereo Components(I have Denon/Paradigm/toshiba) and even Blu Ray players when I get one. I don't give much thought to Sonys lesser products because I just don't buy them and they are a non issue. If you are uninformed and buy a Sony product merely on name, then that is clearly your problem for not researching the value/quality. It could be worse, you could have bought Bose, or Monster Cables or any number of other product representing much worse value than Sony, including a bunch of mid-fi questionable quality receivers. I don't waste time hating on Sony or Monster Cables, because if I am wise enough to know the products aren't the best value, then I am wise enough to buy elsewhere and those opportunities are ample. I have the awesome power of choice.

Microsoft on the other hand has a de facto monopoly. If I want to inter operate with others office documents I need MS office $400 for something thing that costs about 95 cents to produce. If I want to play games I need Microsofts OS for $100+ again for something that cost less than a buck to manufacture. If I buy a new computer and I want my old software to migrate and keep running, again I must buy another copy of the monopoly OS (or pay 2 or 3 times the price for the transferable version).

To me this is when proprietary gets ugly; when I have little choice but to use it and pay excessive markups to support the monopoly, swallow the DRM and say thank you sir, can I have another. Huge difference.
 
This is hilarious. Sony makes such awful products! They are never worth the money! Oops, now I sound silly too.
 
Snowdog said:
Microsoft on the other hand has a de facto monopoly.
Click to expand...

Shakes head... No it isn't.

If I want to inter operate with others office documents I need MS office $400 for something thing that costs about 95 cents to produce.
Click to expand...

So your bitching that a Microsoft product only works with another Microsoft product?

Should I bitch that Konqueror doesn't work with Windows?

If I want to play games I need Microsofts OS for $100+ again for something that cost less than a buck to manufacture.
Click to expand...

1) Id Software tried selling on Linux, didn't work out so hot.

2) Never been in business have ya? R&D costs are something you don't think about is it?

Please, call the waaaaaaaaaaaaaaamulance.
 
gdonovan said:
Shakes head... No it isn't.
Click to expand...

Actually Microsoft is legally (and it should be obvious why) considered to be a monopoly. See Microsoft vs Department of Justice.

Id Software tried selling on Linux, didn't work out so hot
Click to expand...

This only reinforces the fact that Microsoft has a monopoly. What chance does a linux game stand of selling in numbers when Linux has under 2% of the desktop computer market. If you want a successful game you will release for the de dacto monopoly system.

My post was a point of reference to indicate why Sony having a proprietary product is nothing to get bent out of shape about. I can buy a camera from a dozen different manufacturers. Nothing ties/locks or induces me to buy Sony. Unlike a monopoly situation where it is really the only game in town and you are forced to play in the proprietary lands and pay whatever prices the monopolist decides to charge. Sony has Dozens of real competitors for almost everything it sells, that forces their prices to reasonable level and will force them to use open technologies if it matters significantly to most buyers due the great availability of competing equivalent products.
 
gdonovan said:
Shakes head... No it isn't.
Click to expand...

As has been pointed out, it has been found to be one by both the US and the EU. Try again. (Hint: Monopoly doesn't require 100% of people using your product, it just means control of the market to such a degree that they can get away with stuff they couldn't in a truly competitive marketplace.)

gdonovan said:
So your bitching that a Microsoft product only works with another Microsoft product?

Should I bitch that Konqueror doesn't work with Windows?
Click to expand...

Your wish is KDE's command. :D KDE 4 is still basically beta, the Windows version even moreso, but it was made to be cross-platform and does indeed run on Windows. They'll even release a binary once they're satisfied with its status.
 
Snowdog said:
This only reinforces the fact that Microsoft has a monopoly.
Click to expand...

Sorry I don't agree with you- There is free choice in the desktop market. If people don't utilize that free choice don't blame MS.

If you buy a Sony camera your stuck with a memory stick, there is no choice. If I buy a PC I can put what I please on it. There is nothing barring me from wiping Windows off the drive and using something else!

The point was this was another bad choice made by Sony in a string of bad choices like rootkits and other junk.

Please don't give me the "well the dept of justice states MS is a monopoly" which was based on an OS being tied to an OS, not on a computer being tied to an OS if my memory serves me correct.
 
gdonovan said:
Please don't give me the "well the dept of justice states MS is a monopoly" which was based on an OS being tied to an OS, not on a computer being tied to an OS if my memory serves me correct.
Click to expand...

"Against logic there is no armor like ignorance." - L.J. Peter

Sorry that you are ignorant(and inarticulate), but they legally are a monopoly, your opinion doesn't alter reality. Likewise you are completely mistaken about the nature of the case. They are a monopoly,that is in the finding of fact. That has nothing to do with the multitude of abuses of that monopoly power, such as tying other businesses to the monopoly, which is a separate issue.
 
Snowdog said:
I need MS office $400 for something thing that costs about 95 cents to produce. If I want to play games I need Microsofts OS for $100+ again for something that cost less than a buck to manufacture.
Click to expand...


You need some facts and statistics to back your fud up. Right now, I think I need neck high rubber boots, because the shit is getting deep.
 
"lol, he pulls out the dumbass quotes to look intellectual and superior." -Wiretappicus Maximus 2008 A.D.
 
Ockie said:
You need some facts and statistics to back your fud up. Right now, I think I need neck high rubber boots, because the shit is getting deep.
Click to expand...

What FUD?
Price of office: $399.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116161

Do you contend it costs more than a dollar to manufacture a DVD in large scale? Heck I have seen them given away on a cereal box. You can buy blanks for 25 cents or less.

Product profit margin is in excess of 99%.
 
Snowdog said:
Product profit margin is in excess of 99%.
Click to expand...

I think what they're referring to is the fact that it costs lots in R&D to make the first copy, not that each individual copy costs more than that. So it makes sense to charge for more than just the CD duplication.

That said, R&D for an office suite is far less than R&D for, say, a motherboard, and in addition has basically no manufacturing costs as you pointed out. Yet MS Office costs more. The monopoly has absolutely nothing to do with that, right?
 
Snowdog said:
And you are angry because they somehow forced you to buy this crap? I don't own a single sony product and last I checked, no one is forcing anyone to buy Sony products so why sit in your bile hating them. There are dozens of companies that make crap, do you sit around hating on them as well?

Just like with the "They make proprietary stuff" argument. Last I checked no one was forcing you to buy their stuff. So I really have to wonder about the psychology of wasting effort hating on Sony.
Click to expand...

yes, i hate on all companies that make crap... becuase it makes me sick that people like sony try to cash out the fact that they have one or two good products to make a whole host of accessory crap products

do i buy it? no, hell no... it just frustrates me to no end when someone asks me to design their home theatre and they tell me, oh i want sony they are the best at everything... i argue, they dont care... which just proves to me that people have incredibly stupid brand loyalty... (apple fans would fit great here)...

and sony loves pushing their garbage formats (memory stick?) as if they are the end-all of whatever they are supposed to do... :rolleyes:

you can say whatever you want, as far as i am concerned, sony makes crap... ever since it went from made in japan to made in chine... just like the new chinese altec lansing makes crap, compared to the real US made older altec stuff... is the ps3 and their TV's nice? meh, maybe, but i dont do consoles anyway, and the sony logo is a huge turn off :p
 
SirKronan said:
"because they make crap!" I am sure you're educated enough not to really make a generalized all-encompassing statement like that and really mean it...

Please read my post above. I hate Sony's car audio, and you're right about their stupid home audio too. And guess what? I don't buy it, and I don't even recommend it to customers at the store where I work. There are a couple of Sony home theater in a box sets that sound very impressive for their price, however. I will sell those all day, but most of their home theater isn't worth its salt.

But their TVs are quite good, and their larger LCD's are competitively priced and often provide very good picture quality. Also, working in retail I can tell you, no one is better than Sony at getting us replacement parts quickly to repair customers' TV's. Samsung absolutely sucks, LG is hit and miss, and other brands pale in comparison to Sony when it comes to repairs. And no, they don't break down more than other brands. There are many Sony models that we've sold more than two years ago that haven't had a single problem yet - NOT ONE! I know because I see what comes back and what we fix. I get to look at those stats in my position.

Some of their laptops are quite good as well. I bought a Sony Vaio laptop (shelf display even) two and a half years ago. I used it for a year without a single problem, then sold it to my dad who uses it for real estate, trips, home use, etc. It has never had a single part or piece fixed or replaced. My Macbook went to the shop for repairs 3 times during the first year of warranty! In fact it had hardware issues out of the box. And guess who has the highest reliability rating for laptops according to the magazines? Apple. Whatever.



That's my point. You don't want it don't buy it. I tell every customer that comes into the store and considers a Sony camera that they are locked into a more expensive proprietary memory. I make sure they know what they're getting into. This prevents many of them from buying Sony, hence my above post that they are losing at least some business. Not all customers are blind and hype-driven. But it's your choice. Sony's (with Minolta) SLR's are excellent cameras, and many of their point and shoots are top rated. Their SXRD TV lineup (hardly more expensive than competition's similar rear projection models) are quite respected for picture quality and reliability. So please be careful before you make a broad, all-encompassing statement like "because they make crap." I had some rough times with my Macbook, but if I say "Apple makes crap" the vast majority of Apple laptop owners would disagree. Most companies make some "crap." But to say Sony makes crap in general is just stupid. That's why Samsung is getting sued because their $500 blu-ray player won't play many new blu-ray titles while the $400 Sony plays them all just fine ....
Click to expand...

ah dont even get me started on the VAIO laptops, why is sony the only manufacturer (that i know of) to STILL use special laptop ram? wtf? have they not heard of SODIMMS?
 
FLECOM said:
ah dont even get me started on the VAIO laptops, why is sony the only manufacturer (that i know of) to STILL use special laptop ram? wtf? have they not heard of SODIMMS?
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? My mom's new VAIO uses industry standard 200pin DDR2 SO-DIMMS. My wife's old VAIO (ca 2001) used then industry standard 144pin PC-100CL2 SDRAM.
 
FLECOM said:
yes, i hate on all companies that make crap... becuase it makes me sick that people like sony try to cash out the fact that they have one or two good products to make a whole host of accessory crap products
Click to expand...

Please inform us what company delivers consistently great products in your opinion.

From my perspective, products from multiple manufacturers low and mid-grade tiers all roll off the the same assembly line, with little to differentiate them. If you are playing in this space, it is a crap shoot with almost any brand.

While many of Sonys competitors only turn out generic products, Sony at least consistently brings new and interesting products to market, especially in display area: With Trinitrons being the best CRT's for over a decade. Lately they brought SXRD LCOS rear projectors which were IMO the best of the rear projectors, but flat panels are killing rear projectors. Now Sony has become the first to productize OLED and this has lit a fire under other OLED producers. We will probably get OLED displays faster because we have Sony that constantly pushes new technology. Something they should be lauded for.

I have yet to buy a Sony product, but I certainly like that the bring new technology to market faster.

When choosing a product, I always consider each purchase individually with little consideration for brand. It appears you just apply blanket labels and buy/ignore products based solely on brand.
 
Snowdog said:
"Against logic there is no armor like ignorance." - L.J. Peter
Click to expand...

Clearly I'm arguing with an Sony fanboy and wasting my breath.

Sorry there is no edit, I was referring to the case where IE was bundled with Windows.

I can use any OS with a PC, I can't use a standard memory card with a Sony camera.

Get the picture?
 
gdonovan said:
Sorry there is no edit, I was referring to the case where IE was bundled with Windows.
Click to expand...

Well, again the point soars completely over your head. I fear the point must be so far over your head it will soon be nearing the asteroid belt.

Microsoft has a monopoly, that is a fact in law ( should be blindingly obvious). Bundling does not make a Monopoly. Bundling was merely one of the actions that they decided to prohibit, once it was determined they had a monopoly. A monopoly is defined by market domination, not by corrective actions taken against the monopoly.

I can use any OS with a PC, I can't use a standard memory card with a Sony camera.
Click to expand...

Really. So when I go out to buy some software which of these other OS's for my PC will the software work with? Last time I was at the store, I am pretty sure every box said I need microsoft windows. So if I want to run comercial software on my PC, I NEED windows. That is pretty much a monopoly in practice and obviously why they were found to have a monopoly in Law. Why do you insist on arguing against established fact. You are pretty much arguing black is white here. Microsoft isn't even really central to the discussion, just there to show the difference between commodity and monopoly products. Microsoft being the only Monopoly that comes to mind.

Again with the memory stick. Is Sony somehow forcing you to buy their cameras? You don't NEED a Sony camera for anything, cameras are a commodity. Do you also hate on Olympus and Fuji for their even worse memory standard xD?

There must be at least 12 camera manufacturers that you can choose from making cameras. If you don't like the features (memory type) of a commodity product, most sane people will just buy a different competing product, rather than wasting mental energy "hating" a company for having features they don't like.
 
Snowdog said:
Microsoft has a monopoly, that is a fact in law ( should be blindingly obvious).
Click to expand...

Like the justice system finding OJ didn't kill his wife either eh?

You sure waste a lot of energy twisting yourself into funny shapes defending Sony.
 
Snowdog said:
There must be at least 12 camera manufacturers that you can choose from making cameras.
Click to expand...

lol.

And there are dozens of different operating systems I can run on a PC.

So much for Microsoft having a monopoly. Anyone with common sense can see that, but it eludes you.

But *if* I buy a Sony camera I'm still stuck with a memory stick.

Stop trying to compare apples to oranges.
 
Snowdog said:
Really. So when I go out to buy some software which of these other OS's for my PC will the software work with? Last time I was at the store, I am pretty sure every box said I need microsoft windows. So if I want to run comercial software on my PC, I NEED windows. That is pretty much a monopoly in practice and obviously why they were found to have a monopoly in Law.
Click to expand...

WTF?

Products working on Windows is solely because the developers made it to work on Windows. If they wanted to, they can make software and drivers for Linux and Apple. That does NOT make Microsoft a Monopoly! This only means the developer of the product wants to profit the most off their products by selling it to the highest user base and developing them at the least cost (by not coding for Apple and Linux). The only fault in your example are the developer of products, NOT Microsoft. Their reasoning could be "why bother with Linux since there's 99% chance that someone else will create an open source program or driver for me anyways?".
 
Azhar said:
Products working on Windows is solely because the developers made it to work on Windows. If they wanted to, they can make software and drivers for Linux and Apple. That does NOT make Microsoft a Monopoly! This only means the developer of the product wants to profit the most off their products by selling it to the highest user base and developing them at the least cost (by not coding for Apple and Linux)
Click to expand...

What you are describing is pretty much the very definition of a Natural Monopoly. It has the most market share because...it has the most market share. Read up about network effects too while you're at it. There's really no question about whether MS is a monopoly or not. By any definition but the most strict one found only in economics textbooks, it is. The question is whether it should be regulated because of that or not, and that's a completely different discussion.
 
You guys really don't have a clue what a monopoly is. With well over 90% of the desktop computer market windows domination clearly obvious. Exactly what do you think Monopoly means? It doesn't need to be 100% children. Microsoft is well over the threshold to define monopoly. If it was 60%/40% it wouldn't be a monopoly, but when one company controls the platform for over 90% of the desktop market, that is a monopoly, and is defined in law as such in the USA and the EU.

To Nitwit: OJ was let off by a jury in a county prosecution. This has no bearing on the reasonable determination of the DOJ vs Microsoft.
 
gdonovan said:
So let me get this right- Were all wrong and your right?
Click to expand...

About the matter of whether Microsoft is a monopoly or not at least, in a word: yes. Did you even read what the definition of what a natural monopoly is, and how Azhar pretty much nailed on the head why Microsoft is one without intending to? ;)
 
Sorry guys, Microsoft is a monopoly simply due to the fact that if others want to place their product in a position to make money they must deal with MS or MS's products. This in not inherently a bad thing. It's what MS does with its monopoly power that determines whether the monopoly is bad or good.
 
gdonovan said:
So let me get this right- Were all wrong and your right?

Ok then.
Click to expand...

What is all? two or three anon geeks who don't seem to have a grasp of the issue in this thread. Yes all three of you are wrong.

There seem to be an equal number pointing out the obvious error you seem incapable of grasping, and of course the legal rulings in USA/EU.

You can read about it in dozens of business article about the topic:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_34/b3846034.htm
...giving the company one last chance to respond to allegations that it is illegally leveraging its Windows operating system monopoly to gain unfair advantage in the server and audiovisual software markets.
Click to expand...

Even Microsoft has pretty much given up arguing that it doesn't have a monopoly. Why are you tilting at this particular windmill.
 
Actually I looked again, apparently the "All" that is wrong is two of you who think that Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly.

Since you seem completely missing the facts, here the actual case outcome from Microsoft vs the DOJ:
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm

They have pages explaining in very clear terms why Microsoft does in fact have a monopoly. Search down for "Microsoft enjoys monopoly power in the relevant market" to get started.
 
Mircosoft has a monopoly, indeed, but where it differentiates from Sony's proprietary memory usage is this: Even though you can hardly find a mainstream system these days without a Windows operating system, you have a lot of diversity from there on out. When you buy a camera you can only use a Sony memory stick in it, that's either made by Sony, or made by a company paying a royalty to Sony, like Sandisk, for example. This raises the cost. But with Windows, I have several options on programs I can use beyond the operating system. If I don't like Microsoft's office, for example, I can by Word Perfect, or get Open Office for free, even. I'm not limited to Microsoft only programs. Yeah, the other brand's programs are compatible with MS's OS, but I've got nothing but options on brand and type of programs I can buy.

If you buy a Sony camera, you can only use the Memory stick. And I can't take that memory stick out of my sony camera and stick it in a Canon or a Samsung camera. But I can take my A-Data branded SD card out of the Canon and use it in the Samsung, or the Panasonic, or the HP, or the Casio, etc. And I can take any speed, size, or brand of card I want and use it in any camera that supports SD/SDHC. That's definitely universal, where as Sony is proprietary. For this reason I would avoid the Sony camera, but perhaps not the Microsoft Operating system for mainstream/office use. I'm not trying to argue anything here, just make an observation.

Blu-ray and HD-DVD are both proprietary, minus a few dual format players that are a tad on the expensive side... I was hoping the region free and less DRM ridden HD DVD would stick around a little longer. I hate that Blu-ray is region encoded, not that I make frequent trips to Europe, but this is just an unnecessary step for Sony (and partners) to take to reduce usability and functionality of a product for its customers. I am extremely disappointed that this is still around in the next gen format. We have a global economy today where people share information worldwide via a variety of electronic formats including the web, satellite, phone, and physical media devices that traverse the high seas. Most of it works fine in any region, minus DVD's and now Blu-rays, which I think is complete bull crap. Maybe there's some special reason that I just don't know to region encode things, but I don't see how it benefits customers at all. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. I really don't mind. I would like to know why they do this.... Why did they keep regions in Blu-ray, and how come HD DVD didn't do it??
 
What kind of idiot who doesn't want to use memory stick or xD memory, buys a camera that uses it? For such idiots I have zero sympathy.

There is absolutely zero inducement to buy a Sony/Olympus/Fuji camera with non-standard memory. You are not forced to use memory stick/xD unless you actually want to and chose a camera that uses memory stick. This is like buying a minidisk player and complaining that it doesn't use standard CD's.

I believe Sony's/Olympus/Fuji motivations for going with non standard memory was for them to avoid paying any royalties (hardly any standard is free), more than expectations that they could get others in on their standards. I guess they must have done a study indicating they will save more on royalties, than they will lose in sales, as most people don't really care. But it does cost them some sales. I have had 1 Nikon and 2 Canons and ruled out all non standard memory cameras right from the beginning.

When any of these companies use non-standard memory, I shrug and say, "your loss" (of a sale), I don't go off kilter and simmer in anger about it.

Blu Ray and HD-DVD are no more proprietary than DVD is. You pay your license fee ( to MPEG LA) and you can build a player.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top