EU antitrust and bad consumer options
European Union doesn’t like Microsoft’s monopoly on the software market. Neither do I. It’s bad for the consumers to get Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, Windows Media Player and MSN Messenger pre-installed with the operating system, giving Microsoft’s products an advantage over the competitors’ similar products. Consumers are lazy; they will not bother with researching, downloading and using alternative browsers, e-mail clients, media players and instant messengers, just as they don’t do as much as a few clicks to get to Windows Update once a month. This keeps third party software authors at a constant disadvantage over Microsoft’s (crappy) products. So, EU’s antitrust order to force Microsoft to provide a version of Windows without Windows Media Player seems a good step towards the best interest of European consumers, right?
I’m not too sure about that, and the reason is simple. The companies sustaining this decision and trying to provide alternatives to Windows Media Player are Apple and Real Networks. Eeek!! As much as I respect Apple, QuickTime is a different kind of bloated piece of software with someone else’s label on it, but it’s still garbage! There is a reason why QuickTime Alternative exists. And Real Networks’ Real Player?! As someone once put it, “there must be a place in hell for Real Player, right next to Hitler.” Enough said. Both alternatives are as bad as what they are trying to replace!
Little fishes, such as BSPlayer, are no match to Microsoft Windows Media Player, Apple QuickTime and Real Networks Real Player because they are specialized tools and don’t integrate Digital Rights Management or online shopping for media. They can’t promote themselves, so they remain niche products for experienced users. Joe Anonymous only hears about the big names.
According to a recent piece of news from Reuters, the biggest two PC makers in the world — Dell and HP — have decided to follow the market instead of legislative regulators. According to their studies, too few customers will request the stripped-down version of Windows, without Windows Media Player. This seems the most reasonable approach so far; EU’s regulations cannot change consumers’ preferences. If what they want and demand is Windows with Media Player, why would anyone refuse them? Instead of seeking legal debate on taxpayers’ money, Apple and Real Media should instead focus on improving their products and determining computer buyers to switch to one of them just because they would be so much better. Real competition takes place on the market, not in court. Firefox is living proof to that.
