I really do hate it. Windows should be able to bundle Internet Explorer. It really hurts me to say it as I’d prefer it if they bundled a web browser instead, but they should be able to do it. But I should be able to get rid of it if I want.

I don’t like installing Apple software on Windows. The Safari installer nags me to install iTunes. The QuickTime installer nags me to install iTunes. Why? I don’t want iTunes. I also don’t want my music to be locked into a proprietary application (iTunes). I don’t like iTunes.

iTunes gives us even bigger problems, as ultimately it comes bundled with all Apple hardware (so I hear) - desktop and laptop PCs, iPhones and iPods…. Try circumventing that horrible iTunes functionality on your handheld, Hell will freeze over.

Both companies want to tell me what I can and can’t do with my personal posessions. Both companies (vista drm) would like to disable my computer indefinitely and without warning if I download an MP3 which might be illegal (read the Vista EULA). This is especially scary from an Operating System which can’t even remember which country I’m in or keep track of its daylight saving rules, let alone its intellectual property laws.

So yes,… Both companies are evil — and both have their place in our world. Each is as bad as the other really BUT I would like it if there were proportionally fewer Windows computers around. Competition fosters innovation! Furthermore I’m unable to run Windows so what I crave is a higher level of software interoperability - ultimately I think this requires a decrease in the Windows market share. Fortunately this is slowly happening according to most statistics sites in a manner similar to how Firefox initially eroded Internet Explorer’s browser share (and continues to do so).

I guess bundling of software is ok, if the end user gets to choose what’s bundled. Mostly what I’m after, though, is just the constant attitude that if Microsoft does it, it’s evil, and if Apple does it, it’s cool.

What I do not like is not having the option of selecting what software should be installed (it’s also nice to have a range of software to select from, but it’s understandable that MS does not want to ship netscape or firefox bundeled or preinstalled with windows). I don’t like that interoperability becomes dependency either, but that’s besides the point.

Thanks for the tip!

Is equilibrium the correct word for this? The swedish word is “jämvikt”. Doesn’t quite fit…
Fairness or objectivity are words I’d opt for perhaps

I have three replies to that.

1) This blog is in English, so it doesn’t relly matter what it translates to in Swedish, does it?

2) What I was looking for was a word in style with the description linked to above:

In general, a system is said to be in a state of equilibrium if all influences on the system are cancelled by the effects of others.

3) Of course, “fairness”and “objectivity” would be good words for it too, but I wanted to use a title for it that would make it stand out a little more.

Apparently I’m just rambling here!
Anyway…

I’m glad that you share my opinions about this.

Thanks for your comment.

Regarding your second paragraph: yes, that’s when it becomes a problem, as well as bad business practice. But up to that point, it should be up to the company do ship what they want.

There is a problem if a company forces the hardware vendors (like Dell, HP, …) to ship the OS without any addional software. As far as I remember, Microsoft forbade hardware vendors to install additional software like Netscape Navigator, Sun‘s Java, etc. on their products.

Is it fair to treat companies completely different for the same behaviour? No, of course not.

Jeroen,

I don’t think Robert’s entry is as much an attack on Apple, as it really is a wake-up call to people that continiously bitch at Microsoft…

Thank you guys for getting my point! It’s not about Microsoft vs. Apple, it’s about principles and being consistent in judging.

Microsoft and Apple have every right to bundle software though. It’s their platform, but if we’re going to shoot down Microsoft for doing so, at least be consistent and apply the same to everyone else, including Apple. I bet Konfabulator’s marketshare on the Mac has dropped significantly with the introduction of Dashboard. Can’t believe it has done them any good

I don’t think Robert’s entry is as much an attack on Apple, as it really is a wake-up call to people that continiously bitch at Microsoft (or Apple or anyone else for that matter) for being a commercial company.

Faruk: I use MS by choice, it was the first platform I learned and tend to stick to it since my knowledge gives me more advantages in the windows environment… but I was forced to use a Mac while I was working as a webdesigner in a small advertising bureau a few years ago, hmmm I can see a glitch in your arguments here

// Kalle

Thanks for your comment.
I can understand why Apple end users don’t complain, and I know that their choice of OS has usually been a more active one.

But what I’m saying here is that they should both be judged the same way, if it’s good or bad business practice to bundle certain software inj the OS etc.

What happens if Apple get 80% of the market? Is it time then for Windows fanactics to encourage lawsuits against Apple for the programs (above mentioned and others) that they include by default in Mac OS X?

Their behaviour is the same, yes, but it’s quite obvious (to me) why people don’t complain about Apple’s behaviour in said examples.