Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft Government The Almighty Buck The Courts News

Real And Microsoft Close to Settlement 255

pdirty writes "Real networks may be close to winning a $750 million settlement agreement with Microsoft following Real's antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft. The deal would include Microsoft paying cash as well as advertising for Real services, and products through channels such as MSN. Real is holding a conference call after the closing bell today to announce the details." From the article: "The deal follows on the heels of the European Commission appointing a watchdog last week to monitor Microsoft's compliance with its antitrust ruling. The pact is the latest in a string of payments by Microsoft to settle charges, including $750 million in 2003 to Time Warner to end charges about Microsoft acting to suppress Netscape, and $1.95 billion to Sun Microsystems to settle a suit by Sun over Microsoft's use of incompatible Java technology."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Real And Microsoft Close to Settlement

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:24PM (#13766297)
    You will now have to enter a valid email address before logging into your desktop. Also several new unexplained executables will be added to every user's startup folder to enhance the browsing experience.
  • Oh Oh (Score:4, Funny)

    by saskboy ( 600063 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:25PM (#13766299) Homepage Journal
    "The deal would include Microsoft paying cash as well as advertising for Real services, and products through channels such as MSN. "

    This means that ads in MSN messenger are going to say
    "Buffering... 33%"

    And Microsoft should really consider advertising for Mozilla too.
    • Re:Oh Oh (Score:5, Informative)

      by Queer Boy ( 451309 ) * <dragon,76&mac,com> on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:37PM (#13766410)
      And Microsoft should really consider advertising for Mozilla too.

      The problem was that Real wanted to PAY to advertise on MSN and MS said no. It was not free exposure they were after.

      • "The problem was that Real wanted to PAY to advertise on MSN and MS said no." Why is that a problem? Are those who sell advertising not permitted to pick and choose who they allow to advertise?
      • Re:Oh Oh (Score:3, Informative)

        by AviLazar ( 741826 )
        In this country, since when does company X HAVE to render services to company Y. As far as I have ever seen a business can refuse service to anyone they please for any reason, so long as it is not the WRONG reason. The wrong reasons being discrimination (i.e. color, race, gender). Hell, we refuse to help our competitors...and frankly our competitors are not putting spyware on our clients computers.
    • Re:Oh Oh (Score:3, Interesting)

      by The Lynxpro ( 657990 )
      "And Microsoft should really consider advertising for Mozilla too."

      Not really far fetched since Microsoft advertises on Slashdot, which is probably the world's largest collection of rabid anti-Microsofties posting on the net. :)

  • Actual Press Release (Score:5, Informative)

    by gurustu ( 542259 ) <gurustu@nosPAM.att.net> on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:25PM (#13766302)
    The press release with details of the deal is here [realnetworks.com].
  • what about iTunes? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Afecks ( 899057 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:25PM (#13766305)
    OS X comes with iTunes yet there is no foul play there...
    • Hmm... do you think it could possibly be because, unlike Microsoft, Apple doesn't have (and abuse) a monopoly on desktop operating systems?
    • Well, maybe it's just me but I thought you could actually uninstall iTunes. (drag and drop to trash)

      I also thought Apple weren't a monopoly, but I must be wrong!
    • by ad0gg ( 594412 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:35PM (#13766391)
      Windows Media Player has been included since Windows 3.1. Apple had quicktime since System 6. This was way before real even existed as a company. This lawsuit is about Microsoft bundling media player in windows.
      • Apple didn't inlcude Quicktime with the OS until at least 7.5 and I'm pretty sure that even then, Movie Player wasn't included (might be wrong about that part). What we now know as Quicktime Player came even later.
    • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF ( 813746 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:45PM (#13766465)

      OS X comes with iTunes yet there is no foul play there...

      All sorts of people go to school playgrounds and it isn't illegal for them, so convicted child molesters out on parole shouldn't have any trouble going there either.

      Luckily, the laws say otherwise. Monopolies can't use their monopoly to create a new one. Apple sells computers and bundles an OS and a mouse and iTunes. They don't have a monopoly on any of those things. MS does have a monopoly on desktop OS's, thus they can't bundle new products with it. If they want to sell the media player as a separate product with financing segregated from Windows that is fine.

      • by badriram ( 699489 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @01:08PM (#13766650)
        Well see MS was not declared a monopoly until court pronounced it as such. So what are companies supposed to do until then?

        When you are at 69% market share something is legal and at 70% it is not? Even the courts or the laws cannot agree is what exactly a monopoly is. The entire concept of having a monopoly and abusing it is f'ed up. This is esp. true when competitors can do the same. The way I look at it, if Apple bundles iTunes with their OS, and MS competes with them, they should be allowed to do the same.

        Of course the problem is how to protect companies like Real wants to compete with Apple and MS, on particular part of their OS. There are no good answers that treats everyone fairly.
        • The courts CAN agree on what a Monopoly is, there is a legal definition of such. It's just the courts can't always agree IF the firm in question meets the letter of the law. Monopolies are more about actions not market share, although they are inter-related. When you control the market to an extent the barriers to entry are so high no one else can enter thats pretty much a monopoly. There are other products that compete strongly with iTunes to download music so it's not a monopoly, and since Apple has only
        • Well see MS was not declared a monopoly until court pronounced it as such. So what are companies supposed to do until then?

          Your first sentence is kind of silly. MS was a monopoly long before they were found to be such by the courts. A company is legally a monopoly based upon their effect on the market, which MS was well aware of.

          The way I look at it, if Apple bundles iTunes with their OS, and MS competes with them, they should be allowed to do the same.

          Ahh, but Apple does not compete with them. Apple

          • No one sells OS's by themselves to be bundled with computers

            Wait, what do RedHat/Linspire/Novell/SUSE/etc do then? Seems to me they make and OS to be solde and bundled with computers...

            Just becuase you can get 'free' versions of Linux (which, I argue, are NOT the same as a 'Packaged Product' from any of the above) doesn't change the fact that these companies are selling an OS to be bundled on computers. Hell, even WalMart sells PCs with this 'alternative' OS bundled with it.

            • Wait, what do RedHat/Linspire/Novell/SUSE/etc do then? Seems to me they make and OS to be solde[sic] and bundled with computers...

              Redhat, Suse, and Novell all give away their OS for free (it is GPL). They sell support and services and hardware for that OS and that is how they make their money. Linspire does sell their OS in addition to giving it away, with the goal of pre-installing it on PC's but in such small quantities that it has no noticeable effect on the market. In fact, last I heard this was on

        • "When you are at 69% market share something is legal and at 70% it is not? "

          Having a monopoly is not illegal, abusing one is. MS was not found guilty of being a monopoly, they were found guilty of abusing that monopoly.

          "Of course the problem is how to protect companies like Real wants to compete with Apple and MS, on particular part of their OS. There are no good answers that treats everyone fairly."

          Nothing is prefect not even the antitrust laws, but that's all we have. I think the vast majority of people h
      • Other then having a considerable market share advantage over Apple, Apple shows more of monopolistic traits then MS. This goes from hardware to software. As for what bundles with MS, unless you are buying the stand-alone version of MS, it is up to the computer store selling it to you. When I bought my Toshiba laptop and dell laptop it came with a TON of non-MS products.

        And if MS has to sell their media player separately, then so does Apple - that is fair. Not to mention, MS is not restricting you fro
        • Selling a screw that only works with your screwdriver is not a monopolistic practice. It may not be a nice practice, but it's perfectly legitimate. Apple does not dominate the desktop world, not even close, and thus is not a candidate for monopolistic practices. If Apple had 90% of the market share and pushed vendor lock-in, then yes, we could talk about. Not only that, but the record is clear that Microsoft has used its operating system components to damage the competition. I know of no company that c
          • "If Apple had 90% of the market share and pushed vendor lock-in, then yes, we could talk about. Not only that, but the record is clear that Microsoft has used its operating system components to damage the competition. I know of no company that claims Apple cut their throats. Perhaps you could provide some examples."

            Just for arguments sake, had Apple not bought them, the Konfabulator people might take issue over the widgets in OS X 10.4 Tiger.

            And yes, I understand the whole Desk Accessories argument as well.
        • Other then having a considerable market share advantage over Apple, Apple shows more of monopolistic traits then MS.

          You keep using that word... I do not think it means, what you think it means. Overwhelmingly large market share is the only trait of being a monopoly.

          As for what bundles with MS, unless you are buying the stand-alone version of MS, it is up to the computer store selling it to you. When I bought my Toshiba laptop and dell laptop it came with a TON of non-MS products.

          ...and it also came

    • The difference is that in the installer I can opt not to install iTunes, or indeed ever use it. Even if installed I can remove it with one drag to the trash.

      Compare and contrast that (or even Quicktime) with Windows Media Player.
  • by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:26PM (#13766315)
    > Real is holding a conference call after the closing bell today to announce the details.

    But until the close of trading, the RNWK conference call says onlBuffering... buffering... buffering...

  • Unfortunatly (Score:4, Insightful)

    by RingDev ( 879105 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:28PM (#13766328) Homepage Journal
    I'm going to have to side with MS on this one. Real released a crappy product with a shady web site. I think it's a shame to capitalism that the better product will be funding the lessor product in this case.

    -Rick
    • Re:Unfortunatly (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF ( 813746 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:51PM (#13766508)

      Real released a crappy product with a shady web site. I think it's a shame to capitalism that the better product will be funding the lessor product in this case.

      Then perhaps MS should have competed on the quality of their product, instead of illegally bypassing competition and bundling their product with their monopoly. Your opinion is that WMP is better than Realplayer, but it is not up to you or MS to decide what product deserves to be purchased. It should be left to market forces to decide, based upon honest competition between the two products. Those market forces cannot act when a monopoly is used to "force" all users to pay for one option whether they want it or not.

      • Re:Unfortunatly (Score:5, Insightful)

        by RingDev ( 879105 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @01:07PM (#13766639) Homepage Journal
        "but it is not up to you or MS to decide what product deserves to be purchased."

        Never has been. I have never purchased WMP, Winamp, or Real MP. No one's sales have been hurt by Microsoft's actions (by my actions at least).

        RMP sales have been hurt for two reasons, 1) it is an inferior product, and 2) it has a very poor image.

        Using your logic, the makers of TextPad should be able to sue Microsoft for including NotePad in their OS. But they don't. They produce a supirior product and compete with microsoft. Real had that same oppertunity. Produce a supirior, or hell, even similarly performing application, and they could have competed with Microsoft. Even if their product was as annoying as WMP 9 it still would have been popular just because so many people look for non-MS solutions. Instead they create a bloated resource whoring program that was grocely inferior to not just WMP, but pretty much every other streaming content viewer.

        -Rick
        • Never has been. I have never purchased WMP, Winamp, or Real MP. No one's sales have been hurt by Microsoft's actions (by my actions at least).

          You haven't bought a copy of Windows or PC hardware from and major vendor in a while then huh? If you did, like most people, you would have paid for WMP without knowing or having a choice. Heck some retailers charge you for and pass the money on to MS when you buy a mac (or at least used to).

          RMP sales have been hurt for two reasons, 1) it is an inferior product,

          • Re:Unfortunatly (Score:3, Insightful)

            by RingDev ( 879105 )
            "You haven't bought a copy of Windows or PC hardware from and major vendor in a while then huh?"

            Correct. I bought a copy of XP Pro last year, so you could argue that the cost of WMP 9 was included, but I have since downloaded WMP 10 for free.

            "That is a fine assertion, but there is no way to prove that "

            Take a look at the general response here. A typicly rabid anti-microsoft community is placing RMP in an even worse light. True, this >could
            "In truth they have to make product so much better than
    • Re:Unfortunatly (Score:4, Insightful)

      by m50d ( 797211 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @01:09PM (#13766659) Homepage Journal
      I'm going to have to side with MS on this one. Real released a crappy product with a shady web site.

      Then why couldn't MS have beaten them by playing fair? Say what you like about them, Real were wronged here and deserve compensation, no matter how bad whatever else they've done.

      • Re:Unfortunatly (Score:3, Interesting)

        Then why couldn't MS have beaten them by playing fair? Say what you like about them, Real were wronged here and deserve compensation, no matter how bad whatever else they've done.

        Then why in the deal would Real want access to Microsoft's Media technologies and codecs? If Real knew they had the best product, they wouldn't have even requested this in the settlement.

        Quote from article on MSNBC, "RealNetworks will also get licenses and commitments that give it long-term access to Windows Media technologies to
    • Agreed. I was very much looking forward to an end to the travesty that is the Real client-side application.
    • Re:Unfortunatly (Score:3, Insightful)

      by pgnas ( 749325 )
      Yes, this is actually sad, talk about an invasive, bloated, lousy product. I can't wait for "Vista" with Real Player Technology. I bet it will ask you everytime you start windows to provide email address and other demographic data...

      As if there are not enough problems with Spyware on Windows machines, now the OS will come standard filled with it.

      "will enable Real to build services and software that enhance consumer's experience with Real's products and services and take advantage of innovations in Wi

  • Game plan (Score:5, Funny)

    by k98sven ( 324383 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:29PM (#13766333) Journal
    1) Use monopoly power to crush and stifle any competition
    2) PROFIT!!
    3) Pay off government to drop anti-trust charges
    4) Pay off former competitors to drop anti-trust charges
    5) EVEN MORE PROFIT!!

    Nothing quite like the "free market"..
    • Re:Game plan (Score:3, Insightful)

      Actually, that is the free market. You're (through witless sarcasm) implying you want socialism. Here's your little joke properly worded 1) Make inferior product 2) Whine to politicians 3) Sue over a monopoly that by definition doesn't exist 4) Get pro-linux nerds (who also can't compete, on the desktop) all worked up and indignant on your side 5) Post to SlashDot so your fellow geeky dweebs can get all worked up 6) Win lawsuit 7) Profit!
      • Re:Game plan (Score:4, Insightful)

        by fiendo ( 217830 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:46PM (#13766473)
        Monopoly--1 : exclusive control of a particular market that is marked by the power to control prices and exclude competition and that esp. is developed willfully rather than as the result of superior products or skill (Source: Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.)

        By the legal definition I would say that Microsoft is a monopoly and this position has been upheld in court. As Adam Smith pointed out monopolies are the enemy of good management and therefore antithetical to a free market. It is in the best interest of healthy competition to regulate monopolies and restrain them from abusing their power.
        • By the legal definition I would say that Microsoft is a monopoly and this position has been upheld in court. As Adam Smith pointed out monopolies are the enemy of good management and therefore antithetical to a free market. It is in the best interest of healthy competition to regulate monopolies and restrain them from abusing their power.

          Adam Smith was also writing in a time at which "monopolies" were granted by the crown of England, as in, "I grant this company the sole right to import tea from India to

    • by alnjmshntr ( 625401 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:35PM (#13766394)
      Real's (or even SCO's) gameplan:

      1. Make product that noone wants.
      2. ?????
      3. LOSS!!
      4. ?????
      5. Sue the shit out of everyone.
  • 750!!! (Score:5, Funny)

    by gbulmash ( 688770 ) * <semi_famous&yahoo,com> on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:29PM (#13766339) Homepage Journal
    Seems like the standard settlement with Microsoft is $750 million. Maybe they just have suitcases with $750 million pre-prepared. When it comes time to settle, Ballmer takes one out of the closet, opens it up, shows it to the aggrieved party, and says "how does $750 million sound to you?"

    Their little eyes grow wide, their little palms grow sweaty, and their mouth dries up. "Yes, Mr. Ballmer. That will be fine."

    They reach for the suitcase, but Ballmer snatches it away. "First you'll have to sign this," he says, pushing a settlement agreement their way. A pen lies on top, and as they pick up the pen, it extends a small needle and pricks their finger, sucking their blood into the inkwell.

    They sign.

    As they take the suitcase and walk out of Ballmer's office, they hear an evil laugh behind them... muahaha. They turn to see that Ballmer has grown to twice his size, sprouting ram horns from his forehead. "You signed it in blood," he bellows. "Your soul is mine!!!!"

    But hey, $750 million can buy a heck of a good time while you're still alive.

    - Greg

    • Re:750!!! (Score:3, Funny)

      by clem ( 5683 )
      $750 million for a soul? Please. I mean, come on, it's a buyer's market -- I'd think they'd be able to snatch up souls for far less change than that.
  • So... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ikn ( 712788 ) <rsmith29.alumni@nd@edu> on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:30PM (#13766347) Homepage
    Microsoft finally learns the same hard truth we've all learned: once you've touched RealPlayer, THEY NEVER GO AWAY.
    • "Microsoft finally learns the same hard truth we've all learned: once you've touched RealPlayer, THEY NEVER GO AWAY."

      So, you are equating Real Player with herpes?

      In that case, which is more effective, the Windows Remove Installed Programs feature or Valtrex?

  • by digitaldc ( 879047 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:30PM (#13766349)
    "Under the music and games agreements, Microsoft is scheduled to pay Real $301 million in cash and provide services over 18 months in support of Real's product development, distribution, and promotional activities."

    Oh great, now when we start up an XBOX, a notification of a RealPlayer update will appear in the corner, all the media and game files will be hijacked to only work in their player, and the configuration settings are buried in 3 subsets of obscurely-titled menus.
    I wonder what it must feel like to be in charge of quality control and implementation of this new Win-Real venture?
    • by digitaldc ( 879047 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:37PM (#13766408)
      http://jogin.com/weblog/archives/2004/02/29/real_o bnoxious [jogin.com]

      "Unfortunately, playing video streams is only a very small aspect of what Real Player does; Real Player, most prominently, is a small bastard with inferiority complex and delusions of grandeur, not too different from Napoleon. Although Real Player's task is simple and limited to a certain timeframe, Real Player defaults to running at all times, whether its limited functionality is needed or not, and claims a seat for itself in the throne commonly called the systray.
      When you install Real Player, you can either choose an express install, or custom install. If you pick express install, Real Player simply installs itself with every option and feature turned on. If you choose the custom install, the process is a blend between an installer and a Pokemon-like game of gotta-uncheck-all-checkboxes."

      couldn't have said it better
  • Oh, great (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jleq ( 766550 ) * <jleq96@nOsPAm.gmail.com> on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:34PM (#13766384)
    I stopped using RealPlayer after the "G2" version came out (1998, I think?). Even then, it was becoming bloated crapware. Just what I want is for Microsoft, how ever evil they may be, to be FORCED to include that crapware with Windows. OS X includes iTunes, and nobody complains about that. Most Linux distros include XMMS, and nobody cries.

    RealNetworks has done more damage to themselves than anyone else could, through the overpromotion of unstable software, with annoying ads, and 192352398235 different taskbar crapplets that nobody wants. After most streaming sources went to either streaming MP3 or WMA, Real pretty much died. They lost a market they created due to poor management and bad software. Nobody cares about them anymore, and frankly, I wish they'd just get bought or disappear alltogether.

    Note to mods: please only select the "-1 Flamebait" box if you REALLY think I'm flaming. Personally, I don't think I am, but it's up to you.
    • Re:Oh, great (Score:3, Informative)

      by mopslik ( 688435 )

      Most Linux distros include XMMS, and nobody cries.

      When it comes to packages, Microsoft is either Microsoft-centric, or just plain lacking.

      Most Linux distros include a number of media players. For instance, my SuSE 9.3 install DVD included xmms, amarok, mplayer, kaffeine, totem, xine, etc. Many from different organizations/vendors/projects, etc.

      Microsoft Windows ships with Microsoft Media Player. Period.

      Most Linux distros include numerous text/document/office editors. Again, SuSE 9.3 ships with Ope

    • Re:Oh, great (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF ( 813746 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @01:17PM (#13766710)

      OS X includes iTunes, and nobody complains about that. Most Linux distros include XMMS, and nobody cries.

      The makers of those OS's don't have monopolies. Sheesh, how can there be so many people on Slashdot that don't understand the legal or economic difference between bundling products and bundling products with a monopolized product?

      They lost a market they created due to poor management and bad software.

      Yup, Real did a lot of crap that I, as a customer did not like. The question is, did they do those things out of desperation because they were being driven out of business by anti-competative actions? We will never know the answer to that, nor what would have happened if the market had been allowed to decide. Instead we have to deal with what MS has given us. We don't let armed robbers go because they robbed a jaywalker. The problem is these settlements don't work either. Instead of MS being properly punished and a forced change in it's behavior, we get financial settlements where they pay off the victims with money gained from their crimes against other victims. Guess who is really paying. MS's customers.

    • Re:Oh, great (Score:3, Interesting)

      by m50d ( 797211 )
      OS X includes iTunes, and nobody complains about that.

      In case you didn't notice, Apple could eat dead babies and still get love and justifications from the slashdot crowd.

      Most Linux distros include XMMS, and nobody cries.

      Firstly, most of them include a variety of players, often including realplayer. Secondly, none of them is trying to make money off their streaming server.

      RealNetworks has done more damage to themselves than anyone else could, through the overpromotion of unstable software, with annoying

  • Damn (Score:5, Funny)

    by squoozer ( 730327 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:34PM (#13766386)

    I don't know who to hate most Real or MS. Why can't we lobby for a new law that allows for both parties to lose.

  • Habitual offender? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hackstraw ( 262471 ) * on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:35PM (#13766396)

    If I speed down the road, but not too bad I get a fine.

    If I speed down the road going too fast, I have to go to court, potential of jail time, fines, etc.

    If I continue to do these things over and over again, I'm labeled as a habitual offender and have other court fun to go through.

    Microsoft on the other hand just has to keep doing what they are doing and paying fines and now doing "community service" by putting advertisements for a competitor on their websites (which I think is wrong).

    Personally, I would prefer just to be in the fine department for my behavior. Where do I get these privileges?
    • Personally, I would prefer just to be in the fine department for my behavior. Where do I get these privileges?

      Easy. It's called "being filthy rich." According to the American Dream, anyone can do it.
  • by RobertB-DC ( 622190 ) * on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:37PM (#13766404) Homepage Journal
    A bit of Slashdot man-behind-the-curtain trivia. Before this article went live, subscribers [slashdot.org] saw it on the front page. They also saw this article: Real Wins Against Microsoft [slashdot.org], posted by CmdrTaco himself. The Zonk version won out, and the CmdrTaco story became one of my "Ghosts of Slashdot".

    Can you imagine the flames if both articles had gone live? Back-to-back dupes aren't unknown, but there's usually at least a few minutes between them :)
  • Last I checked (Score:3, Interesting)

    by kinglink ( 195330 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:38PM (#13766413)
    Real media played about as unfairly as Microsoft. If I remember right once something is put as a RM, it's as safe as a PDF, you can share it but you can't copy it easily (yes I know there's ways to copy anything but there's no converter from RM to change it back to a AVI from real, and most out there are hack jobs, that the DMCA would be able to stop)

    Even Apple has offered a Movie convert from Mov to AVI but I still don't know if Real offers the same. And that just makes the format almost worthless.

    In addition Real's software has been pretty shoddy for a long time, I remember about ten years ago, about the only reason people still used it then was that there was no other option when stuff was in the format. Now we have many options on what to put it into, I don't see many RMs around except for feeds, (which is what they excel at). Perhaps their problems arn't from Microsoft but from their lack of quality for so long.
    • Real media played about as unfairly as Microsoft. If I remember right once something is put as a RM, it's as safe as a PDF, you can share it but you can't copy it easily (yes I know there's ways to copy anything but there's no converter from RM to change it back to a AVI from real, and most out there are hack jobs, that the DMCA would be able to stop)

      How can Real play as unfairly as MS? Did they bundle their software with some monopoly I haven't heard about? As for RM, you're mostly right, although they

  • XP bundles (Score:3, Funny)

    by MoogMan ( 442253 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:42PM (#13766441)
    Oh god... PLEASE DONT bundle Real Player with XP, that would be the worst possible outcome.

    Relax, it's only a joke.
  • Real Player (Score:4, Informative)

    by gregbains ( 890793 ) <greg_bains AT hotmail DOT com> on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:46PM (#13766470) Homepage Journal
    Thanks to the BBC using Real Player for it's streaming media I have Real Player installed, but also thanks to the license fee for the BBC I get Real Player sans everything else for free, so no ads, no other crappy software, just real player. Still not great, and I'd prefer something else, but it's better than download Real Player from real.com as the basic edition
  • Isn't this a one-time biggest JAVA-related revenue generating opportunity for Sun? Sun's investment in Java must've slow and painful for them...
  • by AFCArchvile ( 221494 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:46PM (#13766475)
    Oh, GREAT. If there was one piece of software that I wanted to see starved off by Microsoft's monopoly, it was RealPlayer. I don't like how Windows Media Player 8/9/10 promotes DRM, installs a DRM service in every Windows XP computer (mspmspsv.exe), and may potentially install more DRMware at the driver or kernel level, but Real is no better. Their software is harder to install, and more bloated and cumbersome than Windows Media Player 9. Their software uses an even worse "web portal" interface than WMP, and performs worse in erratic stream playback than WMP. And their RealOne player is one of the most invasive pieces of software when installed. It's basically spyware and malware.

    From what I've seen, support for streaming media is heading away from Real and toward Windows Media merely because all the computers with Windows XP preinstalled can play WM files already, as opposed to having to download and run the Real installer. The fact that many media sites already have to deal with enterprise MS software licensing may have something else to do with it. Despite being an ISO standard and natively streamable, MPEG 4 has been plagued by the codec mess (mostly Microsoft's fault) four years ago. There is no single "MPEG 4" codec; instead, there's Microsoft's MPEG 4, DivX, XviD, QuickTime, blah, blah, blah. Users are turned away due to the sheer number of codecs they have to download just to view one video. The newest "universal" MPEG format is still MPEG 2, and it doesn't get the compression that many people need to make video sizes or bandwidths palatable to the customers.

    And so now, in the next version of Windows, we'll all have RealONE bundled in, but hopefully with less access violations and bluescreens than the program delivers now. And, hopefully, with a more consumer-friendly and less surreptitious frontend. I'd rather watch Microsoft choke Real to death with WMP; despite the DRM and Microsoft-coded bizarreness, Real's software is worse.
    • From what I've seen, support for streaming media is heading away from Real and toward Windows Media merely because all the computers with Windows XP preinstalled can play WM files already, as opposed to having to download and run the Real installer.

      That's pretty much why Real won. MS bundled their player and their media codecs into the OS, so people just use the "default" player. Their abusing their desktop OS monopoly.

      instead, there's Microsoft's MPEG 4, DivX, XviD, QuickTime, blah, blah, blah. Users are
    • I don't like how Windows Media Player 8/9/10 promotes DRM, installs a DRM service in every Windows XP computer (mspmspsv.exe), and may potentially install more DRMware at the driver or kernel level, but Real is no better.

      What? Real doesn't force DRM down your throat at all. Let alone at every turn like Microsoft. How is that not better?

      Their software is harder to install, and more bloated and cumbersome than Windows Media Player 9.

      Yes, it's harder to install because Real isn't Microsoft. Microsoft uses

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:49PM (#13766492)
    In other news, descendants of Attila the Hun are on the verge of a $5billion settlement with Microsoft in which they accuse the company of lifting its business practices from their ancestor's playbook.
  • How many lawsuits will Microsoft have to settle before it well.... stops having any money left?

    It's probably way, way, wayyyyyy off but the thought popped into my mind. And I'm not ashamed to say, I smiled a bit :)
    • "How many lawsuits will Microsoft have to settle before it well.... stops having any money left?"

      That truly won't happen until businesses, government agencies, and Joe Blow stop buying Dell computers. If more people bought Apple Macs, and/or built their own PCs and installed Linux, Microsoft's magic cash machine would dry out a lot quicker than every new company we hear about filing a lawsuit against Redmond & Co.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    A story about Real and we already have 3 Apple worship posts.

    Something Apple phans may not know: Real supported Linux when nobody else did. Only windows/apple people seem to bitch about Real.

    MP3 and Real was all we had on Linux. Somebody supported Linux when somebody else was taking subsidies from Microsoft [com.com].

    • Something Apple phans may not know: Real supported Linux when nobody else did. Only windows/apple people seem to bitch about Real.

      I did not know there were such things as windows/apple people. Personally I use OS X, Windows, Linux and other OS's on a daily basis, but I can certainly understand disliking Real. Any company that ships malware with their products is deserving of ridicule, even if they don't port that malware to all the OS's they support.

  • by TinBromide ( 921574 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @12:53PM (#13766529)
    http://www.videohelp.com/tools?tool=Real_Alternati ve [videohelp.com] [videohelp.com] it works with media player classic for playing real streams. I haven't fired it up on my new hard drive yet, but it worked (hid the buffering message, but i suspect it may have been at 33%)
  • by Shivetya ( 243324 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @01:00PM (#13766586) Homepage Journal
    It really should read that consumers are paying Real 750 million dollars. Microsoft isn't going anywhere, hence everyone who buys a preloaded PC or uses services of someone who did will indirectly pay this fine.

    Most fines against businesses simply move money from one businesses pocket to another or to the government. The consumer never sees any of it back. Unless a company is driven under by penalty for their actions there is no real loss. One set of shareholders sees a smaller return compared to another. Those shareholders are probably the only "real" people affected directly by the exchange.

    It does look like a feeding frenzy at Microsoft's expense. Most of their competitors failed because of inferior programs. Netscaped sucked for most the 4.xx series and Real has been horrid bloatware/adware for God knows how long.

    • It does look like a feeding frenzy at Microsoft's expense. Most of their competitors failed because of inferior programs.

      Well, if MS wants to compete fairly, they can easily avoid these problems in future simply by offering these programs as separate purchases without discounts for bundling them together. Better yet, they could spin off their applications divisions and bid alongside Real, Mozilla, Apple, and Sun for programs to be included on OEM PCs. If MS is not willing to play fair, then customers su

    • It really should read that consumers are paying Real 750 million dollars. Microsoft isn't going anywhere, hence everyone who buys a preloaded PC or uses services of someone who did will indirectly pay this fine.

      Consumers will not be paying any more. Why? Because MS is already charging them as much as it can. The money will come out of MS's profits

      Unless a company is driven under by penalty for their actions there is no real loss.

      Just like unless a person is driven bankrupt by their fines for criminal act

      • I have to agree, I even installed the RealPlayer 10 release that's available for Linux here in Gentoo and it's quite a nice little app. I don't like it enough to have it replace my Beep Media Player, XMMS or amaroK as far as my music collection is concerned, but for videos it may be a nice departure from Totem and others like it. For some reason I don't seem to like any media players in Linux except for gmplayer. :)

  • Alternative (Score:2, Informative)

    by xlsior ( 524145 )
    At least there's always RealAlternative to play Real video, using Mediaplayer Classic... No questionable taskbar junk, no shady installer, no RealPlayer. You'll never look back.
  • by FlorianMueller ( 801981 ) on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @01:01PM (#13766590) Homepage
    I've fought against Microsoft on the software patent front, and I'm now trying to win Europe's premier political award [ev50.com] so that the Microsoft-sponsored prize money hopefully goes to an anti-patent NGO [slashdot.org] (voting recommendations here [slashdot.org]). I know that Microsoft has a history of turning one monopoly into the next.

    However, I really think the EU made itself ridiculous by ordering Microsoft to ship an alternative version of Windows without the Media Player. Microsoft created that "Windows Reduced Media Edition" (a name that doesn't quite suggest you should buy it) and sold it at the same price (!) as Windows with the Media Player. Obviously they didn't do anything to generate demand for that particular version. So what's the point in all of that? It just became a matter of principle for some bEUrocrats.

    Moreover, the EU Commission lacks a consistent strategy for the software market. On the one hand, they start those anti-trust proceedings and believe they make the market more competitive (which the "Windows Reduced Media Edition" obviously didn't). On the other hand, the EU Commission was a driving force behind that EU software patent directive. And now the EU Commission even wants to retry and legalize software patents in Europe as a side effect of a so-called "community patent regulation":
    ZDNet UK: EC slipping software patents "through backdoor" [zdnet.co.uk]
    TheInquirer.net: EU attempts to intro software patents by the back door [theinquirer.net]

    That makes no sense to me. A bundling of Windows with the Media Player isn't even 1% as bad as patents on multimedia data formats. The bundling may affect market share over time and it may make consumers less likely to choose another software for playing digital media, but patents constitute monopolies from day one and potentially eliminate all choice.

  • Real-ity (Score:2, Redundant)

    by rueger ( 210566 ) *
    " I stopped using RealPlayer after the "G2" version came out (1998, I think?). "

    Real may be favorite whipping boy around here, but honestly it does its job fairly well, at least on my PC, it installs fairly easily, and near as I can tell has removed all of the bad stuff from several years ago.

    Personally I find Windows Media Player more annoying and tire of Quicktime insisting that I need to upgrade to Quicktime Pro.

    Really folks, if you're going to slag the product, at least comment on a reasonably current v
  • Real networks may be close to winning a $750 million settlement agreement with Microsoft following Real's antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft.
    I've always secretly been hopeful Real Networks would run out of money eventually, since their media software sucks and is a pain to even download, let alone install/uninstall. This $750 million settlement ruined my week. Thanks /.
  • For Once... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by rising_hope ( 900951 )
    However unethical M$FT might have been, for once I wish they'd one. Real screwed themselves over, as far as I'm concerned. Their products have always come accross as second rate, full of ads, annoying popups, bundeled with crap I didn't want/need. $750 million to Real means it's just going to take longer for them to crumble. Maybe if they can start developing decent software, I might consider using them again - maybe. I've HATED real player since at least version 7 or so. The only thing I can say posi
  • You must now utilize Real Spyware...err Real Networks to listen to your music, and our advertisements.
  • Although it is definitely arguable that bundling an audio player in the OS is 'monopolistic behavior', one thing does come to mind.

    Adding all of those settlement sums up (Sun + Real + Netscape + etc...) the total $$ amount is still very trivial compared to the amount of money they were able to make from offering their version of reality and bundling all of those products in the OS install.

    So the moral of the story, - if there is one - is that in business, it sometimes pay handsomely to take calculated
  • by mcc ( 14761 ) <amcclure@purdue.edu> on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @01:31PM (#13766837) Homepage
    So now that that's dealt with, can the rest of us sue RealPlayer and demand a settlement that they stop sucking?
  • by The Lynxpro ( 657990 ) <lynxpro@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday October 11, 2005 @01:42PM (#13766947)

    If crappy Real Player can squeeze out $750 million alone from Microsoft's monopolist/predatory behavior, then obviously Time Warner settled for far less by accepting earlier an equal dollar figure to settle the Netscape case. The damage done to Netscape - and AOL indirectly by the over reliance on IE for Joe Blow's sake - is far more than what Real suffered from.

    Real's main problem is with Real itself. Its product, and how it treated its virtual customers, the casual users.

    Hmmm...maybe with such sufficient cash reserves, Apple might be tempted to finally sue Real over that nice little DMCA violation it committed last year by cracking Fairplay's DRM. I'd rather see Apple with another $750 million than Real anyday.

  • According to this BBC story [bbc.co.uk] Microsoft have now settled with Real for $761m.

    Personally, I'd have held out for a bit more, just to beat the $775 that IBM got [bbc.co.uk]. How long before Microsoft's shareholders insist they stop breaking the law?
  • This just in... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by spywhere ( 824072 )
    Kraco, the maker of cheezy one-size-fits all floor mats, will collect a $2.25 billion settlement from the Big 3 automakers for including floor mats with their automobiles.
    "Chrysler, Ford, and GM have no right to 'bundle' floor mats with their products," said Ron Popiel IV, president pro tem of Kraco Enterprises Inc [kraco.com]. "This is clearly an abuse of their market position to consolidate their monopoly on floor mats."

    In a related story, Pioneer, Blaupunkt and Kenwood have announced plans to jointly sue the auto

Trap full -- please empty.

Working...