The CBC is reporting that a senior and oh so anonymous Microsoft exec is saying the company is concerned that third party software loaded onto new computers by manufacturers could hurt the Windows Vista launch.

"Microsoft official told CBC News Online, on condition of anonymity, that the world's largest software maker is frustrated by legal shackles that prevent the company from restricting what kinds of software major computer makers install on new PCs."

Craplets are those annoying pieces of software that PC manufacturers get paid to install on brand new machines. Often times the software is useless or down right malicious. I stopped buying Dell computers since it would take me nearly an entire day to uninstall all the useless crap they throw on there. When I bought my laptop the free and nearly useless anti-virus software reported that the free and completely useless Dell maintenance tool was spyware. It took quite a bit of wrangling with support to uninstall it, since the uninstall tool didn't want to do it on its own.

I for one hope Microsoft can do something about this, though from the article it sounds unlikely. What can we do? Unless consumers refuse to buy PCs with Craplets the manufacturers will not change their ways.

I think a bigger issue will be all the older regular software and hardware that will likely not work with it that work fine in XP. I am positive that my old TV Tuner card will not run in Vista. I have to use 2000/NT drivers as it is to run it in XP, but it works fine in XP.

I hate getting anything but a stock OS disk. If I need specific drivers that aren't on the disk, supply them, but for the love of God, don't give me a lot of junk that I don't want. Personally, I'd like to ask MS why it took so long.

I'm curious as to how far they plan to push it though. I mean, they already don't want me to install something I bought on multiple computers in my own home without buying another license.

I still haven't gotten all the crapplications uninstalled from my Dell and I've had it since June '06... And it's not for lack of trying, either. I'm seriously pondering buying the Windows XP install CD and just flat reinstalling with the Microsoft version...

That reminds me of something I saw on Tomer Gabel's blog once: How to install Windows XP in five hours or less.

What can we do? Unless consumers refuse to buy PCs with Craplets the manufacturers will not change their ways.

Or just buy a Mac.....?

Or just build your PC by yourself. Why oh why buy a pre-made PC?

Yeah, I haven't had a PC that I didn't build for 12-15 years or so. :)

Because not all people are computer freaks - in fact, the (huge number of) people who don't know how to assemble a personal computer are probably the same who have no idea how to remove Craplets, let alone know what trouble they can cause.

Freak? Uh... ok.

Anyhow, building a computer is VERY easy to do. As long as you have the correct parts, very little can be installed incorrectly... it fits only in the correct place and only with the correct orientation.

Besides, I think that the majority of people know someone who can put a computer together. The majority of US teens these days can do it, from what I see.

At the very least, there are the companies like a2zcomputers.com that will put together a computer for you for a considerably lower price than any store-bought computer (as much as 50-70% less!).

Personally I think you overestimate people's ability, but most of all interest in building their own computer if they can just get a cheap one off the shelf.

First of all, there's usually no need to. There's no big point in putting together your own machine if you're using it twice a week to use Google, check your e-Mail and write a letter. Second, for people with a regular job, the time they need to invest in order to decide on which parts to buy, actually buy them, assemble them and then install all the software (ignoring that fact that something along the way ALWAYS goes wrong), can make a custom-built machine much more expensive than a readily assembled one very fast!

Companies who build your computer but don't install the software surely are an alternative, but I guess most people decide to either do it all by themselves, or then buy something they can just plug in and use. Anything in between is probably less popular.

Have you ever looked into the actual cost of building a computer? I can build a computer that sells for $2000 for under $800. On the other hand, if you want a cheaper computer that retails for $600 or so, then you won't likely build one for quite that low... partly because really low end parts tend to be overly expensive... just take a look at the cost of a 20GB hard drive (if you can find one) and compare it to the cost of a 120GB hard drive to see a quick example.

For a gamer, building your computer saves you a LOT of money. For a person who just uses basic internet/email and word processing, I'd tell them to get a Pentium I or similar for under $100 rather than pay more for power that isn't needed.

Not so much anymore. You get better options and freedom of choice when you build your own, but the budget, money saving aspect isn't as prevalent.

Can you build a core2 duo E6600 system with 19" flat panel, 2gb ram, 500gb hdd, with full versions of WinXP, Norton Internet Security, 6months paid internet access, and a X1300 card, case, powersupply, 7.1 sound, MB and the like, all with tech support for under $2000? I doubt it. Even if you could it wouldn't be that much of a difference to allow for a greenhorn to try to do something he has no experience with, all without tech support of any kind.

The benefit of building custom PC's these days is that you get complete control over design and components, which isn't so much the case with boxed sets.

In my case, it's because I'm a poor poor man and my company offered a deal to loan me a sizeable sum of the cost of the laptop, and I took 'em up on it. Plus you really can't custom-build a laptop. Although I did my best with this one. Fastest computer in the house...

That is true. Laptops aren't worth building. It costs more to build one than to buy one in most cases that I've seen... though I've never actually built a laptop myself.

I'm frankly floored by the number of Apple fan-boys I've been seeing online in the last few months. When I owned exclusively Macs (back in the late 90's), I was a lonely lonely boy. My friends insisted upon mocking me. I loved my Mac, and I still have flat-panel iMac that I keep on-hand (I really need to give it more desktop real-estate so it's more comfortable to use), but it's just been too expensive to get a new Mac (even a Mac mini). I guess what I'm saying is: why not just buy a Mac? Because many computers are purchased on a payment plan of some sort, and Apple's financing is... in a word... stupid. Very. Very. VERY. STUPID.

Five hours?

Is it somehow wrong that I can reinstall Windows from scratch in less than two, and have it running perfectly in two and a half? :)

Yeah... It takes just over an hour here to install XP Pro SP1 (I don't have an SP2 disk), then time to download/install SP2 (I forget how long, but I can download at 800kB-1MB/s). Then time to download/install all the drivers that I need. It probably runs me 2 - 2.5 hours to do a complete install of XP.

I think you still can order the SP2 CD from M$, for free. I have one of those.

Edit: yeah, you can. Here it is.

Great! Thanks. :)

I don't have a disk either; those bastards didn't want to send me one at my US address.

But I do have the SP2 pack saved to a partition in my hard drive, along with ALL the programs I've downloaded, patches, tools, and such. ;)

Yes, it is wrong. Installing an OS should not take more than half an hour.

Let me get this straight, Microsoft is frustrated because they don't have control over which other companies a third party PC manufacturer elects to do business with?

While I agree that companies like Dell put a lot of trashware on new systems, I don't think the answer is giving one company, especially Microsoft, the authority to dictate what software can or cannot be installed on a new PC.

If it's really such a big problem, then why doesn't Microsoft refuse to provide for new operating systems on machines that have other software installed, instead of seeking authority to stop someone else's software? The answer is simple really; money. If Microsoft won't make at least minimal stipulations regarding who they do business with in this regard, then why in the hell should they be given the authority to decide for other companies that which they dare would not do to themselves?

The end consumer has the ability to decide which software he will keep or won't. It's very easy to format and do a fresh OS install on a system that hasn't even been used yet. And before I hear this and that about new users not knowing how to format c: or do a win install let me say this; if you don't even know how to put a bare OS on a system then get a mac.

In any case, if "craplets" can thwart the vista launch, then I question the integrity of the OS itself. I don't recall this causing a major problem with other launches.

I can understand being frustrated with trying to make the various trash that is installed on these computers compatible with Vista so that those companies will install Vista on their new machines. I don't think M$ was commenting (at least not in that article) about actually trying to control what other companies put on their computers. I think the comment was just stating that those programs could be incompatible with Vista and that could hurt sales to those companies and that is frustrating to M$. That much is understandable.

I also don't think it will be a major issue. These companies will either sell Vista or XP on their machines and M$ gets paid either way. From what I can tell, Vista will be less compatible from XP (just by what little I've seen/heard... that may not be true), so people need to understand that before getting Vista in the first place. I know that I probably won't upgrade to Vista. At least not anytime soon.

No, it said; "the world's largest software maker is frustrated by legal shackles that prevent the company from restricting what kinds of software major computer makers install on new PCs." -------

They are frustrated because they can't restrict (they being MS). It doesn't mention anything about compatibility issues that thereby hurt the sales.

Aside from that, I don't think anyone buys a Dell for the trashware they get. They buy the latest greatest because it's 'vista' or the 'newest thing' not because of the other programs. Do you know anyone that bought a computer for Win95 from Micron because what they really wanted the Prodigy client that came with it pre-installed?

There was absolutely no mention, by flipkin or in the quoted statements at least, about incompatibility. Useless, malicious, maybe, but incompatible? Microsoft is frustrated because they can't restrict the type of software that the PC manufacturers put on new machines.

Wasn't MS in hot water for running a monopoly already? What would happen if they could dictate which software could or could not be installed on a new machine? I'm willing to bet that if they had it their way, all new trashware would hold the MS name thereby eliminating the old trashware, unless of course a hefty payment was submitted to MS.

Many new OS launches have been met with uncertainty. Every windows version (except for ME maybe) went by with little issue to be had. If the statements by the anonymous MS employee are both accurate and true, then it is quite obvious that this is nothing more than an attempt to make even more money, by being able to regulate whose software does, or does not get in. Translation; pay me to have an accessible audience.

They attempted banning pre-installation of browsers aother than IE. They were sued. That's where these legal shackles come from.

And restricting other software is different from that in what way?

It isn't. That's why said legal shackles are an issue here. Did you think I was disagreeing with you?

No, I didn't.

Did you even read the article?

That was a statement made by the writer of the article... possible to sensationalize it. Look at the actual quotes from M$ instead, such as:

"They could work fine, or they could cause huge problems," the Microsoft source said. "The problem is that we just don't know. And if someone buys a Vista PC and has a problem, they're going to blame Windows."

If you look at the writer's comment before that paragraph, it falls in with what this quote says:

The success of Microsoft's first major revision to its operating system in years could rest on whether or not the uncertified applets cause widespread malfunctions in consumer versions of Windows Vista that ship with new PCs starting Jan. 30.

See above. Almost all of the article is about compatibility. The one quote in the article that has anything to do with the "legal shackles", from the context, sounds to really be in answer to a question such as, "Do you think that Microsoft will prevent untested/uncertified software from running to prevent such compatibility problem? Or will the anti-trust lawsuit prevent you from doing anything?" ... or something along those lines. It's obviously in response to a question (they even said that), but they were careful to not show the question. It can be easy to trick someone into saying something that, out of context, sounds bad.

Well perhaps your argument is with flipkin, not me. I commented on the select quotes posted here, on these forums.

I commented about the notion that legal shackles prevent MS from restricting the software which is installed on new machines, and quite obviously nothing else.

You brought up everything that flipkin didn't, and nothing he did. Either start a new topic, or keep your personal grudge in the personal messages with me where they belong.

Read the article **that flipkin was referring to**. Anytime a thread is started (especially news) about an article and there is a link given, read it before replying or you're the one replying to the wrong thing.

Of course there is more to the story which was linked. And I admit that you give good justifications for the original post's quotes. However, it was never my intention to debate the entire issue of trashware. I was commenting on the notion, presented here, about a company controlling who a hardware distributor does business with. Honestly I really don't care about the whole issue about trashware, I just commented on the part, presented here with quotes, that I thought was an absurdity.

(the quote being an absurdity, not the post).

Then don't comment on what I clearly said was in regard to the article.

Riamus, go back to building up your contribution score, because your tag-team trolling with plantluvver gets old.

play nice.

Let's see... trolling:

In Internet terminology, a troll is a person who enters an established community such as an online discussion forum and intentionally tries to cause disruption, often in the form of posting messages that are inflammatory, insulting, or off-topic, with the intent of provoking a reaction from others.

I have been here since 2001 and am an approver. I have offered help to anyone who comes here and I do not start attacking anyone's posts for no reason. As such, there is no trolling going on from me.

On the other hand, you are new here (March 1, 2006) and the majority of your posts would fall under the category of trolling. Just the fact that the PM you sent me telling me that I should not help a person because YOU don't like that person is a very good example. And, when I told you not to ever send me such garbage again, you immediately started attacking most posts that I've written. If that isn't trolling, then there isn't a such thing.

Stop acting like a spoiled little kid and grow up. If you can't accept that I will not bow down to your wishes and stop helping someone just because you don't like that person, then you are very childish.

Grow up or go away. Stop being the troll that you are calling others.

Btw, I don't care about points. I'd do this even without getting any points at all.

I really, really wanted to hold my tongue a bit longer, but I will chime in here. One solution is Linux. Though, I still haven't purchased a laptop due to the frustration of getting Linux to run on one. While I have not verified that there is no malware embedded within my Linux OS, I do have the freedom to inspect, modify, and recompile the source code, even if this is only an option in theory. (I am much too lazy and unfocused to undertake a project like this.)

My initiation into computers was through working in an insurance company, on a mainframe during the early 80's. Although my programming skills were limited to single use programs for pricing life insurance for my own use, I often worked with programmers to modify programs to meet the needs of my department. Once, I worked on a system conversion, from a system written in assembler to a COBOL based system, and the assembler source code for one report was lost. I had to interview several clerical people to determine how the report was used. Luckily, we also had a programmer who was familiar with the base program of the original system.

It was then that I learned the value of possessing source code. Granted, as a math geek, I may tend to be a purist. (And as an insurance actuary, I learned to qualify every statement I made; ) ) However, I can imagine a nightmarish situation for a small business owner, running a business on an unsupported old accounting application, who now needs to replace the system.

Of course if I wanted to game on my PC I would use MS, but only for gaming.

Mary

Of course if I wanted to game on my PC I would use MS, but only for gaming.

And, well, that's why we're all here, isn't it? 8) The conversation over at MobyApps just isn't as lively.

All of this experience and know-how, yet you've mentioned several times that you can't figure out how to configure MS-DOS to run games?

Weren't you the one that asked if there were any other console games that were compatible with the N64?

I could be wrong, and if I am I humbly apologize, but it seems fishy to me that someone with the technical know-how to convert Assembly to COBOL, demand Linux because of open-source potentials, and have other experience in mainframe programming is too technically backwards to configure an autoexec.bat for DOS or get the concept that a game cartridge must be made for N64 to run on it.

It's really nothing personal, I'm just wondering what you're selling.

"I for one hope Microsoft can do something about this, though from the article it sounds unlikely. What can we do? Unless consumers refuse to buy PCs with Craplets the manufacturers will not change their ways."

I think this craplet thing is Micro$ofts fault. They are giving big discount to PC manufactures for not including real OS installation CD. Restore CD with preinstalled image (that only works with some computer model(s) without hacking) goes cheaper.

Without real installation media there is no way to make "clean" installation. Of course even with real installation media one can not decide what to install (I don't count hiding Media Player icon as leaving it out). But with real installation media one only gets the craplets Bill bundles.

This is how it works: First companies buy PCs with preloaded shit. Then they pay M$ more money for "clean" OS installation. So M$ is making even more money when PC manufacturers do not include real installation media.

If Micro$oft wants to try (I know many end users will not reinstall OS) fix the craplet problem, they order PC manufacturers to include real installation media with OS license. They should also fix Windows installer so that end user can select what to install. I know I am dreaming...

They sell Windows-preinstalled computers without the original media? I have absolutely never ever heard of anything like that! So when your harddisk gets wiped out you can go buy a new copy, or send it in everytime?

One of my classmates bought a laptop and she didn't get an installation CD. Instead, all the installation data was stored in a hidden partition in her laptop's hard drive.

Yes, they do that too. For example HP told me they don't deliver any media (and I told them we don't buy your computers without media). But what I meant is usually one only gets restore CD with all craplets, not real OS installation CD.

Heh. It happens all of the time from many large companies and even some smaller companies. Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. all do that. Some of those will give you a real OS installation CD if you request it, but most times they don't offer that unless you pay for the disk. Instead, they come with a Repair/Restore disk that can sometimes work, but it isn't the real OS disk and is more likely to be a problem than not.

Never buy a computer without a copy of the OS disk! Someday, you'll regret it. :)

Yep. And often their restore disks are destructive only. I have soem files locked away in the depths of my drive inaccessible thanks to a corrupt system file.