Windows Media Player-less WindowsXP

[daniel_dynasty]

well they arent going to call it Reduced Version. Sounds awkward like Microsoft lol

 

[diggingforgold]

I would like to have the option of removing it... but I would still want as much as possible included with Windows as I can get. Why pay for extra after-market stuff?

Here's the way I look at it.

Lets say you pay a visit to your local Ford dealership. You go in and are looking at a nice Ford Explorer. It's got a bunch of stuff standard, PLUS, the dealer is including leather seats, rear DVD, heated seats, a tow package, and a bunch of other stuff- for the same price as the stock, standard Ford Explorer.

Now you see someone come in and demand a standard Ford Explorer. This guy is going to pay the SAME price for a standard Explorer as you are paying for your suped up Explorer. But you know what- he will have to pay extra for after market parts.

Why in the world would you want to not include extra software with your OS? You still have a choice.

Going back to the "choice" thing. You can always install a second DVD player on your Ford Explorer if you so wish. It's not like that one DVD player is forcing you to only use it.

 

[Tatuya]

I do not use WMP therefore I voted no. To be quite honest, WMP is crap and always has been. Freeware players are the best out there HOWEVER they would not exist without windows media player existing because entrepeneurs would probably take the plunge and charge for all media players since a free one would not exist. I'm a man of open source so the Windows in its entirety goes against my philsophies--I'm glad to see some organizations can force Microsoft to change even if just a little, it's a step in the right direction.

 

[dark_15]

Meh... I could care less whether WMP is available or not on my Windows XP install. Either way, I'm going to need to update or patch my media player of choice. And I also need the WMV codecs to compress my videos and stuff, since every other M$ user only like Windows Media Player...

And I can only imagine how many tech support calls M$ will have to answer when the user asks, "Hey!!! Where is that movie player thingy? And it also plays and burns my ripped cd's... o wait, I shouldn't have told you that!"

 

[rabidchicken]

i could really care less i use it for video and winamp for music but could easily completely switch to winamp

 

[Mr.Guvernment]

You will be able to obtain media player though a download, however its not installed on the system as default.. the question is do you see having the choice as a good thing?

Would you feel the same if they took Explorer out of Windows... would it be nice to have choose what browser you use ?

Okay, that is good - but what if i am on a 56k modem - or worse a 28k modem, now i got to spend 2 hours downloading a media player so i can listen to my music...

I think they shoudl go the route of allowing the user to choose if they want it installed or not - and if not offer another players.

Persionally now i like WMP more then winamp since AOL owns winamp and i despise AOL.

Now Explorer - is the core shell of windows, they take that out your screwed more or less no? since u wont be able to use your computer - if you mean IE - again, i think this should be an options - BUT if they dont include IE they need to included some other browser so that you can get onto the internet - no IE - then how do i connect to the internet to download another browser ?

 

[kct2]

You will be able to obtain media player though a download, however its not installed on the system as default.. the question is do you see having the choice as a good thing?

Would you feel the same if they took Explorer out of Windows... would it be nice to have choose what browser you use ?

The fact is you already have a choice. The fact WMP is pre-installed does nothing to stop someone from installing and using another media player. Same with IE. OEMs basically can offer whatever software they want, so if they they want to offer another media player (like Dell does) as an option they can. I'm sure they could do the same with a internet browser.

I don't see how having a free program installed by default does anything to limit my choices. Windows doesn't stop non-Microsoft programs from working, and it does allow these programs to become the default player. If WMP were unable to give up its file associations, then yes, there would be a problem, but as it is I fail to see the issue.

The point is moot anyway because 3 of the top OEMs in Europe already said they have no plans of offering the stripped down version, and the 4th didn't comment. http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,119505,00.asp

 

[UnseenMenace]

Wow im really, really shocked with the way this poll is going, I really thought that people would desire Windows without media player being forced onto the user...
The current EULA for media player gives Microsoft root privilages on your system along with the ability to change what you can play as displayed below.... If you were not aware of the EULA for media player, does this information change your thoughts on the matter ??

"You agree that in order to protect the integrity of content and software protected by digital rights management ('Secure Content'), Microsoft may provide security related updates to the OS Components that will be automatically downloaded onto your computer. These security related updates may disable your ability to copy and/or play Secure Content and use other software on your computer. If we provide such a security update, we will use reasonable efforts to post notices on a web site explaining the update

 

[cornbread]

Personally, I think Windows would sale better and even appeal more to the Linux people if it was just a bare OS, without things like IE, WMP and other crap. I think people should have a choice if they want it or not.

 

[cornbread]

The fact is you already have a choice.

Not really. Yes you can install other software Like Winamp, Firefox, etc. But Windows still ships with WMP and IE installed, so I don't think that's a choice. If a person wants it, they should be able to download and install it themselves without having MS shove it down their throat. If it wasn't being forced on users, do you think MS would spend so much money like they have just to keep it on the OS?

 

[deRusett]

Wow im really, really shocked with the way this poll is going, I really thought that people would desire Windows without media player being forced onto the user...
The current EULA for media player gives Microsoft root privilages on your system along with the ability to change what you can play as displayed below.... If you were not aware of the EULA for media player, does this information change your thoughts on the matter ??

From the EULA, that is hardly root prvilages, they can Only install security updates, which MAY make some software not useable or make some media not playable. if they were indexing my hard drive, maybe I'd be ticked off, but because so many people are dishonest MS has taken steps to protect content that is being stolen, and help content creators protect there content.

So long as MS provides me with a Working Software and does not restrict any legal stuff I attempt I'll be fine, though if an OS came out that was better then windows for my needs I would jump ship in a heart beat.

My needs are
Gaming (RTS / RPG)
Office work
Programming
Web surfing
Ease of use ( installing software easy, naviagting easy setting up stuff easy )

currently nothing is out there better then windows for my needs, on the PC platform

Not really. Yes you can install other software Like Winamp, Firefox, etc. But Windows still ships with WMP and IE installed, so I don't think that's a choice. If a person wants it, they should be able to download and install it themselves without having MS shove it down their throat. If it wasn't being forced on users, do you think MS would spend so much money like they have just to keep it on the OS?

so for someone with dial up, they should have a useless OS? 99% of computers I fix use IE and WMP though I try and switch them to firefox, the majority stick to IE anyway,

I like WMP so I don't try and switch people, though I find WMP is used for Movies while WinAmp is used for Music on many PC's

 

[UnseenMenace]

From the EULA, that is hardly root prvilages, they can Only install security updates, which MAY make some software not useable or make some media not playable. if they were indexing my hard drive, maybe I'd be ticked off, but because so many people are dishonest MS has taken steps to protect content that is being stolen, and help content creators protect there content.

Considering that only someone with Administrator privilages can install applications and updates in WindowsXP how would you define the difference in what Microsoft have?... Now they hardly have guest privilages do they?

How do you assume that Microsoft protect or even discover this media ? They must in one manner or another search your system for it, is this acceptable for you?
As with regards to content or protecting others, Microsoft have only ever protected their own requirements.. example of this is that the standard Media player that shipped with XP could not ripp music to MP3 only to WMA without a patch, this had little to do with choice or support for the artist. It was about promotion of Microsofts WMA format, so to assume these actions would only be taken to protect artist royalties is nieve imho... Also how would MS define the difference between an illegally downloaded MP3 and one that has taken from a CD I purchased for my portable player.

Microsoft by the EULA have the option to update 'OS Components' as they desire, by not specifying what components it gives them a free reign to change your computer as they desire.. With this Eula should a company such as Fraunhofer Institute who own the MP3 patent rights change the licence terms of the Codec as they are considering then Microsoft have the right and ability to stop your Windows from playing all your legaly purchased MP3 files... And you find this acceptable

 

[deRusett]

How do you assume that Microsoft protect or even discover this media ? They must in one manner or another search your system for it, is this acceptable for you?

they discover the media when you try and play it, no place does it say it will delete the media it says it will become unusable

so if you can't use it in Media player use another player to play it

 

[kct2]

Not really. Yes you can install other software Like Winamp, Firefox, etc. But Windows still ships with WMP and IE installed, so I don't think that's a choice. If a person wants it, they should be able to download and install it themselves without having MS shove it down their throat. If it wasn't being forced on users, do you think MS would spend so much money like they have just to keep it on the OS?

I really don't understand this argument. Who cares if WMP or IE are installed by default? That doesn't force you to use them, limit your ability to use other media player software, or ANYTHING (within the law). I don't feel like it has been shoved down my throat, I see it as a feature of Windows, along with a long list of other features that I CHOOSE to use or not.

Microsoft included these features to provide a minimum level of functionality to a default Windows install and the fact that everyone is so upset about them just proves how good these programs actually are. You don't see anyone complaining about Windows Movie Maker. It is up to other developers to produce a product compelling enough for people to go away from the Windows defaults. The fact that largely hasn't happened in the mass-market is not Microsoft's fault. They should not be penalized for putting out a full-featured product.

Actually microsoft decided not to appeal the EU decision, because they knew it was pointless and the real effect would be nonexistent. As reported, the major OEMs don't want more versions of Windows. They spent the money to try to prove they had done nothing wrong, not save WMP, when that was an obvious impossibility they gave up.

Also, as someone else noted, and I feel needs repeating, how exactly do you plan on downloading Firefox if Windows comes standard without an Internet browser?

How do you assume that Microsoft protect or even discover this media ? They must in one manner or another search your system for it, is this acceptable for you?

All that really means is Microsoft may update WMP or Windows via a WMP update to not play certain types of files. How did you possibly take that to mean they will search your computer for media files? Also, the word 'automatically' in that quote from the EULA doesn't mean secretly.

Also Microsoft basically has to include language of that nature. They may be required by law to update their software if a DRM bill were to pass. It's a situation where Microsoft couldn't go back to the government and say, 'you know, we posted that patch that made it harder to pirate music and movies, but gee-shucks, no one downloaded it...' Microsoft and every other developer will be forced to comply.

example of this is that the standard Media player that shipped with XP could not ripp music to MP3 only to WMA without a patch, this had little to do with choice or support for the artist. It was about promotion of Microsofts WMA format, so to assume these actions would only be taken to protect artist royalties is nieve imho..

If someone wanted to rip an MP3 they had the CHOICE to download a MP3 ripper. Why is this so hard to understand? As much as you might not like it, Microsoft can put whatever features they want into their software, and this crap of you, the US government, or the EU trying to tell them what to do with their software is absolute crap. If they want to make WMP only rip WMA then that's all it should do. Who cares about the reason, but OF COURSE they want to promote their own technology, what is wrong with that and why does that bother you?

With this Eula should a company such as Fraunhofer Institute who own the MP3 patent rights change the licence terms of the Codec as they are considering then Microsoft have the right and ability to stop your Windows from playing all your legaly purchased MP3 files... And you find this acceptable

Honestly, yes I do. Would I be happy about it, hell no. But, you miss one thing, if the IP owner changes their license terms then Microsoft has the legal obligation to make sure their software is in compliance. Now you are complaining that Microsoft has the power to protect the IP rights of a 3rd party? I thought you said Microsoft only does things in their own interest. Now I'm confused.

 

[UnseenMenace]

Also, as someone else noted, and I feel needs repeating, how exactly do you plan on downloading Firefox if Windows comes standard without an Internet browser?

Windows 95 came without internet explorer installed and yet I managed to get that on the Internet because I has a choice to use IE or Netscape that came on CD's free from my ISP... its about choice

All that really means is Microsoft may update WMP or Windows via a WMP update to not play certain types of files. How did you possibly take that to mean they will search your computer for media files? Also, the word 'automatically' in that quote from the EULA doesn't mean secretly.

I never assumed that they would search your hard disk, only that the EULA grants them permission to "protect the integrity of content" without having to actually identify what they consider content... I understand that this will be restricted by changing the ability to use or view the content !!

If the application installs changes to the operating system 'automatically' I take that as meaning its not asking for permission to do so, or if you actually want them... thus taking choice from the user, nothing more

Also Microsoft basically has to include language of that nature. They may be required by law to update their software if a DRM bill were to pass. It's a situation where Microsoft couldn't go back to the government and say, 'you know, we posted that patch that made it harder to pirate music and movies, but gee-shucks, no one downloaded it...' Microsoft and every other developer will be forced to comply.

If someone wanted to rip an MP3 they had the CHOICE to download a MP3 ripper. Why is this so hard to understand? As much as you might not like it, Microsoft can put whatever features they want into their software, and this crap of you, the US government, or the EU trying to tell them what to do with their software is absolute crap. If they want to make WMP only rip WMA then that's all it should do. Who cares about the reason, but OF COURSE they want to promote their own technology, what is wrong with that and why does that bother you?.

I do not care if Microsoft put their products in Windows, it really does not bother me although I would however like the choice to use other products and remove Microsoft products without having to hack the OS.... If Microsoft built the best products nobody would look for alternatives, this is simply why Mozilla is doing so well.
If you currently uninstall media player or explorer it just deletes links to it from the shell, it still lays dorment on your hard disk.

Honestly, yes I do. Would I be happy about it, hell no. But, you miss one thing, if the IP owner changes their license terms then Microsoft has the legal obligation to make sure their software is in compliance. Now you are complaining that Microsoft has the power to protect the IP rights of a 3rd party? I thought you said Microsoft only does things in their own interest. Now I'm confused.

I have no problem with Microsoft changing there applications in an manner they desire, what I object to is them changing mine without telling me how and being forced to accept that update...If the age of legaly driving gets raised the government would not take the licences of people who have allready passed the test but are below that age... Is it so hard to inform me of what changes are involved and ASK me if I also find it acceptable ?

Why are you against a choice ?

 

[deRusett]

Why are you against a choice ?

Not sure if this is directed at me as well. so I feel I need to respond to it any way.

I am not against choice the poll question is

Do you Want WMP-Less Windows XP

and my answer is NO, do I want to be able to remove WMP if I so wish? Yes, do I think WMP should be installed default with Windows YES, should removing it be easy YES,

WMP, WMM, IE, Windows Messenger, should all be as easy to remove as going to Add remove Programs Uninstall.

OR during installation you can do a Custom install allowing you to remove things and disable services before you are even finnished the install

 

[kct2]

Why are you against a choice ?

I'm trying to say that you already have a choice. Why do you see the existence of WMP or IE on your hard drive as oppressive?

I have no problem with Microsoft changing there applications in an manner they desire, what I object to is them changing mine without telling me how and being forced to accept that update

You have a false sense of software ownership. You don't own the software; you only own a license for its use. The software and OS installed on your computer are not your property (unless you wrote it) and your permission is not needed to make changes* as long as those changes don't interfere with the license agreement. Also the EULA says efforts will be made to inform users of changes, but it may not be possible for you to have a choice of installing the a specific update as the changes being made may be mandated by law or be part of a larger update you already consented to.

* That being said, as far as I know, Microsoft has never pushed updates to Windows clients, and I don't think the functionality exists as it would be a serious security risk. All updates have to be requested by the client system. So these updates you worry so much about could not be installed truly automatically. However, if you were to request updates to your WMP software, any included updates to Windows that affect secured content (the ONLY thing that passage from the EULA applies to) could be made automatically without further user interaction (it won't ask you seperately if you want to update OS files). So at some point in the process you must agree to the installation of updates, even if that permission is only implyed by you clicking the 'update' button in WMP.

 

[9mmCensor]

I dont really care. I dont use it, and it doesn't bother me. Winamp pwns

 

[speed bump]

I like using WMP for everything except ripping MP3s. Of course I am only using something like version 8 but it works fine and compared to using winamp is much more reliable and less bloated(I never thought I could say that about anything Microsoft made until I tried winamp). My opinion is when installing windows yoube given a choice whether or not to install WMP but you should still allow it to be there if someone want's it.

 

[cornbread]

should removing it be easy YES

WMP, WMM, IE, Windows Messenger, should all be as easy to remove as going to Add remove Programs Uninstall.

OR during installation you can do a Custom install allowing you to remove things and disable services before you are even finnished the install

But it's not that easy, that's what makes people mad...or at least me mad, I want choice, that's all. Im fine if they want to put their products on the disc, but let people choose to install them or not. Like UM stated, you can remove some of these apps, but you have to hack Windows in order to do it, it shouldn't be like that. Even after hacking you still have pieces left in the shell and god knows where else.