juby Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 What is the reason for this? If you don't want it, why not uninstall it and load the Media Player of your choice?My favourite is MusicMatch.The most important thing is to accept all the defaults for the prog. of your choice, (you can alter them later).The later programme will overide the earlier - eg. if you tell your programme to be the default choice for playing MP3s - it will.You can be sure of one thing - Windows wil not be any cheaper without WMP.Best wishes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvw Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 You can't remove Windows Media Player, it's part of the system.XP with Media Player and without Media Player will be the same price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juby Posted December 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 It is debatable whether you can remove it or not, I know. But you can make it so ineffective that you wouldn't know it was there.Some people have the same problems with Real Player but the same comments apply. You can uninstall this but according to the BBC you have to have it in order to play their Radio Programmes.The point is to make sure you have all the settings correct for your chosen player.Merry Christmas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvw Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 I really like Media Player and use it all the time.8.41GB of music installed from my CD's.Media player 10 here by the way, and Photo Story 3 is superb....if you don't have it you're missing out :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juby Posted December 23, 2004 Author Report Share Posted December 23, 2004 Hi, I have about the same, but recorded from a lifetimes' collection of vinyl LPs.Don't get me wrong I've nothing against WMP per se and I have the latest version, but I object to BG trying to force other people out of business.I still prefer MusicMatch, don't like Real Player, love Cool Edit.Probably because I've got used to them, but you show me any other combination of programmes that can edit a CD,LP or anything else audio so precisely.Even WMP in its audacity will try and charge you $30 for a prog. to convert WMA to MP3.Musicmatch costs me $39 for updates for life and they will respond immediately to e-mails if I have a problem. (And they had the facility to convert WAV and just about everything else to MP3 and vice versa about five years ago).Regards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvw Posted December 23, 2004 Report Share Posted December 23, 2004 I object to BG trying to force other people out of business...and me. I'm no M$ lover as such....but they are good.WMP will load CD's as MP3.....but I just use my PC to play my music files...saves hunting around for CD's etc.I must look at Musicmatch...I may learn something, thanks for the info :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted December 23, 2004 Report Share Posted December 23, 2004 I cannot accept that Gates is trying to force other people out of business because he includes WMP in Windows. Why the hell shouldn't he? He is in business to make money and has succeeded very well. There is another thread running on this topic, and I am asking the same question here as in the other thread, WHY DO PEOPLE HATE SUCCESS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-pops- Posted December 23, 2004 Report Share Posted December 23, 2004 WHY DO PEOPLE HATE SUCCESS?Ask the European judiciary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted December 23, 2004 Report Share Posted December 23, 2004 WHY DO PEOPLE HATE SUCCESS?Ask the European judiciary.I think you're more suited for that -pops- ;)Not a problem I think for MS.If you think a Media player makes MS a succesful company...you're thinking wrong.I would love to see the download figures on WMP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted December 23, 2004 Report Share Posted December 23, 2004 WHY DO PEOPLE HATE SUCCESS?Ask the European judiciary.I think you're more suited for that -pops- ;)Not a problem I think for MS.If you think a Media player makes MS a succesful company...you're thinking wrong.I would love to see the download figures on WMP.No one as far as I can see has claimed that it is WMP that makes Microsoft successful. The fact remains that overall they are one of the most successful companies in the world today, and have grown from nothing in a very few years. As far as I can see they are fully entitled to include whatever programs they wish with Windows. No one complains because motor manufacturers include an engine and gearbox in a new car. Personally I don't give two hoots what the download figures are for WMP. I am happy to have it on my computer and use it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r4may Posted December 23, 2004 Report Share Posted December 23, 2004 There used to be a time when an Operating System was just that 'an Operating System' all the other applications you had to add. :( Windows is not really a true Operating System but a multi function Operating Environment which is what a lot of users prefer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarecrow Man Posted December 23, 2004 Report Share Posted December 23, 2004 There used to be a time when an Operating System was just that 'an Operating System' all the other applications you had to add. :( Windows is not really a true Operating System but a multi function Operating Environment which is what a lot of users prefer.Well put.P.S. Winamp is best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest be@vis Posted December 23, 2004 Report Share Posted December 23, 2004 There used to be a time when an Operating System was just that 'an Operating System' all the other applications you had to add. :( Windows is not really a true Operating System but a multi function Operating Environment which is what a lot of users prefer.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>That's why some of us use nLite - http://nuhi.msfn.org/ :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuzzman Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 Simple fact of the matter is this: if Microsoft provides all this software with their mainstream operating system, then people will be more apt to use it, simply because the majority of Windows users don't know any better. In fact, this conversation has ensued on my part many times:Person: What windows do you use?Me: I use LinuxP: Well, differnet people use different software, but what Windows do you use?M: I don't use Windows, I use LinuxP: Then how does your computer start?Personally this makes me sick...People aren't going to know there are Microsoft alternatives if they don't need to. This is in effect, stamping out competition. The only reason Firefox is doing so well, is because it has become mainstream. Media icons are actually telling people to use it. Besides, for those of you who actually like WMP, it will still be available as a download, just not fully coupled with Windows from the get. This will probably actually improve the security of Windows overall by making it less monolithic, and more modulated. It'd be better if they did the same with Internet Exploiter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 I don't see ANY reason at all to attempt to stop people from installing one complete system if that is what they want. I have tried alternatives and prefer Windows, with all it's warts, and it is my right to do so. In Britain we already have a NANNY state in many respects, and I for one don't need forcing to try things that I don't want. I am happy to use Windows, WMP and all the other bits and pieces that Microsoft supply. If someone else wants to use alternatives that is also THEIR choice. All this stems from the fact that starting on a level playing field, Microsoft have outstripped ALL their rivals, and now the others are crying over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuzzman Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 I don't see ANY reason at all to attempt to stop people from installing one complete system if that is what they want. I have tried alternatives and prefer Windows, with all it's warts, and it is my right to do so. In Britain we already have a NANNY state in many respects, and I for one don't need forcing to try things that I don't want. I am happy to use Windows, WMP and all the other bits and pieces that Microsoft supply. If someone else wants to use alternatives that is also THEIR choice. All this stems from the fact that starting on a level playing field, Microsoft have outstripped ALL their rivals, and now the others are crying over it.Be this as it may (or may not) be, you are an advanced computer user, and have made your choice(s) based on comparison with other clients/utilities. Someone opening a computer for the first time, not knowing anything about the internet, would never know of such utilities as Winamp, Realplayer, mplayer, etc, if WMP is by default installed on every system. Whereas, if Microsoft held it as a download, and a download only, those people might have a chance to see what's actually out there, and make up their own mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 Anyone who attempts to use a computer for the first time without some kind of instruction, could well be baffled by the choices available. Most people would in my opinion prefer in the first instance to have an all encompassing system. If they are genuinely interested in making progress then they will start to ask questions and look into alternatives as I did. Just because no one else did all the work that Microsoft has done all these years is NOT good enough reason to punish them now. Gates started from scratch, and is to be admired for what he has achieved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuzzman Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 Gates started from scratch, and is to be admired for what he has achieved.This is crap. Gates bought DOS from PC-DOS, and stole his UI from Apple and X11. The only thing he really did was create the layer in between them, and edit the UI a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 You have obviously looked more deeply into this than I have, especially if you feel free to accuse a milti naional company and its directors of theft. If Apple allowed this theft then that says little for their security. The fact remains that along with millions of others, I am happy with using Windows combined with WMP, and no amount of argument will change my view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuzzman Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 And this is perfectly fine - I just think if a debate is going to take place, it should be done with fact.Here's the real story:Originally from http://www.maxframe.comIBM had originally intended to use Digital Research's (actually, they had the somewhat pretentious name of "Intergalactic Digital Research" at the time) CP/M was then the industry standard operating system - you either ran a BASIC with disk functions, someone's proprietary OS, or CP/M. IBM then talked to a small company called Microsoft. Microsoft was a language vendor. Bill Gates and Paul Allen had written Microsoft BASIC and were selling it on punched tape or disk to early PC hobbyists, which was probably a step up from the company's original name and goal - they were Traf-O-Data before, making car counters for highway departments. Microsoft had no 8086 real operating system to sell, but quickly made a deal to license Seattle Computer Products' 86-DOS operating system, which had been written by Tim Paterson earlier in 1980 for use on that company's line of 8086, S100 bus micros. 86-DOS (also called QDOS, for Quick and Dirty Operating System) had been written as more or less a 16-bit version of CP/M, since Digital Research was showing no hurry in introducing CP/M-86. Paterson's DOS 1.0 was approximately 4000 lines of assembler source. This code was quickly polished up and presented to IBM for evaluation. IBM found itself left with Microsoft's offering of "Microsoft Disk Operating System 1.0". An agreement was reached between the two, and IBM agreed to accept 86-DOS as the main operating system for their new PC. Microsoft purchased all rights to 86-DOS in July 1981, and "IBM Personal Computer DOS 1.0" was ready for the introduction of the IBM PC in October 1981. IBM subjected the operating system to an extensive quality-assurance program, reportedly found well over 300 bugs, and decided to rewrite the programs. This is why PC-DOS is copyrighted by both IBM and Microsoft.So you see: Bill Gates has nothing to credit himself with except: 1) Co-writing MS-BASIC and 2) Being an extraordinary marketer - neither of which will I argue with Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 Fai renough I have had a history lesson. As far as I am concerned however, this does not detract from the fact that Microsoft have brought computers to millions and I am happy with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest be@vis Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 To each his own - and thank God for freedom of choice. Merry Christmas to you all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuzzman Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 Fai renough I have had a history lesson. As far as I am concerned however, this does not detract from the fact that Microsoft have brought computers to millions and I am happy with that.To each his own - and thank God for freedom of choice. Merry Christmas to you all.I cant argue with eitehr of these :)To you both: I'll drink to that.no hard feelings andsome :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted December 24, 2004 Report Share Posted December 24, 2004 Fai renough I have had a history lesson. As far as I am concerned however, this does not detract from the fact that Microsoft have brought computers to millions and I am happy with that.To each his own - and thank God for freedom of choice. Merry Christmas to you all.I cant argue with eitehr of these :)To you both: I'll drink to that.no hard feelings andsome :)Happy Christmas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.