4 ms·

This feels gross, but if the codec costs Microsoft money I don't think I inherently have a problem with it? The alternative is that the cost is built into the p

This feels gross, but if the codec costs Microsoft money I don't think I inherently have a problem with it? The alternative is that the cost is built into the price of Windows, and all Windows users have to pay for it even if they only use patent-free codecs.

sp332 4y ago
A Windows license costs $139. I get that OEMs pay less than that, but it still seems like it could be included.
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Companies never take a price hit for their customers, even if it's 1$. Shareholders would be furious. Even Apple said that all the added price of fairer labor practices in China (and the cost of anti-suicide nets on Foxconn factories), will be passed on to the consumers in the product prices.
  - minedwiz 4y ago
    I think in this case, it's a bit galling since Apple clearly does and has eaten the cost of codec licencing - HEIF/HEVC, and AAC before that.
    - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
      Unfair comparison. Unlike Microsoft, Apple doesn't sell the OS to consumers though, it sells you a whole device, or better, a whole ecosystem, who's profit margins are way higher than what Microsoft makes from selling $99/$139 Windows licenses to consumers, so of course they can afford to eat the cost.
      - xyzzy_plugh 4y ago
        Firstly, Microsoft's profit margins are significantly higher than Apple's, so this doesn't make any sense to begin with. Second -- how much do you think Microsoft makes from selling a $99/$139 license? They can most definitely, absolutely, without a doubt afford to eat the cost.
        jimbob45 4y ago
        Firstly, Microsoft's profit margins are significantly higher than Apple's, so this doesn't make any sense to begin with. Are we talking OS only or everything else?…because there are two different answers for those.
        ChuckNorris89 4y ago
        >Firstly, Microsoft's profit margins are significantly higher than Apple's I was talking about profits Microsoft exclusively makes from selling the $99/$139 Windows licenses to consumer, not the profits of Microsoft entirely. Two different vastly different things. >Second -- how much do you think Microsoft makes from selling a $99/$139 license? They can most definitely, absolutely, without a doubt afford to eat the cost. I dunno. How much does it make selling an OS at the price of two video games, while supporting it with updates for 10 years and paying devs US salaries to work on it for those 10 years? Enterprise customers are Microsoft's bread and butter as those also buy the full AD, Azure, O365, Outlook, etc. package plus pay for support, but I can't imagine they make much money selling just an OS and 10 years worth of development for only $99/$139 to consumers who don't buy anything else out of the Microsoft ecosystem. Keep in mind that Windows 95 retail box would cost consumers $209($409 in today's money), and you imagine that Microsoft is now making a huge profit on selling Windows to consumers today at 25% the original price with the much higher complexity and development costs of today's software? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the consumer $99/$139 price points are actually loosing Microsoft money, similar how consoles are doing, but Microsoft is subsidizing it from the enterprise profits, to maintain the Windows market share monopoly, otherwise consumers would just switch to Linux if they had to pay more than a hundo for Windows. In fact, you don't even have to pay for Windows (legal gray area). I activated my Windows 11 Pro copy with some CD key from Windows 7 I found online and it activated just fine. If Microsoft was actually making a profit on selling Windows licenses to consumers, they would have some serious DRM in place that would rival that of video-games, but the way I see it, it's not making them any money, which is why they don't bother enforcing even the most basic kinds of DRM, which in turn, explains to me why they penny pinch the $0.99.
kevin_nisbet 4y ago
When I first started my career, I was the tech responsible for something like this. The "crippling" of GPS lookup times and accuracy in cell phones. This was network assisted GPS locations, and each hit to the assistance server cost the carrier money (just the way it was licensed from the vendor IIRC). But RIM added a free maps app that would allow users to look up against the assistance server without having GPS in their plan (when it was a separate option). The funny part was, when I applied the change, the tests didn't seem to work, and rolled it back within an hour or two. This was overnight, so when everyone woke up, they started testing their GPS and decided they'd been blocked and made a giant stink on internet forums, and the entire project was cancelled and never re-attempted.
- legalcorrection 4y ago
  Your comment is indecipherable. It sounds like it might be interesting. Any chance you could rephrase?
whalesalad 4y ago
Meanwhile every version of macOS is completely free and does all this stuff out of the box.
- alphalima 4y ago
  I'm sure Apple csn afford it within their hardware sales margins.
- sccxy 4y ago
  How can I get free macOS for my PC?
  - nix23 4y ago
    https://github.com/myspaghetti/macos-virtualbox https://github.com/myspaghetti/macos-virtualbox
- pjmlp 4y ago
  It's included on the price difference between PC and Macs with similar specs.
- brokenmachine 4y ago
  You're talking about the most expensive version of "free" that I've ever heard of.
Kukumber 4y ago
Are you a charity? why should you support the cost? You already have to purchase a Windows license They are a trillion dollar company Apple supports it out of the box https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207022 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207022
- JohnHaugeland 4y ago
  > Apple supports it out of the box No, they don't. Apple just rides the hardware licenses, like almost all Windows machines do.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

sp332 4y ago

A Windows license costs $139. I get that OEMs pay less than that, but it still seems like it could be included.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Companies never take a price hit for their customers, even if it's 1$. Shareholders would be furious. Even Apple said that all the added price of fairer labor practices in China (and the cost of anti-suicide nets on Foxconn factories), will be passed on to the consumers in the product prices.
- minedwiz 4y ago
  I think in this case, it's a bit galling since Apple clearly does and has eaten the cost of codec licencing - HEIF/HEVC, and AAC before that.
  - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
    Unfair comparison. Unlike Microsoft, Apple doesn't sell the OS to consumers though, it sells you a whole device, or better, a whole ecosystem, who's profit margins are way higher than what Microsoft makes from selling $99/$139 Windows licenses to consumers, so of course they can afford to eat the cost.
    - xyzzy_plugh 4y ago
      Firstly, Microsoft's profit margins are significantly higher than Apple's, so this doesn't make any sense to begin with. Second -- how much do you think Microsoft makes from selling a $99/$139 license? They can most definitely, absolutely, without a doubt afford to eat the cost.
      - jimbob45 4y ago
        Firstly, Microsoft's profit margins are significantly higher than Apple's, so this doesn't make any sense to begin with. Are we talking OS only or everything else?…because there are two different answers for those.
      - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
        >Firstly, Microsoft's profit margins are significantly higher than Apple's I was talking about profits Microsoft exclusively makes from selling the $99/$139 Windows licenses to consumer, not the profits of Microsoft entirely. Two different vastly different things. >Second -- how much do you think Microsoft makes from selling a $99/$139 license? They can most definitely, absolutely, without a doubt afford to eat the cost. I dunno. How much does it make selling an OS at the price of two video games, while supporting it with updates for 10 years and paying devs US salaries to work on it for those 10 years? Enterprise customers are Microsoft's bread and butter as those also buy the full AD, Azure, O365, Outlook, etc. package plus pay for support, but I can't imagine they make much money selling just an OS and 10 years worth of development for only $99/$139 to consumers who don't buy anything else out of the Microsoft ecosystem. Keep in mind that Windows 95 retail box would cost consumers $209($409 in today's money), and you imagine that Microsoft is now making a huge profit on selling Windows to consumers today at 25% the original price with the much higher complexity and development costs of today's software? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the consumer $99/$139 price points are actually loosing Microsoft money, similar how consoles are doing, but Microsoft is subsidizing it from the enterprise profits, to maintain the Windows market share monopoly, otherwise consumers would just switch to Linux if they had to pay more than a hundo for Windows. In fact, you don't even have to pay for Windows (legal gray area). I activated my Windows 11 Pro copy with some CD key from Windows 7 I found online and it activated just fine. If Microsoft was actually making a profit on selling Windows licenses to consumers, they would have some serious DRM in place that would rival that of video-games, but the way I see it, it's not making them any money, which is why they don't bother enforcing even the most basic kinds of DRM, which in turn, explains to me why they penny pinch the $0.99.

kevin_nisbet 4y ago

When I first started my career, I was the tech responsible for something like this. The "crippling" of GPS lookup times and accuracy in cell phones. This was network assisted GPS locations, and each hit to the assistance server cost the carrier money (just the way it was licensed from the vendor IIRC). But RIM added a free maps app that would allow users to look up against the assistance server without having GPS in their plan (when it was a separate option). The funny part was, when I applied the change, the tests didn't seem to work, and rolled it back within an hour or two. This was overnight, so when everyone woke up, they started testing their GPS and decided they'd been blocked and made a giant stink on internet forums, and the entire project was cancelled and never re-attempted.

legalcorrection 4y ago
Your comment is indecipherable. It sounds like it might be interesting. Any chance you could rephrase?

whalesalad 4y ago

Meanwhile every version of macOS is completely free and does all this stuff out of the box.

alphalima 4y ago
I'm sure Apple csn afford it within their hardware sales margins.
sccxy 4y ago
How can I get free macOS for my PC?
- nix23 4y ago
  https://github.com/myspaghetti/macos-virtualbox https://github.com/myspaghetti/macos-virtualbox
pjmlp 4y ago
It's included on the price difference between PC and Macs with similar specs.
brokenmachine 4y ago
You're talking about the most expensive version of "free" that I've ever heard of.

Kukumber 4y ago

Are you a charity? why should you support the cost? You already have to purchase a Windows license They are a trillion dollar company Apple supports it out of the box https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207022 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207022

JohnHaugeland 4y ago
> Apple supports it out of the box No, they don't. Apple just rides the hardware licenses, like almost all Windows machines do.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]