Netflix comes to Windows Media Center

"I wish one day Sky (BSB) would allow the use of a PC-based tuner to work with their system so we can use media center instead of their crappy boxes." Can you not use the PC based tuner along with the box Sky provides? At least, that's what I do with the Comcast box.

Waethorn: A little history to back up your points... Re: Operating Systems Note that Microsoft is the only company to offer a modern operating system in many, many years. Apple tried multiple times, failed multiple times and feel back on putting a shell on an OS (Unix) from the teletype days. Linux is just an implementation of that same teletype OS. SUN did multiple versions of that same teletype OS. IBM did manage to put out OS/2 with Microsoft but internal division competition kept it from being pushed to a place where it might have hurt the AS/400 or ES/9000 series of the time and so they've been abandoning modern OS work since those markets collapsed even without OS/2 hurting them. They did, however, attempt a modern OS co-developed with Apple and failed and one on their own and failed. In ones you didn't mention, NeXT put a shell on that same old Unix and failed, Be couldn't figure out whether they wanted to sell hardware or software and failed, Digital Research gave up on GEM and became a failed cloner who was resold for potential litigation value rather than technology. Re: Office Applications WordPerfect really collapsed when they bet on OS/2 rather than Windows, didn't release a Windows version until very late, produced a horrible first product and a second that although slightly better was too little, too late to save them. They ended up being sold and resold to companies with dreams of being the "Next Microsoft". They were, if not dead, a corporate zombie by 1993. Lotus was a one-trick pony. They failed with Symphony, Jazz, Modern Jazz, Manuscript, Agenda and Improv (a really excellent clone of Javelin for NeXT and Windows that they killed off) but managed to keep surviving their bad decisions and products by living on 1-2-3 until they blew the GUI versions with the strange 1-2-3G. Interestingly, where WordPerfect blew the Windows word processor market, Lotus bought Ami Pro which was Word's only real competitor in the space. They were acquired by then-collapsing IBM who had no clue what to do with the Lotus assets.

tayme and panache A few items to look up while you're trying to figure out what those "superior products" were: IBM Workplace OS AIM Alliance Taligent Pink Apple Copland Apple Gershwin

MikeGalos, Show me where ANTITRUST needs to have causes harm to the consumer. I showed the definition of it, and it had nothing to do with harm to the consumer. I showed why you are WRONG. Now you can show me why you think you are RIGHT. It seems like you can't since your whole argument so far has been, "because I'm right".

Panache I'd suggest you look up the phrase "Consumer Protection Law" along with "Anti-trust" to see about 75 years of examples. (Or ask any lawyer who ever studied anti-trust or consumer protection law)

@gorath: YMMV, but I'm happy with my Bell TV HD PVR"+". It's a DISH Network something something....92xx whatever.. It works extremely well though. I rent it from Bell, so I don't have to worry about the hard drive cacking. "Didn't Novell sue for anti competitve practices?" Actually, Novell owned Wordperfect Corporation until they sold it to Corel. They bought it up thinking they could compete. They couldn't. They did exactly as Mike said above - they bet on the wrong operating system. There were no 32-bit versions for Winodws 95 et al until much later than Office 95. In fact, the Wikipedia article even starts out with the first line in the History segment: "WordPerfect was late in coming to market with a Windows version". The rest is there. Notably, Wordperfect failed on their own merit. Microsoft just cleaned up their lost sales because they had a superior product that people actually WANTED to buy. To note: I have never seen OEM systems ship with Word preinstalled with Windows where it wasn't uninstallable. VERY infrequently do I see major OEM's offer Office software applications as full versions without charging for it separately. Maybe 1 in ever 100 computers or so....OEM's bundle what they want. If Novell couldn't offer a better OEM bundling deal, that's their problem. @mike: I agree that Lotus was a one hit sh*t. When GUI operating systems became the norm, they were already a dead horse.

"Nah..not anticompetitive at all." Actually it wasn't. Wordperfect Corporation was looking for a buyer in late 1993. Novell bought it in 1994 and sold it to Corel less than only 2 years later. 2 YEARS!! They probably figured it was a good investment at the time. It's about as good as an investment as Yahoo! is now. Speaking of which, I have some stock in GM I'd like to sell you. Customers actually PREFERRED the 1989 DOS version over the Windows version because they got familiar with the setup (there is still the odd die-hard that likes the Reveal Codes function over WYSIWYG, but most of those people are dillusional). The initial Windows versions of Wordperfect were a flop. Microsoft offered a better product that was new and different.

mikegalos likes to accuse others of personal attacks...if I really cared I would cite several examples of him attacking many on Paul's blog and other places...but really, I don't care that much. Watching mikegalos make a fool of himself is a hobby of mine. --tayme

@Waethorn - You last post is spot on...I am against litigation for success. It is one of the many downfalls of the US right now. Its exactly what Shark said before...that is what competition is all about. It's like the 10 run rule in kids baseball or the 50 point rule in kids football. Nobody learns to lose and to deal with failure...so they sue their way to success. --tayme

On a completely unrelated note: Has anybody checked out the Moblin 2.0 beta?

@ Shark... " "I wish one day Sky (BSB) would allow the use of a PC-based tuner to work with their system so we can use media center instead of their crappy boxes." Can you not use the PC based tuner along with the box Sky provides? At least, that's what I do with the Comcast box. " Well, I can connect a sky receiver to the PC's tuner via component, but I would lose the ability to record two sky channels at the same time, as the decoder is in the sky box itself. Also, by connecting in this manner, I lose the ability to watch any films from sky, as they are scrambled to any recording equipment - sure, there are hacky ways around that, but I long for a properly integrated, media center-compatible solution. Maybe one day Media center will gather enough momentum to make it worth sky's time. Well, at least I can hope!