<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with oem</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/oem</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'oem' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:18:40 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:18:40 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/9779/</link>
		<description> In the midst of being indignant over the death of the BeOS, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.byte.com/documents/s=1115/byt20010824s0001/&quot; title=&apos;&quot;He Who Controls the Bootloader&quot;&apos;&gt;Scot Hacker talks about Microsoft&apos;s OEM license with hardware vendors&lt;/a&gt;. Although Microsoft claims the terms of the agreement are a &quot;trade secret,&quot; preventing it from making appearnce in the DOJ circus, apparently it prevents OEMs from installing &lt;i&gt;any&lt;/i&gt; non-Microsoft OS along side a Microsoft OS... If true, the &quot;browser integration&quot; thing&apos;s just a minor annoyance - &lt;i&gt;this&lt;/i&gt; would be monopolistic and anti-competitive... &lt;font size=&quot;-1&quot;&gt;via &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.rc3.org&quot;&gt;rc3.org&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/font&gt;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2001:site.9779</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:18:40 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>computers</category>
		<category>licenses</category>
		<category>microsoft</category>
		<category>monopoly</category>
		<category>oem</category>
		<category>technology</category>
		<dc:creator>m.polo</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title></title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/2042/</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/deleteframe.pl?story=/articles/op/xml/00/05/01/000501opfoster.xml"&gt;Microsoft fires the final bullet into it&apos;s head.&lt;/a&gt; As of April 1st, OEMs may no longer ship a CD-ROM containing a full-installable copy of Windows with the machines they build.  They can ship a &quot;recovery CD&quot;, or just a &quot;recovery partition&quot;.  So, what did you get for your $90?
&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;
You got to rent Windows until you upgraded your machine.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2000:site.2042</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jun 2000 14:34:39 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>cd</category>
		<category>cdrom</category>
		<category>microsoft</category>
		<category>oem</category>
		<category>windows</category>
		<dc:creator>baylink</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


