IE Rivals Oppose Ballot-Screen Solution for EU

[WheelsOfConfusion]

[citation][nom]sot010174[/nom]Yeah. Do they realize its a MICROSOFT product?[/citation]
"Microsoft has cunningly found a way to accept the commission's suggestion of a ballot screen, but to do so in a way that will be entirely ineffective."
It seems that they do: they say that MICROSOFT has worded the questions in a way that can be confusing or threatening.

 

[eddieroolz]

This mess is starting to get out of hand.

They asked for ballot, then they refuse it, what's going to happen next?

 

[WheelsOfConfusion]

[citation][nom]precariousgray[/nom]How about Mozilla, Opera, and all those other whiney nutjob organizations make their own operating system, with which they can include their own browser, and shut the fuck up already?[/citation]
It's not that the browser is "included," it's that there was no way for people to uninstall IE from Windows (until Windows 7, which is coming out several years after this complaint was filed).
There is also the monopoly facet of this: Google, Apple, etc. do not have a monopoly on operating systems the way MS does with Windows, and according to the EU MS unfairly used that advantage with its OS marketshare to give IE an unfair advantage over competing browsers. And even though most browsers today are free (they weren't always), there is competition among them that drives things like the acceptance of existing web standards and the generation of new standards (WebGL, HTML 5 features, etc.). We can see what happened when MS had so much share of the browserspace during the IE6 years: stagnation in the browser, lax security, use of non-standard markup and abuse of proprietary web technologies. There's a reason many web pages to this day are still "IE Only" or "Best viewed in Internet Explorer," and it's mostly not because the other browsers are lacking.
So that's some of the reasoning the EU Commission used to determine that MS violated their anti-competitive laws and levy a fine against them.

 

[audioee]

MS should make a version that is just the OS. Remove everything that has third party support, ie no built in network support, no built in graphics support, no built in audio support, no built in desktop. Let the EU deal with that.

 

[danish_2828]

I think for the average user they would still pick "Internet" Explorer. If I didn't know any better I would look at Mozilla or Firefox and be like. "What the Hell is this?" Then throw it away cause it didn't have internet in the name.

 

[matchboxmatt]

The ballot is a good solution, the problem is that it's a poorly executed one. You shouldn't have to go through extra confirmation if you choose a non-IE browser, and IE shouldn't add a desktop icon if it wasn't chosen.

In any other circumstance, it would seem like competing companies are just whining, but when 90% of all computers out there are running your competitor's OS and they're giving your product the short end of the stick, then it's completely understandable to be pissed. It's basic business ethics, there's nothing to argue.

 

[bigalfantasy2004]

I wonder if this is why they only offer the Zune HD in America. Maybe MS is finally afraid of the EU.

 

[tayb]

Oh geez. More whining. Someone get my violin and some crackers I'll play a little tune for them.

 

[Sihastru]

The f***tards at Mozilla and Opera should not force me to use their browsers' integrated download manager. I want to be able to use any download manager in the world, but I want them to integrate these options in the install sequence and to make this in a way the user is not influenced in any way to select one over the other. I will spend the rest of my life trying to find one that would work for me... since it will be impossible to decide since they'll all be presented as being equals. Hopefully I would have had time to produce a son before I started off to install Opera or Firefox, so he can take my place in front of the screen when I die, so that the search for an adequate download manager may continue...

 

[dtm4trix]

This is just a joke, it was the other browser companies who requested the ballot idea in the first place and now they don't like it? So does the EU cater to these companies or what?

 

[sidran32]

There's a logic behind Microsoft's bundling their own web browser with the OS. For one, it's easy because there's no licensing to deal with. But mainly, because it would be horribly irresponsible and crippling for users to not have web access out of the box. Most computer buyers don't have a second computer to download programs with. And as the Internet is a primary medium to attain software now, most especially drivers for your system, the user HAS to have a way to access them out of the box. I know, as one who has installed Windows from scratch multiple times on multiple machines, if I did not have IE at the ready on the outset, it would have been a major annoyance, especially when I didn't have another computer or flash drive handy.

Before that, there was no incentive for Microsoft to promote a competing product. They never impeded users from downloading and installing them. But it's not their responsibility to market every browser out there. It's an all or nothing sort of thing; unless they make a deal with Microsoft, there is no reason for them to promote Firefox or Chrome. So, they have IE, it goes in.

I wish it was shown publically what "confusing and threatening messages" Microsoft shows. But, I assume it's probably something like this:
"This program is not supported by Microsoft and is provided with no guarantees. We are not responsible for any harm it may cause your computer or any incompatibilities it may have with websites you may visit."

Because Microsoft is TOTALLY out of the loop in these browser's development process, they cannot make any unsubstantiated claims. So, this is totally reasonable. To be honest, I think if I got a ballot with a wall of choices of a default browser to install, I would be all for it. I'd be interested if it comes to the USA.

And for the record, I keep Chrome as my default, but have Firefox for dev work and IE for compatibility for the rare occasion that I need it. All three I find very usable nowadays, though I prefer Chrome above the others.

 

[apache_lives]

I WANT AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE EU - I DONT LIKE THE FACT THAT IT COMES WITH EUROPE

 

[fuser]

[citation][nom]mrblonde[/nom]I think Mozilla is paid by Google when somebody uses the search from Firefox's default home page. So when somebody uses IE instead of FF, Mozilla "loses" money.[/citation]
Not quite. Google pays Mozilla $75M per year to add a google branded home page as the default when Firefox is installed. It is a flat fee and has nothing to do with # of users.
[citation]Internet Explorer was integrated into the Windows OS. You can not, not have IE on your Windows computer. You can delete all desktop icons, and links to IE... but it's there buried in the Windows folder.[/citation]
You can uninstall IE in Windows 7.

 

[togenshi]

Isn't the issue that IE is also used for Windows Update, accessing control panel, explorer, etc, etc? Therefore unable to be removed without compromising system stability?

Actually, isn't explorer virtually IE with a fancy file: protocol UI?

 

[sciencectn]

Don't they understand that there are alternatives to Windows? It's almost like they're implying that Microsoft has a complete monopoly over the OS market.

And why aren't they bitching at Apple for bundling Safari with OSX?

 

[back_by_demand]

Who cares if IE is integrated or not?

This EU ruling goes to show that if there is a component that is integrated into Windows that someone else has a freeware copy of all you have to do to get it distributed at someone elses cost and expense is cry to the EU.

They are interfering in matters that are beyond their knowledge and they are overextending their authority. This is only further confusing end users, not making things easier. They think they are acting to the letter of the law, but this is a law that they invented using the letters that they make up as they go along. They are not acting in the best interests of the users, only themselves to desperately show that they are relevant and every time I think of the EU trying to fuck over Microsoft I think of the old saying

"Cutting their nose off to spite their face"

Good luck to the writer of the alternative Solitaire program, at this rate you will get it forced into Windows 8 against my will, along with 100 million other bits of shit software that I didnt ask for or want, but the EU thinks is good for me.

Fuck the EU, fucking techno retards!

 

[cookoy]

I have IE shortcut on my desktop and quick launch toolbar but i always use Firefox. IE is there just in case i have to uninstall Firefox for whatever reason, I still have a fallback browser to use. Don't see anything wrong with that.

 

[matt87_50]

hmm, Microsoft get the final say in how any solution is executed? I wonder why that is? oh... thats right... because it's THEIR SOFTWARE!!!

 

[rdawise]

[citation][nom]goeugo[/nom]From the comments here I see that most people totally miss the point the EU is trying to make. As a result of the fact that Microsoft bundled internet explorer for years it gained such a big market share that most people don't even know other browsers exist. I am not talking about the TH visitors but the average users. Even putting a shortcut on the desktop will give MS a competitive advantage because users will choose it. Not by choice but because they don't know better.[/citation]

Let's take another example. Say you live in a town where there is a Ford dealership. Now, there are other dealerships, but people you know bought Fords (happy or otherwise). Now is it Fords job to advertise for the competition? NO!

This is crazy. It is a MS product. You want another browser, download one. These companies should spend the money to advertise instead of trying to find free advertisements.

A recent report in the Wall Street Journal quotes the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS), an industry organization whose members include Opera, Adobe Systems, IBM, Oracle, Red Hat, and Sun Microsystems, says Microsoft's proposed "ballot screen" isn’t a solution.

So will Oracle offer MS SQL db's as an alternative to theirs? I doubt it. Will IBM offer other competitor's servers? I doubt it. Will Red Hat offer different versions of Linux? I doubt it.

[citation][nom]asdfrank[/nom]They can't stop selling their product in the EU, too much money to be made it would be ridiculous. They can, however, pull out all Microsoft jobs - any development sites, packaging factories, offices, etc... Then the EU can put that in their pipes and smoke it. Their socialism is already coming home to roost, and unemployment is skyrocketing in most of the EU. What now, b*tch*s?[/citation]

I agree with this idea (I don't know where you got socialism however). MS should pull all their jobs from the EU countries. This would hurt WAY worst than not selling MS in Europe. The money the would lose from the job loses would be staggering. Hopefully MS would do this.

 

[alextheblue]

[citation][nom]ryanegeiger[/nom]First of all, I don't recall SnowLeopard giving you the option to NOT install Safari on the system, and that's not even the update engine it uses for the OS. Anyway... this is probably the most worthless arguement in history. EVERY system comes pre-loaded with software. Norton/McAfee, WildTangent... etc. etc. Windows has been designed with an integrated browser for a very long time because it's considered part of having a software operating system. Can you imagine a Blackberry without the Blackberry browser, or an iPhone without Safari? Sure you can install others, but how would you get there? MS, my advice, remove IE from the system, don't include an internet browser, and include a "free trial" disc with IE loaded on it. If the customer wants to download a different browser... uhh... through... uhh... someone else's computer... and then... uh... load that on a flash drive... then bring it back to their PC, they can do that. Offer the OEM's an 'option' to include a "Free Preloaded" version of Internet Explorer at the cost of... say... $.01 (which is exactly what the retail value of say, a free trial disc of AOL is) and give them the option to not take it. Problem solved.[/citation]
Actually, Microsoft offered to sell a version of Windows 7 in EU without Internet Explorer. Not to mention the fact that you can completely remove IE in Win7. But for the EU, that just isn't good enough. The EU instead forced them to go with a ballot solution that includes all the major competing browsers.
[citation][nom]audioee[/nom]MS should make a version that is just the OS. Remove everything that has third party support, ie no built in network support, no built in graphics support, no built in audio support, no built in desktop. Let the EU deal with that.[/citation]See above. The EU wouldn't let them drop network support and would still force them to include all the major browsers (ballot option). Not sure if they would care about them stripping out other stuff (GUI, audio support, etc), but that would be stupid. They would just kill their sales. Who the heck would buy it? That's even worse than pulling out of the market completely, which as also foolish.

You know the old saying: Damned if you do, damned if you don't. The EU is giving MS a royal raping, right through the pants, no lube.

 

[vant]

Um, how come every time I visit google.com it doesn't show me a ballot screen with Yahoo! and Bing?

When I walk into Starbucks, why don't they offer McDonalds Cafe or Tully's?

When I buy a Toyota, I'm not offered a Ford steering wheel or a Honda transmission?

I understand that MS has a monopoly, what I don't understand is punishing them for it. Last time I checked, I wasn't FORCED to buy a windows PC. Thats why I have a Mac. Are you going to force OS X to include all other browsers too? An iTunes competitor? AIM/YahooIM due to iChat? Some random calendar program?

These browser companies need to stop turning to lawyers for profit and start using their heads for innovation.

 

[WheelsOfConfusion]

[citation][nom]AlexTheBlue[/nom]Actually, Microsoft offered to sell a version of Windows 7 in EU without Internet Explorer. Not to mention the fact that you can completely remove IE in Win7. But for the EU, that just isn't good enough. The EU instead forced them to go with a ballot solution that includes all the major competing browsers.[/citation]
Actually the ballot was Microsoft's offer. The EU hasn't forced them to do anything. That's why they're still reviewing the possibility instead of already mandating it.

[citation][nom]vant[/nom]I understand that MS has a monopoly, what I don't understand is punishing them for it.[/citation]
They're not being punished just for having a monopoly. They are being fined for abusing the monopoly position of their OS to unfairly compete in the browser space.


Why do I even bother? 9/10 people who comment in these threads have no clue what they're talking about, that's why the keep saying utterly stupid shit like "FORD DOESN'T HAVE TO ADVERTISE TOYOTAS!" or "MAC BUNDLES SAFARI!" Most people don't even recognize that the issue is about monopolies otherwise they wouldn't make comparisons to complete non-monopolies and pretend their analogy was valid. A lot of people seem to conveniently forget the facts of the case ("EU FORCING MS TO USE A BALLOT!") even though this issue has been covered plenty right here at Tom's. Read the damn article: "ballot proposal!" I get depressed every time these threads come up because of the rampant illiteracy, ignorance, or failures of reading comprehension.

 

[Zagen30]

I heard an interesting reason for why the EU even let this lawsuit get filed in the first place, let alone let it continue as long as it has. I know someone who was born and raised in Romania and who keeps fairly on top of what happens in Europe. He said that the EU really doesn't like American companies dominating sectors of the European market at the expense of European companies, and punishes those American companies that do. Since MS has a virtual monopoly on the OS market in Europe, and since there are no real European OSes to speak of, the EU wants to see MS brought down a peg or three and will let anyone jerk MS's chain.

 

[changkong78]

Agree with Wheels here. Many people here are just DUMB and THICKHEADED and think that the EU just want to bash Microsoft. They don't have space in their TINY mind to understand that M$ is ABUSING it's MONOPOLY in the OS space to BLOCK other competitors in the BROWSER space.

Comparing with OSX that has NO SIGNIFICANT MARKETSHARE is STUPID.

And the 'browsers are free' comments are also DUMB. It's free to USERS, but not to THEM. Marketshare still means INCOME, through advertising and what-not.

Say it with me:

ABUSE MONOPOLY POSITION
ABUSE MONOPOLY POSITION
ABUSE MONOPOLY POSITION

 

[changkong78]

Dumb readers will rate me down.

Thank you for proving my points.