Microsoft May Have to Let Users Choose Browser

[steiner666]

i love my firefox and the many add-ons that i use... using a friends firefox, let alone a different browser altogether, feels likes wearing someone elses shoes... and in M$ case, they stink. While it's not too much of an issue to download the ~5MB installer once i finish getting windows set up, it would like to have an option to not install IE on the computer altogether... although sometimes it's nice to have another browser for troubleshooting, thing is i havent had a problem with firefox that required even trying a different browser, or if you work with HTML a lot.

Basically, it really doesnt matter to me in the end... not enough to really care. In fact this entire comment is a waste of time.

 

[erikstarcher]

I don't know why they think this will make a difference. Most people don't know there is more then one browser out there, so when given the choice of which one to use, the will say "I use windows, so I must need the Microsoft one." and install ie anyway. People will not download every choice out there just to see which one is better so this will not make any difference at all. By the way, I have FF, Chrome,Safari and IE8 intalled. Chrome and Safari suck balls. I use IE8 and don't see any reason I need to use FF.

 

[ezareth]

[citation][nom]Cryogenic[/nom]Go Go Go Europe! Make Microsoft fight for browser market share, make them innovate and perfect if they want market share. They simply have double digit worth of market share simply because they bundle their browser, not because it's better than competing browsers.I always used alternate browsers or tried them, I'm a FireFox user now, I was a Netscape 3.0 and 4.0 user, but I also used IE 4 over Netscape back in the days simply because it was better and faster at that time.EU somehow does the right thing, in order for web standards to take place over quirky implementations, there needs to be strong competition in the browser market.[/citation]

Microsoft is allowed to bundle their browser because it is part of the package need to use a computer. They are also looking at bundling anti-virus with Windows which is also allowed.

Firefox and other broswers are pretty much "aftermarket" parts for the Microsoft Windows Operating system. Anyone who wants them are free to download them to run on Microsoft's operating system and Microsoft does NOTHING to prohibit this.

There is nothing monopolistic for a company to bundle their entire software package with an operating system or any piece of software.

 

[IzzyCraft]

Why don't they sue google for taking up 70% of the search engine traffic! or for how much google can invade your pravcy etc.

 

[stradric]

[citation][nom]puddleglum[/nom]By using a download tool like, wget, ftp, scp, etc. I don't know why you think you need a web browser to do this. The same tool that gives folks the choice to download can use those protocols to get it.[/citation]

Oh yeah right. What's the URL to wget firefox? I sure as hell don't know it and I'm in IT. How the hell is a casual user going to figure that one out? You'd have to provide the links, but then why not just give them a browser?

By the way, Tom's, I would go with Firefox, then Chrome, then Opera, then IE, then Safari.

 

[cadder]

When I get a new computer the first thing I do is start up IE.... and immediately download Firefox. From then on I don't use IE unless I absolutely have to. I have full freedom to do that and having IE on the machine to start with is fine with me.

I have an old laptop with XP on it. Early on it got infected by adware from an unscrupulous hotel we visited. I worked for a long time to get that infection cleared up but parts lingered and IE would mysteriously pop open occasionally trying to show me a website. I even tried deleting IE. What did XP do but go on the web, FIND IE, download and INSTALL it! Oh well, finally it was MS's own "malicious so... tool" that helped me get completely rid of the infection. The machine still has IE and I still don't use it, and I still don't worry about it.

I think the EU is out of touch with reality, and maybe they want to generate fines for their own use.

 

[kewl munky]

[citation][nom]PraxGTI[/nom]The EU needs to smarten up. Users have the complete freedom to select their browser by simply downloading it and instlaling it.If Microsoft disabled the ability to install other browsers...sure...complain away...Need we remember how the EU screwed with Windows Vista (and now 7) by not allowing microsoft to lock the kernal. So esencially instead of us getting a PC that is not vulnerable to any really big problem virii, we get a PC that is just as vulnerable because in order for antivirus software to work you cannot lock down the kernal. This was the EU's fault that we didn't get a more secure OS.The EU needs to stop thinking about how to increase their budget and needs to start thinking about the users in this whole ordeal. The users are certainly NOT their concern. Once again a government body more concerned with lining its own pockets than protecting the consumer.If a company has a monopoly it is because they have a better product, it has nothing to do unfair business practices. You cannot survive with a crappy product even if you do have unfair business practices.This is no different than the useless move to aid auto companies to survive their own mistakes. Sure jobs would be lost...but in the end there would be innnovation and far more jobs created. Loss now...mega gain later...but no, lets have government involvement and slow down progress to a dead crawl.My rant for the day.[/citation]

Perfect explanation. The only thing Microsoft should have to allow is the removal of IE.

 

[matchboxmatt]

[citation][nom]tayb[/nom]Here. Please tell the EU that if they decide to make Microsoft deliver software for a rival company in Safari, Firefox, or Chrome then Microsoft will decide to stop selling and supporting software in Europe. Good luck businesses and governments that rely on Windows.[/citation]

So instead of losing a small amount of money, they should lose a whole market's worth of business.

That's a pretty good idea.

 

[fooldog01]

I really never have understood this. Why is an included browser such a big deal? They aren't making them remove paint, calculator, windows defender etc. I mean shouldn't they in theory make them strip the OS down to basically nothing to give the "competition" a fair playing field? It seems ridiculous.

 

[suppliesidejesus]

The whole lawsuit is kind of ridiculous. It would be less ridiculous if they were pursuant of other companies that also bundle browsers with their OSes (see: all of them), but they aren't.

And you can uninstall IE8. It's one of the features of Windows 7.

 

[Niva]

Does OSX offer users a choice of browsers on install? It would be hillarious if MS coded IE for linux and OSX then sued the cr@p out of them for not including it by default on their OS installs ahah.

 

[kittle]

I still say MS should take their OS and go home.
EU doesnt want to buy as it? .. fine - stop selling it there.

 

[doittoit]

There are still stes that I go to that do not render correctly in anything but IE. Developer's fault - maybe. IE needs to be there. I use mostly Opera, then Chrome, then IE. I really like Chrome, but opera has features that no other browser does (lets me d/l the target of multiple links just by selecting multiple and right-click download, generally knows where the "next" link is and let's you space-bar or mouse-gesture to the next page. Actually zooms everything on a page correctly. These are just my favorite features - not plug-ins which may or may not be supported by future releases. Opera, out of the box, ships as by far the most feature rich browser.

 

[crisisavatar]

Just ourageous, Microsoft business is to provide a working OS with preferably as many features as it can. Are we really punishing them for non-educated people who can't tell apart any of this browsers in the first place ?

 

[nekatreven]

[citation][nom]JMcEntegart[/nom]A lot of people don't realise there are other options out there. For ages my friend's mother was using IE ("the internet" as she called it). When I downloaded firefox for her she said she was "using a different internet now and it works better." Some of the not so tech-savvy really have no idea what's available to them.[/citation]

Ridiculously well stated. Anyone who can't understand that MS is at an advantage after reading that statement should just consume fecal matter and desist their life process.

[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]That's like buying a Ford, but insisting on a Chevy radio in it, or a Pontiac grill. Microsoft, the vendor, offers "The Product" for sale. You either buy "The Product," or you do not. The choice is entirely up to you. If you don't like some portion of "The Product," the onus is on you to investigate alternatives, or possibly pay a third party to do something about it for you.[/citation]

I think you're ignoring the fact that the vast majority of the parts that are in Fords or any other car are actually made by Delphi or Matsushita or any of the other couple hundred companies that make components in the far East; the names of which we mostly can't pronounce in the US and EU. Car companies assemble parts more than anything else. All you're really buying from them is assembly quality, aesthetics, and crash test results.

If they got their steel from steel mills THEY owned and designed all of the electronics in-house in companies THEY owned...your argument would make more sense (and depending on their corporate structure the aforementioned car company might be under investigation too).

 

[matchboxmatt]

[citation][nom]fooldog01[/nom]I really never have understood this. Why is an included browser such a big deal? They aren't making them remove paint, calculator, windows defender etc. I mean shouldn't they in theory make them strip the OS down to basically nothing to give the "competition" a fair playing field? It seems ridiculous.[/citation]

The browser you use for the internet is a much more important program than basic apps like paint and calculator. It's basically your gateway to an entire form of media, and including Internet Explorer without any choice on Windows guarantees that Microsoft is in control of a majority of PC users' internet experiences.

Whether it's small things like having the home page set to MSN automatically or having Live search on the top right on default, it largely increases their advertising power as a company while limiting the penetration of other competitors.

 

[asgallant]

Microsoft created their own "web standards" when designing IE, which differ, sometimes greatly, from established standards. By packaging IE with Windows, they obtained a large default install base, much of which was unaware of alternatives and/or uninterested in learning about or trying alternatives (along the lines of "IE works, so why should I try anything else?). With such a large install base for IE, web developers tended to code for IE, rather than established standards - which made the internet unfriendly for alternative browsers.

Thus, by packaging IE with Windows, Microsoft hurt users of alternative browsers like me (I used Netscape until AOL bought it, then Mozilla, and now Firefox). This is the only problem I have with Microsoft bundling IE with Windows. Offering users a choice might sound nice, but most users simply aren't informed enough to make a decision, and so would default to IE (some because of familiarity and others because Microsoft would presumably make it the default option). Those of us who use alternative browsers are not stopped by the absence of alternatives packaged with Windows, and few people would be curious enough to try out the alternatives. Removing IE isn't an acceptable solution either, as few people would have the know-how to obtain a browser without working in a browser (I use Firefox, and consider myself a Windows power user, but I would have a hard time obtaining Firefox without using IE or getting it off of another PC). Thus I see this as a waste of everyone's time.

 

[erloas]

Well I don't see the point. Anyone who cares what browser they use are going to download that one anyway. Anyone who doesn't know is simply going to pick the default one, or possibly all of them, and only ever use one and not even realize the others are there.

I think most users would simply complain that it takes them an extra step to get to use their computer the first time and they are going to complain about the fact that it has to download and install the browser and present them with a few more prompts in the process.

If they require MS to do this with Windows it is also only right that they require all Linux distributions and Apple's OS to do the same.

 

[freename]

Bundling a competitors browser with their OS is ridiculous, and you can be sure if Microsoft is hit by this then their lawyers will do their best to make sure other OS's have the same dramas.

Apple OS's don't include other browsers with them. Hell, my iPod Touch doesn't even have the option to use a browser other than Safari.

They could always stop including a browser with Windows. But how are people going to download their alternate browsers if there isn't one bundled with Windows to begin with?

 

[ravewulf]

Sometimes the EU can be a bunch of greedy idiots.

I have IE, I have Firefox, I have Safari (Apple's updater program that installs iTunes INSISTS on installing all Apple products). IE is my main and that isn't going to change anytime soon. Firefox I have for sites that refuse to add support for IE and as a backup browser.

 

[funkjunky]

[citation][nom]leo2kp[/nom]Um, how would anyone be able to download a different browser if IE wasn't included in the first place? I don't see a damn thing wrong with offering people out-of-the-box internet connectivity. Allowing you to remove it from your system altogether...that's something that could probably be included. And I agree that Apple should also have to follow the same rules then. I want the ability to uninstall Safari because I like IE8. /BS[/citation]

I agree with what this guy initially said. He is wrong about not being able to uninstall safari, but I'm sure someone already pointed that out. Too lazy to read past this post. This is the Be all and end all IMO.

Fyi uninstalling in a mac = delete .app file. Just thought I'd throw that out there .

 

[redgarl]

Microsoft lately got the talent to screw up almost everything they were doing best in the past, IE, MSN, Windows, WMP and even Office...

What the hell are they doing?!!! We only want fast, reliable and light applications... who need aero for God Sake!?

 

[adamovera]

[citation][nom]erloas[/nom]Well I don't see the point. Anyone who cares what browser they use are going to download that one anyway. Anyone who doesn't know is simply going to pick the default one, or possibly all of them, and only ever use one and not even realize the others are there.I think most users would simply complain that it takes them an extra step to get to use their computer the first time and they are going to complain about the fact that it has to download and install the browser and present them with a few more prompts in the process.If they require MS to do this with Windows it is also only right that they require all Linux distributions and Apple's OS to do the same.[/citation]

Agreed, I'm a Linux guy these days and not that fond of MS anymore. However, if the EU gets this done the major Linux distros with corporate backing (Novell, Red Hat, Canonical, ect) could be forced to pre-package every crappy browser out there if they hope to ever be sold pre-installed by system builders at retail outlets in the EU. It'd be hard to stop the minor distros because who would they sue? Also, many other distros operate outside the EU and nothing is actually being sold, so that'd be hard to enforce any fines there. Apple could get around this due to the fact that they offer a total end-user experience from the hardware to the software to the periphs (with air-tight license agreements that state the software is only to be used on Apple branded systems). Making Apple adhere to this would just destroy their entire business model and frankly, it'd never go down. Long story short, it might help MS's competition today, but it sets a dangerous precedent that will only come back to bite everybody in the ass later on. And IF there is coercion of system builders going on by MS, that is an entire other set of charges.

This is frivolous... and that's coming from a Linux fan.

 

[ravewulf]

Just recieved a tweet from Microsoft on this issue, see article here: http://microsoftontheissues.com/cs/blogs/mscorp/archive/2009/06/11/working-to-fulfill-our-legal-obligations-in-europe-for-windows-7.aspx

 

[LordConrad]

[citation][nom]Ezareth[/nom]There is nothing monopolistic for a company to bundle their entire software package with an operating system or any piece of software.[/citation]

Just give us the option to completely uninstall the bundled programs we don't want. Better yet, let us choose which bundled programs we want during installation.