OP: Why Microsoft is Innocent with IE8

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]SAL-e[/nom]Mr. Tuan Nguyen How much Microsoft's Market Development Fund (MDF) money you will get with this article?This is one of the most dishonest article at TH. EU Commission wants MS not to bundle the IE with windows, which is very different from pre-installing it. Most people my not see the difference, but you know better then that.EU Commission has not ruled anything yet. This was MS decision to not pre-install the browser. By default I do not like when government is sticking their finger in to private business, but after this dirty campaign by MS I will not be opposition any more for the EU commission to slap MS with new fine.[/citation]

What's with the MDF comment? Just because I write something supporting one company means I get paid? That is such an old attack at the media. Please, get a new one.

You clearly have no history in following this long standing, multi-year case with Microsoft and the EU in regards to the browser space. The EU has changed its stance several times. First they wanted Microsoft to remove the browser completely. Then they wanted Windows to have the setup option for a browser. Then now they're examining having a choice of browsers. Why do you think they got to this point today? Because people complained about not having the ability to browse. The EU has tweaked its stance on several occasions.

Let's say this ends up in a choice of browsers at startup. What do you think will happen?

The majority of people don't even know about other browsers. The Joe-Average. Like one commenter pointed out, many don't even know about Firefox, Chrome, Opera. The people who will pick another browser other than IE are the ones like you and others here. The ones that KNOW. And the ones that KNOW already use something else!

So what market share will this fix, fix? It will fix NOTHING, because IE will still be highlighted as the default browser in the list. And since Joe-Average-I-Use-My-PC-for-Email-and-Chat won't know any difference, what do you think he'll pick?

This EU browser nonsense, will fix absolutely nothing.

Great that you pointed out that you think I get paid by Microsoft. Especially when most of what I've only written here from time to time are Mac news.

Get a clue. Don't come across all hostile and expect me not to refute you.
 
[citation][nom]weedy2[/nom]Lol, really? Then ask someone who knows SOMETHING about OS X.Removing Safari is like 2 clicks (Applications->Safari) and "delete" button away!You really are pretending to know something when you don't.BTW, it's not possible to register here using either Firefox of Safari on a Mac, please do fix that.[/citation]

That's after you install OS X.
Please, get your facts straight .
I said "I can't recall where the OS X install lets me remove Safari."
 
Oh, your point is that OS X install should let you remove Safari, so there is no browser when you finish it and you can't even download your browser of choice?

What a logical option, isn't it?:)

Sorry tuan, but you just don't seem to be someone who deserves to have his articles posted on a popular expert site like this - you don't bother to check your facts, reply only to the weakest argument and use flawed logic to "prove your point" - all signs of someone who doesn't want to be objective and see "both sides of the coin".
 
[citation][nom]minor[/nom]so there is no browser when you finish it and you can't even download your browser of choice?What a logical option, isn't it?[/citation]

You deserve a facepalm, but if I gave myself one one for everyone in this thread who deserved one I'd break my nose.
 
[citation][nom]minor[/nom]Oh, your point is that OS X install should let you remove Safari, so there is no browser when you finish it and you can't even download your browser of choice?What a logical option, isn't it?Sorry tuan, but you just don't seem to be someone who deserves to have his articles posted on a popular expert site like this - you don't bother to check your facts, reply only to the weakest argument and use flawed logic to "prove your point" - all signs of someone who doesn't want to be objective and see "both sides of the coin".[/citation]

Right, and you read the EU suggestion providing a list of browsers, and Microsoft suggesting that even with IE removed they will allow a function to re-download it.

My point was that all OSes should be treated fairly, and the EU is just trying to find a way to do something that ends up inconveniencing the average computer user.

You took my response out of context of the original point I made in the article. So I think you need to look at both sides of your own coin.
 
Right, and your article is about how all OSes should be treated fairly not how "EU is going over the top" and supposedly pushing MS to remove IE8. :)

You still fail to answer the real argument.
 
For those thumbing down every comment that sides with Microsoft just think of it this way. The only solutions to this "problem" is either Microsoft stops offering IE with windows leaving windows without any internet browser or they package it with competitor browsers as well.

While the second option may sound good it would create huge problems. Microsoft doesn't have the right to package the competitors programs with windows and would have to obtain permission to do such. The competitors would no doubt wouldn't wish to do such for free. So now Microsoft would have to pay them assuming they even can come to a agreement. This would lead to higher prices to make up for the profit loss at the consumers expense. So in the end it costs you money.

Also lets not forget the companies wouldn't be forced to make such a deal with Microsoft and could just refuse to strike any deals with them. This would leave Microsoft stuck as the internet browser monopoly even if they didn't wish to be. Leading to massive fines and lawsuits.

Don't let your personal opinions of Microsoft cloud your judgment.
 
[citation][nom]gah23[/nom]Right, and your article is about how all OSes should be treated fairly not how "EU is going over the top" and supposedly pushing MS to remove IE8. You still fail to answer the real argument.[/citation]

Hahaha oh man people like you are a joke! the argument is in the article, there should be a browser included that i can use as soon as i log into my OS after an install. I want to use my machine right away, without having to do _one_more_thing_.
 
Author didn't even care to read EU verdict. EU wanted for microsoft to give user choice of browser at the installation. The removal of any browser is only twisted interpretation of the verdict by microsoft. And it shows how much microsoft cares about users. So whole article is beside the real point.
 
[citation][nom]minor[/nom]Oh, your point is that OS X install should let you remove Safari, so there is no browser when you finish it and you can't even download your browser of choice?What a logical option, isn't it?Sorry tuan, but you just don't seem to be someone who deserves to have his articles posted on a popular expert site like this - you don't bother to check your facts, reply only to the weakest argument and use flawed logic to "prove your point" - all signs of someone who doesn't want to be objective and see "both sides of the coin".[/citation]

I think you should shut your mouth and just leave, for thou art talking out of thy arse.
 
1. Only MS Windows with %85 market share is in a monopoly position. You cannot apply the same anti-trust intervention against OSX and Linux etc.

2. The EU wanted MS to offer a list of browsers upon installation, but MS didn't want to play ball and instead pulled IE. Counting on exactly this kind of uninformed backlash against the EU demonstrated by the OP and most of the comments, when it was MS's decision, not the EU's decision per se to remove IE.

3. The Windows 7 E edition (with no IE) is only available as a Retail edition. OEM install disks are allowed to include any browsers they wish, along with the rest of crap that are common on OEM installations, and they will definitely choose to include at least one browser (most likeley IE).

4. There are many ways you can install a browser after an install from a Retail Windows 7 E disk. Since you are able to do an installation yourself, you should be competent enough to do any of the following to get a browser after install: You can install any browser through a setup.exe from a cd, removable drive, or network drive. You can install IE through the MS Update service. You can use the command line ftp.exe included in Windows to download a setup.exe.

EU's move is justified, it cannot apply to anyone else than MS, MS is choosing to play foul, and yet there is no need to panic.
 
[citation][nom]Arcadia[/nom]1. Only MS Windows with %85 market share is in a monopoly position. You cannot apply the same anti-trust intervention against OSX and Linux etc.[/quote][/citation]

Why not? If OS X is treating its platform like a sacred shrine for which only Jobs can develop for, then yes, that's monopolistic action towards that particular platform. It applies. EU is just not doing that, because of some mysterious reason.

2. The EU wanted MS to offer a list of browsers upon installation, but MS didn't want to play ball and instead pulled IE. Counting on exactly this kind of uninformed backlash against the EU demonstrated by the OP and most of the comments, when it was MS's decision, not the EU's decision per se to remove IE.
Click to expand...

Read Tuan's post. EU changed its opinion several times throughout this whole saga, and who knows how many more times it will change its stance. MS has every right to do whatever to its product, and refuse such unreasonable offers. Removing IE8 from Windows 7 was the farthest MS was willing to go, so if EU doesn't like it, then deal with it.

3. The Windows 7 E edition (with no IE) is only available as a Retail edition. OEM install disks are allowed to include any browsers they wish, along with the rest of crap that are common on OEM installations, and they will definitely choose to include at least one browser (most likeley IE).
Click to expand...

But that is not Microsoft's fault, and it's outside of their liability. What OEMs do is OEM's fault, and EU should look into the OEMs as such. To blame MS for OEMs putting IE default is like blaming the road for the crash when you've been drunk and speeding with a Ferarri. If no road, then accident wouldn't have happened. But that's not a logical way to argue.

4. There are many ways you can install a browser after an install from a Retail Windows 7 E disk. Since you are able to do an installation yourself, you should be competent enough to do any of the following to get a browser after install: You can install any browser through a setup.exe from a cd, removable drive, or network drive. You can install IE through the MS Update service. You can use the command line ftp.exe included in Windows to download a setup.exe. EU's move is justified, it cannot apply to anyone else than MS, MS is choosing to play foul, and yet there is no need to panic.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with a simple visit to www.mozilla.org to get Firefox? What difference would it make if there was a screen to choose from? None. It would just give us even more bloat when we don't need any more.
 
[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]What's with the MDF comment? Just because I write something supporting one company means I get paid? That is such an old attack at the media. Please, get a new one.[/citation]
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-intel-cpu,7837.html
From your article "Intel Inflates CPU Prices says AMD. We Investigate"
Several years ago, I was the business development manager at a value added reseller (VAR). My company at the time, specialized in customized services for the enterprise space. This meant we helped large firms deal with consolidation, network infrastructure design, deployment and management. Within this scope, we also supplied the necessary hardware and software.

One of our best partners at the time, was Hewlett-Packard. While we had our own marketing budget, HP made sure that we would receive a lot of money every month to spend on marketing if we sold more HP products. This was wholly legal. They're called marketing development funds, or MDFs. Many large companies offer this, and while it may differ in name from company to company, the intent is the same.

Consequently, we ended up pushing more HP products than say, IBM products. HP wasn't paying us money to avoid using other vendors' products, but with a lot of cash sitting there for us to use, it made sense to try to accumulate that money instead of dipping into our own pockets. MDFs are not the same as rebates. With rebates, we received lower prices for certain products if we sold enough of other products. If we sold over 1000 HP multi-function printers (MFPs) for example, we would receive rebates on HP server products.
Click to expand...

I never done this in my career and I am in IT business since 1995. I have following trends like you since then.

[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]Get a clue. Don't come across all hostile and expect me not to refute you.[/citation]

You can refute, but you are the one that comes out as hypocrite.
 
[citation][nom]Arcadia[/nom]1. Only MS Windows with %85 market share is in a monopoly position. You cannot apply the same anti-trust intervention against OSX and Linux etc.2. The EU wanted MS to offer a list of browsers upon installation, but MS didn't want to play ball and instead pulled IE. Counting on exactly this kind of uninformed backlash against the EU demonstrated by the OP and most of the comments, when it was MS's decision, not the EU's decision per se to remove IE.3. The Windows 7 E edition (with no IE) is only available as a Retail edition. OEM install disks are allowed to include any browsers they wish, along with the rest of crap that are common on OEM installations, and they will definitely choose to include at least one browser (most likeley IE). 4. There are many ways you can install a browser after an install from a Retail Windows 7 E disk. Since you are able to do an installation yourself, you should be competent enough to do any of the following to get a browser after install: You can install any browser through a setup.exe from a cd, removable drive, or network drive. You can install IE through the MS Update service. You can use the command line ftp.exe included in Windows to download a setup.exe. EU's move is justified, it cannot apply to anyone else than MS, MS is choosing to play foul, and yet there is no need to panic.[/citation]

Alright, let's break down each of your points shall we?

1. Fair. Like I said in the article, I understand the need for fair competition, but removing the browser is NOT the most brilliant way to do it. Like I explained in the comments, the AVERAGE JOE, doesn't even know of other browsers out there. A lot of people, are not computer savvy. They will use whatever is given. If you remove it, and put it in at the time of the installation, they won't even know. Why? It is likely that someone ELSE installed the OS for them. This move only confuses the vast majority of users. Again, I am not talking of people like yourself who know what to do.

2. The EU just fined Intel $1.4 B. Do you think Microsoft wants to take that chance? It's about the money Microsoft may risk if it bundles IE.

"The European Commission can confirm that it has sent a Statement of Objections (SO) to Microsoft on 15th January 2009. The SO outlines the Commission's preliminary view that Microsoft's tying of its web browser Internet Explorer to its dominant client PC operating system Windows infringes the EC Treaty rules on abuse of a dominant position (Article 82)."--Jonathan Todd, European Commission.

Right because bundling my software with my software is just wrong.

Then the EU goes on to say:

"We never suggested that they have to sell Windows without Internet Explorer. We suggested that they might have to give the possibility to customers to chose between different browsers."

Nice way to backtrack on the previous stance because of consumer complaints to the EU.

3. No argument here.

4. Let's break down the scenarios shall we:

A. EU "suggests" Microsoft make a list of installable browsers at the time of setup.

Too bad the majority of computer users (not savvy PC users) don't know of other browser. In fact, IE is just a feature that they use that's like any other feature of the PC for them. The DVD drive, the Start button, the On switch. For those users, there is no difference. And why does Microsoft now have to bundle OTHER browsers.

B. Make IE downloadable using Windows Update.

Great. See A. And then we're back to IE again. Microsoft making Chrome, Safari, Firefox, through it's own Windows Update? Don't think so. Those are competitor products. Microsoft has the right not to bundle competing software.

You mentioned I am competent enough to do the install so I should be able to grab a browser through other means? Correct. What about my parents who aren't as computer savvy? What about some friends who don't use their PC for anything other than YouTube, Facebook, And Twitter? YouTwitFace? What are THOSE people going to do? Open a command console and ftp their way to Firefox? Right.

C. Include IE setup on the install disc but not install it? See the people I mention in A and B. And oh, we're still back to IE.

D. "You can install IE through the MS Update service"... Great! So what if i don't perform Windows Update? What if I want to get a browser RIGHT away as soon as I am on my desktop? Oh, grab IE through MS Update...

The EU has some idealistic intentions, to "even" the playing field. The browser, is not that way. Instead, it should examine more deep business models that might be aloof.

/ Tuan
 
[citation][nom]SAL-e[/nom]http://www.tomshardware.com/news/a [...] ,7837.htmlFrom your article "Intel Inflates CPU Prices says AMD. We Investigate"I never done this in my career and I am in IT business since 1995. I have following trends like you since then. You can refute, but you are the one that comes out as hypocrite.[/citation]

I said the company I worked for, did this. I didn't say I condoned it. I included that as an example to show that this is a common occurrence with business people in the IT industry and big companies. I also pointed out that the LAW currently considers this LEGAL.

Remind me again how that's being hypocritical?
 
"Let us be reminded that a long time ago, IE was the arm-pit of browsers, and Netscape was king. What happened there? What occurred was that Microsoft came up with a better and more convenient solution for end users. Period."

I think you should think a bit more before writing similar things.
IE was the worst browser at those times and it is the worst still today: it doesn't adhere to W3C standard, it doesn't support the DOM like specified mote than 10 (ten) years ago, and many other drawbacks, so don't write "it's better"; it's different, but not better.

Simply it is embedded in the OS, causing vulnerabilities, crashes and many other problems.
Linux and Mac OS also ship with a browser, but IT ISN'T EMBEDDED in the OS, that's the difference.

The EU NEVER told M$ not to bundle IE with Windows, it simply asked that the browser wasn't embedded in the OS.
If M$ decided not to include the browser at all it's all an M$ choice, EU aked that the user has the choice to install it or not.
 
[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]Really? I can't recall where the OS X install lets me remove Safari.[/citation]

FYI: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1442 also I've installed 10.5.4 and it lets me do the same thing on an Apple machine or my Acer laptop (yes in the hackintosh way for the laptop)

Also since this, as SAL-E, Arcadia and other - marked posters replayed should not point the finger at the Comission for something that MS has done. To use a simple multiple browser option or just to have that ability wouldn't have cost them s**t.
And my final point, after that I will only post on topics that don't involve politics, is that since this is an European issue, and was already posted by Jane earlier, I find it stupid to get your panties up in the air over a matter that doesn't affect the American market. That's why I found your attitude misappropriate, to say the least, over this subject.
 
[citation][nom]tuannguyen[/nom]I said the company I worked for, did this. I didn't say I condoned it. I included that as an example to show that this is a common occurrence with business people in the IT industry and big companies. I also pointed out that the LAW currently considers this LEGAL. Remind me again how that's being hypocritical?[/citation]
You was a business development manager so you was the one setting the business practices in this company. So if you agree with this kind of business practices be a man and admit that you have no morals. If you disagree with that kind of policy be a man an name the company. It is very simple choice. Do not use double standards.
Definitions of hypocrite: "a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives"
 
[citation][nom]SpadeM[/nom]FYI: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1442 also I've installed 10.5.4 and it lets me do the same thing on an Apple machine or my Acer laptop (yes in the hackintosh way for the laptop)Also since this, as SAL-E, Arcadia and other - marked posters replayed should not point the finger at the Comission for something that MS has done. To use a simple multiple browser option or just to have that ability wouldn't have cost them s**t.And my final point, after that I will only post on topics that don't involve politics, is that since this is an European issue, and was already posted by Jane earlier, I find it stupid to get your panties up in the air over a matter that doesn't affect the American market. That's why I found your attitude misappropriate, to say the least, over this subject.[/citation]

That article is old and applies to Tiger. You can't actually remove Safari during the installation, only after.

Notice the different sections of that article say:

"Mac OS X 10.4 offers these customization options when started from the Install disc (after clicking the Customize button before installation starts):"

No option here to remove Safari.

But AFTER you install OSX, then you can use the Options Installer to remove Safari.

"More custom reinstallation options with Mac OS X 10.4
Want to reinstall a part of Mac OS X 10.4 after it's already installed?"
 
[citation][nom]SAL-e[/nom]You was a business development manager so you was the one setting the business practices in this company. So if you agree with this kind of business practices be a man and admit that you have no morals. If you disagree with that kind of policy be a man an name the company. It is very simple choice. Do not use double standards.Definitions of hypocrite: "a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives"[/citation]

I was responsible for SPENDING the money HP gave us for marketing. I didn't setup the MDF program between HP and my employer--that was done by much higher ups. I also did some minor website coding. I was in no position or authority to make any decisions over MDFs, except told how I should spend the money by the CEO.

Besides, regardless of whether or not I disagreed with it, I was no position to make a scene. And you don't just walk from your employment because you disagree with something.

You're making a whole lot of assumptions based on my example and my title to say that I was the decision maker.
 
Tuan: I think most of your concerns are well intended but rest on a scenario that is very unlikely to happen in real life.
How many computer-illiterate people who would be unable to install a browser on their own are actually buying Retail OS disks off the shelf and coming home to do an install themselves?
The "Average Joe" that your argument depends on uses what came with his computer, calls their computers-savvy friend when something goes wrong, or at best runs the OEM recovery / OS install disk. The Windows 7 E edition will not affect Average Joe.
On the other hand, the modestly knowledgeable PC user (like you and me), if he has no desire at all to use IE now has a choice to have a Windows installation without IE. I see that as a Good Thing (R).

Btw, while I agree that IE around 4.0 did offer a better solution than Netscape's at the time, the reason IE wiped out Netscape at the time was due to bundling IE with the OS (since Win98 IIRC) rather than technical superiority. The same reason why FF1 came nowhere near wiping out IE6 in usage share despite being clearly (I think you will agree) superior to IE. IE "competes" primarily through bundling, entrenchment, OEM deals, and other anti-competitive methods, and only secondarily through technical merits.

/Arcadia
 
[citation][nom]SAL-e[/nom]You was a business development manager so you was the one setting the business practices in this company. So if you agree with this kind of business practices be a man and admit that you have no morals. If you disagree with that kind of policy be a man an name the company. It is very simple choice. Do not use double standards.Definitions of hypocrite: "a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives"[/citation]

grammar fail much? last I checked the CEO or VP or other C-level made these decisions.
 
Did you ever heard of wget? Its a single-executable, tiny (in kb) very flexible command-line program for downloading things from the web. Attaching it coupled with a few web addresses to other web browsers installation packages on the internet is not a problem.
You dont need IE to install Firefox.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom