Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Microsoft's Turn-off mode in IE8 not enough, says Opera.

<< < (5/7) > >>

Ehtyar:
I really don't see how many could possibly argue against Microsoft including a run-once utility with Windows that lets you choose a browser to download, install and use. And just to dispense with this crap about common controls, wininet, mshtml etc being a part of IE...why are those components a part of IE when they could exist just as well (many may argue better) without it? Not to mention, the whole Windows Update infrastructure could operate entirely independent of IE if Microsoft simply let you run the automatic update applet manually (this is only an issue in XP of course).

The simple, unfortunate fact is, none of these possibilities will ever come to pass.

Ehtyar.

app103:
Relevant to this discussion:

http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2009/03/is_version_8_th.html

Brings up some important points...

But regardless of which direction Microsoft takes -- WebKit or Gazelle -- it will still have to navigate the treacherous waters of legacy ActiveX support. And as someone who has spent some not-so-quality time developing ActiveX controls in the past, the need to maintain some sort of compatibility layer within any proposed IE replacement is a critical consideration.

For most casual users (i.e., grandma in her den surfing eBay), ActiveX was and is just another annoying RIA (rich Internet application) mechanism, one that has increasingly been supplanted by Adobe Flash or various AJAX-based mechanisms. However, for enterprise IT shops with a heavy Microsoft investment, ActiveX has long been an integral part of many in-house applications.

If Microsoft intends to pull the plug on IE after version 8, it will need to articulate a clear legacy migration strategy that allows these shops to preserve their investments in ActiveX controls and resources.
--- End quote ---


And something I had wondered about, since some of the applications I have written depend on this, as well as many that I personally use on a daily basis:

Finally, there's the matter of third-party developers using IE's rendering engine with their own applications. A good example would be a program that includes a help file in HTML format and then uses a custom form to display an embedded Web browser object to host the file. This embedded object is invariably an ActiveX container for the IE engine that's installed with Windows, so any attempt to remove IE from the OS -- or to radically change its core underpinnings -- will need to account for applications that rely on the existence of an accessible, programmable IE object model.
--- End quote ---

nosh:
Decoupling IE completely from Windows, I'm all for.
Giving Mr."Less than 1% market share" a free piggyback ride with Windows? Naah! 

Josh:
That is my biggest objection. I could care less if IE is coupled with windows. Hell, it makes my job that much easier on a reinstall so that I do not have to download a browser. People whine and whine about IE being included, but in the end, it is the easiest to use and most compatible browser out there. There is a reason the gov't uses it as it's primary platform for web applications. Hell, citrix metaframe still does not interact nicely with opera (but then again, what third party code does) and firefox is only just recently getting it to work.

But yes, as I said above, I am in full agreement with nosh. Why should Microsoft cater to Opera and give them free advertising? Opera should be forced to pay them for a spot in the, if it ever comes to be, browser selection screen.

I almost hope this movement fails because it will open up a pandoras box. What's to say that media player giants don't demand the same? Or calculator developers, or file browsers/shell replacements? Microsoft created IE as well as Windows, I see no reason they should NOT be allowed to incorporate one product into another. The end goal is ease of use for the end user, and as such, including IE makes it easier for the user to "just work". The average user does not want 200 choices when they start their machine or, god forbid, have to reinstall. Why do you think Microsoft slipstreamed the install process?

Steven Avery:
Hi Folks,

The concept of "bundling" as an anti-trust scheme has a long and dishonorable history in realms such as trying to prevent the usage of non-OEM automotive replacement parts by the car manufacturers.  The pressures take various forms, such as pressuring the dealers or manufacturers, warranty stuff, this and that.  Microsoft has been an expert in such abuse.

Now probably a 100% libertarian does not think the government should be involved in anti-trust. While I respect that view, to me it does seem to be one legitimate government function.

The simple fact is that the USA fell down on the job of preventing abusive bundling by Microsoft while Europe did a good job (some may say too aggressively).

Opera is simply using the proper forums, with bite, for trying to bring real change.  I will not fault them for using the only forum that really can change the situation.  (Even if governments and courts tend to come up with mediocre solutions.) As for their competition with Firefox and others, that is a problem for them either way, Firefox happens to be surprisingly successful with their open architecture (plug-ins and extensions) which will likely keep them way ahead of Opera.  Much like the general PC environment is way ahead of Apple, while Apple is nonetheless quite successful.  However all that is neither here nor there in the bundling equation. (My usage is Firefox #1 and Opera #2, Chrome and IE behind.)  Similarly I will not fault Chrome for chiming in .. clearly they learned a bunch about Microsoft machinations.

The really best change would be full browser and op-sys independence, where the IE browser is simply calling op-sys functions that other programs can call (or not) through the API.  An example is Eudora, which has the choice of their own viewer or the IE-viewer.  However that "viewer" should be a Windows op-sys function, called by IE or Firefox or Eudora, not an IE function.

(Eudora is an example of an excellent software product (from Qualcomm) that basically closed up development because of the bundling of the mediocre Outlook Express.)

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Queens, NY

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page