Author Topic: IE to be removed from Windows 7 in EU (Read 19006 times)

Josh · « **on:** June 12, 2009, 10:33 AM »

Microsoft's plan to strip out its Internet Explorer (IE) browser from Windows 7 in Europe, due for sale in the fall, is designed to force the European Commission's hand as it devises an antitrust remedy to restore fair competition in the browser market, said Jon von Tetzchner, the CEO of Norwegian browser maker Opera.

"Microsoft is trying to set the remedy itself by stripping out IE," he said in a phone interview Friday.

Opera complained to the Commission about the bundling of IE in Windows in 2007. The complaint sparked an antitrust probe that resulted in formal charges of monopoly abuse in January this year.

Source

Microsoft's Statement regarding IE8 in Windows 7 in Europe

fenixproductions · « **Reply #1 on:** June 12, 2009, 11:23 AM »

Sometimes I'd really like to hear from MS mouths: "Because of EC recommendations, selling Windows in EU is not profitable so… Win7 (and others which will follow) will not be sold in EU."

Seriously, that would be the only way to wake them up. They would realize what does "crisis" really mean then.

4wd · « **Reply #2 on:** June 12, 2009, 07:51 PM »

I'd like to see them sell a version to the rest of the world that doesn't include IE, WMP or OE (Mail) - that would save me having to do it using nlite/vlite.

I'd order in one from the EU except the prices there and the postage is so ridiculously marked-up it's not worth it.

Eóin · « **Reply #3 on:** June 12, 2009, 08:01 PM »

Sometimes I'd really like to hear from MS mouths: "Because of EC recommendations, selling Windows in EU is not profitable so… Win7 (and others which will follow) will not be sold in EU."
-fenixproductions (June 12, 2009, 11:23 AM)

I'm pretty sure the EU is a bigger market for MS than USA, they couldn't dare risk pulling out. And if they want to do business here then must abide by the rules same as everyone else.

Shades · « **Reply #4 on:** June 12, 2009, 08:11 PM »

As I understand it MS should have made Windows 7 less dependent on IE and include some other browsers (FireFox, Opera, Chrome) next to the IE icons. More MS does not need to do in Win 7 (for their EU customers at least).

It's all about choice and a (more) open market in the EU mindset.

fenixproductions · « **Reply #5 on:** June 12, 2009, 08:25 PM »

As I understand it MS should have made Windows 7 less dependent on IE and include some other browsers (FireFox, Opera, Chrome) next to the IE icons. More MS does not need to do in Win 7 (for their EU customers at least).
-Shades (June 12, 2009, 08:11 PM)

I don't really think Opera will get into list because their market share might not be big enough. And what about other IE based "browsers" (i.e. Maxthon)?

It's all about choice and a (more) open market in the EU mindset.
-Shades (June 12, 2009, 08:11 PM)

Choice was never an issue. People do not like to choose from too many options. If they do, they already know about alternatives and do not use IE (as browser) at all.

This is rather just EC show of to prove what they can do. They did it once already discussing how much curved bananas should be.

I think that from Opera side it is just stupid attempt to have free advertisement within Windows or just stupid blaming other for their own failures. How could it be that their succeeded on mobile devices (no competition) but can't do anything for desktop? Their browser exist longer than Firefox and they did absolutely nothing to get better popularity.

I don't know about other users but I will definitely resign from using Opera on the day they will be shipped inside MS stuff. That will be my own small protest against idiocy.

Eóin · « **Reply #6 on:** June 12, 2009, 08:58 PM »

This is rather just EC show of to prove what they can do. They did it once already discussing how much curved bananas should be.
-fenixproductions (June 12, 2009, 08:25 PM)

I don't know why you assume such maliciousness. The EU has anti-monopoly laws to maintain competition within the market. MS broke those laws and got fined. It's not about throwing weight around.

And that banana thing was blown out of proportion. The original truth is nothing like the story reported in blogs and the media, no surprise there.

PPLandry · « **Reply #7 on:** June 12, 2009, 10:04 PM »

If I were in MS shoes, instead of pulling IE out of Windows (as it is so much part of the OS), I would just include FireFox, Opera and Chrome with Windows. It is IMHO a much more elegant solution to this issue.

mouser · « **Reply #8 on:** June 12, 2009, 10:31 PM »

This is ridiculous.

How does one get on the internet to download an alternate browser if there is no browser installed with the OS?

Instead of pulling IE out of Windows (as it is so much part of the OS), I would just include FireFox, Opera and Chrome with Windows. It is IMHO a much more elegant solution to this issue.

That's a nicer idea.

The whole anti-monopoly thing against MS seems a bit nostalgic at this stage.. Poor microsoft seems on it's last leg and not that steady.. And I have a feeling that if MS tried the hard-sell, cross-product-toolbar-installing type behavior of google, or the paranoia-level control over stuff of Apple, they would be attacked as monsters.

I'm not saying Microsoft doesn't deserve all the anti-trust litigation that it brought upon itself, i'm just saying that since these lawsuits all got started, the state of play has changed so dramatically that this is getting a bit silly now.

Let's just hope all the anti-trust lawyers are prepared to use copy-and-paste and re-use these lawsuit filings against google and apple in the next few years when the need arises.

4wd · « **Reply #9 on:** June 12, 2009, 11:50 PM »

How does one get on the internet to download an alternate browser if there is no browser installed with the OS?
-mouser (June 12, 2009, 10:31 PM)

Go to a newsagent and grab any PC magazine with a cover disc?
Include a magazine with cover disc with all Windows install discs?

They should install the fastest browser available so that people can download what they want: Off By One, Lynx or Links.

nudone · « **Reply #10 on:** June 13, 2009, 03:20 AM »

i've read elsewhere that Internet Explorer 8 will be supplied on a separate CD with every copy of the retail euro Win 7. making the situation all the more annoying and completely pointless.

also, when you think about it, MS can't provide installs or shortcuts to other browsers as there will be browsers that are neglected. these missing browser companies could then claim some kind of unfair anti-competitive blah blah. so the cycle begins all over again.

wraith808 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 13, 2009, 07:37 AM »

i've read elsewhere that Internet Explorer 8 will be supplied on a separate CD with every copy of the retail euro Win 7. making the situation all the more annoying and completely pointless.

also, when you think about it, MS can't provide installs or shortcuts to other browsers as there will be browsers that are neglected. these missing browser companies could then claim some kind of unfair anti-competitive blah blah. so the cycle begins all over again.

-nudone (June 13, 2009, 03:20 AM)

Exactly. And more elegant, sure. But who suffers if none is included? The user. and who will complain? The user. Most users really don't care- they just want to be able to get on the internet out of the box. and if they can't, you can bet that there will be a snowball effect as tech support and other charges get out of hand... this is not the end of this...

nudone · « **Reply #12 on:** June 13, 2009, 07:48 AM »

true. it will be interesting to see what the average user does about it all.

y0himba · « **Reply #13 on:** June 13, 2009, 08:02 AM »

So, you are saying is:

"No Internet Explorer for EU."

(Sorry, just had to)

f0dder · « **Reply #14 on:** June 13, 2009, 08:57 AM »

MS definitely deserves anti-trust, but the whole "remove IE" thing is ridiculous. A web browser is an essential part of an operating system these days... going back to getting software via magazine cover disks is not something that appeals to me.

I'd like to see the EC going against Apple instead - they might not have the same marketshare as MS, but their practices are much more vile.

cranioscopical · « **Reply #15 on:** June 13, 2009, 01:50 PM »

Have I got this straight, that MS plans to include a free banana with every copy of W7 sold in the EU?

fenixproductions · « **Reply #16 on:** June 13, 2009, 03:05 PM »

I don't know why you assume such maliciousness. The EU has anti-monopoly laws to maintain competition within the market. MS broke those laws and got fined. It's not about throwing weight around.
-Eóin (June 12, 2009, 08:58 PM)

I understand punishing them by pushing to not to deliver IE (same case as for WMP) but ordering to advertise competitors? This is just stupid.

And that banana thing was blown out of proportion. The original truth is nothing like the story reported in blogs and the media, no surprise there.
-Eóin (June 12, 2009, 08:58 PM)

If no one knows what is it all about… it is about money. Of course "bananas case" had different cause (IIRC something about import) but was blown up by media out of proportions. Same case with MS is happening now. I understand that there were serious anti-monopoly "things" but it got mixed because of EC and media silliness. MS is playing "who's more stupid" game now.

If I were in MS shoes, instead of pulling IE out of Windows (as it is so much part of the OS), I would just include FireFox, Opera and Chrome with Windows. It is IMHO a much more elegant solution to this issue.
-PPLandry (June 12, 2009, 10:04 PM)

Not really. Why should anybody advertise competitors for free?

I am not businessman but as far as I understand: the basic rule in marketing of "My stuff is the best!". You can never say that someone does things better because this is the first step to suicide.

I still think that pushing MS to provide browsers other than their own would be too much.

On the other hand, there is no rule which browsers should be supplied. Percentage rule? How popular your browser should be? In zillions of downloads or percentage of market share? Who will give advice? Google Analytics or maybe stat24? Does "IE" means Internet Explorer together with his offspring? If not, how do you measure Maxthon chances for getting into list? And if there is no scoring than how long the list should be to stop the world from complaining or to satisfy EC officials? 4? 10? zillions?

nosh · « **Reply #17 on:** June 13, 2009, 03:52 PM »

I think bundling IE on a separate disk would be a good solution to a fcuked up situation. Can anyone cite an instance of a corporation being compelled to promote its competition? It seems completely unfair and other than MS it's Joe user (who would given the choice, probably pay a little more to avoid additional headaches) who's at the receiving end of this farce.

rgdot · « **Reply #18 on:** June 13, 2009, 04:14 PM »

If there is to be something anti-MS domination it should be making computers loaded with alternate OSes more available at the retail point. Removing IE is pointless.
Where I am, Canada, that could have a positive effect on Apple market share but other OSes (linux based or whatever) will be nudged further onto the desktop and that is a good thing.

Lashiec · « **Reply #19 on:** June 13, 2009, 08:14 PM »

Remember this is a solution proposed by Microsoft, and thus has not been accepted by the EU, and the rest of the browsers makers involved in the case. And it would be WRONG to accept it. Not only it does not solve anything, it f**** users in the process while giving Microsoft an advantage in browser distribution with their proposed 'channels'. Seriously, how difficult is to display a window the first time the user tries to access the Internet showing all the possible alternatives (there are not so many after all)? I assume IE controls will still be bundled with Windows (otherwise, tons of apps will break), so all you have to do is set up a page and show it up there.

Still, even if you choose a middle ground to keep everyone happy, what's the point? I understand Opera's original complain, and I also understand Mozilla and Google backing it up, but this is 2009 not 199x. You only have to take a look at market share numbers all over Europe to see that IE is receiving some serious beating by Firefox in many countries, heck, even by Opera in Eastern Europe. I think fair competition has been more than restored since IE's rise to prominence in the late 90s and the subsequent lock on the market.

fenixproductions · « **Reply #20 on:** June 13, 2009, 08:34 PM »

Seriously, how difficult is to display a window the first time the user tries to access the Internet showing all the possible alternatives (there are not so many after all)?
-Lashiec (June 13, 2009, 08:14 PM)

Numbers depends on what we can consider as separate browser but for any rules there are many of them. We all know it's not hard to write such window but different thing is a problem here: how strongly officials can control someone's private business. They can demand to remove something. That's for sure but including software from other companies?

I know I am repeating the same words over and over again but I cannot simply believe that no one see it's wrong.

I've also read comments from other sites and one thing hit me: when someone gives Apple with Safari to be criticised too, there are responses which can be simplified to "Apple is not a problem because they are small. MS is big and its influence to market is disturbing. That is why it should be controlled.". And now the question is: different rules for different players? Embedding IE is wrong but it's OK for Safari because Apple is "too small"? WTF? Can it be money problem only? Do they expect bribe or what? I don't really understand such fuzzy logic.

Lashiec · « **Reply #21 on:** June 13, 2009, 08:55 PM »

They can demand to remove something. That's for sure but including software from other companies?
-fenixproductions (June 13, 2009, 08:34 PM)

Hey, OEMs litter Windows installations with tons of unrelated software

. No, but I understand your point. Actually, China is in the news these days for the requirement they put on all computers sold there to include software to ~~monitor user behaviour~~ block pr0n, although all the major computers makers are "unaware" of the issue (i.e. not commenting). And, while not related to private businesses, one of the provisions of the infamous HADOPI law in France was to apparently require installation of spy software to monitor Internet connections. That is, we know what happens when we let politicians run free.

I've also read comments from other sites and one thing hit me: when someone gives Apple with Safari to be criticised too, there are responses which can be simplified to "Apple is not a problem because they are small. MS is big and its influence to market is disturbing. That is why it should be controlled.". And now the question is: different rules for different players? Embedding IE is wrong but it's OK for Safari because Apple is "too small"? WTF? Can it be money problem only? Do they expect bribe or what? I don't really understand such fuzzy logic.

I think the response is mostly related to the unlikeness of the EU (or any other government) to accept the complaint based on its tiny market share. Although, based on Asa Dotzler frequent remarks, Mozilla wouldn't have a problem filling it. Apple is also a very peculiar case, as they're selling what it's essentially a PC as an appliance under their rules, a good example of going against them being the Psystar case. It would be equivalent to gamepad makers complaining about the proprietary wireless protocol standard XBOX 360 pads use.

fenixproductions · « **Reply #22 on:** June 13, 2009, 09:15 PM »

Hey, OEMs litter Windows installations with tons of unrelated software .
-Lashiec (June 13, 2009, 08:55 PM)

They are making it for free? Is it still MS or hardware manufacturers' fault?

I think the response is mostly related to the unlikeness of the EU (or any other government) to accept the complaint based on its tiny market share. Although, based on Asa Dotzler frequent remarks, Mozilla wouldn't have a problem filling it. Apple is also a very peculiar case, as they're selling what it's essentially a PC as an appliance under their rules, a good example of going against them being the Psystar case. It would be equivalent to gamepad makers complaining about the proprietary wireless protocol standard XBOX 360 pads use.
-Lashiec (June 13, 2009, 08:55 PM)

Hm. I think that it should either be problem for producer (MS, Apple, whatever) what to have in their products or to treat everyone in the same way, no matter how big you are. That is all.

Everyone forgot what was the main reason here: MS probably did bad things with distributors contracting. If that is true, they should be punished for that. And only for that. What is happening now seems to be the case of looking for anything just for the sake of punishment. Well, Al Capone was never sentenced for neither murder nor theft but… taxes fraud

scancode · « **Reply #23 on:** June 15, 2009, 06:02 PM »

How does one get on the internet to download an alternate browser if there is no browser installed with the OS?
-mouser (June 12, 2009, 10:31 PM)

C:\Firefox>ftp releases.mozilla.org Connected to releases.geo.mozilla.com. 220 (vsFTPd 2.0.5) User (releases.geo.mozilla.com:(none)): anonymous 331 Please specify the password. Password:[anything] 230 Login successful. ftp> cd mozilla.org/firefox/releases/3.0.11/win32/en-US/ 250 Directory successfully changed. ftp> binary 200 Switching to Binary mode. ftp> get "Firefox Setup 3.0.11.exe" 200 PORT command successful. Consider using PASV. 150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for Firefox Setup 3.0.11.exe (7545512 bytes). 226 File send OK. ftp: 7545512 bytes received in 71,30 seconds at 105,83 KB/s. ftp> quit 221 Goodbye. C:\Firefox>"Firefox Setup 3.0.11.exe"

Works for me

wraith808 · « **Reply #24 on:** June 15, 2009, 08:13 PM »

But does the average user know how to do that? I think we all know the answer is no.