Which browser would you choose?
For the last year or so, Microsoft has been fighting claims from Europe that bundling Internet Explorer with Windows is anti-competitive. The EU argued that, because Windows has the most common operating system, it was unfair that Microsoft force all those users to use IE without first informing them of their options.
MS and the EU recently came to an agreement that said the software giant had to offer users a choice via a ballot screen with the top five browsers listed along with a brief description. Unfortunately, Opera and Firefox still found reason to complain. The two said that with Internet Explorer appearing first on the list, Microsoft still had an advantage.
Today, Microsoft is showing off the final revision of its browser ballot screen. Each European user will be presented with this screen when they try to connect to the Web for the first time:
Do you think it's fair that Microsoft should have to give Windows users a choice when it comes to browsers but Apple does not? Let us know in the comments below!
since I am under the impression those alternatives are much better...I would say: "Lett's vote !".
I don't particularly see apple objecting to using a similar method on their own Operating Systems.
To "Rab1d-BDGR"
While I don't see apple objecting to it I don't really think they should be forced to if they don't want to. Microsoft sell an Operating System, Apple sell a Package.
Apple do give people a choice of software, Anyone willing to make it can, All you have to do is download or purchase it.
OS also comes back to them selling a PACKAGE not just an OS.
And the hardware is what makes it a Mac and goes deeply into their OS compatibility.
A Mac with Non-Mac software running on another OS with Non-Mac hardware is simply not a Mac. Stop whining about Mac's, No one is making you buy one and they are certainly not going to to take away everything that makes them what they are just for you.
Does MS really just sell an OS? You could argue that they sell a package, just as Apple does. They have the majority of things you need from the get go, sure not all of the software that comes with their os is 1st class, but its definitely good enough for that majority of people who use computers. MS is just in the position its in because its the big dog, that's the only reason.
I don't think its unfair that IE comes with windows at all. I don't expect to buy a car by Lexus and expect it to be running parts from a ferrari. Ok probably a bad example as this stuff goes on all the time in car manufacturing. But you get what i'm getting at right?
Basically, i'd expect nothing less than to buy a windows OS kitted out with windows products only...
Microsoft make a product, why does anyone have the right to tell them what they can and cannot put in it? They give you something for free and there's nothing in Windows that stops you using a different browser (hello Chrome OS - I'm talking about you here!). If another browser wants to compete with IE, they need to show the average person why they would be happier using it, not complaining to the EU that their browser should be forced on people!
Anyone who wants to use a different browser will already know about it and will download and use it. Anyone who doesn't want to use a different one should be allowed to use IE without having to jump through hoops before using it for the first time. It's just creating a problem where one doesn't need to exist.
the thing that is/was bad that for years you could not buy computer without paying for Miscrosoft's software. they were forcing retailers to only sell software bundled with hardware. what if i choose to run some other OS? i don't want to pay for somethign i don't use.
if the Windows comes with browser or calculator or notepad or whatever - so what? there is a problem if OS is designed to purposely sabotage competitive products and making them look bad compared to their own version of whatever (office, web browser, anything) but if there is no trace of malicious code impeding competing products, MS is clean in my book.
the thing that drives me nuts with MS is their constant change of file formats. cavemen made some paintings that are still interpreted pretty much the same way. for some reason MS needs to manipulate/convert my addressbook contacts, resumes, source code or whatever else I use from MS every time there is newer release on the market which is about every to years. however one just need to choose alternative product such as open source version and suddenly you don't need to worry about things like this.
things are generally much better nowdays thanks to such competition. we can have windows that does not need reboot every 1/2 hour, or for display resolution schange or to restart network driver. this requires big thanks to European antithrust commission who changed pedigree of MS.
Apple do not sell their computers WITOUT their OS.
Also, Mac comes with Safari as the default browser without giving an alternative.
I think its a gross injustice that microsoft have to do this. its not like Msoft explcitly stopped you from using a diffrent browser.
but they did. way back in the browser wars MS IE killed off competition by abusing it's market share in the OS market and kept itself on computers by being vital to the systems operation. It was major components of the windowing system in the older OS's.
What we're seeing now is the fall out from those times and the backlash of every community involved in web development crying out for the circumstances that have lead us the this IE6 catatophy to never again be repeatable.
We're seeing something similar start now with the codec fight for HTML5.
MS have every right to include as many of their own products with their OS as they wish, as a package. When you buy a PC off the shelf, you are not buying an OS, you are buying a package of both hardware and software. The OEM makes the decision of what to include in this package based on what the market appears to want most.
Before we know it MS will be forced to remove Notepad, Paint, Calulator, Address Book, Minesweeper... All because they too could be anticompetetive.
MS does not force anyone to use IE, they simply provide it so the user has a browser right from the start, and can access the web without the hassle of having to find a CD/memory stick with a browser on. It does not make sense providing the user with someone elses browser when they have their own.
In this day and age, a blank OS by itself wouldn't get you very far. Some Linux distro's however do provide an application that allows you to download whatever software you want and without the need of a browser. MS doesn't have a program like this so instead it provides you with all the essential tools you need right out the box (eg. browser). Neither way is wrong, and both ways have advantages and disadvantages to the user.
I can hardly wait. I want a choice of minesweeper I can install
Great Move, Microsoft.
back in the youth of the net there WERE no browser and you had to use a FTP program to go and download one before you could get a browser and view nice pages in 16/256 websafe colors
Why is it different for other applications? It's not. Is there a competitive market for simple calculators? Is there a competitive market for notepads? There is not.