OP: Why Microsoft is Innocent with IE8

I have lived in the EU region my entire life (43 years) and have to admit that I would be a happier Windows user if the various incarnations of IE could have been completely uninstallable. That said , the EU has basically decided to single out Microsoft (because of other manufacturers of browsers bitching) and fine them for 'limiting' which browsers can be used with Windows. I have never found it hard to install another browser nor have I ever been able to completely remove IE. The EU has brought this upon themselves and Microsoft has responded in a somewhat 'childish' but understandable fashion.
Had users got involved and stated what they actually wanted rather than let regulatory bodies run blind based on competitors whining , we would have Windows (a Microsoft product) shipping with IE (another Microsoft product) in a fashion that users could choose to either install and use it , install and replace and completely remove it or, never install it in the first place.

this is oppression. Why should i have to buy an o/s with no browser? Stupid EU doesnt actually think about what the people need.

would be funny if Microsoft did just not ship seven to the EU out of spite, then claim that apple isnt being fair on the browser market for shipping mac's with safari installed.

I can see both sides of the issue here. I don't want to have to use a different PC to download firefox, however, I don't overly wnat IE on there. There's never going to be an ideal.

Does this mean software like Valve's Steam will have to look around a number of locations for a browser, or user will have to specify during installation etc?

"Reacting to antitrust concerns expressed by European regulators, Microsoft plans to offer a version in Europe that has the browser removed. Computer makers would then have the option to add the browser back in, ship another browser or ship multiple browsers, according to a confidential memo that was sent to PC makers and seen by CNET News."

http://tiny.cc/g0YGC

If you are buying the OS to install it yourself, chance are you will not use IE8 anyway. I'm see no problem in having to install Chrome or Firefox before I download driver updates, because this is something I would do anyway.

As for consumers buying computers with OS's installed by the manufacturer, I should think it would be common sense for the manufacturer to pre-install a web browser if they wish to maintain their share of the market. Having experience as a sales person I know that consumers will choose convenience every time.

Well if microsoft really was innocent they would have just given users the option of installing other browsers when installing w7, instead of being stupid and preventing any browser to be installed with it.

You know, people that use this site are not the same demographic as your average computer user, your average computer user isn't aware of anything other then IE, and that type of user will never install an OS themselves anyway they will get is per installed on there system or get someone else to install it. Is it really that much of a hassle to have a copy of the browser you want to use on a pen drive?

I think people are missing something important. The EU are in no way forcing Microsoft to remove IE from Windows 7. This is Microsofts childish reaction to the pressure on them to stop acting in an anti-competitive fashion.

In the end, this will not effect most consumers as OEMs will install a browser (probably IE anyway) before shipping the product to customers. The only people left without a browser in their Windows 7 will be people like myself, that build their own computers, who are perfectly capable of having the install files for Internet Explorer or Firefox handy.

Actually, MS offered to put a load of browssers on but the EU said no.

You can't make a statement like this without giving evidence to back up your claim, because the opposite side simply won't believe you.

Besides this decision was made by Microsoft to preempt anything the EU might say.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8096701.stm 3rd paragraph, why would the EU act that way if the decision had been made with there knowledge. Also the this website makes no mention that the EU had any involvement with the decision itself.

Besides, IE8 will be available via Windows Update so there really no moaning about it.

Microsoft was the childish one in not offering alternative browsers. I am not pleased at the outcome of the ruling, and say that Microsoft should and must ship with many browsers, rather than one, and have them all completely removable.

Instead, Microsoft chooses to cripple the Eurozone and further make the EU look like they're being unfair. It's mocking the EU government and it's frankly ridiculous.

Either way, Microsoft is still acting anti-competitively.

Toms, please, stop with this reporting. Microsoft is not innocent, and playing the "everyone else does it" card just doesn't work in the real world. This is terrible terrible reporting, and ridiculously biased.

@Clintonio:

And dare I say your reasoning is naive and somewhat simplistic: Microsoft shipping other browsers with its OS is like Coca Cola shipping a can of Pepsi with every 6-pack.

Why on earth should Microsoft have to ship competing products with its OS? It shouldn't, and as a computer user I would expect my OS to be fully internet-capable out of the box. That being said, Microsoft have been acting in an anti-competitive manner for a very, very long time.

The anti-competitive issues all started back around Windows 98-ish when IE4 became a core component of the OS - you couldn't uninstall it and so much of the budding internet connectivity all ran through the IE system. As a result, the average user had no exposure or need to expose themselves to other browser options. Microsoft, quite simply, used its position to force Internt Explorer on its user base, knowing full well that most of them were not savvy enough to entertain the notion of alternatives. We'll ignore for now the ridiculous security holes this opened up and has plagued the OS since those days.

And now as time's gone on, every OS since has had IE integrated into the OS at this fundamental level.

This is what the anti-trust case is about, but to be honest it's all gone on for so long and gotten so messy there's no simple route out here an the EU have probably gotten very blinkered.

Removing IE from the core system and having it a stand-alone application that can be installed and removed as required is a good first step, as that gives OEMs the choice to install whatever browser they want. But to be honest there's no answer other than educating the Windows user base of the existence of other browsers.

The reason, i feel, that Apple aren't getting the same treatment is that nobody's complaining about Safari - never forget that a lot of the browser manufacturer's complaints about the whole IE thing comes from the fact that IE is a bloated bag of shite that's causing more harm than good. Removing IE as it stands from the internet will be good for us all, however if the EU stick with the anti-competition stuff then they WILL have to address Safari in OSX in order to remain fair.

It's all just a huge mess to be honest.

I reckon this will make no difference whatsoever for the vast vast majority of people who are going to use windows 7.

Microsoft will simply include a link on the desktop for IE8 when you install windows 7, they are under no obligation to do the same for other browsers, which for a lot of people will make it extremely impractical to install another browser (at least without installing IE8 first).

More interestingly is seeing how windows 7 will work with IE8 stripped out - it's such an integral part of windows these days that I wouldnt be surprised to see random parts of the core OS simply not working or being unstable.

@will_chellam:

Entirely agree on the core OS front - as I said above IE has been core to the OS since Win98 and we've seen no end of grief ever since.

In the real world I think all this is going to be a non-issue. OEMs will more than likely install IE8 because it's going to be familiar to the vast majority of their user base, and is probably easiest for the layman to use. Boutique builders will give their clients the choice because they know what the crack is and purchasers of a stand-alone copy similarly know what they're doing and will have their own preferences and installs.

The big thing is going to be how Windows works without IE. We'll probably find that the core communication code is still there to power all the internet connectivity the OS will have, but there's no GUI to render content.

I think it would be fun if m/s told the EU;" Ok weve had it.. as of today micosoft will not sell any products or support any current products in the EU".
Maybe the constant bitching about M/S will stop.
If You dont like M/S..just dont buy their stuff.(but You know you still will)

Gotta love the torrents.

Good for EU to coach Microsoft on responsiblity whether their perfect or not. For MS size and potential(?) ability they are quite sloppy at writing good software anyway without years of updates. Then when they finally arrive like with XP, they start all over, ha ha ha.

Forget the compatibility responsibility tears for MS. Computerized testing of software a monkey could do and proving that is they've been to space more times than MS employees. OEM vendors also help out too.

IE has been responsible for the majority of security updates and "sneak it in" bloatware anyway.

"Home" version of anything needs to be unlawful for the fact it hasn't included factory restore disk making ability. A HP Vista home laptop blue screened after all the Vista updates. How fabulously helpful.

Now I don't update if everything is working well from the start. Just give firewall and virus control to somebody better than MS.

Basically if after so many updates you see how compromised your security was then what are you using MS for anyway? Same as, if I need a 5 year extended warranty then the product QA must suck out of the box. What am I buying it for in the first place?

Forcing Vista without abilty to switch to XP is scandalous too.

Intel, another winning above board friend of MS, ha ha ha.

Yes that 60 day free "trial" install can land MS in court with the EU.

Bravo! Bravo!

Where can I get a copy of windows 7 with no stinking IExplorer?

As far as I can make out from the BBC News item, it is Microsoft that have taken the decision to not ship IE with Win7 not the EU. However MS seem to have taken this choice to preempt the petty minded EU bureaucrats from another pathetic fine for no apparent reason.

Overall I have been following this on and off, being a UK citizen, and while I really am not keen on MS and its practises, the same could be said of Intel in that it has the market share over AMD and Freescale etc. As far as I can remember this all started about the fact that IE was integrated into the OS and there was no option to remove it. It has now got so out of hand and, as someone else said, messy as well that I can't see MS being about to get away without being fined.

The thing that really gets my goat is where does all this money that the EU gets in fines go?

Yeah, this article is pretty misinformed. The EU never dictated that Microsoft should ship an OS without a browser, or even without IE. The problem stems from back in the 9x days when Microsoft shell integrated IE into the OS, made it uninstallable, made it the default browser - regardless of what other browsers the user installed, etc. etc.

Although the EU's ruling will essentially make no difference to anyone - not to consumers, to Microsoft, to other browser developers... - I'm still glad there are some organisational bodies that at least have the will to try and stop unfair practices that harm ultimately consumers (the main reason IE has finally improved in recent years is due to Firefox's increasing market share).

We all like to bitch about MS and IE, but have you used the alternatives? I recently tried ditching Vista64 for Ubuntu 9.04 64. On the same hardware Vista was much smoother than Ubuntu, quite the opposite to what I was expecting.

As for browsers I have tied Firefox and yeah, it's okay. I've not tried Safari in a while, but in early versions my online banking didn't work so well. Ultimately they all have issues, but I don't see why MS should make it easier for anyone of them to operate. Nobody makes it easy for me or anyone else to get another job these days so why should regulators make it easy for poor products to survive? Sorry, but I can't comprehend the logic. If a product is good it will survive regardless of what any two-bit regulators do.

1. In your little metaphor here, what MS would be doing is stopping you from attempting to get another job. At least according to the Eu.

@shaunp

When you say smoother do you mean faster? Or easier to use? Or did the DVD have a smoother case? Cos if you mean faster you've done something wrong.

Let's stay objective here instead of getting into a predictable OS war. I am dismayed at the thought of not having a default browser to fall back on should the situation arise.
The so called EU is limiting my choice here as I have chosen Microsoft as my OS vendor. Why should I as an individual have to put up with their supporting of other businesses over the one I personally have chosen?
Microsoft has its unprecedented monopoly simply because they have produced something that most people are happy with.
If most people were unhappy they would look elsewhere. But now the EU is literally forcing people to look elsewhere even if its not something they ever thought to consider.
How is that in itself not anti-competitive?
I really don't get it and I consider it distinctly unbalanced that MS is being singled out for such action when there are plenty of other monopolies out there that get away with all sorts of underhand profiteering tactics. Most of which don't benefit me on a daily/hourly basis or even by the minute!
The whole thing stinks and pushes me one step closer to rejecting the EU should a referendum come our way over the next year or two.
Oh and I use Firefox as my main browser, I also have Chrome and Opera 10 installed and I would try Safari on occasion too if it didn't try and impose the OSX look and feel on me at the same time (I haven't checked 4 yet...)
IE8 is there if I need it and I like to think it always will be!

@pSynrg

I agree wholeheartedly. I think it takes the Michael somewhat that MS is being singled out. I rarely use Windows anymore but I disagree completely with the EU's ideas on what constitutes fair. Like yourself and many others the first thing I do is download an alternative. The majority of consumers will automatically use ie as it's there by default. I can't see why MS should market alternative competing browsers. That's dumb.

Rather oddly, recently I have started using Firefox with Ubuntu, IE with Vista, Safari on Mac and Chrome on an old laptop and think they are all ok. Just I prefer Firefox. Massively. And if the average consumer is made aware of the variety (or just educates themselves)they will be able to make an educated decision on their preference. If they stick with IE, that's fine. But, as has already been mentioned, why not trouble Apple with the same action. I don't remember seeing a choice when I first booted that up.

I thought I'd go and check Safari 4 out by the way. Was on the Apple home page and have a look at this (quoted straight from the site)

Fine by me but how is this not the definition of what MS is being hounded for?

I'm not surprised with what people that is out of computer business think (meaning consumers), but others are really naive here. The United States have been talking to MS since win98 release. Microsoft didn't change anything about it. Now EU finally is doing something and so many people arguing that EU is to blame.
Others are saying that linux comes with firefox, but people who use linux choose everything that is installed in their system (even smaller modules that aren't even applications)- that means that everything we install there is there for a reason and the reason could be that we don't care and choose all, but that's a choice. Linux has ways to get to internet and download applications (including browsers) without having browsers. Now MS says there will be no IE8 - that's because they still have windows update for whoever choses to have it, and guess what - majority use automatic updates installing everything by default. I'm not complaining about this but they just could do better. There could be a way of getting software without IE. Having internet Explorer in the OS is just like having norton - Once you have it, it's like a virus. This is my opinion others worship it, but those are the ones who should have it.
There are other people that argue that Apple should have the same aproach by the EU and I agree, but are we getting first who has 90% of the market or that one with 10%. In which case should the money everyone pays in taxes be used?

This entire situation is somewhat ridiculous.

The number of posts being made which haven't read the story properly or the replies shows the complete lack of understanding of the situation.

Microsoft was fined massive amounts of money for essentially refusing to sell their 'cars' with other manufacturers 'engines' in them (and yes the comparison does work as no one complained about TVR having sealed engine bays).
Microsoft has responded to this childish singling out by removing the offending item. Yes this response was equally childish but hey , when in the playground
As a previous post here said , IE8 will still be available to download easily from Windows Update.
The end effect is that the EU can't moan about IE being forced on users , users will still default to getting the easiest browser they can and that will be IE installed by Windows Update.

For 'advanced' users , we will install the browser we like best which we will have to download from a separate source.

The complaint that we will have no web access because of no IE is naive , Microsoft have said no browser not no web access. Windows will still be able to 'search for drivers' and update online , just not browse.

How about windows 7 ships without IE8 (But some super striped down page that lets you download any of the browsers and go noware else)

And for me as a European Citisen can have Europe shipping without the EU Burocrats so i can have a choice?

The inclusion of a browser would be more of an issue in my view if the main players weren't all apparently not-for-profit other than getting their brand out there. It may have been different at the outset, but preventing competition at this stage could harm progression of the browsers but it wouldn't affect too much else.

If, for example, MS was to find that another word processing application was being sold and was taking market share out of MS Word then some sort of tactic of including Word bundled within with the operating system (possibly raising the price of the bundle too) with the intention of forcing the competition out of business would be clearly an abuse of position and that's the sort of thing the EU is trying to prevent imho. It's not a great example (particularly as OpenOffice is free so not likely to be knocked out by short term price competition), but there is a purpose to anti-abuse things.

The article seems a touch one-sided

I think your artical is a little unfair to the EU authorites, they never said remove it completely, what the said was that other browsers should be offered along side it, the problem is 90% of the worlds os installs are windows installs, and lets not forget the the early versions of windows didnt have a browser at all, now I think its fair that microsoft should be able to offer a browser but not by pushing out all others, most home users dont even know how to install an alternative and nobody forced microsoft to intergrate it, mac doesnt nor does linux its just a normal program in the OS'S, but when windows 98 came along it was intergrated to the point that you could not remove it without makeing your OS unstable, this was not done out of offering a better browser it was done to wipe out the opposition which at that time was Netscape who did have a better browser, the simple solution is to offer a selection of browsers during the setup that the home user has to complete, then you get choice, instead of microsoft getting out of there pram and removeing IE out of spite, and lets not forget that microsoft is the first to complain when someone else has the monopoly like apple does with the Iphone and Ipod, Iam sure their turn will come next, I hope the EU comes down on microsoft hard for this, acting like a big baby as they are, what we need is inovation not one player doing its best to eliminate the compertition!

Everyone knows that Microsoft acts in an anti-competitive manner. So does Intel. So does any other company that is [key words:] 'allowed to get away with it'.

For that matter, so do soccer players who dive, rugby players who rake, cricket players who ball tamper. That's why we have rules and referees, because otherwise people would run amock taking advantage of others. Setting aside the current repercussions, Microsoft acted in an anti competitive way, and there needs to be some sort of action. So the EU appears to have given Microsoft some leeway, and here's what Microsoft came up with, not the EU. An expected reaction from a company known traditionally to act in an anti competitive manner. And now people are annoyed with the EU? Come on...

So for all the people complaining, including the author of the article, maybe the EU should just MAKE Microsoft package other browsers? Would that be a better option? The damage had been done when Microsoft won the first browser war with these tactics, so what can we do? Inform the ignorant? As the article points out, people on IE just don't know there's better options out there.

On a side note, I also hate the fact that I can't uninstall IE, but then I wasn't surprised about that either coming from MS. Hence the words 'browser wars'. It's just nice that from the ashes of Netscape we managed to get Firefox.

Also we can put men on the moon, surely we can have an extra screen upon startup/successfully connecting to the interent that allows us to choose which browser we want to download?