Thank you EU Regulators, you have broken Windows 7
Posted on 12th Jun 2009 at 13:49 by Tim Smalley with 102 comments
It looks like the European Commission and Opera have got their way and Windows 7 will now ship without a browser installed in Europe.
It's fair to say that Windows 7 is now broken - Microsoft has said that its decision to ship Windows 7 without a browser installed means that it's no longer possible to upgrade from a previous version of Windows while keeping all of your settings, including your browser of choice. Instead, the European version (even the upgrade version) will require a clean install.
It's like a bad joke. It just isn't funny and is actually offensive. That the Commission think this is a good idea shows how far out of touch it is with reality in this instance.
Microsoft will still bundle Internet Explorer with Windows 7 - it just won't install it for you. Instead, it'll be on a separate disc, meaning that consumers who buy the OS at retail have to jump through an additional hoop to get onto the Internet to download their browser of choice.
Retail sales don't make up the majority of Microsoft's sales though - the lions' share of Windows licenses are shipped with new PCs and in that instance it's going to be down to the PC manufacturer to decide which browser (or browsers) to bundle with their machines. I would be surprised if many of the big OEMs move away from Internet Explorer - so what have the EU (and Opera) achieved?
In effect, all that they have achieved is to break Windows 7. The upgrade process can now no longer be described as that and anyone who would naturally install a different browser anyway now has to jump through completely unnecessary hoops.
Of course, Microsoft could include every browser under the sun in Windows 7 by default, but that means unnecessary clutter. Even Firefox execs admit that there's no good way to do that. Microsoft could introduce a polling screen that allows the user to choose their browser during the first Windows boot, but even that is unlikely to make Opera happy because it would only be saved from being bottom of an alphabetical list by the presence of Safari.
So, EU Regulators and Opera, are you happy now that your work is done?
It's fair to say that Windows 7 is now broken - Microsoft has said that its decision to ship Windows 7 without a browser installed means that it's no longer possible to upgrade from a previous version of Windows while keeping all of your settings, including your browser of choice. Instead, the European version (even the upgrade version) will require a clean install.
It's like a bad joke. It just isn't funny and is actually offensive. That the Commission think this is a good idea shows how far out of touch it is with reality in this instance.
Microsoft will still bundle Internet Explorer with Windows 7 - it just won't install it for you. Instead, it'll be on a separate disc, meaning that consumers who buy the OS at retail have to jump through an additional hoop to get onto the Internet to download their browser of choice.
Retail sales don't make up the majority of Microsoft's sales though - the lions' share of Windows licenses are shipped with new PCs and in that instance it's going to be down to the PC manufacturer to decide which browser (or browsers) to bundle with their machines. I would be surprised if many of the big OEMs move away from Internet Explorer - so what have the EU (and Opera) achieved?
In effect, all that they have achieved is to break Windows 7. The upgrade process can now no longer be described as that and anyone who would naturally install a different browser anyway now has to jump through completely unnecessary hoops.
Of course, Microsoft could include every browser under the sun in Windows 7 by default, but that means unnecessary clutter. Even Firefox execs admit that there's no good way to do that. Microsoft could introduce a polling screen that allows the user to choose their browser during the first Windows boot, but even that is unlikely to make Opera happy because it would only be saved from being bottom of an alphabetical list by the presence of Safari.
So, EU Regulators and Opera, are you happy now that your work is done?
102 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyWell, I see it as better time spent than maybe developing weapons of mass destruction wouldn't you agree? But if you'd rather we focus on other issues than corporate monopolies , I'm sure we can discuss it over a Big Mac and A Coke while we smoke a Marlboro in our Designer Levi's with our Nikes on, huh?
Anyway, if this "trend" continues, soon Microsoft will have no other choice but to ship only the kernel.
p.s. Does Apple ship Macs with any other browser than Safari?
Edit: Thats right iTunes doesn't work well in the EU so nvm.
I hope it really pisses off the EU commision too :)
What a load of bloody rubbish the whole IE antitrust issue is. It is patently obvious that Microsoft should be allowed to include whatever software they like with windows. Every other OS developer does! If people really have an issue with being given free software then there is something wrong with them.
Well done EU! You've managed to reduce consumer choice! Brilliant!
I'm glad my taxes are being put to such good use. The people persuing these anti-trust cases need to be set on fire and left to burn, as far as I'm conerned. They do nothing good or worthwhile in this world. They are without worth as human beings.
what about Apple's host of programes that comes with OSX? what about Xcode vs Visual studio?
I agree here. I could see a case if Microsoft were intentionally preventing you from installing another browser and/or breaking an additional browswer but as I far as I could tell they arn't. This ruling can only be bad for consumers (mainly because both Microsoft and the commission are acting like Ronaldo after his hair has been messed up.... but I digress).
On the other hand, its only a freaking browser and no-one forces you to use it. For most people this is just a hassle (will it change IE's market share very much??) and it could make life difficult for developers who can no longer rely 100% on Windows as a web-capable platform.
Though i don't see how the removal of IE can be conisderd breaking the up grade path, it does however help with the security by not having a web facing browser directly tied into the OS.
They used to come with internet explorer. However, one can argue that with some 10% of the PC industry Apple does not hold a monopoly of the platform.
But, looking at things the other way, you could equally argue that Apple holds a browser monopoly on OS X...
Usually when I do a fresh install when it is done, I use Internet Explorer to go and to the Mozilla website to download and install Firefox, but if there isnt a browser installed how do I get the latest release of firefox from the web?? Some kind of Application Store or something?
Silly EU....
Linux has the option to use wget to grab files via HTTP/HTTPS/FTP/etc
It will come on a separate CD in the Windows 7 box. Stupid, ridiculous, pointless, etc.
user:anonymous
pass:anythinguwant
cd "/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/3.0.11/win32/en-US"
binary
get "Firefox Setup 3.0.11.exe"
There you have it, how to get another browser without a browser.
Haha so true..
Can somebody who knows more about these things than I do explain why having a particular web browser on your OS allows you to migrate documents and settings, but not having it does not - because frankly I cannot see the connection between the two.
at the end of the day, they are going to let oems decide wether or not to install a browser, including ie.
i for one think the anti trust rulings ae nothing but a pain in the arse for consumers, if the 3rd party browser makers, or any other sofware for that matter, want beter market share, they should provide a USP (something all businesses need in order to survive)(unique selling point for tose that don't know)
users will find software they like/want to use, or has the features the user requires.
Also I don't know about you all but old Government websites and the likes only code to IE and everyone has to visit one sometime. If you have Firefox you have to addon a IE tab plugin to view such sites. For people that want IE taken out probably have difficult times just knowing how to install the browser much less customize it for such compatibility problems.
I guess this will increase income for self employed PC repair guys, and the the Best Buy Geek Squad. 10% increase in revenue with problems like "I can't view some sites.... Can you fix my PC?,...... I think it has a virus."
Why on earth though would they be expected to bundle a competitors software with their product? Wouldn't bundling all the other browser options cost a massive amount of money in licensing fees?
I was just thinking this actually, kind of ironic that the EU does not want IE to be included with windows when a fair few goverment websites can only be viewed through IE (ignoring IETAB and similar for the moment, as they shouldn't be needed if the websites were coded to standards and I doubt most [non-techie] people would know what IETAB is)...
Ahh, so they illegally bundle and FTP utility with their operating system? Looks like anti-competitive behavior to me! :)
Now that's getting petty... oh, wait a minute. ;)
Effectively, will a EU CD-key work on a US version of windows?
- embedding Internet Explorer into Windows to the extent that it could not be removed without third party tools. Combined with IE's sloppy security, this gave rise to the spyware/malware epidemic that Windows users have had to tolerate ever since.
- "investing" $150 million in Apple in 1997 provided it made IE the default browser on new Macs.
- threatening OEMs who shipped Netscape on their PCs with withdrawal of their Windows licence (see Netscape: A History for more on this).
- providing incentives to ISPs to ship IE instead of Netscape (most notably AOL, who received an icon on the Windows 95 desktop in exchange).
Microsoft did not have to do what it has done because of the EU ruling - it has instead tried to provide as awkward an option as possible for users in an attempt to sidestep the EU's objections and to avoid providing any leeway to companies or groups it regards as competitors. Anyone seeking to blame the EU for this is simply falling for MS' PR.The EUs Statement of Objection raises similar points that the US District Court of Columbia did in its Findings of Fact: Microsoft's Response to the Browser Threat. Microsoft's behaviour, past and present, should be clearly unethical even to those totally new to the computer and software industry and if anything, regulators on both sides of the Atlantic have been too slow in responding effectively.
Those who try to compare Linux distributions (which do include far more applications) to Windows are also missing the point. It is possible to remove any application you don't like and install something else, and no distribution has a monopoly in the Linux world. On Windows, Microsoft is the only (legal) game in town and they have made it is difficult as possible to remove their applications (Outlook Express, MSN Messenger, etc). IE itself cannot be removed without separate software (e.g. IEradicator or XPLite).
As for "how do you download a browser" - well aside from the options above, you can just install one from CD. Microsoft have stated their intention to provide one for IE and it wasn't all that long ago that ISP's posted CDs containing all the software you needed to connect (which included all the correct phone settings for dialup access).
What's up with this? Oh our silly womenfolk wont be able to cope? I think bursar is right but it's gonna be awkward for everyone, men and women.
We're gonna se I.E discs in the box but not installed and we might even start seeing 5 Euro copies of firefox on the shelves if the public consciousness gets the idea that you need a separate browser.
Indeed, especially considering browsers are free.. how is it really uncompetitive if the products are all free...? If it was price jacking and stuff, then OK, I can understand, but the damn things are free, easy to download, and it's not like Windows goes "OMG DON'T INSTALL FIREFOX!"
Apple does hold a large monopoly over OSX, they bundle all their crap with it, including iLife when you buy a new Mac, not counting Quicktime Pro, Safari, XCode, etc etc etc.
Why? So you want Windows, without Windows components..? Just go on a Linux distro then
Windows Vista/7 have their own Update utility.
I like MS's decision, maybe it'll make the EU realize how retarded they're being, or maybe MS should have just revised it's launch plans and decided Win7 wasn't coming to the European market and see how the EU like that.
What's the point of an OS if all you get is an empty shell with a simple file browser? Doesn't that effectively totally defeat the point of an OS? You buy an OS, you're sposed to be able to do simple/moderate productivity work right out of the box..
Meh.. F the European Union gov :(
Why not just offer a pick list on installation with the other browsers to be installed in addition to IE8 with a very clear warning that they are not MS supported?
This is either MS being bloody-minded or trying to play it ultra safe and goofing up big time.
you do know there is literally hundreds of browsers out there, sure there a few top ones but still to be fair they would ALL need to be listed lol, I guess if it was some kind of RSS list and then you select which one and it goes online and downloads it but people would need to be able to have access first.
I'd immagine though that only the main players are being given any consideration here.
They could even have a 'remove IE8 after 3rd party install' checkbox to further appease the EU.
Ha speaking of choice, I'm not sure if it's still the case but for a very long time the iTunes installer (for windows) has ignored whether or not you check "install quicktime" and installed it anyway!
Just see what would happen to there share price if they failed to launch in the only other market which BUYs its software. The EU is at least as big as the US so any large company wanting to make any money has to play ball. Tough at the top.
Most versions of windows provide virtually no functionality out the box you need to add software to make it do any thing.
I just hope it doesn't lead on from here. What constitutes a core part of an OS and what's a seperate program? Strip out Windows firewall next? How about notepad/wordpad, image viewer, CD/DVD burning or, God forbid, solitaire?
bah
Not true, you have Windows Media Player, Wordpad, Movie Maker, Sound recorder, etc etc. It's enough to do basic tasks.
I think Windows Explorer needs to go.. :p
Well, there are plenty of file browsers out there that are far better than windows explorer. They aren't being used by most simply because windows includes one that most people are happy enough with. A bit like IE then.
I'd probably use something other than windows explorer if I could map it to win+e, monopoly on both file browsers AND windows key shortcuts!
But at that point, if you keep replacing everything that is given by MS as part of Windows.. then what's the point of getting Windows..?
At the same time, it shows that MS really don't box you into using just their stuff, try removing Finder from OSX.. You more or less have the freedom to do w/e the hell you want with Windows, you just have to do it yourself, MS just packages what they made for Windows.
It's like buying a car, you pick the model, the year, the trim, the options, and if you want later you ca buy aftermarket parts, replace the engine, etc etc.
This is why its ridiculous.
I'd like to see as many features as possible included in the OS, I'm completely happy with just having the ability to remove them.
If MS included eg an image editor with windows that meant I didn't have to install something else, good for them.
I'm just bewildered how anyone can believe that MS shouldn't have the right to include whatever the hell it likes with its own OS. If you have the choice to uninstall it and use an alternative, what's the problem?
one more time: bah!
Now they start stripping it down.
Nice for us who know what to do. Really bad for people like my mom who doesn't have a clue about computers in general, don't even think about installing things.
Hands up for the EU and their short-sighted-ness! ... :|
Like others have said, where is apples slice having to ship without safari in OSX?
As far as I can tell the EU have not told MS to do anything yet (infact they are still asking around the other developers what they would like done).
This is a leaked memo about what they WANT to do (as dasterdly as it is). When it aint checking the bend of your bannana, the EU aint all retarded you know. :P
Mmm... They already did it for WMP so yea..
My 0.2 pesos.
How about letting Microsoft bundle all the crap they want to, but give joe user the ability to remove what ever he wants. Synaptic does it sweetly, add and remove programs and core options. All though it would be a good idea to hide core opttions behind an "advanced" tickbox and a disclaimer that says "Fiddle with this, you can fubar the system, Microsoft takes no responsibility if you break the OS by removing core facilities". It's not like there is a non viable option for everything Microsoft has to offer.
Hell. I'd give an arm and a leg for the easy customization that Linux distro's have. What I want from Windows is a stable core to build on. Let me decide
whether or not I need Media Player, IE8, notepad, Windows Explorer and so forth. If I need the machine for gaming there is no way I want all the bloat on it anyways. Similar for HTPC's.
Not that I really care about the issue (not being a Windows user and all), but just the existence of IE executable puts you at risk, as, for example, 99% of Firefox exploits work by calling iexplore.exe, most backdoors and trojans use IE .dll files and various IE routines built into the system. IE modules are the cause of 90% of all Windows security holes, mostly because it grew too deep into the system (more than half of explorer libraries are shared with IE).
I think that stripping things off the Windows is actually good for it. I mean, who with the right mind uses IE, WMP or trusts the built-in "firewall"? Removing the unnecessary bloat is only good, especially given the fact that Windows tends to slow down with every installed app (thanks to the centralized configuration database) and the WMP alone has thousands of registry keys and hundreds of files while being completely useless.
The main power of Windows is the huge amount of third party software, so limiting yourself to just what comes built-in defeats the whole idea.
What if someone without any knowledge buys a PC, turns it on and he can't go online because there just is no browser?
Or he can't watch a video of his son's birth because there is no media player?
The average user just needs it to work straight out the box. That's why Apple sells so much to brainless brand zombies: They just turn it on and everything works. Until you look behind the glossy cover that is. Don't get me wrong, OSX is a great OS but it's far from being perfect.
Do you attempt to drive a car without knowing what's that big wheel in front of your seat for? Brainless zombies have their Apple that works like a taxi - you just get inside and it does the rest for you. If you want to drive by yourself you have to do some learning.
And besides, my mother uses Debian (her own choice) and is fluent with apt-get and all the basics. It's just a matter of will to learn something instead of being a brainless ignorant.
The average user DOESN'T care to learn.
Oh, and congratulations on having a mother that knows her Debian. ;)
in fact in insist that all operating systems henceforth be supplied in a kernel-only installation disc.
the EU has got this oh so very completely and utterly wrong.
They should continue going after Intel and preventing Larrabee from launching as that would give Intel even more of a gpu monopoly.
Some further analysis of this courtesy of the Register:
Behind Microsoft's IE-free, Windows-for-Europe ploy
It is an example of the kind of empty, sensationalist journalism I'd expect to find on far lesser sites. Had the entry contained a single fact out with the content of a no doubt deliberately leaked memo I would give it some credibility, had the entry contained a single historical note it would at least serve to place Microsoft's behaviour in context.
As it stands this entry risks portraying Tim Smalley as a gullible fool and calls into question the journalistic integrity of the site as a whole.
It's just bloody silly, I can totally understand why Microsoft are considering this option even if it makes life difficult for the consumer.
Of course this "CD player" would have to be so completely integrated that it also runs the steering and brake peddle and is so flaky that the remote control for the cd player can open the car doors, start it and oh is completely the same over every car made by this company.
Honestly does no one remember how IE got to where it is? By using Windows monopoly to crush Netscape...
Was just about to say that :)
dont forget about notepad, thats so unfair for the paper and pen/pencil industry
For people who just want an OS that has a bit of everything and that don't care about all the let-downs, security holes and problems we have one OS for PCs and one for Macs that get shipped with almost every system.
We could call them "PC OS with windows" and "MacOS" to make it obvious for the fanboys.
Then we could just charge whatever we want because of the fact that these would be de-facto standards for their respective systems.
For people who want to know exactly what is going on on their PC we have a fully customizable OS that comes in every flavour you could ask and even gets distributions for different architectures.
These would be mainly free and would use lots of open source software.
Names for these would be of a large variety just like the OS' itself.
Any of the OS' mentioned above would get mobile versions and server versions and what not so we satisfy every single part of the market.
Doesn't that sound great?
Hmmm... wait a second...
:(
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/12/eu_opera/
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2009/06/12/microsoft_windows_7_ie_europe/
Microsoft have done nothing wrong, they are mearly offering an all in one solution to make life easier for the enduser
they dont prevent the user from installing third party apps. third party software vendors, are only complaining because they have been unable to provide a product that every user wants/needs
Oh, and @Red 5:
Well, I just think it's a bad joke to blame MS and not Apple. And I think Windows is the way it is because people want it to be like that. It's good that way.
TL;DR
Summary plz. Kthx
Microsoft's not going to release programs from other companies for them. It's called MICROSOFT Update, not Microsoft "Steam".
Thank you very much. ;)
Oh, and welcome to the forums of course. And I agree with you about Windows Update.
Finaly, somebody is talking some sense
Misconduct is misconduct. If a company seeks a stupid *ss solution to evade the EU claims thats not the EU's fault.
touche
What you should've said is:
OMFGPWN3D!
:p