bit-tech.net

Microsoft proposes browser ballots

Microsoft proposes browser ballots

The ballot screen in Windows 7 will give users the choice of Internet Explorer 8 or alternative web browsers - if the EC gives it the go-ahead.

Microsoft has answered concerns regarding how you can get a web browser installed on Windows 7 'E' edition, which, of course, doesn't even have a web browser with which to download one – a “ballot screen” of browsers.

As reported over on BetaNews, Microsoft – which is being forced by the European Commission to unbundle Internet Explorer from all versions of Windows 7 sold in the EU under anti-monopoly laws – has confirmed that it is proposing a screen allowing users to choose from a list of web browsers when the OS is first run.

In a public statement given by the company's general counsel Brad Smith, the proposal was described as being the only real option to ship “Windows in Europe with the full functionality available in the rest of the world.

The EC has issued its own statement, confirming that Microsoft's plans mean that “Windows 7 would include Internet Explorer, but the proposal recognises the principle that consumers should be given a free and effective choice of Web browsers, and sets out a means – the ballot screen – by which Microsoft believes that can be achieved.

Perhaps most interesting is the fact that the proposal will relax also previously stringent restrictions on OEMs pre-loading browsers – under the terms of the proposal, OEMs are free both to install an alternative browser of their choice and to set it as the default, disabling Internet Explorer before the machine ever reaches its end user.

While the European Commission has yet to decide on whether Microsoft's plans should be approved, those who have cause to dislike Internet Explorer – and who wish to see it unbundled from Windows – have further fuel for the fires with the news that a critical security flaw in the browser has been classified as so important that the company is breaking with its traditional monthly patch cycle in order to release a fix. The patch, which affects both Internet Explorer and a less serious hole in Visual Studio, is due for release tomorrow.

Does the ballot screen answer your concerns regarding the bootstrapping of a web browser on a brand-new machine, or will it just further marginalise the smaller browser companies that inevitably don't get included? Share your thoughts over in the forums.

54 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Krikkit 27th July 2009, 10:51 Quote
That's a good idea - it's better than having no OS shipped out over here. :\
l3v1ck 27th July 2009, 11:02 Quote
I agree. If the OS ships without any browser at all, you'd need to have one backed up somewhere. You couldn't download one without one already being installed to browse with.
This is a sensible idea from MS. As long as the list has the most popular browsers to choose from (IE8, FF, Chrome & Opera), I can't see how the EU would have a problem with it.
Rkiver 27th July 2009, 11:06 Quote
I think it's a fair compromise on Microsofts end, as pointed out if it didn't come with a browser the average person wouldn't have a clue how to get one (ie from another pc for example). Having a screen letting you choose one of a few and then it installs it makes perfect sense.
Javerh 27th July 2009, 11:26 Quote
Recently, Microsoft's actions have seemed to set the standard in ethical behaviour. Way to go!
SBS 27th July 2009, 11:39 Quote
This is kinda what we expected in the first place, isn't it?

To be fair though, every place I've seen offering preorders of Windows 7 E are supplying a second CD with IE/Firefox on it.
Spiny 27th July 2009, 11:40 Quote
Windows 7E, "Eviscerated" edition!
Denis_iii 27th July 2009, 11:45 Quote
I like it, but want this screen during installation so i can pick what I want installed
ie windows calculator, its anticompetitive to all the free and payed for calculator software out their
Why isn't the EU on the case for calculator software?
eek 27th July 2009, 11:46 Quote
When will the EU give up... the average user doesn't care less what browser they use - more choice equals more confusion!

This ruling doesn't really benefit anyone...
- People who care whether they are using FF/Chrome/IE etc are able to go and download it themselves - also ensuring they have the latest version not something dated from the release of the OS (which in XPs case is a few too many years!!)
- People who don't care (i.e. most people) will never buy an OS anyway so will stick with whatever the OEM bundled with the PC

The whole case is a big waste of time and money.

It's like when I was installing Win7 RC yesterday, the most painful bit was actually setting up the browser with all the accelerators and other rubbish as the number of options and choices are insane - far more than installing the rest of the OS! Whatever happened to the saying 'less is more'?!
crazyceo 27th July 2009, 11:51 Quote
I agree this is a very good gesture by Microsoft and one they don't have to do. They could have shipped the OS without a browser and pointed the finger and the EU saying it's their fault.

My main worry here is how big will the panel be? Surely, Microsoft must include every browser available today to make it anti-competitive otherwise, the ones missing off the list will just scream to the EU and then they get Microsoft fined again.

If the list becomes too big then maybe the user will just pick Microsoft's offering because they don't know any different.

Another concern is who will maintain the browser? Will it now be Microsoft's responsibility to make patches and updates available via it's automatic Windows Update service. If a browser infects your system with whatever, will Microsoft be able to help?

Choice is a good thing but it can also add problems. This isn't over yet and I'm sure we will hear from a few browser developers moaning about costs or being left off the list completely.
lp1988 27th July 2009, 12:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyceo
I agree this is a very good gesture by Microsoft and one they don't have to do. They could have shipped the OS without a browser and pointed the finger and the EU saying it's their fault.

That's properly what I would have done.

but one question, should't this affect Apple as well. they are bundeling a free browser with their system as well, is that not to be considered anti competitive as well?

I bet that when this ships we will have to listen to a bunch of Apple fans arguing that this makes windows complicated, and I would not be surprised to hear a comment from Steve Jobs the first time he gets the chance.

All in all the result is that Steve Jobs are laughing, consumers are being confused, money are being wasted and Microsoft are being hurt even though they are handeling this in accordance to all rules.
shigllgetcha 27th July 2009, 12:17 Quote
hope this goes through, far better than no browser

yeh why are apple exempt. apple is a more agressive than microsoft these days as far as i can see with all their cease and decist letters its handing out atm

i thought IE was an option that you ticked/unticked when you installed windows, so wouldnt it be upto the manufactorers not windows? ie you can install it if you want.

itunes asks you do you wish to install safari everytime it upgrades from what i remember, why is that any different
Syphon Filter 27th July 2009, 12:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by eek
When will the EU give up... the average user doesn't care less what browser they use - more choice equals more confusion!

This ruling doesn't really benefit anyone...
- People who care whether they are using FF/Chrome/IE etc are able to go and download it themselves - also ensuring they have the latest version not something dated from the release of the OS (which in XPs case is a few too many years!!)
- People who don't care (i.e. most people) will never buy an OS anyway so will stick with whatever the OEM bundled with the PC

The whole case is a big waste of time and money.

It's like when I was installing Win7 RC yesterday, the most painful bit was actually setting up the browser with all the accelerators and other rubbish as the number of options and choices are insane - far more than installing the rest of the OS! Whatever happened to the saying 'less is more'?!

+1
l3v1ck 27th July 2009, 12:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by eek
When will the EU give up... the average user doesn't care less what browser they use
I think a lot of people would disagree with you there.
geekboyUK 27th July 2009, 12:58 Quote
They can put up option of downloading browsers without shipping full IE7... eg, wget in the background
lewchenko 27th July 2009, 13:42 Quote
I read that the panel will hold a maximum of 10 browsers, and that in order to get onto the panel you need >0.5% market share.

Also, there is talk of having the options download the latest version at install time rather than relying on a 'carry-on' version, but if no internet connection is available, then yes.. install the carry-on version and prompt the user to update.

Its win-win for MS with this solution. Most people will install IE anyway. Any business would install IE by default.
Most clued up users would also probably install IE and FF atleast too.
Bauul 27th July 2009, 14:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyceo


Another concern is who will maintain the browser? Will it now be Microsoft's responsibility to make patches and updates available via it's automatic Windows Update service. If a browser infects your system with whatever, will Microsoft be able to help?

N'ah, all modern browsers have their own internal Update systems, so Microsoft could just install any old version and it'd update itself accordingly.

Plus, all MS need to do is have a little disclaimer that says "MS accept no responsibilities for these third-party browsers" and they're covered. All they need to make sure is the one version they bundle is virus free and anything else the user does is not MS's concern.
l3v1ck 27th July 2009, 14:47 Quote
Hmmm, I've just spotted a potential problem with FF3. For some reason known only to Mozilla, FireFox 3 (unlike FF2) uses some security settings from IE. How will they get round that unless the next version of FF reverts back (and I think it should) to using its own settings.
perplekks45 27th July 2009, 14:55 Quote
Apparently MS' first "solution" was just to scare the EU and show them how stupid things could be. Well done MS! ;)
D3s3rt_F0x 27th July 2009, 15:42 Quote
EU being continually unresonable. I'm sorry but why don't they chase after apple for there anti competitive practises of bundling software with Operating systems.

Ah thats right because most people don't really give a toss what there using so long as it works and those who want something else more than likely know how to install it.
eek 27th July 2009, 16:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by l3v1ck
Quote:
Originally Posted by eek
When will the EU give up... the average user doesn't care less what browser they use
I think a lot of people would disagree with you there.
Really? Almost everyone I know uses IE and I never hear them complaining about wanting to change it for anything else. Part of this is probably ignorance (probably never heard of FireFox/Chrome/..) but I think people are generally happy with what they have.

Unfortunately, the way the net has evolved, IE has always been a dominant force and as such it is *the* browser that web developers hack their sites to work in - often at the expense of W3C standards and cross browser compatability, but that is just the way it is. If suddenly people are faced with a choice and end up installing the wrong one, when half the scripts on TwitMyFaceTube don't work and they can no longer do what they used to do, how exactly are they benefiting? People like things to just work, and IE does. It may not be your browser of choice, but you're not the average user.
Quote:
Originally Posted by D3s3rt_F0x
Ah thats right because most people don't really give a toss what there using so long as it works and those who want something else more than likely know how to install it.
QFT.
Rkiver 27th July 2009, 16:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by D3s3rt_F0x

Ah thats right because most people don't really give a toss what there using so long as it works and those who want something else more than likely know how to install it.

You sir win the thread.
pimlicosound 27th July 2009, 17:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by eek
Quote:
Originally Posted by l3v1ck
Quote:
Originally Posted by eek
When will the EU give up... the average user doesn't care less what browser they use
I think a lot of people would disagree with you there.
Really? Almost everyone I know uses IE and I never hear them complaining about wanting to change it for anything else. Part of this is probably ignorance (probably never heard of FireFox/Chrome/..) but I think people are generally happy with what they have.

Unfortunately, the way the net has evolved, IE has always been a dominant force and as such it is *the* browser that web developers hack their sites to work in - often at the expense of W3C standards and cross browser compatability, but that is just the way it is. If suddenly people are faced with a choice and end up installing the wrong one, when half the scripts on TwitMyFaceTube don't work and they can no longer do what they used to do, how exactly are they benefiting? People like things to just work, and IE does. It may not be your browser of choice, but you're not the average user.
Quote:
Originally Posted by D3s3rt_F0x
Ah thats right because most people don't really give a toss what there using so long as it works and those who want something else more than likely know how to install it.
QFT.

You're not wrong. As a web designer for a tech company with industrial clients, about 70% of our traffic is from users on IE6 or IE7. In the corporate world, IE is the given default.

Many of those users can't change, even though they want to, because of company-wide restrictions on browser choice. It's pretty apparent, though, that a lot of them probably aren't very aware of the alternatives. Take this statistic: nearly half of our traffic is from users running resolutions of 1024x768 or below. Most monitors from the last 8 years or so have supported higher resolutions, so these are mostly people who probably have not realised that they can change their desktop resolutions. The world is full of users like this, who, if they cannot change their desktop resolution, are almost certainly not interested in the alternative web browsers available.
Fod 27th July 2009, 17:41 Quote
The EU never demanded that MS remove IE from windows. All they wanted was for MS to provide alternatives - something MS have already done in Vista SP2. What MS did with Win7 and the 'no browser edition' was the corporate equivalent of throwing your toys out of the pram. MS responded in a very immature manner, and is only now beginning to see sense.

As a side note: not a single dollar sign in sight so far in this thread! Well done guys!
Ending Credits 27th July 2009, 18:46 Quote
M$!

I feel so clever and witty. :p
Rkiver 27th July 2009, 19:10 Quote
Don't forget freetards! Linux sux! Mac sux! M$ ho ho ho.

Ok think we got them all out of the way there, back to the useful discussion now.
impar 27th July 2009, 19:34 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by l3v1ck
I agree. If the OS ships without any browser at all, you'd need to have one backed up somewhere. You couldn't download one without one already being installed to browse with.
Windows doesnt need a browser to access Windows Update.
Internet Explorer could be downloaded in WU.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fod
The EU never demanded that MS remove IE from windows.
True. Which makes the article at BitTech erronous and partial:
Quote:
... which is being forced by the European Commission to unbundle Internet Explorer from all versions of Windows 7 sold in the EU under anti-monopoly laws ...

Also, Link to this thread is missing on the article.
null_x86 27th July 2009, 20:08 Quote
as long as it has FF, im happy with it
samkiller42 27th July 2009, 20:29 Quote
Thinking about it, the EU could push further, if they can do it with web browsers, what's to stop them from doing it with regards to media players, remember, Windows ships with Windows Media Player, and in most cases, Windows Movie Maker *facepalm*

Oh, and they need to Chase Apple too, because Apple have safari, oh, and that's not all, Google, my HTC Hero which is Android powered came with a browser which i asume is Chrome, oh where will it end?

Sam
impar 27th July 2009, 21:04 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by samkiller42
Thinking about it, the EU could push further, if they can do it with web browsers, what's to stop them from doing it with regards to media players, ...
Thats a good idea, actually.
Media Player Classic > Windows Media Player
Quote:
Originally Posted by samkiller42
Oh, and they need to Chase Apple too, because Apple have safari, ...
"They" will. Once Apple manages to take above 80% of the OS market.
Shagbag 27th July 2009, 21:48 Quote
What's not clear to me is: will the end user be forced to choose or will OEMs choose for them?
If the latter is permitted, will existing 'commercial relationships' influence the choice of browser those OEMs make?
We could end up in the same laughable situation as we had with the WinXP 'N' Editions.
I'm sure the EU Commission is well aware of this, but how can they stop OEMs effectively preventing end-users from choosing?
perplekks45 27th July 2009, 22:13 Quote
Why is there a difference between Windows and OSX? It shouldn't matter how big the market share is. Unfair competition policy is unfair competition policy.

And didn't MS get rid of most of the useless apps like Movie Maker and offer them as Windows Live Whatever as DLC?
impar 27th July 2009, 22:29 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
Why is there a difference between Windows and OSX? It shouldn't matter how big the market share is. Unfair competition policy is unfair competition policy.
Basic competitive legislation:
You cant force your predominance in a given market (OS) to gain advantage in another market (Browser).
OSX is a non-issue, since its market share is diminute.
Horizon 28th July 2009, 02:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by eek
This ruling doesn't really benefit anyone...
I don't think opera would have wined if it didn't benefit them
Quote:
Originally Posted by eek

The whole case is a big waste of time and money.
The EU government and EU lawyers beg to differ *points at them licking their thumbs as they count tons of money*
Quote:
Originally Posted by eek

It's like when I was installing Win7 RC yesterday, the most painful bit was actually setting up the browser with all the accelerators and other rubbish as the number of options and choices are insane - far more than installing the rest of the OS! Whatever happened to the saying 'less is more'?!

+1 true
xprodancer 28th July 2009, 02:13 Quote
what i dont get is everyone in the EU want a simple computer that works so what the f**k is the EU goin on about! so what m$ are rake in the dolla! woopty doo! just proves one point, that there OS with IE works!!!!! the EU needs to sort its own problems instead of complaining about a poxy web browser! i live in the UK and i will certainly import win7 form the US cause they will get the full package! so i will have a copy from there! its not hard i have friends over there! this is realy a wast of time cause im probably not goin to be the only one that will do this!
The_Beast 28th July 2009, 05:19 Quote
Microsoft shouldn't even have to take IE off the OS, Apple doesn't have too but Microsoft has too. It's SOOOOOOO DUMB

If someone wants to use Firefox, they'll download it
thEcat 28th July 2009, 07:46 Quote
I'm happy to see others note that the unbundling of the IE interface is a pre-emptive decision by MS, if anyone can link to the supposed EC ruling I'd be more than happy to read it.

IE interface ? Since Win 98, and arguably Win95 that iirc originally shipped without a browser, the core IE technologies have been embedded in the operating system, I hazard the guess that Win 7 is much the same. The decision to ship without an IE interface and remove the ability to upgrade from previous operating systems must therefore be seen a political one designed to maximise public outcry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffaree
what i dont get is everyone in the EU want a simple computer that works so what the f**k is the EU goin on about! so what m$ are rake in the dolla! woopty doo! just proves one point, that there OS with IE works!!!!! the EU needs to sort its own problems instead of complaining about a poxy web browser! i live in the UK and i will certainly import win7 form the US cause they will get the full package! so i will have a copy from there! its not hard i have friends over there! this is realy a wast of time cause im probably not goin to be the only one that will do this!

The problem comes when a major supplier uses one technology to leverage the uptake of some other technology, the ultimate aim is to limit competition and gain dominance of the market. Once the second technology gains dominance it is time to move to a third then forth technology until market dominance is absolute. This is the threat of monopolies.

In the MS world you start Windows and from the list of approved applications you play your approved media through an interface that supports the approved DRM, non-approved media has not been signed leaving no option to play it. Perhaps you launch IE which opens the default page of the approved channel, all searches go through Bling and of course return approved results, all external applications conform to .NET, Silverlight is the only media player available, all your mail has passed trough MS servers and the default media channel is MSNBC. Time for relaxation, switch on your approved console or download an approved game, or possibly movie, from GFWL.

This is the full on tin foil hat scenario but it is also the dream world of some corporations and some politicians. The PC and the internet have given us access to the largest amount of media and information we have ever known, the greatest freedom to create and exchange we have ever known and the greatest freedom to interact and discuss, sometimes controversial, ideas we have ever known. Step back for a moment and consider the possible futures
xaser04 28th July 2009, 08:40 Quote
Eurgh what a waste of time and money (Well thats the EU commission in general but I digress).

Those who wish to try a different browser either already have done so, or, would do so anyway. Those who wish to just browse the web will automatically choose Internet explorer because they know it just works (or simply don't care that there are alternative because they don't offer anything that IE can't already do).

So what the EU have done here is make no sodding difference what-so-ever apart from making things more confusing for the average user., typical political/red tape BS.
Fod 28th July 2009, 09:30 Quote
It's impressive how MS has spun this to make them look like victims. The amount of people in support of MS in this thread goes to show, if you take an EU demand to 'give people a choice of browser' and spin it to say 'remove your browser from your OS and make it difficult and/or confusing for consumers' the amount of positive PR generated, essentially for free.

Way to go, MS.
lp1988 28th July 2009, 10:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fod
It's impressive how MS has spun this to make them look like victims. The amount of people in support of MS in this thread goes to show, if you take an EU demand to 'give people a choice of browser' and spin it to say 'remove your browser from your OS and make it difficult and/or confusing for consumers' the amount of positive PR generated, essentially for free.

It is not so simple, the problem here is that MS have two choises. 1. remove IE from their OS or 2. ad their competitors browsers to the OS.
The problem with number two is that it is simply free PR for his own competitor, one thing NO company wants to do, imagine if Nvidia had to add a flyer from ATI in every card they sell, or if STEAM had to have a little "experience Windows Live" poster running in STEAM.
Simply the same as a commercial suiside.
Fod 28th July 2009, 10:31 Quote
that's the thing - it wasn't that. all the EU wanted was for them to provide a CHOICE, and communicate that choice.
Star*Dagger 28th July 2009, 10:57 Quote
Kudos to the EU, the only government in the world who is taking MS to task for their ongoing anti-competitive behavior.

EU 4, MS 0

What I would really like to see is the EU make their own OS...

Yours in Visionary Plasma,
Star*Dagger
D3s3rt_F0x 28th July 2009, 11:19 Quote
For me the EU are just using MS as a cash cow.

Although I've got to laugh at the spokesman from opera now wanting to remove the icons of different browsers from the proposed selection screen as too many people know what the IE icon looks like and provides it with a bias.

I think he really needs to grow up.
cjmUK 28th July 2009, 11:45 Quote
For those that think IE's 70%+ market share is an indication that people are content with IE, you should consider that a couple of years ago the market share was 90%+. There are indeed some people who don't understand the issues and don't care two hoots, but it isn't just the geeks who prefer FF/Opera/Chrome.

Even casual users know about the security implications of IE, and a surprising number of non-technical people are aware that websites often look different in IE (although they perhaps don't know why).

I reckon that 90+ of my family & friends are on either FF or Opera. However, at work, the rank and file still use IE, often IE6(!), that will not change for as long as Windows comes with IE out of the box. When IT resources are stretched, the temptation to stick with the familiar IE is hard to resist; but if with this recent change, and given that many home users are becoming familiar with other browsers, I see FF or Opera as a viable default alternative.
impar 28th July 2009, 11:48 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fod
It's impressive how MS has spun this to make them look like victims. The amount of people in support of MS in this thread goes to show, if you take an EU demand to 'give people a choice of browser' and spin it to say 'remove your browser from your OS and make it difficult and/or confusing for consumers' the amount of positive PR generated, essentially for free.
Way to go, MS.
Indeed.
Great spinning from MicroSoft.
eek 28th July 2009, 12:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by D3s3rt_F0x
Although I've got to laugh at the spokesman from opera now wanting to remove the icons of different browsers from the proposed selection screen as too many people know what the IE icon looks like and provides it with a bias.
Awesome idea, we don't want brands using their logo/reputation/goodwill to gain any advantage! While we're at it, the name 'Internet Explorer' gives the user too much info about what it does while 'Opera' will just make people think of fat people singing. To give every browser a fair chance they should either randomly number them and let the user guess which one they want, or even better, install one at random! Can't get much fairer than that!
perplekks45 28th July 2009, 13:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by eek
Quote:
Originally Posted by D3s3rt_F0x
Although I've got to laugh at the spokesman from opera now wanting to remove the icons of different browsers from the proposed selection screen as too many people know what the IE icon looks like and provides it with a bias.
Awesome idea, we don't want brands using their logo/reputation/goodwill to gain any advantage! While we're at it, the name 'Internet Explorer' gives the user too much info about what it does while 'Opera' will just make people think of fat people singing. To give every browser a fair chance they should either randomly number them and let the user guess which one they want, or even better, install one at random! Can't get much fairer than that!
I think they should also randomly install an OS just to make things a bit fairer.
lp1988 28th July 2009, 13:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45

I think they should also randomly install an OS just to make things a bit fairer.

That would definetly make things interesting, and make for the support's worst nightmare
mi1ez 28th July 2009, 21:32 Quote
Unless I can run Firefox with it fully integrated into Steam and WMP I'll be having IE on there anyway!
Fod 28th July 2009, 22:58 Quote
eh? steam store and WMP plugin both work fine in firefox?
B3CK 29th July 2009, 02:47 Quote
I do think that in the end, MS should not distribute a browser at all, and provide a flyer of usable commands in the cmd window to locate the various browsers. Then let the powers that be try that on for size. I do believe that even offering to download or use another companies browser during setup is huge mistake. If this happens, then I want to use IE in freebsd, os-x, as well as calculater and windows explorer as well. FFS, I want to use itunes without having to give apple any of my personal information, while I'm at it.

As long as MS doesn't stop other browsers from being installed, nor keeping users from removing IE from the system; is as far as should be traveled down this road.
woodshop 29th July 2009, 03:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
Why is there a difference between Windows and OSX? It shouldn't matter how big the market share is. Unfair competition policy is unfair competition policy.

The difference is Apple is a systems supplier.
They supply a complete hardware + software solution and the software is made to run only on the hardware..

This makes it fall under the same category as say Cell phones and their OS's, PS3 and XBM, Xbox and its OS etc..
impar 29th July 2009, 09:12 Quote
Greetings!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fod
eh? steam store and WMP plugin both work fine in firefox?
I think he meant the Steam application.
Fod 29th July 2009, 09:17 Quote
but that doesn't make sense. Steam doesn't run in IE, nor does WMP - they are separate applications.


edit: oohhhhhhh brainfart. it's the other way around, isn't it.
lp1988 29th July 2009, 09:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by woodshop
Quote:
Originally Posted by perplekks45
Why is there a difference between Windows and OSX? It shouldn't matter how big the market share is. Unfair competition policy is unfair competition policy.

The difference is Apple is a systems supplier.
They supply a complete hardware + software solution and the software is made to run only on the hardware..

This makes it fall under the same category as say Cell phones and their OS's, PS3 and XBM, Xbox and its OS etc..

As this is a free software it shouldn't matter, it is still pressing a sertain free product on to a customer, and therefore they are doing the same as MS.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums