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.
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.
Previous Article
54 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyThis 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.
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.
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?
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'?!
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.
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.
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
+1
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.
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.
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.
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.
You sir win the thread.
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.
As a side note: not a single dollar sign in sight so far in this thread! Well done guys!
I feel so clever and witty. :p
Ok think we got them all out of the way there, back to the useful discussion now.
Internet Explorer could be downloaded in WU.
Also, Link to this thread is missing on the article.
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
Media Player Classic > Windows Media Player
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?
And didn't MS get rid of most of the useless apps like Movie Maker and offer them as Windows Live Whatever as DLC?
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.
+1 true
If someone wants to use Firefox, they'll download 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.
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
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.
Way to go, MS.
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.
EU 4, MS 0
What I would really like to see is the EU make their own OS...
Yours in Visionary Plasma,
Star*Dagger
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.
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.
Great spinning from MicroSoft.
That would definetly make things interesting, and make for the support's worst nightmare
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.
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..
edit: oohhhhhhh brainfart. it's the other way around, isn't it.
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.