Windows 7 Without Internet Explorer

http://www.pcworld.com/article/166540/windows_7_without_internet_explorer_microsoft_explains.html

 

Thanks for the link, interesting concept. I heard something about this on Steve Gibson's Security Now podcast. As I understood it upon windows installation, there will be an option as to what browsers you want to install (windows will include several) and which you want set as default. A good move in my opinion, because there is no point in pushing one browser just because it's made by the same company that created the operating system.

 

Surely in europe OSX should also be forced to ship without safari?
The Iphone comes with Safari only and you arent allowed to create an application that does the same functionality as something that comes with the phone. opera have made a version for the iphone but arent allowed to ship it because apple say you cant...

so surely the EU should sue apple right away and make apple allow other browsers on the iphone at least?

 

very good point indeed.

 

Mac OS X comes with Safari as its default browser, which is made by Apple. On Linux, KDE systems typically have Konqueror as the default browser, which again is made by KDE. GNOME's most common default browser, Firefox, isn't made by GNOME itself, but it's still a browser monopoly.

While punishment is overdue for Microsoft's strong-arm monopoly tactics, forcing it to ship an OS without a default browser installed is uncalled for, and is probably going to pose considerable technical and usability problems. Third-party programs that call Trident libraries to perform specific functions now will have no standard platform to base those functions on (do Firefox, Opera, Safari etc provide their layout engines' library functions for calling by external apps?), not to mention that many people reasonably expect an OS to be able to browse the web by default out of the box.

IE7/8 is generally a fine browser, and for users that are aware about the alternatives and are sufficiently knowledgeable and/or motivated to make those choices, Microsoft has never stopped anyone from running 3rd-party browsers on Windows. This new development just forces that choices on people who DON'T want to, or don't know enough to.

 

I agree with you. The problem is: Apple does not have the same market share as Microsoft does. And being so, European Commission sees it like Microsoft isn't giving any choice to the competition.

Personally, I'm against this crap. I'd rather see them suing Microsoft for other things, which would be a great thing to all users, everywhere.

What do I and my family care if Windows comes shipped with IE? Lets also rip off Windows Media Player? Windows Defender? UAC? Windows Firewall? Etc?

Should E.C force Apple to release a version of their O.S for other machines than Apple's own? Isn't this though for competition as well? Because, doing this, Apple is saying: Hey, do you like our O.S? Great! Buy our machines!

Why not force Apple to do that, so I can run their O.S, legally, in any machine I want?

Lets kill all Linux variants, and only have the kernel. Why does Linux has to come only with Firefox, and not, for exemple, Opera browser?

Lets only distribute the O.Ss themselves, without any bundled applications. Period. Lets see if more than 98% of users will be happy with it.

This is a joke.

I'd rather see E.C sueing Microsoft for not giving free support to users, both retail and OEM users. Retail paid users pay too much for having to pay for support, and when most of time is some Windows update screwing up things.

That's just an example.

 

Good idea. Let's not include file managers as well. Heck, a window manager shouldn't be allowed either, as Microsoft's DWM is dominating other players like Compiz and Metacity. Scrap the interface as well, KDE and GNOME need to be given a chance. So now you get a fresh new computer that boots up, and lets you stare at the blinking cursor at the command prompt - that's assuming it even boots, as you need to make a choice between boot managers first.

Seriously, what were the EU guys thinking?

 

Hello m00nbl00d,
btw Gnome do have there own browser called Epiphany.
most linux distros simply choose to have firefox.
as default Debian Lenny as desktop installs Epiphany and iceweasel (firefox without firefox logos and trademarks)
all linux distros could ship without any browser. the user simply uses the package manager to install there favourite browser.

surely all windows 7 versions in all countries could ship without a browser?
simply ship a second disc with all the main browsers and let the consumer choose which browser they wish to use.
on the same disc have media players,messenger programs,office programs etc.
choice is good.

Maybe this move will mean more websites will work properly on other browsers such as opera,firefox,chrome etc.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSLC48908520090612

Looks like Opera is beginning to whine now that it realizes its brilliant game plan - to piggyback copies of Opera on Windows - has been upstaged.

Well played, Microsoft.

 

These guys are just stupid IMO.

 

People want to have an OS where they can browse out of the box. This is a very bad decision indeed.

 

I want to browse OOTB but with a decent browser lol.

 

IE7 and 8 are decent no doubt.

 

I'm personally a MS supporter in just about anything they do. Expensive, yes, but quality has a price. On the other hand I completely agree on the fact that when one buys a new computer there should be the widest choices available in order to give everyone a chance to launch their product, and an opportunity to choose from or be advised about the various possibilities available. By the way my main browser is Chrome, so I couldn't care less about IE8 being bundled with Win7 or not.

 

There's a reason why Ubuntu is so much more popular than Arch.

Bash the concept all you like, but fact is, people like bundled.

 

Yes I agree here. Windows is MS product and they have full rights to put inside their own products.
Maybe soon EU tell MS to put gimp instead of paint, open office instead of WordPad, Notepad++ instead of MS Notepad... etc. It's odd...

 

I personally think the EU shouldn't bother with economy, but now I am getting political.

I just think the average user will have even more troubles now.

 

Microsoft has the monopoly in OSes and thus should have the right to bundle these with their own products (Browser). You are still free to download the browser of your choice afterwards. One cannot expect them to include products of competitors as well.

It would be much more effective to make sure customers get more alternatives of non-Microsoft OS (Linux derivates) offered for every new PC.

Also the number of PCs having a Windows OS preinstalled should be limited.

 

What bothers me, is there going to be a difference between IE8 installed from setup DVD and IE8 integrated into the system? Stability or functionality issues?

 

A friend of mine just made a very good point. Say w7 ships on PC's without a browser, how would a beginner download a browser to use?

 

IE8 setup will be on setup DVD and also available via Windows Update, but the problem is, that common users will not be able to instal it, it is just too difficult.

 

Download it manually.

 

EU officially responds and it is ridiculous as allways. If I were MS, I would propose not to sell W7 in EU at all, so people would have to order it elsewhere.

 

Microsoft offers choice of browsers in Windows 7 to satisfy EU

 

What started out as a legitimate concern about competition has turned into one of the most stupid and blatant bullying scenes I have ever witnessed in my life. I wish what the EU was doing was a crime. You give me one good reason why Microsoft should not only have to remove Windows Media Player, disable or remove their browser, but now also have to offer the competitions software on their own damned operating system. At what point in time has Microsoft EVER not allowed anyone to wander over to VLC's website, Opera's website, and so forth, and download a competing product?

All the EU is doing is milking the situation for PR reasons, if they were cornered by anyone with a brain and asked how Microsoft was being anti-competitive now, they'd all fall over dead from the stress of trying to give an actual answer...if they bothered trying at all. The ONLY thing Microsoft has ever done was to get in with software/hardware makers and unfairly make sure products either worked best with Windows or only work with Windows. THAT is their sin, the rest of this crap is pure bullying.