Windows 7 Without Internet Explorer

I agree that the EU's anti-trust regulators are interfering to an extent that is becoming dictatorial in their attitudes. There is an incredible amount of money involved, and MS whether they fight or acquiesce they will still make a fortune. IMO, MS realizes that by agreeing to the rules imposed by the EU, they may lose a bit but they are improving their corporate public image immensely, which in the end will compensate for any perceived wrong doing.

The way I see it, it is up to computer manufacturers to make sure there is a fair choice of programs from different companies bundled with the OS on a new computer. The possibility to install or uninstall completely IE7-8 on Windows 7, from a security point of view is preferable (Experts often reported that the IE being so integrated in the OS has always been a source of vulnerabilities).

 

Gotta agree with you... I think it's all pretty idiotic myself.

 

For me, it's come to the point of utter disgust - I'll be removing Opera from my machines, and dissuaging everyone I know from using it.

Opera is resorting to this stupidity in the hopes that whatever bad PR they receive from it will be offset by the benefits of having the EU force Microsoft to advertise their product for them. I, for one, will be doing my best to see that does not happen.

 

If you think Opera is the only thing behind this you need your eyes checked buddy. It started long ago, Opera only recently started pushing it. Your actions are pathetic.

 

I don't recall anyone saying Opera or any other entity was alone in starting this crap. Try reading before calling people out? In any case, Opera is in this for one reason and one reason alone, to gain ground in the browser wars. If you truly think they are in this for the "good of the people", then perhaps you need to go back to the beginning of all this and also do a little reading about marketing. Make absolutely no mistake, there are no "good guys" in this, this is all out war on Microsoft. To think otherwise would be naive at best.

 

I was making a point not stating a fact, try comprehending things better before calling people out. Let me explain it to you:

Going on an Opera rage rant because of this is about as mature as 1 day old cheese.

 

I figure I'm pretty good at comprehension, "you need your eyes checked buddy", "your actions are pathetic"...you called the guy out and you know it, end of story. Regardless, the nasty truth is Opera is only doing this to gain ground....won't they be shocked when the competing browser of choice Microsoft adds in is Firefox...and it WILL be Firefox, believe me. Chrome MIGHT make it on there, but Opera and any others? Forget about it, not happening. They're going to go with the second most popular and well-known competition and Opera isn't it.

I would imagine the exclusion of Opera is not only for that reason but also as a big middle finger from Microsoft for doing what they are doing right now. Mozilla on the other hand will benefit greatly, not only in regards to exposure, but I'm sure there will be some financial benefits as well. In fact, Mozilla is likely to come out as the big winner in this whole ugly mess.

 

I hope MS will add Firefox and Chrome - as mentioned before: That's enough

 

Well, I put a big "might" in my post because, at least for right now, Chrome has about the same percentage of users as Opera (Stateside that is), meaning hardly anyone. I expect that to change once extensions come into play for Chrome. Opera, I'm sorry, I don't expect any change anytime soon. I'm heading off-topic though. I think Microsoft doing this voluntarily will, at least in the short term, win them some support from just about everyone except the EU. They won't be happy until Microsoft ceases to exist, which, contrary to wishful thinkers, would be a horrendous thing to happen if you really sit down, put your pitchforks and torches away, and think it through.

 

Maybe not, but they're ones being so blatantly shameless about it.

I don't see what's so pathetic about rejecting a company that resorts to crybabying to force Microsoft to advertise its product that nobody wants otherwise. The thing is, Opera knows it stands to gain from its shameful behavior. Granted, they probably will, but I don't see any reason why I should make it any easier for them to benefit from such cowardice.

 

Well I'm not bothered by it they have every right to complain. But in a perfect world, I would imagine a grid-box during w7 installation which would have a list of browsers like:

 

I bet everyone against the EU lives in the Americas . It's all to do with different attitudes. America believes in bigger is better (monopolies). EU on the other hand believes in equality among the smaller and bigger companies even when the bigger company should be in charge of its own product. I guess each belief can be good and bad. EU is limiting the growth of the bigger companies product and improving the growth of the smaller companies product.

I also agree with elapsed. Eice actually atacked a specific browser. Opera did not start this, their only supporting it. I believe Opera is the only major browser developed in the EU which is probably why it is getting attacked by those who hate this plan.

 

Funky, come on, I seriously want just ONE good reason why they should have to do this. Let's say you come up with an OS or some other software, why in the world should you be forced or told you should add in a competitors product to your own? You've spent time and money on this product, and are proud of it, and now you're told to include your competitors product with yours. Please, explain how that is fair and give an example outside of the Microsoft situation where it would make one bit of sense.

Can I blame Opera for what they are doing? In a marketing sense, no, I can't. However, them doing it under the banner of antitrust, I certainly can and do blame them. It's wrong, plain and simple. I honestly think the media coverage, bad PR, and, what's turned into senseless, unreasonable hate for Microsoft, has blinded people as to what is really going on in this antitrust case now. It's moved beyond antitrust, it's now about money and who's going to get it.

 

I do live in America, but I sure don't believe bigger is better. I'm under the affect of a monopoly regarding my cable ISP, trust me, I don't enjoy it. Americans DON'T like monopolies, so I'm not sure where you got that from. We can be greedy little souls, no point in arguing about that, but we like choices just as much as you guys across the pond and elsewhere do.

Here's the problem with your thought on improving the growth of smaller companies: Who is it improving? Microsoft is basically all about Windows the OS. Besides Linux, in that area, who else exactly is going to grow? Linux is in its situation due to its own issues, not because Windows exists. As far as browsers, I refer you back to my earlier post about the fact that absolutely nothing stops anyone from surfing to Mozilla or even Opera, Safari, or Google and downloading their browsers.

So what if IE is included with Windows? It's Microsoft's product just as Windows is, why do they not have the right to include it and their media player? Again, all I'm seeing is blindness to the real issue, intentional or otherwise. No one, no one else but browser developers have anything to gain out of all this. There is no viable "other OS" waiting in the wings to take over (besides Linux). As far as the comment about Opera being attacked....err, have you seen Mozilla, Apple, or Google whooping and hollering about it AS MUCH as Opera? Opera is the one getting the media attention, so, they are fair game.

 

This is nonsense.... Nobody likes a monopoly and lack of choices, American or otherwise. I have to agree again with dw426. Why shouldn't MS have a browser and media player with their OS? This is all ridiculous. Nobody is stopping you from installing and using any browser (or any other software) you like. Let's get real people.....

 

I hate monopolies. with graphics cards for example you only have two choices which means they can be quite expensive.
most people dont relise there is a choice with browsers they simply use what comes with the system or use what a friend reccomends which is genrally firefox. I used to use IE all the time but then someone reccomended firefox so i tryed it. at the time was 1.5 and it crashed tons then i found opera and liked it more and haveused it ever since.

 

You missed THE key reason why Opera is targeted: that they're doing all they can to associate themselves with the case, arguing constantly with a fine blend of stupidity and shamelessness for Microsoft to provide them with free advertising. They've gone to great lengths - much, MUCH more than Mozilla/Apple/Google - to make sure the "Hey guys, I'm a whining ****head!" badge is pinned squarely on them, I guess it's such a great surprise when people take them up on their offer.

 

I live in the European Union, and I hate the EU. It's one of the least democratic systems in the entire civilized world, and basically a way for the bigger European countries (or more accurately their leaders) like France, Germany, Italy and Great Britain, to rule over the whole of Europe without having to fight wars to get that kind of power (wars didn't work that well when they were last tried).

And in this particular case, the EU is just being retarded. Probably just ~Snip~ by the fact that Microsoft is American, and trying to bully some dollars out of MS. Dollars that can then be used to pay outrageous salaries to EU bureaucrats and to further the great EU goal of a single multicultural "European people" where no-one is really French, Italian, Swedish or German, but just somehow "European." A world where European nation-states cease to properly exist and everyone can just hail the EU all day long, kind of like what the Roman Empire of the ancient days was like, only with even more corruption. Basically a really pathetic attempt at copying the United States, but with far more sinister goals.

Wow, that was a nice rant from me. Sorry, guys.

As I was saying, and as others have said, there's no reason why MS shouldn't be allowed to include their own browser in their own operating system. That is just ridiculous. The user benefits from the browser being there - and if it can be uninstalled, even better. Nobody in their right mind wants to go back to the days where the OS just came with a CLI and practically nothing more - no file managers, no network stacks, no nothing. I'm an Opera user, but Opera is really making an ass out of itself with this issue. If they want more users, they should spend more effort on marketing and make a more appealing product.

 

I'd prefer that they would remove Firefox, Opera and replace it by Lynx, K-Meleon.

And as an extra, they can add Arachne.

We don't want to give Firefox preferential treatment just because they have a huge market share, do we ?

 

What I'm not sure I understand is if Win7 is shipped without a browser, how is one going to be downloaded?

Also, is one chooses FF, Opera or Chrome, what about Win7 updates?

 

You're not sorry at all, using a security forum to vent your nationalistic theories makes you a pathetic figure.

 

If IE were not to be shipped it would be a different matter then. Provided IE is shipped with Win7 one can still download the browser of preference.

As far as I know Win 7 won't be shipped without a browser in Europe. MS suggested offering a download choice of popular browsers and the EU is positive about this. That is a concession to the EU and MS backed down.

 

Thanks for the compliment, as well as telling me how I think or feel. What "nationalistic theories", though? My "theory" is that right now, there are several independent nations in Europe (fact), that originally joined the European Union as an economic and somewhat political union (fact), but now the EU is moving more and more towards a federation of states (fact) and becoming more and more distant from the mere economic union between independent states that it was in the beginning (fact). One need look no further than the EU strong-arming Ireland over the constitution vote to see what's really going on. So, where's the theory?

I like the idea of independent states. I think it's great that people are free to choose their own leaders and own policy. I don't like the idea of some massive union of nations where democracy is taken farther and farther away from the individual voters, who live in very different areas of the world and have very different needs. I don't like the artificial idea that there are no differences between, say, the needs of someone living in the Arctic and someone living at the shore of the Mediterranean. The climate, the geography - everything is different. The same laws, for example with regard to agriculture, cannot work in areas so different from each other. That's why people should govern themselves locally, without any supreme union telling them what to do from the other side of the continent. But hey, everyone is free to believe what they wish.

With regard to Microsoft, the EU is being a bully, no doubt about that. They're playing by two rules. Just because Microsoft happens to be large and in a commanding market position, they apply different rules to Microsoft than, say, Apple. According to the EU, MS is doing harm to the competition by including their own browser in their own OS. But when Apple includes Safari, that's perfectly okay, according to the EU. How nice! How about removing Windows Firewall, next, since it's so unfair to firewall software vendors? Or how about removing the File Manager, since it just destroys competition in that field of software? How about text editors? Fortunately, MS seems to be polishing their shield and acting like the nice guy, and giving into even the most outrageous EU demands.

And in actual fact, I am sorry for the off topic. I did not start it, though. I merely replied to the comment of another member that stated that everyone who is against EU must be an American (that's a pretty biased thing to say, really).

 

Hello neighbour, read this:

 

More whining from Opera.