EU may force Microsoft to bundle Firefox with Windows

Just as Internet Explorer 8 goes RC1 we have the European Commission's anti trust considering forcing Microsoft to bundle Firefox with future versions of Windows as per the Microsoft's quarterly filing with the U.S Security and Exchange Commission.

The European Union(EU) recently accused Microsoft of breaking antitrust laws by including the company's Internet Explorer (IE) browser with the Windows operating system. The outcome may require Microsoft or other computer manufacturers to install Firefox or other browsers (Chrome, Opera and Safari) by default alongside Internet Explorer on new Windows-based PCs.

Microsoft reported that while computer users and OEMs are already free to run any web browsing software on Windows, the Commission is considering ordering Microsoft and OEMs to obligate users to choose a particular browser when setting up a new PC. Such a remedy might include a requirement that OEMs distribute multiple browsers on new Windows-based PCs. Microsoft may also be required to disable certain unspecified Internet Explorer software code if a user chooses a competing browser.

The filing further notes that non-compliance would see the EU impose a significant fine based on sales of Windows Operating Systems in the European Union. Microsoft has two months to respond to the charges, after which the EC will make its final ruling on the matter. The software company can also request a hearing and says it's considering this alternative.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Rumor: Steve Jobs scheduled for surgery on Monday

Next Story

Sprint to reduce staff by 8,000, TI to cut 3,400

230 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

That would be DREADFUL if Microsoft bundled Firefox or any 3rd party software for that matter in their OS. Especially because Mozilla practically updates their software every other month, the worst thing is when you buy a new computer and have completely outdated software that comes with it (or if you install the OS yourself). And yes, service packs and windows update has made me overlook any MS products. And making IE separate, it'd be such a pain to download IE if I were to install a new OS. It's basically saying "hey, this is our new OS with no internet support" which would probably mark the death of their new generation of operating systems.

Wait... how would you even download IE/Firefox if you didn't start out with an internet browser? Anyways, does Mac OS X come with Firefox already installed? No. I know linux does but that's linux, it also comes with open office so whatever.

FYI, I'm an avid Firefox user, I've gone as far as to convert other people to Firefox if they don't use it just so that I don't have to use IE on their computer when I go over. But I like the way things are packaged now. Don't do it Microsoft! You'll become the next AOL if you do!

The EU is just being plain stupid and silly.

I don't mind governments trying to stop anticompetitive behavior, but IE's inclusion with windows is nothing of the such.

If MS forces OEM's to bundle IE and not bundle any other browser, then sure, sanction MS.

But MS is doing nothing to prevent other browser makers (or any kind of software maker for that matter) from approaching OEM's and trying to make them bundle their software.

And about the "users don't know there is an alternative" argument, how stupid can you get to even consider that as an argument. This is like saying that every company in the world must inform its customers about its competitors products, which is plain silly.

Its the consumer's responsibility to find the best product for his needs, not the companies' responsibility.

Now, the one that should respond to this is the US government, and that would really hurt the EU (since more than 50% of EU products are sold in the US), by putting more sanctions on EU products, and then watch the EU economy shrink.

If anyone has any doubt about the power of the US economy and its influence on the world, look what happened to the world recently because of the US credit crunch.

This may sound st**id but i dont really understand why they keep pu**** this against IE.
Windows come bundled with Paint and Notepad as well, and if you dont like them you install Photoshop or UltraEdit or whatever is best for your needs, its the same thing.

If EU wins this case and im Adobe i would push to have photoshop installed as well, as an PAINT anti-monopoly strategy, whats the sense?

You are buying a MS OS which comes with a lot of tools, you either use them or discard them, its up to you...

The EU has lost the plot completely. It's a shame MS has to listen to their crazy demands.

Most of you don't realise that whilst you can download another browser if you wish (as you are in the know about technology). Many of the average users do not know of any alternatives and a lot fo them think that Internet Explorer is the Internet!

If people are unaware of other browser options or think of Internet Explorer as the internet, it's their own fault. When did MS advertise or suggest this to be the case? I don't expect Toyota to offer Honda engines because they may be cleaner and more reliable. I don't expect my PS3 to offer support for XBox 360 games, which may have less lags or glitches.

It's not about the other users needing to learn and know more about computers (which I agree they should) or about "demand for an alternative", it's about us web developers and how the majority of Internet users (people who use Internet Explorer 6 and 7) aren't able to see our websites how they are meant to be shown, yet they show perfectly (or perfectly with very minor changes) in every other major browser.

(Haven't you changed your mind there?)
IE is the only major browser. Why is it an annoyance to cater to the majority of the web users? I understand that changes in code may be neccessary to make some websites work perfectly, but if you want to target web users, and most of them are using IE, then unfortunately it has to be done.

Most people have hardly any problems visiting most sites and can start surfing the web as soon as Windows has started. So why change that? By bombarding users, who aren't techno-savvy, with so many different browser options (as it's unfair to just offer Firefox ), they will just become confused. I'm sure most people want their copy of Windows to work straight away, not to ask which program to download for surfing the web, listening to music, etc. I have enough issues with UAC.

Really now EU? why not just tell all the companies to start holding hands, and just make 1 big ass dvd with every OS, browser, and whatever else someone will EVER NEED.
If MS is forced to do this, Apple should be forced to do the same. The fact Apple has gotten away with what it already does is bad enough. Hell MS, just screw the EU and let them live with their stupid decisions. Its your product, screw ppl who tell you what to do with it.

This is stupid, the EU should create there own OS. If they force Microsoft to remove IE from their OS Apple should have to do the same with Safari.

this is so stupid news! I hate FireFox so much! I've heard bad news about firefox affected in internet cafe in philippines, that they got virus often often often. Just like Google search has wrost virus enginner ever! I don't trust FireFox on my computer. FireFox is really creepy out of me lately.

gameboy1977 said,
this is so stupid news! I hate FireFox so much! I've heard bad news about firefox affected in internet cafe in philippines, that they got virus often often often. Just like Google search has wrost virus enginner ever! I don't trust FireFox on my computer. FireFox is really creepy out of me lately.

Yes, Firefox gives you viruses :rolleyes:

If you have a decent anti-virus installed and aren't dumb, then you should be fine! It is more secure than a lot of other browsers out there and probably more secure than Internet Explorer (I do not have proof of this, but I always keep up-to-date with the latest news involving web browser security).

Firefox's phishing capabilities and filter are fantastic!

Do you even know what phishing is? From your comment, it seems you lack some knowledge on web browser security.

Maybe the EU should just make MS hand over the source code and design Windows to their exact preferences, after all the way things are going Windows is not really so much a Microsoft's product anymore at least not in Europe. Next step would be to bundle other OSes in Windows, I wouldn't be surprised if this happens. Businesses that are successful for building a product people buy even when there's competition should not be punished.

helios01 said,
Maybe the EU should just make MS hand over the source code and design Windows to their exact preferences, after all the way things are going Windows is not really so much a Microsoft's product anymore at least not in Europe. Next step would be to bundle other OSes in Windows, I wouldn't be surprised if this happens. Businesses that are successful for building a product people buy even when there's competition should not be punished.

Is there actually even a way to bundle an operating system onto another operating system other than using VMWare/Virtual PC/etc (very inefficient ways)? :blink:

Surely you need a hard drive to install another operating system as well as Windows?

Copies of Windows sold separately would therefore not be able to have another operating system inside and therefore your point would be... well, pointless :D

As stated above, in my replies, many times, it is Microsoft's fault this ruling has happened to them.

They shouldn't have been so lazy and if they hadn't, the majority of Internet users would be using a standards-compliant browser

cJr. said,
Is there actually even a way to bundle an operating system onto another operating system other than using VMWare/Virtual PC/etc (very inefficient ways)? :blink:

Surely you need a hard drive to install another operating system as well as Windows?

Copies of Windows sold separately would therefore not be able to have another operating system inside and therefore your point would be... well, pointless :D

As stated above, in my replies, many times, it is Microsoft's fault this ruling has happened to them.

They shouldn't have been so lazy and if they hadn't, the majority of Internet users would be using a standards-compliant browser :)

Except that bundling OSes wasn't even the point... But I was thinking more in line with something like the university I attend to does, they run Windows and Linux on the same HDD and on boot-up you would to choose which to install, simple enough. Of course it'd be absurd to force them to do that but coming from the people making this decision, anything is possible.

How exactly is it MS's fault? is it for being successful on making a product people buy? for making a non-standards browser? given it'd be better if IE was standards-compliant but it's their product they can make it however they like, just don't use it if you don't like it.

I don't care about what you all say, I'm all for the EU's decision. IE is unsecure, renders terribly, and is outdated. Ff 3 is much better, even if it is forced down people's throats. In fact, I don't really care which browser they force MS to include, as long as it's not IE. I mean, if Ff 3 is successfully forced upon everybody, it's usage will skyrocket, and IE testing will no longer be needed! And besides, most people who don't use IE use Firefox, so it's doing them a favor and saving them the trouble of opening up IE and downloading Ff.

even if it is forced down people's throats

That's a pitty that you think forcing something on people is the way things should be done. And before you say it, Microsoft isn't forcing IE on people either. Just because IE is the default browser out of the box, does not preclude anyone from downloading, installing, and using a different browser.

The whole Windows N fiasco was becase Real complained that they were losing market share on their piece-o-sh*t player. Now there'll be yet another version of Windows that I as a consumer will have to help absorb the cost of simplybecause Opera's market share is like %1. FF, Safari, Chrome, and others (besided Opera) have done really well without being forced on anyone.

You may like or love FF, and more power to you, but the general consumer wants a PC that works when they get it home and not have to sit in front of it configuring options for alternate software.

This whole mess is because of Opera. Nothing more, nothing less.

iamwhoiam said,
That's a pitty that you think forcing something on people is the way things should be done. And before you say it, Microsoft isn't forcing IE on people either. Just because IE is the default browser out of the box, does not preclude anyone from downloading, installing, and using a different browser.

Yes well a lot of people are either too lazy or don't care enough to install Firefox. Then those same lazy people complain that they get virii and that websites don't work properly...

The responses of people on here make me laugh, 98% don't seem to realise what a monopoly is and why they have stricter regulations, the 2nd part is that the majority are Americans and are up in arms at freedom of choice the EU is trying to make a monopoly OS give the consumer the freedom to choice the browser they want, even for those people who are not computer literate, ha, the problem isn't with the EU, its with the MS drones on here, who want to see MS use there monopoly to takeover other markets.

Uhm, the last time I checked, I was free to choose any browser that I wanted to use with Windows. Just because IE is there does not mean I'm "forced" to use it.

iamwhoiam said,
Uhm, the last time I checked, I was free to choose any browser that I wanted to use with Windows. Just because IE is there does not mean I'm "forced" to use it.


Exactly. I am a proud Firefox user and that didn't come on my machine. Sounds to me like the EU is playing to the lowest common denominator that can't understand how to install software on their own...

MS is not a monopoly, it has a controlling share of the world's OS market, being a monopoly would require that it has exclusive control.

Sure, MS at its start used monopolistic policies with OEM's, but that is long gone now, since major OEM's are offering alternative OS'es with their PCs.

When MS starts forcing computer makers not to bundle competitive software to its own, come back again and say its a monopoly.

I'm not in Europe, but...

I feel very strongly that there needs to be fair competition and such, but I really can't say as I agree with this...

I hate when my new computer comes with bundled nonsense that I don't want. This is one of the reasons I am in favor of the plan for Windows 7 to not include a lot of the bundled stuff out of the box. I mean, when I purchased my XPS Laptop from Dell a few months ago I could not even believe now much junk I had to remove from that machine. Applications from Google that provided the same functionality already built into Vista? Why?

I think if anything they should just not install a browser at all rather than bundle them all and let you choose... We all know that even if the other bundled browser's were uninstalled when you made your selection (Which is unlikeley), there would be plenty of unnecessary crap remaining... I say they just have a window open at first boot that allows you to choose a browser, additional software not bundled, etc., and download and install only those selections.

Anything to keep crap off of my computer...

I think MS should stop sale of any MS product, then they will know (I know it sounds stupid). BTW who are the 20 baffuns who votes on yes.

The EU has blown "fair competition" way out of proportion. If the EU has any case, Apple should be forced to do the same.

No, Opera are a bunch of whiney ass cry babies. "Our broswer isn't doing so well, so let's go to the EU and say it's Microsoft's fault."

What is the f***ing point! If you want FFx, just fricking download it. With IE!

EU > Clueless old men who just want money.

Hey, it's a valid tactic to get their economies going again. Just legally steal the money from someone else!

Apparently their last chunk of M$$$$$ ran out.

While I don't think EU has a right to force a company to bundle stuff that isn't created by them, I personally aren't against bundling Firefox. Firefox is much better then IE 7 or IE 6 in terms of workarounds and other buggy non-standard-compliant crap that we have to deal with in IE.

What if I don't _want_ FireFox installed?
In many corporate environments, IE is the standard and will be for years to come. Why should an IT staff in the US have to support 2 browsers because of the EU?
If FireFox comes with Windows, won't that require Microsoft to support (as in, help desk, security patches, bug fixes, etc) FireFox?
What will happen as the Internet evolves? If Firefox fades away and Chrome becomes the standard, and then a few years later some other browser, and then another, will the EU keep changing the requirements, or will we see Windows 10 with good old FireFox 3 installed?

IMHO, the EU needs to get lost. Go find some other way to supplement your failing economy.

JonathanMarston said,
What if I don't _want_ FireFox installed?
In many corporate environments, IE is the standard and will be for years to come. Why should an IT staff in the US have to support 2 browsers because of the EU?

Your kidding right? It's not like its hard to support standards compliant browsers. It's hard to support browsers that AREN'T standard-compliant and buggy (IE 7, IE 6, etc).

Besides, obviously you'd have the ability to choose Internet Explorer over Firefox. In fact, they'd probably have IE installed by default and Firefox as an option to "switch to" without having to download it.

Tikitiki said,
Your kidding right? It's not like its hard to support standards compliant browsers. It's hard to support browsers that AREN'T standard-compliant and buggy (IE 7, IE 6, etc).


Have you ever worked in IT at a large company? Usually many of the web apps are long-standing and/or developed by a third-party and would be costly to upgrade or have upgraded to use "standards". The world of corporate intranets is totally different from the Internet...

Besides, we aren't talking about IE7 and IE6 here. If the EU does force MS to do something like this, it will be with Windows 7, which means IE8 - which has very good CSS 2.1 suppport. As for CSS3 - is that even finalized yet?

Tikitiki said,


Your kidding right? It's not like its hard to support standards compliant browsers. It's hard to support browsers that AREN'T standard-compliant and buggy (IE 7, IE 6, etc).

Besides, obviously you'd have the ability to choose Internet Explorer over Firefox. In fact, they'd probably have IE installed by default and Firefox as an option to "switch to" without having to download it.


I think Jonathan was talking from a Tech Support point of view.

Corporations have enough issues to deal with without having to provide support for yet another web browser.

I'll ask this again, if MS bundle FF with windows, who supports FF? Mozilla or MS!!!!

neo158 said,
I think Johnathan was talking from a Tech Support point of view.

Corporations have enough issues to deal with without having to provide support for yet another web browser.

I'll ask this again, if MS bundle FF with windows, who supports FF? Mozilla or MS!!!!


Exactly. The main issue with what the EU is suggesting is support. It would force IT staffs to support IE and FF (help desk calls, security patches, etc) and would require Microsoft to provide support for FF (if a piece of software comes with the OS, Microsoft is obligated to support it).

So, what happens if a security hole is found in FireFox (as much as people like to pretend it can't happen, it can, and does)? Now MS has a problem - the default install of their OS has a security hole in a piece of software that they have no control over! And, when the patch is released by Mozilla, the IT staff at the corporations now have to manage testing and deployment of patches for both IE and FF.

Wow, the rod up the EU's butt must have a rod up it's butt.

This would be rolling around on the floor hysterical... if only they weren't serious.

Most of you don't realise that whilst you can download another browser if you wish (as you are in the know about technology). Many of the average users do not know of any alternatives and a lot fo them think that Internet Explorer is the Internet!

This disadvantages us web developers greatly (to read why, please see all of my replies to people in this news story)

Everybody should stop being so ignorant to the people who create these websites. It is Microsoft's fault. They have cause the majority of Internet users to use a browser which does not support CSS 2.1 fully (currently IE6 and IE7, which many people will use for ages yet) and they have no browser out there which supports XHTML or any CSS 3 attributes).

Microsoft deserve this.

Although, I do think bundling just Firefox is bad. The EU need to think of a way to offer the user more choice.

Maybe a solution like Windows Update (but obviously not called that), which lets the user download a web browser of their choice (after being given information that web developer's sites may not display correctly in Internet Explorer if the developer has used CSS 3 attributes).

Whilst this is giving the user more information than they need or even understand, it at least lets them make an informed choice for once (as many do not even know alternatives to Internet Explorer exist, disadvantaging us web developers)!

If "many" people do not know there are other choices out there then they should take responsibility for themselves and learn a little about computers. Or, Microsoft's competitors could fight -fairly- for marketshare. Having the EU force it on your customers just demonstrates what lack of demand there really is for an alternative.

Let the people decide. Find more important things to worry about EU.

One word :AOL.

iexplorer is some sort of AOL, less evil but still evil.

EU is trying to FORCE to windows to lets the people can choose which browser they want to install, IT IS NOT THE SAME TO SAY THEY WILL FORCE TO INSTALL FIREFOX. So i think this measure is pretty cool, if you are pleased to, then you can't install firefox (or another browser) but iexplorer, or if you want then you can install firefox as a default browser.

C_Guy said,
If "many" people do not know there are other choices out there then they should take responsibility for themselves and learn a little about computers. Or, Microsoft's competitors could fight -fairly- for marketshare. Having the EU force it on your customers just demonstrates what lack of demand there really is for an alternative.

Let the people decide. Find more important things to worry about EU.

It's not about the other users needing to learn and know more about computers (which I agree they should) or about "demand for an alternative", it's about us web developers and how the majority of Internet users (people who use Internet Explorer 6 and 7) aren't able to see our websites how they are meant to be shown, yet they show perfectly (or perfectly with very minor changes) in every other major browser. Even with Internet Explorer 8, users cannot see things like opacity (unless we use Microsoft's filter attribute which causes a parsing error in validation - meaning we cannot validate our websites) or selection.

As users cannot see our websites how we intend them to see them, it is only fair to us web developers for Microsoft to be forced to install a web browser that does display them as we intend (or for them to give the user a choice).

cJr. said,
Even with Internet Explorer 8, users cannot see things like opacity (unless we use Microsoft's filter attribute which causes a parsing error in validation - meaning we cannot validate our websites) or selection.

LOL!!!!

Before you say that IE can't do opacity, you might actually want to check those "facts".

.transparent

{

   filter:alpha(opacity=40);

   -moz-opacity: 0.4;

   opacity: 0.4;

}



Problem solved. It works really well.

iamwhoiam said,
LOL!!!!

Before you say that IE can't do opacity, you might actually want to check those "facts".

.transparent

{

   filter:alpha(opacity=40);

   -moz-opacity: 0.4;

   opacity: 0.4;

}

Problem solved. It works really well.

LOL!!!!

No it does not work really well at all and it is not problem solved!

Please do not try and make out like you know things when you obviously do not!

The 'filter' attribute used exactly the way you used it (the only way) gives a parsing error on the W3C's Markup Validator! There is no way around this parsing error unless you use a stylesheet specifically for Internet Explorer and use conditional comments on that - like I have done.

This obviously refers to my earlier point that we have to still specifically develop for Internet Explorer; even Internet Explorer 8, when we do not have to change much (if anything) to get our websites working in every other major browser.

Maybe you should check your "facts" before you make a fool out of yourself and try to make a fool out of others! I always check my facts and if you are an intelligent web designer, you will know it is best for web standards to always validate!

(EDIT: I've just noticed, I even said this in the comment of mine you quoted. Why not read properly in future before trying (and failing) to sound like a smart-ass?)

If this ridiculous crap continues, expect to see Windows on Blu-Ray within 5 years! (Kind of a double-jab: bloated Microsoft code + 50,000 forced programs by the EU)

I'm not a big supporter of Interventionism and honestly i don't think it'll make any dent to MS.

But honestly the gouvernement should not have to do move like this. There should already be a companion CD coming with Windows and including some popular 3rd party programs like Firefox and Gimp. Or at least there should be a web site (created by MS) devoted to useful 3rd party programd someone can get for Windows.

Most people don't even know they can get very good free alternative for Windows like Gimp or Open Office. Sometime the free alternative is better than the corporate product like it is the case with Eclipse and extensions beeing one of the best web developement suite you can get.

Logically any company selling an OS would be proud to talk about and support 3rd party programs. MS themself do a lot of work to promote 3rd party games for the 360. We all know why MS doesn't do the same on the PC market. And it's not for the best.

LaP said,
I'm not a big supporter of Interventionism and honestly i don't think it'll make any dent to MS.

But honestly the gouvernement should not have to do move like this. There should already be a companion CD coming with Windows and including some popular 3rd party programs like Firefox and Gimp. Or at least there should be a web site (created by MS) devoted to useful 3rd party programd someone can get for Windows.

Most people don't even know they can get very good free alternative for Windows like Gimp or Open Office. Sometime the free alternative is better than the corporate product like it is the case with Eclipse and extensions beeing one of the best web developement suite you can get.

Logically any company selling an OS would be proud to talk about and support 3rd party programs. MS themself do a lot of work to promote 3rd party games for the 360. We all know why MS doesn't do the same on the PC market. And it's not for the best.


ya except not everyone cares about "free" alternatives. I for one would never again use firefox, open office, or gimp after trying the REAL alternatives (IE7/8, Office, Photoshop).

tablet_user said,

ya except not everyone cares about "free" alternatives. I for one would never again use firefox, open office, or gimp after trying the REAL alternatives (IE7/8, Office, Photoshop).

Rofl it's obvious you never used any of the program listed.

While open office might lack some features a big corporation needs for the average user at home it's as good as Word.

Gimp might lack some features a pro needs but for the average user wanting to alter his digital photo or for the web designer it's far than enough.

As for Firefox versus IE7/8 it's a matter of taste.

And it's not about free alternative only. There's a lot of good products out there for under 50$ that can do the job for the average user but lack the exposure of big corporation expensive software. It would just be logical for an OS maker in a competitive market to promote the products people can get for their OS. You know like MS promote 3rd party 360 games if there's a possibility they sell some systems.

LaP said,


Rofl it's obvious you never used any of the program listed.

While open office might lack some features a big corporation needs for the average user at home it's as good as Word.

Gimp might lack some features a pro needs but for the average user wanting to alter his digital photo or for the web designer it's far than enough.

As for Firefox versus IE7/8 it's a matter of taste.

And it's not about free alternative only. There's a lot of good products out there for under 50$ that can do the job for the average user but lack the exposure of big corporation expensive software. It would just be logical for an OS maker in a competitive market to promote the products people can get for their OS. You know like MS promote 3rd party 360 games if there's a possibility they sell some systems.


Define the average user.

OO does one (and only one) thing that Word does not; spit out clean PDF documents from Word files (and that's the ONLY thing I use OO for).

Besides, OO doesn't do e-mail at all (and that is the single biggest thing, other than than Word, that I use Office 2007 for). To be quite blunt, I have not found a single e-mail program, other than Evolution or KMail, to be the equal of Outlook as a POP3 mail client (which says quite a bit about Outlook, actually, since POIP3 has been said to be a weakeness). Consider that neither Evolution of KMail is available for Windows.

Sometimes, it's not the BIG things that cause folks to choose one application over another.

While I don't like the EU for their ridiculous rulings, I don't see Firefox on Windows quite bad at all. I mean, it's suggested widely among the community already, including those that aren't very tech savvy.

Plus, it isn't Opera so it'd be a lovely slap in the face to them in my opinion. Not that I'm against the Opera browser exactly, but considering their the ones bringing this dumb crap to the EU, their browser shouldn't get tossed into Windows.

Chasethebase said,
So they aren't even saying anything to Apple about Safari?

Bleh.

Of course not. Apple can do no wrong these days, it seems. That'll change eventually...I hope.

mhhh... Replace IE with Firefox, WMP with Winamp and VLC, Windows Messenger with Pidgin/Trillian, Snipping tool with Snagit,Windows DVD Maker with nero/roxio ... Ok, i am asking for too much :P

Its their OS ...... Let Microsoft include whatever they want. Why is it when Microsoft gives something OOTB ... its always antitrust and is not same for other OS in the market

rakeshishere said,
mhhh... Replace IE with Firefox, WMP with Winamp and VLC, Windows Messenger with Pidgin/Trillian, Snipping tool with Snagit,Windows DVD Maker with nero/roxio ... Ok, i am asking for too much :P


God no! I *like* IE7/8, WMP11/12, and WLM! Though it would be nice if the Roxio suite was included...

2Cold Scorpio said,
God no! I *like* IE7/8, WMP11/12, and WLM! Though it would be nice if the Roxio suite was included... :D


I hope your joking about replacing with those apps rakeshishere.

Aww cmon EU. Haven't you hurt us enough?
This is bullc***! Don't we have some more pressing issues? --- Apparently not...
I wonder what these idiots who decide this kind of crap do the whole day... I mean there's absolutely no productivity here and nobody really wins with such a bundle.

Well people who like Firefox are most likely able to download it on their ownes. Same applies to Opera, Chrome and Safari users. If I want such a browser I go get it. Simple.

Ok another approach would be to forbid MS from bundling IE with Windows, who knows, maybe thats the next idea of that stupid circle of #%@! --- Doesn't sound too unlikely does it?

If I want Firefox on my system, I will download it - simple as.

Microsoft Windows comes with the added features of a browser and all in one media player. Nobody forces me to use them, therefore Microsoft are giving people the choice. However, I predict for the majority of Windows users don't really care and therefore will use whatever comes with the OS.

But yes, if Microsoft include Firefox with their OS, then Apple need to include Internet Explorer for MAC users. Both must also bundle Opera, Maxthon, Chrome and whatever else browsers there are out there - i mean, they can't favour one browser right?

This is just stupid; why should MS be forrced to include third party software? If people want FF they can go get it...using IE. To the average user, having two browsers would be confusing. That's like having two different companies' radios in a car. The EU either needs to step off or start slapping Apple around as well.

Seriously, what the EU is trying to do is like forcing Ford to use Chevy seats in their trucks. It's asinine.

The EU is missing the big picture here.

People are ignorant and usually apathetic when it comes to software, they don't care what it is, or how it does it; They just care that it works.

Bundling browsers won't do anything to solve this "problem", because giving them a neutral choice will just make them gravitate to the obvious option, the program named Internet Explorer. So you then choose a non-IE browser alternative by default, but which one? Choose Firefox and you're snubbing Chrome/Opera and so on.

People that want to use an alternative, will seek one out and use it, no need to waste space by bundling them. Let the "peons" use their default browser and continue on in their ignorance, removing IE will only result in pain and strife for them.

All the EU should do is sit ontop of Microsoft and constantly yell "Improve standards compliance" at them until Trident is at the level of Presto/Webkit, then watch them like a hawk so they keep everything standardised and up-to-date.

Athernar said,
The EU is missing the big picture here.

People are ignorant and usually apathic when it comes to software, they don't care what it is, or how it does it; They just care that it works.

Bundling browsers won't do anything to solve this "problem", because giving them a neutral choice will just make them gravitate to the obvious option, the program named
Internet Explorer
. So you then choose a non-IE browser alternative by default, but which one? Choose Firefox and you're snubbing Chrome/Opera and so on.

People that want to use an alternative, will seek one out and use it, no need to waste space by bundling them. Let the "peons" use their default browser and continue on in their ignorance, removing IE will only result in pain and strife for them.

All the EU should do is sit ontop of Microsoft and constantly yell "Improve standards compliance" at them until Trident is at the level of Presto/Webkit, then watch them like a hawk so they keep everything standardised and up-to-date.


Standards compliance? I honestly believe that when 80+% of the market uses a certain thing *it* becomes the standard, not some arbitrary "standards" thought up by some small group if people who think they know what is best for everyone, such as the W3C. I respect the W3C, mind you, but how can something be the 'standard' when only a fraction of folks are actually using it?

2Cold Scorpio said,
Standards compliance? I honestly believe that when 80+% of the market uses a certain thing *it* becomes the standard, not some arbitrary "standards" thought up by some small group if people who think they know what is best for everyone, such as the W3C. I respect the W3C, mind you, but how can something be the 'standard' when only a fraction of folks are actually using it?


That's a whole other discussion for another day.

Athernar said,
That's a whole other discussion for another day. ;)


Indeed. I just think maybe if everyone left Microsoft alone, they'd get more done. ^_^

2Cold Scorpio said,

Standards compliance? I honestly believe that when 80+% of the market uses a certain thing *it* becomes the standard, not some arbitrary "standards" thought up by some small group if people who think they know what is best for everyone, such as the W3C. I respect the W3C, mind you, but how can something be the 'standard' when only a fraction of folks are actually using it?

It can become the standard because every other single major browser out there supports it (with some minor issues).

Internet Explorer doesn't because Microsoft are too stubborn. That is their fault.

To Athernar:

Whilst I agree with some of your points, most users do not know of the alternatives to Internet Explorer and that disadvatages us web developers greatly.

cJr. said,
To Athernar:

Whilst I agree with some of your points, most users do not know of the alternatives to Internet Explorer and that disadvatages us web developers greatly.


That's all part of my point cJr, even if you did present the user with a run-once app in place of the intenet button that selects a default browser, they'll just pick IE; Partly because of name, partly because of the fact it's what they're used to, and maybe a little bit of trust with Microsoft they don't have with Mozilla or Opera.

The only real case here in my opinion is making sure that Microsoft supports the standards and doesn't try to replace them. IE8 will at least make sure there (Going forward) won't be any need for multiple layouts and etc.

I don't really think that IE's poor standards support has anything to do with stubborness in particular, more to do with the fact they IE team was foolishly disbanded after IE6 went final.

Athernar said,

That's all part of my point cJr, even if you did present the user with a run-once app in place of the intenet button that selects a default browser, they'll just pick IE; Partly because of name, partly because of the fact it's what they're used to, and maybe a little bit of trust with Microsoft they don't have with Mozilla or Opera.

The only real case here in my opinion is making sure that Microsoft supports the standards and doesn't try to replace them. IE8 will at least make sure there (Going forward) won't be any need for multiple layouts and etc.

I don't really think that IE's poor standards support has anything to do with stubborness in particular, more to do with the fact they IE team was foolishly disbanded after IE6 went final.

Finally, somebody speaks sense :)

I agree with everything you have said here. I am just impatient and even though Internet Explorer 8 is moving in the right direction, people who would like to use CSS transparency in their webpages (a CSS 3 attribute) still have to use a separate stylesheet for Internet Explorer (if they also like to validate their webpages, which really should be done for many reasons). The reason for having to include a separate stylesheet is because Internet Explorer (8-)'s way of supporting transparency (through the use of the 'filter' tag) causes a parsing error in the validator which cannot be corrected unless we use a separate stylesheet for that code (using conditional comments). Every other major browser, including Firefox now, supports CSS transparency through the use of the CSS 3 'opacity' attribute, which validates perfectly (there is now no need for '-moz' at the beginning in Firefox for this attribute).

That is however, not too much of a major issue and I do agree with your comment. I just wish Internet Explorer didn't have the highest market share because of things like this and because it disadvantages us web developers greatly.

I guess I am just very bitter because of that

You know, they should do the same thing with McDonald's.... force them to include the Whopper sauce inside the Big Mac....

Emotional arguments aside, has anyone thought what it would be like if MS had to include alternative browsers into Windows? I'd say, hilarity ensues.

1) Coke selling Pepsi in their vending machines.

2) A new OS comes out roughly once every 3 years from MS. Service packs roughly once a year. How often is Firefox updated with patches? Will MS now have to schedule their updates with Mozilla, Google and Apple? Including updates for alternative browsers in Windows Updates? Or will every Windows OS be insecure after installing even after Windows Updates because of un-updated versions of all the other browsers?

3) Why limit the browsers to xxx browsers? Why not SeaMonkey, Maxthon and so on? Wouldn't they also cry foul?

4) Any issue that crops up when using alternative browsers. MS's fault?

I agree we should write letters :P. it's unfair to do this and microsoft should definately not back down on this. If I want to use firefox or opera I can download it. Microsoft should be allowed to bundle Internet Explorer as they please.

I don't use firefox and don't want to use firefox, can I then complain that they are bundling firefox with windows?

I don't use opera either. I have used Chrome, firefox, opera, safari and others too, but I always end up going back to Internet Explorer.

I print things from the web for work, research and the such and if i'm prefectly honest NO OTHER browser can print like IE. I like the way Internet explorer handles printing, especially when there are multiple pages and frames.

The EU are just money grabbing ******* and we should ignore it :P. I am British, I live in the United Kingdom and if it came down to it I would definately say NO to EU.

I hate the way they try to enforce laws and the such and they should be stopped, I am sure many UK citizens would agree with this too.

The EU SUCKS and Microsoft is being unfairly treated. I am not a Microsoft lover, nor an Apple lover. I like both Operating systems and have products from both companies and it's not fair that Apple are left to do as they please without EU interuption :P

Maybe Microsoft should have a special European version of windows, without Media Player, Internet Explorer and anything else that people like to moan about. This should be forced into the European Market and the 'Full' version of Windows should not be allowed over here. I bet people start to complain then :)

Well,

Personally I am ashamed to live in the UK when it is part of the EU.

Wasting pathetic amounts of money trying to force a software developer to remove certain aspects of their operating system.

I believe that if Microsoft is forced to remove or any other way disable Internet Explorer, then Apple should have to do the same with Safari in OS X and Linux the same with Firefox or any other browser they bundle.

At the end of the day MS do not force the user of IE and they don't restrict the use of other browsers, all they do is provide as much software to do day to day tasks as possible out of the box.

andyr2005 said,
Well,

Personally I am ashamed to live in the UK when it is part of the EU.

Wasting pathetic amounts of money trying to force a software developer to remove certain aspects of their operating system.

I believe that if Microsoft is forced to remove or any other way disable Internet Explorer, then Apple should have to do the same with Safari in OS X and Linux the same with Firefox or any other browser they bundle.

At the end of the day MS do not force the user of IE and they don't restrict the use of other browsers, all they do is provide as much software to do day to day tasks as possible out of the box.

Many users do not know of the alternatives and that disadvantages us web developers immensely, Please read my other replies in this news story for reasons why.

cJr. said,


Many users do not know of the alternatives and that disadvantages us web developers immensely, Please read my other replies in this news story for reasons why.


You have no idea how much that makes you sound like a crybaby do you.

It's like saying that MS should bundle Python with windows because a Linux user who may have to use Windows (crazy I know) would be disadvantaged.

neo158 said,
You have no idea how much that makes you sound like a crybaby do you.

It's like saying that MS should bundle Python with windows because a Linux user who may have to use Windows (crazy I know) would be disadvantaged.

No it isn't the same. You are obviously very naive.

Everybody, no matter what operating system they are using is able to access your website, if they have an Internet connection and nothing is blocked.

That means it makes sense to be able to create your website once and have that displayed exactly the same as how you made it in every browser.

It doesn't make sense to to be able to create your website once and have that displayed exactly the same as how you made it (with a few minor changes) in every other major web browser except Internet Explorer, meaning you have to go through the pain and somehow find time to make it work in Internet Explorer 6 and 7, sometimes, essentially creating a whole new version of your website!

This is what happens if you develop to strict standards. Internet Explorer is the one who breaks these standards. Believe me, I know, I develop to strict standards.

Also, I never said anything about bundling anything into any operating system so I don't even know what you comment is getting at!?

I said Internet Explorer should be removed. I did say bundling Firefox would be a better idea than just leaving Internet Explorer, but I never said it's the best idea.

I suggest you read properly and do you research.

cJr. said,


No it isn't the same. You are obviously very naive.

Everybody, no matter what operating system they are using is able to access your website, if they have an Internet connection and nothing is blocked.

That means it makes sense to be able to create your website once and have that displayed exactly the same as how you made it in every browser.

It doesn't make sense to to be able to create your website once and have that displayed exactly the same as how you made it (with a few minor changes) in every other major web browser except Internet Explorer, meaning you have to go through the pain and somehow find time to make it work in Internet Explorer 6 and 7, sometimes, essentially creating a whole new version of your website!

This is what happens if you develop to strict standards. Internet Explorer is the one who breaks these standards. Believe me, I know, I develop to strict standards.

Also, I never said anything about bundling anything into any operating system so I don't even know what you comment is getting at!?

I said Internet Explorer should be removed. I did say bundling Firefox would be a better idea than just leaving Internet Explorer, but I never said it's the best idea.

I suggest you read properly and do you research.


I'm not very naive and yes I do have Firefox installed on my system, for the puposes of testing.

I did read it properly and I have done research.

I hate to warn the EU, but most OEM builds of Windows already come with two browsers (mine came with Firefox and IE, and I didn't even ask for it, although it was handy as I use Firefox).

Anyway, this is bull****. I'm very tempted to write a letter to the people in charge about this, the way Microsoft are being treated is practically unlawful.

The Tjalian said,
I hate to warn the EU, but most OEM builds of Windows already come with two browsers (mine came with Firefox and IE, and I didn't even ask for it, although it was handy as I use Firefox).

Anyway, this is bull****. I'm very tempted to write a letter to the people in charge about this, the way Microsoft are being treated is practically unlawful.

Please do write that letter!

The Tjalian said,
I hate to warn the EU, but most OEM builds of Windows already come with two browsers (mine came with Firefox and IE, and I didn't even ask for it, although it was handy as I use Firefox).

Anyway, this is bull****. I'm very tempted to write a letter to the people in charge about this, the way Microsoft are being treated is practically unlawful.

Please do not write that letter.

Please read my other replies on this news story for reasons why Microsoft are being treated like this and for why they deserve it (making it so the majority of Internet users use a browser which does not work properly).

One solution probably is that on first use of Internet Explorer, have a page listing other Web Browsers they may like to consider using...

martinDTanderson said,
One solution probably is that on first use of Internet Explorer, have a page listing other Web Browsers they may like to consider using...

I think this would be the best solution if it comes to it. Bundling the actual installers for other browsers on the installation media is just asking for problems.

In fact this solution would solve all the "problems" the EU and Opera are claiming while showing that it's really just a storm in a teacup.

martinDTanderson said,
One solution probably is that on first use of Internet Explorer, have a page listing other Web Browsers they may like to consider using...

Other = ?

I believe this may be a better solution than just installing Firefox, as long as Microsoft explain that Firefox and the others support web standards (where they do) and which ones support certain CSS 3 features, bascially explaining to the user that a lot of websites may not display correctly in Internet Explorer.

I do not see Microsoft admitting to this and doing this, therefore, the EU should force it.

It serves Microsoft right for not keeping up with web development languages.

garethevans1986 said,
Im happy to use IE to download Firefox on a new Windows build.....the choice should be down to the user and not the EU.

GE

Most of the average users do not know other browsers exist. They therefore use the default which is installed on Windows (Internet Explorer) and then our (web developers) webpages are not shown properly to the user (unless we go through the pain and somehow find the time to specifically develop for Internet Explorer 6 or 7).

Please, do not be so ignorant.

Sorry cJr but I disagree with you, the choice should always be with the consumer and not the government.

btw, I do develop web sites and I know what a pain IE can be, but, why shouldn't Microsoft be allowed to bundle its own browser with its own OS?

neo158 said,
Sorry cJr but I disagree with you, the choice should always be with the consumer and not the government.

btw, I do develop web sites and I know what a pain IE can be, but, why shouldn't Microsoft be allowed to bundle its own browser with its own OS?

The user cannot make a choice if they know nothing about technology and do not even know there is a choice. A lot of the average users do not even know what a web browser is and believe Internet Explorer is the Internet. They do not know there are alternatives.

The reason why I believe Microsoft shouldn't be able to include their own browser in their own operating system is because they have made such a mess already. It is their own fault. They do not deserve to be allowed to.

They have made it so Internet Explorer cannot officially be removed. They have also made it (albeit unintentionally) so the majority of Internet users use a browser which us developers have to specifically target and go through pain and a lot of extra time to support, when our websites already work in every other major web browser (when we develop to strict standards).

That's why I believe they should not be allowed to include it in with Windows as they have already been irresponsible enough and have created this mess.

I demand Keporopspdrusoiurh Browser 0.4.6.4.2.4.4.5.2345 to be installed too! It's unfair that Opera, Safari, Firefox and IE are installed but K...(oh crap... read above) isn't. It's just further destroying the competition with minor browsers!

The EU ate some seriously **** lately.

Cidinho said,
I demand Keporopspdrusoiurh Browser 0.4.6.4.2.4.4.5.2345 to be installed too! It's unfair that Opera, Safari, Firefox and IE are installed but K...(oh crap... read above) isn't. It's just further destroying the competition with minor browsers!

The EU ate some seriously **** lately.


Exactly!

RealFduch said,

Exactly!

I agree that installing just Firefox is not the way to go, but neither is having just Internet Explorer on Windows by default.

They need to think of another way.

Maybe using a program like Windows Update to let the user pick their browser. I believe that is the best way.

Soldiers33 said,
wtf i dotn watch that mozilla S@!# to be installed on my OS

But you quite happily except Internet Explorer 6 or 7 being installed on your computer (it will have been in the past)? A browser which does not work properly.

Why? Because it is made by Microsoft, who also make the operating system?

You do realize that despite Internet Explorer's lack of standards support, its rendering engine is still widely used in the shell and bundled Windows apps?

Help and Support is one example. The reports from Problem Reports and Solutions are another.

edit: this is assuming you're advocating the removal of IE, not just a simple bundling of Firefox.

rm20010 said,
You do realize that despite Internet Explorer's lack of standards support, its rendering engine is still widely used in the shell and bundled Windows apps?

Help and Support is one example. The reports from Problem Reports and Solutions are another.

edit: this is assuming you're advocating the removal of IE, not just a simple bundling of Firefox.

I understand that completely and that has not been part of my discussion (apart from a little bit ago, a few comments down, whilst I was moving up the page, replying to people, where I talked about Microsoft implementing Internet Explorer that deep into Windows that it cannot be removed).

Whilst I am aware of this, I have said I'd ideally like the removal of Internet Explorer and the user given a fair choice between any browser, not just Internet Explorer and Firefox (there would be ways if Internet Explorer could be removed officially - unfortunately, that will not happen).

This gives an unfair competitive advantage to Firefox relative to other fine browsers out there. I demand that Opera be bundled in Windows as well.

</sarcasm>

To many core parts of the system are relaying on the IE engine (help, updates,...) so it seem kinda difficult to completely remove it out and replace it with FF.
Besides, sooner or later Opera, Chrome etc. guys will want to have their share followed by WinAMP, Foobar,...

This is one reason why i get a dam OS cd over bloody OEM!!!
Sod off EU, first you try and take our lovely £, then you try and take our measurments and weights, then you try and remove the queen from our passports, now your trying to force choice on us for browsers SOD OFF!

tunafish said,
This is one reason why i get a dam OS cd over bloody OEM!!!
Sod off EU, first you try and take our lovely �, then you try and take our measurments and weights, then you try and remove the queen from our passports, now your trying to force choice on us for browsers SOD OFF!

Microsoft already essentially 'forced' many of the average user to use Internet Explorer 6 and 7 (both browsers which cannot render webpages properly unless the developer has specifically targeted Internet Explorer) by bundling it into Windows. Many of the average user now think Internet Explorer is the only option. (Some do not even know what Internet Explorer is, they just think it is the Internet).

Most of the average users also do not know that Internet Explorer 6 and 7 can't render webpages properly. Microsoft act like it does :D

haha EU are becoming like communists where is the ****ing democracy . One day they will tell people to use WinAmp instead of media player or linux instead of windows. I dont want firefox bundled nor i wanted windows N

I live in the EU. BUT !!!

I hate these ****ing ideas to force everybody to do what they want.

For example :

I had a Sony nw e003 mp3 player. It had such low output, I could hear everything around me. I couldn't enjoy my music on buses or trams. The Eu forced Sony to limit the output. Why ? I can turn the volume down if I wanted to. They don't have to protect me !!!

Why the do we need Windows without media player or ie. I use opera. Now what. They will bundle it too ? Or Avant or Chrome or Safari or Flock or............

What we'll get finaly is a bloated ****. I can decide what I want . I can live with IE installed or WMP installed. I have my default browser and my default media player. And there are many things in Windows, I am not using. Like wordpad, sticky notes, or minesweeper. But they are installed. And ? Who the hell cares ? These thing are max 200 Megs .

Origamihl said,
I live in the EU. BUT !!!

I hate these ****ing ideas to force everybody to do what they want.

For example :

I had a Sony nw e003 mp3 player. It had such low output, I could hear everything around me. I couldn't enjoy my music on buses or trams. The Eu forced Sony to limit the output. Why ? I can turn the volume down if I wanted to. They don't have to protect me !!!

Why the do we need Windows without media player or ie. I use opera. Now what. They will bundle it too ? Or Avant or Chrome or Safari or Flock or............

What we'll get finaly is a bloated ****. I can decide what I want . I can live with IE installed or WMP installed. I have my default browser and my default media player. And there are many things in Windows, I am not using. Like wordpad, sticky notes, or minesweeper. But they are installed. And ? Who the hell cares ? These thing are max 200 Megs .

Maybe you should read some of my replies to people above.

The reason why they should remove Internet Explorer is simple -

Microsoft have made it so the majority of Internet users are using a browser which does not work properly (Internet Explorer 6 and 7 do not fully support CSS 2.1 and do not support XHTML).

The average user does not know there are alternatives and therefore it is bad for us developers who have to go through the pain of trying to support browsers which do not render webpages as they should be rendered (Internet Explorer 6 and 7)

I agree with most people here that the EU cannot (or should not) force MS to bundle competitors software. But I cannot help wondering if MS is not secretly a bit happy that the EU only wants to do that? When this news was first announced it looked like MS would be forced to completely remove IE from Windows. That would probably have been a much bigger problem.

SibKhatru

SibKhatru said,
I agree with most people here that the EU cannot (or should not) force MS to bundle competitors software. But I cannot help wondering if MS is not secretly a bit happy that the EU only wants to do that? When this news was first announced it looked like MS would be forced to completely remove IE from Windows. That would probably have been a much bigger problem.

SibKhatru

Unfortunately they haven't been forced to remove it and so users have not got a way to be given a completely fair chance of which browser they would like to use (there will be ways).

Instead they now have a choice of a browser which does not work very well (one which doesn't support any CSS 3 but most of CSS 2.1) or Firefox.

I bet the user will go with the one they are used to

As a Brit (and therefore unfortunately also an EU member) I wish the EU commission would just get lost. This sounds like just the most ridiculous idea. It's MSs OS, so they can bundle what they want with it. If you don't like the default choices, either change them yourself, or don't use Windows.

Next you'll have AOL demanding that WinAMP be included, Google demanding Picasa etc. Maybe MS should bundle an alternative Notepad? Do you make systems management tools? Well, just contact the EU, they'll maybe force MS to include them too.

Slugsie said,
As a Brit (and therefore unfortunately also an EU member) I wish the EU commission would just get lost. This sounds like just the most ridiculous idea. It's MSs OS, so they can bundle what they want with it. If you don't like the default choices, either change them yourself, or don't use Windows.

Next you'll have AOL demanding that WinAMP be included, Google demanding Picasa etc. Maybe MS should bundle an alternative Notepad? Do you make systems management tools? Well, just contact the EU, they'll maybe force MS to include them too.

Many people do not know there is a different choice (as all they know of is Internet Explorer. Some don't even know what a web browser is, they just think Internet Explorer is the Internet).

That to me is a prime example of Microsoft's web browser dominance and the average user should be given the chance of knowing there are alternatives (to Internet Explorer 6, which many of them use) which can actually render webpages.

The same argument goes: If they want to install Internet Explorer, they could just go ahead and download it.

Ridiculous - I rather have my PC stripped of all 3rd party software when I get it. Not filled with more. If I want a browser let me have thatchoice, please dont go and preinstall others for me.

If IE was a decent browser I would be against this but the fact is that IE is slow, out of date and useless in the modern internet. Go Firefox.

IE7/8 is a decent browser. I quite happily flip between IE7/8 and Firefox and barely notice the difference. Some things work better in one, some in the other.

Slugsie said,
IE7/8 is a decent browser. I quite happily flip between IE7/8 and Firefox and barely notice the difference. Some things work better in one, some in the other.

If you were a web developer, developing decent websites, then you'd see there is a big difference between the rendering in Internet Explorer 7 and 8.

Internet Explorer 8 is acceptable if you are only using CSS 2.1

That isn't the only reason why people are against the budling of Internet Explorer in with Windows though, it's because many still use Internet Explorer 6 and 7, which are rubbish at rendering webpages. It's not just what people will use in the future. If more people know about other browsers then that will convince people on older computers still using these older versions of Internet Explorer which cannot render webpages properly (unless the user has specifically developed a version of their website for Internet Explorer as well as the version for every other major web browser

There's a lot of reason to force the removal of Internet Explorer from Windows and, for me, it all comes down to standards and not competition.

If Internet Explorer 6 and 7 were as good as Firefox, Chrome, Opera and Safari at rendering web pages, I'd have no problem, whatsoever, with it. The fact is, with Internet Explorer 8, Microsoft have only just fully supported CSS 2.1. Internet Explorer 6, 7 and 8 do not properly support XHTML (the new standard and recommendation) and Internet Explorer 6 does not support transparent PNG images.

This is all despicable and the fact that because Internet Explorer is bundled with Windows, the majority of Internet users now use a web browser which does not properly render web pages.

People will use Internet Explorer 6 and 7 for a while longer and with that, I think this EU accusation can only do good for web developers and Internet users alike.

I don't see why people are against this, knowing that because of Microsoft, the majority of Internet users use a browser which doesn't work and renders web pages wrongly (unless the developer has somehow found valuable time to painfully support Internet Explorer 6 and 7).

It is Microsoft's fault, it obviously isn't hard to create a web browser which can actually compete with Firefox, Opera, Safari and Chrome, fully supporting CSS 2.1 and supporting many useful CSS 3 attributes. Microsoft have not done this and it is unfair on both users and developers!

cJr. said,
There's a lot of reason to force the removal of Internet Explorer from Windows and, for me, it all comes down to standards and not competition.

If Internet Explorer 6 and 7 were as good as Firefox, Chrome, Opera and Safari at rendering web pages, I'd have no problem, whatsoever, with it. The fact is, with Internet Explorer 8, Microsoft have only just fully supported CSS 2.1. Internet Explorer 6, 7 and 8 do not properly support XHTML (the new standard and recommendation) and Internet Explorer 6 does not support transparent PNG images.

This is all despicable and the fact that because Internet Explorer is bundled with Windows, the majority of Internet users now use a web browser which does not properly render web pages.

People will use Internet Explorer 6 and 7 for a while longer and with that, I think this EU accusation can only do good for web developers and Internet users alike.

I don't see why people are against this, knowing that because of Microsoft, the majority of Internet users use a browser which doesn't work and renders web pages wrongly (unless the developer has somehow found valuable time to painfully support Internet Explorer 6 and 7).

It is Microsoft's fault, it obviously isn't hard to create a web browser which can actually compete with Firefox, Opera, Safari and Chrome, fully supporting CSS 2.1 and supporting many useful CSS 3 attributes. Microsoft have not done this and it is unfair on both users and developers!


Firefox doesn'r support w3c standards.
Firefox doesn't support XSL.
Giving multibillion dollar Mozilla Corporation another handicap is trumping competition and free choice.

As a regular user of both Internet Explorer and Firefox, I can only assume that your knowledge of Internet Explorer is outdated.

The real problem as far as I'm concerned is the existing IE6 user base. Any action that the EU take isn't going to change that one bit. IE7 is lot easier to deal with in comparison and IE8 a lot better still.

And as for upcoming web standards, HTML 5 and XHTML 5 are where it's at, not XHTML 2 and below.

RealFduch said,
Firefox doesn'r support w3c standards.
Firefox doesn't support XSL.
Giving multibillion dollar Mozilla Corporation another handicap is trumping competition and free choice.

Firefox displays web pages very similar (if not identical) to Chrome, Safari and Opera. There is always some need to change your code a little bit to make it cross-browser compatible (minus Internet Explorer), but to make it work in Internet Explorer, it requires much more pain and much more effort (we have to develop for Internet Explorer 6 and 7 because most people still use them).

Firefox includes support for many CSS 3 atrributes and is very standards-compliant.

Also, you can't say it's more profit for the Mozilla Corporation as any profit made by that corporation goes straight back into their Mozilla products, so how does it matter if it's more profit? It would just make their products even better, surely? That statement about the profit is true and the Mozilla Foundation make sure of this.

So please, do your research if you don't believe me.

DonC said,
As a regular user of both Internet Explorer and Firefox, I can only assume that your knowledge of Internet Explorer is outdated.

The real problem as far as I'm concerned is the existing IE6 user base. Any action that the EU take isn't going to change that one bit. IE7 is lot easier to deal with in comparison and IE8 a lot better still.

And as for upcoming web standards, HTML 5 and XHTML 5 are where it's at, not XHTML 2 and below.

I never said Internet Explorer 7 and 8 weren't better, but you obviously don't know anything about web developing. You can't just develop for the latest browser version, using the latest language. X/HTML 5 is the future, yes, but not the current standard. Internet Explorer doesn't even support the current standard, so do you really expect them to support future possible standards anytime soon? Also, Internet Explorer 6 needs to still be thought about when designing a website because unfortunately, too many people still use it! Both 6 and 7 are poor at rendering web pages, unless the user develops specifically for Internet Explorer (making their site incompatible with every other major browser) or unless they make two versions of their website.

If Microsoft were to bundle Firefox with windows for puposes of "standards", who fixes the flaws in the browser.

Mozilla or Microsoft!!!!!

cJr. said,
I never said Internet Explorer 7 and 8 weren't better, but you obviously don't know anything about web developing. You can't just develop for the latest browser version, using the latest language. X/HTML 5 is the future, yes, but not the current standard. Internet Explorer doesn't even support the current standard, so do you really expect them to support future possible standards anytime soon? Also, Internet Explorer 6 needs to still be thought about when designing a website because unfortunately, too many people still use it! Both 6 and 7 are poor at rendering web pages, unless the user develops specifically for Internet Explorer (making their site incompatible with every other major browser) or unless they make two versions of their website.

Yes it's hard, but you get used to it. You can quite easily produce sites for other browsers + IE7. IE6 is just a PITA though.

DonC said,
Yes it's hard, but you get used to it. You can quite easily produce sites for other browsers + IE7. IE6 is just a PITA though.

We shouldn't have to do that though. Microsoft have made that mess and made it so it has to be "other browsers + IE7". You can't deny that, surely? :)

Also, it is best to still go through the pain of trying to develop for Internet Explorer 6 because around 20% of Internet users still use that. I bet you, if you've created a website which uses CSS opacity, transparent PNGs and CSS 2.1 standards, it will be more of a pain to develop for Internet Explorer 6 and 7 and strictly validate your code than you think.

If you strictly validate your code, I can guarantee it will work in every other major browser with only minor tweaks (if any) needed.

A set of new HP computers I got just came with Firefox installed. Your average Joe knows what Internet Explorer is. Firefox is a name only known to your more common user. I use Firefox as default on my home PC. Yet Internet Explorer is still on the recent programs list, not because I use it. My wife knows the logo and the name. It doesn't matter that Firefox is at the top of the list saying "Internet" on it, she still only knows Internet Explorer. I know it makes her sound like a novice on computers but she isn't. I would file her under the average Joe category.

Why Firefox? If the EU makes them bundle Firefox, then they should also have to bundle Opera, Safari and any other third party browsers. Do consumers really want 4 browsers installed on their machine by default. If anything, the user should be able to select a default browser to be downloaded via Windows Update.

ok, i love FF and use it as my default browser 99% of the time, but WTF is this nonsense? MS is a monopoly yes, but it has the right to do with it's software whatever the hell it likes! if i had a company i wouldn't want some idiot telling me what i can or cannot!
EU can download it if they want to use it!

Sounds good to me. Its far better than them removing IE, and it means I have a decent browser straight away. Now all Firefox needs is to make it easier to upgrade to newer versions (you can only only update the current version?) and we'll be awesome.

Probably not what Opera had in mind..

Wow, this is unbelievable. Don't get me wrong, Firefox is a good browser especially 3.1 beta 2. But this is one giant hypocritical decision... why force bundled browsers onto fresh installs?

Don't worry guys. Microsoft has quite a medley of super-lawyers. They'll pull through.

I have an idea, why don't they just stop selling all Microsoft products in the EU for a while and put a statement in the EULA saying that you are forbidden to use in any EU country. Keep that going for a year, the EU will repeal their stupid-ass "law". Doing that makes just about every machine in the EU illegal, even the gov't machines. the EU wouldn't be able to take the pressure lol.

Recon415 said,
Don't worry guys. Microsoft has quite a medley of super-lawyers. They'll pull through.

I have an idea, why don't they just stop selling all Microsoft products in the EU for a while and put a statement in the EULA saying that you are forbidden to use in any EU country. Keep that going for a year, the EU will repeal their stupid-ass "law". Doing that makes just about every machine in the EU illegal, even the gov't machines. the EU wouldn't be able to take the pressure lol.


Only it would not apply to licenses already purchased

Hopefully this leads to the Xbox 360 being able to play PS3 and Wii Games because its not fair that it only runs Microsoft Games and not Sony games!

The only positive I see from all this rubbish

Tech Greek said,
Hopefully this leads to the Xbox 360 being able to play PS3 and Wii Games because its not fair that it only runs Microsoft Games and not Sony games!

The only positive I see from all this rubbish


What does this have to do with Web Browsers??????

neo158 said,


What does this have to do with Web Browsers??????


That's what the EU is going to force next; it's only fair if they follow the same guidelines for software.

What to bundle? Mozilla Firefox? Opera? Dilio? w3m? Lynx? Links? Google Chrome? Or ALL OF THEM?

It is just insane!

GraphiteCube said,
What to bundle? Mozilla Firefox? Opera? Dilio? w3m? Lynx? Links? Google Chrome? Or ALL OF THEM?

It is just insane!

Yeah, what is the fair way to decide? And I agree with previous posters with the big question of if MS assumes the responsibility by any security holes in their competitors product.

Most everyone knows how to get Firefox on their system. Even my less tech savvy friends are using it. I don't think it is having any problems with market penetration.

Shadrack said,

Yeah, what is the fair way to decide? And I agree with previous posters with the big question of if MS assumes the responsibility by any security holes in their competitors product.

Most everyone knows how to get Firefox on their system. Even my less tech savvy friends are using it. I don't think it is having any problems with market penetration.

Its ALL OF THEM , Multiple Choice , read all the links on the main news

The only thing MS should so is add the option to d/l them like it does for it's Windows Live apps. Since Win7 doesn't come with Mail etc, they give you a link when you first start up, just add FF/Opera or w/e else to that window.

When users click that link, just download the installer for that directly without starting IE, or add-in a program/package manager type system which I think MS is looking at doing already (there was another article posted last week?)

They shouldn't be forced to install anything though.

Akaruz said,

Its ALL OF THEM , Multiple Choice , read all the links on the main news


You are trumping the free choice! You are proposing giving some unfair handicap to some of the multi-million corporations (like Mozilla Corp.) while shunning other browser makers.

With multiple choice, you then get the (surprisingly important) issue of what order do they appear in, and how minor can the browsers be?

Utter crap.. EU is just retarded.. How is bundling Firefox any different from bundling IE? You are still taking away choice and not that anyone cares that IE comes by default.. People who want Firefox will download it anyway

SVG said,
Utter crap.. EU is just retarded.. How is bundling Firefox any different from bundling IE? You are still taking away choice and not that anyone cares that IE comes by default.. People who want Firefox will download it anyway

Read article it is about adding both browsers so people have a choice not just flicking IE for firefox.

Digix said,
Read article it is about adding both browsers so people have a choice not just flicking IE for firefox.


Read tht already.. It still doesn't make sense..

I was about to post something similiar. I'd be ****ed with EU or UE or whatever the hell the acronym is, with all the things they impose on MS, bundling firefox is just stupid. Then they might want to start bundling itunes next.

Luis.A said,
I'd be ****ed with EU or UE or whatever the hell the acronym is

Yes, must be terribly hard to remember a two letter acronym that's in the article title.

I wonder where all the posts against Europe come from ....

To be honest during the install there should be a set of Browsers to choose , not being implicit IE only , the guy who says well connect to the internet and download , connect with what ? IE ?

Apple does not have the same % of market as MS

Having more places to sell Windows , you must be joking , instead of a layoff of 5k Jobs it would be 10k+ , its China that is gonna buy ? The entire African continent , a few countries in S.America ?
Giving EU the finger ? Roftl it would just make them move elsewhere , wanna bet what Apple would do or even a Linux based system just to get the money from the Governments ?


the Commission is considering ordering Microsoft and OEMs to obligate users to choose a particular browser when setting up a new PC.

In a new pc whats the problem ? to install Firefox on a NEW PC that is gonna be sold to the costumer , jesus some already are full of crap installed that we dont need , so 1 more or less program wont case any trouble


and btw the title is bull**** since in one of the news if you ACTUALLY read it it does say

"Such a remedy might include a requirement that OEMs distribute multiple browsers on new Windows-based PCs. We may also be required to disable certain unspecified Internet Explorer software code if a user chooses a competing browser."

So its just not FF but Multiple browsers AKA Give the User a choice instead of being feed with crap since the start

The most MS should do is add links to FF and Opera in the Welcome area or w/e it's called in Win7 where they have their Windows Live apps linked.

Click on one of those and the installer is downloaded without starting IE, simple stuff. But forcing them to install other apps from the start? This is like adding more junk on top of the other junk OEMs install already.

No thanks.

To be honest during the install there should be a set of Browsers to choose

But why stop at browsers? How about IM clients, mail clients, image editors, OpenOffice, development tools, games, virtualization software, video editors - I know, why don't they just take Download.com and put it in the setup!!

Joking aside, the issue with this is now who supports the software? If browser X comes pre-installed, isn't it now Microsoft's problem if that software crashes, or has a security hole?

ah let it go ffs.

How does this pursuit of Microsoft in this manner promote fair competition or innovation for that matter?

Microsoft should just release a featureless Starter addition of Win7 in the EU...and when piracy soars from ppl illegally downloading Win7, Microsoft can ride the EU to do something about it...okay never going to happen and unrealistic but yeah.

Simple solution for Microsoft, don't sell Windows licenses directly in the EU, don't produce Windows CDs and DVDs in the EU, force all EU customers to import their windows Licences from the US through US resellers. The EU will then have squat to say about it.
Impractical? yes
More expensive? yes
giving the EU the finger? priceless

At some point I would have agreed with all the microsoft bashing and legal harassment, but now... man... it's just so last millenium, there are so many alternatives to most MS based technologies, the EU can't pretend consumers aren't aware and are force-fed MS stuff, Firefox's market share alone is a good proof of that.

Don't understand all this fuzz... users are still free to choose the browser they want, coming with windows or not...
IE and other browsers are free, microsoft isn't making money with browsers

Why does Microsoft even bother listening to these jackasses? Europe isn't the only market where Microsoft can sell Windows.

FrozenEclipse said,
Why does Microsoft even bother listening to these jackasses? Europe isn't the only market where Microsoft can sell Windows.

Well it must be a big enough market, or I'm quite sure MS would have pulled out after the billions they were fined a ocuple of years ago.

If I was Microsoft I would either, remove all browsers from the OS for lulz or just remove all products from the EU until they left Microsoft have their way. This is just retarded

Watters said,
If I was Microsoft I would either, remove all browsers from the OS for lulz or just remove all products from the EU until they left Microsoft have their way. This is just retarded

+1, the EU would collapse. better yet, shut down ALL updates to Europe for windows...how's them apples?

ChrisJ1968 said,
+1, the EU would collapse. better yet, shut down ALL updates to Europe for windows...how's them apples?

+2 Idiots just want some of dem M$$$$$.

A quick fix to their failing economies: Take the money from someone else!

ChrisJ1968 said,
+1, the EU would collapse. better yet, shut down ALL updates to Europe for windows...how's them apples?

Yeah, obviously the EU would collapse, instead of it switching to Linux and OS X, and Microsoft collapsing...
This is all hypothetical anyways, Microsoft would never be that stupid.

So it's fine for Apple to bundle Safari with OSX, but soon as MS does the same with IE they committed the greatest crime against humanity, talk about double standards. The EU needs to get a grip on reality, nobody cares about their pointless lawsuits. Look at the whole Windows N edition mess they created and guess what? nobody cared and kept buying the "normal" editions, get a clue EU!

+1 on "this has gone too far." Shouldn't businesses be allowed a *little* flexibility, in addition to the end users?

With all the money Microsoft loses because of these idiots, they should just stop selling windows in Europe, i am sure they would be fine dealing without them.

That's quite impossible. The European market is a big chunk of market share that they'd be stupid to give up and couldn't afford to give up.

I think Europe probably needs windows more than Microsoft needs them. If they were to pull out of the market, then there'd be a huge backlash against the EU for this

iamwhoiam said,
That's quite impossible. The European market is a big chunk of market share that they'd be stupid to give up and couldn't afford to give up.

This, so everyone saying, OMG stop selling MS products in the EU, lol at you.

Minimoose said,
These people don't realise how big Europe is, do they?

Population of Europe = 731million.
Population of European Union countries = 491million.
Population of USA = 305 million.

oufc_gav said,
Population of Europe = 731million.
Population of European Union countries = 491million.
Population of USA = 305 million.

All you've shown is that a group of countries in across the ocean have a bigger population than the US. Population does not equal computer usage, and the numbers are generally not close enough to use this as some sort of "estimation". China for instance has a 1.33 billion population, with only 253 million using the internet as of 2008. (source)

Also, you're comparing how big Europe is, shouldn't you compare it to the rest of the world instead of just the US?

I'm not arguing that Europe is indeed a good amount of users, but that the stuff you're throwing out there doesn't exactly answer any kind of questions.

oufc_gav said,
Population of Europe = 731million.
Population of European Union countries = 491million.
Population of USA = 305 million.

the EU has the highest GDP in the world. From 2 years ago it became "the" largest economy in the world. Microsoft pulling out of the EU would be financial suicide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...y_GDP_(nominal)

Whatever fines they have to pay will pale in comparison to the losses of pulling out of the EU.

wow. As already stated, this has gone too far. Also, as stated, the EU should force this upon all OS manufacturers if they are going to do this at all.

The EU should be fine with having MS do this..... require at the first run of IE (per user) that the user sees a splash screen that says 'pick your browser'. It will then take the user to the download link (in IE) of that browser -- if the user chooses something else and then have it change the defaults in the OS. There's no reason to strip out IE further than you have to. That's it. Basically the same thing they do for the search provider in IE7.

Even that is annoying, but hey, they give every user that option that the EU is looking for.

BTW, I am a Firefox user on Windows.

What if I want to have neither of them at install time (minimalistic system)?

Just give the user a way of obtaining the web browser of their choice with a simple tool (wget?), and then proceed to the installation.

If someone buys a computer sytem with winows on it and prefers Firefox or Opera or Chrome they just hop on the internet and download it and install it. That is what the world calls "FREE CHOICE".
The EU is trying to violate this in a big way, and everyone should tell them to take their noses somewhere else !
In fact I feel that the new American President Obama should step in on this one. There is NOTHING stopping a computer user from swapping any piece of software that they want to intermix these days, god you can even have windows on a mac if you want to....has the EU ever heard of the program "Boot camp" ????
No longer is there an email client in windows (windows 7) ....you have to download it, microsoft is trying its best leave them alone. I feel that the EU likes flexing its muscles too much and that this is one of those times.

Screw this...

If they want to go this far, then they need a set of rules that applies to EVERY OS maker...

Microsoft, Apple, Red Hat, all them should have to be required to do the same, not just Microsoft. this crap is going way to far...

I want Toyota to start including Honda i-vtec motors, or some boxer engines from Porsche, I mean it's just not fair that Toyota is offering me only their engines.

SierraSonic said,
I want Toyota to start including Honda i-vtec motors, or some boxer engines from Porsche, I mean it's just not fair that Toyota is offering me only their engines.


Exactly. OR.... "I want OS X on my PC. It's not fair that only the people who buy the Mac can use OS X. I mean, really. Apple has a 100% monopoly on OS X, and that's just not right."

RAID 0 said,
Exactly. OR.... "I want OS X on my PC. It's not fair that only the people who buy the Mac can use OS X. I mean, really. Apple has a 100% monopoly on OS X, and that's just not right."

Actually, it is. It's their OS. The issue isn't whether OS X should or should not be allowed to run on other hardware. In fact, OS X really isn't the issue here. Its position in the market is completely different from Microsoft's.

LTD said,
Actually, it is. It's their OS. The issue isn't whether OS X should or should not be allowed to run on other hardware. In fact, OS X really isn't the issue here. Its position in the market is completely different from Microsoft's.


I respectfully disagree.

You stated, The issue isn't whether OS X should or should not be allowed to run on other hardware.
I know that's not the issue here, however when you load any OS, it's on your hardware that you paid for. Should Apple be forced to offer a Vista or Windows 7 install when you buy your computer?

Its position in the market is completely different from Microsoft's.


This I know. How about this... Apple has a commanding lead in market share in the MP3 market. Should they be forced to bundle a different program to manage your music, because after all... that would only be fair... right?


RAID 0 said,
This I know. How about this... Apple has a commanding lead in market share in the MP3 market. Should they be forced to bundle a different program to manage your music, because after all... that would only be fair... right?

Apple actively prevents you (iPod database hash) from doing so.

Can I move my Zune content to a Mac if I wanted to switch? I assume all it takes is plugging it in and downloading the Zune software . . .

LTD said,
Can I move my Zune content to a Mac if I wanted to switch? I assume all it takes is plugging it in and downloading the Zune software . . .

You are obviously not seeing the analogy being made.

GP007 said,
Of course he's not, you can't use Apple in any negative way, it breaks the reality LTD lives in.

lol

and SierraSonic... good point :P

I think LTD has a mac monitor on his computer that sweeps Neowin every 5 seconds for any mention of Mac, OSX etc... when it finds something it alerts him so he can log on to defend it's honour!
If it's a slow day then he'll trawl off to some Mac fanboy site to pick up some news (???) to post here and claim it's just for lively discussion and to be honest i for one am getting pretty bored of it now.

LTD real name Jobs?

LTD said,
Actually, it is. It's their OS. The issue isn't whether OS X should or should not be allowed to run on other hardware. In fact, OS X really isn't the issue here. Its position in the market is completely different from Microsoft's.

"I am an Apple fanboy, and Apple should not be sued."

if thats the case why don't they do the same to apple and make them include firefox etc. with OS X. oh and why don't they force microsoft to include other media players (like VLC), calculators, paint (equivalent programs) and so on.

This IS bull****. I hope MS fights this and wins their case. By bundling other software (as in not MS's) with THEIR OS, they are taking on any problems the other browsers may have, which could negatively affect the public opinion of MS's product, in this case, Windows. And that, is beyond ridiculous. I would counter sue the EU for negligence, not only is this a waste of their taxpayers' dollars/pounds/euros, but they are promoting customer confusion by trying to force MS to bundle competitors' software with their OS.

I understand the idea of competition, but this is bull****... Forcing a company to include a competitor's product...

Also, does Windows/Microsoft update work in other browsers? I guess the option would be to pick a default browser as opposed to installing one versus the other... don't like the idea that a company is forced to do that.

I'm just curious, but does Apple do this, or will they be forced to do this?

Deathray said,
I'm just curious, but does Apple do this, or will they be forced to do this?

If i were MS, this would be high on my priority list when presenting their case to the EU. If the EU is all about fair competition, then Apple should be forced to do the same thing.

Elessar said,
If i were MS, this would be high on my priority list when presenting their case to the EU. If the EU is all about fair competition, then Apple should be forced to do the same thing.

+1 and what about linux!, it should also follow the same rules!

lflashl said,
+1 and what about linux!, it should also follow the same rules!

I don't think you really understand "Linux" in this context . . .

Deathray said,
I understand the idea of competition, but this is bull****... Forcing a company to include a competitor's product...

Also, does Windows/Microsoft update work in other browsers? I guess the option would be to pick a default browser as opposed to installing one versus the other... don't like the idea that a company is forced to do that.

I'm just curious, but does Apple do this, or will they be forced to do this?

Actually in Vista and Windows 7 Windows/Microsoft Update is an independent program and does not rely on the browser to function. This would only affect new machines so XP is in the clear here.

Afaik, most linux distributions already come with two or more browsers installed by default, with the additional ones only one checkbox away from the installation, all of which you can choose while installing the OS.

LTD said,
I don't think you really understand "Linux" in this context . . .

Don't worry, if most of the people posting here had dynamite for brains, they would not have enough to blow their hat off. Microsoft are reaping what they have sown :-)

apple should definitely have to do the same - totally an unfair advantage if not
why don't MS have some sort of IE Lite installed that is very basic but allows u 2 download any browser u like - including the full version of inet explorer - which would of course replace said IE Lite if installed?

then no need for doubling up browsers if u don't want to!

this is stupid and going too far. does anyone want an os without ANY software, not even basic stuff. here is windows, it can run software but you must purchase a calculator, notepad, paint, and every other program because ms is evil. let it go already.

This has been done before, and Microsoft found ways around it. Device operating systems are melting into the background, Microsoft is becoming an irrelevance. Vista and undoubtedly Windows 7 has bloated out of all proportion. Windows NT4.0 and then 2000 was Microsoft's high points. People will find Firefox, through friends and family. Microsoft need to work on improving their bloatware than be distracted by legal battles (which is why they have lost their way).

boho said,
irrelevance...blablabla...undoubtedly...blablabla...bloated...blablabla...out of all proportion...blablabla......blablabla...bloatware

So credible!

I'm currently located in the EU (unfortunately) and news like this just makes me ashamed of Europe and I wish the UK could withdraw entirely.

I don't want Firefox installed on my system by default thank you very much. If I choose to install Firefox, then I will download and get it myself. I don't want it forced on me.

Last thing i would want is Firefox 3.0 installed on my system... FF 2 FTW

I think its not fair that they force MS to do this... Its like saying "yes we worked really hard to get this far and now we have to give up out market share cuz we are to good for it."

Every user is free to install what ever they want on WIndows... After all dont OEM computers have enough of the companies mainstream **** installed on it already? Lenovo anyone?

TCLN Ryster said,
I'm currently located in the EU (unfortunately) and news like this just makes me ashamed of Europe and I wish the UK could withdraw entirely.

My sentiment exactly!

brent3000 said,
Last thing i would want is Firefox 3.0 installed on my system... FF 2 FTW

Stop living under your rock and install FF3! You're not even safe with FF2 anymore. They disabled the phising filter to try and get people like you to upgrade.


Getting back on topic, even though I use FF3, it's absolutely ridiculous that the EU are doing this! It's Microsoft's OS, and they have the right to put their own programs on it, just like Apple have the same right to stick their programs in Mac OS X!

If the EU is gonna force this, then bundle Firefox with both Windows and Mac OS X, it'll make them both better!

NEXT UP:

EU may force Microsoft to bundle Adobe Photoshop with Windows.
Microsoft may also be required to disable certain unspecified MS Paint software code if a user chooses a competing graphics program.

thenonhacker said,
NEXT UP:

EU may force Microsoft to bundle Adobe Photoshop with Windows.
Microsoft may also be required to disable certain unspecified MS Paint software code if a user chooses a competing graphics program.

lol.

brent3000 said,
Last thing i would want is Firefox 3.0 installed on my system... FF 2 FTW
]


Last thing I want is IE installed on my system :}

deadearth said,



Last thing I want is IE installed on my system :}


So buy a mac, hey look at that you have choices, what a crazy idea.

brent3000 said,
Every user is free to install what ever they want on WIndows...

That's actually not right you absolutely have no choice but to install Internet Explorer. It's not a choice. And this is honestly what started this stupid browser fight.

You should be able to not install IE when you install Windows. Or at least be able to remove it and make components of Windows requiring it work with another browser (like the help of Windows). This would be a far better move than requiring Firefox to be bundled with Windows.

Krazzer said,
So buy a mac, hey look at that you have choices, what a crazy idea.

I run Mac, Linux, and Windows. Yeah, you are right, i have a ton of choice. Let me go play Left4Dead on my mac... errr.. on my linux box.... errrr..... guess I'm stuck with my Windows machine and therefore stuck with IE.

This comment is stupid. How the hell are you supposed to browse the internet if you don't even have a browser to begin with? Oh right, because every single person who buys a new computer just happens to have an installer of an internet browser right on a thumb drive. I forgot about that.

If you don't like IE, then just don't use it. Christ lord, it's not rocket science.

TCLN Ryster said,
I don't want Firefox installed on my system by default thank you very much. If I choose to install Firefox, then I will download and get it myself. I don't want it forced on me.

But you *do* want that IE garbage forced onto you, huh?

Now I'm not trying to defend Firefox (I'm using Opera myself), but it certainly would be a great deal better than IE, so I'm all for the EU kicking MS' ass if they continue forcing crap on people's PCs without giving an alternative.

Also, let's not forget that most people aren't technically minded at all and don't know how to download and install a new browser and are thus forced to make do with the IE crap - and that's exactly what MS speculates on.
Oh, and for the record - I am also located in the EU, *fortunately*, and news like this make me proud of Europe and that it shows MS that it can't do whatsoever it wants.