MS Anti-trust suit with IE

By vcv
in Web Browser Discussion & Support

 Share

Recommended Posts

Mentor

vcv

Posted
Posted

[Mods: move this if you see fit. It probably does belong there, so sorry if you do have to move it]

Here's a debate I have not seen in a while.

How do you all feel about Microsoft being sued for shipping IE with windows as the default browser?

Personally, I think it's absolute bollox. They are including their own utility (IE) in their own software (Windows). Having a browser come with Windows really helped the internet move along as fast as it did, in my opinion. People were able to browse the net without having to go to the store or order software to do so. It came for free* with their computer.

Did Windows not let you install another browser? Absolutely not. Did it recommend you not use it when you did? Nope. Did it try to do anything to stop you from installing another browser? Nope.

It was simply a better browser and more convenient for users. Besides, if IE wasn't shipped with windows.. how could you download another browser?! You'd have to go to the store and PAY for Netscape, or order Opera from someone elses computer.

I simply fail to see how a software company can be accused of a "browser monopoly" for including software within their own software, and having the better product.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/277420-ms-anti-trust-suit-with-ie/
Share on other sites
Grand Master

leesmithg

Posted
Posted

Well I don't see mozilla whinning about it, I see them trying to be better. I prefer I.E. out of choice, not that my arm is being twisted behind my back.

I am sure that a few years ago you could buy I.E. boxed, it I think it was called 'Internet Explorer Professional'.

It will be maybe Paint, movie maker or outlook express, soon they get whinned at for I spose.

Grand Master

+unabatedshagie Subscriber¹

Posted
  • Subscriber¹
Posted

I wouldn't mind so much if I had the option of removing it, but since microsoft decided to hook it into everything then it's next to impossible to easily remove it.

Same goes for windows media player and outlook express.

Grand Master

Daninku

Posted
Posted

If they will remove IE from Windows, piracy is going to increase for sure. So removing IE from Windows is not a good idea, including all the reasons vcv mentioned. There are free browsers, but maybe people don't know much about them and they do prefer IE.

I agree with you vcv.

Grand Master

PseudoRandomDragon

Posted
Posted

They were sued because it's installed by default, there by default and not removable, the most you can do is remove the icons for it. Microsoft also scewed the test to make computers running windows 98 without IE appear slower in an attempt to prove that it is a needed component, so my heart isn't exactly bleeding for MS. They pulled that bs so they could have control over the standards at which web pages are coded. I don't think it is so much that they included it, it's that you couldn't remove it, even though it really isn't a needed component. They are doing the same thing with WMP to support their format, WMV, as well as their DRM.

Mentor

vcv

Posted
  • Author
Posted
They were sued because it's installed by default, there by default and not removable, the most you can do is remove the icons for it. Microsoft also scewed the test to make computers running windows 98 without IE appear slower in an attempt to prove that it is a needed component, so my heart isn't exactly bleeding for MS. They pulled that bs so they could have control over the standards at which web pages are coded. I don't think it is so much that they included it, it's that you couldn't remove it, even though it really isn't a needed component. They are doing the same thing with WMP to support their format, WMV, as well as their DRM.

585374611[/snapback]

I know WHY they were sued. You are free to delete the shortcuts and NOT use it. It wasn't a "needed" component technically speaking.. but it was neccesary for what the direction they wished to take Windows and Explorer.

Again.. it is their software, they are not disallowing other software. You can not remove it, but you can choose not to use it. What is so wrong with this? Why is apple not being sued?

Grand Master

Fotix

Posted
Posted (edited)

Having a monopoly in an industry is not necessarily illegal, however it is a prerequisite for prosecution under the Sherman Anti-trust Act.

So I wish people would stop including Apple into this; their marketshare in the OS business is puny and as such, are not subject to this Act.

EDIT: Updated in bold.

Edited by Fotix
Grand Master

Fotix

Posted
Posted
They were sued because it's installed by default, there by default and not removable, the most you can do is remove the icons for it. Microsoft also scewed the test to make computers running windows 98 without IE appear slower in an attempt to prove that it is a needed component, so my heart isn't exactly bleeding for MS. They pulled that bs so they could have control over the standards at which web pages are coded. I don't think it is so much that they included it, it's that you couldn't remove it, even though it really isn't a needed component. They are doing the same thing with WMP to support their format, WMV, as well as their DRM.

585374611[/snapback]

Microsoft also had to pay millions of dollars in settlements to companies like Be (BeOS) for strongarming OEMs (such as Hitachi) into refusing to ship other operating systems on their PCs. :pinch:

Mentor

vcv

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Having a monopoly in an industry is necessarily illegal, however it is a prerequisite for prosecution under the Sherman Anti-trust Act.

So I wish people would stop including Apple into this; their marketshare in the OS business is puny and as such, are not subject to this Act.

EDIT: Updated in bold.

585375761[/snapback]

monopoly

1. Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: <<<<<<<

2. Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party.

3. a. A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity. <<<

b. A commodity or service so controlled.

4. a. Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth. <<<<

b. Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly. <<<<

Note the word "exclusive". Now, let me explain something to you that you might not understand. INTERNET EXPLORER IS NOT A COMMERCIAL PRODUCT. Kind of hard to have a monopoly for a free product, isn't it?

Yes, the judge ruled against them. This does not make him right though. How is it fair to apply laws to one company when another company does the same thing, simply because of the level of market-share?

Remember, Opera has been around for 10 years as a COMMERCIAL product, and thus that is at least 1 other player in the browser market. Don't forget Netscape/Mozilla, 1x net browser tried to make a run as well but couldnt keep up, and a ton of other browsers were developed (I believe there is somewhere around 40 for windows alone).

Grand Master

Andrew Lyle Global Moderator

Posted
  • Global Moderator
Posted

what you said is just what other people say. Microsoft ships windows with IE as its default browser, simple because you cant get onto the internet to download other browsers unless you have a web browser correct?

i dont totally agree with Messenger being on there and uninstallable. but HEY its there product. if you DONT LIKE IT, DONT BUY IT.

i hate how people need to have things built up around them, and be told what to think and say. no one thinks for themselfs anymore. If your offended by a TV show, or Radio station (howard stern) you just simply, press a BUTTON and no more right? why do people always complain?

Veteran

aldo

Posted
Posted

NO NO NO NO!

Once again everyone DOESN'T understand the DoJ lawsuit against MS.

It was NOT against the fact they shipped IE. It was the fact that if OEMs (Dell etc) wanted to put a different browser on by default, they'd charge them a lot more for the Windows license.

Grand Master

chavo

Posted
Posted

Wow a whole thread of idiots rambling on about something about which they have no clue. Haven't seen one of these on Neowin in about a minute or so.

There is nothing illegal about being a monopoly. It is illegal to use your position as a monoply to force out competition.

This is what MS did. They used their position to keep BeOS and others off of PC's by threatening to raise OEM prices for Windows. They also used their power to keep other software off of default OEM installs Desktops. PC sellers were not allowed to put, for example a Netscape icon on the desktop, for their hard drive image used to install Windows.

Good Lord people this thread is a meandering steaming pile of misinformation and twisted logic.

The facts are out there, use the resources right in front of your face. http://google.com

Come on let's give our parents something to be proud of and our children something to look forward to.

Grand Master

PseudoRandomDragon

Posted
Posted
Again.. it is their software, they are not disallowing other software.  You can not remove it, but you can choose not to use it.  What is so wrong with this?  Why is apple not being sued?

585375655[/snapback]

This is true, but they give IE an unfair advantage over other browsers by having it installed by default, non-removable and artificially faster by the use of integration and secret dlls. Apple isn't being sued because they are not a monopoly and you can remove safari.

Rising Star

blowMeNeo

Posted
Posted

The reason everyone is pitching a fit about this is because IE is now part of the OS. You can't uninstall it or disable it. If you want to use Windows Update, you need IE. Several other Windows components won't work unless you use IE. Make IE uninstallable and Windows Update work wiith other browsers and IE would be in trouble. Because of this, Microsoft has become laxed and pretty much not care about IE anymore. Any updates that have been made to it are laughable and only a band aid to stop the bleeding. ActiveX is being exploited left and right and is the major reason for the security issues. Get rid of it and the security issues would be minimal. IE needs a complete overhaul or 2 years from now, the amount of Firefox users will be triple what they are now.

Rising Star

blowMeNeo

Posted
Posted
If I was microsoft i would tell those people if you don't like IE intergrated then change to Linux and I know they would come back running to windows  :laugh:

585375981[/snapback]

It's interesting that you bring up Linux. If IE and ActiveX weren't a part of a Windows OS, Windows computers would be as secure as Linux.

Experienced

El_Cu_Guy

Posted
Posted
This is what MS did. They used their position to keep BeOS and others off of PC's by threatening to raise OEM prices for Windows.

In regards to BeOS, this was due to a license agreement which forbade OEM from installing another bootloader. OEMs such as Toshiba shipped numerous PCs with BeOS and a floppy disk which would allow users to load it. Many however, did not understand this concept and didn't even know it was there.

Community Regular

MurrayF1

Posted
Posted
Microsoft gave people what they wanted.  The easiest way to get on the internet, check their email, etc.  Having it right there was a good business move on Microsoft's part.  That's what they are, a business.

585372530[/snapback]

They also gave:-

Hackers An easy way into the users pc system,

An easy way to install spyware

A Buggy pile of s**t

Grand Master

Slimy

Posted
Posted

lol, if ie didn't originally come with windows, how they hell would ppl download firefox? all the fanboys wouldn't be able to access the site without going to the store to purchase *shudder* the browser they hate so much. cuz, common, mozilla wouldn't distribute firefox to stores.

Rookie

TheGuru

Posted
Posted

hmm that's a new point that i have come across by vcv. and it surely makes sense :).

so ... what would have happened if IE was not bundled with Windows?

I would say ... every ISP would have followed the AOL route. They would have come up with their own browsers, just like AOL. So today, we would have had hundreds of browsers ... and most of them incompatible with one site or the other! Wouldnt have worked on other ISPs! Switching ISPs would have meant switching and learning a new browser! Aaaah it would have been a much bigger hell. :wacko:

So it's good that MS shipped IE with Windows.

But they should have given us a choice during Windows installation if we want to install it, and also an uninstall option.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.