That's enough. Down with Opera!

[Calum Veteran]

I think Opera Software and the EU really have made the right decision here. It's such a pain for web developers to have to create websites to support Internet Explorer 6 and 7, just because they cannot render webpages as well as Internet Explorer 8 or (if you would like to include some CSS 3 attributes) any of the other major browsers.

Many, many, people still use Internet Explorer 6 and 7 - too many. I understand the reasons, but the fact that Microsoft made those broken (and if they cannot render webpages to the same level as other web browsers, they are clearly broken) web browsers so widely available and used by many people who do not even know there are any alternatives (by including it as the default browser in every Windows installation) then it is entirely there fault.

It's obvious that something needs to be done about the mess that Microsoft have created. I am certain that if every single computer user was informed about Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, Opera and Chrome, told about the benefits and drawbacks of each browser and was given a chance to try it out, then Internet Explorer would definitely not have the highest market share (expept maybe due to the amount of people who use it in businesses and corporations).

The truth is, Microsoft have made it seem like Internet Explorer is the only way to explore the internet. They may not have meant to, but they have.

It may be their operating system and their web browser, but an operating system's purpose is to run programs, it isn't there to have programs already installed on it and so Microsoft cannot use that argument.

EDIT -

To add to all of this -

I think operating systems should be developed for their purpose - to run programs.

They shouldn't be developed with programs installed as it can harm the competition greatly. I'm talking about Windows, Mac OS X, any Linux distribution etc. It makes sense. Just develop the operating system and let the users decide and choose which programs they install and run.

It really would help prevent what Microsoft have done with Internet Explorer and the mess they have made.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Calum

[DavidM]

Wow at all the trolls. You really are clueless and ignorant.

As the few sane people in the thread have mentioned this suit is not only by Opera. Also Mozilla and Google.

Also Opera do not agree with MS's removal of IE:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10262913...ag=2547-1_3-0-5

Opera ONLY wanted their browser bundled with Windows nothing less, I hope the EU accepts Microsofts removal of IE. Nobody should be able to tell a company what to do with their own products.

How many browsers should be included? Say top 3, oops no Opera there! Top 5? Top 100? Will we need a text based browser as well? Anybody left out will start to bitch and complain and we will be right back where we started. Since Apple and Linux bundle browsers with their OS's will they be allowed to continue? I bet Apple would love the force MS to include Safari with Windows 7 and bundle it with OSX.

As others have pointed out, why stop a just browsers? Media players, notepads, paint tools, cd burning software, anti-virus software, file explorers, mail apps, games, photo viewers, and so on. Don't people already complain about the amount of OEM crap installed onto their computers, and now let's add some more.

I'm not going to boycott UNTIL MS is made to bundle anything with their OS, that's too slippery a slope to start down. The removal of IE, stops everyone from complaining about IE's market share due to being already installed and that's all they should get.

[Bryan R.]

...

It's obvious that something needs to be done about the mess that Microsoft have created. I am certain that if every single computer user was informed about Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, Opera and Chrome, told about the benefits and drawbacks of each browser and was given a chance to try it out, then Internet Explorer would definitely not have the highest market share (expept maybe due to the amount of people who use it in businesses and corporations).

...

That's all fine and great and makes sense, but who will be the one to provide an unbiased representation of the other browser options?

To add to all of this -

I think operating systems should be developed for their purpose - to run programs.

They shouldn't be developed with programs installed as it can harm the competition greatly. I'm talking about Windows, Mac OS X, any Linux distribution etc. It makes sense. Just develop the operating system and let the users decide and choose which programs they install and run.

It really would help prevent what Microsoft have done with Internet Explorer and the mess they have made.

The only way to make it alright to sue Microsoft for all this is too punish every other company doing it also. What I think is despicable on Opera's part is that they are suing Microsoft and not Apple. I understand that Microsoft is in a position where it is considered to be taking advantage of a monopoly, but to me, it's the principal of the act alone, not how big the offender is.

Opera ONLY wanted their browser bundled with Windows nothing less, I hope the EU accepts Microsofts removal of IE. Nobody should be able to tell a company what to do with their own products.

How many browsers should be included? Say top 3, oops no Opera there! Top 5? Top 100? Will we need a text based browser as well? Anybody left out will start to bitch and complain and we will be right back where we started. Since Apple and Linux bundle browsers with their OS's will they be allowed to continue? I bet Apple would love the force MS to include Safari with Windows 7 and bundle it with OSX.

As others have pointed out, why stop a just browsers? Media players, notepads, paint tools, cd burning software, anti-virus software, file explorers, mail apps, games, photo viewers, and so on. Don't people already complain about the amount of OEM crap installed onto their computers, and now let's add some more.

I'm not going to boycott UNTIL MS is made to bundle anything with their OS, that's too slippery a slope to start down. The removal of IE, stops everyone from complaining about IE's market share due to being already installed and that's all they should get.

Yes, I agree. Law is always about setting precedent. And if Opera is allowed to force Microsoft to include other browsers, I'm sure companies from all corners are going to take advantage of that precedent.

[Jerry Grey Member]

For just a second take off your Microsoft fanboy hat and think for a second, Microsoft is using it's monopoly market share for OSs, to force users to use their browser, that is against the law.

Also this doesn't mean that Windows will be shipped with Opera and other browsers, all Opera wants is Windows to have ballot screen where you choose your browser and its downloads to your computer, that's it. I believe that is okay to ask for.

[protocol7]

Your average Joe PC is familiar with using IE. He probably wouldn't even know what Opera is. So if you give him a ballot screen with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Opera and Safari what one do you think he's gonna click on?

Pointless exercise imho.

[Calum Veteran]

For just a second take off your Microsoft fanboy hat and think for a second, Microsoft is using it's monopoly market share for OSs, to force users to use their browser, that is against the law.

Also this doesn't mean that Windows will be shipped with Opera and other browsers, all Opera wants is Windows to have ballot screen where you choose your browser and its downloads to your computer, that's it. I believe that is okay to ask for.

I completely agree with this post.

Your average Joe PC is familiar with using IE. He probably wouldn't even know what Opera is. So if you give him a ballot screen with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Opera and Safari what one do you think he's gonna click on?

Pointless exercise imho.

It may seem pointless to you but it isn't

Whether most people would click 'Internet Explorer' or not, it's still giving the user a choice from the outset and making people aware that other web browsers exist.

Also, I'm sure more than you think would choose a different browser to Internet Explorer. Hopefully they would be able to research the benefits of each browser.

[+Raphaël G. MVC]

Your average Joe PC is familiar with using IE. He probably wouldn't even know what Opera is. So if you give him a ballot screen with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Opera and Safari what one do you think he's gonna click on?

Pointless exercise imho.

Exactly!

Plus, why do most of you here agree with the will of Opera to be bundled with windows (ballot screen or not)? I, for one, would rather buy my pc, and just have Windows (with the bundled microsoft software, including IE) on it, instead of all the crap coming from other brands... Clean install FTW!

Looks like the EU forgot to ask its inhabitants what they would prefer (I live in the EU fyi).

[jakem1]

Ask the EU not me :p They have already done it with WMP, but for things like Paint / Notepad they aren't as obvious as IE is in the OS (no desktop shortcut/quick launch etc) and they are very basic in what they can do. How often does the average user use things like notepad / paint?

You're right and remember what that was about - RealPlayer!!! The EU made MS remove Media Player because the least popular/most hated media application complained about unfair competition. Opera is the new RealPlayer and their complaint is just as ridiculous. MS removed Media Player in the EU despite the fact that iTunes was taking over people's PCs and now they have to remove IE8 as Firefox takes over. What is the point?

The EU aren't interested in giving people more choice because we've always had it. There's nothing stopping you downloading alternatives to built in Windows apps and using them as the default software. In the case of browsers nothing could be simpler as every borwser nags you to be set as the default if it isn't already. All the EU are doing is looking for excuses to fine MS and cause end users as much trouble as they can.

Opera claim that this is about web standards but IE8 is now fully standards compliant. When combined with UAC it's also more secure than Opera. What is the problem here? Why will EU users be made to jump through additional hoops just to get onto the internet? Opera aren't even based in the EU so why are they able to complain to the commission about these things?

[Calum Veteran]

Plus, why do most of you here agree with the will of Opera to be bundled with windows (ballot screen or not)? I, for one, would rather buy my pc, and just have Windows (with the bundled microsoft software, including IE) on it, instead of all the crap coming from other brands... Clean install FTW!

A proper clean operating system, with no rubbish and bloat would be one without programs like Windows Media Player, Internet Explorer, Notepad, Paint, iMovie, iPhoto, iTunes, iDVD, iChat etc.

That is how it should be.

An operating system's purpose is to run programs, not to contain programs.

Obviously something is needed to allow these programs to be downloaded and therefore there should be some sort of way to choose a web browser whilst installing the operating system, but no way should it be limited to Internet Explorer on Windows and Safari on Mac OS X. If it is limited to those, many overage users do not know alternatives exist. It harms competition greatly.

There's nothing stopping you downloading alternatives to built in Windows apps and using them as the default software.

There is when the user does not know any alternatives exist. Microsoft have made it seem like Internet Explorer is the only option by bundling it with the operating system and naming it "Internet Explorer". If the user has a choice, he is able to realise there are alternatives out there, sometimes better.

Browsers should be able to be chosen at installation time and all other programs should be removed from the operating system, allowing users to download any program they want, once they have chosen their browser.

That way, competition does not become hurt and us software developers have a fair chance at our product becoming popular.

Opera claim that this is about web standards but IE8 is now fully standards compliant. When combined with UAC it's also more secure than Opera. What is the problem here? Why will EU users be made to jump through additional hoops just to get onto the internet? Opera aren't even based in the EU so why are they able to complain to the commission about these things?

Are you forgetting that the majority of users and businesses use outdated versions - Internet Explorer 6 or 7. Those are far from standards compliant.

Microsoft have made this mess.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Calum

[sujmano]

I can understand the reasoning behind making Microsoft take IE out of Windows but i mean wanting to have an option menu of some sort wtf.

[Ci7]

A proper clean operating system, with no rubbish and bloat would be one without programs like Windows Media Player, Internet Explorer, Notepad, Paint, iMovie, iPhoto, iTunes, iDVD, iChat etc.

That is how it should be.

An operating system's purpose is to run programs, not to contain programs.

hmm

so MS should Ship windows with only NT kernel.

so we get the option to install whatever GUI , installer software , TCP/IP stick and offcourse our choice of whatever XYZ format we went the opreating sys to run under

[Calum Veteran]

That's all fine and great and makes sense, but who will be the one to provide an unbiased representation of the other browser options?

There are other ways this problem can be solved.

The user could be given an option once they have set up their Internet connection, via a built in 'helper' program which states it is best they download a web browser to accompany their Internet connection.

There could be a database maintained by the EU or an official, unbiased, body which includes any web browser approved by that body. Developers would be able to submit their web browser for approval and if it passes certain security checks (i.e. no spyware or viruses), it would be added to the list. This list could be in the form of links to a page within that 'helper' program, customised however the browser developer wishes, with information about their browser; users can then read about the browser and choose which one they download.

There isn't anything fairer than that for all corporations, even Microsoft (let's face it, it's not unfair on them to have to remove Internet Explorer, after the mess they have created)

The only way to make it alright to sue Microsoft for all this is too punish every other company doing it also. What I think is despicable on Opera's part is that they are suing Microsoft and not Apple. I understand that Microsoft is in a position where it is considered to be taking advantage of a monopoly, but to me, it's the principal of the act alone, not how big the offender is.

I have said many times that I think developers of Linux, Mac OS X and Windows should take out all the programs that are bundled with the operating system, similar to what Microsoft did with Windows Live Essentials.

This would include Apple with Mac OS X and the Safari web browser.

It makes sense, as I have said, an operating system's purpose is to run applications, not contain applications.

hmm

so MS should Ship windows with only NT kernel.

so we get the option to install whatever GUI , installer software , TCP/IP stick and offcourse our choice of whatever XYZ format we went the opreating sys to run under

I never said anything of the sort.

I said the programs which are bundled with the operating system should be removed.

The GUI of the operating system, the installer software etc are all part of the operating system as they aid the running of applications. Windows would not be user-friendly without its GUI and its GUI is a part of the operating system.

The NT kernal is the NT kernal; it is not the operating system itself.

[Bryan R.]

A proper clean operating system, with no rubbish and bloat would be one without programs like Windows Media Player, Internet Explorer, Notepad, Paint, iMovie, iPhoto, iTunes, iDVD, iChat etc.

That is how it should be.

An operating system's purpose is to run programs, not to contain programs.

...

Honestly, I think that's going too far. What prevents your logic from applying to other markets? Someone else brought up the automotive industry - GM makes vehicles "bundled" with their engines. If you are able to strip Microsoft Windows of Microsoft products, surely we should be able to strip GM of theirs as well.

[Calum Veteran]

Honestly, I think that's going too far. What prevents your logic from applying to other markets? Someone else brought up the automotive industry - GM makes vehicles "bundled" with their engines. If you are able to strip Microsoft Windows of Microsoft products, surely we should be able to strip GM of theirs as well.

No.

A car cannot function without an engine.

I'm talking about fully functional products which are fit for their purpose.

An iPod is not usable without basic headphones provided. A car cannot function without an engine. Therefore, those two 'arguments' are not valid by anyone.

An operating system functions, does its job and is usable without a media player, web browser, text editor, image editor, dvd creater etc.

Wouldn't it be best to just be able to install what you want? I'm sick of opening up 'Control Panel' and finding a load of rubbish which was already put there by Toshiba, the brand of laptop I bought. The same applies to Microsoft and bundling software with the operating system that people could just download if they so wished.

I'm doing a clean install of Windows 7 when it is released and I will do when I buy my next laptop because of what is included by OEMs. It would be even better if it could be a complete clean install and Microsoft could provide its 'essential' programs, for download, in the way I've described. I'd download most of them, but I have no need for Windows Media Center...

[backdrifter]

No.

A car cannot function without an engine.

I'm talking about fully functional products which are fit for their purpose.

An iPod is not usable without basic headphones provided. A car cannot function without an engine. Therefore, those two 'arguments' are not valid by anyone.

An operating system functions, does its job and is usable without a media player, web browser, text editor, image editor, dvd creater etc.

Wouldn't it be best to just be able to install what you want? I'm sick of opening up 'Control Panel' and finding a load of rubbish which was already put there by Toshiba, the brand of laptop I bought. The same applies to Microsoft and bundling software with the operating system that people could just download if they so wished.

I'm doing a clean install of Windows 7 when it is released and I will do when I buy my next laptop because of what is included by OEMs. It would be even better if it could be a complete clean install and Microsoft could provide its 'essential' programs, for download, in the way I've described. I'd download most of them, but I have no need for Windows Media Center...

I don't quite follow your analogy there. The operating system is no longer a very low level foundation that we have to setup stuff over to do our work. It's an interface between the user and the computer, it's how we see our computer and work with it. So basic functionality we expect from a computer should be there out of the box. An operating system with no software bundled is just like the iPod without headphones in your example. It definitely works and plays the music in the technical sense, but it's no good for the user because he wouldn't hear it.

[sujmano]

No.

A car cannot function without an engine.

I'm talking about fully functional products which are fit for their purpose.

An iPod is not usable without basic headphones provided. A car cannot function without an engine. Therefore, those two 'arguments' are not valid by anyone.

An operating system functions, does its job and is usable without a media player, web browser, text editor, image editor, dvd creater etc.

Wouldn't it be best to just be able to install what you want? I'm sick of opening up 'Control Panel' and finding a load of rubbish which was already put there by Toshiba, the brand of laptop I bought. The same applies to Microsoft and bundling software with the operating system that people could just download if they so wished.

I'm doing a clean install of Windows 7 when it is released and I will do when I buy my next laptop because of what is included by OEMs. It would be even better if it could be a complete clean install and Microsoft could provide its 'essential' programs, for download, in the way I've described. I'd download most of them, but I have no need for Windows Media Center...

Yea you have a good point and i'd agree with you on all the crap preinstalled on laptops, but the majority of people just want a computer that just works, not something there gonna have to fiddle around with. I mean perhaps they could offer a basic version of windows.

[Bryan R.]

No.

A car cannot function without an engine.

I'm talking about fully functional products which are fit for their purpose.

An iPod is not usable without basic headphones provided. A car cannot function without an engine. Therefore, those two 'arguments' are not valid by anyone.

An operating system functions, does its job and is usable without a media player, web browser, text editor, image editor, dvd creater etc.

...

Ok, so a vehicle can't operate without an engine. Let's replace engine with <insert accessory here>. What if I wanted a Camaro with seats or wheels made by a competing car maker? A vehicle can operate and function perfectly fine without those, although without seats, I think the driver would feel just as handicapped as a user without a browser from the moment they take it for it's first run.

Operating systems have changed into what they are currently. I think with this change has come an accepted definition of what an OS actually is and provides the user.

[Eice]

An iPod is not usable without basic headphones provided. A car cannot function without an engine. Therefore, those two 'arguments' are not valid by anyone.

An operating system functions, does its job and is usable without a media player, web browser, text editor, image editor, dvd creater etc.

An iPod without headphones plays music perfectly well, it's just that the user won't be able to hear it. A car functions perfectly without an engine either, it's just that it won't be able to move. Likewise, Windows works perfectly well without those programs, except that you won't be able to browse the web, check your email, type documents, listen to music, watch videos - in short, all the things you bought your PC for. Perfectly usable.

If Microsoft is expected to rip out all components from Windows, then it's obviously absolutely legitimate to order Apple and GM to do the same as well.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Max
Do not circumvent the swear filter. Removed unecessary comments.

[Descartes]

Why couldn't they just bring back the old dialog in setup that allowed you to check/uncheck components that you wanted before installation? Like it was done in Windows 98, except that it would actually remove functions you didn't want, instead of hiding them...

<snipped>

And maybe Opera and the EU as well...

Edited June 13, 2009 by Barney

[Bryan R.]

An iPod without headphones plays music perfectly well, it's just that the user won't be able to hear it. A car functions perfectly without an engine either, it's just that it won't be able to move. Likewise, Windows works perfectly well without those programs, except that you won't be able to browse the web, check your email, type documents, listen to music, watch videos - in short, all the things you bought your PC for. Perfectly usable.

If Microsoft is expected to rip out all components from Windows, then it's obviously absolutely legitimate to order Apple and GM to do the same as well.

Actually I don't think a car can do very much of anything without an engine, so I do give him that. There would be nothing to turn the belt for the alternator, A/C, etc.. Someone can correct if I'm wrong as I am no automotive genius. :p

Edited June 13, 2009 by Max

[protocol7]

Yea you have a good point and i'd agree with you on all the crap preinstalled on laptops, but the majority of people just want a computer that just works, not something there gonna have to fiddle around with.

Exactly. That was one of the reasons often touted for linux not taking over the world. Having to go looking for win32 codec packages, flash players and all sorts of extras to get what people nowadays consider "basic functionality". If an out-of-the-box OS can't do YouTube it's wrapped in fail. Some distros include this stuff now, others don't for licencing reasons).

The reason MS are getting nailed is because of monopoly abuse. You can't apply the same logic to Apple (though they don't like anyone who tries to compete on their turf... Psystar for example) or Linux. But you have to wonder why Opera are pushing for this. If they think it's gonna significantly increase their market share, they're dreaming. Two words: brand recognition. Let's look at at Joe PC and his hypothetical ballot screen:

IE = Microsoft. I've used this since I got my first PC

Chrome = Google. Oh yeah I use them all the time to search for stuff.

Firefox = Hear a lot of people saying this is better and safer and faster than IE. Hmm maybe.

Safari = Apple. Got an iPod/iPhone. And I think I got this last time I installed my iPod/iPhone. Maybe I'll try it now.

Opera = Who?

If the onus is left to OEMs to install a browser, the wise ones will include IE as that's what the masses are familiar with. The not-so-bright ones will include 3 or 4 and make a right mess of things from the get-go. MS could probably include IE in Windows Live Essentials as new users would likely use this to get WLM anyway.

[xStylezx]

and the counter argument would me microsoft themselves. Opera is just doing what microsoft has done a hundred times before. Poetic justice

im in total agreement. microsoft has sued and been corporate bullies to get what they want many times before,so whats wrong with opera playing on the same level and slinging some feces of their own. i say good,the harder it is for microsoft to dominate,the better. competition in any form is great

[Bryan R.]

Damn sorry, I guess it's not so easy using the iPhone to quote and reply. :/

[Calum Veteran]

I don't quite follow your analogy there. [...] An operating system with no software bundled is just like the iPod without headphones in your example. It definitely works and plays the music in the technical sense, but it's no good for the user because he wouldn't hear it.

Correct. I didn't think about this logically :p I'm disappointed in myself.

Ok, so a vehicle can't operate without an engine. Let's replace engine with <insert accessory here>. What if I wanted a Camaro with seats or wheels made by a competing car maker? A vehicle can operate and function perfectly fine without those, although without seats, I think the driver would feel just as handicapped as a user without a browser from the moment they take it for it's first run.

Operating systems have changed into what they are currently. I think with this change has come an accepted definition of what an OS actually is and provides the user.

You're right.

I really didn't think of those things, for some reason. Thanks for reminding me :)

I guess I'm just trying to think of ways this problem can be solved - I just think bundling programs, especially a web browser, into an operating system harms competition, for reasons I have explained i previous posts in this thread.

There has to be something that can be done to stop this?

If Microsoft is expected to rip out all components from Windows, then it's obviously absolutely legitimate to order Apple and GM to do the same as well.

I always said that was fair.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Calum

[neo158]

Maybe MS should just ship blank Windows 7 media to the EU, then they can call it Windows 7 N, N for Nothing on the disk!!!! :rofl:

/sarcasm

Seriously though, I remember when Windows was never bundled with a Web Browser and had extremely basic functionality, Windows 3.1 anyone!!!!

However, times have changed and people expect more from their PCs meaning that MS had to bundle a Web Browser with Windows.

So, I fail to see why MS shouldn't bundle IE with Windows 7 in the EU, people have a choice it's just that average users are too lazy to find an alternative. It's all about educating users, not forcing other alternatives on them through a ballot screen.

Edited June 13, 2009 by neo158