Damned if they do and damned when they don't

[davidnix71]

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/afp/20090611/tc_afp/useuropeitinternetsoftwaremicrosoft

Microsoft is shipping Windows 7 in Europe without IE, but that prompted a new complaint. EU rules say users should have a choice of browsers. Shipping without a browser doesn't provide a choice.

[worker201]

Hilarious.  It's hard to download an alternate browser without a browser.  Microsoft's asshattery might single-handedly bring back the browser CD wars.

[Lead Head]

Why doesn't the European Union sue Apple for bundling Safari with OSX? Not that I find that a problem at all. I don't get why they make such a big fuss over a bundled browser. Yes, it was a bit extreme with the older versions of windows where you had to rip half the OS apart just to get rid of IE, but still.

[worker201]

Apple probably gets away with a lot because they are such a small portion of the market.

[davidnix71]

I don't think you actually need Safari for OSX to work. I haven't tried it, but you could probably just delete the app if you didn't want it. OSX help files use the system Finder app, they aren't html or chm files like Windows. I rarely use Safari and after I set Firefox as the default browser, I've never had it start unless I deliberately called it.

I've had multiple broswers running at the same time in OSX before and no problems. Opera, Safari, IE for Mac, Firefox, Shiira, iCab all running at the same time causes no problems. Once, just for sh!ts and giggles, I opened Opera, Firefox and IE at the same time and pointed them to the same page on a pc. After closing the browsers, I couldn't get on the internet at all until I uninstalled Firefox and Opera and restarted.

Software Update is it's own app. I called it and it ran without calling anything else.

[7031]

I don't think you actually need Safari for OSX to work. I haven't tried it, but you could probably just delete the app if you didn't want it. OSX help files use the system Finder app, they aren't html or chm files like Windows. I rarely use Safari and after I set Firefox as the default browser, I've never had it start unless I deliberately called it.

True, though isn't the rendering engine still part of the OS, regardless of whether the actual app is installed? For example, doesn't iTunes use it for the iTunes store? I may be wrong though...

You do have a point though, and again, the fact that the actual app can be removed is probably the reason for the EU not going insane. That, or again, the lack of marketshare.

[Lead Head]

IE is no longer integrated with Vista/7 as well. It will too function fine without a browser. But imagine OSX or Windows without any means at all to get on to the internet. Could you picture Apple/Microsoft including all their competitors browsers default to provide a choice? I can't.

[davidnix71]

I delete iTunes from every Mac I own, so I don't know if it uses Safari or not. iTunes has accelerated privileges that I find unacceptable, plus it keeps track of all your media. iTunes will run from the Trash. I'm not going to pay money for something with DRM anyway.

The other app I delete always is the DVD player. It will require you to set a region code and I refuse to do that. VLC always works as long as you just let it follow the dvd disc menu. As soon as rpc1 flashes are available I flash my drives region free.

The older version of Shiira for Panther and up is only 3.3 MB. Off-By-One for Windows fit on a floppy. Adding a second browser to an OS disc is trivial.

[worker201]

I'm not going to go read up on case law or the Microsoft court decisions.  But I think forcing them to dike out IE was stupid.  

Over the past 50 years, the concept of an operating system has gone from a basic instruction set to a multi-tiered hardware/software architecture.  OSes these days are judged based on how many cool little apps and utilities they include.  Not including a text editor, for example, would be ridiculous, and the OS wouldn't sell.  I honestly think that Solitaire is one of the reasons why some people won't ditch Windows.  Now, a browser is considered an essential app for a computer.  Believe it or not, Microsoft was the first company to ship an OS that included a web browser.  And they get punished for this?  Good god, why?

If you want to see some real crazy embedded might-even-be-illegal shit, take a look at QuickTime.  Most people only know about the crappy little frontend program that plays videos.  DVD Player is another shitty little frontend.  Behind it is one of the largest system frameworks in OSX.  I don't even think OSX could perform the mundanest of tasks if all references to QuickTime were removed.  But that's okay - it provides all kinds of weird functionality that a standalone player never could.  I can't think of any reason we should punish manufacturers for coming up with innovative software technologies.

If Microsoft deserves to be sued, it's for its exclusive OEM distribution deals that punish sales partners for shipping computers that don't have Vista installed.  That's exclusionary and monopolistic, and it doesn't do a goddamm thing to advance the technological art.

FYI, I like iTunes, and I like the iTunes store.  The integration from network to desktop to device is just so dang convenient.  The DRM is easily skirted, if you absolutely must.

[Calum]

Believe it or not, Microsoft was the first company to ship an OS that included a web browser.  And they get punished for this?  Good god, why?

is your question rhetorical? you answer it yourself!

If Microsoft deserves to be sued, it's for its exclusive OEM distribution deals that punish sales partners for shipping computers that don't have Vista installed.  That's exclusionary and monopolistic, and it doesn't do a goddamm thing to advance the technological art.

Substitute "Vista" for "Internet Explorer" in that quote, and think back ten or fifteen years. perhaps this isn't as relevant now as it was back in the day, but that's the reason historically. MS had no interest in making compliant web browsers, or advancing open standards, in fact they wanted to completely crush any organisation who had those aims, because they perceived them as a threat.

As it turns out the only way Netscape managed not to let their browser lose the browser wars was to initially make it free, which worked to some extent, and then to allow it to become Free, which worked to some extent as well.

[worker201]

If Microsoft deserves to be sued, it's for its exclusive OEM distribution deals that punish sales partners for shipping computers that don't have Vista installed.  That's exclusionary and monopolistic, and it doesn't do a goddamm thing to advance the technological art.

Substitute "Vista" for "Internet Explorer" in that quote, and think back ten or fifteen years. perhaps this isn't as relevant now as it was back in the day, but that's the reason historically. MS had no interest in making compliant web browsers, or advancing open standards, in fact they wanted to completely crush any organisation who had those aims, because they perceived them as a threat.

Like I said, I'm not planning on reading case files or anything like that.  I recall that Microsoft at first was handing out free copies of cds, just like Netscape was.  When they started pre-installing it with the OS, that was, in my memory, never at the exclusion of other browsers.  OEMs had a lot more control back then.  At least that's the way I remember it.

I also recall that I switched to IE from Netscape around version 5.  I was taking an XML class, and IE had XML support that was light years beyond Netscape.  It wasn't until the beginning of the Mozilla project (after the release of the Netscape codebase) that the tables started to turn.  IE has been playing catchup ever since.

[Lead Head]

IE is disgustingly far behind any other modern browser. What is pitiful is that MS is still encouraging poor standards-violating web coding. IE8 actually has two modes, compatibility and standards-compliant mode. Computability mode is enabled by default, and it causes IE8 to behave like the previous versions of IE. Even the standards compliant mode still has pretty poor support for many web standards. I just find it amazing that they seem to favor poor coding just to make some older websites work, rather then standards compliant to help unify the web.

[worker201]

Well, if their goal was to unify the web, then they would focus on standards compliance.  But that has never been their goal.  And no matter what they tell you, that's not the goal of anyone else who has a product to sell.  Microsoft's goal regarding the internet has always been "If we can control it, we will rake in the money".  From their business interests, Microsoft-controlled standards are the best kind of standards, because W3C standards don't open pathways for Microsoft to make money.  In the web, as in all markets, Microsoft's goal was to pervert industry standards to their own liking, and then force those standards on their huge user base.

So in a way, IE has been standards compliant for its entire lifespan.  It's just a question of "which standards?"

[Calum]

Like I said, I'm not planning on reading case files or anything like that.

When they started pre-installing it with the OS, that was, in my memory, never at the exclusion of other browsers.  OEMs had a lot more control back then.  At least that's the way I remember it.

worker, you remember wrong.

but since you plan to pour your opinions into this thread while actively avoiding any real history, then what's the point in replying to you?

[worker201]

but since you plan to pour your opinions into this thread while actively avoiding any real history, then what's the point in replying to you?

I feel kinda special that I got a reply, even though I'm apparently not worth replying to.

WTF, man?  I thought I made it pretty clear that the information presented in these posts would be opinions and interpretations, not facts.  If you wish to correct my opinions and interpretations by presenting facts, feel free to do so.  If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, and I'm man enough to admit it.  But don't threaten to correct me and then withhold your corrections as some kind of punishment.