An anonymous reader writes "A lengthy interview on Groklaw discusses the EU's case against Microsoft. The case is supported by Opera, Google, Mozilla, ECIS, and the Free Software Foundation Europe. The EU has demanded that users be offered a 'ballot screen' to make it easier for users to select other browsers. Microsoft has responded by implementing the ballot screen as a web page inside IE. While this may nominally satisfy EU's demand, it is unlikely to satisfy users who prefer other browsers. In order to select another browser, users must be running IE. Also, users will be shown security warnings when choosing from the ballot. Microsoft's ability to charge patent fees in Europe is also discussed: why are they allowed to charge patent fees where software patents are not recognized?"
Thanks Microsoft. How considerate of you to dirty-up my Windoze with Innerweb Exploder, just so I can download an alternative like Opera or Firefox or Safari.
I'm sure Microsoft could include a small FTP program in the "choose your browser" screen to go retrieve the browsers directly, but of course they don't want to do that. They want IE on there in hopes you'll use it someday.
I don't think any FTP program producers will complain about hidden command line ftp commands being used. You do know about command line programs do you ? I don't see anybody complaining that the windows embedded FTP client interferes with GUI based FTP programs. Not to mention that FTP standards are more rigorously adhered to, or it wouldn't work. MS doesn't break http it breaks html. There is no equivalent in FTP.
IE is an open door that lets viruses through. I was having a problem with viruses, and when I uninstalled IE, they disappeared. What a piece of crap program.
Why IE? Why not create a windows app that provides ballot screen which ftp the browser behind the scenes after user selection. If MS wants to do this there are ways to do it
without using IE. But hey EU is satisfied with MS. I think this should be sufficient too. What next, provide ballot screens to select Windowing too.
The functionality is in trident, If i MS used IE to render web pages in WMP/outlook/help, they would be thoroughly retarded, fortunately they are not they use the engine to do the rendering in a GUI suited to the needs of the user. IE has a lot of functionality, but you would be an idiot for suggesting all windows interfaces are done using it.
Don't think i fell for you troll I just worry others may.
...how and to what extent this "ballot screen" is going to be forced on people. I manage a lot of Windows computers at work and the last thing I want is an automatic update suddenly presenting my users with the invitation to choose a new browser, which they won't be able to take up anyway because they lack the administrative privileges to install one.
Here's hoping there's a quick and easy way to disable this with group policy or registry tweaks. What makes sense for Joe Sixpack or Granny Crabapple is not
He is not limited to a screen shot and a paragraph or two of description - which will inevitably be fretted and fussed over word-by-word by the anal-retentive geek and EU bureaucrat.
You can remove it, you just have to create a custom install disc, which is far more work than one should need to put in. Why MS can't conceive that people don't want a lot of that crap is beyond me.
Why MS can't conceive that people don't want a lot of that crap is beyond me.
I dont think "normal people" care that much though. They dont see the difference between IE being still installed but hidden and IE being completely removed from the system. They get to choose another browser tho.
Microsoft has responded by implementing the ballot screen as a web page inside IE.
I wonder how they've could had done it differently. If you provided the install exes along with OS setup, they would be outdated (bad bad thing in browsers). They could had made another protocol that tells the setup what browsers to show for the user and setup then downloads it, but whats the point. When it's an actual webpage, there's much more control in updating it, and it would had been pretty useless for MS to develop completely new rendering engine and browser just for that (and MS browser would still had been there). The security warnings are stupid however.
So, the IE installed on the system is not out of date? It is the same tihng. You can include the EXEs and have browser search for its updates on the first startup, without actually going to an unsecure website. Or just provide an EXE that goes onto the web and downloads the most recent version. But, I don't think it is that big of a deal except for the security warnings.
An full-on webpage may be more flexible, but that is only by virtue of the browser supporting the features laid out in the standards referenced by that webpage.
There's absolutely nothing stopping Microsoft from simply hosting the options as an XML file, downloading that using any ol' connection technology, parsing it, and popping up any images, descriptions, URLs, as would a browser. It doesn't need to support CSS, it doesn't need to support Javascript, etc. The results could then easily be displayed in a
When I'm working on someone's computer and they are having problems with IE that I know Firefox would solve, I usually first just ask them if they've heard of Firefox. About half the time they have, usually having used it on a friend's computer. Then I ask them what sites they usually visit. My mom's an avid Craigslist fan so I installed Firefox and added Greasemonkey with the Craigslist image script. The script automatically pulls the images from the ads and inserts them on the main page under each heading. Needless to say I made an instant believer out of my mother and she uses Firefox to this day.
No amount of whining or explaining is going to make most people switch browsers. Just show the strengths (adblock being a good standby) of the alternatives and they sell themselves.
Honestly, It sounds to me like everyone is over-engineering this to to death.
I'm yet to be convinced that a modern desktop-oriented operating system should be crippled by being forbidden from preinstalling a browser. At the very least, it makes zero sense to not provide an html renderer with the OS. It has become one of the most basic functionalities you can ask for.
This said, and accepting you have a browser pre-installed, it takes about half an hour to come up with a mock-up of a page with a decent presentation and a listing of all the browsers they could ask for. The bit of code
Or perhaps you know, Microsoft could better design their OS to not break when one component is removed.
EVERY OS relies on an HTML rendering component. This isn't unique to Windows, it's just that Windows is the only OS that people get pissy about.
They seem to have taken IE, tied it into everything and they decided that they better make it into a library for convenience sake, rather than build a library and use it.
The built the library (that's what MSHTML is) and IE at the same time. The library for all appl
and to get the damn Live-Mail, you almost have to use IE and jump through a lot of hoops just to get it. Went through that the other day and it was a real PITA as the Live Downloaded wanted to install a whole rash of other crap, just like all the other freebies out there. Of course instead of adding the Ask Toolbar, it wanted to add in Messenger, the damn Blogger accelerator for IE and sign you up for both a Live Id and a damn hotmail account.
Damn MS for making it even harder on people to simply get a copy
You, uh, are aware that there are better alternatives to the shitheap that is outlook express, right? Thunderbird, just to pick the popular one, doesn't have any hoops at all. Why would you jump through the MS hoops for a piece of low-grade quasi-free software?
Clean, simple, free - I found it years ago, and the wife learned to use it in just a couple days. And, she's no computer whiz. It runs beautifully on WinXP, and my search for Win7 on the forum suggests that it runs just fine on Win7.
I searched this out specifically because OE was being targeted by worms, and it was installed on all of my machines until I decided to move to Google mail.
They are seeing financial hard times (who isn't?) so a little donation would be even more a
Look, if you don't like the product, don't use the product! Shocking, I know, but there it is.
No matter if you use it or not, please don't come here and whine here about it. If you want Microsoft to make the install process easier, send feedback to Microsoft. Again: shocking, I know.
That's in response to those asshat toolbars like "WebSearch" which fool less than computer literate people into installing them. They switch all your search preferences to their own spyware option automagically.
The Bing option you mention would require you to manually change it, so it can't get hijacked.
First off, you don't need IE to get Windows Live (from whence you get Live Mail). Windows comes with a handy dandy little app that will go get it for you instead. It uses the same api's IE uses, but who the hell cares? Those are windows networking api's for the most part.
If for some reason you can't get it through the app (AV security restrictions, for one) then you can go to the windows live website - which is just a website that can be accessed from any browser.
Do people just make things up so they're complaints sound solid? I must be new here.
You must be, that's a hallmark of Slashdot argument. I'll show you how to make yourself sound like an expert on a subject in less than 5 minutes:
First, read the post you disagree with and look for any "fact" (facts are flexible here) that looks less than solid.
Fire up Google and search for a negation of that fact (such and such is not yadda yadda). Even if this yields nothing, you should now know enough about the jargon to start making shit up.
All you really need to do is make sure it is relatively logica
I'd like a ballot screen for choosing the operating system.
I saw one like that from HP's business line. Two problems:
1) Both were from MS (XP or Vista)
2) The notebook was summarily handed to an idiot with a major case of "Oooh, clicky!" syndrome who not only loaded Vista against his company's wishes, but then tried to get XP back by deleting everything he could find. Including Windows and the recovery files.
Somehow, this all wound up being my fault.
The problem with an OS chooser is that it's only useful to people who know what an OS is. A lot don't, and the
That's an excellent example of the schism between what ordinary people think of as a computer and how Microsoft sees it.
Ever noticed how OEMs are not allowed to change things like the Windows start-up sound? As far as Microsoft are concerned, their product is XP and your computer has it. As far as the consumer is concerned it's a Sony/HP/Dell/etc computer and it does what computers do. I reckon at least 50% of people don't even know what Windows is, or that Internet Explorer is a web browser and there are alternatives. All they see is a computer and an icon called Internet Explorer which is "the internet".
The problem for OEMs is that it's hard for them to sell a computer with Linux because people can't install The Sims 3 on it. ASUS did the world a massive favour with their Linux netbooks which demonstrated that as long as you don't have a slot to put Sims 3 discs in and your product otherwise looks similar to and does all the things that Windows does you need not pay the Microsoft tax. Google and Facebook are really helping too because now they are the "killer apps" most ordinary people want, all without an optical drive.
You really need to think your troll/ridiculously stupid posts through. It would be trivial to have an MSXML/text/MSSQL file contain a list of browsers,icons,download locations and then have an app show that list (in a nice GUI with icons and all), complete with misleading warnings.
or to put it another way "I'd create a GUI interface using visual basic to see if I can install the browser people want"
What about Pepsi coupon attached on Coca Cola can?
You don't understand the problem. You are allowed to have a monopoly in the US. You are just not allowed to use that monopoly (in OSs) to give you an unfair advantage in a different market (Internet Browsers)
You're right. And when the U.S. DOJ fined the record companies for telling Walmart, Kmart, Target, and other stores, "You must sell these CDs are $12 or more, or else be cutoff from future supplies," the DOJ was wrong there too. Companies should be free to treat their customers and stores like ____, and do whatever is necessary to "win" and kill off the competition via monopolistic practices. Yes technically the record companies violated anti-cartel and price-fixing laws, but who what?
Heck the government shouldn't even be regulating monopolies like Baltimore Gas & Electric, or Bell Telephone. Let them charge the customers whatever they want. Yes they hold a monopoly but so what? It's their market and their right to do whatever they want.
Please see this post [slashdot.org] for clarification. In short: if we wake up tomorrow and ChromeOS is already the dominant operating system, would it be required of it to support installation of third party browsers, even if such a feature was never intended?
The only way to be fair would be to have an independant bit of code that would download your preference for you. Lynx is a browser and is simple to drive so the actual download would not be an issue, just the splash-screen GUI. Or FTP even, its already embedded in Windows ready to be used.
As it is, it will probably be like Microsoft's 'which search engine do you want' which pretty much says "you can use any, if you really want to go to the trouble of clicking through the next buttons, or you can just CLICK
/rollseyes Because Microsoft don't have any programmers capable of writing this interface in any other form right?
Running the selection process inside IE is a blatant attempt to sway the user towards selecting IE, well, that along with installing IE by default (and requiring an internet connection to download the others), putting IE first on the list, and prompting the user with security warnings if they make any other suggestion.
Microsoft abused the market to get IE to the position its in, and they're go
interesting my ass, why do MS have to use fully blown IE (with interface and all) to render a single webpage at a fixed location? This is the kind of thing a simple tool (vb could do it!)+an XML file is suited to. If they didn't want to go to all that effort, then why not use a plane window (no adressbar/no controls) and trident to render the webpage. This isn't about following the intent of the law (offering competing browsers) its just following the letter of the law, that's cool but next time anybody wan
a very limited number of known products, specific browsers which have been concluded by the European Commission should be included on the ballot screen.
Does anyone else find it really, really, strange that the allegedly libertarian geek would accept without protest - even demand - that the state bureaucracy give its stamp of approval before a browser can appear on the ballot?
Can't he see what a precedent this sets?
Surfing the political wave is treacherous - with dramatic shifts from left to right. FOSS and anti-trust can wipe-out.
Because that requires an internet connection. I know internet access is common, but can we really assume these days that *everybody* has it, and that it is correctly configured and connected right out of the box? Most home routers are administered via a web page, requiring a browser. Imagine if the ftp session fails to connect. Now what?
Customer talking to ISP tech support: I get an error when I select Opera as my browser ISP tech: Hmmm. What is the error? Customer: Something about "con
If the web were standardized... then it wouldn't matter which browser you used.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Standardizing the internet has absolutely *nothing* to do with this. The UI menu items, toolbar icons, and options available by default all matter tremendously, especially to novices. For example, f the browser does not have an icon bar displayed, many (most?) will be incapable of figuring out how to turn it on. They will rely on friends. If everybody has a different UI this becomes exponentially more diffi
We'll install Opera right after we install IE (Score:2)
Thanks Microsoft. How considerate of you to dirty-up my Windoze with Innerweb Exploder, just so I can download an alternative like Opera or Firefox or Safari.
I'm sure Microsoft could include a small FTP program in the "choose your browser" screen to go retrieve the browsers directly, but of course they don't want to do that. They want IE on there in hopes you'll use it someday.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure Microsoft could include a small FTP program in the "choose your browser" screen to go retrieve the browsers directly
And just think of what an uproar other FTP program makers will do then.
You really want to have another ballot screen to select your favourite FTP program before the browser ballot screen comes up?
Re:We'll install Opera right after we install IE (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
P.S.
IE is an open door that lets viruses through. I was having a problem with viruses, and when I uninstalled IE, they disappeared. What a piece of crap program.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Or perhaps they tailor their product to demand.
There is a demand for IE.
I use other browsers about 99% of the time, but I also need to have IE installed.
A home user might be able to get by with it, but I use a grip of different management tools, some of which require IE.
Some router config utils don't render properly in FF (and some don't render properly in certain versions of IE.)
I'd be pretty annoyed if I was doing a new office setup and couldn't install network devices because I needed to download a brows
Lynx (Score:2, Interesting)
unbelievable (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The functionality is in trident, If i MS used IE to render web pages in WMP/outlook/help, they would be thoroughly retarded, fortunately they are not they use the engine to do the rendering in a GUI suited to the needs of the user. IE has a lot of functionality, but you would be an idiot for suggesting all windows interfaces are done using it.
Don't think i fell for you troll I just worry others may.
So what? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not like IE is being removed from Windows anyway. There's other things that use it no matter what your default browser is.
This is just whining for the sake of whining.
I'm more concerned about... (Score:2)
Here's hoping there's a quick and easy way to disable this with group policy or registry tweaks. What makes sense for Joe Sixpack or Granny Crabapple is not
Whine Whine Whine (Score:2)
With a browser installed by default the user can go online and compare the home pages of other browsers.
He can - if he chooses - seek out independent reviews.
The more technically minded might be attracted to resources like Secunia: Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.x [secunia.com]
He is not limited to a screen shot and a paragraph or two of description -
which will inevitably be fretted and fussed over word-by-word by the anal-retentive geek and EU bureaucrat.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I don't care about the screen... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why MS can't conceive that people don't want a lot of that crap is beyond me.
I dont think "normal people" care that much though. They dont see the difference between IE being still installed but hidden and IE being completely removed from the system. They get to choose another browser tho.
Microsoft has responded by implementing the ballot screen as a web page inside IE.
I wonder how they've could had done it differently. If you provided the install exes along with OS setup, they would be outdated (bad bad thing in browsers). They could had made another protocol that tells the setup what browsers to show for the user and setup then downloads it, but whats the point. When it's an actual webpage, there's much more control in updating it, and it would had been pretty useless for MS to develop completely new rendering engine and browser just for that (and MS browser would still had been there). The security warnings are stupid however.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
An full-on webpage may be more flexible, but that is only by virtue of the browser supporting the features laid out in the standards referenced by that webpage.
There's absolutely nothing stopping Microsoft from simply hosting the options as an XML file, downloading that using any ol' connection technology, parsing it, and popping up any images, descriptions, URLs, as would a browser. It doesn't need to support CSS, it doesn't need to support Javascript, etc. The results could then easily be displayed in a
Re:I don't care about the screen... (Score:5, Interesting)
When I'm working on someone's computer and they are having problems with IE that I know Firefox would solve, I usually first just ask them if they've heard of Firefox. About half the time they have, usually having used it on a friend's computer. Then I ask them what sites they usually visit. My mom's an avid Craigslist fan so I installed Firefox and added Greasemonkey with the Craigslist image script. The script automatically pulls the images from the ads and inserts them on the main page under each heading. Needless to say I made an instant believer out of my mother and she uses Firefox to this day.
No amount of whining or explaining is going to make most people switch browsers. Just show the strengths (adblock being a good standby) of the alternatives and they sell themselves.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Honestly, It sounds to me like everyone is over-engineering this to to death.
I'm yet to be convinced that a modern desktop-oriented operating system should be crippled by being forbidden from preinstalling a browser. At the very least, it makes zero sense to not provide an html renderer with the OS. It has become one of the most basic functionalities you can ask for.
This said, and accepting you have a browser pre-installed, it takes about half an hour to come up with a mock-up of a page with a decent presentation and a listing of all the browsers they could ask for. The bit of code
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Or perhaps you know, Microsoft could better design their OS to not break when one component is removed.
EVERY OS relies on an HTML rendering component. This isn't unique to Windows, it's just that Windows is the only OS that people get pissy about.
They seem to have taken IE, tied it into everything and they decided that they better make it into a library for convenience sake, rather than build a library and use it.
The built the library (that's what MSHTML is) and IE at the same time. The library for all appl
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Even better: Windows 7 doesn't come with a mail client.
Re:No more Outsuck Express (Score:5, Informative)
Windows 7 no longer includes Windows Mail (the program that replaced Outlook Express in Vista).
If you want a mail client, you have to download Windows Live Mail or your choice of client.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
and to get the damn Live-Mail, you almost have to use IE and jump through a lot of hoops just to get it. Went through that the other day and it was a real PITA as the Live Downloaded wanted to install a whole rash of other crap, just like all the other freebies out there. Of course instead of adding the Ask Toolbar, it wanted to add in Messenger, the damn Blogger accelerator for IE and sign you up for both a Live Id and a damn hotmail account.
Damn MS for making it even harder on people to simply get a copy
Re:No more Outsuck Express (Score:5, Insightful)
You, uh, are aware that there are better alternatives to the shitheap that is outlook express, right? Thunderbird, just to pick the popular one, doesn't have any hoops at all. Why would you jump through the MS hoops for a piece of low-grade quasi-free software?
Parent
Re:No more Outsuck Express (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.pmail.com/index2.htm [pmail.com]
Clean, simple, free - I found it years ago, and the wife learned to use it in just a couple days. And, she's no computer whiz. It runs beautifully on WinXP, and my search for Win7 on the forum suggests that it runs just fine on Win7.
I searched this out specifically because OE was being targeted by worms, and it was installed on all of my machines until I decided to move to Google mail.
They are seeing financial hard times (who isn't?) so a little donation would be even more a
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Then use something else!! Jesus Christ.
Look, if you don't like the product, don't use the product! Shocking, I know, but there it is.
No matter if you use it or not, please don't come here and whine here about it. If you want Microsoft to make the install process easier, send feedback to Microsoft. Again: shocking, I know.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
"Do you want to make Bing your main search engine and make it so this is impossible for other search engines to change?"
Wtf?? Its like hey, want us to rootkit you?
Re:No more Outsuck Express (Score:4, Insightful)
That's in response to those asshat toolbars like "WebSearch" which fool less than computer literate people into installing them. They switch all your search preferences to their own spyware option automagically.
The Bing option you mention would require you to manually change it, so it can't get hijacked.
In other words, it's not a bad thing.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First off, you don't need IE to get Windows Live (from whence you get Live Mail). Windows comes with a handy dandy little app that will go get it for you instead. It uses the same api's IE uses, but who the hell cares? Those are windows networking api's for the most part.
If for some reason you can't get it through the app (AV security restrictions, for one) then you can go to the windows live website - which is just a website that can be accessed from any browser.
Wow, look at all that lock-in required to
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do people just make things up so they're complaints sound solid? I must be new here.
You must be, that's a hallmark of Slashdot argument. I'll show you how to make yourself sound like an expert on a subject in less than 5 minutes:
First, read the post you disagree with and look for any "fact" (facts are flexible here) that looks less than solid.
Fire up Google and search for a negation of that fact (such and such is not yadda yadda). Even if this yields nothing, you should now know enough about the jargon to start making shit up.
All you really need to do is make sure it is relatively logica
Re:No more Outsuck Express (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:No more Outsuck Express (Score:5, Funny)
Grub?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd like a ballot screen for choosing the operating system.
I saw one like that from HP's business line. Two problems:
1) Both were from MS (XP or Vista)
2) The notebook was summarily handed to an idiot with a major case of "Oooh, clicky!" syndrome who not only loaded Vista against his company's wishes, but then tried to get XP back by deleting everything he could find. Including Windows and the recovery files.
Somehow, this all wound up being my fault.
The problem with an OS chooser is that it's only useful to people who know what an OS is. A lot don't, and the
Re:No more Outsuck Express (Score:5, Interesting)
That's an excellent example of the schism between what ordinary people think of as a computer and how Microsoft sees it.
Ever noticed how OEMs are not allowed to change things like the Windows start-up sound? As far as Microsoft are concerned, their product is XP and your computer has it. As far as the consumer is concerned it's a Sony/HP/Dell/etc computer and it does what computers do. I reckon at least 50% of people don't even know what Windows is, or that Internet Explorer is a web browser and there are alternatives. All they see is a computer and an icon called Internet Explorer which is "the internet".
The problem for OEMs is that it's hard for them to sell a computer with Linux because people can't install The Sims 3 on it. ASUS did the world a massive favour with their Linux netbooks which demonstrated that as long as you don't have a slot to put Sims 3 discs in and your product otherwise looks similar to and does all the things that Windows does you need not pay the Microsoft tax. Google and Facebook are really helping too because now they are the "killer apps" most ordinary people want, all without an optical drive.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Er, why is a web browser needed at all to display a selection screen? It's not like they couldn't make a little program to choose one.
This ridiculous shoving of a web browser into places it doesn't belong is starting to get annoying.
Re:Enough is enough (Score:4, Informative)
You really need to think your troll/ridiculously stupid posts through. It would be trivial to have an MSXML/text/MSSQL file contain a list of browsers,icons,download locations and then have an app show that list (in a nice GUI with icons and all), complete with misleading warnings.
or to put it another way "I'd create a GUI interface using visual basic to see if I can install the browser people want"
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
What about Pepsi coupon attached on Coca Cola can?
You don't understand the problem. You are allowed to have a monopoly in the US. You are just not allowed to use that monopoly (in OSs) to give you an unfair advantage in a different market (Internet Browsers)
Re:Enough is enough (Score:4, Funny)
You're right. And when the U.S. DOJ fined the record companies for telling Walmart, Kmart, Target, and other stores, "You must sell these CDs are $12 or more, or else be cutoff from future supplies," the DOJ was wrong there too. Companies should be free to treat their customers and stores like ____, and do whatever is necessary to "win" and kill off the competition via monopolistic practices. Yes technically the record companies violated anti-cartel and price-fixing laws, but who what?
Heck the government shouldn't even be regulating monopolies like Baltimore Gas & Electric, or Bell Telephone. Let them charge the customers whatever they want. Yes they hold a monopoly but so what? It's their market and their right to do whatever they want.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What part of Windows being a monopoly don't you get?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We would all be annoyed of course, but isn't that the ultimate goal of the "fairness" crowd?
Historically, most attempts by government (any government) to promote "fairness" almost always result in increased inequity.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you have any examples at all to back this absurd statement up?
Rich.
Re: (Score:2)
The only way to be fair would be to have an independant bit of code that would download your preference for you. Lynx is a browser and is simple to drive so the actual download would not be an issue, just the splash-screen GUI. Or FTP even, its already embedded in Windows ready to be used.
As it is, it will probably be like Microsoft's 'which search engine do you want' which pretty much says "you can use any, if you really want to go to the trouble of clicking through the next buttons, or you can just CLICK
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
/rollseyes Because Microsoft don't have any programmers capable of writing this interface in any other form right?
Running the selection process inside IE is a blatant attempt to sway the user towards selecting IE, well, that along with installing IE by default (and requiring an internet connection to download the others), putting IE first on the list, and prompting the user with security warnings if they make any other suggestion.
Microsoft abused the market to get IE to the position its in, and they're go
Re: (Score:2)
interesting my ass, why do MS have to use fully blown IE (with interface and all) to render a single webpage at a fixed location? This is the kind of thing a simple tool (vb could do it!)+an XML file is suited to. If they didn't want to go to all that effort, then why not use a plane window (no adressbar/no controls) and trident to render the webpage. This isn't about following the intent of the law (offering competing browsers) its just following the letter of the law, that's cool but next time anybody wan
The geek gone Socialist (Score:4, Interesting)
a very limited number of known products, specific browsers which have been concluded by the European Commission should be included on the ballot screen.
Does anyone else find it really, really, strange that the allegedly libertarian geek would accept without protest - even demand - that the state bureaucracy give its stamp of approval before a browser can appear on the ballot?
Can't he see what a precedent this sets?
Surfing the political wave is treacherous - with dramatic shifts from left to right. FOSS and anti-trust can wipe-out.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because that requires an internet connection. I know internet access is common, but can we really assume these days that *everybody* has it, and that it is correctly configured and connected right out of the box? Most home routers are administered via a web page, requiring a browser. Imagine if the ftp session fails to connect. Now what?
Customer talking to ISP tech support: I get an error when I select Opera as my browser
ISP tech: Hmmm. What is the error?
Customer: Something about "con
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Standardizing the internet has absolutely *nothing* to do with this. The UI menu items, toolbar icons, and options available by default all matter tremendously, especially to novices. For example, f the browser does not have an icon bar displayed, many (most?) will be incapable of figuring out how to turn it on. They will rely on friends. If everybody has a different UI this becomes exponentially more diffi
If it's a fuck off to the eu (Score:4, Insightful)
then it's oh-so-richly deserved.
I've seen more clueless crap emanate from the eu than any hick state in the US.
Parent