Microsoft Blocks 3d-Party Browsers In Windows RT, Says Mozilla Counsel 329
nk497 writes "Mozilla has accused Microsoft of trying to go back to the 'digital dark ages' by limiting rival browsers in the ARM version of Windows 8. Third-party browsers won't work in the desktop mode, and Metro style browsers will be limited in what APIs they can use, said Mozilla general counsel Harvey Anderson, forcing users to move to IE instead. Mozilla said it was the first step toward a new platform lock-in that 'restricts user choice, reduces competition and chills innovation,' and pointed out that such browser control was exactly what upset EU and U.S. regulators about IE in the first place. Anderson called on Microsoft to 'reject the temptation to pursue a closed path,' adding 'the world doesn't need another closed proprietary environment.'"
Re:Completely reasonable (Score:3, Interesting)
You read the article and wrote your reply in 0 minutes? Nice try, Ballmer.
Re:Double standards (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Completely reasonable (Score:5, Interesting)
So you are claiming that Metro IE uses no non-public WinRT APIs? Do these APIs allow for a browser that is not based on the IE rendering engine?
Unsurprising. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Double standards (Score:4, Interesting)
Microsoft was convicted of using a dominant position in one area (desktop OS) to gain an unfair (anticompetitive) advantage in another area (browsers). Microsoft has no monopoly in the ARM tablet market, so they should be (and are, legally) held to the same standard as everyone else who does not have a dominant position in that area.
Re:Completely reasonable (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I don't want to use IE (Score:3, Interesting)
and Linux gets F/OSS Blu-Ray support
VLC 2.0+ has Blu-ray playback capabilities on Linux. :)
Re:Another closed proprietary environment? (Score:3, Interesting)
Generally I speak out for the free market, however it has some historically discovered limits. For instance, financial products have to be traded on an open/transparent market, this means they can (and unfortunately should) be regulated (congress can see what is going on and therefore is able to do something about it, usually pass a law). Otherwise people buy AAA rated "investments" promising double (or more) the going rate and then they lose their money.
What happened the last time Microsoft coupled their browser to their OS (and then they let you run a different one along side it)? Interoperability across the entire Internet was broken. Thousands of people developing websites big and small had to do (about) double the work. My approach was to find something all major browsers rendered acceptably, others parsed the User-Agent header and served different pages for different browsers. The serving of different files lead to problems, like this [wikipedia.org]. Now we are finally recovering from these problems and we find we have come full circle (Microsoft is going to do it again). This gets to an unpopular position I hold (bye-bye karma), interoperability in established software markets (web browsing, word processing, spreadsheets, and etc.) needs to be mandated and regulated.
Disclaimer I work for a standards body. However, I work there because of my beliefs (I was a volunteer for years before I was hired), not the other way around.