Random Thoughts on EU and MS Case
Just some random thoughts of mine. Some people might even call it troll-o-rama…
1. Where the line should be drawn? Should Windows include alternative browsers only? Or also alternatives to WordPad, Paint, Calculator, etc. as long as those are free?
2. If it happens that Microsoft will be forced to ship Windows with other web browsers, how many of the alternatives should it have? 5, 50, 500 or 5000?
3. If other people are not aware of other web browsers, such as Firefox, Safari, Chrome or Opera, what makes you think that they will actually select and trust “unknown” one during setup?
About (Author Profile)
Vygantas is a former web designer whose projects are used by companies such as AMD, NVIDIA and departed Westood Studios. Being passionate about software, Vygantas began his journalism career back in 2007 when he founded FavBrowser.com. Having said that, he is also an adrenaline junkie who enjoys good books, fitness activities and Forex trading.
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
The line should be drawn where there is a market which Microsoft has illegally ruined. But WordPad and Paint both produce file types other applications can read and write, so there’s no lock-in there.
The other questions are mostly useless until we know what the EU decides on. But it’s not that complicated:
The EU can decide which browsers to include. Or some “X most used” or something like that.
People will notice that there are other browsers even if they use IE, which increases awareness.
But could you please stop trolling abut this now? This stuff has been discussed at length all over the place. You are just showing off your ignorance and bias by constantly going on about this.
this is the truth other browsers can not compete with IE ,so they demand force from EU and UN in the future and congress to compete with it.
There’s always a million reasons not do to something.
Fact is, Microsoft bundling of IE with their OS significantly damaged the web in its form and shame and ultimately the user experience.
Questions? Well, sure, there are questions to be asked, but just as well, there are answers to be given:
Where the line should be drawn? Should Windows include alternative browsers only? Or also alternatives to WordPad, Paint, Calculator, etc. as long as those are free?
No, Microsoft should only provide alternatives for Windows Media Player and Windows Internet Explorer. For now.
If it happens that Microsoft will be forced to ship Windows with other web browsers, how many of the alternatives should it have? 5, 50, 500 or 5000?
MS shouldn’t be forced to ship any browser with its OS. They should, however, be forced to ship it with a system that enables the user to DOWNLOAD the browser of its choice, when the OS is first ran.
If other people are not aware of other web browsers, such as Firefox, Safari, Chrome or Opera, what makes you think that they will actually select and trust “unknown” one during setup?
Nothing makes us think that, and that is not the objective of this case. The objective is to make people aware that they have a choice. EVERYTHING else is irrelevant. For now.
Thanks for your answers, guys :-)
Tiago Sá
this is logical answers but, who can decide the alternative and the standards (this is more inportant) that to be included in OS.
until now the best browser in terms of showing the webpages correctaly is IE regardless its hags and slowness comparing to other and I think this is far logical than others if you look at the future of WWW where is the speed of internet is doubled each time and the web content itself become lighter by new programming languages which makes other browser war for speed is non snnse at all in the long run.
other standrds like asid test and blah blah blah…………….. is not that important if the webpage can show correctely each time.
Huh, no, Internet Explorer is not the best browser to show webpages correctly. It might be the only browser that works with SOME pages, but that doesn’t really mean anything. It’s slow, and it’s buggy, and it’s insecure, and it’s heavy, and it crashes, and those disadvantages largely outweigh the advantage that is to be able to visit that small tiny percentage of pages made by technological dinosaurs that can only work with frontpage because it has a graphical interface and comes “for free with the computer duh lol”.
@abcnet
Wrong. IE is NOT the best. IE is lucky enough to not have to be even decent because pages will be designed specifically to work in IE anyway.
It isn’t IE that works with sites. Sites work with IE.
Your ignorance is astounding. Simply astounding.
Random thoughts require random references
http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/show.dml/2916027
MS should simply implement a repo manager where they make alternative software available. they don’t even have to make it on their own server, they simply could make a central place to store the repo list -> user downloads it once a week or so -> done. noone can complain, user gets cool “new” feature.