EU could force Microsoft to bundle Firefox/Opera/Safari with Windows

[MetalheadGautham]

Do you remember what everyone says about Sony laptops. They install lot of freeware and trialware (a.k.a bloatware) with windows image making the OS heavy right out of the box. The best way to keep windows share growing is by keeping it simple yet effective, light yet resourceful.

I said the same thing indirectly.
Forcing such software on people is crap, but giving them an option, say in the installer menu, would make things much more cozy.

Filling windows install disc with s/w's will not do any good.

Whats wrong ? User still has freedom of choice whether to install or not install software.

2.6 GB free space doesn't mean that they should fill it up. The size of win7's image is bigger than that of Vista, mainly due to bigger driver pack.

How big ???

 

[gxsaurav]

I thought its lighter than vista ? So when vista DVD image is 2GB compressed, Win7 should have less, right ?

Then WHY can't MS use the extra free 2.6GB to give us optional installables like messenger, movie maker, mail, visual studio 2008 express editon, office viewer, etc ? The space would be more than enough.

Because they are being sued for bundling Microsoft's own other products with Windows.

GX asked WHY ubuntu does not bundle konqueror in its CD.
So I said that in ubuntu, the fact that konqueror is existing in its own repos is enough to mean that ubuntu "bundles" konqueror in some way. Not that I support the EU ruling though.

but its not installed. it should be just like EU wants MS to bundle Firefox.

And unless I am highly mistaken it had more to do with the closed codecs of WMP. If MS has kept their own codecs royalty free, and also claimed support for FLAC, ogg, by default in WMP, that wouldn't happened.

No this was not the reason. Do u know that MS only sold 1500 OEM copies of Windows XP N Edition . It was the biggest OS failure in the history of Microsoft.

Here is the thing which you all should understand. "A software development company cannot bundle something they did not code with there product which relies on there product to work without testing it first & without giving it proper certification as it might create incompatibilities with the OS or other applications". If u go by this logic then Firefox is not at all a Windows Certified Browser, K-Mellon is.

Whats wrong ? User still has freedom of choice whether to install or not install software.

As a user I don't wants wizards on my face like Linux during installation. Make it as simple as you can which Windows 7 installation is. I would even prefer them to remove the screen asking to set the time zone, it should take it automatically from my BIOS

 

[desiibond]

I said the same thing indirectly.
Forcing such software on people is crap, but giving them an option, say in the installer menu, would make things much more cozy.

Oh. IE is so big that it will slow down the entire OS. I didn't know that. IE is as much essential to windows as WMP is, as explorer is, as notepad is.

There is a difference between bloatware and essential s/w

Whats wrong ? User still has freedom of choice whether to install or not install software.

Ejjactly. That is why IE is there so that right after installing, user can download any s/w that he/she wants from internet. And with HDD size so big and users getting more and more knowledgeable, all they have to do is one time download and install from disc. That, in my opinion is difficult to do in Linux, thanks to the technology called dependencies.

How big ???

Will be around 2.8-2.9Gb for final release.

 

[MetalheadGautham]

Oh. IE is so big that it will slow down the entire OS. I didn't know that. IE is as much essential to windows as WMP is, as explorer is, as notepad is.

What about those who use Firefox instead of IE, or those who use MPlayer instead of WMP or those who use Notepad++ instead of notepad ???

The question as I said before is why NOT provide an option to remove it. Providing an option to remove does NOT mean that it wouldn't be installed by default.

Essential software (IE, WMP, etc) should be installed with the OS but an option should exist to remove them.

Extra software (Movie Maker, Visual Studio, etc) should NOT be installed with the OS, but user should still get an option to install them from the OS disc.

All I need are OPTIONS, OPTIONS & OPTIONS.

Ejjactly. That is why IE is there so that right after installing, user can download any s/w that he/she wants from internet. And with HDD size so big and users getting more and more knowledgeable, all they have to do is one time download and install from disc.

But why should there NOT be an option to remove IE ? THATS my question.

That, in my opinion is difficult to do in Linux, thanks to the technology called dependencies.

Acutally, you CAN have statically compiled versions of software to make them portable. But nobody does it because it simply needn't be done, considering that linux is an OS for those with an internet connection or for those who need custom needs.

Will be around 2.8-2.9Gb for final release.

Thats still not too high. Visual Studio Express is 0.9 GB. Remaining software wouldn't cross 0.4GB. And thats easily includable.

 

[Liverpool_fan]

As a user I don't wants wizards on my face like Linux during installation. Make it as simple as you can which Windows 7 installation is.

How much is Windows 7 installation different than Windows Vista. If they can make it more simpler than Ubuntu's installation, I am really curious.
And No I wasn't talking of Wizard during installation, but rather a wizard that would launch with an icon: Connect to Internet in the desktop or when user loads an HTML file.

I would even prefer them to remove the screen asking to set the time zone, it should take it automatically from my BIOS

Your BIOS has time zone?

 

[gxsaurav]

What about those who use Firefox instead of IE, or those who use MPlayer instead of WMP or those who use Notepad++ instead of notepad ???

Ok, install it yourself like U install something new using Synaptic.

Essential software (IE, WMP, etc) should be installed with the OS but an option should exist to remove them.

Have u ever looked at Add/remove Windows Component in Control Panel?

Extra software (Movie Maker, Visual Studio, etc) should NOT be installed with the OS, but user should still get an option to install them from the OS disc.

The version on the disk gets outdated soon so online installation is preferred.

All I need are OPTIONS, OPTIONS & OPTIONS.
But why should there NOT be an option to remove IE ? THATS my question.

U r a nutcase users, more option = more confusion = hassle to end user experience.

Thats still not too high. Visual Studio Express is 0.9 GB. Remaining software wouldn't cross 0.4GB. And thats easily includable.

microsoft does not want to be sued by bundling any more of there apps with Windows.

 

[Liverpool_fan]

U r a nutcase users, more option = more confusion = hassle to end user experience.

Are you serious?
Tell you what we should become a Cuba and have users only select one particular desktop computer.
There would be:
Less Computer Choices == Less Confusion == Less Hassle

 

[desiibond]

The number of users using IE+notepad+WMP is far far higher than those not using them and hence there is no reason to have them uninstalled. There is no need in the first place. They are built into the kernel and they don't pose any threat to resources.

yes. Linux is OS for those who can do lot of R&D. That is the reason why windows haS major market share. coz users don't want to spend more time resolving dependencies than working. That is where windows excels. Making everything simple to use.
When IE+notepad+WMP is doing the job for many, whey should someone even consider it as monopoly. If someone else don't want to use it, let them get something else. As simple as that.

And it's designed by MS and they should have the right what to include and what not to, whether to have option to uninstall or not (which is already there for IE in EU).

 

[Liverpool_fan]

When IE+notepad+WMP is doing the job for many, whey should someone even consider it as monopoly. If someone else don't want to use it, let them get something else. As simple as that.

The problem is people use these software and do not even know anything about other choices and the fact that the alternatives can increase their productivity by some factor.

Why shouldn't a user be made aware, particularly about Web Browser since it is such an INTEGRAL COMPONENT of an Operating System.
Most people use IE6 at this time, and I am sure you'll agree they would been *much* better served if they knew about alternatives like Firefox, Opera or even that a much better update called IE7 (now IE8) is available.

 

[MetalheadGautham]

^^Good point. I know many who start complaining of the issues with IE6 and curse Windows, without knowing that even IE7 exists.

Casual users tend to use what MS chooses for them in windows. Thats a fact.

 

[desiibond]

The problem is people use these software and do not even know anything about other choices and the fact that the alternatives can increase their productivity by some factor.

Why shouldn't a user be made aware, particularly about Web Browser since it is such an INTEGRAL COMPONENT of an Operating System.
Most people use IE6 at this time, and I am sure you'll agree they would been *much* better served if they knew about alternatives like Firefox, Opera or even that a much better update called IE7 (now IE8) is available.

yes. Users must be made aware of other options. But why should MS teach end users how to use the rival software. IF others can't make users understand about alternatives, why should MS be blamed. They aren't good enough to market their products, why should MS do it for them.

If you have a company that is making huge profits on a product, will you advertise about your rivals product and say, hey you don't like my product, use my rivals product.

That sucks. Right?

And MS has already send IE7 over windows update and that means users should be well aware of IE7's existance.

^^Good point. I know many who start complaining of the issues with IE6 and curse Windows, without knowing that even IE7 exists.

They should be knowledgeable enought to learn that there are alternatives and if they can't, it's not MS's headache

Casual users tend to use what MS chooses for them in windows. Thats a fact.

That's why they are called casual users. They are happy with what they have and they don't want to scratch their head thinking about alternatives.

Those who just want a browser are using IE and are happy.

Those who want to do lot of modifications are using FF and are happy and they do ignore IE.

It is companies like Opera (and SCO) that take sidetracks to gain advantage.
Look at Firefox, they are not complainint about IE coming in windows. They are taking the competition to MS by doing things that MS never did. (tabs, plugins, addons). That is how the competition should be. You should not blame your competitor for your lack of progress.

 

[Liverpool_fan]

^ ^
Well Microsoft Windows is not only simply a product of Microsoft. It's a platform, it has become almost like a "standard", a "standard" which is prevalent in most of the desktops, and with that MS products like IE get an overwhelming advantage which they should rather get in the same difficulty that its rivals have, that is getting approval of the user's choice/marketing.
That is why there must be a choice particularly in Web Browsers as they seem to shape up the future of computing.

You should not blame your competitor for your lack of progress.

You should if you are yourself dependent on that rival as a platform.

Consider the analogy. What if Intel the largest CPU vendor decides to always integrate its Original line MB with its CPU, and sells, Don't you think companies like ASUS, MSI, etc. will complain?

 

[desiibond]

Windows IS a product and is manufactured by MS. It has become like a standard, then why should we let EU sling dirt at it.

I can't say anything if you say that windows is not simply a product. MS is not doing charity here. It's business and in business, to excel you should not have emotions for your rivals.

There always is a choice.

install windows. open IE, open download page and download the product. Save it to disc. Install the alternate product.

On subsequent installs, install the product from the disc.

What's wrong with this method???

You should if you are yourself dependent on that rival as a platform.

Did Mozilla depend on MS when developing FF??

Consider the analogy. What if Intel the largest CPU vendor decides to always integrate its Original line MB with its CPU, and sells, Don't you think companies like ASUS, MSI, etc. will complain?

This is a totally irrelevant comparison.

Consider this. Intel is selling it's own IGP and they are the market leaders. Did ATI/nVidia complain??

FYI, Intel is largest manufacturer of motherboards. But still ASUS and other 3rd party vendors are making business. That is because they are making their products better than Intel's and they are not licking EU's feet.

PS: combining cpu+mobo is like combining windows+office. And both will never happen as it is Intel/MS that will lose money.

 

[Liverpool_fan]

Did Mozilla depend on MS when developing FF??

Well in the previous context, yes. i.e. Mozilla needs Windows to serve majority of users.

This is a totally irrelevant comparison.

Consider this. Intel is selling it's own IGP and they are the market leaders. Did ATI/nVidia complain??

Maybe it was the wrong anology I made.

FYI, Intel is largest manufacturer of motherboards. But still ASUS and other 3rd party vendors are making business. That is because they are making their products better than Intel's and they are not licking EU's feet.

I know. And Intel is doing well by their brand and quality and not by tying the CPU and MB. Also Intel releases chipsets for other vendors, don't they? Are they being charitable?
Opera on the other hand have been just so plain unlucky. Anybody who used Opera would realise it is the most underestimated software in the world.
And please... licking "EU's feet" is not a good statement. They only sued MS, they have legal rights don't they? It was upto EU to dismiss or entertain their request.

PS: combining cpu+mobo is like combining windows+office. And both will never happen as it is Intel/MS that will lose money.

Umm...I guess my anology did not put my point across...

Now I am getting bit tired...Whether anything happens or not, I don't care much...either way...
I always keep more than few browsers in whichever OS I use, so I guess I am a bit or maybe a lot biased...

 

[Ecko]

The other browsers are available to be installed in the Repository when the user wants but by default only Firefox or Konqurer is installed.

Well, in case of Windows, the other browsers are available to be installed when the user wants, but by default IE is installed.

People never see an option of installing Opera or Firefox
Do they...!!!
Only noobs who dont care about anything use IE dese dayz
Else more than 50% or people use Firefox
Atleast Windows would've a repository for browsers

 

[din]

For ex a car accessories manufacturer may complain that the car maker is killing competition by selling cars with alloy wheels or mp3 player or fog lamps.

Aahh After years here comes the 'Car' again !!! LOL Gooooooooooooobi, where are you ?

 

[desiibond]

Well in the previous context, yes. i.e. Mozilla needs Windows to serve majority of users.

yes. they want windows to get market share. They didn't expect MS to remove IE to get market share, which is what Opera is trying to do.

I know. And Intel is doing well by their brand and quality and not by tying the CPU and MB. Also Intel releases chipsets for other vendors, don't they? Are they being charitable?

And who is winning here? Intel or other vendor? Anyways, let's not go to other industries.

What happens if MS gives IE for linux. It will face the same fate that Opera will face if is bundled with windows.

Opera on the other hand have been just so plain unlucky. Anybody who used Opera would realise it is the most underestimated software in the world.
And please... licking "EU's feet" is not a good statement. They only sued MS, they have legal rights don't they? It was upto EU to dismiss or entertain their request.

yeah. Totally closed for 3rd party vendors. can't render many pages properly. Opera team has to open their doors before trying to enter into other territory. They don't let others to work on their product and they blame MS for monopoly. how lame!!!

 

[Liverpool_fan]

What happens if MS gives IE for linux. It will face the same fate that Opera will face if is bundled with windows.

A few niche users would install it just to test their web pages. As an aspiring web developer it would save me some time from testing IE within Virtualised Windows. It is unlikely it would succeed much beyond that, but if they make it good enough, a few users will use it.
But if Opera if is bundled in Windows, it would be accpepted as much as IE is now. People have a knack of keeping what is given to them. The usage of IE6 is the proof.

yeah. Totally closed for 3rd party vendors. can't render many pages properly. Opera team has to open their doors before trying to enter into other territory. They don't let others to work on their product and they blame MS for monopoly. how lame!!!

Well closed...OK, but they are highly standards compliant browser. Opera 10 Alpha for instance is recognised for that just like its predecessor and gives 100/100 in Acid3 test. And though I hate to say this but rendering problem is mainly due to poor web development all around or developers not considering Opera.
But yes if they open their source code, then they'll PWN other browsers particularly Firefox (IMO)...

 

[infra_red_dude]

but they WILL know if they see ubuntuguide

If people can take the pains to see ubuntuguide then they sure can see Windows Market Place!

Let me guess: you have a 320GB HDD ?

Lets say I haf only 6GB hdd, if I remove IE how much space would I save? 50mb, 100mb??!!! Would that matter??!! Not for me, never for me!

The best way to keep windows share growing is by keeping it simple yet effective, light yet resourceful.

In fact, this applies to any software.

The version on the disk gets outdated soon so online installation is preferred.

This is a very valid point which goes against EU. Bundling 3rd party apps with Windows isn't such a good idea imho.

...They are built into the kernel and they don't pose any threat to resources.

WTF??!! Dude.. are you nuts??!!

Linux is OS for those who can do lot of R&D. That is the reason why windows haS major market share. coz users don't want to spend more time resolving dependencies than working. That is where windows excels. Making everything simple to use.

Do not agree with a single point! Linux is not for R&D. Its a great everyday desktop OS. Its the drivers which are causing adoption problems. If the hardware has proper drivers then installing any GNU/Linux (except Gentoo) comes next to Mac OS X in ease of installation (when I say ease of installation, I mean a fresh separate installation). People complain about installation only coz they wanna dual boot and hence manully need to partition.

Anyways, the post is going offtopic. I dunno who dragged Linux and open source in this discussion.

And it's designed by MS and they should have the right what to include and what not to, whether to have option to uninstall or not (which is already there for IE in EU).

No second thots on this! MS should haf every right to decide what to bundle and what not to.

Consider this. Intel is selling it's own IGP and they are the market leaders. Did ATI/nVidia complain??

In fact, anuraag's analogy is perfect. Think of it this way: Intel forcing every customer who buys Intel processors to get a motherboard with intel IGP. Then nVidia and ATi will cry for sure coz except the enthusiasts people never both about graphics. Thats a fact.

Aahh After years here comes the 'Car' again !!! LOL Gooooooooooooobi, where are you ?

lol.. You bet

can't render many pages properly....

Oh please! Opera is one of the most standards compliant browsers out there. This is coz many pages are built for "IE". Its not Opera's fault.

 

[Ecko]

@desibond
Dude Opera was a paid browser
What they fear probably is the same scene going in Linux market
Too much open source & you see a hundred of OSes flaunting
BTW Opera holds fastest web page rendering records & is most compatible , less resource taking & smallest packaged web browser with IRC support
Not to mention that as far as I remember many of features Firefox lovers (I 2 like it) enjoy 2day are directly derieved from Opera (atleast the concepts)
What Internet Explorer is Bull$hit, without any user control totally aimed at advertising
Not even till today they have any feature that I can say even matches 1% with other browsers