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

Status
Not open for further replies.

desiibond

Bond, Desi Bond!
WTF??!! :confused: Dude.. are you nuts??!!

I am perfectly all right.

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.

I do know exactly the difference between windows and linux. I tried like hell to get my TV card working with it. I really missed TV and perfect media client when I used linux. It's not for those who want to have everything work out of the box.


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.

Reason is not MS is not forcing you to use IE. You have option to user other browsers and if Intel saying that users should have their mobo with their CPU is like MS not allowing users to install any other web browser. THERE IS LOT OF DIFFERENCE.

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.

The same pages work without any problem on numerous other browsers. safari/IE/FF. And if it doesn't work on Opera, it's IE's fault. GREAT!!!!
 

Liverpool_fan

Sami Hyypiä, LFC legend
^ ^
Please no Linux v Windows debates. :D

And no, not IE's fault entirely but MS fault to an extent for setting imcompatible standards (I still remember MSN's delibrate incompatibily with Opera early this decade to snuff them out) and more so of the developers fault for only focusing on IE or just Firefox and IE.
And I dunno of any site which works in Safari(Webkit) and not in Opera.
 

Ecko

Wandering In Tecno Land
*i40.tinypic.com/24ordhx.jpg *files.myopera.com/Tamil/Smilies/Cop.gif

*i41.tinypic.com/zl6sg5.jpg

*i43.tinypic.com/2mwa1ww.jpg*files.myopera.com/Tamil/Smilies/Tease.gif *files.myopera.com/Tamil/Smilies/Tease.gif

Opera view tab thumbnail came after IE 7 beta 1 was released. This I actually paid attention to in the past....
You should've paid attention to the beta before that
It was in that Beta ;)
 
Last edited:

desiibond

Bond, Desi Bond!
^^ using a browser based on ACID test??

seriously, I won't do that.

I prefer a browser which is able to render 99% of webpages without any problem. I used opera for brief period and got irritated by some issues.

Now, I am using IE+FF, and sometimes for fast browsing, Chrome.

^ ^
Please no Linux v Windows debates. :D

And no, not IE's fault entirely but MS fault to an extent for setting imcompatible standards (I still remember MSN's delibrate incompatibily with Opera early this decade to snuff them out) and more so of the developers fault for only focusing on IE or just Firefox and IE.
And I dunno of any site which works in Safari(Webkit) and not in Opera.

Okay. sorry. my mistake. no win vs lin here. Let's concentrate only on windows.

Let's see. MS is making IE8 to be more in-line with ACID3 but let's see how that will effect the webpage rendering.
 
Last edited:

Liverpool_fan

Sami Hyypiä, LFC legend
Well Acid3 is not the ultimate...but yes if a browser passes it means it is pretty much standardized and should not render improperly unless there is something web master has done...which is beyond Opera's control.
Opera is in itself perfect but unfortunately in this world perfection does not nessecarily stick to market demands.
Furthermore the Acid3 is not meant much for end users so as to use the browser on its account though...Frankly I don't use Opera based on Acid3 test but due to other features...now I'm going to discuss Opera...let's leave it here.
Some people are claiming IE8 to be more standards-compliant so let's see. It fails the Acid3 pretty badly...but let's not read much into that and hope IE8 indeed be standards compliant.

@Ecko: You have customized Opera layout quite well for IE/FF users. And is that 10 Alpha?
 
Aahh After years here comes the 'Car' again !!! LOL Gooooooooooooobi, where are you ?
Hey, I didn't notice that. Nice find :D
If people can take the pains to see ubuntuguide then they sure can see Windows Market Place!
They are NOT the same. Windows online help center would be the equivalent of ubuntuguide.

Windows Market Place is more like the add/remove programs menu's highly primitive equivalent.

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!
You hit the nail without meaning to. It indeed DOES matter. Several small 50mb fragments saved can mean plenty of space. I know this especially because I struggle trying to fit my 100GB multimedia collection onto my 18GB Partition. I often end up wishing stuff like "if only there was 50 more MB, this whole album could have made it into the HDD".

Netbooks are more like portable entertainment gadgets than ordinary notebooks. The 50MB of Internet Explorer would mean a 96kbps LC-AAC RIP of Death Magnetic to some.

In fact, this applies to any software.
Ekjacktly. Any OS when modular, light and less resource hungry, with an elegent interface, would be highly appealing to end-users.

This is a very valid point which goes against EU. Bundling 3rd party apps with Windows isn't such a good idea imho.
But fact remains - 3rd party apps are ALREADY being bundled. Just check the number of assemblers back in the 2003-2006 era of extreme windows xp popularity. MOST of the OEMs bundle trial versions of Norton or McAfee antiviruses today, while back then, esp in India, it was rare to see a computer without winamp installed by the assembler.

The reason I find the EU ruling amusing is because they say people use whats bundled with the PC, but such people are almost ALWAYS users of OEM desktops or laptops. Its they who use whats bundled with the OS.

Those who legally buy a Retail copy of Windows are either enterprises, who KNOW whats good for them and whats bad, or WELL INFORMED USERS who buy windows because they like what it offers and they also know that they can install another program.

And hence its only the OEMs who create scenarios for AntiTrust violations, but they ALWAYS bundle trialware and tonnes of crap with the OS. So EU courts should ask all europian OEMs to bundle a handful of media players and web browsers instead of going after MS :lol:


No second thots on this! MS should haf every right to decide what to bundle and what not to.
I second that. Its unfair to IMPOSE something on MS. Users can have their opinions, but IMPOSING a rule like this is just not right.

@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

The bolded part is exactly the reason why Opera is desprate to get at IE.

Already, they have gladly agreed to let several small distros like Vector Linux to bundle it despite the fact that its propiatary.
They are also maintaining a huge linux fanbase.

Because linux encourages choice by nature, and because KDE users don't have native firefox intergration, opera finds linux safer than windows.

Opera is made by a For-Profit Propiatary company. They need market share.

Hence they are firing away anti-trust lawsuits against Microsoft, in whose OS they obviously have a very tiny chance of succeeding.

DO you see Mozilla filing anti-trust lawsuits against MS ? They don't NEED to.






PS:

I realised this a few hours back:

THE main reason I found IE uncomfortable to use is because when only one tab is open it does not have a close button on the tab. And the tab bar is a bit too big and uses a lot of screen space.
 

iMav

The Devil's Advocate
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.
err ... user aware? If you buy Vista, you get IE 7, why do I need to specifically beat a drum roll in that case?

And my friend, if you use something that is 6 years old & have Windows Update turned off, then, well ... no one can help you.
 

chooza

Journeyman
Friends, I am very much confused to understand by going through all your posts. If FF has a very large market share and IE is losing ground fastly(as per ur comments) then where is need of such debate??? If MS bundle IE, you should be least bother about it becoz you dont use it and IF they remove it, then also you should be least bothered. Anyway,I had tested, my IE8(beta 2) and Opera 9.63 and FF 3.0.5(which I had removed) on www.bcheck.scanit.be/bcheck and found my IE is as safe as Opera and FF.
 

infra_red_dude

Wire muncher!
I am perfectly all right.
You maybe :D But saying that stuff like IE, notepad etc. 'are built into the kernel' is one of the most hilarious things I've heard!!!

I do know exactly the difference between windows and linux. I tried like hell to get my TV card working with it. I really missed TV and perfect media client when I used linux. It's not for those who want to have everything work out of the box.
Thats what I'm saying. Its the drivers that matter. Haf a driver for every hardware and any OS works just perfectly! But that doesn't make Linux an R&D only OS. Anyways, no point digressing.

Reason is not MS is not forcing you to use IE. You have option to user other browsers and if Intel saying that users should have their mobo with their CPU is like MS not allowing users to install any other web browser. THERE IS LOT OF DIFFERENCE.
My point is not that you are not allowed to, but that if intel stops selling processors and bundles CPU and mobo then I bet hardly the normal users would bother to look beyond the default combo.

Anyways, I'm against EU for its decision to impose such a decision on MS.

The same pages work without any problem on numerous other browsers. safari/IE/FF. And if it doesn't work on Opera, it's IE's fault. GREAT!!!!
Are you blind or something??!! Where did I say that its IE's fault??!!! Read my post fully. I said that those sites are mostly "built" for IE.

^^ using a browser based on ACID test??
Not using a browser based on ACID test, but "rating" a browser.

Let's see. MS is making IE8 to be more in-line with ACID3 but let's see how that will effect the webpage rendering.
That would NOT affect the page rendering. If IE is more in line with ACID tests, its the developers who would be happy.

Friends, I am very much confused to understand by going through all your posts. If FF has a very large market share and IE is losing ground fastly(as per ur comments) then where is need of such debate??? If MS bundle IE, you should be least bother about it becoz you dont use it and IF they remove it, then also you should be least bothered.
I dunno about others but I am opposed to EU's decision.
 

Liverpool_fan

Sami Hyypiä, LFC legend
Friends, I am very much confused to understand by going through all your posts. If FF has a very large market share and IE is losing ground fastly(as per ur comments) then where is need of such debate??? If MS bundle IE, you should be least bother about it becoz you dont use it and IF they remove it, then also you should be least bothered. Anyway,I had tested, my IE8(beta 2) and Opera 9.63 and FF 3.0.5(which I had removed) on www.bcheck.scanit.be/bcheck and found my IE is as safe as Opera and FF.

That link is broken remove the "www" and it'll work. Also interesting test.
 
My point is not that you are not allowed to, but that if intel stops selling processors and bundles CPU and mobo then I bet hardly the normal users would bother to look beyond the default combo.

So you are saying that EU should sue Intel Atom ? :D

I dunno about others but I am opposed to EU's decision.

^^ Tell that to brainless idiots in EU :)

Then I guess most of us are unified in our stand that the EU ruling is flawed.

But nobody answered my question - WHAT ABOUT OEMs ? EU never targets any of them, when, even if we go by EU's own logic, its the OEMs who should be asked to bundle a zillion extra software, AND, most importantly, offer OTHER OSes.

But fact remains - 3rd party apps are ALREADY being bundled. Just check the number of assemblers back in the 2003-2006 era of extreme windows xp popularity. MOST of the OEMs bundle trial versions of Norton or McAfee antiviruses today, while back then, esp in India, it was rare to see a computer without winamp installed by the assembler.

The reason I find the EU ruling amusing is because they say people use whats bundled with the PC, but such people are almost ALWAYS users of OEM desktops or laptops. Its they who use whats bundled with the OS.

Those who legally buy a Retail copy of Windows are either enterprises, who KNOW whats good for them and whats bad, or WELL INFORMED USERS who buy windows because they like what it offers and they also know that they can install another program.

And hence its only the OEMs who create scenarios for AntiTrust violations, but they ALWAYS bundle trialware and tonnes of crap with the OS. So EU courts should ask all europian OEMs to bundle a handful of media players and web browsers instead of going after MS
 

Ecko

Wandering In Tecno Land
Guyz I want that Microsoft must give users option as in case of linux
Atleast they must tell their users that you have these browsers also that u can choose from .I've no problems in Internet Explorer to be default till the user knows that he can switch between browsers like Opera FF & Safari (....:))
Let There be light ............!!! :D
 

chooza

Journeyman
That link is broken remove the "www" and it'll work. Also interesting test.

Sorry buddy. Its My fault. :(:(

I think, the problem with Eu is , they had tasted Blood and they know that the comapny which can pay huge money is only Microsoft. So, they are again and again doing the same which they started from Windows 98. The 98 is Deadbut Eu dont. and also they know that no OEM manufacture is going to pay them any amount. they had tried many times, either with Samsung,Sony,etc.that's why they do not ask them to remove IE or Bundle some other. BHAIYA PAISA AA RAHA HAI MAUJ MASTI KE LIYE.
 
Last edited:

desiibond

Bond, Desi Bond!
But nobody answered my question - WHAT ABOUT OEMs ? EU never targets any of them, when, even if we go by EU's own logic, its the OEMs who should be asked to bundle a zillion extra software, AND, most importantly, offer OTHER OSes.

I do agree to this point. Also, why should I pay for new OS license everytime I get a new laptop/PC (branded). There should be option to select OS or no OS with every branded pc/laptop.

I will certainly support EU if they start a ruling for this particular point :)
 
I do agree to this point. Also, why should I pay for new OS license everytime I get a new laptop/PC (branded). There should be option to select OS or no OS with every branded pc/laptop.

I will certainly support EU if they start a ruling for this particular point :)
Thanks for agreeing to something at last. :)

Anyway, I personally think this is the REAL antitrust violation. Forcibly asking a customer to buy a product and allowing no way of returning it.

Also, due to the OEM licensing policy, if your rig has reached warranty expiry and it bails out on you, and the system becomes a mass of plastic+metals+semiconductors, you are lot allowed to use the license on another machine. You are also not allowed to transfer license to another machine.

Tell me, is that fair at all ?

Windows in its current state is not at all at fault. Considering all the intergration factors, I too would actually prefer Windows Vista with IE7 and WMP11 than without them, atleast when BUYING a copy for myself.

I feel that EU is targeting the wrong people by sueing microsoft.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom