I'm almost equally scared of the Chrome dominance now as I was for IE6.
I'm far less afraid since Chrome users actually get updates to their browser.
Deal forcing Microsoft to offer browser choices ends
31–40 of 101 posts
Re: Deal forcing Microsoft to offer browser choices ends
#32I remember being shown this screen - after I had already installed Firefox and Chrome by downloading them.
(Sorry Opera.)
Re: Deal forcing Microsoft to offer browser choices ends
#33I remember seeing this on TV and not understanding why microsoft was threatened with a fine if they ship IE by default on their products. Actually I still don't. Nobody ever stopped me from downloading another browser on windows, anyone who wants to do it will do it. So people did have a choice, they just didn't know they had it, and it's their problem, not microsoft's! Could someone explain this to me?
I thought the original reason wasn't that Microsoft was shipping IE with Windows per say, but that they were telling OEMs that they weren't allowed to pre-install Netscape if they wanted to keep their sweet Windows OEM license deals. Am I thinking of the wrong case?
Re: Deal forcing Microsoft to offer browser choices ends
#34Re: Deal forcing Microsoft to offer browser choices ends
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
IE-dominance has finally more or less ended ... in favor of a Google/Chrome-dominance. Not much of a victory for the end user.
Did you even look at the browser stats link I posted? No browser has a majority usage share anymore.
Do you mean the huge green Chrome bar?
Re: Deal forcing Microsoft to offer browser choices ends
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but I don't see why the browser is singled out as something needing special legal treatment Does your calculator interact with anything else but your computer? Same with file manager (SMB excluded)? Now lets look at the browser, it interacts with different servers, via the HTTP protocol, and the documents they serve via many different technologies such as HTML, Javascript, Java, XML, Flash, along with others. 'Back…
I don't quite see what interaction over the Internet has to do with the issue. Microsoft Office is regularly bundled with new Windows computers as a trial, or basic license. Could that not be seen as anti competitive? I could argue that the TCP/IP stack is "bundled" with the operating system, and it's something that's very difficult to change (if not impossible without recompiling the kernel). Network engineers have…
There wasn't a whole lot of evidence that MS was trying to explicitly kill for-profit TCP stack vendors.
Re: Deal forcing Microsoft to offer browser choices ends
#37Re: Deal forcing Microsoft to offer browser choices ends
#38I remember seeing this on TV and not understanding why microsoft was threatened with a fine if they ship IE by default on their products. Actually I still don't. Nobody ever stopped me from downloading another browser on windows, anyone who wants to do it will do it. So people did have a choice, they just didn't know they had it, and it's their problem, not microsoft's! Could someone explain this to me?
I thought the original reason wasn't that Microsoft was shipping IE with Windows per say, but that they were telling OEMs that they weren't allowed to pre-install Netscape if they wanted to keep their sweet Windows OEM license deals. Am I thinking of the wrong case?
That was my recollection of the crux of it as well.
Oh, you want to bundle Netscape with your Windows PC? Each copy of Windows will run you $80. If you decide to not bundle Netscape, it'll only be $30.
I'm also reminded of Linux/desktop bundling. IIRC, MS tried (and I think succeeded) in their licensing terms require Windows licensing based on PCs shipped, not Windows PCs shipped, so even selling a Linux-only desktop still required an MS-tax, meaning it was more expensive to sell a Linux desktop than a Windows desktop (at least for some of the big players like Dell, HP, etc).
Re: Deal forcing Microsoft to offer browser choices ends
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well... you know what a browser is (and you also know that there are alternatives). Most people don't. Most people don't open the browser, they "go to the Internet"; the browser is the "Internet". If a dominant player bundles their browser (as a component) in their OS, people become less and less aware of the browser as a possible and separate "product", and will of course use the dominant one as default - this is (a…
But the same is true for the calculator app, or the file manager. Granted, the web is used for a lot more than those... but I don't see why the browser is singled out as something needing special legal treatment.
Well, I don't know about the basis for a different "legal treatment", but I know that today the browser is the effective plaftorm/container/"VM" for the most popular applications. The browser capabilities and features will actually affect users and web applications - besides the ability to use this as leverage for other products, a single player with browser monopoly will have an unhealthy preponderance in the shaping of the web. I don't believe we can make an intellectually honest comparison with the calculator or the file manager...