Microsoft ditches Windows 7 E plans
Microsoft has dumped the Internet Explorer-free version of Windows 7 that it had planned to release to the European market in the hope of appeasing antitrust regulators. The company confirmed on Friday that after receiving nothing more than a shrug of the shoulders from the European Commission, following Microsoft’s offer to …
I'm sure I'm not the first to realise this, but surely releasing Windows with no browser at all can only hurt their image for the average customer. The sound of a million Mr and Mrs Joe Publics crying out "Where's the internet gone?", will not serve them well.
"We’ve been open both with the Commission and with our customers and partners"
That's a first then.
So, um, what happens to my order on Amazon of Windows 7 Pro E then?
MS are squirming. They keep changing their plans even though the EU have made no rulings or official comments about any of their proposals.
With that kind of awkward behaviour, you can practically smell their fear.
I suppose some retard will arrive shortly to say something retarded about another browser maker...
...a ballot screen that shows each browser's performance in the Acid3 test. That might help consumers to make a more informed choice.
"Question 1 : Would you like a browser that works?"
I am an FF user. I avoid I.E like the plague and I use Linux so I am no fan of MS, but HTF can MS ship an o/s without a browser? How do people get online to download one of their choice?
MS can harldy be expected to ship other browsers on media accompanying the o/s. Arguably, a browser is an essential part of an o/s these days in the same way as a text editor is.
So what about all the applications that expect to find a browser?
And if you haven't got a magazine CD with Firefox on, how would you install a browser from the web - unless MS ship some form of FTP client?
That Browser Ballot page looks interesting and could possibly get around the EU legislation - perhaps they could also do a media player ballot while they're at it... and a "productivity software" ballot (i.e. office suite)...
Hell, go the whole hog and offer to download rival OSs (e.g. Debian, Fedora, FreeBSD, Mandriva, Mint, OpenSolaris, OpenSUSE, PCLinuxOS, Slackware, Ubuntu ... and maybe even something that attempts to ape Leopard - but on x86 hardware)
It doesnt matter what MS do about the broswer, the EU wont be happy. For a start MS is a nice revenue stream for the EU so the longer this problem remains unfixed the better for them!
I already preordered windows 7 e.... does that mean I have to preorder again, or does it mean i'll receive a different product to what i ordered?
I wonder where this indecision will ultimately leave those of us who pre-ordered the Upgrade version of Windows 7 E on the strength of it effectively being the full version for the upgrade price? If the EU goes for Microsoft's new option then the reason for offering E as full version only no longer applies.
Three upgrade versions at 45 quid a pop isn't quite the bargain that three full versions would have been. I look forward to the final word on this debacle. If the three pre-orders I have turn out to be upgrade only versions, I may be better off cancelling them and pre-ordering the Family Pack.
What a mess.
ISTR that not too many years ago we were all struck by the common sense of making the O/S present it's stuff in HTML and let the browser handle the front end bit. A triumph for light design and code reuse.
Move on a few years and it's "illegal".
Question: Which exact pieces of legislation have been enacted in the intervening years that have made it so? I'd love to see the exact text of a bill that specifically forbids the use of browser code in an O/S. For a start this would raise my opinions of the level of technical knowledge of legislators by an amount perishingly close to infinite*. Ah, so it isn't "illegal" per se it's just another stretching of the interpretation of "anticompetitive", which is pretty much what you make it IMHO.
The problem here is not MS. It's the fact that the goalposts are made of elastic, mounted on castors and positioned by capricious gits.
*Let's face it. Most of 'em think "browser" is a misspelling of a truckful of aviation fuel and "O/S" is probably something naughty involving zip-up latex, suspiciously-shaped fruit and maracas.
The whole argument about them being anti-competitive is rubbish. Who really stands to lose commercially by IE being part of the operating system? Most are open source free browsers.
The only other one that's really of commercial advantage to anyone is Safari and yup, that's because it's bundled by force with Mac OS X and the EU doesn't bat an eyelid about that!
Though Google can get commercial gain out of theirs but theirs is heavily tied to their search engine and will of course be central to the Google Chrome OS. Bet the EU doesn't kick up a fuss about that either! They don't even seem to care that Google are advertising Chrome to all IE users who browse to the Google home page (which must be the home page to the vast majority of users). Why should Google only advertise their browser on their home page? Surely in all EU fairness all other browsers should be advertised as well, until the page is 90% links to browsers and 10% is the seach edit box ;)
Pah, who cares. If you don't like what MS put out, go use another operating system, simple as that. Plenty of commentards here bang on about it enough.
It's like objecting to the fact Ford stick Ford engines in their cars. Don't like it, don't buy a bloody Ford!
I realise that this is vapourware, but that screenshot appears to show the ballot in IE. Going on past experience of Windoze, with IE shipping on the PC it somewhat implies that it will remain albeit hidden. Ballot via Windows Update would be the only compliant option would it not?
...what happens to your order?
Has anyone noticed how they are ignoring Apples shit completely?
Zzzzzzzz... I dont want Safari on my mac, I want IE. (giggles)
the commentards come out of their holes to raise such thought provoking diatribe such as
"how does an OS work without a browser"
and
"what about Apple"
Jesus fucking wept what do they teach in schools these days. Common sense and cognitive function are certainly thin on the ground too.
NB. For comment tripe (1) lookup FTP and for (2) look up convicted market abusing monopolist.
"Oh hows it gonna download a browser den, duh?"
FFS, how difficult do you think it is to link to a maintainable download page at MS servers, the links then point to the EXE downloads on the actual browser websites, FF, Opera, Chrome, etc?
Finally you can write a LWP downloader in Perl in about 10 secs FFS! I'm sure even MS can be trusted to code a CURL/WGET type EXE than pull in a browser package EXE and run it!
Now shut up and stop being so flipping moronic! IT people can so pig-headed when they try.
... then (according to MS statements) you'll get a full copy of W7.
Well I don't know about all that.
All I know is I am excited to have the opportunity to finally download and install the famed "Browser 6"! I think "20 word description" says it all right there.
First, for all of you people saying "without a browser install CD how would someone be able to install one," Microsoft has been shipping a FTP client with their OSes for at least the past decade. Secondly, Microsoft's no-browser-at-all version of the OS is meant as a way for them to get numbers to throw claiming that almost no-one wants Windows without IE. Therefore almost everyone wants IE. Just a nice little slight of hand. AND, if the EU wanted to REALLY discourage Microsoft, why don't they make Windows ship without a browser at all and have Microsoft include an application which allows them to select a browser and install it via servers Microsoft is forced to keep online and up to date at all times. This would be a suitable reminder of why not to play greasy little games with consumers.
Microsoft has stated that people in the EU who pre-ordered the Win7 E versions will get FULL Windows 7 versions - the same versions as the rest of the world. Your orders will be honoured and you won't be stuck with an upgrade disc. Clearly that wouldn't work.
So all is well, and you got a bargain ... er ... relatively speaking.
Presumably Win7 upgrade versions will start being sold over here at some point (though not the 'family packs' apparently).
Why not have all of them?
Why not just stick the install package for each alternate browser on the hard-disk image a long with Windows.
I have Mozilla Firefox, Konqueror (with two flavors of rendering engine), and Opera on my desktop PC
Shouldn't Europe be using an European OS, not this United States rubbish? We invented digital computers.
In 2006 Mozilla/Firefox make about $70 Million from search engine royalties.
This whole charade seems ridiculous to me. And I don't get where this antitrust business is going. What next, 50 screens when i install windows offering me different browsers, calculators, notepads, calendars, et al? Where do you draw a line and say 'enough!'.
A browser is a perfectly sensible thing to ship with an OS. If you don't like that on, just bloody install one you do like! Instead of wasting millions of pounds on ridiculous court cases. This kind of legislation makes no sense and it clearly will never be applied to any other industry, or even other developers in the OS industry.
what ? an FPT client in windows ? that is surely monopolistic. We should have a ballot on which ftp client to install first ! Think about all those programs like smartftp , cuteftp that now are beeing blocked by the monopolistic ftp client from microsoft ...
and while we are at it can we also have a ballot for each and every other file that comes with a windows install.... That would certainly give a lot of choice to the user.
I also want a button that asks if i want fries with that...
It's just a browser... who cares. Go buy a Mac if you hate IE that much...
"It's just a browser... who cares. Go buy a Mac if you hate IE that much..."
Nah, I'll just install Firefox thanks. The reason people care is because it isn't just a browser - unless of course you can tell me how to uninstall it without completely fucking the OS over?
Thought not.
...at dawn.
For those asking why would the EU not want a browser shipped with a new OS. The EU/MS battle started years ago then the EU took an age to come to ruling/big fine.
In current terms... There is browser freedom. MS was making a point. The EU were shrugging their shoulders going not us mate and privately unhappy.
I hate it so much I never use it... on Win XP.
Why on earth should hating IE make me a Mac buyer?
Or is that the MS camp are getting so sensitive (poor dears) that they are beginning to cry, "Don't like our browser? Well then! You can't play with our OS! So THERE!"
The US Appellate court specifcally decided that commingling IE with the OS did in fact violate US antitrust laws. The same laws that have been in affect since the beginning of the software industry.
Strange that TheRegister saw fit to censor the original post.
I guess those at El Reg can not handle the truth either.
Remembers me of a situation where some mac afficionado tried to convince me it was so much better than a PC with microsoft .
I asked what software he ran on his mac. The answer was : MS Word , MS excel , MS powerpoint , MS access , MS internet explorer and some other MS stuff...
When i pointed out that MS stood for Microsoft all i got was a blank stare ...
Nobody's home and the lights were off too ....
It would appear so.
I tried earlier to post a comment explaining how Microsoft's act remain illegal in the US and the EU.
But, what happened to the post?
The Register removed it leaving readers a bit ignorant. Sorry about that. Ask the Register about it.
Sorry, but the help engine, at least for older apps needs IE in order to work. How are they going to do that then?
IE is a desktop application for browsing the web and doing other internety things. IE uses underlying OS components that can remain in the OS for the OS to use HTML in other areas. The EU's complaint is about the application "IE". Just removing the application IE won't break the OS or stop it from working in other areas, such as the Help system.
Most people, I mean consumers, will choose IE; it's a recognized brand icon. Geeks and techheads will choose whichever browser wets their pants.
Don't expect a massive shift to the sly Fox just because of the browser selection dialog. At the end of the day, Microsoft can make it very difficult for OEMs and system integrators who in turn will complain to the EU if the EU's decisions in anyway harm OEM revenues.
To Microsoft, I'm not sure of the decision to put IE icon first and left. I would put it front and center so the user sees it first. But I'm sure Mircosoft has invested in psychological research to backup their decision.
Real people don't give a toss - most of them think google is their browser.
But then Microsoft would have to make sure that the versions on WU were always up-to-date, test them to make sure that every browser installed successfully on lots of different hardware, and probably provide support for any installation failures.
Why should Microsoft have to pay for all this simply for their competitors' advantage? A ballot screen presented in a web browser (which has to be IE, since this is a virgin installation of Windows) seems like a fair compromise to me. My only question would be whether or not this screen would be presented if an OEM had decided to pre-install a competing browser (which would be the fairest thing to do, displaying the ballot screen on first run in whichever browser the OEM had installed)?
"most of them think google is their browser" --- sadly true, and slightly ironic too
Windows Update will be able to access the internet and get drivers and updates (including IE8 if you want it) but a user-browser would not be provided by default.
Simple, really.
I too got excited, but then I realised it is just a marketing ploy. It's really a new browser, full of bugs and limited functionality, but psychologically if you release a version 1 or 2 or well anything less than 5 really EVERYONE knows how bad it will be. So call it 'Browser' to sound hip and cool and randomly call it version 6.
Everyone will go ''oooh, that sounds like a mature browser" and choose it. Firefox 3[.5] sounds so immature compared to it don't you think?
