EC asks: Been leant on by Microsoft? The European Commission is asking computer makers what communication they have had with Microsoft over its ongoing browser bundling case. A questionnaire sent out asks OEMs whether Microsoft asked them to make certain statements about the case or about its proposed settlement - giving people a choice of browsers. The "ballot …
Personally i think Windows should come with no browser, and just a basic core OS...
And then OEMs are free to create bundles based on the core and whatever other software they choose. Users would never see a ballot screen, they just receive whatever browser the OEM gives them.
Also extend this to retail, allow third parties to sell retail distributions in the same way, as it stands a retail version of windows is rather useless since it comes with no useful software and often severely lacking in drivers and will typically be multiple patch levels out of date, making the whole install process extremely painful and time consuming. The pirate distributions are a lot better...
Had this happened a few years ago, Netscape would likely still be king, many customers wanted Netscape and most OEMs wanted to include it.
"the financial and operational impact of the ballot screen remedy"
What financial impact is there of MS putting in a screen in their first run process which brings up a little "ballot screen"?
Or is the financial impact actually MS saying "if you support this ballot screen idea then the cost of your OEM Win7 licences goes up by 100%"?
“We’re hearing from our computer manufacturer partners that they have serious concerns about the financial and operational impact of the ballot screen remedy"
What possible impact could that have on an OEMs bottom line? It looks like the courts have seen through this amazingly transparent attempt by MS to repackage reality in such a way that it looks like MS are sitting on the moral high ground.
Hopefully the OEMs will grow a set and actually stand up to those bullying arseholes for once. Surely they must realise that being bent over Microsofts barrel all the time is not exactly in their own best interests.
P.S. Where the hell is the Evil Ballmer Icon?
Why is the Linux option and the Windows option on these netbooks NEVER available on the SAME hardware. You can never do a direct comparison because the hardware is always different. Usually the Linux hardware is less powerful too.
Now you're telling me that Microsofts dirty hands aren't all over this?
Look at the Acer Revo, the Linux version is flash only and not available yet. Why?
Funny the selfsame retailers weren't so forethinking when they decided to happily slap on Vista Ready horseshit on all their products.
Another tiny piece of software amidst Microsofts bloat, that'll cost SO MUCH EXTRA TO INSTALL.
That extra 0.0001s of install time sure does add up.. (OEMs blatently would use cloned HDDs so they wouldn't even need to do anything more than once)
If it looks like Microsoft and it smells like Microsoft.. then it must be Bullshit.
I think the unrequired software that PC manufacturers - especially Acer - put on is more serious than whether IE is bundled with my OS.
Symantec is usually the worst with Norton AV, and to add insult to injury the manufacturers don't even supply OS or recovery discs to purge my new system of this crap.
While this solution seems reasonable on the surface there are a number of legal liability issues to consider, some that leave the EC open to lawsuits itself.
1. Who decides *which* browsers get on the ballot?
2. If controlled by individual OEMs doesn't that mean IE will always be included, Opera maybe never? If so how is it any different than now?
3. If the EC controls the ballot (since it's obvious MS never should) then what happens when a new browser comes out? Is there a mechanism in place to petition a place on the ballot? If not can the new browser maker sue the EC for exclusionary collusion?
4. There are *lots* of browsers out there. If a user is given a list of 2 dozen browers, which one should they pick? Will they even know?
5. Will the ballot have a default setting? Can you change your mind after installation? If there is a default what should it be?
6. Mechanically, how will this work? Who creates the ballot screen software? If each OEM has to do it then that places additional load on third parties--making this solution illegal. Courts can't impose a solution on uninvolved third parties. If MS does it, then how can you secure the software against hackers?
7. If the the individual browser makers are responsible for their own browser download bandwidth (which seems reasonable) and the ballot is nothing more than a list of download URLs then it should be simple to hack. Remember you would have to secure *every* OEM...
8. What about the infrastructure that goes with IE? Not the trivial front end, the actual Trident rendering engine? Remember a large number of third party software requires Trident to be present. If MS is forced to pull Trident out then the EC is directly responsible for breaking existing software and third parties could rightly sue the EC for interfering in third party business affairs.
9. If you leave Trident in, how have you really done anything at all? Isn't that even *less* effective than Windows N? Are you telling me the (tiny) front end that is IExplorer.exe is worth the billions of dollars wasted on this farce? (Fines, the time governement employees spent on it, the reams of dead trees, the *printer ink* and *toner* costs? :))
10. Finally, remember we are talking about programs that are FREE to the user! What sane person invests billions to tell someone else which free program they get to use?
I think the EC is pointing a massive cannon at their own heads. Neelie-burgers, anyone?
Unless this ballot is closely policed by the EC, Microsoft will find a way to "influence" the decision about what goes on the ballot, and how it is presented. Even if the EC did police it, there is a huge issue as to how the information will be presented. Alphabetically? Look out for browsers being (re-)named AAA or A1, just like taxis. Market share? This is just playing into Microsoft's hands. Security? Cue lots of legal battles, not to mention a new career option of "company-sponsored hacker". The EC is stuffed if it does, and stuffed if it doesn't.
Surely, in order to be consistent, the EC has to police the choices, either directly or through some made-up body, it has effectively made itself into the sponsor of every web browser out there, and any new ones. And for what - most users don't have a clue that there are other browsers, what they do, nor do they care, as long as it works. I'm not covinced that half of them actually know what "browser" means. Computers are a commodity now - the vast majority of home users just want it to work straight out of the box. Unless someone (Microsoft, the manufacturers - who?) bundles every browser available at a given time into the installation, it still needs a browser to download a different browser! Maybe the EC has an idea of mandating a "micro-browser" of its own that will just go one of a list of browse (and do you want government-mandated software on *your* machine??).
Finally, I may be dim, but why is this important? If the challenge was to the effective market domination by Windows, I could understand it. People pay money for Windows, not the browser. Isn't this the equivalent of the EC complaining that Notepad is bundled with Windows?
Paris, 'cos she knows when she's been stuffed!
.... >10. Finally, remember we are talking about programs that are FREE to the user! What sane person invests billions to tell someone else which free program they get to use?
So how's the weather in Redmond, Wolf? Rainy as usual? :)
The point is not about a free piece a GUI. The point is about everything MS has done with it once it had killed Netscape, like:
- pervert web standards so web sites only worked on their browsers
- then create new "standards" so IIS could get some market share (then use that to push ASP, etc. "Cascading effect" it is called).
- stall browser innovation once their undisputed market domination no longer created incentive ("there is nothing left to invent " MS said, imagine browsing the web with IE6 today...).
Had MS played fair (yeah, I know, I have RSI just forcing my hands to type this), the browser would not matter. Considering how abusive their utilisation of said browser market domination was (see a pattern there?), they brought the wrath of the EC unto themselves. And it is well deserved, though extremely late.
You are right, remedies will not be simple or perfect. But better than leaving the status quo unchallenged.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
