Windows 7 browser ballot gets green light from EU

I read a news article yesterday in the Daily Mail regarding too much choice is making people depressed.

By DaChimp on 7 Oct 2009

Too late, too little

This won't be in place for the launch on October 22nd, when a large proportion of buyers will be recieving and installing the software. It's all an awful waste of time and energy.

By Stiggy on 7 Oct 2009

@Stiggy. Its not an install time option, you get the browser ballot screen pushed out to you at some date in the future if IE is the only browser installed (or it may just have to be the default one not entirely sure which). Presumably it will be a windows update item.

By Shuflie on 7 Oct 2009

It'll always be unfair to someone...

It all depends on where you draw the line. We can't escape the fact that some browsers will fall outside of the ballot, so these products will be just as disadvantaged as Firefox and Opera are today.

So the ballot has fixed precisely nothing.

In terms of EU initiatives, that's probably counted as something of a success.

By PaulOckenden on 7 Oct 2009

I'd just love to know why Linux and Apple aren't forced to do the samething

By a_byrne22 on 7 Oct 2009

Apple may well be forced.....

To a_byrne22, Apple may well face a similar fate from the EU monopoly commission regarding interoperability of iTunes with non-iPod MP3 players. It's much less likely that OS-X will (for now) be forced to give users choice because it has such a tiny market share.

By skarlock on 7 Oct 2009

iTunes?

@a_byrne22 - not sure what you mean by "Linux", but you're free to download and install and whichever GNU/Linux distro with whichever browser in it you like, or just download and install your own.

@skarlock - Apple do allow third parties access to the iTunes library - the library is simply an XML file so it couldn't be easier. RIM use it to sync iTunes music with compatible Blackberry devices. Palm should develop their own software rather than stealing another company's product.

By mhawkshaw on 7 Oct 2009

Needless EU meddling!

I have already posted this once only to find it removed so I suspect I have offended someone in this political-correctness-gone-mad society in which we all now live. So, here’s the revised ‘cuddly’ version to keep everyone happy...

I fail to see how Microsoft is being anti-competitive by including a free browser with Windows. They wrote the OS and as such they should be allowed to give away any free software they see fit. If the likes of Firefox and Chrome were commercial products that people had to pay for then maybe the EU would have a point – but they are not. They are all free.

Does the EU threaten Ford for selling cars with Sony stereo systems? Why not make Ford ask the customer to fill in a questionnaire, whether they would like a Philips system or maybe a Goodmans. Why force the customer to have Bosch windscreen wipers and so on.

I really do fail to see what all the fuss is about. I’m sure there are more important things for the EU to worry about such as the imminent prospect of President Blair!

By anthona on 7 Oct 2009

Incorrect analogy

@anthona. Your analogy is incorrect. If Ford were to start making their own windscreen wipers and then use their dominance as a car maker to dominate and eradicate competition from the windscreen wiper market, that would be a problem similar to what the EU claims for Microsoft.

However, I also can't see what the fuss is about. The only real competition at the time IE was first launched was Netscape. So why can all these new kids on the block have a piece of Microsoft?

By halsteadk on 7 Oct 2009

Regarding my analogy, your point about wipers is correct - the difference being all the browsers are free, no one is making any profit from them so who cares if IE has 65% or 10%? Firefox doesn't get its funding from installations of Firefox and MS gets its money from the OS not the browser.

By anthona on 7 Oct 2009

@mhawkshaw
"not sure what you mean by "Linux", but you're free to download and install and whichever GNU/Linux distro with whichever browser in it you like, or just download and install your own"

You've always been allowed to do that with Windows as well. MOst Linux distros have a default browser included the same as Windows and Chrome and OSX.
Is Google and SOny breaking some law by coming to a deal to include Chrome on their computers?
I couldn't really care for IE but I wish that it was fair because it's Microsoft bashing for no reason

By TimoGunt on 7 Oct 2009

"Interested parties have until 7 November to comment on the proposed remedies offered by the US software giant."

Cue Opera to make an appearence...

By phantombudgie on 8 Oct 2009

For those who miss the obvious...

Owning the OS gives microsoft a great deal of control over 3rd party programmes and 3rd party hardware. All GPU manufacturers are wed to the DirectX system. All programmers (and users) face issues when microsoft deletes instruction sets from the next version of windows.

It is entirely wise to deny microsoft this level of control over the internet. With complete market saturation MS could turn FLASH off globally, and on 90% of computers with auto updates, youtube would simply stop working. Would this count as a Denial of Service attack?

Microsoft's EULA allows for this kind of thing, which is why the EU doesn't.

By ANTIcarr0t on 8 Oct 2009

Missing the point!

Microsoft own the OS, we all chose to use it. If they decide for arguments sake to lock out Flash then simply use an OS that allows it. If you want to look at examples of an OS where the manufacturer locks things down, then look no further than the draconian 'do-no-evil' Apple. Windows is all about flexibility and compatibility. Your argument doesn't stand up I'm afraid.

By Andrew_Anthony on 8 Oct 2009

What about everyone else?

Reading over all the comments, I agree 100% with anthona and Andrew_Anthony. Microsoft own and develop windows so why is it such crime to have there own free internet browser? Why is the EU not asking Apple to do the same? Also I wonder which browser Google will provide with their desktop OS.

By ajherkes on 10 Oct 2009