News MS to ship Windows 7 in EU without IE

Well, there are plenty of file browsers out there that are far better than windows explorer. They aren't being used by most simply because windows includes one that most people are happy enough with. A bit like IE then.

I'd probably use something other than windows explorer if I could map it to win+e, monopoly on both file browsers AND windows key shortcuts!

 

But at that point, if you keep replacing everything that is given by MS as part of Windows.. then what's the point of getting Windows..?

At the same time, it shows that MS really don't box you into using just their stuff, try removing Finder from OSX.. You more or less have the freedom to do w/e the hell you want with Windows, you just have to do it yourself, MS just packages what they made for Windows.

It's like buying a car, you pick the model, the year, the trim, the options, and if you want later you ca buy aftermarket parts, replace the engine, etc etc.

 

You could take that to the n'th degree by forcing MS to two parts one sells the kenel and then a second wing of MS sells the rest of the fluff and is forced to compete on the open market with out the advantages being bundled comes with.

 

This is why its ridiculous.

I'd like to see as many features as possible included in the OS, I'm completely happy with just having the ability to remove them.

If MS included eg an image editor with windows that meant I didn't have to install something else, good for them.

I'm just bewildered how anyone can believe that MS shouldn't have the right to include whatever the hell it likes with its own OS. If you have the choice to uninstall it and use an alternative, what's the problem?

one more time: bah!

 

I'd prefer to know exactly whats installed on my machine and where the potential security holes are, though the ability to completely remove the installed fluff would be a reasonable compromise since many people prefer to have as much installed as possible.

 

What good is the EU ruling going to do? They are way over stepping their bounds. If MS made it painful to manufacturers to ship with other browsers that is a valid problem, so fix that and just that. To force MS to ship their intellectual property with other browsers is beyond where any overtly socialist government should go, it would be like the US government controlling GM and forcing them to make cars no one wants. Oh wait, Big Brother for all, we don't have a need or right to determine how we live our lives the government can do all that for us!

 

The reason why Windows was succesful was that it was easy to use and had almost everything you'd need for a start.
Now they start stripping it down.
Nice for us who know what to do. Really bad for people like my mom who doesn't have a clue about computers in general, don't even think about installing things.

Hands up for the EU and their short-sighted-ness! ...

 

My one ask would be that all the EU people working on the case are presented with a pc with a fresh install of win 7 sans browser, then asked to surf the net to check the news without using a second pc. I can see that changing their mind pretty quickly!

Like others have said, where is apples slice having to ship without safari in OSX?

 

Hmm... seems some people have jumped the gun here.

As far as I can tell the EU have not told MS to do anything yet (infact they are still asking around the other developers what they would like done).

This is a leaked memo about what they WANT to do (as dasterdly as it is). When it aint checking the bend of your bannana, the EU aint all retarded you know.

 

Mmm... They already did it for WMP so yea..

 

Well.
My 0.2 pesos.

How about letting Microsoft bundle all the crap they want to, but give joe user the ability to remove what ever he wants. Synaptic does it sweetly, add and remove programs and core options. All though it would be a good idea to hide core opttions behind an "advanced" tickbox and a disclaimer that says "Fiddle with this, you can fubar the system, Microsoft takes no responsibility if you break the OS by removing core facilities". It's not like there is a non viable option for everything Microsoft has to offer.
Hell. I'd give an arm and a leg for the easy customization that Linux distro's have. What I want from Windows is a stable core to build on. Let me decide
whether or not I need Media Player, IE8, notepad, Windows Explorer and so forth. If I need the machine for gaming there is no way I want all the bloat on it anyways. Similar for HTPC's.

 

Not that I really care about the issue (not being a Windows user and all), but just the existence of IE executable puts you at risk, as, for example, 99% of Firefox exploits work by calling iexplore.exe, most backdoors and trojans use IE .dll files and various IE routines built into the system. IE modules are the cause of 90% of all Windows security holes, mostly because it grew too deep into the system (more than half of explorer libraries are shared with IE).
I think that stripping things off the Windows is actually good for it. I mean, who with the right mind uses IE, WMP or trusts the built-in "firewall"? Removing the unnecessary bloat is only good, especially given the fact that Windows tends to slow down with every installed app (thanks to the centralized configuration database) and the WMP alone has thousands of registry keys and hundreds of files while being completely useless.
The main power of Windows is the huge amount of third party software, so limiting yourself to just what comes built-in defeats the whole idea.

 

YOU know all that stuff... does your mom know too?

What if someone without any knowledge buys a PC, turns it on and he can't go online because there just is no browser?
Or he can't watch a video of his son's birth because there is no media player?

The average user just needs it to work straight out the box. That's why Apple sells so much to brainless brand zombies: They just turn it on and everything works. Until you look behind the glossy cover that is. Don't get me wrong, OSX is a great OS but it's far from being perfect.

 

Do you attempt to drive a car without knowing what's that big wheel in front of your seat for? Brainless zombies have their Apple that works like a taxi - you just get inside and it does the rest for you. If you want to drive by yourself you have to do some learning.

And besides, my mother uses Debian (her own choice) and is fluent with apt-get and all the basics. It's just a matter of will to learn something instead of being a brainless ignorant.

 

True. That's exactly what I said.

The average user DOESN'T care to learn.

Oh, and congratulations on having a mother that knows her Debian.

 

you know its funny the younger folks say hey old people just learn and dont be dumb and yet when the younger folk get old they will be in the same boat with the new generation of young folks saying the same thing to them lol

 

oh ffs. this is genuinely retarded. under the same reasoning we should be going after apple and every linux distro maker for bundling any piece of software into their OS. of course, they can't supply users with a command line terminal like bash, or a way to download software applications such as curl! that would be anticompetitive!

in fact in insist that all operating systems henceforth be supplied in a kernel-only installation disc.

the EU has got this oh so very completely and utterly wrong.

 

The EU should punish corrupt British politicians instead on continually picking on Microsoft. This insanity has to stop. Microsoft have paid their dues. Intel are the company that are abusing their position in spite of the EU fine. Punish them

They should continue going after Intel and preventing Larrabee from launching as that would give Intel even more of a gpu monopoly.

 

Eh no. The reason Windows was successful was that it was the only WIMP environment available for IBM PC compatibles (Digital Research's GEM having been crippled by an Apple look'n'feel lawsuit). By the time competition had arrived (in the form of OS/2, BeOS and NextStep) Windows (then at around version 3.11) had a huge application base and was almost universally included with every new PC.

Three points:

• As mentioned above, the EU are not requiring the removal of IE. Microsoft is taking this action unilaterally - and showing that previous court testimony about IE being an essential part of Windows was complete fabrication.
• Even without an installed browser, there are several ways to install one which have been listed above. Windows 3.x and 95 users had little difficulty in getting online - though with dialup access speeds they needed some patience.
• IE's universal distribution has caused computer users clear harm both in the security problems it created (whether used or not) and in limiting website design to "what IE would accept" (slowing down the takeup of bandwidth-saving features like CSS for example). In the absence of equal competition, this clearly puts the issue within the EU's jurisdiction.

If Apple's OSX (or the Linux distro of your choice) was bundled with every new PC sold, regardless of whether you wanted it or not, then you would have a point. However, as they are not...

Some further analysis of this courtesy of the Register:

Behind Microsoft's IE-free, Windows-for-Europe ploy

 

This blog entry has no place on Bit-Tech.

It is an example of the kind of empty, sensationalist journalism I'd expect to find on far lesser sites. Had the entry contained a single fact out with the content of a no doubt deliberately leaked memo I would give it some credibility, had the entry contained a single historical note it would at least serve to place Microsoft's behaviour in context.

As it stands this entry risks portraying Tim Smalley as a gullible fool and calls into question the journalistic integrity of the site as a whole.