[Ditchster]

I recently went to a Windows 7 system builder seminar hosted by Microsoft which on the whole was quite informative. This is where we were told of the recent ruling by the European Union that Microsoft is not allowed to ship IE8 (or any other web browser) with any of its Windows 7 OS releases. Microsoft executives at the seminar stressed that their lawyers had tried, in vain, to overturn the ruling. This is why in the EU, come October, you will see all retail and OEM copies of Windows 7 having an E suffix after the title along with a clear label stating that the discs Do Not contain Internet Explorer.
In any other circumstance I would not have given the above much thought - after all we do have many ridiculous rules and regulations in the EU, so I wasn’t be surprised. As far as Microsoft is concerned, system builders simply mount the IE8 image along with the Win 7 image for pre-installed computers being sold or for software retailers they will be giving out freebie Internet Explorer discs when someone buys a retail copy of Win 7. So basically Microsoft isn’t concerned one bit really.
However, if you intend to develop an OS which has a completely Integrated web browser, the above news would be a severe blow indeed.
The reason why I am a bit suspicious of this strange EU ruling regarding web browsers and operating systems is due to the following observations:
At the previously mentioned Microsoft seminar, when the news was stated about the IE8 exclusion, the Microsoft presenter looked very anxious indeed whilst receiving a few questions from a baffled audience and constantly looked to the senior exec for support. But why, after all it isn’t Microsoft’s fault and if anything it is just an inconvenience to them, surely – so why the concern.
Two possible reasons:-
1. Microsoft are just embarrassed about the whole affair and perhaps numerous Microsoft employees have had been told to not to embarrass Microsoft further??
2. Or more sinister – Microsoft employees have been told from up high Not to discuss the matter what so ever because they have engineered a EU directive which blows Googles Chrome OS out of the water.
Whatever the reason, it surely must cause Google a severe headache and hopefully i will be able to post a response from Google, re the above, in due course.

[RootbeaR]

Has absolutely nothing to do with Google Chrome OS.

[Ditchster]

After allot of digging about i have found the EU Press Release re the IE8 and windows 7 issue see

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleases...guiLanguage=en

After reading you will find that it is all down to freedom of choice. What the EU commision was after was for microsoft to sell Windows 7 with several web browser options to allow people to choose - instead they will be selling their new OS without one.

But this does meen that IF Google does not allow for alternative web browsers in its own forthcoming Chrome OS you can expect microsoft to certainly push for the same Antitrust restrictions.

Bottom line is that Google is deffinately going to be worried.

[DaveA]

Along these sames lines, Apple and the other OS makers just may have to follow suit. It seems to me that it would only be fair IF all OS makers HAD to do the same.

[aka Brett]

Originally Posted by Ditchster

After reading you will find that it is all down to freedom of choice. What the EU commision was after was for microsoft to sell Windows 7 with several web browser options to allow people to choose - instead they will be selling their new OS without one.

That wont work in theory because thier is no way to get online to get a browser.
So what will happen is you fire up the computer..get connection made,windows updates takes off....and behold there is internet explorer.

[Elvandil]

The real problem will be inconvenience. MS's efforts to smoothly integrate online and local content depends on the presence of the IE functionality, if not IE itself. If you were to remove all IE from your machine, delete iexplore.exe and all its support files, and then open Computer and type a URL into the box, guess what pops up? It's IE (sort of). Even explorer.exe has IE features that insure that web content is handled the same way as local content. Is explorer.exe going to be blocked, too? It definitely makes life easier for the newest apps that are web-based. And even those who surf with a different browser are using IE to render any HTML that is used in other applications, such as all the Help files.

This is the 21st century. The courts should recognize that a browser is an integral part of an OS and should be supplied with it. People can still choose what they use to surf. The line of thinking they are following is scary. What else can be banned? Media players, start menus, balloon tips, etc.?

[Ditchster]

I can at least now clarify why the microsoft staff looked out of sorts during the seminar as i have now completed my historical search through the EU press release database relating to microsoft and can confirm the following -

For the past several years (well before 2004), microsoft was repeatadly investigated by the EU for systematically abusing its market position to the extent that in just one of the ongoing cases microsoft was fined 899 million Euros (thats well over a Billion US Dollars) see http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/08/318&format=HTML&aged=1&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

Other ongoing issues concern the integration of Non essential OS apps like media centre, media player, IE etc. For the folk who understand fully just how far microsoft have gone with apps integration within Windows 7 (makes windows xp seem bare) well then isn't microsoft just asking for a severe kicking from the EU for continual breaching of "fair competition law". For those folk who do not appreciate just how many Microsoft imbedded applications there are in windows 7, and the implications, i will be starting a new thread titled "How Original is Windows 7" you might be supprised as to the extent of cloning other competitors ideas.

[Elvandil]

All other OS's do the same thing. Do you know of any other that does not include browsers, media players, and even sometimes office applications? This has implications for every OS that exists, and not very good implications, either.

[Ditchster]

Brett888, Microsoft have already confirmed that you will get a copy of a browser (more than likely IE8) when you buy their OS from a retailer - system builders who mount a pre-installed image have been incouraged (not told or pressured) to add the IE8 image along with Office trial image - this gets round the legalities.
Elvandil, I agree it is daft but the logic behing the EU is pretty solid - Microsoft have continuously gone against the move from the EU for greater open competition, not just with IE, and have therefore brought this onto themselves. They have been fined a Billion USD already and that is just for license payment infringements let alone forced market saturation which is still being investigated by the EU. All this could simply have been avoided if microsoft took a leaf out of Apple or Linuxs' book and simply used their download centre for additional NON ESSENTIAL apps and gave the consumer the choice.

[Elvandil]

Originally Posted by Ditchster

Brett888, Microsoft have already confirmed that you will get a copy of a browser (more than likely IE8) when you buy their OS from a retailer - system builders who mount a pre-installed image have been incouraged (not told or pressured) to add the IE8 image along with Office trial image - this gets round the legalities.
Elvandil, I agree it is daft but the logic behing the EU is pretty solid - Microsoft have continuously gone against the move from the EU for greater open competition, not just with IE, and have therefore brought this onto themselves. They have been fined a Billion USD already and that is just for license payment infringements let alone forced market saturation which is still being investigated by the EU. All this could simply have been avoided if microsoft took a leaf out of Apple or Linuxs' book and simply used their download centre for additional NON ESSENTIAL apps and gave the consumer the choice.

Don't get me wrong. I'm only playing the devil's advocate here. I see the rationale on both sides of this issue. But what I think is needed is a solid, legal definition of what an operating system is, and what it is not. Few people will buy an OS that just sits there waiting for programs to be installed, especially the "typical" user who knows nothing of all these controversies and how to navigate them.

You're right that lessons can be learned from others, but I have had the experience of installing a Linux distro and having some browser thrown at me that was clearly not the best one available and smacked of revenge against MS more than good design. I never got that sense from IE and have no problems using other browsers, either. There needs to be some balance brought to this whole issue.

[Ditchster]

Elvandil, thanks for the response - as the old saying goes Hindsight is a B**** which definately rings true here - however the following is very interesting:

It was confirmed to me from microsoft that if it was not for the netbook (mininotebook) sales during the past year (2.1 million in the uk alone) that microsoft would have had negative growth rather than posting a zero growth. It is this market that the Chrome OS is targeting.

So as mentioned before - although this ruling by the EU is a damn inconvenience to microsoft - behind the scenes, i bet the Microsoft Board of Directors are wetting themselves laughing at the major inconvenience it is going to cause the likes of Google. As long as there is a major delay with deployment from Google for the Chrome OS which gives microsoft that critical Service Pack 1 release opportunity un-challenged - then rather than the EU penalising Microsoft, they have only gifted them a golden egg!!!

[aka Brett]

Originally Posted by Ditchster

I can at least now clarify why the microsoft staff looked out of sorts during the seminar as i have now completed my historical search through the EU press release database relating to microsoft and can confirm the following -

For the past several years (well before 2004), microsoft was repeatadly investigated by the EU for systematically abusing its market position to the extent that in just one of the ongoing cases microsoft was fined 899 million Euros (thats well over a Billion US Dollars) see http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/08/318&format=HTML&aged=1&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

Other ongoing issues concern the integration of Non essential OS apps like media centre, media player, IE etc. For the folk who understand fully just how far microsoft have gone with apps integration within Windows 7 (makes windows xp seem bare) well then isn't microsoft just asking for a severe kicking from the EU for continual breaching of "fair competition law". For those folk who do not appreciate just how many Microsoft imbedded applications there are in windows 7, and the implications, i will be starting a new thread titled "How Original is Windows 7" you might be supprised as to the extent of cloning other competitors ideas.

The other side of the coin then would to have an OS with basically nothing
Not very appealing.
I like windows media player etc....But lets go deeper I like notepad,..you see where I am headed with that.
The competition is Apple....its nice..wouldnt be so nice if they werent allowed to create it the way they want to.
Lets face it microsoft made having a pc affordable and something grandpa can use....They gambled big and it payed off.
Back to preloaded software..IMO they should be able to add anything they wish..as long as its honest and legit...and they are.
Lets go further...I would also rather have it free than have to pay for it later.
Well its not free as a copy of windows isnt cheap. Software sales lets face it.people read that it comes with this and that so they buy it,for instance many people dont use office..but glimmer when they read it has it already installed.
The govt is to involved with this browser stuff.....lets take the same scenario with a new car....I cant get factory tinted windows as it hurts the aftermarket,how bout that cd player in the dash?
How about buying an AC with the refrigerant already in it?Filter?
Batteries for the remote?

Would a copy of windows that cant play music,cant surf the net,cant save a simple notepad file,cant open pdf file,cant open a picture,cant burn a cd,cant play a movie,cant recognize a thumbdrive,cant import from a camera, etc....it dont seem very appealling,if I have to jump hoops all day...been there done that..and I come back to windows.
The software companies need to stop whining and play the game correctly,create good software at an affordable price so people will buy it.
which brings me to my final point....when is the last time someone paid for a browser.

[Ditchster]

Originally Posted by brett888

which brings me to my final point....when is the last time someone paid for a browser.

Very good point brett - since when!!! after delving through reams of docs published by the EEC pertaining to microsoft - it has never been a case that microsofts' internet explorer has been singled out. not that i can see from any documentation- if anything, there pre-loaded office and multimedia apps have been singled out and for perfectly good reason.
So why remove it????

Here is a very, substantiated, yet sinister view which comes back to my main concern and gut feeling:

Say for arguments sake, that the EU wanted concessions as to what could be pre-loaded/provided with the new windows 7 release??. Now put yourself in microsofts shoes and think - if you knew that someone was going to take a strike at one of your main growing markets which involved incorporating a web browser into an OS....... which, of all the apps do you give up????

Before we get to set onto massive corporate conspiracy theories - i say it is wise to obtain clarity, straight from the folk that know..... question to be asked of the UK goverment "did microsoft volunteer Internet Explorer 8 ommission from the EU Windows 7 release" OR was it demanded from the EU council - the differences between the two are astronomical...

Such is the shear magnitude of this issue i have submitted a UK 10 Downing Street Pettition for a Public Enquiry inti this whole fiasco and i will submit the link for you to add you own support for the same - clarity is the key!!!!

[RootbeaR]

I think what they were after was to have IE removable.

My Linux OS came with a browser.

But I can choose from many more. I can also un-install the one that came with it.

ChromeOS is Linux kernel based. I am sure they will have options for browsers.

[Ditchster]

RootbeaR, the IE is a completely seperate app altogether - any version of windows can be installed without it. So you are free to choose which one to install.. What is quite laughable is that there are not many web browser images available to system builders to add along side Windows 7 - so which one will they go for, of all choices - yep, IE8 - no skin of Microsofts nose due to the fact that that IE8 images are readily available now