Why Mozilla could beat IE in a European ground war
Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.
That's the message coming out of the European Commission as it grumbles about Microsoft's decision to strip Internet Explorer from OEM and retail versions of Windows 7 in Europe, as CNET reports.
The EU wants Microsoft to bundle a range of competing browsers with Windows 7. Microsoft, apparently in an act of defiance, said "Let them eat cake!" and is offering no browser at all.
Before you join the EU's protest, however, consider that this could well be Mozilla's best chance to increase its 31.1 percent market share in Europe.
Microsoft's Dave Heiner indicates that it will "offer (IE) separately and on an easy-to-install basis to both computer manufacturers and users." For such people, Firefox will be as hard (or easy) to get as before.
But what about those left without a browser? As Mike Shaver, Mozilla's vice president of engineering, articulated to me, most people download Firefox...using IE, which means leaving them browser-less (even without IE) is tantamount to cutting off their access to Firefox.
I disagree.
Mozilla has done a masterful job of marketing itself. From Asa Dotzler's early Spread Firefox campaign to its campus representatives, Mozilla rightly earns kudos from Advertising Age:
Mozilla competes against Microsoft, Apple and Google -- arguably the biggest and most valuable brands in the world -- and it succeeds with no traditional advertising (or big budgets) to speak of.
How? It's the community, stupid. In a ground war--that is, in a war of foot soldiers and hand-to-hand combat--I think Mozilla would beat IE. When your neighbor in Colmar, France, complains about her lack of Internet access on her new PC, are you going to install Firefox or IE for her? I'm guessing that Mozilla's army of enthusiastic community volunteers would be over in seconds with a Firefox-laden USB stick.
In fact, I can see the Firefox community taking up residence outside retail computer shops, offering to install Firefox. I can see the same community figuring out clever ways to add Firefox installation to other programs, giving Mozilla the same inside track on installations that Microsoft presumably will have.
Necessity is the mother of all invention, and it may well prod Mozilla's community to get deeply engaged in proselytizing and distributing Firefox in ways far beyond what it has hitherto done.
Sure, Microsoft's tactics (providing easy FTP access, etc.) will give it a healthy handicap in the competition, but community, not government, could make this one of Mozilla's single-best opportunities to leapfrog IE in Europe.
For those that like the idea of government and community helping Mozilla, just remember, as these Wall Street Journal readers do, that the hand that feeds today can quickly become the hand that takes tomorrow. What happens when Firefox gets too big for the EU's comfort? Will it coddle Opera into a competitive position next?
Even so, Mozilla's Shaver suggests a valid concern, noting that "if it takes a non-profit with a global community to overcome the (browser market's) barriers,...the market is fundamentally non-competitive." He may be right.
But that's not the question for me because I think government involvement here can end up hurting the market as much as it helps it. The question is whether Mozilla could win this war through superior marshaling of community ground forces. I think it could. Do you?
Update @ 12:45 PT: Mozilla CEO John Lilly offered this statement on Microsoft's actions in Europe:
It's impossible to evaluate what this means unless and until Microsoft describes -- completely and with specificity -- all the incentives and disincentives applicable to Windows OEMs. Without this it's impossible to tell if Microsoft is giving something with one hand and taking it away with the other, and more to the point, it's impossible to tell whether this does anything more than change the technical installation process of the OEMs and make life more difficult for people upgrading to Windows 7.
It's a good point. Microsoft's decision to remove the browser completely could well be a sneaky way to try to undermine the European Commission's case, and may have the effect of making the OEMs push Microsoft and Google bid against each other for inclusion.
In other words, same ol' same ol'. Microsoft will undoubtedly offer financial incentives, documented or not, to OEMs to include IE. In a fair fight Mozilla wins. But Microsoft doesn't have much incentive to fight fairly...unless forced to do so.
Follow me on Twitter @mjasay.
Matt Asay brings a decade of in-the-trenches open-source business and legal experience to The Open Road, with an emphasis on emerging open-source business strategies and opportunities. Matt is vice president of business development at Alfresco, a company that develops open-source software for content management. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. You can follow Matt on Twitter @mjasay. 
Just doesn't make any sense to me really... i just don't get it.
And just to clarify one thing, i hate internet explorer, i use mozilla firefox, i even used i.e. to download firefox, so that part of the article is true. I don't have to like it to make a point. The fact that Microsoft is catching so much heat for being good at what they do is just ridiculous.
Yes, we are all aware, having more grey matter than a fruit fly, that you can download and install FF separately but it's hardly the path of least resistance, is it.
i totally agree with Mike Shaver though... in a way it's much easier to download firefox from its website through a pre-installed browser on your machine than getting some file on a USB from some guy who's offering you his help outside computer store (it's users like you that give "dumb-user" a bad name)
Any browser worth its salt is already freely avaible for download and install. There is presently absolutly nothing stopping an individual using the browser of there choice.
I just really, really dont get it ! The time, money and energy wasted on this could of been used more wisely.
Run -> cmd -> ftp ftp.mozilla.org
Just like the old days, when the site was called ftp.netscape.com... not like it's that hard to get hold of, ne?
ftp ftp.mozilla.com
LCD c:\documents and settings\all users\documents
CD /mozilla/bla/bla/bla
bin
get mozilla.xxx.21345.3456345.i686.exe
quit
mozilla.xxx.21345.3456345.i686.exe
Instead of just clickind on the download link.
I love it. I can see the phone calls I'll get from my parents now...
The remaining 5%, will be upgrading an existing machine to Windows 7. You could argue that people capable of doing an OS upgrade are most likely technically savvy enough to figure out the browser part. However, it probably would be better to have a simple mechanism to do this. It appears that the specifics of this mechanism is still a work in progress.
ah, kids...
Dunno how to tell you, but until Windows 95 came out, everyone who wanted an Internet connection in Windows had to:
* get hold of Trumpet Winsock and install it.
* get hold of an FTP program and install that.
* set up their modem for SLIP/PPP, dial-in number, etc., or pray that their ISP supplied them with a script for this and supplied all the aforementioned goods.
* find an ftp site that hosts the browser download
* download the sucker (ab't 1.5-2 hours)
* make sure you had all the dependencies before installing the browser
- then you could browse the web.
BTW - I know most Microsoft fanboys are laughably ignorant of how to use a command line, but it would be real easy:
ftp ftp.mozilla.org*
(type "user anonymous" and then a fake email addy at the login prompt).**
get latest-firefox.zip***
quit.
* for Mozilla's ftp site, it's "org", not "com". Next time, run ftp for long enough to confirm an addy, at least so you don't look silly - thx in advance. :)
** easy enough to fix at the server end so that it automatically logs a user in...
*** it would be drop-easy for the site to post a link to the latest install package right on the main directory
--
Anyrate, yep, as mentioned, this is a moot point. To wit: "95% of users will get Windows 7, when they purchase a new PC. The PC maker will have already installed a browser, so there is no issue."
The hardware companies preinstall so much junk on a new system these days that having them install something that is actually useful would not be asking too much of them.
In fact, you said, "I can see the same community figuring out clever ways to add Firefox installation to other programs, giving Mozilla the same inside track on installations that Microsoft presumably will have." Should Internet Explorer also be bundled if Firefox is bundled in these applications? It starts to get a little bit ridiculous...
I think the real reason Firefox would win a "ground war" would be the overall quality of the application, as compared to its competitors, and not necessarily the Mozilla community promoting it.
This whole monopoly thing is getting ridiculous; You're telling me if I made an OS, I had a large market share, I would have to bundle other peoples products over mine? Get real, I would be the first person to laugh you out the door.
I've decided I'm going to make a calculator App, then I'm going to complain to the EC that Microsoft's bundling of their calculator hurts the use of my free calculator. Then I will get millions out of Microsoft. It's a perfect plan. Then I'll work on a text editor, I'll call it NetPad. Can you guess what? Notepad which Microsoft includes really doesn't help me to compete with them. So maybe we should have a ballot screen to let people choose when they install windows. Do they want my Calculator, my NetPad? Where does it end?
Believe me I'm no Microsoft lover, but this is getting crazy.
No. They didn't.
RTFA.
This whole monopoly thing is getting ridiculous; You're telling me if I made an OS, I had a large market share, I would have to bundle other peoples products over mine? Get real, I would be the first person to laugh you out the door.
I've decided I'm going to make a calculator App, then I'm going to complain to the EC that Microsoft's bundling of their calculator hurts the use of my free calculator. Then I will get millions out of Microsoft. It's a perfect plan. Then I'll work on a text editor, I'll call it NetPad. Can you guess what? Notepad which Microsoft includes really doesn't help me to compete with them. So maybe we should have a ballot screen to let people choose when they install windows. Do they want my Calculator, my NetPad? Where does it end?
Believe me I'm no Microsoft lover, but this is getting crazy.
If the totally turkey EU big wigs want to see what happens when you have a great browser look at what happened when Apple released Safari -- 11 million installs in 3 days. So Mr.Opera who is lobbying your backyard EU to keep a rival out of the market, make a better product and the world will beat a download to your door! Obviously the Opera folks are a lot better lobbyists than they are techies.
All you haters and meddlers in the marketplace -- go away and come back when you have a better product and understand what technology is all about. And US government -- Isn't it about time that you stepped in and declared all of this European Microsoft / Intel attacking is really a violation of international free trade agreements. And take some real expensive actions against them.
Why don't we just give them one of our big three auto makers for free? Never mind.
I ask myself when is the Obama administration going to wake up start retaliating against European companies doing business in America.
This EU probe is just a flat out disguise for European anti- Americanism.
It would never get to the ground war. It would all happen in the air ;-).
Microsoft has the advantage of being Microsoft.
Apple has their own products and leverages iTunes to get market share.
Google leverages their search engine, Gmai, Google Earth and other applications.
Mozilla has managed to gain significant market share without a huge marketing budget or other popular products to leverage.
Then there is Opera which wants the government to force Microsoft to market their product for them because they can't seem to find a way to market it themselves.
IE's dominance is already slipping away. It should slip even faster as more smartphones are used. Right now it is hard to do without IE because there are a considerable number of web sites that only work properly with IE. As a larger percentage of consumers use other browsers, web developers will not be able to reach a large percentage of the market with IE only implementations.
We should be getting to the point where IE only implementations start becoming much more scarce.
There are very few sites these days that cannot be acessed by Firefox, Opera, Safari, Chrome or whatever. I speak as a Mac user.
I cannot access Flash based sites with my iPhone. WIll the EU come down on Adobe, Apple or both?
It gives error messages-- 3-4 times per day.
It's just not ready for the prime time.. This is why google came out with their own browser-- because the whole netscape lineage has too much dead weight to be the browser of the future.
The bottom line is that google and Microsoft have enough money to fight a browser war.. Firefox is a waste of time and energy.
If firefox wants to go somewhere-- they need to do 10 times better job at testing their software
Get over it.
And I feel the Average Joe would accept Google Chrome as 'The Internet' as readily as they accept the blue 'e' is The Internet. Whereas Mozilla Firefox on their desktop would freak them out as to what it is.
- by allanm051 June 12, 2009 11:15 AM PDT
- It's nearly the end of this game. Microsoft will not ship without a browser. OEMs won't load IE unless they get paid, as they now have MS over a barrel. Solution simple (somewhat like the Middle East (ouch!!)): MS will ship with Opera, Firefox, Safari, and IE. Everyone will be happy, the playing field will be level, may the best browser win.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by Jlmc727 June 12, 2009 11:32 AM PDT
- I am just guessing here but are Opera, Firefox, Safari copyrighted products? And if they are wouldn't reproduction of copyrighted software without paying Royalties be breaking the LAW and be considered priacy.
- Like this
-
- by pianom4n June 12, 2009 11:35 AM PDT
- The problem with forcing the inclusion of browsers is where do you draw the line of whose browser gets to be installed? Right now you can say the big 5 (although you didn't even mention Chrome), but a year ago Chrome didn't exist, two years ago Safari for windows didn't exist.
- Like this
-
- by c-n-e-t June 12, 2009 11:48 AM PDT
- Your sports teams analogy is so freaking ridiculous I don't even know where to begin to refute it. I will try anyway. If a sports teams does not provide the locker rooms to the visiting team, they will face the same action when they visit the other team's stadium. It's call reciprocation.
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (54 Comments)Speaking of level playing fields, aren't sports teams required to provide locker rooms, benches, etc., to visiting teams? (This in answer to the guy who wants "one other example" of a business required to provide fair conditions to its competitors. Teams are also required to change ends at the half, which is where the expression "level playing field" comes from. For 30 years, MS has had a steep slope in its playing field and has never offered to swop ends with its competitors.
Before you object that sports teams aren't businesses, of course they are. They are guided by numerous rules that ensure fair play. Businesses are also guided by rules (called laws) that ensure fair play, but some of them choose to violate the rules for their own benefit.
How much usage does a browser need to get on the list? But if it's not on the list, how is it supposed to get the market share to get on the list (according the EU's logic). Obviously it's well below 0.7% market share, otherwise Opera wouldn't be getting considered.
Forcing computers to be sold with a list of browsers would create a new barrier to entry in the market, exactly the type of thing that the EU wants (along with more money).
To take your analogy to it's logical conclusion, we will have to make Mozilla, Opera, etc. install Internet Explorer also when people download those browsers since it's only fair to make both teams provide the same service right?
Before you reply that Mozilla or Opera does not make Operating System so they don't have to follow this rule of equal playing field. You are essentially saying that only one team has the stadium and all the other teams keep coming into their home turf and demand that they are given access to locker room facilities without ever returning the favor.
Think before you post man.