Who wins, loses with browser-less Windows 7
Microsoft's move to offer Windows 7 in Europe without a browser may help rivals, but it could make life more difficult for European consumers, particularly those who want to upgrade their existing machines.
As first reported earlier on Thursday by CNET News, Microsoft plans to ship Windows 7 to both PC makers and retail stores with Internet Explorer removed.
Now, most people will get Windows 7 on a new PC. Presumably, in that case, the computer maker will chose to add back Internet Explorer, include one or more rival browsers, or do both.
Indeed, that is what Microsoft itself is suggesting.
"Microsoft recommends that OEMs pre-install either IE8 or at least one other browser of their choice before distribution," Microsoft said in a memo to PC makers that was seen by CNET News. "If you do this, your end users in the European territory should be able to access the Internet without any additional steps or inconvenience."
The real hassle comes for those who want to upgrade their existing PC to Windows 7.
Moving from Windows Vista to Windows 7 can normally be done via an upgrade that preserves one's applications and data. However, because it removes the browser, moving to the "E" version of Windows 7 can only be done with a clean installation.
At that point, users have a system with no browser at all. So if they want Firefox or Opera or any other browser, they have no easy way to get it. For its part, Microsoft plans to make it as easy as possible for them to get IE. It will offer it via CD-ROMs at retail stores and via FTP, an old file downloading technique that has been largely sidelined due to modern browsers.
Forrester Research analyst J.P. Gownder said that the result is something that is very unfriendly to the very consumers that the EU is allegedly trying to protect. The European Union said in January that it had reached a preliminary finding that the inclusion of a browser within Windows violated its antitrust laws.
"It's a disaster caused by poor regulatory oversight," he said."It's definitely regulation gone wild and it's not going to help the consumer."
Matt Rosoff, an analyst with Directions on Microsoft, said the software maker probably made the move in an effort to avoid further regulatory action on the part of the European Union, which said in January that it believed the inclusion of a browser in Windows was a violation of European antitrust law.
"I guess Microsoft has taken the preemptive move to avoid a big fine," he said. "The EU didn't ask them to do this. They are still fighting the statement of objections."
Audio
What a browser-less Windows 7 means
CNET News intern Mats Lewan talks to reporter
Ina Fried about the impact of a browser-less Win7
on the market and European consumers.
Download mp3 (2.89MB)
So who benefits? Well, PC makers stand to gain, because they now have a more valuable piece of real estate to sell. In the past, they could offer deals to include rival browsers as the default on a new PC, but they were still shipping a PC with Internet Explorer. Presumably now, a browser maker could strike a deal to be the only browser on a machine.
"It certainly gives them a new placement to sell," Rosoff said. "Previously, with IE included, there wasn't as much incentive for browser makers to strike these kind of deals."
Of course, striking an exclusive deal would probably take a lot of cash. So it would seem Google, and not Opera (which brought the EU complaint), is in the best position to take advantage of the new landscape.
Gownder said he expects most new machines sold in Europe will still come with Internet Explorer, though some smaller PC makers might opt to exclude Microsoft's browser.
"It could be that there are some deals cut," Gownder said. "I would think the more typical case is that they ship with IE or IE plus one other."
As for Microsoft, Rosoff said that the company plans to offer an "Internet Pack" disc that includes not only IE, but also its Windows Live programs such as Windows Live Mail and Windows Live Messenger.
Editors' note: Matt Rosoff is a member of the CNET Blog Network.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
with Windoze. Because user can't try such products from other developers.
EU should make Microsoft only ship the kernel to EU consumers!!!!
Yeah, lets do that...
I have another suggestion for EU: I own a company that produces notetaking software and Microsoft is hurting(!) the competition by shipping Notepad in Windows. I think no operating system should come with a notepad or a calculator, or
These guys should really wake up. A web browser is an integral part of any serious operating system. I would argue it is as critical as having TCP/IP support or an application programming interface. Web has become the new application delevelopment platform. An operating system must have native HTML, XML, Javascript, ...etc support to even be relevant. Asking Microsoft to remove IE is like saying they have to remove any other application programming interface like Win32 APIs. Where will this end? What if tomorrow Google comes up with their own memory management <or insert your favorite OS subsystem here> subsystem. Should Microsoft be forced to remove Windows memory manager not to hurt the competiton? Should I download my choice of memory manager before being able to start using my new PC? How does that help the consumer?
This is all EU crap.
>An operating system _must_ have native HTML, XML, Javascript
And where exactly is this in Windows at the moment? Woops, that's right, it isn't, unless you believe in that Microsoft thinks you need in a browser: crippled HTML support, crippled XML, crippled CSS, crippled JavaScript.
Microsoft are almost coming up to being a decade behind in this area, and that is just sad.
I'm just happy conditional comments and browser sniffing is possible in IE.
Just plain stupid!
Why is Apple allowed to ship a productivity suite with thier OS? Safari's also there. Why? Because no one cares. They're such a tiny slice of the market that the most restrictive OS (OS X) just gets a pass. If the EU is going to mandate something like this, it's unfair and unbalanced to enforce it on one manufacture. I demand that they enforce the removal of any browser that ships as a part of the OS. OS X should not ship with Safari given this ruling.
One could create a WPF or WinForms app, to allow anyone to download any browser.
Forcing IE8 is just one way Microsoft's forcing it's way in. Vista was another, but thank God... Vista is history.
Not sure IF IE ActiveX control will be there if there is no IE8 installed on the machine. Also every one cannot write WPF or windows application using IE control to browse the net.
EU just wanted money from MS and now it is solid reply by removing IE, EU gets nothing except frustrated cosumer trying to figure out how to browse the net.
the customers
how is removing ie from windows a win situation for customers? how is the extra headache of getting ie or the alternative a win situation for customers when they can more easily go to mozilla or any other browser's website and download it when windows is loaded with ie?
[CNET editor's note: Personal attack deleted.]
Way to go EU!
To make things even fairer, I think PC makers should be required to limit the installation of any one browser to say 25% of all new machines. This would:
1. prevent browser vendors with deep pockets (Microsoft, Google, Apple, ...) from "purchasing" 100% share.
2. make it easier for future browser vendors to bring their browser products into the mainstream.
People purchasing these new PCs could stick with the browser that was pre-installed by the PC maker (which many would) or install their preferred browser and uninstall the original.
Government should simply allow the consumer to make the choice and it should be made when the consumer is ordering the PC just as they choose what size hard disk they want and memory. By simply getting out of the way the government can solve the problem and let the market decide what they want.
competitors from making money ?
nobody cares of browser except geeks who know the difference between different browsers.
Why is that tying?
#1 Microsoft has a monopoly in Operating Systems
#2 There is a separate market for Browsers
#3 Microsoft unconditionally include their browser in to their monopoly product, thereby distorting the market.
That's the classic antitrust argument, anyway.
On the other hand, you may also argue that there is a separate market for calculators. There is a separate market for notepads. So does that mean Windows should not be allowed to ship with any accessories? There is a separate market for almost everything you can think of. Does that mean no (sub)product should be allowed to be shipped with some other (sub)product?
Please name me a single consumer operating system that does not ship with a browser. A single one! Why does EU not tell Apple to remove Sarafi?
As always, there is a separate set of rules for Microsoft, and a separate rules for everybody else. And they call this justice (!) It sucks to be in EU.
"Too big to fall"
I think that pretty much sums up the current affairs in America at the moment over this depression.
Who decides who is too big to fall?
If FTC never used a separate set of rules for MS back then, this wouldn't even be a problem now.
I wish MS were broken in 2 separate divisions... but Microsoft's OS was an exported good, a very popular exported good, and the rest is history.
There is no difference between what MS is doing and what those other companies are doing. Sometimes, different rules for MS because it is a 'de-facto' monopoly are good.... this is a BAD rule.
Now you'll have 'The Car'(OS) made by just MS, The Dealer can throw in whatever radio or GPS(browser) they want.
Much like many throw in Google Desktop to replace Sidebar.
@Unifex - Browser type does depend on what advertising you see, If I type something into IE8s address bar I get taken to MS's own search engine, with it's own adverts, which MS get a cut of. In Firefox n co it's generally Google thats default so you get Google advertising n sponsored links. Also IE has pre-made bookmarks to MSN, Hotmail etc, which each page will have more advertising MS gets a cut from. It's one of hte main complaints of the EU's anti-trust is that MS are using there browser to control the web when it should just be selling its OS and leave browsers as a separate market for it to go after. Mozilla, Google, Opera don't have their own OS with which to ship their own browser on, MS do and are using that ability unfairly.
I think about 60% of IE users don't know there are other options out there or even how to get them, add in not being about to jump online to download it easily and we has the recipe for another Vista like thought run about the OS being horrible. I only see this as more headaches to the techs who repair and the phone crews for PC makers.
Oh god AOLv3 the horrors of the past come back to haunt us......
Bloody Luddites probably think you have to have Outlook Express to read email, too.
The support was removed from IE7... and moved to Explorer (which still comes with windows). Just enter a FTP address such as ftp://www.firefox.com/latest_firefox.exe and vola!
you get your ass kicked regularly by bicycle pushers or towel heads...Good luck annexing some real opponents... :)
_____________________________________-
Seeing as how those 'towel heads' have managed to kill 10K soldiers, I think they are a 'real opponent'. Seeing as how France has buckled everytime that someone has challenged them after a SMALL amount of fighting and seeing how wimpy the EU has gotten.... I think we would EASILY take everything in Europe, including Russia!
You use IE to download Fire Fox, Chrome, Opera et al
Or may be you find some thing on some crap ware CD
This will be a big problem
obviously you do not know how to operate a computer,they know better in EU
Yes I do but lets pretend I only know the basics
I would need to google how to do it
oh thats right I don't have a browser
It is the experts like you who fail to understand that a computer should be something easy to use
When use get in your car you don't need know anything more than driving unless your are an
enthusiast.
It only becomes an issue for enthusiast that make their own PC's with an OEM version of Win7, but we tend to have a copy of FF or similar lying about anyway.
I'm using Firefox which I downloaded using IE. If I don't have any browser on my PC, I really don't know how to download it, and I think that there are a lot of people with the same "problem" as me...
And if the OEMs don't supply the browser, most people will be stuck without a browser.
I think that the EU should obligate the OEMs to install at least one browser, or at least ask the costumer which browser will he/she want.
I think it is pretty stupid for the EU to do this to their poor countrymen (and women!)
Maybe Microsft should put a moratorium on EU sales for a while, until the EU learns what their people really want...
The problem is if you read my above post a lot of people that use IE cause its there and don't understand how to get a different one or want to learn how to.
Icon on all desktops that say "Internet"
When clicked, it shows a window that shows options for browsers.
You click it, it will:
1) Run browser if installed
2) Install browser, see 1.
3) Download browser, see 2 and 1.
This is such a simple thing to do.
And who knows, maybe it will actually drive Microsoft to make a decent package manager, unlike that terrible excuse for a manager we are stuck with by default.
And a win for them for selling 1st AND 3rd party programs through some sort of MS App shop? (as well as allowing free programs as usual)
Steal my idea Microsoft, you know it is good, and it will instantly nullify any anti-trust lawsuits if you do it right.
remove that as well
Unlike IE, the FTP exe is perfectly fine.
Microsoft used IE to lead.
Microsoft deliberately buckled IE to hold back others. (and STILL are)
Microsoft built ActiveX to hold on to users by allowing it to have access to OS resources, which allowed developers a lot of freedom.
^- because of this, millions of PCs are still running IE6, a terrible browser with holes everywhere, and terrible support for web standards. (not that IE8 is any better)
Also, they canned it too, so good luck running a newer IE in Company X with all this ancient code.
This is why this whole case came about.
Nobody uses FTP enough to care about it.
Also why is Apple, or the numerous flavors of linux not being sued or regulated? I could care very little about what OS ou use or how much you paid for your computer but atleast let me make the choice to buy something that works!
When you install the distro, you'll know what you're getting, most distro websites tell you what they put in their latest version and such a said browser is completely abstract of the surrounding OS allowing for a total removal, which was *not* the case of IE in any version of Windows that I have used ('95 - Vista).
Thirdly, and this is my major point, most distros aren't sold, they're given away, free as in beer and free as in free speech. Linux distros by and large aren't "products", they're the kernel plus compilations of software and configuration settings. It's inane to regulate something that is being passed freely between people who are making the choice for themselves whether or not to have it in the 1st place.
So basically an entire region of the world will have to download and install KB updates manually.
Yeah...that's going to happen... not. Consumers, by and large, don't update anything unless it is set up for them to do so automatically.
That is not quite correct. Although Vista and Windows 7 use a different interface to show the user what is going on with a windows update and no longer is tied to the Windows Update website, it still uses the core IE files to facilitate the download. A Vista system with brute-force removed IE (Using VLite) will not download automatic updates.
The version of Windows 7 that is going to ship without IE8 is still going to have the HTML rendering engine and associated files, the favorites archive and DLLs for local use by Windows components and other installed apps. The OS can't operate properly without them. What will be missing will be the files associated only with IE8 such as the IE8 executable.
I don't know why any of you guys actually think that OEMs in the EU aren't going to have the sense to install alternative browsers with their new PCs. It's a small matter to have the additional software pre-installed. Haven't you guys noticed how easy it has become for manufacturers to install crapware?
Yes, but IE isn't completely removed like that. This change is to help competition in the browser market, not to increase security, and none of the browser companies care if parts of IE are still used for system updates and the like. You're right, removing it through VLite will cause problems, but that's not what this is about.
As darkxeno said, "It may call parts of the IE library that all parts of windows uses and will not be removed due to that."
The reason I love my Macintosh systems is that they both come with a browser and I can use it immediately.
I have nothing against the PC. It's good to have competition, hence why I chose the Macintosh platform.
Seriously, you should be able to have a web browser from the time you power up your PC for the first time.
Competition is good, but a Windows based PC without a web browser is just plain silly.
That's like having a keyboard without a mouse and expecting the user to be able to click the icons to gain access to the system.
On that note, I hope Microsoft prevails.
Fair is fair.
I think the EU are complete morons for what they did to IE, just like they would be complete morons to force Safari from OS X.
then we'll have an even playing field of useless computers.
Imagine buying a new car and being told that the radio won't be included because they want 3rd parties the opportunity to sell you their brand.
Same thing with the integrated GPS. Sorry, but your automobile won't have that feature.
Next thing you know, it will be the tires!
This is seriously getting out of hand.
It's not nearly that simple. First, the car manufacturer has to have a monopoly - they're selling just about every car out there. And secondly, the car manufacturer has to be actively competing with the car radio industry that has to virtually depend only on sales to that monopoly. If every time the radio industry tries to create a distinct product, the car manufacturer copies their features and adds them to their bundled offerings, then its anti-competitive. That's what's been happening.
That is pretty much a non-issue, considering Flash has pretty much taken all of that market and is on near-enough every computer... (which i personally hate since Flash is still terrible. Flash, another monopoly that has resulted in terrible inefficient code for years. And the fact it is in version 10 is even worse.)
Any others are pretty much going to lose out just for streaming a WMV / AVI or whatever directly and HOPING that the end user has program X and codec Y installed.
Several video sites have already died due to this. (i forgot the one that streamed divx videos)
I haven't seen the plugin thing show up since pre FF1.
Either way, an option to choose would be nice. Simply leaving out all internet browsers is stupid, though I can't wait to see "Internet Explorer" CDs in PC World just like AOL CDs.
>though I can't wait to see "Internet Explorer" CDs in PC World just like AOL CDs.
And hopefully growing old, just like the AOL CDs.
And how do you prevent even more people from using Firefox or Opera? Make it impossible to simply go to www.getfirefox.com or www.opera.com. Great job, EU.
If anything, they are more likely to MOVE to the EU. (and other places)
See http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aAKluP7yIwJY
Also, FTP, as it has been mentioned several times now.
Ultimately most consumers don't care. They just want to browse the internet and aren't concerned about which browser they use. They're more concerned about the content they are viewing, not the browser they are viewing it with.
But that would be WAY to convenient.
They just want to browse the web.
what is of their choice?
so you have to install ten browsers,
twenty antivirus software,
twenty music player,
twenty dvd writer...
etc..etc.?
how many is enough?
Do you have that space?
every software has more than 10 competitor..how you choose?
Windows give you the basic...you want more advance stuff...go buy 3rd party...
btw...how much is your computer going to cost if I bundle all the different software in the world?
don't just think U.S...different part of the world has they own software too..
like japanese or chinese softwares...
how can you bundle it all?
it's just stupid.
That was the weirdest haiku I've ever read. Good points all!
Exactly!
I have a Mac and instead of using iMovie (bundled with the system) to produce my YouTube videos, I use Final Cut (more expensive OPTION).
IF people want better choices, they will decide for themselves.
Are IT groups in the EU going to be able to get Win7 with IE already installed? (other than IE6 included with Virtual XP).
@syonatl. Do you think the EU cares what consumers and corporate want? They just wanted $$$ in fines. "
That says it all doesnt it? It's not about the software, its not about a monopoly or breaking anti-trust laws - its all about a covert trade war against the US with MS being the meat of the day in the sandwich (who's next?). because of its 'bad boy' image.
The point about all of this is that people ALREADY have a choice about which browser they use - anybody can download an alternative browser.
The other point that should be made is that Opera initially was never FREE - it was TRIALWARE and in those days it was crapware (couldn't get rid of it quick enough). And do you really think that once IE has been knock out of the browser equation that Opera will remain free? Yea, and pigs will fly. (actually, I think that Opera already has two versions of its browser - trialware and free).
And people suggesting discs and ftp isn't that a bit backwards just to support your hate for Internet Explorer? "Just because I hate Microsoft and Internet Explorer so much I think it should be difficult and cumbersome for people to get online with Windows PCs" thats an exact translation to what people really mean who support this.
- by Kaleborn June 11, 2009 12:37 PM PDT
- Don't see why Microsoft can't right a little utility that uses some rudimentary http functionality over port 80. Have it point to a site that contains a list of Window 7 - compatible browsers and allows the user to kick off the install executable for the browser of their choice.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by tomasm2005 June 11, 2009 1:13 PM PDT
- But why should a paying customer have to wait to get the software to access the net, AFTER he paid for his brand new system with brand new OS, when it could have been put in so that he could get on the web right away after firing up his system the first time.
- Like this
-
- by Hernys June 11, 2009 7:10 PM PDT
- > a little utility that uses some rudimentary http functionality over port 80
- Like this
-
- by Mergatroid Mania June 12, 2009 6:16 PM PDT
- Kaleborn you're absolutely right. Microsoft already includes stripped down text editor, word processor, dialer, e-mail software etc.
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 6 pages (298 Comments)This utility wouldn't be a full browser just an app with a very specific purpose. It would be up to each browser maker to ensure their 'install' page was compliant with the way this utility works. This way a user wouldn't have to know a URL or FTP site, it's hosted centrally under the 'works with Windows 7' banner or something.
Obviously MS would only do this if they were serious about maintaining some impartiality concerning browsers on their OS. They'd help mitigate any PR disasters with users unable to browse the web after firing up their shiny new Windows 7 OS. You can almost hear the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ad guys salivating over this already...
Majority of the users don't want to mess with installing browsers and such. They tend to stick with what then know.
Because that would be a web browser. And the EU doesn't want them to include any.
There's no reason they couldn't include a stripped down version of a web browser. This browser would allow you to enter a URL, and load a webpage that would only show down-load links. You could enter firefox.com, microsoft.com or whatever you wanted and then just click to download. They could even put buttons at the top of the browser that would take you to whatever site you want.
There is no excuse for not doing this other than wanting everyone to use Internet Explorer.
They should do the same thing with Mediaplayer. Include a stripped down version with basic functionality and let people download it if they want it.