Apple's Safari gets prime placement in Windows browser ballot
Microsoft's Windows browser ballot in Europe presents its options in alphabetical order, putting Apple's Safari as the first choice for users to install.
The design caught the ire of Jenny Boriss, a Firefox designer, who believes that the layout gives an unfair advantage to Safari over competing browsers. Her personal comments were not made on behalf of the Mozilla Foundation.
"Windows users presented with the current design will tend to make only two choices: IE because they are familiar with it, or Safari because it is the first item," she said.
Microsoft plans to offer the ballot screen in response to an ongoing antitrust dispute with the European Union.
After it was alleged that the Windows maker was engaging in anticompetitive practices, Microsoft was forced to release versions of its operating system without Windows Media Player bundled. Apple's rival to the north was also ordered to pay ?497 million for alleged abuse of its dominant position in the market.
Early this year, the European Commission warned Microsoft that it believed the inclusion of Internet Explorer in Windows was an abuse of its stance in the market. The legal body argued that the ubiquity of Internet Explorer forces Web developers and programmers to optimize mostly or exclusively for the Microsoft browser, limiting the number of features available to users.
Due to launch on Oct. 22, Windows 7 will allow PC vendors to choose which Web browser they want to install on their hardware. Manufacturers can opt for Microsoft's own Internet Explorer, or choose another option instead.
After reviewing Microsoft's browser ballot, the option earned praise from the European Commission. A market test was conducted, and found that the new method provides greater information to consumers about Web browsers.
"The improvements that Microsoft has made to its proposal since July would ensure that consumers could make a free and fully informed choice of Web browser," the commission said. "Microsoft has in particular agreed to present users with a first screen explaining what web browsers are. 'Tell me more' buttons for each browser would also enable users to learn more about the web browser they may wish to install. The user experience would be better and the choice screen would better represent competing browser vendors. Finally, the proposed commitment would now be subject to a clause allowing the Commission to review it in the future to ensure that consumers would continue to have a genuine choice among browsers."
But Boriss said she believes a ballot isn't the right way to go, and the current design gives a "disproportionate advantage" to Apple's Safari. She cited studies that found that in traditional elections, lesser-known candidates can have their vote totals boosted by as much as 50 percent if their name is listed first.
She went on to say that Safari is not an "ideal" browser for Windows, as Apple puts more focus on software for its own Mac OS X platform than it does for Windows. She said that Safari is the least likely to be the browser Windows users want. She offered a number of alternatives, including random order of the top five browsers, or probability ordering by percentage market share.
"Past consumer choice has shown that Safari does not provide an ideal browsing experience on Windows," she said. "Taking IE out of the equation because of its advantage as the bundled browser, the free market really does show what Windows users prefer. Safari has the smallest market share of the five other browsers at 2.6 percent."
The overall share os Safari has increased steadily in recent years, thanks to increasing Mac sales, as well as the browser's availability for Windows. According to Net Applications, Safari has an overall 3.70 percent market share among all browsers.
When it launched in June, Safari 4 got off to an explosive start, with 11 million downloads of the browser within its first 3 days. More than half of those downloads -- 6 million -- were to users of Microsoft Windows operating systems.
The design caught the ire of Jenny Boriss, a Firefox designer, who believes that the layout gives an unfair advantage to Safari over competing browsers. Her personal comments were not made on behalf of the Mozilla Foundation.
"Windows users presented with the current design will tend to make only two choices: IE because they are familiar with it, or Safari because it is the first item," she said.
Microsoft plans to offer the ballot screen in response to an ongoing antitrust dispute with the European Union.
After it was alleged that the Windows maker was engaging in anticompetitive practices, Microsoft was forced to release versions of its operating system without Windows Media Player bundled. Apple's rival to the north was also ordered to pay ?497 million for alleged abuse of its dominant position in the market.
Early this year, the European Commission warned Microsoft that it believed the inclusion of Internet Explorer in Windows was an abuse of its stance in the market. The legal body argued that the ubiquity of Internet Explorer forces Web developers and programmers to optimize mostly or exclusively for the Microsoft browser, limiting the number of features available to users.
Due to launch on Oct. 22, Windows 7 will allow PC vendors to choose which Web browser they want to install on their hardware. Manufacturers can opt for Microsoft's own Internet Explorer, or choose another option instead.
After reviewing Microsoft's browser ballot, the option earned praise from the European Commission. A market test was conducted, and found that the new method provides greater information to consumers about Web browsers.
"The improvements that Microsoft has made to its proposal since July would ensure that consumers could make a free and fully informed choice of Web browser," the commission said. "Microsoft has in particular agreed to present users with a first screen explaining what web browsers are. 'Tell me more' buttons for each browser would also enable users to learn more about the web browser they may wish to install. The user experience would be better and the choice screen would better represent competing browser vendors. Finally, the proposed commitment would now be subject to a clause allowing the Commission to review it in the future to ensure that consumers would continue to have a genuine choice among browsers."
But Boriss said she believes a ballot isn't the right way to go, and the current design gives a "disproportionate advantage" to Apple's Safari. She cited studies that found that in traditional elections, lesser-known candidates can have their vote totals boosted by as much as 50 percent if their name is listed first.
She went on to say that Safari is not an "ideal" browser for Windows, as Apple puts more focus on software for its own Mac OS X platform than it does for Windows. She said that Safari is the least likely to be the browser Windows users want. She offered a number of alternatives, including random order of the top five browsers, or probability ordering by percentage market share.
"Past consumer choice has shown that Safari does not provide an ideal browsing experience on Windows," she said. "Taking IE out of the equation because of its advantage as the bundled browser, the free market really does show what Windows users prefer. Safari has the smallest market share of the five other browsers at 2.6 percent."
The overall share os Safari has increased steadily in recent years, thanks to increasing Mac sales, as well as the browser's availability for Windows. According to Net Applications, Safari has an overall 3.70 percent market share among all browsers.
When it launched in June, Safari 4 got off to an explosive start, with 11 million downloads of the browser within its first 3 days. More than half of those downloads -- 6 million -- were to users of Microsoft Windows operating systems.
Comments
She should just convince Mozilla to change the name of Firefox to Aardvark and then keep quiet!
Given a smorgasbord selection like this with large logos I think people will gravitate first to the logo most familiar to them.
And I'll bet Mozilla wishes they were named Amozilla right about now.
second. She'd be singing a different tune then.
Such a big list. It could certainly cause confusion to people in Florida.
While maybe randomizing the order would be the most fair, doesn't Safari have one of the smallest percentages of users on the Windows platform, if not THE smallest? I'm not sure how this is unfair, though I would probably recommend to users they install Chrome or Firefox over Safari on Windows.
Well, it's pretty close to one of the smallest. Poor Opera is languishing in last place. But the real fact that gets me is that she says that Safari is not an "ideal" browser for Windows. I don't seem to have a problem using it on Windows, especially after Apple released Safari 4, which has more "Windows" looks. Before, it looked more fit on a Mac than Windows. And most people don't even know that Apple is providing a browser; people don't recognize it b/c their friends haven't used it and therefore haven't recommended it. Everyone just recommends Firefox anyway because most likely that's what will fit most of everyone's needs, due to its plugins. So I call this blog post false, because obviously she has a motive to push, even though she doesn't explicitly say it.
I wish she were more honest; that derails her whole argument. Just saying that she would like to be the designer for the most popular browser on any OS and she would stop at nothing to achieve that, including criticizing whatever practices the software makers put out, would help her credibility. But then no one would read a fangirl(?)'s perspective.
I wonder if she'll criticize the Mac platform for having Safari as the default browser initially? Or what about Linux having Firefox as the default? You don't see a ballot on either of those OSes. Apparently she's a hypocrite
What does Boriss suggest then? At least putting things alphabetically has some logic behind it
yes but they were done by company, which is how Apple ended up first. the companies mean little to many so why not put them by software name with IE in the middle and not at the front.
People who know what browser they like download it and uninstall any pre-installed browser.
People who don't know but want to find out more do the research and then download.
People who are clueless use something pre-installed.
This is just a waste of everyone's time, as everyone will still do these things and it will make no difference other than giving the biggest browsers more market share as the choice is severely limited (which surely defeats the purpose). Oh, and of course confusing the people who can barely use the Internet.
And if this is supposed to be 'fairer', then how come people are arguing about existing market share based on placement? You can't have it both ways - you either want to even the playing field or you don't.
Sometimes I hate Europe.
They can list it in terms of what a chimp picks out for all I care.
Microsoft's Windows browser ballot in Europe presents its options in alphabetical order, putting Apple's Safari as the first choice for users to install....
What a ridiculous article.
First off, you can bet that if Microsoft knew it was being forced into a ballot like this and it *wanted* to be first it would just have to change it's name to "Explorer" which you know they would do if they thought it would give them an advantage. Secondly, MSIE is in the best position of all, which is dead centre. Third, if you read the language below, MSIE is installed by default and then *un-installed* during the browser ballot process. The reasonably scary language makes it quite unlikely the consumer will decide to just "decide later." Most will just pick the browser in the centre that is generally thought of as a part of the OS and that was just uninstalled.
What's really bad here though is that the entire complaint, and the entire article about the complaint seems to be based on an assumption that hasn't even been tested (that first position is best). You'd think someone could at least point to a study or something that might indicate that this is anything more than just an assumption.
Given a vertical alphabetical list, like in an election ballot, then being first may have some advantage.
Given a smorgasbord selection like this with large logos I think people will gravitate first to the logo most familiar to them.
Yup. In fact people can complain that MS did itself a favor by placing itself right smack in the middle where first glances tend to zero in.
What a ridiculous article.
First off, you can bet that if Microsoft knew it was being forced into a ballot like this and it *wanted* to be first it would just have to change it's name to "Explorer" which you know they would do if they thought it would give them an advantage. Secondly, MSIE is in the best position of all, which is dead centre. Third, if you read the language below, MSIE is installed by default and then *un-installed* during the browser ballot process. The reasonably scary language makes it quite unlikely the consumer will decide to just "decide later." Most will just pick the browser in the centre that is generally thought of as a part of the OS and that was just uninstalled.
What's really bad here though is that the entire complaint, and the entire article about the complaint seems to be based on an assumption that hasn't even been tested (that first position is best). You'd think someone could at least point to a study or something that might indicate that this is anything more than just an assumption.
Question order IS a known factor in poll results, which is why political polls (for example) will sometimes randomize that.
However, polls don't normally exist in one single row. I agree that in a HORIZONTAL layout like this, IE, smack in the middle, is what pops into my awareness first.
Still, now everyone can point in amazement at how low Safari's share is despite having an "advantage"
Who gives a sweet damn, it's Windows.
They can list it in terms of what a chimp picks out for all I care.
Huh! The chimp went straight for Opera. Interesting.
I expected something on the order of current IE8 accelerator choices. I think this is actually a pretty fair choice screen, though I doubt this will shift marketshare one way or the other.
The vast majority of users will just click on the icon that they already use (IE users will hit IE, FF will click FF, but in same percentages as are now.
Apple and MS have a nice financial relationship. what a way to show it off
Other than selling Microsoft Office, what kind of relationship are you referring to?
Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple in 1997 ±. Is that it?