The people deciding whether to sue MS or not on competition grounds are civil servants and not politicians. They will not limit your choice on IE or any other browser. They just do not want IE to be incorporated in the operating system. MS would be free to install it as a free standing browser.
What would that accomplish? What other Windows apps would have to be completely separate from the OS if this passes? What about OS X and all its integrated frameworks as it gains marketshare?
The fact is the easiest way to install a different browser if with a browser, that IE is losing marketshare, and MS is being pushed into adopting more standards.
What would that accomplish? What other Windows apps would have to be completely separate from the OS if this passes? What about OS X and all its integrated frameworks as it gains marketshare?
The fact is the easiest way to install a different browser if with a browser, that IE is losing marketshare, and MS is being pushed into adopting more standards.
It would accomplish that all applications for which there are viable freestanding alternatives are not bundled with the operating systems. This gives the consumer the ability to remove such apps when not wanted and replace them with the application of their choice.
I am not a fan of Microsoft but I really can't see how they can solve this problem. First, you cannot download web browser without having a web browser to access the internet and website. Second, you can't force a company to bundle 3rd party software especially when the 3rd party is a competitor.
What next? Breaking up MS Office and sell Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc individually to break MS monopoly in word processor, spreadsheet, presentation, etc markets?!
I understand it is about choice but software sometimes need to be bundled together because it will provide better user experience and value.
The current situation "distorts competition on the merits between competing web browsers insofar as it provides Internet Explorer with an artificial distribution advantage which other web browsers are unable to match," the organization says in its confirmation of the statement. "The Commission is concerned that through the tying, Microsoft shields Internet Explorer from head to head competition with other browsers which is detrimental to the pace of product innovation and to the quality of products which consumers ultimately obtain."
The same arguments apply to Safari which is tied to Mac OS X, but also the iPhone. Both Firefox and Opera are better web browsers than Safari which is tied to Mac OS X and the iPhone OS X.
Moreover, Apple is illegally blocking Firefox and Opera developpers from distributing their web browser through the iTunes iPhone App Store for use on the iPhone.
I encourage the developpers of Firefox and Opera to launch an antitrust complaint with the European Commission against Apple which is illegally blocking their web browsers from distribution on the iTunes iPhone store.
I am not a fan of Microsoft but I really can't see how they can solve this problem. First, you cannot download web browser without having a web browser to access the internet and website. Second, you can't force a company to bundle 3rd party software especially when the 3rd party is a competitor.
What next? Breaking up MS Office and sell Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc individually to break MS monopoly in word processor, spreadsheet, presentation, etc markets?!
I understand it is about choice but software sometimes need to be bundled together because it will provide better user experience and value.
If MS would incorporate MS Office with the operating system that would incur the wrath of the competition commissioner. It is the incorporation of an app, not the provision of a separate app that is at issue
The same arguments apply to Safari which is tied to Mac OS X, but also the iPhone. Both Firefox and Opera are better web browsers than Safari which is tied to Mac OS X and the iPhone OS X.
Moreover, Apple is illegally blocking Firefox and Opera developpers from distributing their web browser through the iTunes iPhone App Store for use on the iPhone.
I encourage the developpers of Firefox and Opera to launch an antitrust complaint with the European Commission against Apple which is illegally blocking their web browsers from distribution on the iTunes iPhone store.
While the percentage of Safari users on OS X seems to be significantly higher than IE users on Windows, calling Apple's policy to not allow for private APIs illegal and calling for anti-trust lawsuits is laughable.
If MS would incorporate MS Office with the operating system that would incur the wrath of the competition commissioner. It is the incorporation of an app, not the provision of a separate app that is at issue
They incorporate Notepad and Wordpad, yet those word processing apps having incurred any such wrath. The reason they don't include them is because they are major profit centers for the company.
Should MS be sued because they include various backgrounds and screensavers that reduce the ability for others to compete in this potential market? Of course not, because those so inclined can install their own at will, just like they can do with 3rd-party web browsers.
It's true though, how are you going to download something else if your machine didn't come with a browser, but microsoft seriously needs to detach iE from windows cause dude that shit really is a bug magnet & having that thing embedded into the OS makes things even Worse, i mean why should people have iE in their machines if they don't want it.
If IE is to windows what Safari is to Mac, why don't they force Apple to remove Safari from Mac OS and iPhone OS. While at it, remove iCal, iTunes, Quicktime, Address book, iChat...
Just leave IE there, if you want to use another browser install Safari or Firefox.
The same arguments apply to Safari which is tied to Mac OS X, but also the iPhone. Both Firefox and Opera are better web browsers than Safari which is tied to Mac OS X and the iPhone OS X.
Moreover, Apple is illegally blocking Firefox and Opera developpers from distributing their web browser through the iTunes iPhone App Store for use on the iPhone.
I encourage the developpers of Firefox and Opera to launch an antitrust complaint with the European Commission against Apple which is illegally blocking their web browsers from distribution on the iTunes iPhone store.
That's not so true, you might think Apple is going it but in reality things are different, as you might recalled this past week a few bullshit browsers where release throw the App store, all based on webkit, so i don't see how Apple can block firefox since they use webkit same as safari. People quickly jump to all kinds of conclusion when they don't see something on the app store, although these browsers seem small you can't cook one overnight you know
That's not so true, you might think Apple is going it but in reality things are different, as you might recalled this past week a few bullshit browsers where release throw the App store, all based on webkit, so i don't see how Apple can block firefox since they use webkit same as safari. People quickly jump to all kinds of conclusion when they don't see something on the app store, although these browsers seem small you can't cook one overnight you know
Firefox and Opera mobile browsers have a different code from Mobile Safari, they are based in Webkit too but it is a different interpreted code. Apple have on the developer I don't know what that they do not accept interpreted code.
If IE is to windows what Safari is to Mac, why don't they force Apple to remove Safari from Mac OS and iPhone OS. While at it, remove iCal, iTunes, Quicktime, Address book, iChat...
Just leave IE there, if you want to use another browser install Safari or Firefox.
Isn't Quicktime embedded deep down Mac OS X?
Your not getting it, if safari for example is exposing my mac to a security risk i could just take it and delete and never see it again if i wish, iE is embedded to the OS so you can't get rid of it and have windows work right, to me iE is like a door for all kinds things to makes it's way to your machine but a door you can't close shut
Your not getting it, if safari for example is exposing my mac to a security risk i could just take it and delete and never see it again if i wish, iE is embedded to the OS so you can't get rid of it and have windows work right, to me iE is like a door for all kinds things to makes it's way to your machine but a door you can't close shut
Oh I see, so if there's something wrong with the app, lets say Safari, I just delete from the applications folder. In Windows I would have to remove from add/remove windows features in the add/remove programs configuration pane.
So the point is not making IE so embedded, so you can remove and use something else like Firefox. What I don't see is the fine line between programs and OS Utilities... like Keychain.
Dude, everyone knows that the Saucer people made a deal with the reverse vampires years ago that completely stopped this kind of thing. Why, it was renewed just last week at the Tin-foil hat seminar in London.
There is a moral argument being made here, and it goes something like this: "Microsoft is bad because it is a monopoly. They need to be regulated by someone good. The government should regulate them, because the government is good."
The moral argument here is that "All monopolies are bad. X is bad because it is a monopoly". Very well then - let's take their logic and apply it to another group (such as the government) to see if it still holds up. Well, here's the problem: the government is also a monopoly. So, let's see how well this works out:
"The government is bad because it is a monopoly. They need to be regulated by someone good. The government should regulate them, becausethe government is good." Clearly, that's absurd - its a contradiction, not to mention a conflict of interest. This idea just doesn't work- if you want someone to regulate monopolies, governments are certainly the last group who should be given that task. It simply isn't logical to call for governments to regulate monopolies. You can still want it, but then you're not making arguments anymore - they're just empty opinions, like "I like blue", in which case, you have to stop acting so pompous and so sure that you are right. If you don't want your theories to be held up to logical consistency, then drop the moralising, gloating and finger-wagging. I don't mean this as an attack, please don't misunderstand me- it would really be great if we chose to use reason instead of just tossing empty opinions pack and forth. But until then, if you just have an opinion, then be honest about it: "I like the idea of the government regulating Microsoft. I don't know why, and it might not be right or logical - but I still like it." Does that make sense?
I can certainty understand how it might seem... unconventional, and even alarming, to hold governments to the same standard as we hold anything else. People like to invent moral rules on the spot or just repeat what they were told, and apply these rules inconsistently, because that is how moral arguments were used against them when they were growing up. I get that most people aren't rational, and as unfortunate as that is, its a reality we have to deal with. So I'm not going to get angry at you for using a straw man attack - that would be silly. However, I hope that we can agree that logic and reason are very important here. If you want to use some other standard, then fine, but you'll have to give up the easy credibility and certainty that logic and reason will give you.
Oh I see, so if there's something wrong with the app, lets say Safari, I just delete from the applications folder. In Windows I would have to remove from add/remove windows features in the add/remove programs configuration pane.
So the point is not making IE so embedded, so you can remove and use something else like Firefox. What I don't see is the fine line between programs and OS Utilities... like Keychain.
Tank-you!
No you can't remove iE from add/remove windows features in the add/remove programs configuration pane cause iE is part of the entire OS, it's embedded! lol. let me make it a bit clearer, what good does locking up your front gate do if you always leave all your house doors & windows open, Viruses and worms almost all go for iE cause they know it's there and vulnerable, if a virus is crafted to attack your machine throw iE but iE was deleted a year ago how the heck is it going to get in. Keychain on macs sit in Utilities and it keeps passwords that's it, OS X prompts your for a password every time something is requesting permission to the core of the OS only, but not like Vista where even a freggin picture is a threat cause it has access to everything. Permissions are highly enforced in OS X, a freggin picture for example has no business changing all your files or deleting them don't you think
Comments
The people deciding whether to sue MS or not on competition grounds are civil servants and not politicians. They will not limit your choice on IE or any other browser. They just do not want IE to be incorporated in the operating system. MS would be free to install it as a free standing browser.
What would that accomplish? What other Windows apps would have to be completely separate from the OS if this passes? What about OS X and all its integrated frameworks as it gains marketshare?
The fact is the easiest way to install a different browser if with a browser, that IE is losing marketshare, and MS is being pushed into adopting more standards.
With Firefox, Safari, and Chrome out there this is a non-issue. Microsoft is not monopolizing the browser anymore.
What would that accomplish? What other Windows apps would have to be completely separate from the OS if this passes? What about OS X and all its integrated frameworks as it gains marketshare?
The fact is the easiest way to install a different browser if with a browser, that IE is losing marketshare, and MS is being pushed into adopting more standards.
It would accomplish that all applications for which there are viable freestanding alternatives are not bundled with the operating systems. This gives the consumer the ability to remove such apps when not wanted and replace them with the application of their choice.
What next? Breaking up MS Office and sell Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc individually to break MS monopoly in word processor, spreadsheet, presentation, etc markets?!
I understand it is about choice but software sometimes need to be bundled together because it will provide better user experience and value.
The current situation "distorts competition on the merits between competing web browsers insofar as it provides Internet Explorer with an artificial distribution advantage which other web browsers are unable to match," the organization says in its confirmation of the statement. "The Commission is concerned that through the tying, Microsoft shields Internet Explorer from head to head competition with other browsers which is detrimental to the pace of product innovation and to the quality of products which consumers ultimately obtain."
The same arguments apply to Safari which is tied to Mac OS X, but also the iPhone. Both Firefox and Opera are better web browsers than Safari which is tied to Mac OS X and the iPhone OS X.
Moreover, Apple is illegally blocking Firefox and Opera developpers from distributing their web browser through the iTunes iPhone App Store for use on the iPhone.
I encourage the developpers of Firefox and Opera to launch an antitrust complaint with the European Commission against Apple which is illegally blocking their web browsers from distribution on the iTunes iPhone store.
I am not a fan of Microsoft but I really can't see how they can solve this problem. First, you cannot download web browser without having a web browser to access the internet and website. Second, you can't force a company to bundle 3rd party software especially when the 3rd party is a competitor.
What next? Breaking up MS Office and sell Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc individually to break MS monopoly in word processor, spreadsheet, presentation, etc markets?!
I understand it is about choice but software sometimes need to be bundled together because it will provide better user experience and value.
If MS would incorporate MS Office with the operating system that would incur the wrath of the competition commissioner. It is the incorporation of an app, not the provision of a separate app that is at issue
The same arguments apply to Safari which is tied to Mac OS X, but also the iPhone. Both Firefox and Opera are better web browsers than Safari which is tied to Mac OS X and the iPhone OS X.
Moreover, Apple is illegally blocking Firefox and Opera developpers from distributing their web browser through the iTunes iPhone App Store for use on the iPhone.
I encourage the developpers of Firefox and Opera to launch an antitrust complaint with the European Commission against Apple which is illegally blocking their web browsers from distribution on the iTunes iPhone store.
While the percentage of Safari users on OS X seems to be significantly higher than IE users on Windows, calling Apple's policy to not allow for private APIs illegal and calling for anti-trust lawsuits is laughable.
The people deciding whether to sue MS or not on competition grounds are civil servants and not politicians.
They're proxy politicians.
They will not limit your choice on IE or any other browser.
Neither does MS.
MS would be free to install it as a free standing browser.
This is government doublespeak.
If MS would incorporate MS Office with the operating system that would incur the wrath of the competition commissioner. It is the incorporation of an app, not the provision of a separate app that is at issue
They incorporate Notepad and Wordpad, yet those word processing apps having incurred any such wrath. The reason they don't include them is because they are major profit centers for the company.
Should MS be sued because they include various backgrounds and screensavers that reduce the ability for others to compete in this potential market? Of course not, because those so inclined can install their own at will, just like they can do with 3rd-party web browsers.
Just leave IE there, if you want to use another browser install Safari or Firefox.
Isn't Quicktime embedded deep down Mac OS X?
While not a fan of MS' monopolistic practices, this is not one of them.
PS: Does Vista use IE to update the OS or does it use a seperate app like *nx-based systems?
I think it uses a program called Windows Update... but I don't know if it is linked to IE or not.
The same arguments apply to Safari which is tied to Mac OS X, but also the iPhone. Both Firefox and Opera are better web browsers than Safari which is tied to Mac OS X and the iPhone OS X.
Moreover, Apple is illegally blocking Firefox and Opera developpers from distributing their web browser through the iTunes iPhone App Store for use on the iPhone.
I encourage the developpers of Firefox and Opera to launch an antitrust complaint with the European Commission against Apple which is illegally blocking their web browsers from distribution on the iTunes iPhone store.
That's not so true, you might think Apple is going it but in reality things are different, as you might recalled this past week a few bullshit browsers where release throw the App store, all based on webkit, so i don't see how Apple can block firefox since they use webkit same as safari. People quickly jump to all kinds of conclusion when they don't see something on the app store, although these browsers seem small you can't cook one overnight you know
That's not so true, you might think Apple is going it but in reality things are different, as you might recalled this past week a few bullshit browsers where release throw the App store, all based on webkit, so i don't see how Apple can block firefox since they use webkit same as safari. People quickly jump to all kinds of conclusion when they don't see something on the app store, although these browsers seem small you can't cook one overnight you know
Firefox and Opera mobile browsers have a different code from Mobile Safari, they are based in Webkit too but it is a different interpreted code. Apple have on the developer I don't know what that they do not accept interpreted code.
Just leave IE there, if you want to use another browser install Safari or Firefox.
Isn't Quicktime embedded deep down Mac OS X?
Your not getting it, if safari for example is exposing my mac to a security risk i could just take it and delete and never see it again if i wish, iE is embedded to the OS so you can't get rid of it and have windows work right, to me iE is like a door for all kinds things to makes it's way to your machine but a door you can't close shut
Your not getting it, if safari for example is exposing my mac to a security risk i could just take it and delete and never see it again if i wish, iE is embedded to the OS so you can't get rid of it and have windows work right, to me iE is like a door for all kinds things to makes it's way to your machine but a door you can't close shut
Oh I see, so if there's something wrong with the app, lets say Safari, I just delete from the applications folder. In Windows I would have to remove from add/remove windows features in the add/remove programs configuration pane.
So the point is not making IE so embedded, so you can remove and use something else like Firefox. What I don't see is the fine line between programs and OS Utilities... like Keychain.
Tank-you!
Dude, everyone knows that the Saucer people made a deal with the reverse vampires years ago that completely stopped this kind of thing. Why, it was renewed just last week at the Tin-foil hat seminar in London.
There is a moral argument being made here, and it goes something like this: "Microsoft is bad because it is a monopoly. They need to be regulated by someone good. The government should regulate them, because the government is good."
The moral argument here is that "All monopolies are bad. X is bad because it is a monopoly". Very well then - let's take their logic and apply it to another group (such as the government) to see if it still holds up. Well, here's the problem: the government is also a monopoly. So, let's see how well this works out:
"The government is bad because it is a monopoly. They need to be regulated by someone good. The government should regulate them, because the government is good." Clearly, that's absurd - its a contradiction, not to mention a conflict of interest. This idea just doesn't work- if you want someone to regulate monopolies, governments are certainly the last group who should be given that task. It simply isn't logical to call for governments to regulate monopolies. You can still want it, but then you're not making arguments anymore - they're just empty opinions, like "I like blue", in which case, you have to stop acting so pompous and so sure that you are right. If you don't want your theories to be held up to logical consistency, then drop the moralising, gloating and finger-wagging. I don't mean this as an attack, please don't misunderstand me- it would really be great if we chose to use reason instead of just tossing empty opinions pack and forth. But until then, if you just have an opinion, then be honest about it: "I like the idea of the government regulating Microsoft. I don't know why, and it might not be right or logical - but I still like it." Does that make sense?
Oh I see, so if there's something wrong with the app, lets say Safari, I just delete from the applications folder. In Windows I would have to remove from add/remove windows features in the add/remove programs configuration pane.
So the point is not making IE so embedded, so you can remove and use something else like Firefox. What I don't see is the fine line between programs and OS Utilities... like Keychain.
Tank-you!
No you can't remove iE from add/remove windows features in the add/remove programs configuration pane cause iE is part of the entire OS, it's embedded! lol. let me make it a bit clearer, what good does locking up your front gate do if you always leave all your house doors & windows open, Viruses and worms almost all go for iE cause they know it's there and vulnerable, if a virus is crafted to attack your machine throw iE but iE was deleted a year ago how the heck is it going to get in. Keychain on macs sit in Utilities and it keeps passwords that's it, OS X prompts your for a password every time something is requesting permission to the core of the OS only, but not like Vista where even a freggin picture is a threat cause it has access to everything. Permissions are highly enforced in OS X, a freggin picture for example has no business changing all your files or deleting them don't you think