Windows 7 and IE split concerns

Tsimo said:
the fact is that MS has made a superior product. now before every linux fan or mac monkey out there start crying buckets you have to look at it from a standard users point of view. you start it up the first time and you answer a few questions and you go. it works.
Click to expand...

That point only holds up if a majority of the total market have done: "start it up the first time...it works" and done so on Win and Mac and Linux and therefore are have a right to say "the fact is that MS has made a superior product."

Since the vast majority of the market have never even heard of Linux and are vaguely familiar with that hip guy on TV telling them he's Mac, your point is not worth reading any further.

Yeah, there are the semi-enlightened others (yeah, heard it,... nah, not tried it) that are certainly guilty of stubbornly holding on to the now because of all the time spent cutomising and tweaking the installation for fear of ... of ... actually being pleasently surprised by a real superior product.

Case in point:

Red Hat's Fedora 11: So easy you'll forget it's Linux
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10260478-16.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=TheOpenRoad
 
SO stupid. Most people are going to install IE8 that comes on the separate CD...talk about cutting off your nose to spite your own face.
 
Peter (And when I say Peter I mean everyone that thinks this is a smart move or supports this trash in any shape or form), you are a total moron. You are letting your hate of MS blind you a little here.
Here are the facts:
#1: It is going to be a total ball ache to get a browser.
#2: MS is running a business. Not a smart idea to promote your competitions product.
#3: Being forced to do #2 is NOT democratic, no matter how much you dress it up.
#4: Why do the big 4 browsers get preference. If you truly wanted things to be fair, you would need to promote every crappy little browser equally.... and there are LOTS of them.
#5: Dont Macs ship with Safari? Where is the browser representation there?
#6: Do you honestly believe this is going to make a difference. Cause if you do you dummer than a sack of rocks. (which is pretty dumb)
#7: I cant believe you need this spelt out to you.
#8: Why doesnt Coke put Pepsi labels on their cans?
#9: You just made your network admin jobs a ****e load harder
#10: Can you imagine apply this logic (or lack thereof) to every other product?
#11: Aw I give up, if you cant see it you a total muppet.

Also why limit ourselves to browsers. What about Media Player, thats got to go. And Text editors... notepad... thats out too. The calculator app... totally anti-competitive. When does offering consumers "options" start to inconvenience them? Ah, yes... when it directly affects YOU.
 
Last edited:
SlappY said:
#8: Why doesnt Coke put Pepsi labels on their cans?
Click to expand...

This is the point that I have a problem with. That is not the same as Microsoft giving a browser out with their OS. The problem is that Microsoft has a dominant market position with their OS and they are using that to stifle competition. It is more like Coke using a dominant position in the advertising industry to ensure that Pepsi doesn't get the screen-time it needs to sell it's product. That is what the EU has a problem with.
 
SlappY said:
#1: It is going to be a total ball ache to get a browser.
Click to expand...
Agreed - the EU's plan of including a selection of browsers to be installed is a much better idea.
SlappY said:
#2: MS is running a business. Not a smart idea to promote your competitions product.
Click to expand...
Sure - but repeatedly ignoring the laws of the markets in which you wish to do business is also not a good idea.
SlappY said:
#3: Being forced to do #2 is NOT democratic, no matter how much you dress it up.
Click to expand...
It may not be democratic, but neither is abusing your market dominance.
SlappY said:
#5: Dont Macs ship with Safari? Where is the browser representation there?
Click to expand...
Apple doesn't have 95% market share. If they did I think they'd probably abuse their dominance far more than MS has.
 
@slappy - agree in principle, without all the unnecessary emotion.

All this legislation is going to do is drive the industry as a whole to come up with better strategies to tie end users to bundled platforms.

The EU seems to love creating democratic legislation which often has the opposite effect by increasing beurocratic time-wasting and implying greater cost and effort on the part of the people they are trying to help. Nice on paper. Impractical in reality.

All the while China steams ahead...
 
It is an emotional topic :)
Dont worry, you learn to not take me seriously after a while.

Personally I dont think it has anything to do with competition so much as others trying to exploit MS distribution channels that they legitimately built up. Think about it, what better delivery service can you have than your competitors very own reputation.

And dont for one minute think that there is a little underhandedness going on here from the EC/Opera/FF/etc side.
 
chiskop said:
Apple doesn't have 95% market share. If they did I think they'd probably abuse their dominance far more than MS has.
Click to expand...

On this note. The market dictates product superiority. So in affect one could argue that these move are NOT in the best interest of the consumer. Cause by forcing a level playing field you are directly ignoring what the market wants.

Take MySpace vs Facebook. MySpace is the "only" (used loosely) community website. Facebook comes along, superior product, everyone jumps ship. When it comes to browsers fact is you havent given the consumer a compelling reason to change, so now you try stifel the #1.

Underhanded!
 
Last edited:
SlappY said:
On this note. The market dictates product superiority.
Click to expand...

Got to disagree there. This is only the case in a free market. When one company undermines another company's ability to compete then it makes no difference whether their product is superior or not. A good example is Eskom or Telkom, their product is clearly not superior, but their isn't an alternative at the moment.
 
porchrat said:
Got to disagree there. This is only the case in a free market. When one company undermines another company's ability to compete then it makes no difference whether their product is superior or not. A good example is Eskom or Telkom, their product is clearly not superior, but their isn't an alternative at the moment.
Click to expand...

No, nonsense. There most certainly is real competition in the browser market:

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

IE in total: 41%, FireFox: 47.7% ... Many people are installing FireFox despite having IE already installed.
 
That is for W3 Schools.

Globally their market share is over 20% - that is a huge cut for a browser that is predominantly downloaded in an aftersales fashion.
 
kingmonty said:
No, nonsense. There most certainly is real competition in the browser market:

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

IE in total: 41%, FireFox: 47.7% ... Many people are installing FireFox despite having IE already installed.
Click to expand...

How different would those numbers be if people were offered a choice when installing Windows rather than needing to download another browser after the fact?

It cannot be denied that what Microsoft is doing stifles competition. Having said that I don't think that just removing IE is an answer.
 
porchrat said:
Got to disagree there. This is only the case in a free market. When one company undermines another company's ability to compete then it makes no difference whether their product is superior or not. A good example is Eskom or Telkom, their product is clearly not superior, but their isn't an alternative at the moment.
Click to expand...

Well kinda proves my point since there are plenty of alternatives in the OS/Browser market. Yet MS is holding the reigns. They make a good product, people like it, they have no reason to change. End of story.

Simply put, they are outdoing everyone, and it isnt going down too well. Hence all these barriers. Yet despite the barriers, they keep on trucking and driving the market. I have said plenty of times in the past, the MS world is brilliant. Everything is seamless, integrated, scalable and serves EVERYONE. Where these other lot only target certain people. Mac targets neanderthals, Linux Targets More advanced users, PS targets hardcore gamers, WII targets recreational gamers. Open Office targets individuals. Novel targets business.

MS Targets them all and does a bloody good job of all of em. And all their products talk together.
 
porchrat said:
Got to disagree there. This is only the case in a free market. When one company undermines another company's ability to compete then it makes no difference whether their product is superior or not. A good example is Eskom or Telkom, their product is clearly not superior, but their isn't an alternative at the moment.
Click to expand...

A free market is determined by legislation. What consumers decide is based purely on how good your product is vs competitors. Telkom and Eskom are sheltered by protectionist laws. Therefore they don't operate in a free market. Consumers don't have a choice. The laws are changing for Telkom and competitors have arisen. Supply of a country's essential services are another topic.

I don't see any laws telling me what OS to install or what browser to use. Or any laws saying that another company can't compete with IE. Hang, people should be happy that they are getting any browser for free. That's only happened because Netscape and other browsers were free when it all began. That's because there's competition in a free market.

I agree with the example of MySpace / Facebook. If you don't like MS, buy Mac or Linux. If you don't like IE, use something else. If MS decided to offer Office for free tomorrow and bundle it with the OS, is that now illegal because it will compete with OpenOffice? How about when Apple reaches 51% market dominance... will they then need to unbundle value-added free software?

If the EU really wanted to give consumers a choice, they would separate bundling of OS with hardware so that hardware can be used by any OS. But then Apple's even worse than MS in that regard. Moving against Intel's anti-competitive practices were in the interest of the consumer. But I feel this move is a bit too much bandwagoning and not enough substance.
 
Last edited:
SlappY said:
http://mybroadband.co.za/news/Software/8421.html

I rest my case. This is a witch hunt.
Click to expand...

No, it's about MS abusing it's position int the OS market to force out competitors in other markets so that it can control consumers.

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?p=2873815#post2873815

So, do you REALLY believe MS giving to charity for every download of IE8 is got anything to do with altruism?
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10263790-56.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=BeyondBinary
 
Toby said:
They should make Microsoft Place links on the desktop that give you the option to download and install the browser of your choice.

Firefox at the Top and IE at the bottom of the List. The rest in the middle.

What is wrong with FTP to start the initial download. Remember it is available as a command from the "Dos Box" Command Window
Click to expand...

This is bullsh1t. They cannot be expected to promote other companies' browsers for free. :rolleyes:
 
Slootvreter said:
This is bullsh1t. They cannot be expected to promote other companies' browsers for free. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

At the same time Microsoft should not be allowed to use it's position of market dominance in the OS market to promote it's browser.

Personally I don't think there is an answer to this. Forcing MS to provide links to allow users to download any browser they choose would be ideal for me, but I can see why MS would object to it. At that point removing IE is just silly because it isn't very convenient to have to go to another machine, download the browser installer and then tranfer it to the new machine.

I do understand why the EU has it's panties in a bunch over this though.
 
Last edited:
porchrat said:
At the same time Microsoft should not be allowed to use it's position of market dominance in the OS market to promote it's browser.
Click to expand...

Who's choice/decision is it to release a PC with Windows on it? And I don't think it's using market dominance to promote it's browser. The browser is part of the package. But yes, people will always have issues because it's their worst enemy Microsoft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X