Windows 7 minus IE

[I am Penguin]

Heh, maybe because WINDOWS had everything to do with the current incarnations of "desktop friendly" Linux Distros. I won't be surprised if those pet peeves [i.e. the DLLs] mysteriously find it's way on your Linux desktop too eventually .

Unfortunately as much as people like to push their Linux agenda, everyone on a PC STILL have a windows platform in some form [that includes you Wine-it-is-not-an-emulator people...check the DLLs on that thing ].

Instead of attacking Windows as an OS, people should attack the companies who is making the applications for Windows [and not for Linux] . The reason i'm not using Linux is not because of Linux [i found Ubuntu perfectly easy to use for basic stuff] , but because of all the stuff that is NOT on Linux, including an entire missing gaming platform. Even the whole entertainment [graphics engines/drivers] aspect was not fully supported until recent times....and you had to go through hell getting it to work only to realize there's nothing you can freaking do with it anyway.

I played World of Warcraft on Ubuntu, but it was a horrible inferior experience after hours of fiddling with settings, now ask Blizzard why don't they make a Linux version without DLLs instead of wondering how Microsoft got 11 million users from Blizzard alone?

Ubuntu is great "out of the box" , but the moment you get past all the "cool it got all these goodies right here on my desktop!" part and dig into it, you realize that "rich experience" is missing. You know, everything feels disjointed, not integrated, a zillion little lose apps that does not "quite" do what you could do in Windows......

You said it for me THANKS a Zillion!

 

[kingmonty]

Now there's a good argument. Windows ME was the slowest most unstable operating system I've ever used, therefore I conclude that Windows 7 is the same.

You're grasping a straws here. The early days of Redhat have absolutely nothing to do with the current versions of Fedora, OpenSuse, Ubuntu, Mandriva etc...

Perhaps you should look at your frame of reference, you might find it a bit outdated.

How is it outdated? Package managers today are exactly as a result of Linux application developers not building their applications into installers 10 years ago. This is due to many factors, not least of which the many differences that existed in distributions back then. Today package managers in Ubuntu, RedHat, FC, Mint, Mandriva, all of them are as a result of trying to ease the installation of packages and drivers and libraries for users (i.e. as far as possible to eliminate the need for users to install packages from source).

Even now with all the fancy package installers I still have to resort to installing from source from time to time. Most users will never need to resort to that. Good for them.

I don't get what you lot are trying to argue about: I'm merely pointing out that Windows OS's has used unmanaged Application Installer systems since pretty much the start, whereas Linux had to - through necessity - design a different model for application installation. RPM installation methodologies today are as a result of the way Linux applications were installed then. But as a Linux user over decades, I still think installing applications on Windows was easier than often was on Linux. Today it's a bit easier on Linux - provided the app is available as a deb/rpm/whatever package or in a repository that is maintained. But if the app ain't there, good luck to you if you have no clue on how to compile and install from a source tarball.

 

[d0b33]

The fact that people are comparing a free, Opensource OS to a corporate maintained closed source pricey OS says it all really.

I'll just point to my sig for those still blinded by their BSOD failure that happens now and again.

 

[PeterCH]

Or the peterCH Japanese version operating system, Sorry I mean the MacApple fanboi MacOSX system.

I love Windows because it works
I'd love Linux but its a bit of a drag to get used too.
I hate OSX because it was a rippoff from the start and never really got the hang of the market.

There is only space for one system in a persons life, time is a factor.

The man said it, someone give him a cigar.

 

[PeterCH]

The fact that people are comparing a free, Opensource OS to a corporate maintained closed source pricey OS says it all really.

I'll just point to my sig for those still blinded by their BSOD failure that happens now and again.

Windows is a dud. The problem is that it created this self-sustaining eco-systems of Windows-only techies who are possibly now a bit worried about their future? With the failing economy and Windows possibly going down the toilet in the future as corporates wake up to alternative systems, or maybe not.

 

[I am Penguin]

Windows is a dud. The problem is that it created this self-sustaining eco-systems of Windows-only techies who are possibly now a bit worried about their future? With the failing economy and Windows possibly going down the toilet in the future as corporates wake up to alternative systems, or maybe not.

OMG. He still is stuck on the failing economy. Microsoft will be one of the last companies to fail. Please check the Topic header and if you cannot contribute ON TOPIC, Back to your cage now.

 

[I am Penguin]

The fact that people are comparing a free, Opensource OS to a corporate maintained closed source pricey OS says it all really.

I'll just point to my sig for those still blinded by their BSOD failure that happens now and again.

Nobody does the comparing only the biased Linux fanbois and M$ haters!

 

[Sackboy]

It's human psychology. Most people are happy with the run of the mill standard item they're supplied with. Hence if they already have a browser, "WHY bother to get a second one? Won't it be confusing? Won't the fight over which one must start? Won't it destroy their PC? Won't it take up too much space?"

The EC originally wanted MS to allow multiple browser installs. I know it's not the best solution, but it's better than letting MS get away with what it was doing, short of breaking MS up or kicking them out of the EU. EC's action against MS is proceeding and possibly MS will be forced to allow for a multi browser install wizard OR may have to donate money to OEMs to allow them to create such code for users' PCs.

Peter, you don't seem to realise that it isn't only about an installed browser. I'm come across software that won't use anything other than IE.

 

[PeterCH]

Peter, you don't seem to realise that it isn't only about an installed browser. I'm come across software that won't use anything other than IE.

I'm sure the EC has looked into it.

First confirm for me, is Trident stripped out completely from this new MS actioned version of Win7 Lite?

Secondly, EC is taking corrective steps to rectify the damage MS has done.
They want to fix the artificial mess we now have, and level the playing fields for competitors.
EC never forced or asked MS to strip out the Trident engine. All they wanted was for MS to offer a way to allow easy install
of alternative browsers. Perhaps that means with IE another browser is installed or a Wizard pop-ups at the beginning, or the OEM
does that. I'm not familiar with the exact details of what's on the table but doing what MS did was certainly not an option the EC was entertaining.

Finally,
Maybe app writers need to change the way they write their apps?

 

[PeterCH]

OMG. He still is stuck on the failing economy. Microsoft will be one of the last companies to fail. Please check the Topic header and if you cannot contribute ON TOPIC, Back to your cage now.

I've contributed more On Topic comments in this thread than yourself.

 

[diabolus]

Oh, here's some star sarcastic comments from digg.com on this topic. I think it sums up nicely what's wrong with all this:

http://digg.com/tech_news/Windows_7_to_be_shipped_in_Europe_sans_Internet_Explorer

I'm hoping they go after calculator next, it's insane that Microsoft can push their proprietary calculator software on us. Microsoft is crushing other smaller companies trying to provide better, open-source, calculator solutions.


They should ship a totally striped down version of windows for revenge on the EU. No gui, just a CLI with piece of ***** programs a highschool C class made and released as open source. Just make it good enough to print "Brought to you by the European Union".

 

[Lino]

Those of you compalining how much you all hate Windows! Then here is an idea STOP using it. The linux fanboi's why are you in this thread? You do not use Windows and quite frankly this thread has nothing to do with you.

All most of you are doing is using this thread to spread anti Microsoft rubbish. Sure MS did a lot of terrible things, I do not deny that. However at the moment how many of you have actually used there newer products?

Use Active Directory there is quite frankly currently no alternative for it. The support on the Windows client systems such with XP, Vista and Windows 7. No other OS has the amount of commercial applications support for it.

Now removing the IE browser does seem logical, if the EU keeps on going on, I mean then they can stop using Windows altogether in my honest opinon. Now if I buy an OS that costs +-R1500 it better come with a web browser.

Yes users can install other browsers but they need a browser to be able to install another one. The next person who says its fine use a usb stick, go to internet cafe etc. You are not practical at all! WTF spend Rxxxxx on a PC but then you have to spend hours and hours more to get it working?

Please do not use the excuse of the OEM sellers will install one. Along with the other rubbish that slows down your machine before you buy it.

No people stay on topic and know what you actually talking about!

 

[Kloofvreter]

Now removing the IE browser does seem logical, if the EU keeps on going on, I mean then they can stop using Windows altogether in my honest opinon. Now if I buy an OS that costs +-R1500 it better come with a web browser.

Well said.

 

[porchrat]

I thought the point was that internet browsers are a separate market to the OS market. Because it is a separate market Microsoft is not permitted to use it's dominance in the OS market to gain an unfair advantage in the browser market. It stifles competition, when that happens legal action needs to be taken an exception can't be made for Microsoft just because the idea of an OS without a browser is silly.

Besides what is to stop Microsoft creating a small application that gets the latest URLs to all major browsers from an MS webpage and then offers those options to the user of the Microsoft OS?

IMO that sounds like a good way to handle it, unless of course I'm missing a crucial point. They don't need to ship Windows with IE and they are seen to be giving users an equal opportunity to choose a browser. Everyone is happy.

 

[kingmonty]

I thought the point was that internet browsers are a separate market to the OS market. Because it is a separate market Microsoft is not permitted to use it's dominance in the OS market to gain an unfair advantage in the browser market. It stifles competition, when that happens legal action needs to be taken an exception can't be made for Microsoft just because the idea of an OS without a browser is silly.

Besides what is to stop Microsoft creating a small application that gets the latest URLs to all major browsers from an MS webpage and then offers those options to the user of the Microsoft OS?

IMO that sounds like a good way to handle it, unless of course I'm missing a crucial point. They don't need to ship Windows with IE and they are seen to be giving users an equal opportunity to choose a browser. Everyone is happy.

That assumes that that computer has an internet connection...

The point of this is not separation of OS and browser, the point is that MS was seen as forcing their browser thereby stifling competition. The same applied to the media player. The original anti-trusts suits tried to force MS to remove IE from their OS, but as MS pointed out it was a vital part of their code stack that provided core functionality to the OS itself. The EU has been on MS's case since. Fine after fine and countless hours in EU courts and still they're on MS's case. Even removing the browser entirely will probably still attract the wrath of the EU.

 

[longboy]

How do I browse web?

 

[diabolus]

Oh for the Linux fanbois:

KDE : Konqueror
Gnome : Epiphany

...wonder a little about those applications. Try uninstalling that...

 

[Kloofvreter]

Besides what is to stop Microsoft creating a small application that gets the latest URLs to all major browsers from an MS webpage and then offers those options to the user of the Microsoft OS?

Why should MS market any other browser than their own? Nobody complained when they got FF with Ubuntu? Or Even this silly little Apple Safari that gets installed automatically when updated by Quicktime?

 

[porchrat]

Oh for the Linux fanbois:

KDE : Konqueror
Gnome : Epiphany

...wonder a little about those applications. Try uninstalling that...

I'm running Gnome and epiphany is not installed... how is that the same as IE?

It can be removed through a package manager.

Why should MS market any other browser than their own? Nobody complained when they got FF with Ubuntu? Or Even this silly little Apple Safari that gets installed automatically when updated by Quicktime?

Again, this isn't about IE, it is about antitrust. Those OSes are not dominant, they are not using their position of dominance in one market to stifle competition in another market. If they were dominant like Microsoft is, the same thing would be happening to them.

Keep in mind that I do not mindlessly support this EU ruling, just removing IE from Windows is not a solution to this problem. Every OS needs a browser. I am by no means a fanboi, I just think we aren't focusing on the issue here.

 

[Telkomisaloser]

You know.... Microsoft should just give the ability to uninstall Internet Explorer without causing any problems... That way everyone will be happy