5punk

Thank you EU Regulators, you have broken Windows 7
It looks like the European Commission and Opera have got their way and Windows 7 will now ship without a browser installed in Europe.

It's fair to say that Windows 7 is now broken - Microsoft has said that its decision to ship Windows 7 without a browser installed means that it's no longer possible to upgrade from a previous version of Windows while keeping all of your settings, including your browser of choice. Instead, the European version (even the upgrade version) will require a clean install.

It's like a bad joke. It just isn't funny and is actually offensive. That the Commission think this is a good idea shows how far out of touch it is with reality in this instance.


Category: Blog
Publish Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:49:21 +0100
Read more...

Source: bit-tech.net Feed
Description: Computer hardware, games and technology reviews and news

That's just fucking inconvenient, anyone who wants to use Opera would probably download it anyway. Oh sorry, you can't download it because you don't have a browser?

Can I upgrade from my W7 RC version though? I'm starting to prefer it over XP (mainly because XP is making my speakers spazz out and I can't be arsed working out why).

.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .lol
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\

Also, if spazzes need a browser, how are they going to get a browser without one pre-installed unless there's a series of icons on install saying 'to get IE click here' and 'to get a.n. other browser click here'. everyone who has a clue will delete them and anyone who doesn't will just get IE, why? Because they know that the blue 'e' icon gets them the internet.

What a waste of fucking time!

And why exactly do ms have to suddenly conform when apple have produced an OS and browser twin for fucking ages?


Amblin, the problem with EC/EEC/EU is that we listen. A program on the telly not long ago showed that most of the bullshit is ignored by every country except us. We actually propose a lot of it, everyone votes and keeps their cushy mep life busy and then every other country ignores the new laws. It's our own fucking fault half the time. And Brussels IS a shit city, glass and metal and a total lack of charm.

They're bundling a disc containing IE with the European version of W7 which means, fucking nothing at all changed, except we have to do more stuff and we still need to pass through IE to get our favourite browser, a fact I've never had a problem with. I mean come on, it's like telling a pizzeria not to put their own kind of tomato sauce on the pizzas, instead supply it seperately from the pizzas - it works a little less, it's pointless and it's fucking frustrating.

It's not like I'm not sweeping Windows anyway...

I expect they'll keep the http rendering engine in anyway, so nothing at all will change, just some fucked up UI to get a browser.

.

The intricacies of the national fishing borders eludes me, but one thing I go suggest is that throwing away good fish is helping no-one.
By all means impose a penalty for over-fishing, but making fishermen throw away dead fish is pointless.

HereComesPete wrote:And Brussels IS a shit city, glass and metal and a total lack of charm.

LIES!!11!1

I don't know what part of Brussels you visited Pete, but the only bit that has an over-abundance of glass and metal architecture is the business district, and the part near the EU parliament.
The old part has architecture that is fairly unique to Western Europe, and still has most of it's 1920's to 1930's buildings in it's original state, including most of the buildings Victor Horta designed.

On the subject, I don't give two shits about what the EU does, as long as it doesn't affect my daily life.
Saying I don't agree doesn't solve anything anyway.

It was those bits I visited. Field trip for the porpoises of geography/business studies. Was boring so I just went the pub for the four days. I didn't even know there was nice bits, I'm disappointed I didn't just wander off into those instead. I shall endeavour to go again and avoid all the cocks in suits.

Mr. Johnson wrote:
LIES!!11!1

I don't know what part of Brussels you visited Pete, but the only bit that has an over-abundance of glass and metal architecture is the business district, and the part near the EU parliament.
The old part has architecture that is fairly unique to Western Europe, and still has most of it's 1920's to 1930's buildings in it's original state, including most of the buildings Victor Horta designed.

^ that

Mr. Johnson wrote:On the subject, I don't give two shits about what the EU does, as long as it doesn't affect my daily life.

the funny bit about that is the fact that belgium is probably the worst offender when it comes to "creatively ignoring" the rules that Brussels creates for the EU

surely though, you don't break an OS by shipping it without a browser do you? Sounds like MS just saying "well, if you insist on us shipping it without xyz feature then it's arse will fall off and the whole thing will just be shit and it's your fault so poo to you"

OTOH thinking about it the browser is kinda central to any PC in this internets world so perhaps you have a point.ooooh, I don't know

The problem of not shipping with some sort of browser, is that you lack the required software to actually get a browser.

And even if MS ship in on a seperate CD, people will have to install it, and most people won't understand why it's not part of the standard OS install anymore, and the vast majority won't change either once they've installed that OS.

The only way I can think around it would be a MS inbuilt mini browser which takes you to a webpage where you can chose a browser to use, but that'll run into it's own problems as MS will obviously put IE in big bold letters at the top of the page as the default option.

So why don't they ship with IE, FF and Opera?...

I honestly don't see why they should. Apple have never really been attacked for shipping integrated browsers. MS weren't attacked for years because their browser started off as a piece of shit. Finally they make something that works quite well for those that don't care too much and Opera types have a throwing dummies session because FF is the only one making any real gains on IE.

As I see it, it's not anti-competitive to ship a browser that ties in with an OS used by the vast majority of PC users, it's a continuing status quo that only superior products can affect.

The 'problem' of a browser isn't being solved with this it's being moved to the OEM's by this frankly pointless cry more session from Opera.

Given most people who don't give a shit/have a clue what browser they have are more than likely to be the pre-build, big name customer market then the fact that Dell, HP, Compaq, Acer et al are going to make a decision that aids their selling strategies means IE is pretty much guaranteed to continue to be shipped with Win7 because they're going to supply what their customer is used to. The only difference is that the OEM's will install it themselves and there will be an extra cd in the pile of cd's that arrives with the pc and gets bundled into a drawer.

FF have stepped out and said they don't want bundling with Win7 and they've said Opera can't say that market share is protected by bundling because FF market share is steadily increasing by taking IE users. More here about it.

tl:dr? Opera sucks opera maker people, make it better or get over it and stop being pussies.

HereComesPete wrote:As I see it, it's not anti-competitive to ship a browser that ties in with an OS used by the vast majority of PC users, it's a continuing status quo that only superior products can affect.

The tying was the issue, as there was no reason to do it other than to make IE a "required" component.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_%28commerce%29

Netscape was shit, there's doubt about it. But if they had been allowed to compete properly, IE would have had to continually improve to keep up. It's doing that now, but its unmoving years as market leader have hurt the web.

Opera introduced many of the ideas we now see in all browsers, such as tabs for one. They're understandably pissed that however many innovations they make, their main competitors eventually adopt them yet still lead them in market share.

It is about money, despite all browsers being free to the user, for example you make a tidy sum from Google for integrating their search engine - another thing Opera pioneered. Now Google have their own browser, that revenue may have decreased. Search engines means advertising and it means usage tracking and companies selling stuff will pay for those.

So why are Opera in last place, with a product everyone else wants to copy? Because people don't know about it. Firefox is trumpeted by all as a cross-platform product with huge third-party add-on support, Chrome has been advertised to buggery by Google plus having a wickedly fast javascript engine and IE...has been bundled with every Windows computer since Windows 95.

Are any of those methods fair? Opera has to pay for advertising, Chrome and IE don't. I guess getting your name in the press is a start at redressing the balance, even if it's in a negative way. But Opera are hardly the bullies in this market.

Imagine if it was the same with a paid-for product, like ISPs. There is a bit of this going on, with people feeling almost obliged to take their broadband with suppliers of other services like BT, Sky and Virgin. There's brand loyalty like Tesco, O2 and Talk Talk. But what if every copy of Windows came pre-setup with AOL, and it was a bastard to change or cancel?

Stoat wrote:Netscape was shit, there's doubt about it. But if they had been allowed to compete properly, IE would have had to continually improve to keep up. It's doing that now, but its unmoving years as market leader have hurt the web.

IE's based on Netscape, or an earlier copy of NCSA Mosaic on which Netscape grew from. Netscape shot themselves in the foot when they started talking about charging as well as becoming bloatware. The open-source elements of Netscape became Mozilla - awful at first - but became what we now know as Firefox.

True, they hammered it into place alongside office and the search functions of the OS to ensure it's pre-eminence. But for years no-one bothered to complain with any real effort.

I think this 'choice' is being forced on consumers who don't know enough and will consequently continue to use the browser they always have. It's nothing but confusion to those that don't care about the choice, because those that do are informed enough to make their decisions beyond any bundled software.

I don't like IE and I don't use it. But as for alternatives I'm not sure lots of choice would have helped. I think MS's greed actually stabilised the web and helped it's expansion. Their insistence on bundling this software with their OS meant exposure to billions of people.

Now of course it's stifling affect has hurt the internet for those that want it to be more free-form and see the rules of IE constricting and dulling the capabilities of the internet. But in the early days of the world wide web if not IE then what? A million different standards? A million ways of writing a web page? All of them incompatible with the other? If you didn't know any better would you regard IE as hurting the web? Would you even think about that at all?

Maybe consumers be forced to try opera, firefox and chrome? That proposition is worse than leaving people to sit comfortably in their ignorance or letting them look beyond what they use by themselves. It's going beyond tied selling into a pro-active effort to make people use unfamiliar products to their own initial detriment.

To the average uninterested party IE is a superior product to Opera, and FF's ability to be faster and to be tweaked to a very exacting and personalised set up means nothing to those that don't know.

IE is the beige box standard and I sincerely doubt 90%+ of internet users give a shit about this whole thing and will only kick up a fuss if they have to change OS and find there's no browser waiting for them.