Who wanna take a bet 90% of the OEM's will stick with IE.

I'm a ubuntu and firefox user, but this ruling was way unfair against MS, everybody else ship browsers with their OS

It's unfair for the people who make the os to put their own software in it? I still say the EU ruling is stupid as hell, it's like saying i need to promote Dryers ice cream in a cold stones ice cream parlor if you want that go somewhere else you have the option FF is bundled with Linux builds and mac lets sue them! where is the ie there, is it only fair play when you don't have majority control? If they want in they should have to pay not the other way around...

Is this really any different from how things already worked? I'm sure if Dell wanted to, they could uninstall IE from all of their computers and put on Firefox. The only difference now seems to be that they can request the OS without IE in the first place, at least in Europe, big whoop-de-doo.

But ya, I agree with sanctoon, this probably wont change the fact that almost every PC sold will still have IE on it by default. At least I really doubt that vendors will place multiple browsers on their systems. Grandma is going to be very confused as to why her computer has 2 or 3 different internets. The reason this whole mess is so stupid is that most people dont give a crap what browser they get, and the people who do care are the ones who already know how to download and install firefox or chrome.

So ridiculous but at least MS now has a viable way of dealing with the nonsense.

Bitchslap MS on its price increases and frequent OS lunches, not this crap.

That is funny. MS is playing victim. I have posted many times before, but media propaganda is much stronger. There is big difference between bundling and pre-installing a web-browser. As far I know none of Linux distribution are bundling Firefox. They pre-install FF. You can remove the FF and install whatever you want. I don't know about Mac OS X and Safari, but I suspect that you can remove Safari and put other browser.
MS is bundling their browser. All current versions of windows will break if you try to remove the IE and there are technical measures that prevent you from removing IE. This is called technical restriction and removing the shortcut does not count. There is also market restriction. You can not get Windows with out IE and you can not get IE with out Windows. That is why EU is taking the case. Now MS is playing politics and try to swing consumer/user opinion in order to win against EU.
Providing Windows without IE is step in the right direction, but the way MS is doing this only shows real motives why MS bundled IE on the first place.
The right solution would be. MS is offering only one version of Windows that can be installed without installing the IE, but IE should be on the CD. There should be Wizard Question during the install that states that if you don't install IE you will need to install alternate browser in order to browse the web. No ballot screen - this is crap. MS should not be forced to advertise their competitors.
Regard to OEMs they should get Windows and IE licensed separately. This will allow the other vendors to make a deal with OEM vendor to pre-install their browser along IE or exclusively, but this should be OEM's choice and MS should be prohibited from charging more for Windows if OEM vendor chooses to work with other browser.
I have to say that a bit sad that tech-savvy readers of TH are so easy to manipulate. MS is trying to play us. It is not the problem or question about pre-installing the IE. The problem is that MS is bundling IE in order to leverage their monopolistic position with OEM vendors and keep the other browser vendors away.
Sorry for using a little hard language, but this media propaganda is ridiculous.

Price doesn't increase really at all...Home edition cost me 200 dollar just about, vista home premium cost me 200 dollars just about, if i talk about inflation and how my US dollar is worth less then when i bought xp then it actually cost less, maybe...

SAL-e, you don't know what you're talking about.

Microsoft made Windows. It is their product. They should be able to ship whatever the hell they want with it. Don't like it? Don't buy it. Simple. Or hey, why not change browsers yourself like tons of people before me have said. MS is the victim here. The victim of their own popularity. More people use IE? Hey, maybe people like it. I sure do.

McDonalds is sure getting big. Maybe they should be forced to start selling Whoppers.

Yes I do, but you have not read my post in its entirety or did not bother to think about it. Yes MS is making a Windows.
Yes the can pre-install IE.
Yes if you like it, you are welcome, use it.
Yes MS should not be forced to ship other browsers on their Windows CD.
Yes MS should not be forced to promote other browser.

But If I don't like IE MS should not force it on me.
MS should allow me to remove it. IE is security problem for me and I don't want it on my systems. I don't want to spend every month of testing and deploying patches on product that I do not use.
I want to buy system from Dell or other vendor and I want to have option "Do not install IE".


And yes I want that too.
I want to open the OEM vendor's page select computer and click option "No operating system pre-installed"

Because you never had to deal with MS as OEM you are speaking like that. I have. As small shop I had to sign deal that prevent me from installing other OS in order to get OEM discounted price. Other wise I had to pay retail price of Windows. You can negotiate other contract with MS only if you running millions of dollars. Other wise it is take it or leave.

SAL-e, since I am on my work laptop, I cannot completley verify this, but you should be able to remove IE from Add/Remove Programs. Therefor your whole bundle vs pre-installed argument is irrelavent. But again, I can't try this out on my work laptop, so feel free to correct me if I am wrong. If you are correct, and Microsoft made it impossible to remove IE, then yes, I would suddenly side with the EU. But I don't think this is the case.

From now we will see application requirements:
Windows x or later + Internet explorer y or later.
instead of:
Windows x or later.

So people will be forced to instal IE one way or another, because lot's of applications use IE components to render web pages.
Even Winamp uses the IE rendering component for it's windows.
Lot's of help systems for various applications use IE to render their help manuals, etc ...

IE is not just a browser, IE is a also web rendering technology that applications can use, and many have been using. Besides why shouldn't they?

Anyway I don't want vendors to remove IE from new PCs, but to install alternate browsers by default.

That would be the only solution that would allow the users to choose the browser that they want. But apparently the influence of some may damage the users once again.

Apmyhr,
The "Add/Remove Programs" removes only the shortcuts from your desktop, quick lunch and "Start" menu. Take a look in the column how much disk space will be free if you used that option. It is 0K, because IE will be there. MS put this option in order to comply with other order from EU. I think EU commission was wrong with that order, but hey they are politicians.
You can verify my position by this experiment take a new disk install fresh windows. Then use Add/Remove and remove IE. Then run Windows Update and note that first patch offered to you would be "Cumulative patch for IE xxxx" Then go to Run... dialog box and type "http://xxxxx" and hit Run. Notice what is going to happen.
I have not done this on Windows 7. I have done it last on XP SP2 my trusted friend did it on Vista when was introduced. I have not done it on Vista SP1 or SP2. If you do try it on Win7 please let us know.
On Windows XP if you delete iexplorer.exe MS is going to put it back. There is a way to do it, but then windows will not start normally.

Better still:
No Win 7 at all in the EU.

That will expedite progresss the way we want it.

I'm a little more pissed off that windows is bundled with that useless Notepad program when I'd much rather be given the choice of installing OpenOffice, or Notepad++, possibly even the programmers notepad! Where is my ballot! Gosh... On a serious note:

1. Power User - Win, if there is a version of 7 that doesn't come bundled with IE, than IE will now be uninstallable.

2. Consumer - Win, they really don't care which browser is installed, as long as they can get to their facebook.

3. EU - Lose, they are never going to win. Isn't influencing which browser people use an act of anti-trust in it's self? If you have nothing better to worry about than an IE vs FF vs Safari vs Opera farce, maybe you should just dissolve into a useful form of government (yet to be discovered form)...

Seriously, maybe Microsoft should simply stop shipping Windows to the EU, and put a clause in the EULA forbidding it's use! Problem solved?

After this, the EU is going to say Microsoft should give users the option to select which calculator tool they want to use, as well as which paint software. Providing only the one they built (at no cost to the user) just doesn't seem to be enough.

This EU decision really doesn't pass the common sense test. The only way you could side with EU was if Windows actually prevented you from installing other browsers, but that is obviously not the case.

Not sure if this would be a good idea... but what gives EU the right to sue MS? If the EU doesn't like MS, then don't buy MS >> gosh, simple as that.

So it sounds to me like you made the decision on your own to use MS and Internet Explorer. You could always sell computers with Linux on them.

first fortune cookies, next the world! oops, this isn't the Chinese green dam story... looks like EU is own by China. Only one answer to the world's woes - tin foil hats - protects the noggin from alien thought control waves

I think in Europe they should leave the browser out entirely. Let the buyers go BUY a browser from someone else and install it. Of course not having a browser in the first place, they would have to buy the browser of their choice on CD and install it that way. Couldn't just download it like we can. Maybe the European customers would complain to their stupid officials.

With XP I don't think you can uninstall IE. I tried it with my laptop and Windows went on the internet, found IE, downloaded it and reinstalled it! I did this twice and it reinstalled twice, then I gave up and just ignored it from then on.

No, I was forced. My vision was and still is that my customers should use the best hardware and software to get maximum efficiency and profit. Some times it makes sense to use MS Windows, some times it is Linux or other OS. I want to provide the best service to my customer. Not like Mr. Tuan Nguyen who admitted here: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/a [...] ,7837.html that he was pushing HP products based on money paid by HP to his employer instead of offering the best solution for their client. Yes, I can make quick money that way, but I will lose my customer in the long run. I have small number of clients, but I have their trust and I never going to betray that. Many in US are speaking about honesty and go to church every weekend, but during the week they are forgetting everything. I am not and I don’t want to be a hypocrite.

Your customers wanted Microsoft, so you CHOSE to make that an option. If you felt that strongly about it, you had the option of not offering it.

I guess we have very different definition what "Choice" means.
My options from Microsoft were:
Option 1: You get OEM price for XP $89 and not sell PC with pre-install Linux or no OS pre-installed;
Or
Option 2: You pay full XP price of $199 when your competitors are paying $89.
So my choices were:
1. I would have to pay $110 MS tax in an attempt to provide my service to my customer and go out of business;
Or
2. Or try to stay in business and be prohibited of offering other solutions to my client when it makes sense.
You may see choice here, but I don't.

And we are talking about PCs around $1000. The profit margins were around 15% or $150. If I pay $110 to MS I will have about $40. How much service you can provide with that profit? Look around you. How many times you have been called by a friend about PC problem, because he/she can’t get his vendor to help?

I think the ballot screen would have been best, since now the competing players in the internet browser field can possibly sway computer companies to pick up their browser over others.

It would have been a better idea to just include all major internet browsers in the thing, and have a side by side comparison of all of them.

quick question... oem version, how the fu*k do you download a browser without a browser? hahaha.

This is exactly what they needed to. Sure they may have some fault in preventing IE from being uninstalled all these years, but it doesnt excuse the bully tactics that the EU is handing down to foriegn countries. And if anyone can stand up to the EU it's MS.

Who choses what third party software Microsoft must include with their OS? If you only include the "major" browsers, aren't you being "anti-competitive" by not giving a chance for the smaller browsers? If people suddenly chose between the top 4 browsers at start up, there is almost zero chance of the 5th major browser becoming well know at all, because now people have to reason to ever go browser shopping in the first place. Here in lies the flaw in this reasoning. You actually end up killing competition by doing this.

+1 for Windows. -999999999999999999 for the Eu. WHOS WITH ME?!?!?

There's not significant competition beyond the top 5 browsers for it to be considered any more anti-competitive than including IE with Windows. If they displayed the top 5 browsers available for download on the ballot immediately, they could easily just include a link to show all the other available browsers that are compatible with Windows 7 that don't have enough of a market-share to consider then significant players. If anything, it would help competition since most of those browsers are left completely unexposed anyway.

This ruling is useless. Microsoft bundles IE because its easy to use and works well with their websites/windows update/media player that they have. They don't bundle it due to "competition" and gaining a monopoly over the market, they bundle it because after 26 years of making operating systems its expected to come with windows.

So now how about safari? its only fair.

I'm wondering if there is other motivation by this ruling, perhaps europe is afraid of the microsoft monopoly and is taking that out in a negative way(the antitrust stuff)

We are arguing semantics here and I am playing the devils advocate.. You could always get out of the PC game altogether and never have to deal with MS in this situation again.. Im not saying thats the best thing to do, but its still a choice you have to make.. Just like ditching Microsoft completely is a choice, even though it doesnt make any business sense what so ever.