Mozilla Attacks Microsoft Browser Strategy on ARM
Uh oh. Déjà vu. Microsoft locks out competing browsers from Windows RT.
Mozilla says that Microsoft will only allow IE to run in Windows RT, the version of Windows that will run on ARM computers. The scenario is reminiscent to a time when Microsoft tightly integrated IE into Windows 95/98, which eventually led to an antitrust lawsuit against the company that almost resulted in the breakup of the company.
Only the "Classic" environment of Windows RT is apparently affected, but Mozilla cries foul and says that Windows on ARM, "as currently designed", does not allow user choice, "reduces competition and chills innovation." Mozilla's General Counsel Harvey Anderson noted in a blog post:
"Windows on ARM prohibits any browser except for Internet Explorer from running in the privileged Windows Classic environment. In practice, this means that only Internet Explorer will be able to perform many of the advanced computing functions vital to modern browsers in terms of speed, stability, and security to which users have grown accustomed. Given that IE can run in Windows on ARM, there is no technical reason to conclude other browsers can’t do the same."
Windows RT Classic is believed to be a heavily restricted mode, in which only Microsoft code can be executed. Given the target market of Windows RT and especially entry-level notebooks that may not include touch screen support that can run the Metro interface, software vendors such as Mozilla may, in fact, be locked out of a substantial market. Firefox product manager Asa Dotzler explained that a Metro browser "does not have the APIs necessary to compete with IE or any other modern browser. On x86, Microsoft has given browser vendors the same privileges and APIs that IE uses. They have not done this on ARM."
Mozilla's only opportunity to offer Firefox is as a Metro app in a sandbox and cannot access Win32 APIs. Only Microsoft will be able to access both Metro and Classic features on ARM, Mozilla said. As the entry-level notebook market is shifting, this could turn into a tremendous problem for Mozilla, especially if Google is gaining traction with Chrome OS and locks out Mozilla from running Firefox on top of Chrome as well.
Anderson said that Mozilla encourages "Microsoft to remain firm on its user choice principles. Excluding 3rd party browsers contradicts Microsoft’s own published principles that users and developers have relied upon for years. These principles represented a Microsoft market approach that was both notable and went above and beyond their DOJ antitrust settlement obligations."
Well... all i can say is, "It's about bloody time that something like this happened!" I'm sick to death of companies making software that doesn't follow the rules or leaves behind services after you un-install (I'm looking at YOU Chrome!).
Either way Firefox will still probably be available in a safe format and I've zero issue with this.
However... stuff like this makes for great articles that create spin
it's not the point that the user is too dumb not to use ie, it's the fact there will be no choice at all, they have a very good reason to be worried
"Extent of ban is unclear, but Google and Mozilla are outraged, say Microsoft is promoting a monopoly"
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=24661
It's merly based on the point that you have an OS "allow competition" or "it's closed system".
Apple introduced an "closed system" and didn't be beat to the death by lawsuit.
He also block application doing the same thing that his OS do.
Basicly any applications can be block because Apple decide to add a similar feature to his OS new version.
(It's why I hate so much Apple, that doesn't make sense to me.)
So did Microsoft can make a step behind and "closed a little bit more his OS" ? Surely.
DOJ can't do nothing in that, DOJ have to completely destroy the Apple model before doing something with this.
It's just bad that Mozilla get cut because Apple closed system and succes.
I stopped using Firefox anyways as its over-hyped by the vocal minority on tech sites. In fact Firefox for Android (while I tried to use it) was a disaster and worked like sh!t.
Is it just me, or this an example of why Microsoft won't really be able to gain traction in the tablet market? When they first announced the versions, I looked at a comparison sheet between all of them and noticed one major thing, the ARM (tablet) version of Windows won't support the x86 (PC) version and vice versa. This makes sense. For example, nobody expects software written for an iPad to work on a Mac or a PC.
The difference here though, is that Microsoft is advertising it as a full blown OS will all the capabilities you'd expect from the PC version. But if they don't allow access to the same APIs, users might get really frustrated and won't understand why an app that works on their PC won't work on their tablet which is supposed to be the same.
Perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe Intel will release chips that gain traction in the tablet world, making this a non-issue. I'm guessing though, that once again, Microsoft is failing in their training/marketing department, regardless of how good or bad Windows 8 really is.
Though Android allows it.
Not on their Chromebooks.
I use opera, but nice try!
Funny I use opera browser, your claim is not valid! I can also use firefox, chrome, opera, on OS X. Again your . . . um . . . false, wrong, not informed, wishful thinking.
So doed the iPad, great trolling though!
sorry