Microsoft Backs Down On Making IE8 Default At Upgrade

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Backs Down On Making IE8 Default At Upgrade

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Monday July 20, 2009 @12:44AM from the you-call-that-backing-down-huh dept.

Barence writes "Internet Explorer 8 will no longer replace the default browser when a user selects the 'Use express settings' option during installation. Back in May, Mozilla and Opera accused Microsoft of force-feeding users Internet Explorer 8 through the Automatic Updates process. The object of their ire was the 'Use express settings' option which automatically sets Internet Explorer 8 as the default browser. The option was already ticked when Automatic Updates offered users the choice to upgrade their browser. 'We heard a lot of feedback from a lot of different people and groups and decided to make the user choice of the default browser even more explicit,' notes Microsoft in a blog post."

160 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Browsers War by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 00:48 · Score: 0, Informative

If you don't use IE do not upgrade it and it won't change your default browser
1. Re:Browsers War by lordandmaker · 2009-07-20 00:51 · Score: 1
  
  That's been my plan thus far.
  
  I've no idea what it'll do if I upgrade to it, so I'm sticking with IE6 on my PC, and IE7 on everyone else's.
2. Re:Browsers War by IBBoard · 2009-07-20 00:52 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  And then you just leave yourself with outdated and potentially bug-riddled software still installed on your machine. The better option would be to remove IE completely if you don't use it, but that's obviously not possible ;)
3. Re:Browsers War by mlts · 2009-07-20 01:07 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  All my machines went to IE8, even though I use Firefox as my browser of choice. Three reasons:
  1: Security. You always want stuff that handles protentially hostile code as updated as possible. IE6 was made for the security threats of 2001. IE8 is made for far more current threats. Nothing is perfect, but IE has gotten a lot better as times have gone on. It has decent clickjacking protection, and seems to have had done a good job in standing up to NSS Labs's security tests.
  2: Features. Auto-zapping all history and cache, and InPrivate browsing make it decently usable for those sites which require IE, or don't work well with Firefox.
  3: Compatibility mode. There are some sites which still assume that everyone is going to be using IE6 for the forseeable future.
4. Re:Browsers War by Dotren · 2009-07-20 01:07 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  If you don't use IE do not upgrade it and it won't change your default browser
  Or you can update it and just be sure to uncheck the "default browser" option. I realize that not everyone knows how to do that but its not one of the harder things to change.
  I do find it funny though that all of these companies are essentially fighting over the users ignorant of how to do such things. I suppose it makes sense in a way, if you can snag the majority of these people, you'll have them for ages AND you'll never have to give them new features because they won't understand how to use them anyways. They'll be endlessly happy with whatever you throw at them as long as it doesn't complicate things any more for them and still lets them access the internet.
5. Re:Browsers War by L4t3r4lu5 · 2009-07-20 01:41 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  What the hell is this? A well structured, informative, and easily accessible statement of reasons why IE8 isn't rubbish? Clearly, you must be new here!
  
  Kindly fall into line behind the blind F/OSS advocates to add your X to the list of people who think Microsoft is bad like the rest of the sheep without considering any alternate opinion! Your valid reasoning is not welcome here.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
6. Re:Browsers War by Starayo · 2009-07-20 02:05 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  1: Security.
  QFT.
  
  I am finding I'm running into many applications that use embedded IE to access the internet. Two off the top of my head are Steam and Darkfall Online - Steam of course uses it for its store, community pages, and in-game overlay's web browser, while Darkfall used a horribly implemented system for its journal, clan pages etc.
  
  There are many others, and if you're using one which happens to stumble upon a compromised site you'd be better off with a newer IE, I'd think.
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
7. Re:Browsers War by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 02:11 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Since the "whoosh" meme is a bit played out, I'll try a different one: ::Toooooooooooooot::
  Hear that? That's the sound of you missing the boat.
8. Re:Browsers War by johny42 · 2009-07-20 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  What the hell is this? A well structured, informative, and easily accessible statement of reasons why IE8 isn't rubbish? Clearly, you must be new here!
  Nobody said IE8 isn't rubish. It's just better than IE6.
9. Re:Browsers War by RiotingPacifist · 2009-07-20 03:00 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  on wine AFAIK, you don't actually need to install IE to get steam working, there is some sort of hack to get it working using gecko! can this be done on windows? OFC if embedded IE uses IE6bugs then IE8 with compatibility mode is probably your only choice,
  
  --
  IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
10. Re:Browsers War by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 03:38 · Score: 0
  
  Nobody said Firefox isn't rubbish. It's just better than IE8.
  Fixed that!
11. Re:Browsers War by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 03:52 · Score: 0
  
  Jesus dude, take your meds. I think that your hate for MS is so strong taht you must have a secret gay crush on Bill Gates. Otherwise your undies wouldn't be in such a bundle.
12. Re:Browsers War by Bigbutt · 2009-07-20 04:02 · Score: 1
  
  Heck, I have applications on my machine that use IE as their display engine (I guess). So when IE gets upgraded, my scanner software stops working. Finally HP addressed it with a patch so it'd use IE 8 but it was annoying for a bit that I couldn't use the HP software to change the default settings.
  [John]
  
  --
  Shit better not happen!
13. Re:Browsers War by spectre_240sx · 2009-07-20 04:49 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, this just gave me an idea. Has anyone thought of creating a standard interface to speak to rendering engines for internal program use? This could rid us of a lot of pain if it caught on.
14. Re:Browsers War by shutdown+-p+now · 2009-07-20 06:48 · Score: 1
  
  on wine AFAIK, you don't actually need to install IE to get steam working, there is some sort of hack to get it working using gecko! can this be done on windows?
  There is a wrapper around Mozilla that exposes it via the same COM interfaces that IE provides for hosting purposes. It would be possible to use that, and write a simple stub DLL that would be registered for CLSID_WebBrowser (MSHTML), but would instead instantiate CLSID_MozillaBrowser (the wrapper). Once done, all applications on the system should pick the new engine. It would be somewhat more complicated to do this for specific apps only, but still possible if you intercept DLL calls using something like Detours, and look for and intercept any attempts to do CoCreateInstance(CLSID_WebBrowser). No idea if anyone actually tried, but it should be fairly trivial for anyone moderately proficient in Win32 development.
15. Re:Browsers War by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 09:02 · Score: 0
  
  Wow, resorting to homophobic bigotry. The truth hurts doesn't it?
16. Re:Browsers War by cbhacking · 2009-07-20 10:06 · Score: 1
  
  You can actually do it on Windows. MSHTML.dll (the Trident rendering engine) is the default rendering engine on Windows, but it can be replaced - pretty sure it's just a registry key. Of course, anything that relies on it actually being Trident will break - Steam on Wine is good (although not perfect) but there are other, much more painful examples - but it's theoretically possible.
  Wine implemented the Gecko "IE" feature because they needed *some* rendering engine, but they're working on a proper MSHTML implementation.
  
  --
  There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
17. Re:Browsers War by BikeHelmet · 2009-07-20 10:47 · Score: 1
  
  3: Compatibility mode. There are some sites which still assume that everyone is going to be using IE6 for the forseeable future.
  Short of rubbish sites that require ActiveX, I've found most sites made for IE6 render better in Firefox than IE8.
  I suppose that's why there is a compatibility mode. But to me, this isn't a positive I'd go around boasting about.
  I'm happy they finally got security "right". I'd lump it up there with Safari and Firefox. (though not Chrome or Opera, until it's proven itself for a while)
18. Re:Browsers War by BikeHelmet · 2009-07-20 10:49 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  And being clueless, they're far more likely to click on an advertisement, thinking it's a legitimate search result. Which company wouldn't want them using their own browser!? ;D
19. Re:Browsers War by L4t3r4lu5 · 2009-07-20 21:22 · Score: 1
  
  Wow, an AC fighting against himself.
  
  Get out more! :D
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
What crap... by tengeta · 2009-07-20 00:50 · Score: 4, Interesting

Mozilla can't complain, the last few times I installed Firefox it had an automatically checked box to make it default. Then again, they did complain with Opera, so some stupidity was due.

--
"They confiscated everything, even the stuff we didn't steal!"
1. Re:What crap... by hodet · 2009-07-20 00:57 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  ..and does it really matter? Anyone using Firefox or Opera will just click their Firefox/Opera icon like they usually do and be prompted to set it back. The rest of the world who don't know what Firefox and Opera are will continue to use IE.
2. Re:What crap... by EvilMonkeySlayer · 2009-07-20 01:09 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  That isn't what Mozilla was complaining about. What Mozilla was complaining about was that IE8 was being delivered as an automatic update, then when it prompts the user whether to use express or custom settings the user of course would deem it just an update and would of course select express not realising it sets IE as the default.
  
  The reason why it's acceptable that Firefox, Opera etc does this is because the user chose to download the browser. However, since MS pushed IE8 as a critical update through their automatic update service the user doesn't really have much choice. I accept the set as default using express if the user downloads IE8 as a separate download. But through an automatic update? No.
3. Re:What crap... by VGPowerlord · 2009-07-20 01:13 · Score: 1
  
  I'm lazy. My Windows menu (formerly Start menu) has my default Internet browser at the top, and that's what I usually use to launch it, rather than hunting for it on my Desktop or All Programs menu.
  It's a known location that's in the same spot regardless of whether I'm using XP at work or Vista/7 at home.
  
  --
  GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
4. Re:What crap... by lordandmaker · 2009-07-20 01:15 · Score: 1
  
  When you installed Firefox, you specifically sought out the installer, downloaded it and ran it. It's quite a reasonable assumption there that you'd like to use it as your default browser.
  
  This is not the case with routine system updates.
5. Re:What crap... by xouumalperxe · 2009-07-20 01:18 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  However, since MS pushed IE8 as a critical update through their automatic update service the user doesn't really have much choice
  It's slightly more subtle than that. A forced upgrade from IE7 to IE8 doesn't seem much of an issue to me. It defaulting to changing itself to being the default browser doesn't rattle me too much either (though it does annoy me). What really gets to me is the fact that such a huge change in user preferences is "hidden" behind a "use express settings" tick box.
6. Re:What crap... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 01:26 · Score: 0
  
  Well, laziness comes with a price. I guess you're paying it.
7. Re:What crap... by lordandmaker · 2009-07-20 01:33 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Well, laziness comes with a price. I guess you're paying it.
  
  Isn't half the point of a computer that you don't need to pay such a price for being lazy?
8. Re:What crap... by ElSupreme · 2009-07-20 01:34 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  I chose to update to Firefox 3.5, but I still wanted my IE8 as my default browser, but FF3.5 decided to take over the role. I wasn't asked, it just assumed. I don't see how this is any different. People you have to just stop bashing EVERYTHING Microsoft does. They do enough that is cause for alarm, but this just isn't one of them.
  
  --
  My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
9. Re:What crap... by lordandmaker · 2009-07-20 01:37 · Score: 1
  
  I've not used the FF3.5 installer, but the FF3 one had a checkbox in the installer for it. If they've dropped this for FF3.5, that's a Bad Thing IMO, but I don't think the design of the FF3.5 installer is something likely to gain much news coverage...
10. Re:What crap... by L4t3r4lu5 · 2009-07-20 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  Right click > Pin to Start Menu.
  
  Hell, you can manually drag the icon there if you're really that lazy.
  
  Remember, it's not being lazy to leave the icon where it is and work harder every time; It's being lazy to move to where it causes the least work.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
11. Re:What crap... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 01:57 · Score: 0
  
  Guess not.
12. Re:What crap... by Useful+Wheat · 2009-07-20 01:59 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "The reason why it's acceptable that Firefox, Opera etc does this is because the user chose to download the browser."
  You're using a double standard here. I downloaded Google Chrome so I could go and try it out. Give it the benefit of the doubt, and so forth. I didn't need it to be my default browser any more than I needed Opera to be my default browser when I decided to try it out.
  Certainly its easy to fix this. Most of the browsers will demand to be set as the default browser when you open them, but this is a conversation for the new and inexperienced users who don't know how to change that. If they did download Chrome (because Google is pushing chrome aggressively on every page) having it be the default browser could be a huge learning curve.
  Now, I'm all for making users learn something, but eventually they end up calling you on the phone and demand you make it work right.
13. Re:What crap... by billcopc · 2009-07-20 02:01 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  IMO, the reason why it's unacceptable is because this is a freaking upgrade. The preference is already set to whichever browser the user favors, why should it be reset ? The existing choice should be left alone.
  If it's a fresh installation, fine go ahead and toggle it by default, that's a good way to minimize user confusion ("I just installed Thingy 8, where the hell is it?"). If it's an upgrade, just replace those damned files and leave my settings the way they are.
  
  --
  -Billco, Fnarg.com
14. Re:What crap... by nschubach · 2009-07-20 02:05 · Score: 1
  
  I just right click pretty much anywhere and hit Firefox. Openbox is wonderful. I don't need to worry about pinning, plopping or any of that. ;)
  [though I will admit that it took a minute or two of my life to get it setup right, but now that's out of the way...]
  
  --
  Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
15. Re:What crap... by R.Mo_Robert · 2009-07-20 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  The difference is that Microsoft wasn't giving you an option. When you start IE 8 for the first time, if you choose "Express Setup" rather than "Custom," it makes IE the default--and not only does it not give you an option, it doesn't even tell you that it's going to make it default, either.
  This update addresses this issue by including a "Make IE default browser" checkbox right under the "Express Setup" radio button. It's still checked by default (as it is for most browsers), but at least you can't say you didn't know what you were getting into.
  For the record, you could always choose with custom setup, but that involves a way-too-long wizard asking you questions ranging from whether you want Suggested Sites turned on to if you want Bing as your default search provider (if not, too bad, we don't include Google by default, and you'll have to guess that "Google search suggestions," despite the odd name, is the one you'll want from our website). Most users won't bother with that.
  
  --
  R.Mo
16. Re:What crap... by socsoc · 2009-07-20 02:29 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  The problem is when I install an alternative browser to a non tech savvy's person's computer with it as the default and then automatic IE8 upgrade changes that setting, they may not notice. I am sad to admit that I know (older) people that honestly can't tell me what browser they are currently using and don't notice that suddenly the UI has changed.
17. Re:What crap... by WildStreet · 2009-07-20 02:35 · Score: 0
  
  This is the main reason I have never used automatic updates. I always click on "Custom". Might be a little paranoid or anal, but I like to see what I'm being delivered.
18. Re:What crap... by VertigoAce · 2009-07-20 02:51 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Under the "Use Express Settings" header it listed everything that would be set. One of the items was "Default Browser: Internet Explorer" (note that it only had this text if IE wasn't already the default). The IE blog has screenshots of this behavior: http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2009/05/01/ie8-installation-the-user-is-in-control.aspx
  Since that post was written, they've decided to move the default browser page out of the express settings and require users to make a choice (unless IE is already their default browser). You'll notice that the user really does have to make a choice as no option is selected by default (the 'Next' button is disabled until they choose 'Yes' or 'No'). Here's the IE blog post with screenshots of the new behavior, since Slashdot didn't link to it directly: http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2009/07/16/changes-to-ie8-s-first-run.aspx
19. Re:What crap... by plague3106 · 2009-07-20 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  There's an Internet icon that picks up on your default browser. That's the icon he's talking about. If he followed you're advice, FF would be listed there twice, which is a waste of space.
20. Re:What crap... by plague3106 · 2009-07-20 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  I think they did drop that, because I recently switched to IE8, but keep FF to make sure my web pages work with it. I remember having to tell it NOT to "ensure it was the default" and switch the default back to IE8.
21. Re:What crap... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 03:26 · Score: 0
  
  So, determining whether to use compatability view, or picking your search engine, or accelerators is perfectly okay to hide, but which browser is set to be default isn't?
  I'm sorry, but that's just stupid, and you're stupid for not clicking "show me all the options" tick box when you had the chance. Only an idiot goes by defaults. An idiotic idiot, at that.
22. Re:What crap... by bheer · 2009-07-20 03:28 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Ironically the media player wars were exactly about this. Real would become the default player for all sorts of formats, then Quicktime would, and so on. Someone must have learnt their lesson, because these days Real and Windows Media Player play nice, not too sure what Quicktime does (not installed it in some time).
  If the media player vendors can learn, why not the browser? And yes, I don't buy the argument that anyone downloading Firefox is looking to make it his default browser. I download Opera and Chrome onto new PCs too, I'd be pissed if I couldn't stop them from becoming my default.
  
  --
  Go somewhere random
23. Re:What crap... by Phroggy · 2009-07-20 04:02 · Score: 1
  
  If it's a fresh installation, fine go ahead and toggle it by default, that's a good way to minimize user confusion ("I just installed Thingy 8, where the hell is it?"). If it's an upgrade, just replace those damned files and leave my settings the way they are.
  IE can't be a fresh installation (on XP or Vista), because everyone already has IE installed. If someone has IE7 installed but never uses it because their default browser is Firefox, and one day they decide they want to ditch Firefox and switch to IE8, they should be presented with the option to make IE8 their default browser, even though it's technically an upgrade.
  However, until now, instead of asking whether you want to set IE as your default browser, the IE installer was instead asking "hey, do you want to just skip all these questions and set it up normally?" The fine print does tell you that this will include setting IE as your default browser, but it's easy to miss if you're not looking for it. Microsoft has decided to make that a separate question now, as it should be.
  
  --
  $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
  $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
24. Re:What crap... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 04:13 · Score: 0
  
  Right click -> Pin to Taskbar
  Then you can use WinKey + 1 to launch it..
  (W7 only though..)
25. Re:What crap... by CodingHero · 2009-07-20 04:14 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure QuickTime still forces itself to be default without ever giving you the option. I notice an iTunes update was available this morning so I guess I'll find out for sure when I go home tonight and install it . . .
26. Re:What crap... by pizzach · 2009-07-20 04:20 · Score: 0
  
  I chose to update to Firefox 3.5, but I still wanted my IE8 as my default browser, but FF3.5 decided to take over the role. I wasn't asked, it just assumed. I don't see how this is any different. People you have to just stop bashing EVERYTHING Microsoft does. They do enough that is cause for alarm, but this just isn't one of them.
  Seriously, I would bash Firefox if it did that to me too. I have never seen that happen though. Maybe you should submit a story so you can feel better?
  
  --
  Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
27. Re:What crap... by Ilgaz · 2009-07-20 04:28 · Score: 1
  
  Express settings are way more than browser, it is almost like a spyware install carefully hiding options.
  If you express install IE 8, you are basically owned by their Live services. Search, homepage, "look up", "blog", "look on map". All are Microsoft properties which are horribly unpopular compared to other options.
  It is way more than "default browser" setting. They really lost it this time since monopoly court is still watching them with EU guys are already on them.
28. Re:What crap... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 04:31 · Score: 0
  
  However, since MS pushed IE8 as a critical update through their automatic update service the user doesn't really have much choice.
  IE8 was not a critical update.
29. Re:What crap... by midia · 2009-07-20 04:48 · Score: 1
  
  So what will my options be in Google Chrome OS, and will changing the default browser be apparent?
30. Re:What crap... by yoshi_mon · 2009-07-20 05:25 · Score: 1
  
  Very true. I often have people who can't even tell what exact program they are using. This is while they are in said program. Could easily look up at the top part of their window and see.
  To such people it's just a sort of magic box that responds in a certain way when they push certain buttons in a certain sequence. No real thought involved just rote actions.
  
  --
  
  Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
31. Re:What crap... by Onymous+Coward · 2009-07-20 06:20 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  When you installed Firefox, you specifically sought out the installer, downloaded it and ran it. It's quite a reasonable assumption there that you'd like to use it as your default browser.
  I disagree. A browser installation or upgrade should always ask whether you want your default browser changed.
  I would expect Mozilla also to agree with this, so I doubt that other poster's claim that FF3.5 presumes to make itself the default browser and would like to see that claim substantiated.
32. Re:What crap... by Onymous+Coward · 2009-07-20 06:33 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Here's a logical fallacy for you:
  Puppy Mike is ornery, always causing problems. Puppy Moe is adorable, does many cute things and is very agreeable.
  Ornery puppy Mike shits on your carpet. "Bad puppy!"
  Adorable puppy Moe — whoops! — also shits on your carpet.
  You look back and forth between them, scratch your head, and declare, "You gotta stop bashing EVERYTHING puppy Mike does!"
  As if you wanted crap on your carpet at all?
  But given Moe's past performance, I'd be surprised if there were in fact crap on your carpet. So maybe you should post a story about it, as recommended.
33. Re:What crap... by ElSupreme · 2009-07-20 06:39 · Score: 1
  
  I am assuming Mike is IE and Moe is FF. I'll accept that.
  
  But this sort of thing isn't like shitting all over the carpet. It is more akin to farting. You shouldn't bash Mike for farting, you should bash him for shitting all over your carpet.
  
  And my story isn't story worthy. I fixed it in 2 seconds. Iam just pointing out that this isn't unusual behavior.
  
  --
  My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
34. Re:What crap... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 06:53 · Score: 0
  
  It's not cause for alarm, per se. It's just the basic fact that since Microsoft is a de facto monopoly (in this case) they are governed by law to (not) do certain things. Do you think it's good that Microsoft repeatedly breaks the law and gets away with it, or do you think they should be forced to follow it?
  Do please elaborate, if you respond.
35. Re:What crap... by shutdown+-p+now · 2009-07-20 06:56 · Score: 1
  
  What really gets to me is the fact that such a huge change in user preferences is "hidden" behind a "use express settings" tick box.
  Did you see how it actually looks like? It's not exactly hidden. It's right there for everyone to read, "Default browser: Internet Explorer".
  Of course, most users don't bother to read anything and would just click Next-Next-Next, but that is a very different problem.
36. Re:What crap... by danomac · 2009-07-20 07:40 · Score: 1
  
  I would expect Mozilla also to agree with this, so I doubt that other poster's claim that FF3.5 presumes to make itself the default browser [slashdot.org] and would like to see that claim substantiated.
  Well, a couple of days ago I upgraded my Firefox 2.x install to 3.5 (I don't use Windows that often) and it asked me if I wanted to make it the default browser. There was a checkbox (that was by default checked, but it may have been because my FF 2.x install was default? dunno) that I could have unselected had I wanted to.
37. Re:What crap... by bill_mcgonigle · 2009-07-20 09:13 · Score: 1
  
  What really gets to me is the fact that such a huge change in user preferences is "hidden" behind a "use express settings" tick box.
  I don't get this. 'Express Settings' means "I trust Microsoft to pick the best software update scheme for me." In this case, IE8 is probably better for more users than IE7 is.
  You have to cede some control to get everything taken care of for you.
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
38. Re:What crap... by mangobrain · 2009-07-20 09:46 · Score: 1
  
  "I trust Microsoft to pick the best software update scheme for me."
  Gah! The entire point of this is that if you've installed an alternative browser, and set it as your default, it might be precisely because you *don't* trust everything coming out of Microsoft.
  
  IE8 is probably better for more users than IE7 is.
  Yes, IE8 is undoubtedly better than IE7, but what if IE7 wasn't your default browser beforehand? The update process doesn't account for whether or not your current default is a version of IE. The problem isn't forcing people to go from IE7 to IE8, it's about Microsoft "upgrading" people from (for example) Chrome to IE8.
  FWIW, if IE was the default before the update, the process would simply not have to change the default, because IE8 *replaces* earlier versions. So the simplest thing to do from the very start would have been to make an installer that just leaves the current default alone.
39. Re:What crap... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 09:53 · Score: 0
  
  You're using a double standard here. I downloaded Google Chrome so I could go and try it out.
  Of course not it is not double standard. The user does need to have ever wanted to try IE8, and yet this upgrade *of the operating system* defaulting to making IE8 the default will be forced onto him.
  Furthermore, a user that made the effort to download a 3rd party browser is much more likely to be able to make his choice and go back to another default browser.
  On the other hand, the vast majority of clueless ones, that had FF installed by someone else for example, will get back to IE8 without even realizing what happened, never able to go back to FF or anything else ... This is just usual Microsoft monopoly abuse.
40. Re:What crap... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 10:01 · Score: 0
  
  Who are the idiots who moderated this stupid argument "insightful" ? Idiots, or rather, shills should I say ? Lately on Slashdot, I notice more and more stupid pro Microsoft posts, with flawed logic, getting highly moderated.
  Failing to see the double standard here (when comparing an upgrade of the operating system, with an installation of a willingly installed software) is either being idiotic, either being paid to be blind.
  And I'm not speaking about the poster, but about the moderators ; there always will be idiotic poster, or just people writing a comment without thinking long enough. The fact that their argument get moderated high is what is clearly twisted.
41. Re:What crap... by bill_mcgonigle · 2009-07-20 10:09 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, IE8 is undoubtedly better than IE7, but what if IE7 wasn't your default browser beforehand?
  Well, my reply was specifically to a comment that had conceded that point, so you have to take it in context
  But, to whit, it's distasteful, for sure, but who is this going to affect? Pretty much only somebody who has no idea he's using Firefox and doesn't care, right? "Microsoft has no class", we knew that, but what's the actual harm - that users have to click "OK" when Firefox asks them again, right?
  I don't use Windows, but I think there's some value in a fox acting like a fox, so you aren't mistakenly lead to the complacent belief that he's really a funny-looking rooster.
  (Please excuse the namespace collision between the metaphor and the software at hand.)
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
42. Re:What crap... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 10:16 · Score: 0
  
  Not really hidden, they give you the choice of the defaults or ala carte. If you don't read the options (its not like they are hidding it in a locked file drawer in a disused lavoratory in the basement with no working lights and guarded by a tiger) then it sets it as it the same as when you first start up windows. People who don't understand computers won't notice or care because they never changed it to begin with. And people who do will start up their regular browser and click the button to reset as default. And people who really care are always going to use custom settings anyway.
  This is a whole lot of noise about absolutly nothing.
43. Re:What crap... by BikeHelmet · 2009-07-20 10:52 · Score: 1
  
  But you downloaded it manually, correct?
  Automated updates are not supposed to change settings, but installing can. Your beef would be valid if every Firefox patch set it to be the default browser, even when IE8 was.
44. Re:What crap... by BikeHelmet · 2009-07-20 10:54 · Score: 1
  
  Certainly its easy to fix this. Most of the browsers will demand to be set as the default browser when you open them, but this is a conversation for the new and inexperienced users who don't know how to change that. If they did download Chrome (because Google is pushing chrome aggressively on every page) having it be the default browser could be a huge learning curve.
  Chrome never set itself to be the default browser, for me? I couldn't even get it to set itself to open .html files, when I wanted it to.
45. Re:What crap... by BikeHelmet · 2009-07-20 10:56 · Score: 1
  
  If the media player vendors can learn, why not the browser? And yes, I don't buy the argument that anyone downloading Firefox is looking to make it his default browser. I download Opera and Chrome onto new PCs too, I'd be pissed if I couldn't stop them from becoming my default.
  You can stop them from becoming default. You uncheck a box.
  Most browsers assume you want it to be the default when you install it. That's fine - they all seem to do it. This same behaviour is not fine, when it's merely applying a patch or upgrade.
  If I upgrade from FF3 to FF3.5, and Opera is my default browser, Opera should remain my default browser. This is where Microsoft messed up.
46. Re:What crap... by Bungie · 2009-07-20 13:57 · Score: 1
  
  Gah! The entire point of this is that if you've installed an alternative browser, and set it as your default, it might be precisely because you *don't* trust everything coming out of Microsoft.
  If I click Next through the Firefox setup it pisses me off because it added an icon to the desktop that I didn't want. Most users who click through the install probably find it makes FireFox more accessible. I've setup the shortcuts on my desktop myself and since I don't trust Mozilla to manage my destop, they should remove that option for everyone.
  
  --
  The clash of honour calls, to stand when others fall.
47. Re:What crap... by Bungie · 2009-07-20 15:20 · Score: 1
  
  On the other hand, the vast majority of clueless ones, that had FF installed by someone else for example, will get back to IE8 without even realizing what happened, never able to go back to FF or anything else ... This is just usual Microsoft monopoly abuse.
  Of course the majority of those clueless people were only using FF because it was forced on them by the guy who installed it. If they don't notice the change it's because they just want to browse the web and don't care what they use. They probably did not choose to run Firefox in the first place.
  
  --
  The clash of honour calls, to stand when others fall.
48. Re:What crap... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 16:12 · Score: 0
  
  I chose to update to Firefox 3.5, but I still wanted my IE8 as my default browser, but FF3.5 decided to take over the role. I wasn't asked, it just assumed. I don't see how this is any different. People you have to just stop bashing EVERYTHING Microsoft does. They do enough that is cause for alarm, but this just isn't one of them.
  Bashing microsoft is quite a legitimate business. I make money off Microsofts' misgivings. It keeps me in a good job.
49. Re:What crap... by xouumalperxe · 2009-07-20 20:46 · Score: 1
  
  We're talking about delivery as a freaking system update. Not as a standalone. Also, "Default Browser" is "hidden in plain sight" if you will. It's next to last item on that list (dead last would be more noticeable), everything else in that list is a setting about Explorer itself, and the reasonable expectation is that a system update won't change your default software of choice.
50. Re:What crap... by notrandomly · 2009-07-21 01:58 · Score: 1
  
  Does Google Chrome OS have a dominant market share? Actually, has Google been convicted of engaging in anti-competitive practices with Chrome OS?
51. Re:What crap... by notrandomly · 2009-07-21 02:00 · Score: 1
  
  You have to specifically download and install Firefox, and Mozilla has not been convicted of anti-competitive practices, unlike Microsoft.
52. Re:What crap... by midia · 2009-07-21 03:32 · Score: 1
  
  Well we certainly don't want Google to go afowl of the law in the future, now do we? I am confident that Google will not create a browser-based operating system where the browser is claimed to be intergrated into its systems like Microsoft has.
53. Re:What crap... by Onymous+Coward · 2009-07-21 05:36 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, this is probably what they experienced. They probably zoomed past the dialog and didn't realize it.
  Maybe it would be better to have the dialog require the user think. Two buttons to progress to the next screen, "make default browser" and "don't make default browser".
  It seems that's really pushing it, though. How many dialog boxes does the user have to fiddle with anyway? If four or less, they can pay enough attention to handle this one dialog.
54. Re:What crap... by Onymous+Coward · 2009-07-21 05:47 · Score: 1
  
  And my story isn't story worthy. I fixed it in 2 seconds. Iam just pointing out that this isn't unusual behavior.
  I'd say you put yourself in a position of responsibility to post a story after libeling Firefox. Especially since you haven't recanted.
  Most likely you ran past the dialog that prompts you about taking the browser as a default.
  But as far as farting v. shitting, sure, that's a better analogy. The thing you have to keep in mind that Mike farts a lot. At some point you gotta reconsider having Mike around.
  Or you run a risk of detonation.
55. Re:What crap... by notrandomly · 2009-07-21 20:26 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  Bundling a browser isn't illegal. What's illegal is to leverage your dominance in one market to prevent competition in a different market. Should Chrome OS ever become the dominant operating system, Google will of course have to pay careful attention to what they are doing to avoid breaking the law.
56. Re:What crap... by Onymous+Coward · 2009-07-23 06:06 · Score: 1
  
  Most likely you ran past the dialog that prompts you about taking the browser as a default.
  Yep.
  I did the FF3.5 install last night. The very first dialog prompts for whether you want the browser to be the default.
  So, no, it's not simply that your story isn't worthy. It's just a lie. A +5 Interesting lie.
  I'm reminded of why online forums suck.
Common sense by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 00:52 · Score: 1, Interesting

By selecting "Express settings" the user is saying to the vendor: "Yes, I want to you use any settings you consider to be the best for me."
You give the vendor a blank statement. Microsoft wouldn't have to bother changing the default. They are actually quite kind to Mozilla, Opera and Safari there.
The first thing I do by Kokuyo · 2009-07-20 01:02 · Score: 1

when installing a new system, be it server or my own machine, is to hide IE7+8 from the listed updates.
Of course with Windws 7 I've had no choice ;)
1. Re:The first thing I do by recoiledsnake · 2009-07-20 02:56 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  You're opening yourself up to vulnerabilities in the browser control used by various programs like Winamp, RealPlayer etc. What's so bad about keeping IE up to date while you use your favorite browser? I bet millions of geeks do that with no problem.
  
  --
  This space for rent.
What? by Rennt · 2009-07-20 01:07 · Score: 4, Insightful

Surely the problem was that the update changed the default browser, not that it upgraded the non-default one.
Usually Microsoft's actions are fairly transparent, but I really can't understand what they are trying to achieve with this policy
1. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 01:13 · Score: 0
  
  I doubt that it's really any policy. Checking "Use express settings" just installs with all of the default options selected so that the user doesn't have to go through them one by one. The problem is that the check box to set Internet Explorer to be the default browser, if it isn't already, was the default option, as it is with every other browser when you first install it, but since the user checked to not be bothered to see any of the settings the user is not made aware of this. Checking the "Use express settings" check box is the equivalent of hitting "Next,Next,Next,Finish" for any browser.
2. Re:What? by nschubach · 2009-07-20 02:08 · Score: 1
  
  Personally, I don't see why an application is setting itself as the default anyway. That should be left up to the user and the OS.
  
  --
  Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
3. Re:What? by Phroggy · 2009-07-20 04:09 · Score: 1
  
  Personally, I don't see why an application is setting itself as the default anyway. That should be left up to the user and the OS.
  Originally it was done as a convenience, because most users didn't know how to set it in the OS settings, and it's somewhat cumbersome to do anyway. Many apps have a "set me as default" option.
  Then Apple stupidly decided every application should expose this system-wide preference in the application's own preferences dialog, and the system-wide preference option should be removed entirely. Until other browser manufacturers caught up, this meant that in order to choose something other than Safari as your default browser on Mac OS X, you had to launch Safari, open its preferences, and select your preferred browser there. Ditto for Mail. I can't imagine what they were thinking. Unfortunately everybody else will probably try to copy this.
  
  --
  $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
  $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
4. Re:What? by bhtooefr · 2009-07-20 11:43 · Score: 1
  
  Apple just stole that bit of awesome usability from KDE (same place they got WebKit, for that matter,) where to get KDE apps to respect your choice of default browser, I recall having to set Opera (my browser of choice) as the default browser in Konqueror...
5. Re:What? by Phroggy · 2009-07-20 12:46 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, I was thinking there was somebody else doing the same thing, but I didn't realize Apple copied it from them. How disappointing.
  Interestingly, this functionality on Mac OS was originally not part of the OS; it was provided by a third-party application called Internet Config. It became a de-facto standard, and most applications supported it, even though the OS itself offered no means of selecting default applications for anything. Apple started bundling Internet Config with Mac OS, then wrote their own front-end to it that they included as part of Mac OS 8.5. Mac OS X now implements the IC API as a front-end for various native services and whatnot, but there is no centralized GUI.
  
  --
  $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
  $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Only for legal reasons by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 01:11 · Score: 0

With all the anti-trust stuff happening in the US and Euro-zone, it wasn't the user feedback that caused Microsoft to change this. It was their lawyers. Microsoft is just trying to save face by implying that user feedback was involved.
Not Uncommon by kevinNCSU · 2009-07-20 01:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

Good, I hate when installers and update utilities hide crap like that behind "express" or default settings. It's by no means a Microsoft-only trick though, the one I find most annoying is AIM's attempt to install all sorts of toolbar crap hidden behind a default checkbox so you have to uncheck two levels of things to stop it. Even Mozilla does this to some extent to set itself as default, the only difference is anyone who's installed Mozilla probably actually WANTS it to be default, whereas with IE you'll have it rather you want it or not.
1. Re:Not Uncommon by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 01:46 · Score: 0
  
  This is one of the reasons I mostly stick to Linux and all its free software. It's less annoying. The marketroid speak would be "more user-centric" or "customer-focused". Everything's about you and the usefulness of the software, not about some company wanting to push their wares any way they can. It's less of a problem on Mac, but on Windows everything seems doomed to end up being bloated and/or installing an IE toolbar or some other spyware. You have to keep a constant vigil on Windows... it's really quite unpleasant because of that.
2. Re:Not Uncommon by Bigbutt · 2009-07-20 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  Same with Java or Adobe and the Yahoo! toolbar.
  [John]
  
  --
  Shit better not happen!
3. Re:Not Uncommon by shutdown+-p+now · 2009-07-20 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  Good, I hate when installers and update utilities hide crap like that behind "express" or default settings.
  
  Please look at the screenshot of the dialog in question before judging. Would you still say that it's "hidden behind express" after seeing how it actually looks?
4. Re:Not Uncommon by cbhacking · 2009-07-20 09:58 · Score: 1
  
  If you'd actually looked at the behavior, you'd see that it tells you the changes that will be made by the "Express Settings" option. You also must explicitly select that option before continuing - the dialog box's "Next" button is disabled until you choose Express or Custom settings. If you cancel the dialog, no settings are changed (meaning a lot of the new features in IE8 don't do anything, since it will use the settings from your old version). This is actually behavior that a lot of other installers should emulate, not that we should complain about.
  That said, if the user had previously selected another default browser and had turned off the option to have IE check whether it is default at start, then the "Express Settings" probably shouldn't assume that the user has changed his or her mind.
  
  --
  There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
A Negative Slashdot Article About Microsoft? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 01:17 · Score: 0

I never thought I'd see the day.
What makes a monopoly? by Cougem · 2009-07-20 01:20 · Score: 0, Flamebait

I understand the idea - microsoft can't push IE8 like Apple push Safari because they have a monopoly. I understand why that's good, it's not what I'm asking.

What I'm asking is this: What makes it a monopoly?

I guess Microsoft is the biggest OS retailer on computers, but what's a computer? Surely to count that we have to exclude 'computers' like Xboxes, PS3s, Wiis, and other such computers which run with different hardware and things? If we did not fudge it this way then Microsoft would not have a monopoly. But then why can we not consider Apple computers separately? Apple computers have a different sort of architecture to normal PCs - it's a huge effort to install windows on them without bootcamp for example - so surely Apple have a monopoly on Apple computers, and their pushing of Safari is a bit unethical?

But what about MP3 players? I confess I do not know the figures for sure, but when I walk down the street it seems 90% of portable music players are iPods. To use an iPod you realistically HAVE to use iTunes, they are pushing this piece of software through their hardware. And then with THAT they push Safari etc. too.

How are Apple not abusing monopoly laws with iPods? I don't understand.

Any lawyers about?
1. Re:What makes a monopoly? by lordandmaker · 2009-07-20 01:30 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  What I'm asking is this: What makes it a monopoly? I guess Microsoft is the biggest OS retailer on computers, but what's a computer?
  
  Biggest OS retailer on PCs. Ignoring the notion that a mac isn't a PC (are modern 'PCs' any closer to an IBM PC than a wintel mac?), MS do have the vast bulk of the market on desktop and laptop personal computers.
  This is where they have a monopoly. The issue, in general, though, is less that they have the monopoly than that they abuse the fact they have one.
  
  But what about MP3 players? I confess I do not know the figures for sure, but when I walk down the street it seems 90% of portable music players are iPods.
  
  In my experience it's far closer to 50%. But, again, I've no idea of the true figures.
2. Re:What makes a monopoly? by RedK · 2009-07-20 01:42 · Score: 1
  
  How much were you paid for your post ? Seriously, the question of wether Microsoft is or isn't a Monopoly was put to rest 10 years ago.
  
  --
  "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
  Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
3. Re:What makes a monopoly? by hawkinspeter · 2009-07-20 01:45 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  What Microsoft is doing wrong is abusing a monopoly in one market to gain dominance in another market. That is what is illegal. Just having a monopoly isn't illegal - it's the abuse of it that is wrong. Apple aren't abusing their monopoly on iPods to gain a market.
  
  --
  You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
4. Re:What makes a monopoly? by marsdominion · 2009-07-20 01:55 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  While neither a lover of Microsoft or Apple, calling Apple a monopoly is simply ludicrous. They hold about 3% of the global PC market (~7.7% in the US), 1% of the global cell phone market, and by some estimates about 23% of the Personal Digital Music Player market (Source: http://tinyurl.com/nm3m4n). Certainly not a monopoly in any of the markets. Microsoft on the other hand has ~90% global market share.
  As far as why Apple is not abusing monopoly laws with their iTunes software as it relates to the iPod, for the same reason that Blackberry's and Palm's software does not abuse monopoly laws for connecting to their devices.
5. Re:What makes a monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 02:00 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  apple absolutely has used their "monopoly" on ipods to gain a market. In this case it's online distribution of music.
  Apple and toyota seem to have a halo around them, they are still publicly traded corporations, and at their core are just the same as MS or any other business.
6. Re:What makes a monopoly? by RedK · 2009-07-20 03:24 · Score: 1
  
  Except the iTunes Music Store isn't the only game and neither is the iPod. Amazon and Wal-mart have music stores that sell DRM-less music too. Also, the iPod isn't the only game in town either. There are tons of MP3 players in the market. Basically, Apple isn't stiffling competition in the Market, like Microsoft has done. It's not illegal to have a monopoly, it's illegal to abuse it.
  
  --
  "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
  Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
7. Re:What makes a monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 04:02 · Score: 0
  
  There is nothing wrong with having a monopoly. The problem is when you use that monopoly to try and force the competition out.
8. Re:What makes a monopoly? by UnknowingFool · 2009-07-20 04:09 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I guess Microsoft is the biggest OS retailer on computers, but what's a computer? Surely to count that we have to exclude 'computers' like Xboxes, PS3s, Wiis, and other such computers which run with different hardware and things?
  Remember "monopoly" does not mean "highest marketshare." per se. From dictionary.com:
  
  1) exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices.
  
  MS has a monopoly (as determined by a US court) on OS for Intel X86 computers (PCs). The commodity is PCs. In this case, MS has control over the OS that runs on most PCs which are made by others. Apple only has control over the products that they created which isn't a monopoly.
  
  I guess Microsoft is the biggest OS retailer on computers, but what's a computer? Surely to count that we have to exclude 'computers' like Xboxes, PS3s, Wiis, and other such computers which run with different hardware and things? If we did not fudge it this way then Microsoft would not have a monopoly.
  
  It's not a fudge. The term "PC" means a very specific thing. PC does not mean anything with a computer in it. In the case of MS, they have a number of different businesses. They have a monopoly in OS for PCs not in their consumer products division.
  
  But then why can we not consider Apple computers separately? Apple computers have a different sort of architecture to normal PCs - it's a huge effort to install windows on them without bootcamp for example - so surely Apple have a monopoly on Apple computers, and their pushing of Safari is a bit unethical?
  
  This is not sound logic. A company can have a monopoly in their product. That's perfectly legal. Would you charge Dell with a monopoly on Inspiron PCs? It's their product.
  
  But what about MP3 players? I confess I do not know the figures for sure, but when I walk down the street it seems 90% of portable music players are iPods. To use an iPod you realistically HAVE to use iTunes, they are pushing this piece of software through their hardware. And then with THAT they push Safari etc. too.
  How are Apple not abusing monopoly laws with iPods? I don't understand.
  
  Certainly Apple has the largest marketshare but one does Apple have exclusive control of the MP3 player market? Is it the only player? Do realistic alternatives exist? Are the barriers to market entry sufficiently high enough to prevent competition? One visit to BestBuy and you can see that there exists many different direct competitors to iPods. Also remember, Apple iPods play MP3s and AACs which can be played on any other player. Their DRM'ed Fairplay files from iTunes cannot be played; however, Apple gives customers the option to decide between DRM and non-DRM when purchasing music from iTunes. On the other hand, how many alternatives can you get for your OS at BestBuy if you buy a desktop? If you don't buy Apple, you only get Windows.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
9. Re:What makes a monopoly? by KingMotley · 2009-07-20 06:32 · Score: 1
  
  I would say that Apple is stifling competition pretty well. They have tied their iPod/iPhone to different markets like their music store, a media player, and cellular carrier. Yes, there are alternatives, but the alternatives make up such a small market share, that it effectively gives Apple monopoly wielding power.
10. Re:What makes a monopoly? by hawkinspeter · 2009-07-20 06:47 · Score: 1
  
  Again - it's not having monopoly wielding power that's illegal, it's abusing it that's wrong. AFAIK Apple haven't abused any of their monopolies (although I don't think Apple really have a monopoly in any of their markets - there's decent alternatives to everything they sell). By the way, I'm not an Apple fan myself, I've never bought anything Apple as I think their stuff is overpriced.
  
  --
  You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
11. Re:What makes a monopoly? by KingMotley · 2009-07-20 07:48 · Score: 1
  
  Using a monopoly in one domain to influence another is considered "abuse". As iPods (hardware) is influencing cellular carriers (AT&T), Media Players (iTunes), and music sales (iTunes store) they most certainly have been abusing their monopoly power.
12. Re:What makes a monopoly? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 08:38 · Score: 0
  
  Hmm... Can my iPod sync with Winamp? Or any third party player?
13. Re:What makes a monopoly? by RedK · 2009-07-20 11:01 · Score: 1
  
  Except iPods aren't in a monopoly situation. There is plenty of healthy competition in that market. The iPhone isn't either, nor is iTunes or the iTunes music store. In that scenario, it isn't illegal to leverage one product in order to make inroads in another market.
  
  --
  "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
  Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
14. Re:What makes a monopoly? by mgblst · 2009-07-20 11:16 · Score: 1
  
  What I'm asking is this: What makes it a monopoly?
  Fuck off, if you are really interested in this there are numerous resources on the internet explaining it in great detail.
  You might as well come here asking about the moon landing...
  Go back to neowin...
It's a positive article about Microsoft you fool by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 01:27 · Score: 0

It is an article explaining that Microsoft listened to people and then did the right thing. They didn't have to.
Oh, and incidentally, I am not surprised that it is on Slashdot.
Why is that mentioned Blog-Post not linked. by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 01:27 · Score: 0

Even if you do not like Microsoft, please link to the source! Where is the link to that Microsoft Blog Post?
and now they want our livers! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 01:31 · Score: 0

Any lawyers about?
No, seriously, if Jobs is after our livers, what can we do to legally protect ourselves?
I'm willing to let this one slip... by i_ate_god · 2009-07-20 01:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

...if it helps continue the death of IE6

--
I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
1. Re:I'm willing to let this one slip... by bunratty · 2009-07-20 01:43 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  The use of IE8 is increasing mainly at the expense of IE7 use. IE6 remains in use at companies with older versions of Windows or where they have intranet applications that require IE6.
  
  --
  What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
2. Re:I'm willing to let this one slip... by CapnStank · 2009-07-20 05:26 · Score: 1
  
  I still find it funny about how much time my company spends fixing security issues and crashes with their IE6 intranet instead of investing in IE8 or more compliant software. They're rather be reactive than proactive.
3. Re:I'm willing to let this one slip... by pbhj · 2009-07-20 09:37 · Score: 1
  
  I'll grab my pitchfork, you get the scythe, meet me at the old barn and bring everyone you can find.
  IE6 will die.
They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? by mandark1967 · 2009-07-20 01:38 · Score: 2, Interesting

I did a fresh install of 7 recently (June 10th) after some tweaking of my system rendered it unstable. (not the point of the post, just background on why I did the reinstall)
I did the Windows 7 clean install, loaded my drivers, and activated it.
Grabbed the normal updates and, during that process, I right clicked the automatic update entry for IE8 and selected "Hide Update" because I choose not to load the IE8 software.
Now with patches loaded, I go back to see if any of the patches needed patching. I go back to Windows update to get the latest round of patches and guess what the first entry on my Windows update page was...IE8! "critical", no less)
I went through the process to hide it again. I load the other patches
The next week MS released some more patches. I went to Windows Update to grab them and you wanna guess what the first "critical" patch was? IEfucking8!
I made a thread at the Windows 7 forum, http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/itprovistaapps/thread/2d8a57f3-8904-49b8-a626-c6a5481ca9b4 asking them why they are trying to ram this program down my throat when I have specifically chosen not to use the program and, to date there have been 166 views of the thread, but no replies from MS...not that I expect a reply...

--
Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
1. Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 02:02 · Score: 0
  
  Ever stop and think that those are different patches? They update the browser regularly. Even if you don't use the browser, the rendering engine and other bits are still available as part of the Windows API and are still exploitable.
2. Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? by DAldredge · 2009-07-20 02:45 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  People like you are the reason we have botnets.
3. Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 03:26 · Score: 0
  
  Windows 7 comes with IE8 pre-installed. What you are probably seeing are different critical updates for IE8, so when you hide one another shows at a later time because it is a completely different update.
  I'm assuming people who mod this stuff up are either MS haters, have never used Windows 7, or use Windows 7 but do not realize IE8 comes with it.
4. Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? by nine-times · 2009-07-20 04:08 · Score: 1
  
  Windows update also won't let you hide Silverlight.
5. Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? by Phroggy · 2009-07-20 04:24 · Score: 1
  
  As others have pointed out, you're a moron.
  Open the Control Panel, click "Programs and Features", then click "Turn Windows features on or off" in the sidebar on the left. Uncheck the box for "Internet Explorer 8" and click OK. You'll get a warning that removing IE could break things (but nothing you care about), then it'll ask you to reboot.
  This does not remove IE's rendering engine (Trident/MSHTML), which is embedded in a bazillion other applications. There are still going to be security holes in that, and you really should patch them, because you have no idea which other applications those are going to be (Valve's Steam and Google Talk are a couple of examples, according to Wikipedia). However, removing the application should prevent you from getting any further updates to Internet Explorer itself.
  
  --
  $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
  $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
6. Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 05:08 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah. I read your post. If I were an employee of Microsoft, I sure as hell wouldn't respond to you either.
  "Is MS so paranoid about IE losing Marketshare that you're trying to force the software onto my system? Or are you just not content in adding vulnerabilities to Firefox through Windows Update the silently loaded add-on that you got reamed about in the media?"
  So, let me just conclude...
  TROLL
7. Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 05:09 · Score: 0
  
  *and retarded children.
How is this a troll? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 01:42 · Score: 0

I asked a question!
Yes you did by L4t3r4lu5 · 2009-07-20 01:45 · Score: 3, Informative

In Windows 7, you can uninstall it.

--
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
1. Re:Yes you did by jo42 · 2009-07-20 03:04 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  Really, really uninstall it? As in "uninstall" will delete all the IE files off of your storage device? Or just make the links disappear and keep most, if not all, of the files around so that Windows 7 can keep functioning?
2. Re:Yes you did by DrgnDancer · 2009-07-20 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  I imagine it keeps the library files around, since they're called by the "My Computer" and "Windows Explorer" features. I wonder though, what it does when you type an "http" URL in the "My Computer" browser bar. The current behavior is to simply grab IE's web libraries and turn your file browser into a web browser on the fly. Will it still do that? On my Mac when you enter "http" URLs into the file browser it opens the default web browser.
  
  --
  I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
3. Re:Yes you did by bhtooefr · 2009-07-20 11:32 · Score: 1
  
  Windows has called the default web browser, even if it's IE, seperately, since IE 7.
4. Re:Yes you did by Bungie · 2009-07-20 16:02 · Score: 1
  
  Really, really uninstall it? As in "uninstall" will delete all the IE files off of your storage device? Or just make the links disappear and keep most, if not all, of the files around so that Windows 7 can keep functioning?
  Removing IE removes the application, local libraries and wizards. It does not remove the rendering libraries since they are considered a component of the operating system. They are not used exclusively by Internet Explorer so they should be kept around for the many other applications which use them.
  FireFox links to the USER32.DLL but I don't consider it part of FireFox and hope that won't be removed if I uninstall FF. That doesn't mean most of FireFox is still there, it just means that the parts of Windows are still there.
  
  --
  The clash of honour calls, to stand when others fall.
5. Re:Yes you did by ksemlerK · 2009-07-20 16:21 · Score: 1
  
  Even on WinXP, if you have Firefox installed and set up as your default browser, if you enter in any url into the address bar on a normal explorer window, it will launch your default browser, (firefox in the example I listed above). Not since IE6SP1 has Windows integrated seameless interaction between IE and Explorer.
  
  --
  Get your free Dropbox account with 2 GB Free storage!
"In this case, we are afraid to be evil." by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 02:04 · Score: 3, Insightful

The problem with not upgrading is that something else may use the browser, and an old Microsoft browser will be buggy, probably.

Google: Don't do evil.
Microsoft: Evil for profit.

Google: It's finished, but we call it beta.
Microsoft: It's beta, but we call it finished. (All of our customers are part of our beta test team.)

"Internet Explorer 8 will no longer replace the default browser when a user selects the 'Use express settings' option during installation. ... 'We heard a lot of feedback from a lot of different people and groups and decided to make the user choice of the default browser even more explicit,' notes Microsoft in a blog post."

Translation: "We do as much evil as we can. But we are afraid of another anti-trust investigation."

All my opinion, but I'm not the only one.
1. Re:"In this case, we are afraid to be evil." by noundi · 2009-07-20 03:01 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Mostly I agree with your post. I'd probably change the word evil for something with more substance. Also google works for profit as well. Anyway whatever one might think I'd say there's little doubt about one part of your post:
  
  But we are afraid of another anti-trust investigation.
  Perhaps I'm paranoid, perhaps I'm a fanboy, perhaps I love spreading FUD, or perhaps I've never heard anything from Microsoft that ever even remotely sounded like this:
  
  We heard a lot of feedback from a lot of different people and groups and decided to make the user choice of the default browser even more explicit
  Something just doesn't sound right, and I doubt I'm the only one feeling that.
  
  --
  I am the lawn!
Slow crap by bmwEnthusiast · 2009-07-20 02:20 · Score: 1

I was excited to try IE8. About 20 minutes after install and use I wasn't excited anymore. When I open a new tab my whole system slows down until its finished loading. I haven't looked at the CPU usage but i'd assume its pegging it for the render engine. Just a thought.
1. Re:Slow crap by plague3106 · 2009-07-20 03:05 · Score: 1
  
  Huh... FF 3.5 is slower than IE now, and I can't really disable tabbed browsing, which I hate. At least I still have a choice in IE.
2. Re:Slow crap by bmwEnthusiast · 2009-07-20 05:22 · Score: 1
  
  I use chrome almost exclusively. I like a simple browsing experience.
3. Re:Slow crap by webheaded · 2009-07-20 06:51 · Score: 1
  
  What...were you trying to load up a tab with Slashdot?
  
  --
  "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - BenF
4. Re:Slow crap by Bungie · 2009-07-20 16:42 · Score: 1
  
  was excited to try IE8. About 20 minutes after install and use I wasn't excited anymore. When I open a new tab my whole system slows down until its finished loading. I haven't looked at the CPU usage but i'd assume its pegging it for the render engine. Just a thought.
  It's most likely an addon which is causing your issue. You can run IE with no addons under Accessories->System Tools and confirm if that is the cause.
  IE 8 handles each tab esentially as a sepatate IE process and some addons have real problems with it. IE addons for antivirus/antispyware especially - I think SpyBot's IE protection even had problems.
  
  --
  The clash of honour calls, to stand when others fall.
Not Robinson Crusoe On This Score by BrightSpark · 2009-07-20 02:24 · Score: 2

And how many software writers for MP3 players, video players and graphic editors do the same thing when it comes to the long tick box of file extensions with most of them pre-ticked for you? At least with IE8 it's just one tick. I can think of a few software downloads that end up changing those familiar icons in Explorer to new programme icons. It's no big deal - other than the Windows Updater always wanting to download the product which I haven't got on my system. Heck, what's the point of a monopoly if you don't use it? :-)
Too Late... by NoName+Studios · 2009-07-20 02:31 · Score: 1, Insightful

Too late because it is already been five months later. How many more users were stolen from other browsers by this tactic?
1. Re:Too Late... by Monkeedude1212 · 2009-07-20 02:49 · Score: 1
  
  Guess what! We've stopped Shackling people in chains and calling them our slaves! ... Oh those guys still in chains? Yeah we can't take them off once they're in em.
Uninstall plz by u64 · 2009-07-20 02:36 · Score: 2, Interesting

I want to uninstall IE6 and IE7 before i install IE8 bloat.
IE8 crash more often then IE6 and IE7 put together. It's wrong
to force that on n00bs. They have hard time as it is.
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Setup\7.0]
"DoNotAllowIE70"=dword:1
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Setup\8.0]
"DoNotAllowIE80"=dword:1
I'm temped to add 9.0 too to avoid future nag...
Things like these and WGA spyware is why i dont run WindowsUpdate.
I'm also thinking of redirecting IE shortcuts to Opera or Firefox.
Windows 7 includes IE8... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 02:41 · Score: 5, Informative

Are you retarded, or a troll?
IE8 is included in Windows 7.
1. Re:Windows 7 includes IE8... by bwian · 2009-07-20 04:36 · Score: 1
  
  Not in Europe
  see http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/06/windows-7-to-be-shipped-in-europe-sans-internet-explorer.ars
  MS have also stopped Windows 7 upgrades in Europe. It's a clean install, or forget it.
2. Re:Windows 7 includes IE8... by BOFslime · 2009-07-20 05:01 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Are you retarded, or a troll?
  IE8 is included in Windows 7.
  Actually, if you uninstall IE6/7/8 from a windows machine, automatic update will instantly (upon reboot) nag you to patch IE, even though its not installed. I think this is what parent is attempting to describe.
  His MS technet link states he only uses firefox.
Also... by Filter · 2009-07-20 03:12 · Score: 1

Also, all the people I have helped by installing and defaulting to Firefox, are now wondering why they have 15 search bars and half an inch of actual browser window. These are the users microsoft wanted back.

--
"better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior things" - Linus Torvalds 09-08-07
Service Packs required IE8 too for Vista! by antdude · 2009-07-20 03:14 · Score: 2, Interesting

Since IE8 was considered a critical update and service packs require ALL critical updates, users have no choice to get IE8 to be able to upgrade with a service pack via Windows Update in Vista. :(

--
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Higher management should give them a lesson by Ilgaz · 2009-07-20 04:15 · Score: 1

I wonder if MS fired the team responsible for that scandal (IE 8) that even their best buddies didn't like and the decision to pull a trick even Real Networks gave up.
"If user has installed me over automated windows update and has another browser selected by default, don't touch his settings".
How hard it is? It is really malicious and nothing else, the team, managers, all must be fired unless they publicly apologize.
Their action, while at court with EU could cost them millions if not billion. Yes, that childish action has potential to cost them. I am sure EU officials already added it to their files.
BTW MS, we noticed you hired some AC guys, tell them to post a bit later defending your actions. First 3-4 posts coming from fake AC accounts (paid accounts in fact) really shows too much.
It also has KB number, better install (!) by Ilgaz · 2009-07-20 04:22 · Score: 1

I love how they gave it a KB number so poor user should think it is part of system functionality or some kind of something gets updated.
Just a page out of other browsers' playbook by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 05:31 · Score: 0

Microsoft actually used to be the best about this (in IE 6, maybe 7). IE 6 had you opt into being the default browser and had "Ask me every time at start up" unchecked. Firefox and Opera ask you every time unless you opt out, even if it's not after installation. Sure, it's trivial, but it's annoying nonetheless.
Bad microsoft, you're grounded by mrstella · 2009-07-20 08:49 · Score: 1

It's pretty much indefensible behaviour on MS's part. I like a lot of the things they do (Windows Server 2003 - 2008, Windows 7, Visual Studio .Net etc) but I equally dislike their sometime's underhanded business practices. Backing down now just smacks of putting the cookies back in the jar after you've been caught.
Not in EU by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 09:28 · Score: 0

IE8 is banned from Windows7 in European Union.
Visitor uses IE6 I encourge him to upgrade to IE8 by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 09:59 · Score: 0

You are 100% correct.
That's why I use my blog to spread the word about this as "How to get rid of Internet Explorer 6".
On my website I use ie6-upgrade-warning script code to get rid of IE6 Visitors on the future (Visitor uses IE6 I encourge him to upgrade to IE8), it makes my website more easy to manage. I Advise everyone to do the same.
Re: Microsoft Backs Down On Making IE8 Default At by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 15:58 · Score: 0

If the user has EVERY done anything with a browser (or browsers) on their computer, the default browser setting is already determined. Why does a program upgrade of any kind not honor the existing settings in the first place? Sun Java does this as well. When it upgrades, it turns on automatic updating and installs either msn, google or yahoo! toolbar.
If I turned off automatic updates, there was a reason - so things like toolbars I don't want won't install without my decision to do so.
Upgrading or patching a program, generally should have the right, as it is a prerequisite, to make changes to program code and in some cases, system settings. User based settings are something else entirely (particularly preference related stuff such as background image, theme, update settings or..... default browser).
How would you feel if your computer, at random times decided to run a randomly scheduled desktop background image change, hammering your CPU, of course, to do it, only to change your background to a randomly chosen advertisement for a randomly chosen product made by a randomly chosen business partner of microsoft... well random, but after a considerable amount of customer analysis of your browser history and temp files.
How would you like to find that your email settings have changed and your smtp, pop3, imap, exchange settings have been altered to use microsoft's unencrypted public servers.... and you work for say the State Department, you are emailing or have been emailed trade secrets or you are simply writing sweat nothings to your boy/girlfriend.
Sure, the browser thing is pretty benign. On the other hand, this proves rather directly and obviously to the average user that these types of things can be changed without your express knowledge or approval. Here's to hoping the average user starts to make the abstraction.
Re:What crap... teaching users... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-07-20 22:46 · Score: 0

teaching ALL users to "custom install" any app would be an improvement in security....
- LOOK, DECIDE, INSTALL -
should be everyone's motto of the day.
reg - anonymous Coward of the day! *lol*
anticipatory upload every update included for free by sgt+scrub · 2009-07-21 02:20 · Score: 1

$10 says it still uploads to your machine every time you do a windows update but asks if you want to upgrade to IE8. Then, if you say no, it deletes it from the temp directory so you can upload it over and over until you are tired of the massive upload every time you do a windows update.

--
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
It is just a VM by sgt+scrub · 2009-07-21 04:49 · Score: 1

If you love the windows this post is not for you.
I don't see the big deal. If your windows VM wants to pump crap on its virtual drive let it. You have a 1T drive right? That is the cool thing about demoting jenky OS's to virtual machines. You can still use those outdated applications that haven't been fully replaced by a Linux/OSX version, not worry about it BSoD'ing your machine, and let it do all of it's BS updates it wants.

--
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Stupid.. by xmvince · 2009-07-21 05:42 · Score: 1

Wow, MS usually does the opposite of what they should do. IE7 blows REALLY bad, doesn't display web pages correctly and is much more insecure than IE8. Now MS is backing down on the default upgrade to IE8? Good job MS, once again, you've MISERABLY failed.