Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Giving Rival Browsers a Lift

gollum123 tips an article at the NY Times on the progress of the European Windows browser choice screen that we have been discussing recently. "Rivals of Microsoft's market-leading Web browser have attracted a flurry of interest since the company, fulfilling a regulatory requirement, started making it easier for European users of its Windows operating system to switch. Mozilla, whose Firefox browser is the strongest competitor to Microsoft's Internet Explorer worldwide, said that more than 50,000 people had downloaded Firefox via a 'choice screen' that has been popping up on Windows-equipped computers in Europe since the end of last month. ... Opera Software, based in Oslo, said downloads of its browser in Belgium, France, Britain, Poland, and Spain had tripled since the screen began to appear. Microsoft said it was too early to tell whether the choice screen might prompt significant numbers of users to change. The digital ballot is being delivered over the Internet with software updates, and it is expected to take until mid-May to complete the process. The browser choice will also be presented to buyers of new Windows computers across the European Union for five years."

26 of 272 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Opera with or without ads? by SCVirus · · Score: 5, Informative

    Opera hasn't had ads for years. It is totally free as in beer.

    September 20, 2005
    Opera Software today permanently removed the ad banner and licensing fee from its award-winning Web browser.

  2. BTW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The script on that page uses a proper shuffle algorithm now (Fisher-Yates/Durstenfeld). If the page is viewed without Javascript, the order is fixed though, with IE being in the leftmost spot...

    1. Re:BTW by biryokumaru · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have to wonder, why would a brand new installation of Windows have javascript turned off?

      --
      When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
  3. informed decisions? by bsDaemon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not being from Europe, and also having no intention to use Windows 7 any time in the near future, I haven't seen this "choice screen" until I just searched for a screen shot of it. There appear to be little one-line descriptions, but nothing really substantive from which to base a choice upon if you didn't already know the differences between the browsers to some degree anyway (in which case, you'd have probably downloaded whichever one you want to use separately regardless of this court-mandated action). So, to my question: is there any way to measure how many of these downloads were due to users making an informed choice rather than just "clicking something" like they do with the "next" button on most graphical installers? And what happens if you just click "select later?" Does it still install IE and default to that?

    1. Re:informed decisions? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Informative

      This leads me to ask who wrote the descriptions of the various browsers.

      It's something that is trivial to find out on your own. Here is the ballot page. If you click on "Tell me more" buttons, you'll see that all links lead to web pages hosted on a domain owned the company behind the browser (mozilla.com, apple.com, opera.com, google.com etc).

      Sorry if that didn't provide any substance to yet another "evil MS" conspiracy theory...

    2. Re:informed decisions? by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That would be the reason why the change was necessary. MS doesn't do a particularly responsible job of supporting IE, and way too many people think that IE is the internet and Outlook is email.

      But why should they care how they access the web. If they think that IE is the internet, then how is tricking them into loading another browser going to help them?

      The browser choice system is designed to help the other browser makers like Mozilla and Opera. It is designed to help the website designers who bitch about CSS support in IE. It is not designed to help the people who actually own the computers that are being forced to re-choose their software.

      The thing that everyone has forgotten here is what is best for the general public - the ones who aren't interested in tinkering with their computer and who just want to get onto the web. They don't care that there are other options out there, because they just want to use what they already know. They don't care if writing a website for IE is more work for the webmasters, because they don't see any of that and all they know is that all the websites that they want just work.

  4. How is this news? by Jorl17 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We all knew it would happen. If you know that X leads to Y and you also know that you will be doing X in Z time, then you know that, in said Z time, Y will happen.

    X Y Z Means eXtreme eYebally microZoft, of course.

    Seriously, though, this was really expected. It's not that people actually like the browsers in such cases, but they just randomly click. I've had my grandfather randomly picking Firefox already; I've had my grandmother clicking an add that says "You are visitor 1M, you win a big prize!". It's the fact that many people are still "ignorant" or careless towards this question.

    The dialog pops-up: "CHOOSE THY BROWSER".
    Reaction: "What the hell is a browser? Choose? I just want to 'surf' the 'internet'. Hell, this one with the shiny colors and the fancy name should be good, I'll click it. [double-clicks instead of single-clicking]."

    All in all, I'm glad that people are being given the choice. But, really, those of us who care about it, already had the means to do it; it's the fact that we're fucking upset that other people don't get pulled into using them...
    Jorl has spoken. Now mod up/down/sideways.

    --
    Have you heard about SoylentNews?
  5. Overreach. by cosm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am aware Microsoft has been a little overreaching with their software practices in the past, but damn if it isn't contributing to the combined lack of intelligence of the computer illiterate populace when organizations like the EU force things like this on Microsoft.

    EU: "Hey Microsoft, people are too ignorant to do research and realize there exist alternatives to IE"
    M$: "So what."
    EU: "Give them the option to use third party software options other than the installed feature built into your OS, or else pay up!"
    M$: "Ok, we'll buckle, we don't need any more bad press waxing possible monopolist practices."

    What if I started a class action suit against Apple because Itunes is installed by default, and that is a "monopoly" on digital music storefronts? Would Apple have to install a Media Player Choice(TM) screen, allowing customers to choose Windows Media Player for OSX, RealPlayer, or WinAmp because they are too ignorant to do the research themselves? Yes Microsoft is huge. Yes they are the main provider of consumer level OS's to the big-box retailers. So let them package and run by default the software of their choosing. People don't have to buy M$. This would be like forcing a leading car manufacturer to offer brakes from 3rd party companies, because the buyers are complacent enough to accept their shitty factory brakes, but litigation hungry enough to file complaints about them.

    What the fuck is society coming to.

    --
    'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    1. Re:Overreach. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      I am aware Microsoft has been a little overreaching with their software practices in the past

      Congratulations, sir, for winning the understatement of the day award.

      They barely got off in 1991, thanks to a deadlocked panel. They settled with the DOJ in 1994 to end their investigation into abusive monopoly practices, and then they breached that settlement, prompting the trial in 1998 involving 20+ states and the US Department of Justice.

      In that trial, witnesses intentionally failed to answer questions, claimed not to recall, and provided answers directly contrary to the documentary evidence. Microsoft submitted falsified video evidence and edited demonstrations regarding the operation of its software and the process involved in switching to that of competitors.

      They were convicted of abusive practices, a finding not overturned on appeal.

      Similar EU proceedings produced the ballot screen, also a minor slap on the wrist.

      What if I started a class action suit against Apple because Itunes is installed by default, and that is a "monopoly" on digital music storefronts?

      It's not. It's a dominant player, but it's not a monopoly, and even if it were, it has not engaged in unlawful leveraging of that power.

      Microsoft's IE trouble isn't because it's included with Windows--it's because they launched IE as a separate product and then violated their DOJ agreement when they started integrating into Windows. It took seven years of legal action to get them to un-integrate it.

      Had they complied with their original obligations and kept the products separate while allowing OEMs to bundle other browsers without being penalized, they wouldn't be in this situation and no one would care that MSIE is the default browser on MS Windows.

      Yes they are the main provider of consumer level OS's to the big-box retailers. So let them package and run by default the software of their choosing. People don't have to buy M$

      Contradiction of points. The difficulty of avoiding Microsoft and their misconduct in prior settlements is the major reason they face this penalty.

      This would be like forcing a leading car manufacturer to offer brakes from 3rd party companies, because the buyers are complacent enough to accept their shitty factory brakes, but litigation hungry enough to file complaints about them.

      Ah, the inept car analogy. Now I know I'm just feeding the trolls.

      1. No leading car manufacturer uses first-party brakes.
      2. Brakes are an integral component of a car; IE was a separate product that Microsoft decided to weave into Windows specifically to quash competing products, using their captive monopoly audience (both OEMs and customers) to do so.
      3. MS is not being punished for its selection of a shitty browser, but for its repeated breach of legally-binding settlements requiring that they not bundle any additional products with Windows. Trying to tie the IE codebase into the OS was an attempt to dodge that bullet by calling IE a "feature" and not a product.
      4. Unless that car company was using its cars in order to squeeze out other brake manufacturers, and made it such that installing third party brakes meant adding an extension onto the axles, with the MS brakes still mounted to the wheel, and then forcing all of its dealers and licensed maintenance shops to use MS brakes and not offer any others for aftermarket installation, it would not be engaging in similar conduct.
      5. Even if the car company did engage in that conduct, if it complied with the original penalty (no mandatory bundling), it would still more than likely be permitted to install its brakes as the default choice.

    2. Re:Overreach. by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What if I started a class action suit against Apple because Itunes is installed by default, and that is a "monopoly" on digital music storefronts?

      You have your cart and horse backwards. First, iTunes the application is not a monopoly of any sort. OS X is not a monopoly of any sort. That leaves iTunes the service, which as a lot of market share in the US. That means Apple can't bundle OS X with that service, but they don't they bundle the application with the OS and tie the service to the application.

      If Apple required OS X to use iTunes, you'd have a case. If Apple forced people to buy a copy of OS X to buy a song on iTunes, you'd have a case. In fact though, Apple is moving iTunes to a Web interface to remove the tie with the application as they approach monopoly levels of market share... Which is probably the best you could hope for from any lawsuit regarding it. Apple can't leverage OS X's monopoly influence to promote iTunes because OS has no monopoly influence. Apple isn't leveraging iTunes service monopoly to promote anything in particular.

      What the fuck is society coming to.

      It is now and always has been a clamoring crowd of ignorance. People who insist on expressing their uneducated opinions without bothering to understand the topic even superficially first.

    3. Re:Overreach. by randallman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A little? They've used their monopoly to dominate the browser, office software and corporate email. They go out of their way to avoid interoperability with their protocols and file formats and use vertical integration in addition to lock users into the Microsoft world of software. They have a history of unethical practices and continue today (OOXML, Linux patent threats). Many of their offerings have superior alternatives, but fitting them in with Microsoft's closed ecosystem is too difficult so people just do the easy thing and buy they stuff that works with their Active Directory, Exchange and Desktops.

      In the browser market, Microsoft has clearly shown abuse of their Desktop monopoly with their lack of standards compliance and proprietary extensions. Tell me why MS can't build a standards compliant browser with their resources. Even today, they're trying to push Siverlight to hold the keys to the web's multimedia and with MS holding patents, there will always be a cloud over compatible implementations like Mono. And don't say they won't play that card. They already did it with their Linux patent threats. They've been anti-competitive with I.E. They deserve this.

  6. Opera downloads tripled by bunratty · · Score: 3, Funny

    Opera Software, based in Oslo, said downloads of its browser in Belgium, France, Britain, Poland, and Spain had tripled since the screen began to appear.

    So now that makes six Opera users. And they'll all be crowing that this was all due to a complaint raised first by Opera!

    --
    What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
  7. Awareness is the best result. by headkase · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The best outcome of this in light of Microsoft's monopoly position is that it breaks how they got there: many people use Internet Explorer simply because they are unaware of alternatives. This puts that front-and-center. No longer will a more experienced user get strange looks when they mention another browser with a funny name. Instead quite a few people will have seen the ballot screen and especially initially it will raise the talk about them. Long-term it is good as well, once people become aware they have a choice in browsers they may also as well begin to wonder if they have choices elsewhere.

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:Awareness is the best result. by cosm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is a shame it takes this sort of spelling out to make people understand. Instead of spreading computer literacy, lets just continually dumb down our systems. Idiocracy, here we come!

      --
      'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
  8. Re:Opera with or without ads? by Threni · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder how much money they ever made from ads, and if they regret it, given that 5 years on they're still trying to lose the bad aroma it produced? It was bad enough wading through all the ads on the net, without extra ads built into the browser - what were they thinking?

    Opera - the browser that could have been king.

  9. Re:Opera with or without ads? by biryokumaru · · Score: 4, Funny

    From my understanding it is the pages fault and not Operas.

    It's the page's fault the same way it's the river's fault that my car isn't a boat.

    --
    When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
  10. Re:Opera with or without ads? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder how much money they ever made from ads, and if they regret it, given that 5 years on they're still trying to lose the bad aroma it produced?

    Given that Opera has not had ads for nearly 5 years, it would probably be fair to say that many Opera users today have never used a version that did have ads. In fact, Opera has been ad-free for long enough that I'm genuinely surprised when I see someone (like the OP) who still thinks it's ad-supported. I would think that anyone who would have been using Opera 5 years ago would at least be up to date enough to know that it doesn't have ads anymore. But, apparently, I would be wrong, as the OP appears to be one of those people. Sort of makes me wonder if the browser he's using is branded "Phoenix" or "Firebird".

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  11. Some things, you need to 'force'. by unity100 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the food health standards are forced too. despite most of the populace knowing no shit about them. but, it is necessary.

    same thing here.

    1. Re:Some things, you need to 'force'. by icebraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't you get it? It's not for the benefit of the clueless users, it's for our benefit, by having an internet less dominated by IE. Maybe its market share will drop enough to justify the usage of technologies like HTML5 which IE doesn't support.

  12. Re:Opera with or without ads? by glwtta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would think that anyone who would have been using Opera 5 years ago would at least be up to date enough to know that it doesn't have ads anymore.

    I don't know, I haven't used Opera in years and I did have a vague Opera-"ad supported" association in the back of my mind. People will naturally expend only so much effort keeping up with marginal web browsers, and first impressions can stick with you for a while. I couldn't, for example, tell you if Konqueror has stopped sucking in the last 5 years (not to pick on Konqueror in particular - just an example).

    And yes, I remember the Firebird fiasco, too - six years is not that long a time.

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
  13. Re:Opera with or without ads? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Right, my point is that 18-25 year olds using their Wii or Nokia phone have probably never even heard that Opera was ad-supported. Kids in high school now who sort of "came online" as Firefox was gaining popularity may hear about Opera at some point online (such as.. here) and would be hearing about what it's doing now, not what it was doing in 2005. The only mentions of Opera using ads, like here, also point out how it hasn't been doing that for 5 years.

    The old guys? Even though I would expect most of us to know that Opera doesn't use ads, I can expect there to be a group of people who probably hate them for ever advertising in the first place. I don't think that's a very large group, though. There are other, more worthy corporations to focus our hate on now, such as Sony and Apple.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  14. Re:Just a thought by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Funny

    > Just a thought, how many people would use Internet Explorer if it didn't
    > come with Windows?

    Thousands. Probably even some who don't work for Microsoft.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  15. Re:Opera with or without ads? by Mistlefoot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and his point is that he, like me, hasn't had a problem with Real Player crashing my machine in years.

    Because I won't install Real Player on my machine after past issues.

    There are many browser options, as this article is about. The OP does not owe Opera the opportunity to be installed on his machine when such quality choices exist.

  16. Re:Opera with or without ads? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since when are one or two people enough to assume a globally smelt “bad aroma”??

    Actually those are the first two I know, who even know or remember Opera having ads. Geeks.

    Meanwhile, my whole family loves Opera. And in Poland, I hear, it’s the number one browser.
    Also, everybody here who tried surfing over the phone, has heard of Opera. :)
    So that’s what most people know of it.

    I usually get two reactions from people I recommend Opera to:
    1. They don’t know what it is. But since I show that I like Opera, and they can feel it, they get drawn in.
    2. After a week or so, they wouldn’t want to miss it.

    For some it’s Firefox, and that is just as good.
    Only for IE users I have no heart at all. Since I used to be a webdev. And that thing has caused my nights to be nightmares for years. I would right here sign a law that said that every person using IE past next month will get shot. Without blinking. That’s how horrible it was. Like a war wound kinda...

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  17. EU by Exception+Duck · · Score: 4, Interesting

    kudos to the European union.

    this and reading they will oppose ACTA's 3strike rule makes me want to join

  18. Re:Opera with or without ads? by kiddygrinder · · Score: 3, Funny

    so you're saying that it's actually your car's fault that the river isn't a road?

    --
    This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.