Windows RT Browser Restrictions Draw Antitrust Attention

An anonymous reader writes "Last week we heard complaints from Mozilla that Windows RT would restrict users' choice in web browsers, unfairly favoring Internet Explorer over alternatives like Firefox and Chrome. Unfortunately for Microsoft, the situation is now on the Senate Judiciary Committee's radar, and they will look into claims that Microsoft is engaging in anti-competitive behavior. That said, it could be a difficult case to make, since Windows RT is destined for ARM-based tablets, and Apple currently dominates that market. 'When it comes to proving abuse of monopoly power, an important question is determining the market in which a monopolist has power — the relevant market, in antitrust legal terms. In the [late '90s] DOJ case, U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's findings of fact concluded Microsoft had a monopoly in the market for "Intel-compatible PC operating systems." Windows on ARM doesn't run on x86 chips, so by Jackson's standards, Windows RT hasn't been judged to be part of Microsoft's monopoly.' Microsoft addressed some of these issues in a blog post in February."

Comments

Where's the one on Apple?

[recoiledsnake]

"There' is no tablet market. There is only an iPad market" say the fans and Apple gets away with not only bundling Safari but banning all other browser engines. Yet Microsoft with it's 0.1% share of tablets in the "Post-PC world" gets flogged for this.

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[mystikkman]

"There' is no tablet market. There is only an iPad market" say the fans and Apple gets away with not only bundling Safari but banning all other browser engines. Yet Microsoft with it's 0.1% share of tablets in the "Post-PC world" gets flogged for this.

Dude, haven't you gotten the memo?

"It's OK for Apple to block Firefox, but wrong when Microsoft does it".
http://tinyurl.com/d2m8qs3
(Sorry for tinyurl, it's legit I promise, Slashdot filters the link because it's too long).

Not to mention Apple's worse actions like forcing their in-app payments and their 30% cut of even in-app purchases(driving many apps, esp. ebook related ones out of the market) and even forcing developers not to charge Android users less for the same services from the money they save from not paying the 30% tithe to Apple.

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[recoiledsnake]

All the browsers available in the App Store are just wrappers and skins on the Safari browser engine, except Opera Mini, which runs the browser engine in the cloud to escape Apple's banning of running Javascript(or any other JIT code).

That's why there is no Firefox or Chrome(or even IE ;) for iOS.

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[recoiledsnake]

How many copies of webkit do you want on your phone/pad. ;-)

Count the number of gekko/webkit links and bundles you find on a well-augmented Ubuntu or Fedora box.

So, you solution is to ban all those browsers on the Linux box, I presume?

Ff Webkit is all important, why is Chrome way more popular than Safari on Windows? They use the same Webkit engine, don't they? A browser is much much more than it's engine.

"I" may or may not want something, but that doesn't mean browser makers must be banned from providing alternate rendering and JS engines.

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[ifrag]

why is Chrome way more popular than Safari on Windows?

Thanks to Mozilla, we know the answer to this. It's because Chrome has a higher version number.

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[mario_grgic]

Actually, you are completely wrong. Also, no one is asking for permission to "replace" Safari engine, just to install another one and give user a choice. All browsers for iOS devices on the App Store use WebKit (Safari) engine and they just provide different UI around it. But if something doesn't render (work) in Safari, it won't work in any other browser. The only exception is Opera Mini which renders content on the server and then sends the rendered content to the browser on iOS device. In this regard Apple is way worse than Microsoft ever was. Now Microsoft is playing catchup in evil practices that Apple got away with so easily.

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[CanHasDIY]

How many copies of webkit do you want on your phone/pad. ;-)

Strawman - as the consumer who purchased and supposedly owns the device, that should be for me to decide, not Apple.

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[thetoadwarrior]

Because Apple makes shit software for Windows like Microsoft makes shit software for OS X.

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[jimshatt]

But what if I *want* a crappy, unsecure, resource needy browser. I'd like that to be my choice to make. If IE really is better on WinRT then let the market speak. I know, I know, they're afraid WinRT will get bad rap because the batteries will be drained in 10 minutes, but then they should just focus their marketing on that. Put out advertisements with battery life comparisons between WinRT with FF and WinRT with IE.

At least give other browsers (and IMO all software) the chance to be crappy and ruin my device if I so choose.

It's the same as on the PC really. Even though I hear from many that FF sucks their memory and CPU, that isn't the case with me and I choose to run it. I'll pick another browser when the time comes, but at least *I* pick.

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, do you even read what you link to?

A new Google-funded study of browser security by security research firm Accuvant Labs crowned Chrome the champion of security features, and ranked Firefox below Internet Explorer in terms of protection available from web-borne threats.

How is it even relevant, when ARM version of IE won't have plugins, so no (how carefully you copypasted those!) sandboxing or plug-in security.

By your logic, MS should have insisted on Chrome, then.

PS: You gotta get paid, I know, I know, but - please! - do you really have to sound so much like a sales pitch? Tell your higher-ups that not having to follow an obvious script, but rather having a degree of freedom in your postings adds to your value as a marketing asset. Just add something about leveraging synergies for better monetization of social media resource and you won't have to sound like a broken record.

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[shutdown -p now]

It's more than just being required to use WebKit. It's being required to use a particular version of WebKit, with no ability to extend or change it in any way.

I want Firefox to keep using its own engine, thank you very much. Last thing we need for the Web is to see "best viewed in WebKit" monoculture, and it's already starting to to trend that way. Didn't a decade of IE dominance teach people anything?

Re:Where's the one on Apple?

[scot4875]

I didn't buy Apple. I don't want to be limited to their sandbox. I might have bought Apple if it weren't for their draconian control measures over the hardware and software. (Though there are now enough other reasons to avoid them that it's unlikely they'll be on my consideration list any time in the foreseeable future.)

Do I still have to just shut up and accept it? I think they're bad for the industry. I think they're taking software development to a place that I don't want it to go. I think that the idea of being forced to pay a yearly subscription to a hardware manufacturer and going through some arbitrary review process shouldn't be the *only* sanctioned way of running code on a device.

--Jeremy

Re:iPad

[camperdave]

Because Apple doesn't sell operating systems for generic computers. Apple only makes OSs for Apple products. If Microsoft only made OSs for Microsoft computers, they wouldn't get this kind of scrutiny either.