Microsoft hedges its Windows 7 bets with new IE 8 'removal' option
Summary: Microsoft has taken another step to hedge its Windows bets in case the European Commission lowers the boom on Redmond's browser-bundling practices. Microsoft is making it possible for Internet Explorer 8 to be "removed" from the Windows operating system, according to the AeroXperience site, and other testers with whom I've spoken.
Microsoft has taken another step to hedge its Windows bets in case the European Commission lowers the boom on Redmond's browser-bundling practices.
With the current Windows 7 Build (No. 7048) that is circulating among selected testers, Microsoft is making it possible for Internet Explorer 8 to be removed from the Windows operating system, according to the AeroXperience site, and other testers with whom I've spoken.
"Removing" here is somewhat of a loaded -- and perhaps overzealous -- word. Microsoft can easily remove the IE 8 browser from startup. But over the past few years, the company has integrated the guts of IE into the operating system.
As Bryant Zadegan explained on AeroXperience: "This [new IE 8 removal option] only seems to wipe the actual executable running Internet Explorer 8 (iexplore.exe), but given that many of the most vocal proponents of choice were just looking for an option to functionally remove IE8, this might’ve been the only way to do it without killing the rest of Windows."
One Windows tester, who requested anonymity, emphasized that the new "remove IE 8" option was primarily cosmetic. "(The Windows) Explorer and Internet Explorer use a ton of shared libraries because they both perform similar and intertwined actions," so that makes complete removal of IE from Windows near impossible at this point, he said.
The Windows team has been believed to be readying its "Plan B" in order to try to head off a potential derailment of the release of Windows 7 as a result of an ongoing antitrust case levied by Opera Software in the EU. Opera claimed Microsoft's policy of bundling IE with Windows reduced consumer choice. In January, the European Commission (EC) issued a "statement of objections" in the case, indicating to many that it was prepared to find Microsoft guilty and force the Redmond company to take some kind of remedial action in the EU. Last month, Mozilla joined the complaint and Google requested the right to do so.
Interestingly, Opera officials have not asked for Microsoft to be forced to exorcise IE from Windows; instead, Opera execs have said they are advocating Microsoft to be forced to distribute other vendors' browsers alongside IE. But the Windows team seems to be operating under the assumption that the EC could require the company to remove IE from Windows. Microsoft seems to be trying to further componentize Windows 7 so that such a requirement would have less potential negative impact on Windows 7's release schedule.
The Technologizer tech-enthusiast site recently reported that the Windows team is still on track to deliver Windows 7 in the third quarter of this year, but is ready to delay Windows 7's release until January 2010 if the EC requires the company to remove IE from Windows. (Microsoft isn't commenting on either of these dates.)
I asked Microsoft for a statement on the new AeroXP report, as well as the Plan B scenario for Windows 7 in general. Still no word back.
Update (March 5): The Windows team delivered an official no comment. A spokeswoman added the following statement: "Windows 7 is still in development and currently in beta. We have no new information to share regarding any of the product's final features."
Update 2 (March 6): Microsoft has decided it does have information to share, after all. The company posted an acknowledgment of its decision to allow IE 8 to be removed from Windows 7 (an option most testers will see in the next month or so when the Win 7 Release Candidate build is issued) -- but didn't mention the Opera antitrust suit as a reason for the decision.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Opera should do their jobs
What they really want, as MJ points out, is for MS to ship other browsers, including Opera.
Why? Because their browser has such a dreadfully small market share and they just can't convince enough people to give Opera a try.
So rather than consider creative ways in which they might be able to increase thier adoption numbers, the go whining to the EU moaning about how they have such a hard time getting people to use their (frankly mediocre) browser.
Note - Opera is a European company. Anyone else notice soemthing odd about a European company trying to get the European Union Government to twist the arm of an American software company to force it to ship a European browser?
Great business sense there guys.
Mozilla and Google aren't European.
My impression -- from a very long distance so it could be wrong -- is that someone in the relevant part of the EU just wants to mess with Microsoft, or perhaps just wants to extract money (fines) from them. I doubt they care much about Opera's market share, European company or not.
Opera is Norwegian
So Opera is ALSO not European, at least as far as the Commission is concerned.
The more interesting point is ...
Nor can Microsoft stop OEMs from providing additional browsers in their builds. (Though OEMs haven't seemed very interested in doing so.)
In the end, the only needs not being considered by those who would force Microsoft to unbundle its browser (as well as other components) from its OS are regular consumers, most of whom don't have the knowledge to make an intelligent decision about which browser to choose.
The rest of us can choose NOT to use IE in favor of whatever we want today!
Most consumers need to have a one-stop option (be it Windows, Macintosh, or any one of a number of UNIX or Linux vendors).
The EU views Microsoft as just one more US company which dominates the world market. Oddly, Europeans don't seem to mind.
Opera is more like a distant 5th...
Forcing a competitor to distribute your product seems a bit odd for a corporation to ask for, but it is one way to handle it. The problem is, if IE isn't included in Windows, how would the average person even go to the proper web sites to download any of the other browsers? Perhaps they could put FTP links or download script icons on the Windows desktop?
I do admit that it will be nice to have the future option of removing IE after I download Firefox on each new system.
Europeans do mind...
BTW Firefox, being Open Source, is arguably at least part European (and part Australian, and Asian, and... you get the picture ;-)
Anyway, I'm just glad that someone can tell Microsoft that not everybody are buying their story. The US antitrust body, after much debate, has given Microsoft a slap on the wrist. Vice versa, the EU antitrust body has apparently scared MS out of their bully strategy a tiny bit.
... and yes, it might just be politics after all, i.e. why should the US do harm to one of their major companies and money makers, and why should the EU be idle when a foreign monopolist takes most of their internal market?
You are a spokesperson for the entire European Union?
To begin with, the EU hosts countries with the largest Windows marketshare per capita. Larger than in the U.S. <br><br>
EU OEMs, what there are of them, all offer Windows as the default OS and they are not "forced" to sell Windows. It's just a little thing called selling your most popular product and making money that influence those decisions. People in the EU love Windows. <br>
Look at all of the technical books written on MS technologies aned you'll find a large number of the Authors are from the EU. Look how many businesses in the EU are Microsoft partners. <br><br>
I think the reality points to the fact users in the EU flock to Windows and they have many choices other than Windows. <br><br>
Finally, isn't this reminiscent of when the EU forced MS to offer a version that didn't come with Media Player? Do you recall that little thing? They are called the "N" versions, such as Windows XP Home N. <br><br>
Now have you bothered to see how these units w/o media player sold? People don't want windows busted up, they've made it clear time and time again, yet these government bodies, using laws made by non elected officials in what amounts to a monopoly of the laws in the EU....the EC, try to convices us they are doing the bidding of the people. What a laugh.
<br>
Total joke.
You are a spokesperson for the entire European Union?
To begin with, the EU hosts countries with the largest Windows marketshare per capita in the world. Larger than in the U.S. <br><br>
EU OEMs, what there are of them, all offer Windows as the default OS and they are not "forced" to sell Windows. It's just a little thing called selling your most popular product and making money that influence those decisions. People in the EU love Windows. <br>
Look at all of the technical books written on MS technologies aned you'll find a large number of the Authors are from the EU. Look how many businesses in the EU are Microsoft partners. <br><br>
I think the reality points to the fact users in the EU flock to Windows and they have many choices other than Windows. <br><br>
Finally, isn't this reminiscent of when the EU forced MS to offer a version that didn't come with Media Player? Do you recall that little thing? They are called the "N" versions, such as Windows XP Home N. <br><br>
Now have you bothered to see how these units w/o media player sold? People don't want windows busted up, they've made it clear time and time again, yet these government bodies, using laws made by non elected officials in what amounts to a monopoly of the laws in the EU....the EC, try to convices us they are doing the bidding of the people. What a laugh.
<br>
Total joke.
So it doesn't matter that the monopolist is anticompetitive
Is it on merit perhaps? :-) Of course not!
It's crucial for the healthy market to be balanced and fair. In a perfect
world everybody should have equal opportunities to work their way up
and [b]compete[/b].
Microsoft deserves the smacking as long as they continue with their
aggressive protection of their monopoly on the PC desktop.
They can...
Not what I was saying.
Mostly, though, I was pointing out that it's stupid to say that the EU are doing it to favour a European company over an American one.
Norway...
Microsoft are serial offenders in terms of anti-competative behavior - however Opera haven't exactly been a beacon of marketing best pratice, I'd suggest that they should look towards Mozilla as an example. As a web developer, I personally think that Microsoft deserve a knock for their complete lack of standards adherence, but thats a different argument.
Norway ...
True, but they're a damn sight more European than American. Why do you think Opera went crying to the EU than the DOJ?
"It's not EU vs' USA, although I get the impression that some individuals are trying to twist it that way."
It <b>absolutely IS</b> EU vs. US. The EU is flexing its muscles against the US here. This was a test case - a way for the EU to show the US that it had teeth and would enforce its rulings, lest the US believe that it could continue to ride roughshod over the formerly toothless EU.
"Microsoft are serial offenders in terms of anti-competative behavior"
Microsoft WERE offendors. No longer.
"however Opera haven't exactly been a beacon of marketing best pratice"
Completely agree - which was my point.
"I'd suggest that they should look towards Mozilla as an example."
Of what? Marketing? When was the last time you saw ANY Mozilla marketing?
"As a web developer, I personally think that Microsoft deserve a knock for their complete lack of standards adherence, but thats a different argument."
Yes, it is. But since you brought it up: Back when Microsoft entered the fray, Netscape was pretty much the only browser on the block (Mosiaic was a joke in comparison). Back then, EVERYONE embellished what few standards there were.
Heck, Mozilla still does this today supporting Mozilla customizations to CSS. Mozilla and others support elements of the non-yet-standardized (X)HTML 5.0 proposals.
Microsoft have not broadly supported standards to date largely because such a significant portion of public internet and private intranet Web Sites came anywhere close to properly supporting HTML 4.0, let alone the more stringent next-generation (X)HTML formats.
Over the last year in particular, more and more sites are becoming increasingly standards compliant and MS has been revving their Trident engine to support current standards, whilst also providing a fall-back mechanism when a non-standards compliant site is displayed.
Not correct...
Microsoft doesn't support standards because they want it all. ActiceX is a non supported "protocaol" which forces users to IE whether they like it or not to properly view those websites who use it.
And any website built with the FrontPage abomination wil result in an IE only site which locks out all other compliant browsers.
Getting rid of ActiveX and VBScript and will make the net a much more compliant place.
Re: Frontpage
Norway: a clarification and some reflections
Hmmm... OS Neutral, it's not exactly so. Indeed, Norway is not an EU member, and neither is Iceland. The Danish dependency of the Faeroe Islands is outside the EU as well (and so is Greenland).
However, Sweden, Finland and Denmark [b]are[/b] full EU members, even though only Finland has adopted the euro. Additionally, the three Baltic states, especially Estonia, like to position themselves as Nordic, too, and they are also full EU members.
Non-EU Scandinavian countries do have close ties with the EU, not only economic but also in matters of security, environment and international relations, and many of their policies and laws end up closely following the EU's. All Scandinavian countries, EU and non-EU alike, are also members of the Schengen Agreement, meaning free travel between them with no border controls and close cooperation in areas such as security.
However, what matters for our case in point is that Norway is not a member of the European Commission, has no vote or direct influence in it, and given Opera Software's small size, it would be very unlikely that it could exert any significant pressure on the EC by itself. The EC may have other strategic interests, though.
Since I'm neither American nor European (I'm Brazilian) and have no "patriotic" or "loyalty" qualms to worry about, I can't help but support Opera's predicament. Personally, I don't like their browser - I find it weak, lackluster, unimpressive, and very awkward to use (though it has improved a lot in that respect since the earlier versions). But choice and competition are always good. And I couldn't care less where it comes from.
This is planet Earth, an increasingly globalized one, and issues of national pride and influence should stay as far away from my desktop as possible.
Denmark is in the EU.
"& ?"
only give so much before we lose our EDGE. Microsoft should not give up it's
EDGE!
D'accord mon ami !
What worries me is that as IE is integrated into Windows Explorer and Windows ... if that link is broken what other horrors lurk in the stygian murk that is Windows? I have suspected for a long time that shortly after a new version of Ms. 'X', 'Y' or 'Z' is released - a perfectly operational (pause for cynical hollow laugh please) earlier version mysteriously starts to "fall over". Help lines auto response is "UPDATE". I am just cynical enough to believe this situation can be easily engineered by a built in obsolensce command in (say) a security update or patch. Sometimes Messrs Redmond are so cocky they offer you the latest incarnation and when you decline it you're faced with a message that smilingly advises you that if you don't accept the update version, the existing program in question will cease to work.
Of course our elected representatives are going to take on the mighty Microsoft - they want to be re-elected !
--> "...we europeans..."
This explains a great deal about why you post the way you do.
I'm all for competition, but not for government mandated competition. Competition should be able to stand on it's own two legs.
Firefox does just that.
Opera is a bunch of whiners who cannot, or more properly, will not step up and make a world class browser worth trying.
It's interesting that you support this kind of nonsense, but then "being active in all levels of the government" tells me even more. That you also don't want to actually work for a living.