Poll: Is Microsoft's Windows 7 E a stroke of genius?

Summary: Anyone who thinks the Evil Empire has lost its dastardly edge should take a hard look at Microsoft's plans for Windows 7 E. I think Microsoft's proposal to release an IE-free version of Windows 7 in the European Union is a stroke of brilliance for Microsoft... and a horrible development for users. You?

Anyone who thinks the Evil Empire has lost its dastardly edge should take a hard look at Microsoft's plans for Windows 7 E.

If Microsoft has its way, the Internet-Explorer-less Windows 7 E version is going to be the one and only version of Windows 7 that will be sold in the European Union. There won't be a version of Windows 7 with IE 8 included sold in the European Union (unless an OEM decides to add it on its PC).

With Windows 7 E, the way Microsoft is envisioning it, the "guts" of IE 8 will still be in there -- things like the rendering engine, the HTTP stack and so on. But there will be no user browser functionality in it at all. No IE 8. No Firefox, no Chrome, no Opera. It will be up to PC makers to preload a browser with Windows 7, if they decide to do so, or up to users to go through some convoluted process to download a browser from a PC with no apparent way to connect to the Web.

Microsoft history buffs may recall that Microsoft built a substantial case (complete with a controversial video) back in the late 1990s around its claim that Internet Explorer was part of Windows. It was so inextricably integrated that to remove it would make the entire operating system inoperable, the Redmondians railed. What a difference a decade makes. In 2009, the idea for Windows 7 E, via which Microsoft magically decouples IE from Windows, is hatched.

Historical inconsistencies aside, Windows 7 E is a total win for Microsoft -- and a total loss for customers.

Think about it. Many EU consumers are going to be very unhappy, and probably vocally so, about getting a crippled version of Windows 7. Some will likely complain to their local politicians about the European Commission (EC). Microsoft officials will continue to insist they are simply trying to be EU-law-abiding monopolists, and that their hands are tied. At the same time, Microsoft will likely be able to collect additional dollars by offering IE 8 to PC makers for license. Sure, Microsoft will have to compete with Mozilla, Google, Apple and Opera for browser-preload contracts, but it will undoubtedly win some of them. Ca-ching!

Thinking it through, I'd say Microsoft's plan for Windows 7 E is a stroke of genius for the company. In one fell swoop, Microsoft creates anti-EC sentiments; makes itself look like the law-abiding underdog; thwarts the "ballot screen" plan the EC seemed to be favoring, which would put IE on a level playing field with its competitors' browsers; and possibly earns a few extra bucks via OEM browser-licensing deals. [poll ID = 33]

Other write-in opinions welcome.

Update: Here is Microsoft's official statement on its Windows 7 E proposal, courtesy of David Heiner, Vice President and Deputy General Counsel. He attributes Microsoft's decision to push Windows 7 E as wanting to insure it could launch Windows 7 on time, in all geographies. He also made it plain Microsoft sure doesn't like the "ballot screen" remedy:

"Our decision to only offer IE separately from Windows 7 in Europe cannot, of course, preclude the possibility of alternative approaches emerging through Commission processes. Other alternatives have been raised in the Commission proceedings, including possible inclusion in Windows 7 of alternative browsers or a 'ballot screen' that would prompt users to choose from a specific set of Web browsers. Important details of these approaches would need to be worked out in coordination with the Commission, since they would have a significant impact on computer manufacturers and Web browser vendors, whose interests may differ. Given the complexity and competing interests, we don’t believe it would be best for us to adopt such an approach unilaterally."

Topics: Operating Systems, Browser, Microsoft, Software, Windows

About

Mary Jo has covered the tech industry for more than 25 years for a variety of publications and Web sites, and is a frequent guest on radio, TV and podcasts, speaking about all things Microsoft-related. She is the author of Microsoft 2.0: How Microsoft plans to stay relevant in the post-Gates era (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

125 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • I think you need more options.

    I think it's a brilliant move on Microsoft's part. But I wouldn't be
    surprised to see the EU reject it. I think they want to force MS to install
    other browsers (one who's name shall not be mentioned) and were using
    tying as an excuse to do it (why else would they take this up 10 years
    after the US government did?).
    ye
    • Been done before...

      And it was done by...Microsoft. Remember the notorious Vista "N" releases?

      The EC howled about those (after they figured out that MS had *also* removed all of the supporting code and codecs along with the Windows Media Player application), and they'll howl about this move, as well.

      Serves 'em right.
      M.R. Kennedy
      • It has. Which is why it was odd they didn't propose it in this case.

        I suspect it's because the EC isn't really advocating choice but rather to
        force MS to promote a certain other browser who's name shall remain
        unspoken.
        ye
      • Of course it will be rejected...

        Why? Because they haven't had a chance to take their proverbial pound of Microsoft flesh... (i.e. they haven't had a chance to fine them a billion or two or three euros.
        Wolfie2K3
    • mONEY

      It is not about IE or Firefox or any other
      software. This is all about money. People rob
      banks because it is where the money is. Rob
      Microsoft because they have deep pockets,
      period...EU money grab at best!!! They will
      figure out some other way to grab money from
      Microsoft (US) to pay for the liberal EURO agenda
      because it can not pay for itself. Sorry for that
      rant I forgot We (US) are now going socialist
      also..ALL FOR ONE AND ONE FOR ALL, right...
      BOSS4908
  • ISPs and OEMs can already distribute IE for free

    There's no licensing deal to make. Download the Internet Explorer Administration Kit, sign the agreement online and you may distribute the browser for free.

    So there's no money to be made here. There's only cost, because MS will need to take steps to get the EU-version RTMed and distributed.

    OEMs will have more work to do to integrate the browser of choice, customers will have to download it via one way or another...

    And my best guess is, is that MS will provide a way to easily download and install IE some way or another. It won't be in there, but you certainly can get it.
    jlandheer
    • Microsoft's proposal for making IE available

      Hi. Yes they do already have a handy plan in place to make IE 8 available for the Win 7 E users. From News.com's story:

      ?For computer makers that want it, Microsoft will offer a free ?IE 8 pack? that allows them to add the browser back in. It?s a little more complicated for consumers that buy a retail copy of Windows 7. Because the operating system lacks a browser, there?s not direct way to go to Microsoft?s Web site to download one. Microsoft plans to make it as easy as possible for folks in Europe to get the browser, though and plans to offer it via CD, FTP and through retail channels, according to a person a familiar with the situation.?

      I still wonder if there won't be new licensing deals, too... If there is actually some competition, in terms of which browser(s) will be loaded on new PCs, I wouldn't be surprised to see someone try to charge.... But maybe not. Thanks. MJ
      Mary Jo Foley
      • This is so 1993!

        [i]Microsoft plans to make it as easy as possible for folks in Europe to
        get the browser, though and plans to offer it via CD, FTP and through
        retail channels, according to a person a familiar with the situation.?[/i]

        How sad the EC is bringing this upon their constituents.
        ye
        • What's wrong with 1993?

          Things were quite useful and quite competitive back then.

          And back then the ISPs provided their own browser software to their clients. No reason why that can't happen now. In fact it DOES happen now, most ISPs for home users have their own software installations for their users.
          Michael Kelly
          • Is that why the industry moved to include browsers in every OS?

            Because the alternatives were better? I have a horse and buggy for sale?
            You interested?
            ye
          • Nope, we have the buggy

            and the horse can be rented. Just because it's an old idea that does not mean it is not useful. In fact our company earns plenty of extra money from offering things both old and new.
            Michael Kelly
          • I thought Amish people couldn't use electronics.

            Yet here you are :-)
            ye
          • Something you may not know about the Amish

            They have a lot more money than they let on, and they are willing to spend that money to get what they want. And you don't have to be Amish to sell things to them.
            Michael Kelly
          • Ok, fine...

            So if you're outfit isn't Amish, then it *has* to be St. Vincent de Paul. I've much respect for charitable organizations.

            I've got an idea for you: how about applying for government assistance. I hear you can get a government-guaranteed, late-model, GM or Chrysler. You know? Like 'move into' the new millennium - transport-wise, that is.

            ... Mind you, even then you've still got the problem of raising the small fortune you'll need to fill those suckers up at the gas station <sighs>.

            Ahh, i *remember* the good old days ...

            Keep the faith.
            thx-1138_
          • THX-1138...

            My GM product gets great mileage for a gas hog, but then it is a hybrid.

            I've found that if I tweak it right. It hardly ever runs the gas motor in town. When the motor does come on, at idle usually, it only runs on four cylinders out of eight(6 liter). I didn't fill it up for a month after I bought it. I do mostly in town driving.

            As soon as I find a good methanol fuel cell, I'll be running on methanol and getting fantastic mileage! Looks like I'm going to end up with an Oorja unit; as they have a 300v model that might be the ticket.

            Hell, I might rip the gasoline motor out and sell it!
            JCitizen
          • @JCitizen

            I'm an unabashed Chrysler fan myself. But for the cost of gasoline, i'd be hitting Route 66 on a regular basis in a white 1970 Challenger.

            Oh to be ...

            ;^)

            But seriously, and i think to be perfectly honest, there is a lot to be said for the failings of U.S auto-industry. With each passing year, it appears there are a few, almost *spooky* similarities to the way the OS market is evolving: the "Big 3" of Ford, GM and Chrysler as opposed to the "Big 3" in the OS market of MS, Apple and (the combined versions of) Linux.

            Do the two bigger players (i.e. MS and Apple) 'ignore' all the signs and just stay with the current systems architecture they've adopted (x86 and Unix/BSD-based respectively)? OR do they move away from the closed-source architecture design principles each adheres to??? The analogy (good or bad) being how GM and Chrysler have been *all but* consigned to the nearest 'tar pit'. Why? failure to move manufacturing practices toward hybrid and/or electric vehicles (until 'ipso facto').

            The sheer speed at which the Big 3 have imploded lends undeniable proof of the folly that lies in refusing to change and adapt - in time, that is. But then, what time do we have?

            There was, in my firm belief, just a plain and simple failure by (in particular) GM and Chrysler to 'see the signs' - that the internal combustion engine has simply had its day. Like the fossil-fuel they've become so dependent on over many decades, the vehicles that the Big 3 produce are testament to the blatant arrogance and refusal to change.

            Now, ironically, the U.S economy and its citizenry - whom, once so reliant on the Big 3 for employment, revenue and industrial leadership, now, are being 'bled dry' by a steady flow of rapidly escalating "rescue packages".

            It is important to point out that the design concepts for hybrids and electric "cars of tomorrow" were on GM and Chrysler R&D desks years ago. Yes, that's correct .. and yet, did any of the Big 3 so much as budge? Did they even bother to contemplate what hybrid and electric cars could do for their rapidly declining bottom-line revenues???

            I will not speculate as to what MS and Apple have as far as vested interests but to say they are clearly supplanting the old guard: the likes of GM, Chrysler and Ford as power-brokers on capitol-hill.

            I think the American people have just about had all they can take of the capitol-hill posturing and lobbying by the nation's industrialists. The scary truth is, western culture (as we know it) 'teeters precariously' upon the edge of oblivion due to the pig-headed, short-sighted mentality of many past industrialists and ultra-capitalists - and whom (i repeat), the beleaguered public, have now been unwittingly made to rescue.

            A minute late ... and a penny short.

            thx-1138_
          • @THX...

            ONe thing good to report is China adopting FreeBSD as an official secure operating system. If this becomes THAT popular; Redmond should be sweating bullets!

            That could become a world game changer, as more folks would find more applications built for BSD, and maybe Linux too!

            May not be the focus of the story, but exciting none the less.

            Oh, and GM, BMW, and Chrysler/Diamler developed the new 2mode tech that critics say is the best transmission to come along since the Dodge Bros. six speed special. So Chrysler is at least not hurting from the cooperation, but they all took it in the pocket book for the development and manufacturing costs. Ford ducked the bullet by accepting the Japanese Synergy Drive. But I don't think large vehicle loving Americans are going to accept that for long. Sorry for the off topic remarks. I just love the energy tech discussion!(too much)
            JCitizen
          • @JCitizen

            Let's hope for the sakes of Ford, GM and Chrysler - not to mention their collective employee-base, that their new R&D and operational changes are successful.

            You state that you were off topic - and to some degree we both were. However, MS and Apple would do well not to take any leads from the Big 3 book of running a corporation. In that sense, at least, there was relevance in our discussion.

            I like to cover things automotive as well. I think the new engine designs that the Big 3 are working with (some of which you mention) are just the tonic to turn things around in Detroit.

            Grazi
            thx-1138_
          • Bundle, but not integrate. That's the important distinction. [nt]

            [nt]
            olePigeon
          • "the industry" = Microsoft ???

            And by "the industry" I guess you mean Microsoft, huh?

            I know why they included IE into Windows:

            THEY WERE GETTING KILLED IN THE BROWSER WARS BY NETSCAPE AND THE ONLY WAY THEY COULD WIN WAS TO FORCE IT UPON EVERYONE BY MAKING SURE NO ONE COULD BUY WINDOWS WITHOUT IE.

            Do you actually think it's fair that I as a Windows user who uses neither IE, WMP, Outlook Express or Messenger am forced to contribute financially to the development of these applications just because Microsoft wants to earn more money and are to lazy to compete on merit or features?

            I don't expect an answer cause you never give one.

            Typical Microsoft shill/astroturfer...
            EarFix