Microsoft and Opera are both right

IE8 seems to have started passing Acid2 right after Opera's complaint:
http://www.webstandards.org/2007/12/19/ie8-passes-acid2-test-2/

Yeah, sure. Shame that most of the W3C ones aren't the ones IE supports.
Microsoft has been spouting bull about its browser since the dawn of time. We all know why it's bundled - it's the same reason Microsoft used to give away Windows to schools for next to nothing. It's all about capturing and keeping the market.
Besides, if the browser really was such an important part of the OS, you'd think it would get regular updates. That used to be the case - from IE 1.0 in 1995 to IE 6 in 2001, there was just about a new version every year. IE 7 came out in 2007. That's six years of nothing for a "core OS component".
Nothing adds up with Microsoft. It's only about the money.

You know firefox comes with google as the default search engine, and unlike IE 7, it doesn't ask me if I'm cool with that....

Did you know that when I install KDE konqueror is installed?

Pretty sure Safari is pre-installed with a mac...

My car came with a stereo, and tires, and nobody asked me if I was ok with that...

I mean honestly... Microsoft Windows comes with Microsoft software pre-installed, how dare they.

I believe that no one has any right to tell Microsoft what they can and can't include in their software. If you don't like, go elsewhere. There is always OSX and Linux.

Microsoft pays the money for the product to be developed, and you pay Microsoft for the right to use that software. Either accept it the way it is, or don't use it. Its pretty simple. 

I haven't used IE for more than 10-15 minutes in the past 5 years. When Windows is installed, I go right to firefox.com and DL the newest client. After that, IE is never opened up again unless a site is having problems with FF.

Bottom line: If you dont like the product the way it is, don't use it, or learn to get around it. Don't tell a company what they should and should not include because YOUR own product can't cut it.

even though you can choose which browser you want to be the default some programs still open up IE.

I have FF set as my default browser but sometimes, after a software installation, when a program takes you to their web site or something, it opens up IE. And when Paint Shop Pro prompts me with a software update it also opens up IE.

Here is the weird part: I un-installed IE in the "Add/Remove Windows Components" program. And in the "Set Program Access and Defaults" window I unchecked the box that says "Enable Access To This Program".

I remember when I was using nLite to edit one of my XP disks I was trying to remove the extras that I didn't need and it told me that IE is a core part of the system and many programs rely on it.

So, I'm with Opera on this one. M$ needs to let the user have chose which browser they want completely.

"There is no rule or code that prevents users from using any browser they desire to use."

Incorrect. Many sites still REQUIRE MSIE.

No Mention of Mac OSX coming with iTunes, QuickTime, and Safari as default parts of the OS - perhaps more "in your face" than Window's set-up.

Or Ubuntu Linux coming with Firefox as the default browser.

They can whine all they want, but there is simply nothing from stopping any user from downloading an alternate browser or media player onto Windows and using it. And although I despise Vista, Bill Gates et al made it even simpler not only to choose default applications, but even choose with application handles specific file extensions.

If they think that Windows Vista should come loaded with all available browsers and make the customer choose, that's bloatware to me.

Sorry, Opera, but you sound like a sore loser.

My only gripe about IE is Microsoft making it mandatory to use for Windows/Microsoft Update, and some other sites that use Active X exclusively.

Just look how bad M$ web site building is.
Only stupid companies selling hardware use it, but anyway.
Check this site out with eihter IE or any other browser:

http://webshop.eurosys.be/

As you will see, only IE crap works.
Why? 
Don't know, but I need this site a lot and they DO force me into using Windows + IE!

Guess what, they are heavy in bed with M$.

<i>" If they do anything to Microsoft, they better do the same thing to Apple. "</i>

Uh, no. Microsoft are convicted abusive monopolists. So all the rules are different for them. The point is that's legal proof this isn't a normal competitive business environment any more.

It's like a radio in a car, you are given one when you buy and it's easiest to use and designed to interface seamlessly but you still can change if you want. It just might screw your security or something.

I have to come down with M$ on this one. While Opera is a commendable browser with a small footprint, as a Web developer it is a lot easier to write pages for the supposedly non-compliant IE7, than for Opera. Firefox used to be a pain, but lately has improved a lot.

Currently most of my problems come from IE6, mostly from weird rendering bugs. Firefox still has issues because it renders bulleted items and check boxes quite differently than IE, Opera, or Safari.

And the standards are sometimes rubbish, like the article mentions. Despite more than a decade of improvements HTML retains a lot of very poorly conceived features, that web designers have to work around rather than work with.

I tried out Tiger from MacOS a while ago. Suprised, it came bundled with a browser, a media player, and a bunch of other apple crap that they force upon you. Why can Apple do it and MS can't? Every Linux distro I've played with comes with all the same crap bundled and built in. Besides, if you didn't have a browser that came with your OS, how you could even download a different browser? I'm sure most average users would be content getting a blank operating system and having to go use another pc and burn a disc or use a usb drive to download a browser so they can install Firefox. And then download media players that install crappy toolbars and emusic icons on my desktop. Then lets buy defrag software, and search software and a zillion little other tools.

As for Office being a monopoly, how is that? How do they force people to use their format and software? What happened to word perfect, lotus, and all the other office software? How is it MS's fault that they lost?

@RagtagOp:
You mean standards like the XHTML which removed target="_blank" attribute and forced people to figure workarounds for legitimately opening new windows?!?

Or the standards which force you to use back/forward buttons which doesn't work once you cross over the secure page (cache expired on a page == no way back past that page).

Or the standard by which Firefox and Opera have unreasonable margin and padding defaults?!?

Or is the standard the way the latest Firefox 2.0.0.11 underlines hyperlinked images like on this page [http://www.levicki.net/gallery/photos.php] which it didn't do in 2.0.0.9?!?

Or even better, the way Firefox renders transparent tooltips on this page [http://www.levicki.net/gallery/showcat.php?cat=18] in completely different location than IE?!? 

Or the way Firefox changes the selection rectangle size as you mouse over the selected thumbnail on that page?!?

I am sick of you open source zealots. Make it work first and then bitch and moan all you like.

Ask yourself this -- Is there any OS distribution that comes without a browser today?!?

my problem with IE is that theres always this internet "explorer exe" and "iexplore exe" script hogging sources on the OS in task manager, even if you're using firefox. I can understand the need for deleting IE from the OS, its always on, bloating things, and acts as a unseen influencial background browser even when you dont want it running. -
my 2cents worth.

I believe this is a battle between the losers and the winners in life. The losers going after the sucessful Microsoft IE. 

Why don't the losers put the same energy they use to complain about the top dog into developing a new browser for their stinkin selves!

If you want something in life work hard for it and your work just may pay off someday. 

Jealousy is evil.

DonHo

Just because you made a long post does not make it a good one.

If MS had not a monopoly then the issue would be as you put it. But they have an unfair advantage and competitors are complaining, and they are right.

I can't believe someone is stupid enough to try to justify MS here, LOL.

I do think that Opera has a point about Microsoft trying to create some kind of IE monopoly. I use Firefox and actually uninstalled IE7 because I couldn't see myself ever using another version of IE again (especially now I've discovered IE Tab for Firefox).

Anyway, today I had the windows updater start doing its thing - it starts automatically and afaik you can't stop it downloading its stuff. When it came to the installing bit, on a whim I went for 'custom installation' and what did I find?

The updater had downloaded and was waiting to install ANOTHER copy of IE7 for me. Yeah, like that's going to happen...
I'm fine with Internet Exploder being pre-installed with Windows but once I've made my choice of browser, how about leaving me alone after that?

I'm also with Opera (now) about the need for a a single web page standard or whatever as I just had to 'Switch rendering engine' to IE in Firefox (IE Tab) because the verification code needed to post this comment wouldn't show up in Firefox...

I'm not sure why Opera is having to resort to such tactics to try to boost market share.

Maybe because most Linux distributions bundle Firefox as default browser?

Opera is good, (I never read the Inq. with anything else), but it is in an awkward niche. 

It is free, but not open source, so it tends not to get bundled with Linux distributions, because having proprietary source code is heretical to the open source religion.

On the other hand it has to compete with IE on Windows, and a lot of Windows users simply accept what is dished out to them without ever thinking about alternatives.

People who now can't live without tabbed browsing in IE and Firefox, and plenty of other innovations Opera has introduced over the years, should at least take the thing for a spin now and again, so the guys at Opera can stick to coming up with innovative browser features, instead of embarking on futile outbursts regarding Microsoft.

Opera have stated that they don't have an issue with bundling per-se, and would be happy enough with MS bundling IE PROVIDED it was standards compliant. 

They see the problem as one of MS using IE, and its non-compliance, to skew the web and reduce the number of sites that will support alternate browsers. i.e. Developers continuing to build sites that are IE compliant only and will not support FF, SAFARI, OPERA etc etc.

Opera clearly stated that they don't have an issue with Apple bundling Safari, or Ubuntu bundling FireFox. They further said that while it should be easy for people to choose alternates (same as they can choose alternate search engines) they primarily object to MS bundling a BROKEN IE and being totally recalcitrant about fixing it, as being broken suits their own agenda.

Let me get this straight: Opera Software wants Microsoft to make IE fully compliant--effectively making it a *better* browser--and this will somehow level the playing field? Do they think Microsoft will remove the special Microsoft hacks/extensions too? Doubt it. So in effect, they'll have everything everyone else has and then some. What will make people want to switch if Microsoft now becomes the end-all-be-all browser?

If they take IE out, how are you going to get Opera or Firefox? Sure its possible if you know what you're doing, but most people don't. If they don't have a web browser built it, then they'll never get one, unless they have to go buy it.

It's the uninstall stupid ! That's how they get there way. You can't get rid of it easy like any other program. As long as they can keep it that way the abusive monopolist will never end. It's there advantage. Nobody seem to question that part. I mean uninstall, not just get rid of the icons.

Personally I uninstall. Nobody has figured out how with Vista yet though.

That's the other one too Ever notice how there market share is growing with Vista ever so slowly even though they spend nothing on ads ? You see Mac Ads all the time but where are the Vista ads ?. They don't have to advertise Its already installed on 99% of the computers. 

There the same old abusive monopolist that they have always been. They need to get kicked down to size once and for all.

I use opera myself - very good on 'screen estate' unlike others... it has a multitude of things all built into a small file , unlike FF, that needs many different files to get almost the same result..

But even I am getting sick of their 'reticence'... :(

If opera were a person, he would be a bit agoraphobic, prefering online contact only (everyone does it, dont they??), and they would visit many big places, with their 'close friends'... but not want to see the 'real public'(those that read magazines, etc, and any thought of being 'out there', shocking, grabbing attention, is where insanity lies.....

such a shame... that is just why his mate FF has all the appreciation now.... shocked a lot of people, got 'gangsta' rep, now getting all the plusses...







There is no rule or code that prevents users from using any browser they desire to use. In fact as can be seen on many forums people DO choose to use different ones. While it is true that MOST people may use IE because it's right there 'in their face' with windows that does not negate their choice to do otherwise.

As for the standards argument I would argue that when IE has by far the 'share of the market' it is in fact the def facto standard. Nobody is going to design their web site to only be viewed by Opera, Safari or even Firefox due to this fact. It is also common knowledge that these same designers do try to fit these other 'standards' into the pages for those users who wish not to use IE.

If Opera thinks it's unfair that people default to IE then they need to actively and consistently show these people WHY they should switch. And the fact that most responses to 'why?' revolve around security and such shows that for the 'average' user this is not enough of a compelling argument to switch.

Do these browsers offer 'more' than IE? In some cases the answer is yes. Did MS incorporate IE into Windows to shut down Netscape back in the day? Most likely they did. But tell me ANY business that doesn't try to get their customers to 'stay in their store'.

Wal-Mart does by making Super Centers so people can get their groceries while they shop for clothes, electronics etc. Grocery stores do it with liquor/beer so that they can get more money instead of the liquor stores.

Instead of crying about it they should be courting the PC makers to push their browser onto more installed desktops right out of the box. If MS punishes the manufactures for doing so then that is a different argument all together.

With that said perhaps MS should have an initial set up screen where you choose which browser people decide to use the first time they try to connect to the internet with no default setting. Of course people would still cry foul if IE was at the top of that list as well. But at least it would remove one layer of the demonize MS camps arguments.

If they do anything to Microsoft, they better do the same thing to Apple.


Microsoft states that the integration of IE is there to benefit the customers and that the customers have the freedom to choose another browser. Well then, why doesn't that same model apply to MS Office? Due to MS's monopoly, most people are forced to use MS Office apps so why doesn't MS just provide it as part of the OS? The simple answer is that, unlike the browser market, they don't have to (ie. money and marketshare). MS Office owns the productivity suite marketshare so they have no reason to give it away. And their format is proprietary so they have a built in advantage which allows them to control the market. The same can't be said for the browser. Thanks to the better judgement of most web developers, the internet hasn't become locked into IE's proprietary coding tactics.and so people actually have the ability to choose the tool they want to use to view websites. What keeps IE's market share inflated is that MS is relying on the fact that most users don't know any better and will just use what's in front of them. I'm sure this is the real reason MS went to great lengths to force vendors from installing other browsers onto their default images. And now people are used to how IE works and most people don't like change so now they are locked in like little lemmings.

..except even when firefox is installed, vista won't let you choose it as the preferred browser over IE under "default programs".

I think Opera guys went too far this time. Had they settled only on compliance to web standards (supporting which is the tagline of their browser), they might actually achieve something, if only the publicity.

I use Opera myself and I think it's great, it has this sleek and rigid feel to it. Besides, one can see that guys really try to invent something new, especially in the field of user interface, not following blindly M$-Officesque paradigm of controls. I started to hate HM$ Office's inertious bloat after using opera's mail client for some time. Opera has some issues (though few), with properly rendering pages heavily infected with IE-specific content. I think they should've attacked MS from this side.

I just wish that they would uncouple IE from the OS (same with media player).... i would like to be able to uninstall it completely.

The only reason they don't is to keep up the monopoly - and of course to have a reason to not make their own sites (i found a few the other day) incompatible with other browsers (e.g. Firefox 2)

Talk about your sour grapes. Opera hasn't grown its market share while Firefox, IE, Safari and others have and they need to blame someone. Nothing to see, move along.

Since when was full compatibility and compliance with the standards set for HTML, XML, CSS and DOM asking Microsoft to support "rubbish" standards? The fact of the matter is that IE7 still can't pass the Acid2 test.

Of course, some may ask, what's standard if it doesn't work with the majority of users' browsers? Wouldn't it be nice if instead of making a page to deal with one browser's quirks and hoping it will show up half-decently in another browser, you can just whip something up, test it to a standard, and know that it will work on all the browsers out there? Uniformity of presentation of web pages should have been mastered long ago; browsers really should only differentiate themselves with usability features and perks (luckily, the Inq looks as good on Opera at home as it does IE at work).

And both Firefox and Opera have drop-dead simply and effective migration tools. So no excuses there.