Mozilla steps up to knife Microsoft

I'm not sure it matters that Windows is shipped with IE built in.

As the operating system (and IE) age, the impetus to install a newer third party browser becomes greater.

Currently I only use IE to access my router's setup pages.

By contrast I have never wanted to update or replace Windows Media Player because I don't much care how good or bad it is.

They should thank Microsoft. Without Microsoft, Netscape would have never released its code to the public and Firefox would not exist at all. If Mitchell wants a suggestion for how to stop Microsoft's "domination" how about realizing that internet browsers are essentially a dead market nowadays? No that won't stop the "domination" but it's the fact of life. If there is one reason why IE still has 70% of the market despite few updates over the past half decade, it's because it's good enough for most people to not need to seek out anything else. As such, no amount of "uncoupling" of the OS and browser is going to make Firefox or Opera any more popular because people simply don't care that much anymore. Are they going to pay Dell to install it on their machine instead of IE? That kind of marketing lost its appeal long ago. Give it up and concentrate on making something that will compel people to switch on their own.

Increasingly, this is looking liks a battle that Microsoft cannot win, simply because it is not WORTH winning. It's no longer about market-share, since - however many actually use it - IE has no identifiable fan-base. Most of the people who still use it, do so, because they do not know that there are alternatives. Building a product for the digitally-illiterate is no kind of business plan. The effort of producing a standards-compliant web rendering engine is something well suited to the aims of a non-profit, since no one is going to pay money for a web browser, anyway. Furtheromore, it's an effort whose rewards can only ever result in something that is 'good enough', by definition. Is the browser standards-compliant? Yes? Does the page render right? No? Then the page is wrong. Is the page standards-compliant? Yes? Does it render right? No? than the browser is wrong... Where, exactly, is the market-differentiator in that sort of market? Meanwhile, a buzz of third-party plugin developers continue to make the alternative offerings look so much more compelling and interesting than Explorer, despite the fact that Explorer can have plugins developed for it, too. No one bothers to develope plugins for IE, however, simply because, like AOL, IE is something that only Grandad uses, these days, and Grandad doesn't use plugins. IE is a leaden albatross around Microsoft's neck - consuming developer resources, while acting as a magnet for negative press coverage... and all the time, it only ever able to claim that it's "half as crap as it was": which is a bit like Lotus launching a campaign to say their cars now only leak half as much oil, as they did previously. This is not to say that Microsoft won't continue haemorrhaging money on Internet Explorer, of course, but that most people, who know, regard the effort as rather irrelevant.

you can't stop MS from bundling IE in Windows, it's like a freebie you get when you buy Windows, just like you get Safari, iPhoto, iMovie, etc., when you buy Apple's OS X. But the fact that you can't uninstall IE from Windows at all is wrong.

If Windows didn't ship with IE, how would you download Opera or Firefox?

Perhaps the EC could focus this time on the impact which MSIE-"optimised" web sites have on the market, and software companies in the EU. The EC could simply force government agencies, banks and dealers in the EU to comply 100% with the W3 standards. Microsoft would not be able to misuse their monopoly position. Of course the same should apply to all proprietary software, not just from Microsoft. For example, a bank which forces customers to install (insecure) Adobe Macromedia Flash software should be banned from doing business online.

As someone mentioned, lets drag Apple into court too, as they only release OSX with Safari, oh wait and 90% of linux distros have FireFox as default browsers so I guess we need to get Mozilla beind the table with MS.

It is all garbage, as has been said countless time, People do not care what browser they use. If Mozilla and Opera want to get people to use their product then try to educate them and not drag MS into court and waste everyones time.

"IE has no identifiable fan-base. Most of the people who still use it, do so, because they do not know that there are alternatives"

Well said. Out of a few dozen individuals that I have introduced Firefox or Opera to, only one person actually preferred IE and continues to use it.

Yes you can,put all icons on desktop and let people choose. Make sure that IE is a standalone browser that does not intertwine with the OS. Its all about installing and portals for the uninformed.

It is is pretty amazing that an IE competitor can compete with IE and do this well when the IE and windows OS comes pre-installed on 99% of all high street PCs. (Knowing that most of these suppliers don't even give you the option to purchase a PC with an alternative OS)
If you have never tried Moz, you are missing out!

I really don't see why Microsoft (or any organisation) would care too much about being the dominant web browser. It only costs them money to build, money to support and maintain, money to upgrade, and what does it give them in return? The chance to default the initial home page to their search engine?

They don't (thank god) embed advertising in web browsers, and most regular users don't care what they use as long as it works and doesn't annoy them.

I'm writting this in Firefox, however I would only ever upgrade friend/family if they ask for or needed it (plugin use for example).

The only benefit I see from the browser wars is increased innovation, which we can thank the recent batch on FF for a few years ago forcing MS to pull their finger out.

I think I'd rather just start out with IE and then download what I preferred than having everyone's version of everything swamping my disk at install time.

My other big wish is to have a 'works straight out of the box' Windows OS that doesn't need 120 questions to install.

I'm also with BB. I don't need a million bells and whistles to read a web page. Just give me anything that works and I'm happy. I use Firefox pretty much exclusively at work (the techy plugins are great) but have no need for them at home so use IE most of the time.
Haven't even bothered installing Firefox on my laptop. Would I have if given the chance at install?... You know what, I'd probably have to toss a coin.

"A big cheese at Mozzarella, Mitchell Baker, said in her bog"

Could we trust anyone that release statements from a toilet?

dont why you are all complaining about IE and saying firefox/opera are great. Firefox/Opera should write their own damned OS rather than hijack Microsofts. MS should be allowed to do whatever they want with their OS, afterall there alternatives.

Obviously we would use telnet :) to download our web browsers. Oh wait a second, that isnt installed by default.

"Currently I only use IE to access my router's setup pages. "

Why is that? Because your router "makes you" by default use IE? Maybe we should investigate your router??

Oh....I happen to like IE8...... does that matter? LOL

Quote: "It's no longer about market-share, since - however many actually use it - IE has no identifiable fan-base. Most of the people who still use it, do so, because they do not know that there are alternatives. "

Apparently you do not work in the enterprise realm. Pick your favorite browser, and try deploying, configuring, and updating it centrally on a large computer fleet without leaving your desk. Now try restricting add-ons/extensions to the ones you deem safe, and enforcing security settings on the browser, whether the users want to cooperate or not.

After a decade, IE still stands alone as the only Windows browser with a functional central-management system, via Group Policy, WSUS and MBSA. I think Mozilla could easily come up with a central-management console, analogous to those used to deploy, configure and enforce settings upon enterprise security software, but they seem to not know, or not care, about the needs of the enterprise market.

Why, in the first place, would you want to enforce policy upon a browser that is not integrated into the OS, like FF? Firefox is build around a sand-box, so even when on unsafe websites one still doesn't have to worry that a hidden ActiveX is sneaking behind his/her back. Plus, FF is so customizable when it comes to security plugins (see ABP, for example) that only a MS bred admin would want to stick to IE...

F'*ing Fireferret. Its worse that IE by COUNTRY MILES!!!! I now use Iron and IE sometimes cus its slow.

But really? What gives them the right to dictate what a business should do with their product????? Mozzarella GO BUILD YOUR OWN fuking OS and then bitch. Everyone is piggybacking on MS success and then they bitch cus MS is so good at what they do. ... WHAT HAVE THE ROMANS EVER DONE FOR US????

When my mom's lappy got that Antivirus 2009 worm IE got borked... so i got her Fireferret and her 1st reaction?!!? .... WHERE IS THE INTERNET ICON? Blue E??? I had to change the icon and then she absolutely hated it. oohh it doesnt work .... ooohh it its asking me q's ... aaahhh take it off and give me INTERNET back. Had to format whole lappy and give her INTERNET back, and IE 6 at that!!!! Fireferrets my ass.

"Building a product for the digitally-illiterate is no kind of business plan."

Erm, isn't that Apple's current business plan?

(Gets coat)

Is it Apple's business plan? Well, maybe, but Apple SELL their products. There's nothing wrong with a business plan that makes money - and having rich, gadget-obsessed customers is a good starting point. What I meant, was, building a product, for free, and then giving it away to people who barely know how to use it, and have no intention of ever paying you for it, is a business plan that has about as much life, as sticking your ISP CDs on the front covers of Hello! magazine. Oh, and @mechBgon... Please skip me this bullshit about 'Enterprise rollouts'. If this was the big selling point for IE, then we wouldn't keep hearing about all the 'Enterprises' that get infected with viruses targeting vulnerabilities which Microsoft patched last year, would we? Its always the 'enterprises' that hire cheap Windows Wonks, to manage their networks, and insist on Internet-Explorer-only-policies, that always get these infections and suffer these vulnerabilities, isn't it? I suppose from inside the distortion field of such an 'enterprise', your argument makes sense, but I'll wave to you, if I happen to be driving past your 'enterprise', the day it folds, and you find yourself carrying your belongings out in a cardboard box. Look on the bright side, sonny: when Active Directory is no more, there'll still be beefburgers!

What I don't understand is why some people feel the need to defend Microsoft (or Apple for that matter). It's a large corporation for Job's sake! It would happily skin and eat you alive if such an act was allowed by law had any business merit.

If Apple boys act like the self-appointed Church Missionary Society, Microsoft defenders seem more like the Ignorance & Illiteracy Club.

I believe I understand the species philocorporatus.
They have been brought up since Reagan became president and have been fed a steady diet of "the Free Market Is Holy". Since under the free market Microsoft was free to screw Netscape and screw up html standards by bundling I. E. with Windows, then, of course, that act was Good.
QED