Mozilla Joins EU Antitrust Case Against Microsoft

[blackened144]

[citation][nom]n3aRd3aTh[/nom]The end word is this yes, but it's just censuring of criticism. Criticism is diffenrent from complaining. Complaining is a demand for a change, criticism is a suggestion for a change. And not because one is using something, that he does'nt have the right to critic it. I have choice, I run Ubuntu, Vista and XP in multiboot, and still I use XP most of the time cause I like it. It's a great, fast, compatible and easy to use OS indeed. But it's not perfect either.[/citation]

But your apparent support for the EU to go after Microsoft goes WAY past criticism.

 

[n3ard3ath]

'There will always be security flaws when one is connected to the internet, IE is the least of them. Has anyone thought about the computer illiterate, the people who aren't power users. Microsoft has their browser in place for them.'

That's exactly what's bothering. Noobies all over the world running a browser with ActiveX and GPO vulnerabilities. Anyway, I already posted too much, those who can't understand this point will never.

 

[n3ard3ath]

'But your apparent support for the EU to go after Microsoft goes WAY past criticism.' Do you read what I write or just half of it? I said it was'nt a anti-trust problem and that forcing a third party browser into the OS is ridiculous. So EU reasons for attacking MS are not really honest. But with EU pushing in MS back, now is the time for them to make change to their browser market approach, not just the changes that EU want, but that MS can come up with.

 

[NuclearShadow]

I guess the guys at Mozilla won't be getting a cake from the IE boys next time a new version of Firefox is released.

 

[saravis4]

[citation][nom]n3aRd3aTh[/nom]Noobies all over the world running a browser with ActiveX and GPO vulnerabilities.[/citation]
There's nothing you can do about that. The computer illiterate will always be their own security flaw. How many people, that you know, don't even secure their wireless connection? Besides, if one isn't using IE do activex and GPO vulnerabilities still exist. Unless I'm missing something, please educate me, these flaws only exist when they get installed via browsing to certain sites that implement them. If one was to open up IE, download and install Firefox, change the default, and use FF from then on is IE still that much of a security flaw?

 

[blackened144]

[citation][nom]n3aRd3aTh[/nom]'But your apparent support for the EU to go after Microsoft goes WAY past criticism.' Do you read what I write or just half of it? I said it was'nt a anti-trust problem and that forcing a third party browser into the OS is ridiculous. So EU reasons for attacking MS are not really honest. But with EU pushing in MS back, now is the time for them to make change to their browser market approach, not just the changes that EU want, but that MS can come up with.[/citation]

I read everything you wrote, Ive read every word on the thread.. I think I just replied to the wrong post though.. Looking back through the thread I cant even find the post I meant to reply to anyway..

 

[n3ard3ath]

[citation][nom]saravis4[/nom]There's nothing you can do about that. The computer illiterate will always be their own security flaw. How many people, that you know, don't even secure their wireless connection? Besides, if one isn't using IE do activex and GPO vulnerabilities still exist. Unless I'm missing something, please educate me, these flaws only exist when they get installed via browsing to certain sites that implement them. If one was to open up IE, download and install Firefox, change the default, and use FF from then on is IE still that much of a security flaw?[/citation]

You are right indeed, concerning the ActiveX vulnerabilities. But GPOs exploits can still be performed via a virus or spyware. Then again, it's the user's fault for not running an anti-virus (still, I got infected by Virtumonde virus, which mess with GPOs, while running an up-to-date free Antiviri and SpyBot), and any other GPOs can be affected that way (like disabling regedit), you're right. It's just that those GPOs expending to the browser ones can expend the damage, are not necessary and could be avoided by making it independant. There is absolutly no reason for it to be that way unless your in a controlled business network. And I'm not a web developper, but I'm pretty sure dariushro is right about IE slowing down web developpement, but that is another matter.

 

[n3ard3ath]

[citation][nom]blackened144[/nom]I read everything you wrote, Ive read every word on the thread.. I think I just replied to the wrong post though.. Looking back through the thread I cant even find the post I meant to reply to anyway..[/citation]

Lol, ok.

 

[IzzyCraft]

Ha-ha it's bullshit imo.

What the EU is saying is hey Microsoft advertise for your competition it's only fair. I mean common opera is a company builds a great browser but no operating systems and they do it for allot of platforms it's totally fair that you Microsoft a software company should advertise for another.

Why the EU remove chrome advertisement all over everything Google doesn’t owns its unfair right?

It's not like you can only use live search and mail when you have IE installed
OMG don’t want IE on your computer STFU don’t run windows if you don’t want IE, don’t want the 1000324 security holes that pop up annually update your IE everyone and awhile removes a huge chuck of those so call risks.

Want Microsoft not to include a media player? So when some guy that doesn’t know shit about computers trys to play a DVD on his computer or something will get a pop up telling him ionno what that is. And eventually he’ll just download wmp anyways. Or VLC or GOM really I mean if it’s not going to be installed Microsoft will just have the help prompt tell you where to get it. Or perhaps they want the help prompts to tell them about the other media players first.

Really about business there are unfair practices that would be forced on Microsoft, unfair to them.

Is it their fault not enough ppl use Mac’s or Linux or w.e. You have a choice not to have Microsoft perhaps it’s unfair for programs to only run on windows they should be forced to work on all platforms. This is really just ridiculous anti-trust lawsuit. Imo it’s like telling a carmaker to offer different tires steering wheels and other things which you can customize yourself if you wanted to but probably don’t care enough to.

Why not force every computer seller to not install trail shit all over every computer they sell.

Idk about security flaws in terms of just pure anti trust it's no more anti trust then any other packaged deal. Omg i can't get atnt fios without uverse so then i have a choice not to get uverse. Why not force linux companys and mac to have more displays in stores why not force mac to have other ppl sell their computers.

 

[eddieroolz]

[citation][nom]blackened144[/nom]I also bet that most of the people complaining are running Windows.[/citation]
Of course. This is a computer hardware site after all, and who the hell uses Linux when building a gaming rig?

Besides, this has nothing to do with Windows users complaining. This has to do with EU trying to milk out every penny Microsoft's got. That practice is despicable.

On another note, if EU wants to complain so bad, why not just STFU AND USE MAC! No one is preventing the European people from using Macs or Linux distros. The fact that no one bought Windows XP N should've shown the EU so-called "judges" that no one wanted features to be removed. I don't think anyone outside the enthusiast community gives a crap about having IE on their machine. Many of my friends' laptops still have IE on it, but they download and use Firefox. Uprooting IE will cause more problems than fix it.

Eventually, EU will go after Microsoft as a whole. Probably will claim that the name infringes on some European company. And don't give me crap about EU is being more forward-looking or future-minded, this is just a nonsense way to make money.

 

[cruiseoveride]

jeez... as if anyone still uses microsoft anymore

 

[kelfen]

[citation][nom]Bone Squat[/nom]If FF wants their share of the market so bad then they should monopolize like MS. I like IE much better than crappy firefox or others. It's better as far as I can tell. It's the easiest to use and least intrusive plus it's built into Windows which makes it all that much better. I don't mind integration as long as it isnt bloatware. And IE is NOT bloatware. Power to MS for monopolizing Operating systems, DirectX (you have to buy vista to get DX10 +) and browsers. You guys rule.[/citation]
agree 100% stupid thing thinks everything is an addon ticks me off when I want to run a program and download then I have to go back to interet explorer to do so.

 

[ravenware]

Cry me a river. What's next, are we going to see software publisher come out against the inclusion of computer solitaire? How dare Microsoft allow it's customers access to the internet. Why aren't they perusing apple for it's inclusion of safari?

Fu** Opera, I never liked their browser much anyway.

 

[afrobacon]

They should just make a stripped down version of Windows; no M$ crapware included. Let the user install the browser of their liking and all the 3rd party software they want.

Every time I reinstall the Windows OS I spend hours deleting M$ products and replacing them with something useful. You won't find IE, paint, M$ games, any of the original system tools on my computer.

 

[m3kt3k]

What are with some of you hignminded morons? Nothing is stoping you from making your own os, Selling systems with linux or founding a company to take on MS. Just because you dont like them dosent mean they suck. Out of several OS's I have tried windows is the most flexable and has the most software. Jesus linux cant even limint itself to less then 10 versions because every crap little company makes a different version. OHHHH RIGHT there is OSX yea that is so much better. Make a system that can run it and try to sell it and get sued.

 

[saravis4]

[citation][nom]n3aRd3aTh[/nom]You are right indeed, concerning the ActiveX vulnerabilities. But GPOs exploits can still be performed via a virus or spyware. Then again, it's the user's fault for not running an anti-virus (still, I got infected by Virtumonde virus, which mess with GPOs, while running an up-to-date free Antiviri and SpyBot), and any other GPOs can be affected that way (like disabling regedit), you're right. It's just that those GPOs expending to the browser ones can expend the damage, are not necessary and could be avoided by making it independant. There is absolutly no reason for it to be that way unless your in a controlled business network. And I'm not a web developper, but I'm pretty sure dariushro is right about IE slowing down web developpement, but that is another matter.[/citation]
While I don't have a problem with making it independent, I don't really think there is that much of a need. The computer illiterate will always need their applications served to them on a silver platter, IE is installed with Windows for this purpose. Those who are power users will utilize whatever they so please and will, if smart enough, take the appropriate measures to ensure security, whether they are using IE, Firefox, or whatever. If anything making it independent would compromise a computer illiterate's computer. I would never put it past the stupid to accidentally uninstall their web browser. Granted they could just have a tech reinstall the web browser, but you know that complaints will arise. You said it yourself, people need to implement AV to protect themselves from harm and that is the only way, making it independent will not be enough to protect IE from harm. Viruses will find ways to get around obstacles. Virus protection is an ongoing battle and the only way to fight it is to stay up to date with definitions. That's just the simple reality of the situation. Nothing anybody can do about it.

As far as IE slowing web development, perhaps, but other web browsers, not having as much influence, are forced to better their product, so that they can get a bigger piece of the pie. Having one on top will always force those behind to get better and will keep the one on top continually striving to remain on top, this is competition.

 

[falchard]

[citation][nom]zip-it[/nom]Next on the hit list is Ms Paint and Calculator. Who said I wanted Their calculator? >If I were microsoft Id stick it to them and not provide anything. See how they manage to get some browser installed when they got none in a fresh install.[/citation]

I agree, a fully licensed copy of Photoshop should be included in every windows OS.

 

[owdee]

this is a ridiculous lawsuit because, in effect, it would cripple windows. the best argument in favor of the lawsuit (IE not being able to be uninstalled easily) is, in fact, the best argument against the lawsuit. think about it. 99.9% of the computer-using population would NEVER know how to get a working browser back onto their system if they accidentally uninstalled IE. no one wants to install an operating system and have to jump through hoops just to get on the internet. people want their computers to "just work." they want to install windows and they want everything to work out of the box. without a browser, that will never happen.

 

[randomizer]

I think you people are missing the point. What makes this "anti-competitive" is that because most people use Windows, they use whatever browser comes with it, which is IE. That means that only those who know what a browser is and how/where to get a different one will try. Therefore Microsoft has control over the majority of computer illiterates. If users were given a choice at installation time as to what browser to include, or better yet, when they first try to connect to the internet (because many will have Windows pre-installed), that would mean some will try something different. Not all, but more than now. You don't need a browser to connect to the internet, you just need a tool which will download the selected browser for you.

Alternatively, Dell could add browsers as a customisation option for their computers. There should be no added cost because that would mean people will again choose the "free" IE.

Microsoft is not innocent in all this, they WANT to control the market as any multi-billion-dollar corporation does, but a large reason for their monopoly is user ignorance.

 

[htoonthura]

Why everyone is picking on Microsoft? Let MS grow. If you do not like IE, you have all the options to choose different browsers. It is ridiculous.