Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Backs Down On Making IE8 Default At Upgrade

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the you-call-that-backing-down-huh dept.

Microsoft 160

Barence writes "Internet Explorer 8 will no longer replace the default browser when a user selects the 'Use express settings' option during installation. Back in May, Mozilla and Opera accused Microsoft of force-feeding users Internet Explorer 8 through the Automatic Updates process. The object of their ire was the 'Use express settings' option which automatically sets Internet Explorer 8 as the default browser. The option was already ticked when Automatic Updates offered users the choice to upgrade their browser. 'We heard a lot of feedback from a lot of different people and groups and decided to make the user choice of the default browser even more explicit,' notes Microsoft in a blog post."

cancel ×

160 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Browsers War (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755073)

If you don't use IE do not upgrade it and it won't change your default browser

Re:Browsers War (1)

lordandmaker (960504) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755107)

That's been my plan thus far.

I've no idea what it'll do if I upgrade to it, so I'm sticking with IE6 on my PC, and IE7 on everyone else's.

"In this case, we are afraid to be evil." (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755759)

The problem with not upgrading is that something else may use the browser, and an old Microsoft browser will be buggy, probably.

Google: Don't do evil.
Microsoft: Evil for profit.

Google: It's finished, but we call it beta.
Microsoft: It's beta, but we call it finished. (All of our customers are part of our beta test team.)

"Internet Explorer 8 will no longer replace the default browser when a user selects the 'Use express settings' option during installation. ... 'We heard a lot of feedback from a lot of different people and groups and decided to make the user choice of the default browser even more explicit,' notes Microsoft in a blog post."

Translation: "We do as much evil as we can. But we are afraid of another anti-trust investigation [amazon.com] ."

All my opinion, but I'm not the only one.

Re:"In this case, we are afraid to be evil." (2, Insightful)

noundi (1044080) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756409)

Mostly I agree with your post. I'd probably change the word evil for something with more substance. Also google works for profit as well. Anyway whatever one might think I'd say there's little doubt about one part of your post:

But we are afraid of another anti-trust investigation.

Perhaps I'm paranoid, perhaps I'm a fanboy, perhaps I love spreading FUD, or perhaps I've never heard anything from Microsoft that ever even remotely sounded like this:

We heard a lot of feedback from a lot of different people and groups and decided to make the user choice of the default browser even more explicit

Something just doesn't sound right, and I doubt I'm the only one feeling that.

Re:Browsers War (3, Insightful)

IBBoard (1128019) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755117)

And then you just leave yourself with outdated and potentially bug-riddled software still installed on your machine. The better option would be to remove IE completely if you don't use it, but that's obviously not possible ;)

Re:Browsers War (5, Interesting)

mlts (1038732) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755229)

All my machines went to IE8, even though I use Firefox as my browser of choice. Three reasons:

1: Security. You always want stuff that handles protentially hostile code as updated as possible. IE6 was made for the security threats of 2001. IE8 is made for far more current threats. Nothing is perfect, but IE has gotten a lot better as times have gone on. It has decent clickjacking protection, and seems to have had done a good job in standing up to NSS Labs's security tests.

2: Features. Auto-zapping all history and cache, and InPrivate browsing make it decently usable for those sites which require IE, or don't work well with Firefox.

3: Compatibility mode. There are some sites which still assume that everyone is going to be using IE6 for the forseeable future.

Re:Browsers War (4, Funny)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755519)

What the hell is this? A well structured, informative, and easily accessible statement of reasons why IE8 isn't rubbish? Clearly, you must be new here!

Kindly fall into line behind the blind F/OSS advocates to add your X to the list of people who think Microsoft is bad like the rest of the sheep without considering any alternate opinion! Your valid reasoning is not welcome here.

Re:Browsers War (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755651)

Nice troll. But, maybe try for a little more opacity in the shilling next time.

Re:Browsers War (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755841)

Since the "whoosh" meme is a bit played out, I'll try a different one: ::Toooooooooooooot::
Hear that? That's the sound of you missing the boat.

Re:Browsers War (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28756393)

No, fucktard, I got the message crystal clearly. Here, for the slow, I'll explain.

This is how it works. An article is put up that exposes Microsoft for the underhanded tactic du jour. Obviously the article is critical, why wouldn't it be? Microsoft does some sneaky shit, they get criticized. That's how it works for anybody, even the precious purveyor of the mighty Windows. Then the softies wait for somebody to innocently post how they don't really see a problem with what happened, (see GGGP) and then they pounce with the classic response of mock sarcasm with the intent of exposing the supposed anti-Microsoft pro-F/OSS group-think Slashdot party line and how the GGGP (the pawn) must be some unenlightened fool for not going along (wink wink). There are variations on this theme to make it seem genuine but, you aren't really fooling anybody.

It's well-known that Microsoft has paid astroturfers. So, no, I wasn't "whooshed" or "tooted" or whatever childish bullshit you want to say. You are trolling and you are a shill.

Re:Browsers War (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28756941)

Jesus dude, take your meds. I think that your hate for MS is so strong taht you must have a secret gay crush on Bill Gates. Otherwise your undies wouldn't be in such a bundle.

Re:Browsers War (1)

johny42 (1087173) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756269)

What the hell is this? A well structured, informative, and easily accessible statement of reasons why IE8 isn't rubbish? Clearly, you must be new here!

Nobody said IE8 isn't rubish. It's just better than IE6.

Re:Browsers War (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28756769)

Nobody said Firefox isn't rubbish. It's just better than IE8.

Fixed that!

Re:Browsers War (2, Informative)

Starayo (989319) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755765)

1: Security.

QFT.

I am finding I'm running into many applications that use embedded IE to access the internet. Two off the top of my head are Steam and Darkfall Online - Steam of course uses it for its store, community pages, and in-game overlay's web browser, while Darkfall used a horribly implemented system for its journal, clan pages etc.

There are many others, and if you're using one which happens to stumble upon a compromised site you'd be better off with a newer IE, I'd think.

Re:Browsers War (2, Interesting)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756399)

on wine AFAIK, you don't actually need to install IE to get steam working, there is some sort of hack to get it working using gecko! can this be done on windows? OFC if embedded IE uses IE6bugs then IE8 with compatibility mode is probably your only choice,

Re:Browsers War (1)

spectre_240sx (720999) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757785)

Oh, this just gave me an idea. Has anyone thought of creating a standard interface to speak to rendering engines for internal program use? This could rid us of a lot of pain if it caught on.

Re:Browsers War (1)

Bigbutt (65939) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757097)

Heck, I have applications on my machine that use IE as their display engine (I guess). So when IE gets upgraded, my scanner software stops working. Finally HP addressed it with a patch so it'd use IE 8 but it was annoying for a bit that I couldn't use the HP software to change the default settings.

[John]

Re:Browsers War (4, Interesting)

Dotren (1449427) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755235)

If you don't use IE do not upgrade it and it won't change your default browser

Or you can update it and just be sure to uncheck the "default browser" option. I realize that not everyone knows how to do that but its not one of the harder things to change.

I do find it funny though that all of these companies are essentially fighting over the users ignorant of how to do such things. I suppose it makes sense in a way, if you can snag the majority of these people, you'll have them for ages AND you'll never have to give them new features because they won't understand how to use them anyways. They'll be endlessly happy with whatever you throw at them as long as it doesn't complicate things any more for them and still lets them access the internet.

What crap... (4, Interesting)

tengeta (1594989) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755093)

Mozilla can't complain, the last few times I installed Firefox it had an automatically checked box to make it default. Then again, they did complain with Opera, so some stupidity was due.

Re:What crap... (4, Informative)

hodet (620484) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755161)

..and does it really matter? Anyone using Firefox or Opera will just click their Firefox/Opera icon like they usually do and be prompted to set it back. The rest of the world who don't know what Firefox and Opera are will continue to use IE.

Re:What crap... (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755285)

I'm lazy. My Windows menu (formerly Start menu) has my default Internet browser at the top, and that's what I usually use to launch it, rather than hunting for it on my Desktop or All Programs menu.

It's a known location that's in the same spot regardless of whether I'm using XP at work or Vista/7 at home.

Re:What crap... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755381)

Well, laziness comes with a price. I guess you're paying it.

Re:What crap... (3, Insightful)

lordandmaker (960504) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755443)

Well, laziness comes with a price. I guess you're paying it.

Isn't half the point of a computer that you don't need to pay such a price for being lazy?

Re:What crap... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755687)

Guess not.

Re:What crap... (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755543)

Right click > Pin to Start Menu.

Hell, you can manually drag the icon there if you're really that lazy.

Remember, it's not being lazy to leave the icon where it is and work harder every time; It's being lazy to move to where it causes the least work.

Re:What crap... (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755767)

I just right click pretty much anywhere and hit Firefox. Openbox is wonderful. I don't need to worry about pinning, plopping or any of that. ;)
[though I will admit that it took a minute or two of my life to get it setup right, but now that's out of the way...]

Re:What crap... (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756343)

There's an Internet icon that picks up on your default browser. That's the icon he's talking about. If he followed you're advice, FF would be listed there twice, which is a waste of space.

Re:What crap... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28757235)

Right click -> Pin to Taskbar

Then you can use WinKey + 1 to launch it..

(W7 only though..)

Also... (1)

Filter (6719) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756545)

Also, all the people I have helped by installing and defaulting to Firefox, are now wondering why they have 15 search bars and half an inch of actual browser window. These are the users microsoft wanted back.

Re:What crap... (4, Informative)

EvilMonkeySlayer (826044) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755249)

That isn't what Mozilla was complaining about. What Mozilla was complaining about was that IE8 was being delivered as an automatic update, then when it prompts the user whether to use express or custom settings the user of course would deem it just an update and would of course select express not realising it sets IE as the default.

The reason why it's acceptable that Firefox, Opera etc does this is because the user chose to download the browser. However, since MS pushed IE8 as a critical update through their automatic update service the user doesn't really have much choice. I accept the set as default using express if the user downloads IE8 as a separate download. But through an automatic update? No.

Re:What crap... (5, Insightful)

xouumalperxe (815707) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755317)

However, since MS pushed IE8 as a critical update through their automatic update service the user doesn't really have much choice

It's slightly more subtle than that. A forced upgrade from IE7 to IE8 doesn't seem much of an issue to me. It defaulting to changing itself to being the default browser doesn't rattle me too much either (though it does annoy me). What really gets to me is the fact that such a huge change in user preferences is "hidden" behind a "use express settings" tick box.

Re:What crap... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28756677)

So, determining whether to use compatability view, or picking your search engine, or accelerators is perfectly okay to hide, but which browser is set to be default isn't?

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid, and you're stupid for not clicking "show me all the options" tick box when you had the chance. Only an idiot goes by defaults. An idiotic idiot, at that.

Re:What crap... (5, Interesting)

ElSupreme (1217088) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755447)

I chose to update to Firefox 3.5, but I still wanted my IE8 as my default browser, but FF3.5 decided to take over the role. I wasn't asked, it just assumed. I don't see how this is any different. People you have to just stop bashing EVERYTHING Microsoft does. They do enough that is cause for alarm, but this just isn't one of them.

Re:What crap... (1)

lordandmaker (960504) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755473)

I've not used the FF3.5 installer, but the FF3 one had a checkbox in the installer for it. If they've dropped this for FF3.5, that's a Bad Thing IMO, but I don't think the design of the FF3.5 installer is something likely to gain much news coverage...

Re:What crap... (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756389)

I think they did drop that, because I recently switched to IE8, but keep FF to make sure my web pages work with it. I remember having to tell it NOT to "ensure it was the default" and switch the default back to IE8.

Re:What crap... (0)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757329)

I chose to update to Firefox 3.5, but I still wanted my IE8 as my default browser, but FF3.5 decided to take over the role. I wasn't asked, it just assumed. I don't see how this is any different. People you have to just stop bashing EVERYTHING Microsoft does. They do enough that is cause for alarm, but this just isn't one of them.

Seriously, I would bash Firefox if it did that to me too. I have never seen that happen though. Maybe you should submit a story so you can feel better?

Re:What crap... (4, Insightful)

Useful Wheat (1488675) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755707)

"The reason why it's acceptable that Firefox, Opera etc does this is because the user chose to download the browser."

You're using a double standard here. I downloaded Google Chrome so I could go and try it out. Give it the benefit of the doubt, and so forth. I didn't need it to be my default browser any more than I needed Opera to be my default browser when I decided to try it out.

Certainly its easy to fix this. Most of the browsers will demand to be set as the default browser when you open them, but this is a conversation for the new and inexperienced users who don't know how to change that. If they did download Chrome (because Google is pushing chrome aggressively on every page) having it be the default browser could be a huge learning curve.

Now, I'm all for making users learn something, but eventually they end up calling you on the phone and demand you make it work right.

Re:What crap... (2, Insightful)

bheer (633842) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756699)

Ironically the media player wars were exactly about this. Real would become the default player for all sorts of formats, then Quicktime would, and so on. Someone must have learnt their lesson, because these days Real and Windows Media Player play nice, not too sure what Quicktime does (not installed it in some time).

If the media player vendors can learn, why not the browser? And yes, I don't buy the argument that anyone downloading Firefox is looking to make it his default browser. I download Opera and Chrome onto new PCs too, I'd be pissed if I couldn't stop them from becoming my default.

Re:What crap... (1)

CodingHero (1545185) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757243)

I'm pretty sure QuickTime still forces itself to be default without ever giving you the option. I notice an iTunes update was available this morning so I guess I'll find out for sure when I go home tonight and install it . . .

Re:What crap... (4, Insightful)

billcopc (196330) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755729)

IMO, the reason why it's unacceptable is because this is a freaking upgrade. The preference is already set to whichever browser the user favors, why should it be reset ? The existing choice should be left alone.

If it's a fresh installation, fine go ahead and toggle it by default, that's a good way to minimize user confusion ("I just installed Thingy 8, where the hell is it?"). If it's an upgrade, just replace those damned files and leave my settings the way they are.

Re:What crap... (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757101)

If it's a fresh installation, fine go ahead and toggle it by default, that's a good way to minimize user confusion ("I just installed Thingy 8, where the hell is it?"). If it's an upgrade, just replace those damned files and leave my settings the way they are.

IE can't be a fresh installation (on XP or Vista), because everyone already has IE installed. If someone has IE7 installed but never uses it because their default browser is Firefox, and one day they decide they want to ditch Firefox and switch to IE8, they should be presented with the option to make IE8 their default browser, even though it's technically an upgrade.

However, until now, instead of asking whether you want to set IE as your default browser, the IE installer was instead asking "hey, do you want to just skip all these questions and set it up normally?" The fine print does tell you that this will include setting IE as your default browser, but it's easy to miss if you're not looking for it. Microsoft has decided to make that a separate question now, as it should be.

Re:What crap... (1)

WildStreet (1362769) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756119)

This is the main reason I have never used automatic updates. I always click on "Custom". Might be a little paranoid or anal, but I like to see what I'm being delivered.

Re:What crap... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28757499)

However, since MS pushed IE8 as a critical update through their automatic update service the user doesn't really have much choice.

IE8 was not a critical update.

Re:What crap... (1)

lordandmaker (960504) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755295)

When you installed Firefox, you specifically sought out the installer, downloaded it and ran it. It's quite a reasonable assumption there that you'd like to use it as your default browser.

This is not the case with routine system updates.

Re:What crap... (1)

R.Mo_Robert (737913) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756007)

The difference is that Microsoft wasn't giving you an option. When you start IE 8 for the first time, if you choose "Express Setup" rather than "Custom," it makes IE the default--and not only does it not give you an option, it doesn't even tell you that it's going to make it default, either.

This update addresses this issue by including a "Make IE default browser" checkbox right under the "Express Setup" radio button. It's still checked by default (as it is for most browsers), but at least you can't say you didn't know what you were getting into.

For the record, you could always choose with custom setup, but that involves a way-too-long wizard asking you questions ranging from whether you want Suggested Sites turned on to if you want Bing as your default search provider (if not, too bad, we don't include Google by default, and you'll have to guess that "Google search suggestions," despite the odd name, is the one you'll want from our website). Most users won't bother with that.

Re:What crap... (4, Informative)

VertigoAce (257771) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756309)

Under the "Use Express Settings" header it listed everything that would be set. One of the items was "Default Browser: Internet Explorer" (note that it only had this text if IE wasn't already the default). The IE blog has screenshots of this behavior: http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2009/05/01/ie8-installation-the-user-is-in-control.aspx [msdn.com]

Since that post was written, they've decided to move the default browser page out of the express settings and require users to make a choice (unless IE is already their default browser). You'll notice that the user really does have to make a choice as no option is selected by default (the 'Next' button is disabled until they choose 'Yes' or 'No'). Here's the IE blog post with screenshots of the new behavior, since Slashdot didn't link to it directly: http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2009/07/16/changes-to-ie8-s-first-run.aspx [msdn.com]

Re:What crap... (2, Interesting)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756047)

The problem is when I install an alternative browser to a non tech savvy's person's computer with it as the default and then automatic IE8 upgrade changes that setting, they may not notice. I am sad to admit that I know (older) people that honestly can't tell me what browser they are currently using and don't notice that suddenly the UI has changed.

Re:What crap... (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757441)

Express settings are way more than browser, it is almost like a spyware install carefully hiding options.

If you express install IE 8, you are basically owned by their Live services. Search, homepage, "look up", "blog", "look on map". All are Microsoft properties which are horribly unpopular compared to other options.

It is way more than "default browser" setting. They really lost it this time since monopoly court is still watching them with EU guys are already on them.

Re:What crap... (1)

midia (1346619) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757761)

So what will my options be in Google Chrome OS, and will changing the default browser be apparent?

Common sense (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755109)

By selecting "Express settings" the user is saying to the vendor: "Yes, I want to you use any settings you consider to be the best for me."

You give the vendor a blank statement. Microsoft wouldn't have to bother changing the default. They are actually quite kind to Mozilla, Opera and Safari there.

The first thing I do (1)

Kokuyo (549451) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755209)

when installing a new system, be it server or my own machine, is to hide IE7+8 from the listed updates.

Of course with Windws 7 I've had no choice ;)

Yes you did (3, Informative)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755551)

In Windows 7, you can uninstall it.

Re:Yes you did (0, Troll)

jo42 (227475) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756463)

Really, really uninstall it? As in "uninstall" will delete all the IE files off of your storage device? Or just make the links disappear and keep most, if not all, of the files around so that Windows 7 can keep functioning?

Re:Yes you did (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757839)

I imagine it keeps the library files around, since they're called by the "My Computer" and "Windows Explorer" features. I wonder though, what it does when you type an "http" URL in the "My Computer" browser bar. The current behavior is to simply grab IE's web libraries and turn your file browser into a web browser on the fly. Will it still do that? On my Mac when you enter "http" URLs into the file browser it opens the default web browser.

Re:The first thing I do (2, Insightful)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756349)

You're opening yourself up to vulnerabilities in the browser control used by various programs like Winamp, RealPlayer etc. What's so bad about keeping IE up to date while you use your favorite browser? I bet millions of geeks do that with no problem.

What? (4, Insightful)

Rennt (582550) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755237)

Surely the problem was that the update changed the default browser, not that it upgraded the non-default one.

Usually Microsoft's actions are fairly transparent, but I really can't understand what they are trying to achieve with this policy

Re:What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755283)

I doubt that it's really any policy. Checking "Use express settings" just installs with all of the default options selected so that the user doesn't have to go through them one by one. The problem is that the check box to set Internet Explorer to be the default browser, if it isn't already, was the default option, as it is with every other browser when you first install it, but since the user checked to not be bothered to see any of the settings the user is not made aware of this. Checking the "Use express settings" check box is the equivalent of hitting "Next,Next,Next,Finish" for any browser.

Re:What? (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755797)

Personally, I don't see why an application is setting itself as the default anyway. That should be left up to the user and the OS.

Re:What? (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757179)

Personally, I don't see why an application is setting itself as the default anyway. That should be left up to the user and the OS.

Originally it was done as a convenience, because most users didn't know how to set it in the OS settings, and it's somewhat cumbersome to do anyway. Many apps have a "set me as default" option.

Then Apple stupidly decided every application should expose this system-wide preference in the application's own preferences dialog, and the system-wide preference option should be removed entirely. Until other browser manufacturers caught up, this meant that in order to choose something other than Safari as your default browser on Mac OS X, you had to launch Safari, open its preferences, and select your preferred browser there. Ditto for Mail. I can't imagine what they were thinking. Unfortunately everybody else will probably try to copy this.

Higher management should give them a lesson (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757271)

I wonder if MS fired the team responsible for that scandal (IE 8) that even their best buddies didn't like and the decision to pull a trick even Real Networks gave up.

"If user has installed me over automated windows update and has another browser selected by default, don't touch his settings".

How hard it is? It is really malicious and nothing else, the team, managers, all must be fired unless they publicly apologize.

Their action, while at court with EU could cost them millions if not billion. Yes, that childish action has potential to cost them. I am sure EU officials already added it to their files.

BTW MS, we noticed you hired some AC guys, tell them to post a bit later defending your actions. First 3-4 posts coming from fake AC accounts (paid accounts in fact) really shows too much.

Only for legal reasons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755265)

With all the anti-trust stuff happening in the US and Euro-zone, it wasn't the user feedback that caused Microsoft to change this. It was their lawyers. Microsoft is just trying to save face by implying that user feedback was involved.

Not Uncommon (4, Insightful)

kevinNCSU (1531307) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755305)

Good, I hate when installers and update utilities hide crap like that behind "express" or default settings. It's by no means a Microsoft-only trick though, the one I find most annoying is AIM's attempt to install all sorts of toolbar crap hidden behind a default checkbox so you have to uncheck two levels of things to stop it. Even Mozilla does this to some extent to set itself as default, the only difference is anyone who's installed Mozilla probably actually WANTS it to be default, whereas with IE you'll have it rather you want it or not.

Re:Not Uncommon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755571)

This is one of the reasons I mostly stick to Linux and all its free software. It's less annoying. The marketroid speak would be "more user-centric" or "customer-focused". Everything's about you and the usefulness of the software, not about some company wanting to push their wares any way they can. It's less of a problem on Mac, but on Windows everything seems doomed to end up being bloated and/or installing an IE toolbar or some other spyware. You have to keep a constant vigil on Windows... it's really quite unpleasant because of that.

Re:Not Uncommon (1)

Bigbutt (65939) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757573)

Same with Java or Adobe and the Yahoo! toolbar.

[John]

A Negative Slashdot Article About Microsoft? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755313)

I never thought I'd see the day.

It's a positive article about Microsoft you fool (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755383)

It is an article explaining that Microsoft listened to people and then did the right thing. They didn't have to.

Oh, and incidentally, I am not surprised that it is on Slashdot.

What makes a monopoly? (0, Flamebait)

Cougem (734635) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755337)

I understand the idea - microsoft can't push IE8 like Apple push Safari because they have a monopoly. I understand why that's good, it's not what I'm asking.

What I'm asking is this: What makes it a monopoly?

I guess Microsoft is the biggest OS retailer on computers, but what's a computer? Surely to count that we have to exclude 'computers' like Xboxes, PS3s, Wiis, and other such computers which run with different hardware and things? If we did not fudge it this way then Microsoft would not have a monopoly. But then why can we not consider Apple computers separately? Apple computers have a different sort of architecture to normal PCs - it's a huge effort to install windows on them without bootcamp for example - so surely Apple have a monopoly on Apple computers, and their pushing of Safari is a bit unethical?

But what about MP3 players? I confess I do not know the figures for sure, but when I walk down the street it seems 90% of portable music players are iPods. To use an iPod you realistically HAVE to use iTunes, they are pushing this piece of software through their hardware. And then with THAT they push Safari etc. too.

How are Apple not abusing monopoly laws with iPods? I don't understand.

Any lawyers about?

Re:What makes a monopoly? (2, Insightful)

lordandmaker (960504) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755417)

What I'm asking is this: What makes it a monopoly? I guess Microsoft is the biggest OS retailer on computers, but what's a computer?

Biggest OS retailer on PCs. Ignoring the notion that a mac isn't a PC (are modern 'PCs' any closer to an IBM PC than a wintel mac?), MS do have the vast bulk of the market on desktop and laptop personal computers.
This is where they have a monopoly. The issue, in general, though, is less that they have the monopoly than that they abuse the fact they have one.

But what about MP3 players? I confess I do not know the figures for sure, but when I walk down the street it seems 90% of portable music players are iPods.

In my experience it's far closer to 50%. But, again, I've no idea of the true figures.

and now they want our livers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755425)

Any lawyers about?

No, seriously, if Jobs is after our livers, what can we do to legally protect ourselves?

Re:What makes a monopoly? (1)

RedK (112790) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755523)

How much were you paid for your post ? Seriously, the question of wether Microsoft is or isn't a Monopoly was put to rest 10 years ago.

Re:What makes a monopoly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28757085)

There is nothing wrong with having a monopoly. The problem is when you use that monopoly to try and force the competition out.

How is this a troll? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755529)

I asked a question!

Re:What makes a monopoly? (2, Informative)

hawkinspeter (831501) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755549)

What Microsoft is doing wrong is abusing a monopoly in one market to gain dominance in another market. That is what is illegal. Just having a monopoly isn't illegal - it's the abuse of it that is wrong. Apple aren't abusing their monopoly on iPods to gain a market.

Re:What makes a monopoly? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755715)

apple absolutely has used their "monopoly" on ipods to gain a market. In this case it's online distribution of music.

Apple and toyota seem to have a halo around them, they are still publicly traded corporations, and at their core are just the same as MS or any other business.

Re:What makes a monopoly? (1)

RedK (112790) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756657)

Except the iTunes Music Store isn't the only game and neither is the iPod. Amazon and Wal-mart have music stores that sell DRM-less music too. Also, the iPod isn't the only game in town either. There are tons of MP3 players in the market. Basically, Apple isn't stiffling competition in the Market, like Microsoft has done. It's not illegal to have a monopoly, it's illegal to abuse it.

Re:What makes a monopoly? (2, Informative)

marsdominion (1599149) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755643)

While neither a lover of Microsoft or Apple, calling Apple a monopoly is simply ludicrous. They hold about 3% of the global PC market (~7.7% in the US), 1% of the global cell phone market, and by some estimates about 23% of the Personal Digital Music Player market (Source: http://tinyurl.com/nm3m4n [tinyurl.com] ). Certainly not a monopoly in any of the markets. Microsoft on the other hand has ~90% global market share.

As far as why Apple is not abusing monopoly laws with their iTunes software as it relates to the iPod, for the same reason that Blackberry's and Palm's software does not abuse monopoly laws for connecting to their devices.

Re:What makes a monopoly? (2, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757185)

I guess Microsoft is the biggest OS retailer on computers, but what's a computer? Surely to count that we have to exclude 'computers' like Xboxes, PS3s, Wiis, and other such computers which run with different hardware and things?

Remember "monopoly" does not mean "highest marketshare." per se. From dictionary.com:

1) exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices.

MS has a monopoly (as determined by a US court) on OS for Intel X86 computers (PCs). The commodity is PCs. In this case, MS has control over the OS that runs on most PCs which are made by others. Apple only has control over the products that they created which isn't a monopoly.

I guess Microsoft is the biggest OS retailer on computers, but what's a computer? Surely to count that we have to exclude 'computers' like Xboxes, PS3s, Wiis, and other such computers which run with different hardware and things? If we did not fudge it this way then Microsoft would not have a monopoly.

It's not a fudge. The term "PC" means a very specific thing. PC does not mean anything with a computer in it. In the case of MS, they have a number of different businesses. They have a monopoly in OS for PCs not in their consumer products division.

But then why can we not consider Apple computers separately? Apple computers have a different sort of architecture to normal PCs - it's a huge effort to install windows on them without bootcamp for example - so surely Apple have a monopoly on Apple computers, and their pushing of Safari is a bit unethical?

This is not sound logic. A company can have a monopoly in their product. That's perfectly legal. Would you charge Dell with a monopoly on Inspiron PCs? It's their product.

But what about MP3 players? I confess I do not know the figures for sure, but when I walk down the street it seems 90% of portable music players are iPods. To use an iPod you realistically HAVE to use iTunes, they are pushing this piece of software through their hardware. And then with THAT they push Safari etc. too.

How are Apple not abusing monopoly laws with iPods? I don't understand.

Certainly Apple has the largest marketshare but one does Apple have exclusive control of the MP3 player market? Is it the only player? Do realistic alternatives exist? Are the barriers to market entry sufficiently high enough to prevent competition? One visit to BestBuy and you can see that there exists many different direct competitors to iPods. Also remember, Apple iPods play MP3s and AACs which can be played on any other player. Their DRM'ed Fairplay files from iTunes cannot be played; however, Apple gives customers the option to decide between DRM and non-DRM when purchasing music from iTunes. On the other hand, how many alternatives can you get for your OS at BestBuy if you buy a desktop? If you don't buy Apple, you only get Windows.

Why is that mentioned Blog-Post not linked. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755387)

Even if you do not like Microsoft, please link to the source! Where is the link to that Microsoft Blog Post?

I'm willing to let this one slip... (3, Insightful)

i_ate_god (899684) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755467)

...if it helps continue the death of IE6

Re:I'm willing to let this one slip... (2, Informative)

bunratty (545641) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755533)

The use of IE8 is increasing mainly at the expense of IE7 use. IE6 remains in use at companies with older versions of Windows or where they have intranet applications that require IE6.

They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? (2, Interesting)

mandark1967 (630856) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755475)

I did a fresh install of 7 recently (June 10th) after some tweaking of my system rendered it unstable. (not the point of the post, just background on why I did the reinstall)

I did the Windows 7 clean install, loaded my drivers, and activated it.

Grabbed the normal updates and, during that process, I right clicked the automatic update entry for IE8 and selected "Hide Update" because I choose not to load the IE8 software.

Now with patches loaded, I go back to see if any of the patches needed patching. I go back to Windows update to get the latest round of patches and guess what the first entry on my Windows update page was...IE8! "critical", no less)

I went through the process to hide it again. I load the other patches

The next week MS released some more patches. I went to Windows Update to grab them and you wanna guess what the first "critical" patch was? IEfucking8!

I made a thread at the Windows 7 forum, http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/itprovistaapps/thread/2d8a57f3-8904-49b8-a626-c6a5481ca9b4 [microsoft.com] asking them why they are trying to ram this program down my throat when I have specifically chosen not to use the program and, to date there have been 166 views of the thread, but no replies from MS...not that I expect a reply...

Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755743)

Ever stop and think that those are different patches? They update the browser regularly. Even if you don't use the browser, the rendering engine and other bits are still available as part of the Windows API and are still exploitable.

Windows 7 includes IE8... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28756189)

Are you retarded, or a troll?

IE8 is included in Windows 7.

Re:Windows 7 includes IE8... (2, Informative)

BOFslime (178524) | more than 5 years ago | (#28758013)

Are you retarded, or a troll?

IE8 is included in Windows 7.

Actually, if you uninstall IE6/7/8 from a windows machine, automatic update will instantly (upon reboot) nag you to patch IE, even though its not installed. I think this is what parent is attempting to describe.
His MS technet link states he only uses firefox.

Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? (4, Insightful)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756235)

People like you are the reason we have botnets.

Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28758125)

*and retarded children.

Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28756685)

Windows 7 comes with IE8 pre-installed. What you are probably seeing are different critical updates for IE8, so when you hide one another shows at a later time because it is a completely different update.

I'm assuming people who mod this stuff up are either MS haters, have never used Windows 7, or use Windows 7 but do not realize IE8 comes with it.

Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757175)

Windows update also won't let you hide Silverlight.

It also has KB number, better install (!) (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757353)

I love how they gave it a KB number so poor user should think it is part of system functionality or some kind of something gets updated.

Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 5 years ago | (#28757399)

As others have pointed out, you're a moron.

Open the Control Panel, click "Programs and Features", then click "Turn Windows features on or off" in the sidebar on the left. Uncheck the box for "Internet Explorer 8" and click OK. You'll get a warning that removing IE could break things (but nothing you care about), then it'll ask you to reboot.

This does not remove IE's rendering engine (Trident/MSHTML), which is embedded in a bazillion other applications. There are still going to be security holes in that, and you really should patch them, because you have no idea which other applications those are going to be (Valve's Steam and Google Talk are a couple of examples, according to Wikipedia). However, removing the application should prevent you from getting any further updates to Internet Explorer itself.

Re:They stopped trying to force IE8 in May? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28758119)

Yeah. I read your post. If I were an employee of Microsoft, I sure as hell wouldn't respond to you either.

"Is MS so paranoid about IE losing Marketshare that you're trying to force the software onto my system? Or are you just not content in adding vulnerabilities to Firefox through Windows Update the silently loaded add-on that you got reamed about in the media?"

So, let me just conclude...

TROLL

Slow crap (1)

bmwEnthusiast (1384289) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755937)

I was excited to try IE8. About 20 minutes after install and use I wasn't excited anymore. When I open a new tab my whole system slows down until its finished loading. I haven't looked at the CPU usage but i'd assume its pegging it for the render engine. Just a thought.

Re:Slow crap (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756471)

Huh... FF 3.5 is slower than IE now, and I can't really disable tabbed browsing, which I hate. At least I still have a choice in IE.

losers (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28755971)

Mozilla and Opera especially are so pathetic. Waah, waah, wahh! There might be some dumb people out there who don't know how to pick their own stupid browser, its not fair! Suck it! And what's Mozilla complaining about, they're still gaining aren't they?

Not Robinson Crusoe On This Score (2)

BrightSpark (1578977) | more than 5 years ago | (#28755981)

And how many software writers for MP3 players, video players and graphic editors do the same thing when it comes to the long tick box of file extensions with most of them pre-ticked for you? At least with IE8 it's just one tick. I can think of a few software downloads that end up changing those familiar icons in Explorer to new programme icons. It's no big deal - other than the Windows Updater always wanting to download the product which I haven't got on my system. Heck, what's the point of a monopoly if you don't use it? :-)

Too Late... (1, Insightful)

NoName Studios (917186) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756083)

Too late because it is already been five months later. How many more users were stolen from other browsers by this tactic?

Re:Too Late... (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756283)

Guess what! We've stopped Shackling people in chains and calling them our slaves! ... Oh those guys still in chains? Yeah we can't take them off once they're in em.

Uninstall plz (2, Interesting)

u64 (1450711) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756131)

I want to uninstall IE6 and IE7 before i install IE8 bloat.

IE8 crash more often then IE6 and IE7 put together. It's wrong
to force that on n00bs. They have hard time as it is.

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Setup\7.0]
"DoNotAllowIE70"=dword:1
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Setup\8.0]
"DoNotAllowIE80"=dword:1

I'm temped to add 9.0 too to avoid future nag...
Things like these and WGA spyware is why i dont run WindowsUpdate.

I'm also thinking of redirecting IE shortcuts to Opera or Firefox.

Service Packs required IE8 too for Vista! (2, Interesting)

antdude (79039) | more than 5 years ago | (#28756561)

Since IE8 was considered a critical update and service packs require ALL critical updates, users have no choice to get IE8 to be able to upgrade with a service pack via Windows Update in Vista. :(

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?