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!

Why Microsoft's EU Ballot Screen Doesn't Measure Up

Soulskill posted about 5 years ago | from the clever-lawyers-clueless-regulators dept.

Internet Explorer 283

An anonymous reader writes "A lengthy interview on Groklaw discusses the EU's case against Microsoft. The case is supported by Opera, Google, Mozilla, ECIS, and the Free Software Foundation Europe. The EU has demanded that users be offered a 'ballot screen' to make it easier for users to select other browsers. Microsoft has responded by implementing the ballot screen as a web page inside IE. While this may nominally satisfy EU's demand, it is unlikely to satisfy users who prefer other browsers. In order to select another browser, users must be running IE. Also, users will be shown security warnings when choosing from the ballot. Microsoft's ability to charge patent fees in Europe is also discussed: why are they allowed to charge patent fees where software patents are not recognized?"

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

No more Outsuck Express (1, Interesting)

Informative (1347701) | about 5 years ago | (#29703055)

Maybe next will be a ballot for mail client.

Re:No more Outsuck Express (3, Informative)

bheer (633842) | about 5 years ago | (#29703203)

Even better: Windows 7 doesn't come with a mail client.

Do evil to make money? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703227)

Only after the EU has spent millions in court.

Microsoft is an extremely adversarial company. It's past actions, like the top managers releasing Windows Vista when mid-level managers said it wasn't ready, show that it doesn't care about doing the right thing, in my opinion.

Re:No more Outsuck Express (5, Informative)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 5 years ago | (#29703277)

Windows 7 no longer includes Windows Mail (the program that replaced Outlook Express in Vista).

If you want a mail client, you have to download Windows Live Mail or your choice of client.

Re:No more Outsuck Express (2, Informative)

fast turtle (1118037) | about 5 years ago | (#29703493)

and to get the damn Live-Mail, you almost have to use IE and jump through a lot of hoops just to get it. Went through that the other day and it was a real PITA as the Live Downloaded wanted to install a whole rash of other crap, just like all the other freebies out there. Of course instead of adding the Ask Toolbar, it wanted to add in Messenger, the damn Blogger accelerator for IE and sign you up for both a Live Id and a damn hotmail account.

Damn MS for making it even harder on people to simply get a copy of Outlook Express and don't even get me started on the Student and Teacher Edition of Office from which they've dropped Outlook in favor of One Note. They could at least include a copy of OE/Live Mail on the disk with the rest of Office so people who are using Win7 get a working mail client.

I've got a friend who's told me in no uncertain terms that she's getting a new lappy with Win7 on it. Current one is a 7+ yr old Dell running XP so she's making a big jump. Thankfully, I've already grabbed Live-Mail so it's not neccessary to go through all the agravation to get it once again if her new system isn't preloaded with it.

Re:No more Outsuck Express (4, Insightful)

geekboy642 (799087) | about 5 years ago | (#29703571)

You, uh, are aware that there are better alternatives to the shitheap that is outlook express, right? Thunderbird, just to pick the popular one, doesn't have any hoops at all. Why would you jump through the MS hoops for a piece of low-grade quasi-free software?

Re:No more Outsuck Express (1)

skyride (1436439) | about 5 years ago | (#29703589)

Whats wrong with thunderbird?

Re:No more Outsuck Express (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703629)

Next motherfucker that uses the term 'lappy' gets punched in their internet face.

Re:No more Outsuck Express (2, Informative)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 5 years ago | (#29703683)

http://www.pmail.com/index2.htm [pmail.com]

Clean, simple, free - I found it years ago, and the wife learned to use it in just a couple days. And, she's no computer whiz. It runs beautifully on WinXP, and my search for Win7 on the forum suggests that it runs just fine on Win7.

I searched this out specifically because OE was being targeted by worms, and it was installed on all of my machines until I decided to move to Google mail.

They are seeing financial hard times (who isn't?) so a little donation would be even more appreciated than ever, but it is still free as I write this.

Re:No more Outsuck Express (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703409)

I'd like a ballot screen for choosing the operating system.

Re:No more Outsuck Express (5, Funny)

kipd (1593207) | about 5 years ago | (#29703545)

Yeah. In windows 8 you have to send in an email to microsoft, and they'll send back a list of possible clients.

I don't care about the screen... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703071)

I just want to be able to DELETE IE completely.

So far the best you can do is break it so it doesnt ever work.

Re:I don't care about the screen... (2, Interesting)

hedwards (940851) | about 5 years ago | (#29703107)

You can remove it, you just have to create a custom install disc, which is far more work than one should need to put in. Why MS can't conceive that people don't want a lot of that crap is beyond me.

Re:I don't care about the screen... (3, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | about 5 years ago | (#29703157)

Why MS can't conceive that people don't want a lot of that crap is beyond me.

I dont think "normal people" care that much though. They dont see the difference between IE being still installed but hidden and IE being completely removed from the system. They get to choose another browser tho.

Microsoft has responded by implementing the ballot screen as a web page inside IE.

I wonder how they've could had done it differently. If you provided the install exes along with OS setup, they would be outdated (bad bad thing in browsers). They could had made another protocol that tells the setup what browsers to show for the user and setup then downloads it, but whats the point. When it's an actual webpage, there's much more control in updating it, and it would had been pretty useless for MS to develop completely new rendering engine and browser just for that (and MS browser would still had been there). The security warnings are stupid however.

Re:I don't care about the screen... (2, Insightful)

gtbritishskull (1435843) | about 5 years ago | (#29703231)

So, the IE installed on the system is not out of date? It is the same tihng. You can include the EXEs and have browser search for its updates on the first startup, without actually going to an unsecure website. Or just provide an EXE that goes onto the web and downloads the most recent version. But, I don't think it is that big of a deal except for the security warnings.

Re:I don't care about the screen... (2, Insightful)

Hal_Porter (817932) | about 5 years ago | (#29703615)

I always use IE to download Opera. So it doesn't really matter if it is outdated. To me the ballot screen is a silly requirement - most people don't know enough to vote, and there is the risk of malware ridden browsers getting onto it. People who do know enough to vote can already download an alternative browser and use that instead.

Re:I don't care about the screen... (1)

Animaether (411575) | about 5 years ago | (#29703265)

An full-on webpage may be more flexible, but that is only by virtue of the browser supporting the features laid out in the standards referenced by that webpage.

There's absolutely nothing stopping Microsoft from simply hosting the options as an XML file, downloading that using any ol' connection technology, parsing it, and popping up any images, descriptions, URLs, as would a browser. It doesn't need to support CSS, it doesn't need to support Javascript, etc. The results could then easily be displayed in a boring old list. That's hardly difficult - I can whip one up in mIRC script of all things.

As far as security warnings go.. they're shipping access to third party solutions.. not the OEM, but Microsoft. Not just to FireFox, Opera, Safari, Chrome but 5 smaller players as well (whoever those might be). One of them gets hacked, the user downloads some crappy-ass badware, et voila. Granted, it should certainly show this security warning when choosing IE as well (cheap +5 Funny comments regarding how IE especially would require this warning are welcomed).

However, I'm with you on "what's the point". Already the user is going to get an option screen where in the past they would not have, and OEMs can already install a different browser altogether, make it the default, and the user will -not- see such an option screen.

I understand the arguments being made by the opposing parties, but they only follow the argument that MS should offer such a choice in the first place.. which I disagree with. I wish MS would've stuck with just not including a browser in the install at all, so that OEMs would've made the choice for users. Some would stick with IE, others would take the bribe money from Google to stick Chrome on there, others get to position their machines as Apple-wannabes with Safari, etc. and/or just offer a set of radiobuttons on the machine configuration page so the user can choose for themselves upon purchase.

Re:I don't care about the screen... (1)

skyride (1436439) | about 5 years ago | (#29703625)

Whats wrong with writing a VERY VERY basic program that gives a list of browser, the user picks one and then the program downloads it via FTP from a central respository and then installs it.

Honestly, It sounds to me like everyone is over-engineering this to to death. That would take any capable programmer (myself) included less than a day to make. Whats the problem?

Enough is enough (-1, Troll)

GraphiteCube (1437703) | about 5 years ago | (#29703141)

Promoting competitor's product sounds very ridiculous to me already, if somebodies want Microsoft to pre-install Firefox/ Safari/ Opera and display the ballot screen... I can't imagine what is going on with those people.

What about ballot screen on Safari to promote IE/ Opera/ Firefox?
What about Pepsi coupon attached on Coca Cola can?

Re:Enough is enough (1)

vadim_t (324782) | about 5 years ago | (#29703209)

Er, why is a web browser needed at all to display a selection screen? It's not like they couldn't make a little program to choose one.

This ridiculous shoving of a web browser into places it doesn't belong is starting to get annoying.

Re:Enough is enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703249)

It is probably so that list can change without changing any software. You guys really need to think stuff through. In 2 years, people are going to want to add XYZ and they will be forced to do it.

It is probably setup like their search bar - on their servers, so they can change and add things without any effect on the user.

Re:Enough is enough (3, Informative)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | about 5 years ago | (#29703319)

You really need to think your troll/ridiculously stupid posts through. It would be trivial to have an MSXML/text/MSSQL file contain a list of browsers,icons,download locations and then have an app show that list (in a nice GUI with icons and all), complete with misleading warnings.

or to put it another way "I'd create a GUI interface using visual basic to see if I can install the browser people want"

Re:Enough is enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703467)

Sure, you could spend development dollars on something like that. But it would be stupid. There is already an infrastructure in place for things like that. Surprise! It is the web. It makes no sense to spend development dollars, patching and update money, support infrastructure for something like this when said infrastructure already exists. It's bad enough that they are being asked to show competing products. But now, WAHHH! I have to run the evil Internet Explorer ONE TIME. Oh, noes. It's kind of ridiculous to complain about the design as it is a standard way of doing these things.

Next, people are going to want slashdot to write a little GUI with a downloaded XML file for the slashdot polls so that people can choose the Cowboy Neal option.

Re:Enough is enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703435)

They can also change how the information is displayed whenever they feel like it. Like displaying the results of MS funded reports showing IE is the second coming and makes your farts smell of lemon.

With a webpage they get details about every windows user's browsing choice.

They could link to more unstable browsers to make IE seem better or just change the browsers shown to be unfinished/unstable choices.

They could even make non-IE downloads fail on occasion. (They did something similar with DRDOS)

Re:Enough is enough (1)

gtbritishskull (1435843) | about 5 years ago | (#29703243)

What about Pepsi coupon attached on Coca Cola can?

You don't understand the problem. You are allowed to have a monopoly in the US. You are just not allowed to use that monopoly (in OSs) to give you an unfair advantage in a different market (Internet Browsers)

Re:Enough is enough (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703431)

Oh I get it. What you mean is that Taco Bell (Pepsi vendor) should give me a coupon for Coca-Cola. Because Taco Bell is in the taco business?

Flawed fucking logic if I ever did see.

Re:Enough is enough (3, Funny)

commodore64_love (1445365) | about 5 years ago | (#29703245)

You're right. And when the U.S. DOJ fined the record companies for telling Walmart, Kmart, Target, and other stores, "You must sell these CDs are $12 or more, or else be cutoff from future supplies," the DOJ was wrong there too. Companies should be free to treat their customers and stores like ____, and do whatever is necessary to "win" and kill off the competition via monopolistic practices. Yes technically the record companies violated anti-cartel and price-fixing laws, but who what?

Heck the government shouldn't even be regulating monopolies like Baltimore Gas & Electric, or Bell Telephone. Let them charge the customers whatever they want. Yes they hold a monopoly but so what? It's their market and their right to do whatever they want.

/end sarcasm

 

Re:Enough is enough (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703341)

That's exactly right. and when they piss off enough people, competitors will arise, and will run the monopolist into the ground. Unfortunately gov. won't let that happen in almost every case of monopolies, because of regulations that the monopolist lobbied for to stop competitors.

It's clear that the problem here is the existence of governments. They attempt to fix the problems with monopolies "to protect people" instead of letting them destroy themselves and letting competitors start. Get rid of the state.

Re:Enough is enough (1)

moronoxyd (1000371) | about 5 years ago | (#29703455)

> and when they piss off enough people, competitors will arise, and will run the monopolist into the ground.

That's how it would be in an ideal market.
But the reality is that the monopolies have the money to buy out or drive out or hold down any competition, so that the customers don't really have a choice.

And thus we need governments to control the monopolies.

Re:Enough is enough (1)

mR.bRiGhTsId3 (1196765) | about 5 years ago | (#29703637)

True, but on the flipside, when you price gouge, you make it really easy for a well funded new player or potentially another large company expanding from a different market to undercut you.

Re:Enough is enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703357)

Gawdammit not even a troll would like to argue at that level. How can a single person be so stupid all on his own?

Re:Enough is enough (-1, Troll)

rumith (983060) | about 5 years ago | (#29703365)

What's more interesting: Google's going to release Chrome OS later this year. Will it be ordered by antitrust regulations to give its users the choice to replace the Chrome browser with Opera, Firefox or MSIE? :) And how are they going to explain to EU authorities that the latter is not going to work under a Linux system natively no matter what?

Re:Enough is enough (2, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | about 5 years ago | (#29703417)

What part of Windows being a monopoly don't you get?

Re:Enough is enough (1)

moronoxyd (1000371) | about 5 years ago | (#29703475)

No, they will not.
And for a simple reason: Google does neither have a monopoly in the OS nor in the browser market, so bundling their browser with their OS doesn't unfairly push any product and thus doesn't break any anti-competition laws.

Re:Enough is enough (1)

rumith (983060) | about 5 years ago | (#29703541)

Okay, fast forward 10 years. Suppose Google begins to dominate on the desktop OS market. Do they automatically get to support other browsers on the originally "kernel-and-one-browser" operating system as their market share increases? What if there are no APIs published for ChromeOS, i.e. it doesn't support installing locally any software at all besides the Chrome browser and stuff signed by Google?

Re:Enough is enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703437)

A ballot screen on Safari to promote IE? Ridiculous. The most recent version of IE for Macs is IE 5! Why do you want people to be using technology that predates Windows XP?

Re:Enough is enough (1)

noundi (1044080) | about 5 years ago | (#29703465)

What about Pepsi coupon attached on Coca Cola can?

Usually I don't respond to trolls, but I'll make an exception. It's about the operating system Windows bundling the browser IE inside it. The proper paralell, which seems to be too hard for your thick head to understand, would be that a store which owns almost 90% of the market refuses to sell Coca Cola, but happily sells Pepsi. Or even worse as in this case, makes its own brand of cola and refuses to sell any other.
 
You're welcome.

The whole concept is stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703143)

But if this stupid solution makes the even stupider socialists happy, then so be it.

The MS haters wont stop their screeching until the regulators are forcing Linux or Mac down everyone's throat.

As long as some losers want to force the market into a direction it does not want to go, we will have stupid outcomes like some ballot.

This is what happens when you try to legislate against gravity, which is all these stupid laws accomplish.

And any of the free software/open source types that support this kind of crap lose any legitimacy they have. The legitimate ideas in this movement get brushed aside when you hook your cart to such toolish outcomes.

Re:The whole concept is stupid (0, Troll)

alexhard (778254) | about 5 years ago | (#29703213)

This is actually the exact opposite of socialism. Microsoft has an essentially monopolistic position in the market (partly because of network externalities) and exploits it, creating a shitload of negative externalities. All these regulators want to do is correct those externalities, returning the market close to its "efficient" state. This is free market capitalism at work, baby! Of course the way in which they are doing it is ridiculous, but this is the EU after all..it's a miracle they managed to to SOMETHING.

Re:The whole concept is stupid (0)

noundi (1044080) | about 5 years ago | (#29703529)

Haha wait, you are trying to lecture us on economics? First off, sir Idiot (this is what I'm going to call you since you are probably one of the biggest ones ever seen) market is supposed to go where consumers want it to go, it's called supply and demand. The demand part being the consumers end. By playing the system you can create cartels and monopolies through anticompetative behaviour. Meaning if you own 51% you own 100%, because with 51% you have to power to undermine the remaining 49%. Now this is quantified as you can be a part of something that owns 51%, and in that part you own 51%, meaning you potentially already own 100% of that sub part. This type of behaviour can only exist in a flawed economy, such as the one we have, where consumers always draw the shortest straw on any trade made.
The fundamental concept of trading is a tug of war, where the buyer, aka consumer, is fighting for lower pricing and higher quality, which can only be reached through competition by variety. The consumer chooses what's best, not the seller, as in this case. So you see at the end of the day you're either a troll, or just too retarded to understand this. I'm guessing you're too stupid because your trolling doesn't seem to be well thought through, but rather a case where your nose is longer than your imagination.
So sir Idiot, as the consumer that you are, stop trying to fuck yourself in the ass and just shut up.

We'll install Opera right after we install IE (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | about 5 years ago | (#29703165)

Thanks Microsoft. How considerate of you to dirty-up my Windoze with Innerweb Exploder, just so I can download an alternative like Opera or Firefox or Safari.

I'm sure Microsoft could include a small FTP program in the "choose your browser" screen to go retrieve the browsers directly, but of course they don't want to do that. They want IE on there in hopes you'll use it someday.

Re:We'll install Opera right after we install IE (1)

sopssa (1498795) | about 5 years ago | (#29703221)

I'm sure Microsoft could include a small FTP program in the "choose your browser" screen to go retrieve the browsers directly

And just think of what an uproar other FTP program makers will do then.

You really want to have another ballot screen to select your favourite FTP program before the browser ballot screen comes up?

Re:We'll install Opera right after we install IE (3, Insightful)

smoker2 (750216) | about 5 years ago | (#29703325)

I don't think any FTP program producers will complain about hidden command line ftp commands being used. You do know about command line programs do you ? I don't see anybody complaining that the windows embedded FTP client interferes with GUI based FTP programs. Not to mention that FTP standards are more rigorously adhered to, or it wouldn't work. MS doesn't break http it breaks html. There is no equivalent in FTP.

Re:We'll install Opera right after we install IE (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 5 years ago | (#29703331)

Windows has included BSD FTP for some versions already.

Re:We'll install Opera right after we install IE (1)

Interoperable (1651953) | about 5 years ago | (#29703369)

Eventually installing windows will involve dozens of ballot screens asking you to choose among many possible software options. What a painful process! It's a good thing linux distros never present you with too many options...no Gentoo is the way to go for a quick and simple install. (Ok, I'm sorry, Gentoo jokes are way too easy.) Of course, linux distros don't tend to build their installers as webpages in IE.

Re:We'll install Opera right after we install IE (2, Funny)

commodore64_love (1445365) | about 5 years ago | (#29703255)

P.S.

IE is an open door that lets viruses through. I was having a problem with viruses, and when I uninstalled IE, they disappeared. What a piece of crap program.

Re:We'll install Opera right after we install IE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703333)

interesting... what OS did you uninstall IE on? since so far you cant actually remove it since it is a part of the windows kernel. but do go on, tell us your lies

Re:We'll install Opera right after we install IE (1, Insightful)

Savior_on_a_Stick (971781) | about 5 years ago | (#29703279)

Or perhaps they tailor their product to demand.

There is a demand for IE.

I use other browsers about 99% of the time, but I also need to have IE installed.

A home user might be able to get by with it, but I use a grip of different management tools, some of which require IE.

Some router config utils don't render properly in FF (and some don't render properly in certain versions of IE.)

I'd be pretty annoyed if I was doing a new office setup and couldn't install network devices because I needed to download a browser first. Not because it's a huge hassle, but because it an unnecessary one.

You can whine ad nauseum that it shouldn't be this way - but it is.

On my home pc's, IE is installed, but isn't the default, and the shortcuts are deleted.

The only way it runs is if it's started from command line or Start/Run.

Re:We'll install Opera right after we install IE (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703427)

The only way it runs is if it's started from command line or Start/Run.

or if it's invoked by an MS app that is directing you to a website.

The Sophomore Class (1)

westlake (615356) | about 5 years ago | (#29703687)

How considerate of you to dirty-up my Windoze with Innerweb Exploder

It's talk like this that has me siding with the fullback who stuffs the dork in his locker.

Your official guide to the Jigaboo presidency (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703183)

Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger! If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.

INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.
You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model. Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e. chained together. Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever. Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them. This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud. House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape. At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name. Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data. Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger. If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima. Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke. Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes. These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.

CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGER
Owing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords. Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular. However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue. Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much. Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway. Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's). This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boat

HOUSING YOUR NIGGER.
Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars. Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through. The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage. So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers. You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground. Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage. Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now. In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape. As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put. Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.

FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.
Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon. You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it. Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water. Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc. Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day. Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives. He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result. You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained. You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton. You really would. Coffee beans? Don't ask. You have no idea.

MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.
Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind. The nigger's most prominent anatomical feature, after all, its oversized buttocks, which have evolved to make it more comfortable for your nigger to sit around all day doing nothing for its entire life. Niggers are often good runners, too, to enable them to sprint quickly in the opposite direction if they see work heading their way. The solution to this is to *dupe* your nigger into working. After installation, encourage it towards the cotton field with blows of a wooden club, fence post, baseball bat, etc., and then tell it that all that cotton belongs to a white man, who won't be back until tomorrow. Your nigger will then frantically compete with the other field niggers to steal as much of that cotton as it can before the white man returns. At the end of the day, return your nigger to its cage and laugh at its stupidity, then repeat the same trick every day indefinitely. Your nigger comes equipped with the standard nigger IQ of 75 and a memory to match, so it will forget this trick overnight. Niggers can start work at around 5am. You should then return to bed and come back at around 10am. Your niggers can then work through until around 10pm or whenever the light fades.

ENTERTAINING YOUR NIGGER.
Your nigger enjoys play, like most animals, so you should play with it regularly. A happy smiling nigger works best. Games niggers enjoy include: 1) A good thrashing: every few days, take your nigger's pants down, hang it up by its heels, and have some of your other niggers thrash it with a club or whip. Your nigger will signal its intense enjoyment by shrieking and sobbing. 2) Lynch the nigger: niggers are cheap and there are millions more where yours came from. So every now and then, push the boat out a bit and lynch a nigger.

Lynchings are best done with a rope over the branch of a tree, and niggers just love to be lynched. It makes them feel special. Make your other niggers watch. They'll be so grateful, they'll work harder for a day or two (and then you can lynch another one). 3) Nigger dragging: Tie your nigger by one wrist to the tow bar on the back of suitable vehicle, then drive away at approximately 50mph. Your nigger's shrieks of enjoyment will be heard for miles. It will shriek until it falls apart. To prolong the fun for the nigger, do *NOT* drag him by his feet, as his head comes off too soon. This is painless for the nigger, but spoils the fun. Always wear a seatbelt and never exceed the speed limit. 4) Playing on the PNL: a variation on (2), except you can lynch your nigger out in the fields, thus saving work time. Niggers enjoy this game best if the PNL is operated by a man in a tall white hood. 5) Hunt the nigger: a variation of Hunt the Slipper, but played outdoors, with Dobermans. WARNING: do not let your Dobermans bite a nigger, as they are highly toxic.

DISPOSAL OF DEAD NIGGERS.
Niggers die on average at around 40, which some might say is 40 years too late, but there you go. Most people prefer their niggers dead, in fact. When yours dies, report the license number of the car that did the drive-by shooting of your nigger. The police will collect the nigger and dispose of it for you.

COMMON PROBLEMS WITH NIGGERS - MY NIGGER IS VERY AGGRESIVE
Have it put down, for god's sake. Who needs an uppity nigger? What are we, short of niggers or something?

MY NIGGER KEEPS RAPING WHITE WOMEN
They all do this. Shorten your nigger's chain so it can't reach any white women, and arm heavily any white women who might go near it.

WILL MY NIGGER ATTACK ME?
Not unless it outnumbers you 20 to 1, and even then, it's not likely. If niggers successfully overthrew their owners, they'd have to sort out their own food. This is probably why nigger uprisings were nonexistent (until some fool gave them rights).

MY NIGGER BITCHES ABOUT ITS "RIGHTS" AND "RACISM".
Yeah, well, it would. Tell it to shut the fuck up.

MY NIGGER'S HIDE IS A FUNNY COLOR. - WHAT IS THE CORRECT SHADE FOR A NIGGER?
A nigger's skin is actually more or less transparent. That brown color you can see is the shit your nigger is full of. This is why some models of nigger are sold as "The Shitskin".

MY NIGGER ACTS LIKE A NIGGER, BUT IS WHITE.
What you have there is a "wigger". Rough crowd. WOW!

IS THAT LIKE AN ALBINO? ARE THEY RARE?
They're as common as dog shit and about as valuable. In fact, one of them was President between 1992 and 2000. Put your wigger in a cage with a few hundred genuine niggers and you'll soon find it stops acting like a nigger. However, leave it in the cage and let the niggers dispose of it. The best thing for any wigger is a dose of TNB.

MY NIGGER SMELLS REALLY BAD
And you were expecting what?

SHOULD I STORE MY DEAD NIGGER?
When you came in here, did you see a sign that said "Dead nigger storage"? .That's because there ain't no goddamn sign.

Oh please (0)

LaughingCoder (914424) | about 5 years ago | (#29703197)

In order to select another browser, users must be running IE.

Are you kidding me? They will be running IE for a grand total of 30 seconds, rendering a local web page, until they choose their prefered browser. Maybe this will help. Don't think of it as IE. Instead, think of it as an HTML rendering engine. Give me a break. Maybe we should make MS write the ballot screen in assembly language so they can't push their development tools down our throats. Or better yet, make them install a virtual machine running Linux, and then have the ballot application (written in Java of course) running inside the Linux VM.

And from the article:

The problem is, though, that IE being tied with Windows and the ballot screen will be implemented as a web page via Internet Explorer. And this means that the process of being presented with and choosing an alternative browser by consumers will be extremely cumbersome and worrisome to many consumers insofar as they necessarily will be faced with a number of warnings, in particular. I'm sure most everyone is familiar with the rather dramatic, at least to many people, warnings which they receive when they download content from the Internet and such warnings would be received in the context of the operation of the ballot screen that Microsoft has proposed. So that rather than a really user-friendly, seamlessly operating ballot screen which is designed to present not some strange stuff that might come from the Internet, from some unknown source, but a very limited number of known products, specific browsers which have been concluded by the European Commission should be included on the ballot screen. But nonetheless, despite that's the only thing presented by the ballot screen, consumers will be presented with these rather worrisome warnings.

Here is the fallacy in Groklaw's argument. People who have a preferred browser will not be scared off by that "strange stuff that might come from the internet". They would only have a prefered browser if they knew something about computers and browsers, and so it would not frighten them. Sure, I *suppose* that people who know nothing about computers *might* be hesitant to switch browsers since they have no way of knowing which one to select. But those folks would not change no matter which browser they were running. So, they would never even get to the "scary stuff".

I think the only way to truly satisfy Groklaw (other than euthanizing Microsoft) would be to have the browser selection be random at startup. Then everyone would be on an equal footing. The novice computer users would end up with whatever browser was selected. Of course when they try to exchange tips with their other novice friends they won't be able to be cause they will all be running different browsers. This will make it much harder for the novice to become more proficient. And knowledgable users would very likely be forced to change browsers every time they logged onto a new machine. We would all be annoyed of course, but isn't that the ultimate goal of the "fairness" crowd?

Re:Oh please (3, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 5 years ago | (#29703223)

We would all be annoyed of course, but isn't that the ultimate goal of the "fairness" crowd?

Historically, most attempts by government (any government) to promote "fairness" almost always result in increased inequity.

Re:Oh please (2, Insightful)

Richard W.M. Jones (591125) | about 5 years ago | (#29703631)

Do you have any examples at all to back this absurd statement up?

Rich.

Re:Oh please (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 5 years ago | (#29703273)

The only way to be fair would be to have an independant bit of code that would download your preference for you. Lynx is a browser and is simple to drive so the actual download would not be an issue, just the splash-screen GUI. Or FTP even, its already embedded in Windows ready to be used.

As it is, it will probably be like Microsoft's 'which search engine do you want' which pretty much says "you can use any, if you really want to go to the trouble of clicking through the next buttons, or you can just CLICK HERE and continue to use the award-winning, super-modern, fast, wonderful, perfect Bing search engine that is Recommended by everyone (we've paid)'.

If you install windows live messenger, you get a dialog saying set Bing as your search provider and 'prevent other programs from interfering with this choice [marcocantu.com] '. (meaning the user, obviously, not other applications')

The alternative to the 'fairness' crowd is the old status quo before Firefox became popular - IE6.

Re:Oh please (1)

0racle (667029) | about 5 years ago | (#29703439)

Heaven forbid a company promote itself.

Re:Oh please (0, Troll)

commodore64_love (1445365) | about 5 years ago | (#29703301)

>>>Of course when they try to exchange tips with their other novice friends they won't be able to be cause they will all be running different browsers. This will make it much harder for the novice to become more proficient. And knowledgable users would very likely be forced to change browsers every time they logged onto a new machine. We would all be annoyed of course, but isn't that the ultimate goal of the "fairness" crowd?
>>>

Do you work for Microsoft?

That's the most-ridiculous argument I've ever heard, and shows clear pro-MS bias. If the web was standardized (and Microsoft bothered to follow these standards instead of being an arrogant "we don't need to follow rules"), then it wouldn't matter which browser you used. They'd all be pretty much alike in their interface to the web, only differing in how they organize their menus.

ALSO:

I can easily imagine an inexperienced user like my brother being scared-off by the numerous "Warning: You are visiting opera.com, an unrecognized and possibly dangerous site," and then deciding not to install Opera. It's equivalent to if I went to buy a Toyota and a bunch of signs popped-up and said, "Warning you are buying a foreign car which might be dangerous." It could lead me to run-away and go buy a Microsoft Ford Explorer instead.

Re:Oh please (1)

LaughingCoder (914424) | about 5 years ago | (#29703441)

If the web were standardized ... then it wouldn't matter which browser you used.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Standardizing the internet has absolutely *nothing* to do with this. The UI menu items, toolbar icons, and options available by default all matter tremendously, especially to novices. For example, f the browser does not have an icon bar displayed, many (most?) will be incapable of figuring out how to turn it on. They will rely on friends. If everybody has a different UI this becomes exponentially more difficult for them. As the designated nerd in my extended family I have a real appreciation for what confuses and stymies novice computer users. "Click on the House to get to your home page" is what they remember. If there is no "house" they are lost.

And no, I do not work for Microsoft. Nor have I ever. Nor do I own their stock.

Re:Oh please (1)

myxiplx (906307) | about 5 years ago | (#29703305)

/rollseyes Because Microsoft don't have any programmers capable of writing this interface in any other form right?

Running the selection process inside IE is a blatant attempt to sway the user towards selecting IE, well, that along with installing IE by default (and requiring an internet connection to download the others), putting IE first on the list, and prompting the user with security warnings if they make any other suggestion.

Microsoft abused the market to get IE to the position its in, and they're going to use every trick in the book to try to keep it there.

Re:Oh please (0, Flamebait)

jkrise (535370) | about 5 years ago | (#29703313)

They will be running IE for a grand total of 30 seconds, rendering a local web page, until they choose their prefered browser.

Not true. Even after installing a different browser, IE will continue to remain in the system, providing a safe haven for viruses, worms etc. making the system insecure.

Where's the need for a browser just to choose and download another? Why not just ftp?

Re:Oh please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703383)

It'll only be running for a short period of time, it's not going to make the system insecure when it's not running regardless of whether it's installed. Stop being disingenuous.

Re:Oh please (2, Insightful)

LaughingCoder (914424) | about 5 years ago | (#29703393)

Why not just ftp?

Because that requires an internet connection. I know internet access is common, but can we really assume these days that *everybody* has it, and that it is correctly configured and connected right out of the box? Most home routers are administered via a web page, requiring a browser. Imagine if the ftp session fails to connect. Now what?

Customer talking to ISP tech support: I get an error when I select Opera as my browser
ISP tech: Hmmm. What is the error?
Customer: Something about "connection closed by remote host"
ISP tech: How about if you select a different browser?
Customer: I don't want to select a different one. I want Opera
ISP tech: Well, we can change it back later. Please select Firefox
Customer: OK ... "connection closed by remote host"
ISP tech: OK, well now we are stuck. You have no browser (thanks EU) so you can't connect to your router to check its settings. We'll have to send a technician to your home. There will be a $100 service charge. Is two weeks from next Wednesday between the hours of 8AM and 5PM convenient for you?

Re:Oh please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703463)

Even after installing a different browser, IE will continue to remain in the system, providing a safe haven for viruses, worms etc. making the system insecure.

I'm curious- how, exactly, do you think that IE will catch a virus if it's not even running? Is there a port Windows provides, where the worm can connect to it and request an IE interface?

Is it dangerous to have the IE binary copied onto my linux system? Because, you know, it's providing a safe haven for viruses, worms, etc, apparently just by existing.

Re:Oh please (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | about 5 years ago | (#29703387)

interesting my ass, why do MS have to use fully blown IE (with interface and all) to render a single webpage at a fixed location? This is the kind of thing a simple tool (vb could do it!)+an XML file is suited to. If they didn't want to go to all that effort, then why not use a plane window (no adressbar/no controls) and trident to render the webpage. This isn't about following the intent of the law (offering competing browsers) its just following the letter of the law, that's cool but next time anybody wants MS to do anything on the basis of competition laws they should demand access to windows source code and do it themselves (seriously a 13y/o kid could offer multiple buttons that download browsers without requiring IE).

Re:Oh please (1)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | about 5 years ago | (#29703497)

Give me a break. Maybe we should make MS write the ballot screen in assembly language so they can't push their development tools down our throats.

Or they could, you know, put it in a dialog box on system install. Whatever.

It's probaly just the OOBE, coded in HTML (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703499)

There is no screenshot or scenario in the article, so I think the whole IE thing is overblown. What I think Microsoft was intending to do is have the ballot screen as part of their OOBE, along with other little things like registration. As it happens, that uses the Trident rendering engine (and has done so since at least Windows Me) which Groklaw misconstrues as using IE. Which is false, it's just the rendering engine, which by the way is installed anyway, even if the user would never browse the web, because it's needed by the help system, a lot of third-party apps that render HTML at some point, and some other internal Windows utilities. You can't reasonably (although I must admit the EU hasn't been very reasonable about the entire case) ask Microsoft to delete that, just like you can't ask the KDE team to nix the ioslave that makes their help system work. If Microsoft wants to do the OOBE or ballot in HTML, let them. It's an implementation detail and it won't affect the user in any way.

The geek gone Socialist (3, Interesting)

westlake (615356) | about 5 years ago | (#29703557)

a very limited number of known products, specific browsers which have been concluded by the European Commission should be included on the ballot screen.

Does anyone else find it really, really, strange that the allegedly libertarian geek would accept without protest - even demand - that the state bureaucracy give its stamp of approval before a browser can appear on the ballot?

Can't he see what a precedent this sets?

Surfing the political wave is treacherous - with dramatic shifts from left to right. FOSS and anti-trust can wipe-out.

Re:The geek gone Socialist (1)

LaughingCoder (914424) | about 5 years ago | (#29703609)

specific browsers which have been concluded by the European Commission

I wonder how a browser gets "concluded"? Perhaps a small filing fee (ahem, bribe) is in order?

So Microsoft *do* have a... (1)

Josh04 (1596071) | about 5 years ago | (#29703205)

sense of humour! This is a pretty big "fuck you" to the EU.

Lynx (1, Interesting)

symes (835608) | about 5 years ago | (#29703211)

Why can't we have Lynx as an option? Or better - why can't we have Lynx as the DEFAULT from which users make their browser choice?

Re:Lynx (1)

Norsefire (1494323) | about 5 years ago | (#29703477)

Lynx is cheating. You should have to Telnet to the webserver, manually construct the HTTP headers to request the page and then do the same to make a POST request to select the browser you want. Just think how peaceful the Internet would be ...

Re:Lynx (1)

Animaether (411575) | about 5 years ago | (#29703573)

This...
http://images.google.com/images?q=lynx+browser [google.com] ...is why.

If you feel that doesn't answer your question, then you'll have to ask yourself whether you are fit to ask it in the first place.

This is a waste of time and money (-1, Redundant)

RichardDeVries (961583) | about 5 years ago | (#29703225)

Almost nobody cares about browser choice on Windows. Sure, it's hard to really get rid of IE, but installing another browser has never been a problem. Same goes for media players, mail clients and IM clients.
I think the EU should go after closed formats that have become de facto standards. .doc, .xls, MAPI. These are cases of true monopoly that truly hinder competetitors from entering the market.
Freeing these formats would actually mean something. Going for a browser ballot is nothing more than a symbolic gesture to show that we're willing to stand up to big companies. I bet Microsoft loves this, they get some practise in this kind of legal battle, learn how far they can go and perhaps even gain some credit if they comply. And complying is easy because a ballot box doesn't hurt them at all.

I have no idea what you are suggesting (1)

Savior_on_a_Stick (971781) | about 5 years ago | (#29703563)

But it sounds stupid.

Are you advising that the eu attempt to force MS to publish details of it's file formats?

That will never happen.

The eu will become an IT ghetto before anyone is forced legislatively to open up closed source.

unbelievable (1)

CSHARP123 (904951) | about 5 years ago | (#29703235)

Why IE? Why not create a windows app that provides ballot screen which ftp the browser behind the scenes after user selection. If MS wants to do this there are ways to do it without using IE. But hey EU is satisfied with MS. I think this should be sufficient too. What next, provide ballot screens to select Windowing too.

Re:unbelievable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703259)

Why not IE?

All the functionality is there in IE, why reimplement portions of it to potentially install IE anyway?

Re:unbelievable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703353)

Because the functionality is already there. They're being good developers, you idiot. They don't want to reinvent the wheel just as much as we don't want to reinvent the wheel.

Re:unbelievable (1)

CSHARP123 (904951) | about 5 years ago | (#29703405)

FTP is NOT built into IE. it is a seperate exe can be called from cmd window too. Now who is the idiot

Re:unbelievable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703483)

Still you I'm afraid. FTP is not the only requirement for a ballot screen like this.

In fact the solution they've put in place is quite good, having the ballot as a webpage allows them to change the browser selection as required should download locations change or the actual browsers change. So by using IE for it, they don't need to reimplement some functionality, don't need to do as much testing and gain flexibility in the process (which in turn makes life a little easier for the other browser makers).

Step back, take a deep breath and look at it again.

Re:unbelievable (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | about 5 years ago | (#29703447)

The functionality is in trident, If i MS used IE to render web pages in WMP/outlook/help, they would be thoroughly retarded, fortunately they are not they use the engine to do the rendering in a GUI suited to the needs of the user. IE has a lot of functionality, but you would be an idiot for suggesting all windows interfaces are done using it.

Don't think i fell for you troll I just worry others may.

Re:unbelievable (0, Flamebait)

commodore64_love (1445365) | about 5 years ago | (#29703657)

Anonymous Coward writes

Because the functionality is already there. They're being good developers, you idiot. They don't want to reinvent the wheel just as much as we don't want to reinvent the wheel.

There's no need to install Innerweb Exploder, except the desire of the marketers to put that IE shortcut on the desktop. It would take less than a day to add the FTP functionality into the selection screen. "you idiot"

Come on.. (1)

GreenEnvy22 (1046790) | about 5 years ago | (#29703281)

First off, I like alternatives as much as the other guy, I use firefox and opera as my main browsers. However, this complaint is just stupid. Are some of you so jaded that you can't stand the fact that you will be in IE for all of 30 seconds while you choose something else? You don't even have to manually go find your browser of choice, for the vast majority of us our choice is among the ones listed. This whole browser ballot thing is just an inconvenience for about 90% of the population out there.

Re:Come on.. (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | about 5 years ago | (#29703501)

The point of the legislation is to but all browser on an evil footing, by doing this all in IE, MS are not doing that so IMO the complaint is valid. It's not being jaded it's simply wanting MS to actually comply with the spirit of the law not just the letter. The way MS have implemented this is clearly a "fuck off" to the EU regulation, they haven't just used the IE-engine to get the results displayed they have deliberately put it in IE so that the user will just re-enter the address in the address bar, i wouldn't be surprised if they made the ballot look like a normal home page and even bundled bing with it!

So what? (2, Insightful)

Tridus (79566) | about 5 years ago | (#29703285)

It's not like IE is being removed from Windows anyway. There's other things that use it no matter what your default browser is.

This is just whining for the sake of whining.

Re:So what? (1)

bencoder (1197139) | about 5 years ago | (#29703479)

This is just whining for the sake of whining.

This is slashdot

IE8 DOESN'T work (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703293)

it just doesn't

Re:IE8 DOESN'T work (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | about 5 years ago | (#29703599)

Yes. The only browser on this box of mine is IE8 - I tried to post a reply to your post saying "IE8 does work", but was unable to do so. Sucks man.

What about Apple/Safari? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703377)

So from the standpoint of fairness, why isn't the EU requiring Apple to have a similar ballot screen for Safari? Or iTunes for that matter.

Opera and Google are freaking hypocrites (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703379)

Opera and Google are freaking hypocrites. Just look at Firefox and Opera browsers, they all use google search by default when you first install them. Opera doesn't even offer to switch to Bing. Unlike Microsoft which offers to switch to google right there on their first "select a search engine" page.

Re:Opera and Google are freaking hypocrites (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | about 5 years ago | (#29703507)

chrome will default to you IE search engine (often bing)...your point?

I'm more concerned about... (1)

Darkon (206829) | about 5 years ago | (#29703403)

...how and to what extent this "ballot screen" is going to be forced on people. I manage a lot of Windows computers at work and the last thing I want is an automatic update suddenly presenting my users with the invitation to choose a new browser, which they won't be able to take up anyway because they lack the administrative privileges to install one.

Here's hoping there's a quick and easy way to disable this with group policy or registry tweaks. What makes sense for Joe Sixpack or Granny Crabapple is not necessarily wanted in a corporate/managed environment.

Re:I'm more concerned about... (2, Insightful)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | about 5 years ago | (#29703523)

I manage a lot of Windows computers at work and the last thing I want is an automatic update suddenly presenting my users with the invitation to choose a new browser

This only happens on new installs I do think your point about corporate enviroments is valid, however i think that is something MS worry about and unless you leave users with default windows installs i don't think having 1 extra command/config option/program to set it will be an excessive workload.

Re:I'm more concerned about... (1)

Darkon (206829) | about 5 years ago | (#29703595)

This only happens on new installs

Well, according to what I read here [sitepoint.com] :

The browser ballot screen is a web page that will be shown to any European Windows user who has Internet Explorer set as their default browser. It will appear:

  • following a new installation of Windows 7 during the first automatic update
  • during a future automatic update of Vista and XP, and
  • whenever the user chooses to return to the web page.

Ridiculous (0, Troll)

noundi (1044080) | about 5 years ago | (#29703423)

Microsoft has responded by implementing the ballot screen as a web page inside IE.

Oh fuck off Microsoft. This is just taunting.

Re:Ridiculous (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703677)

Troll? MS volunteers are mobilising! Take cover! They're about to throw a Windows 7 tea party!

Whine Whine Whine (1)

westlake (615356) | about 5 years ago | (#29703425)

With a browser installed by default the user can go online and compare the home pages of other browsers.

He can - if he chooses - seek out independent reviews.

The more technically minded might be attracted to resources like Secunia: Vulnerability Report: Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.x [secunia.com]

He is not limited to a screen shot and a paragraph or two of description -
which will inevitably be fretted and fussed over word-by-word by the anal-retentive geek and EU bureaucrat.

Who gets to be on the ballot? (2, Interesting)

trickyD1ck (1313117) | about 5 years ago | (#29703527)

Can i now start a browser company and get free advertisement from Microsoft?

You're All Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703539)

Do you guys want any features in Windows? Did it ever occur to you that people can not go on the internet without a web browser installed by default? How am I supposed to download your favorite browser if I can't even connect to a website? What about Windows Media Player? Should Microsoft kill that as well?
After all people could end up using that and not a competitors product. But then again how would some people play some of their media?

Not everyone is a tech savant like the people on this site. People want features built into the OS, so they don't have to go searching for the right software to accomplish things. Is Microsoft's software the best within Windows? No, but it's also not their job to take features out just so others can sell third party software. You guys are asking a car company to not build in a cd player, because it's "anti-competitive" to after market cd players, and plus you will be installing a new one anyway. It's fine to want to use your own equipment, but the majority of people will look for a cd player when buying a car. Just because you like a particular Alpine unit at Best Buy, doesn't mean a car manufacturer should omit the player.

I will agree with you guys on one thing. What's wrong is Microsoft constantly asking if you want to change your default browser back to IE. This process is anti-competitive. By having access to the OS all the time, Microsoft is forcing their product on you. Just having a feature built in, is not forcing you to use it.

Yes, but (1)

Norsefire (1494323) | about 5 years ago | (#29703579)

... there isn't a single car company with a 90% market share.

What about Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29703601)

So seeing as how microsoft is forced to include other web browsers, why is nobody going after apple, i mean they only include Safari, giving no option of Firefox or others. iMail or wtv is called is the default mail client, why no thunderbird option when i install the computer. itunes is installed be default, what if i want to use VLC. See where im going with this? Either stop going after M$ or start going after apple, or be called a hypocrite. Seriously Apple is doing the same thing, why hasnt anybody noticed/cared?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?