Microsoft unbundles IE from Windows 7 for Europe

[Mem]

The worldwide launch of Windows 7 is fast approaching, but a pending legal case raises concerns about the sufficiency of competition among the Web browsers that are available to Windows users in Europe. In January the European Commission provided its preliminary view that Microsoft?s ?bundling? of Internet Explorer in Windows violated European competition law.

We?re committed to making Windows 7 available in Europe at the same time that it launches in the rest of the world, but we also must comply with European competition law as we launch the product. Given the pending legal proceeding, we?ve decided that instead of including Internet Explorer in Windows 7 in Europe, we will offer it separately and on an easy-to-install basis to both computer manufacturers and users. This means that computer manufacturers and users will be free to install Internet Explorer on Windows 7, or not, as they prefer. Of course, they will also be free, as they are today, to install other Web browsers.

Link.

Windows 7 will be offered in Europe in all of the versions that will be available here in the United States, both 32- and 64-bit, with an ?E? at the end of the product name (for instance, Windows 7 Home Premium E). The E versions of Windows 7 will ship at the same time as Windows 7 ships in the rest of the world, and they will be available in 23 European languages.

What does this mean for European consumers? The E versions of Windows 7 will include all the features and functionality of Windows 7 in the rest of the world, other than browsing with Internet Explorer. Computer manufacturers will be able to add any browser they want to their Windows 7 machines, including Internet Explorer, so European consumers who purchase new PCs will be able to access the Internet without any problem. Consumers will also be able to add any Web browser to their PCs, to supplement or replace the browsers preinstalled by their computer manufacturer.

Most importantly, the E versions of Windows 7 will continue to provide all of the underlying platform functionality of the operating system?applications designed for Windows will run just as well on an E version as on other versions of Windows 7.

 

[frostedflakes]

I've never understood this and the whole issue the EU has with Windows Media Player. Why is it such a big deal if Microsoft bundles a browser or media player with the OS? I mean it's not like they prevent you from installing alternatives.

 

[ViRGE]

This blows my mind, almost as much as Vista N (the WMP-free edition) did. An operating system without a web browser? What is this, 1993? I simply can not conceive an OS lacking a web browser in 2009.

And to be fair, OEMs will undoubtedly throw something on there, but there's no guarantee it's not going to be useful, only that they got the biggest kickback for it. Meanwhile for people building their own computers, this may be a problem. It sounds like Win7E will be the only version shipped, unlike Vista N.

I can't wait until Win8 ships, and we get to find out what new feature the EU requires be removed. I mean really, who needs an OS that actually does things?

 

[frostedflakes]

My understanding is that these versions will only be available to system builders, and most will probably opt to just install IE on the systems. No consumers are going to get an OS without a browser, that's just silly.

 

[Nothinman]

I'm sure it'll just be iexplore.exe that's missing, the core MSHTML and all of it's dependencies will surely still be there so it's not really unbundled.

I can't wait until Win8 ships, and we get to find out what new feature the EU requires be removed. I mean really, who needs an OS that actually does things?

IMO just about everything should be optional, including things like IE and WMP. If the EU forcing MS to remove/hide things like IE makes the OS more modular I'm all for it.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
I'm sure it'll just be iexplore.exe that's missing, the core MSHTML and all of it's dependencies will surely still be there so it's not really unbundled.

I can't wait until Win8 ships, and we get to find out what new feature the EU requires be removed. I mean really, who needs an OS that actually does things?

IMO just about everything should be optional, including things like IE and WMP. If the EU forcing MS to remove/hide things like IE makes the OS more modular I'm all for it.

The core components can't really be removed. They're valid elements that other programs rely on (not the least of which are Help files and Valve's Steam). So they're still there, it's only the executable that's gone.

And the thing is that all of this stuff was already are optional under Vista. You can tell IE7 and WMP to go shove it if you want, and OEMs could even configure it that way.

 

[Modelworks]

Anyone wanting to try it out on the win7 beta can go to programs and features , turn windows features on and off. Uncheck IE.


Curious so I did the above.

What changed ? Nothing that I can tell except IE is gone from the menus and in program files the IE folder only has a few dll and an exe labeled reinstallIE.

everything else seems to work fine.
MS office , visual studio, both working fine.

 

[walkur]

Sometime (ok often) I don't get the EC.

EC response to the removal of IE

So now they want MS to promote the product of the competition.
Loads of issues with that ofcourse...

As a resident of the EU I really hope MS will stick to their plan.

stupid politicians....

 

[Nothinman]

The core components can't really be removed. They're valid elements that other programs rely on (not the least of which are Help files and Valve's Steam). So they're still there, it's only the executable that's gone.

But IMO a web browser shouldn't be a core element, even more so on a server. And the fact that MS released Windows Server Core shows that they're realizing this and hopefully they'll get to the point where everything really is modular enough to be removed/installed on a whim. And if MS had proper package management Steam could just depend on MSHTML and it could be installed when you install Steam.

And the thing is that all of this stuff was already are optional under Vista. You can tell IE7 and WMP to go shove it if you want, and OEMs could even configure it that way.

But they're not really shoving it, you're just putting a bag over their face by removing the shortcuts and the UI executable.

So now they want MS to promote the product of the competition.
Loads of issues with that ofcourse...

They just want consumers to be given a choice, with the OEM version that works out fine since the OEM can decide whether to install IE or not. For the retail version it's more difficult since it's MS' burden but hey, that's the part of being a monopoly.

stupid politicians....

Stupid MS. If they had just left the web browser separate from the core OS they'd be fine. Hell if they'd make the core renderer replaceable things would be fine too. I don't think anyone really cares if their help files are rendered by MSHTML or Gecko, just as long as they're rendered.

 

[Titan]

So, can I buy a disc with firefox on it or what? Will I need to FTP somewhere to get my first web browser?

 

[Modelworks]

The problem with MS bundling anything with the OS is that it gives them an unfair advantage over the competition. They sell the framework on which other products must use in order to exist. If you are a user of a new pc are you going to use IE that comes with the OS or are you going to go looking for something else ? I truly wish MS would just sell a vanilla OS. Nothing but the kernel and the files it needs to run. No media player, browser, or anything else that can't be uninstalled completely. Right now with windows 7 I have the aggravation that even with windows media center uninstalled, the remote I use still wants to control functions I don't want it to because it is tied to resources media center still keeps installed after uninstalling the main app.

If you look back at when windows , talking about 3.1, there was nothing bundled. It was an OS and anything you wanted for software to run on that OS you had to install. Over time MS started adding applications to the OS by default and I don't think they did it to try to hurt competing software, but instead to make MS a better competing OS. The problem is that once they got that OS dominance they didn't go back to just selling an OS. They made a serious mistake along the way by making some of the bundled applications core parts of the OS. I really think this was because of lazy programming and not because they were trying to keep out competitors. It is much easier to use parts of an OS that you happen to have the source code for, than it is to write all the functions from scratch.

I would love a vanilla version of 7, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Quiksilver]

So...
Are users supposed to use the Windows Update program to get it? If that will function without IE... Or is there going to be a separate disc with just IE8 on it? How is this going to work?

 

[RebateMonger]

Originally posted by: Quiksilver
So...
Are users supposed to use the Windows Update program to get it? If that will function without IE... Or is there going to be a separate disc with just IE8 on it? How is this going to work?

Edit: It looks like, with Vista, Microsoft removed the Windows Update reliance on Internet Explorer. I never noticed that before now.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Quiksilver
So...
Are users supposed to use the Windows Update program to get it? If that will function without IE... Or is there going to be a separate disc with just IE8 on it? How is this going to work?

I uninstalled IE and windows update still works.

 

[Nothinman]

Are users supposed to use the Windows Update program to get it? If that will function without IE... Or is there going to be a separate disc with just IE8 on it? How is this going to work?

Even if browsing to WU doesn't work AU still works so it's not a big issue.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

And the thing is that all of this stuff was already are optional under Vista. You can tell IE7 and WMP to go shove it if you want, and OEMs could even configure it that way.

But they're not really shoving it, you're just putting a bag over their face by removing the shortcuts and the UI executable.

That's all you can do. Otherwise you're going to break all the applications that expect the OS to have HTML and multimedia services.

Stupid MS. If they had just left the web browser separate from the core OS they'd be fine. Hell if they'd make the core renderer replaceable things would be fine too.

The core renderer is replaceable. As are all of the multimedia components accessed through DirectShow. You can't remove this stuff because you'd break things, but you can replace it.

All of this is doable today, with Vista. No one chooses to do it however, because really, why would you want to do that?

 

[Dari]

Europe sucks.

 

[Nothinman]

That's all you can do. Otherwise you're going to break all the applications that expect the OS to have HTML and multimedia services.[ /Q]

Or you can implement proper package management...

The core renderer is replaceable. As are all of the multimedia components accessed through DirectShow. You can't remove this stuff because you'd break things, but you can replace it.

Once upon a time there was a project to make Gecko implement everything necessary by MSHTML to replace it. It's late so I don't rememeber the specifics so either it's too much of a PITA or it's impossible. Either way MS has won.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

That's all you can do. Otherwise you're going to break all the applications that expect the OS to have HTML and multimedia services.

Or you can implement proper package management...

Or you could just offer services, so that applications can take advantage of them. Package management as a solution to this problem is little more than throwing the problem at the feet of application developers, and making them deal with the fact that the OS is missing important services.

The core renderer is replaceable. As are all of the multimedia components accessed through DirectShow. You can't remove this stuff because you'd break things, but you can replace it.

Once upon a time there was a project to make Gecko implement everything necessary by MSHTML to replace it. It's late so I don't rememeber the specifics so either it's too much of a PITA or it's impossible. Either way MS has won.

It's still alive, Wine uses it as its MSHTML replacement. It actually works pretty well, Steam for example seems to get along just fine with it. However I'm sure it's not perfectly compatible, largely because it doesn't support ActiveX, which undoubtedly someone somewhere out there expects. I have a hard time believing that "it's impossible" is the reason however.

Regardless, I can't imagine why you'd want to replace MSHTML in a working Windows distribution. It doesn't accomplish anything. Gecko's no more secure and you can't use add-ons, so it would do little to differentiate itself from MSHTML.

 

[postmortemIA]

Originally posted by: Dari
Europe sucks.

it is just top-level racketeering

they just looked for excuses to make them first generously pay for being present on market, now there's this ridiculous claim that they can't provide to its customers way to use internet out-of-box.


Would they do this to EU-based company? nope, they would subtly do best they can to protect its monopoly (see Airbus)

 

[Snapster]

Originally posted by: postmortemIA

Originally posted by: Dari
Europe sucks.

it is just top-level racketeering

they just looked for excuses to make them first generously pay for being present on market, now there's this ridiculous claim that they can't provide to its customers way to use internet out-of-box.

Would they do this to EU-based company? nope, they would subtly do best they can to protect its monopoly (see Airbus)

It is hypocritical and something I do not like, even as an EU citizen I'm offended by it. Take Apple, if you have a go at Microsoft for bundling everything but the kitchen sink why not Apple? They do exactly the same and blatantly use that fact in adverts knowing Microsoft's hands are tied.

Only reason: $$$

 

[Imported]

What's next? Some start-up in the EU complaining about the bundled Notepad, Calculator, or Solitaire?

 

[Nothinman]

Or you could just offer services, so that applications can take advantage of them. Package management as a solution to this problem is little more than throwing the problem at the feet of application developers, and making them deal with the fact that the OS is missing important services.

But in many cases a web browser isn't an important service and sure as hell should be optional. Good package management gives the developers a good way to determine if something is installed and either let the user know it needs to be installed or have it be automatically installed. The Windows Installer stuff is a start but it's either not completely there or no one uses it properly.

Regardless, I can't imagine why you'd want to replace MSHTML in a working Windows distribution. It doesn't accomplish anything. Gecko's no more secure and you can't use add-ons, so it would do little to differentiate itself from MSHTML.

That's beside the point, I could've used the rendering engine used by Opera or Safari just as easily. The point is that there's nothing special about MSHTML. I can install 3rd party programs to handle a lot of things in Windows like URL and file types but why does IE's rendering engine get to be special?

Take Apple, if you have a go at Microsoft for bundling everything but the kitchen sink why not Apple? They do exactly the same and blatantly use that fact in adverts knowing Microsoft's hands are tied.

Because MS is a monopoly so special rules apply to them. If the market was split and there was real competition then you wouldn't see this happening to MS.