Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Canned worms, anyone?

Expand Messages
  • Ryan Shripat
    http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/06/state_of_the_br_1.html It would be
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 25, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/06/state_of_the_br_1.html
      <http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/06/state_of_the_br_1.html>It
      would be interesting to hear another perspective on this.

      I have not yet heard a similar complaint against Apple for tying Safari to
      > its operating system. Or against the KDE guys for tying Konqueror to theirs,
      > for that matter.


      In any case, Microsoft is not awaiting the European Commission�s formal
      ruling and has chosen the Zero
      option<http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/01/last_friday_a_p.html>.
      A new Windows computer will contain zero browsers � unless the hardware
      vendor installs a browser of its choice.

      There are several things wrong with this solution:

      1. Suppose a consumer buys a new computer and it doesn�t have any browser
      installed on it. How is he going to get one?
      2. Probable answer: some kind of temporary download program that pops up
      the very first time he uses his computer and gives him the choice of no less
      than *five* browsers. Problem is, the consumer doesn�t want this choice
      because he has no idea what�s going on.
      3. Besides, if this solution is implemented we can expect a stream of
      complaints from the truly tiny browsers nobody has ever heard of. In all
      fairness, we should include them, too. So the user will get the choice of
      eight to ten (twelve? fourteen?) browsers � a choice he doesn�t want and has
      no idea what to do with.
      4. Or will somebody have to decide which browsers to allow in this
      program? Who? How long will it take before this person or institution is
      accused of unfairness because he forgot one browser?
      5. Now suppose the hardware vendor installs one browser on the computer.
      Even worse, suppose this browser is actually IE. Are we going to get a
      crusade against hardware vendors, too, for daring to install the wrong
      browser?
      6. Suppose the world caves in to the mighty pressure of teh Interwebz and
      forsakes IE forever. Now hardware vendors will install another browser.
      Let�s say they mostly opt for Firefox � a reasonable choice in today�s
      market. Will we get a re-run of the entire thing, but now aimed against
      those evil hardware vendors who�re giving Firefox an unfair advantage? If
      so, when will it stop? If not, where�s the fairness in the process?


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Richard Jobity
      They are not monopolies, using their dominance in one category to ensure dominance in another category. Unlike Microsoft. I will agree that Apple (the Jobs
      Message 2 of 4 , Aug 26, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        They are not monopolies, using their dominance in one category to ensure
        dominance in another category. Unlike Microsoft.

        I will agree that Apple (the Jobs factor) is even more paranoid about
        keeping control, but when Apple gets more than 50 percent of desktops,
        I'll get worried then. iTunes do have a good share of the music market
        and Pixar do have a near monopoly on Oscar-nominated and winning
        animation, but I don't see iTunes dictating terms to the record
        companies such that people can't get most of their music elsewhere.

        And for KDE? Not a monopoly in Linux Uis.

        Convicted monopolies are treated differently, because they have proven
        to the satisfaction of a court of law that they cannot be trusted to not
        abuse their power. Microsoft, being an unrepentant monopolist, will be
        subject to such restrictions more than most other companies.



        -rij




        -----Original Message-----
        From: TTLUG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TTLUG@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
        Ryan Shripat
        Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 11:13 AM
        To: TTLUG@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [ttlug] Canned worms, anyone?

        http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/06/state_of_the_br_1.html
        <http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/06/state_of_the_br_1.html>
        It
        would be interesting to hear another perspective on this.

        I have not yet heard a similar complaint against Apple for tying Safari
        to
        > its operating system. Or against the KDE guys for tying Konqueror to
        > theirs, for that matter.


        In any case, Microsoft is not awaiting the European Commission's formal
        ruling and has chosen the Zero
        option<http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/01/last_friday_a_p.h
        tml>.
        A new Windows computer will contain zero browsers - unless the hardware
        vendor installs a browser of its choice.

        There are several things wrong with this solution:

        1. Suppose a consumer buys a new computer and it doesn't have any
        browser
        installed on it. How is he going to get one?
        2. Probable answer: some kind of temporary download program that pops
        up
        the very first time he uses his computer and gives him the choice of
        no less
        than *five* browsers. Problem is, the consumer doesn't want this
        choice
        because he has no idea what's going on.
        3. Besides, if this solution is implemented we can expect a stream of
        complaints from the truly tiny browsers nobody has ever heard of. In
        all
        fairness, we should include them, too. So the user will get the
        choice of
        eight to ten (twelve? fourteen?) browsers - a choice he doesn't want
        and has
        no idea what to do with.
        4. Or will somebody have to decide which browsers to allow in this
        program? Who? How long will it take before this person or institution
        is
        accused of unfairness because he forgot one browser?
        5. Now suppose the hardware vendor installs one browser on the
        computer.
        Even worse, suppose this browser is actually IE. Are we going to get
        a
        crusade against hardware vendors, too, for daring to install the
        wrong
        browser?
        6. Suppose the world caves in to the mighty pressure of teh Interwebz
        and
        forsakes IE forever. Now hardware vendors will install another
        browser.
        Let's say they mostly opt for Firefox - a reasonable choice in
        today's
        market. Will we get a re-run of the entire thing, but now aimed
        against
        those evil hardware vendors who're giving Firefox an unfair
        advantage? If
        so, when will it stop? If not, where's the fairness in the process?


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



        ------------------------------------

        Help build TTLUG by forwarding this to anyone who is interested in the
        subject matter or would otherwise benefit from joining the mailing list.

        Trinidad and Tobago Linux Users Group
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ttlug
        To subscribe, send an email to_______ TTLUG-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To
        unsubscribe, send an email to_____ TTLUG-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        List owner/moderator Richard Jobity__ TTLUG-owner@yahoogroups.com Yahoo!
        Groups Links
      • helenhosein
        The trouble with antitrust laws is that it s not only about practices, it s also very much about market share. It s perfectly fine for Apple to ship Safari
        Message 3 of 4 , Aug 26, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          The trouble with antitrust laws is that it's not only about practices, it's also very much about market share. It's perfectly fine for Apple to ship Safari with MacOS because their market share does not make MacOS a dominant product in the OS market. The issue with Microsoft is that Windows is already dominant and the EU claims they are using that dominance to push their browser as well by bundling it.

          That said, another solution (albeit lame) exists: go back to the old days where you had to install your first browser separately using offline media (CD, etc)...

          -Hel

          --- In TTLUG@yahoogroups.com, Ryan Shripat <ryan.shripat@...> wrote:
          >
          > http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/06/state_of_the_br_1.html
          > <http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/06/state_of_the_br_1.html>It
          > would be interesting to hear another perspective on this.
          >
          > I have not yet heard a similar complaint against Apple for tying Safari to
          > > its operating system. Or against the KDE guys for tying Konqueror to theirs,
          > > for that matter.
          >
          >
          > In any case, Microsoft is not awaiting the European Commission's formal
          > ruling and has chosen the Zero
          > option<http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2009/01/last_friday_a_p.html>.
          > A new Windows computer will contain zero browsers — unless the hardware
          > vendor installs a browser of its choice.
          >
          > There are several things wrong with this solution:
          >
          > 1. Suppose a consumer buys a new computer and it doesn't have any browser
          > installed on it. How is he going to get one?
          > 2. Probable answer: some kind of temporary download program that pops up
          > the very first time he uses his computer and gives him the choice of no less
          > than *five* browsers. Problem is, the consumer doesn't want this choice
          > because he has no idea what's going on.
          > 3. Besides, if this solution is implemented we can expect a stream of
          > complaints from the truly tiny browsers nobody has ever heard of. In all
          > fairness, we should include them, too. So the user will get the choice of
          > eight to ten (twelve? fourteen?) browsers — a choice he doesn't want and has
          > no idea what to do with.
          > 4. Or will somebody have to decide which browsers to allow in this
          > program? Who? How long will it take before this person or institution is
          > accused of unfairness because he forgot one browser?
          > 5. Now suppose the hardware vendor installs one browser on the computer.
          > Even worse, suppose this browser is actually IE. Are we going to get a
          > crusade against hardware vendors, too, for daring to install the wrong
          > browser?
          > 6. Suppose the world caves in to the mighty pressure of teh Interwebz and
          > forsakes IE forever. Now hardware vendors will install another browser.
          > Let's say they mostly opt for Firefox — a reasonable choice in today's
          > market. Will we get a re-run of the entire thing, but now aimed against
          > those evil hardware vendors who're giving Firefox an unfair advantage? If
          > so, when will it stop? If not, where's the fairness in the process?
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • Trevor Christian
          [?] 2009/8/26 helenhosein ... As you ve re-mentioned that point, I must admit that I find it rather funny and had never considered the fact
          Message 4 of 4 , Aug 26, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            [?]

            2009/8/26 helenhosein <hel@...>

            > That said, another solution (albeit lame) exists: go back to the old days
            > where you had to install your first browser separately using offline media
            > (CD, etc)...
            >
            As you've re-mentioned that point, I must admit that I find it rather funny
            and had never considered the fact that without IE being already there on
            some windows installation I'da been hard-pressed to acquire firefox to use
            in it's place...

            Going this route does open up an minor avenue of revenue for the opensource
            browser though seeing as they'd be selling software packages. Imagine
            people lining up all night outside the "Mozilla Store" to get their very own
            copy of "Firefox 4" :-)

            Trevor "TeC" Christian
            Cell #: (767) 225 4472 / (868) 687 0436
            Home Page (http://www.trevorchristian.com/)


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.