RSSGoogle: Windows 7 users should be able to choose any browser, any time
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published March 11, 2009, 10:36 AM
In its first statement in response to Microsoft's decision announced over the weekend to enable Windows 7 users to deactivate and/or uninstall Internet Explorer 8 after the operating system's setup installs it, a spokesperson for Google, which makes the Chrome browser, told Betanews overnight that not only should Windows users be given the option to choose their browsers during setup, but to do so every time they turn their machines on.
"We have not yet been able to see the planned new features of Internet Explorer but are looking forward to examining them when they are released. The Internet was founded on choice and openness and this requires a level playing field with multiple options for accessing it. From the moment a computer is turned on, people should be able to access a range of browsers easily and quickly," the spokesperson stated.
Google thus officially joins Opera, whose CEO, Jon S. von Tetzchner, in an interview with Betanews Monday, made clear in no uncertain terms that the Norweigian browser maker would not be satisfied until Windows openly offers its users a menu of alternatives during setup.
This morning's Google statement comes as the European technology news service Euractive led with the headline this morning that the European Commission was not impressed by Microsoft's decision. However, a close read of the actual statement from EC spokesperson Jonathan Todd to Euractive actually says the EC had nothing to say on the matter -- at least not until Microsoft follows up with a response to its Statement of Objections sent in January.
"Microsoft has not told us anything so far. If they think it is relevant, they will presumably include the measure in their response to our Statement of Objections," Euractiv quotes Todd as saying. However, Todd has previously told the press that the intention of this latest round of objections is to compel Microsoft to offer customers an unbiased choice of Web browsers. Google's statement makes it clear that it would prefer that choice to be offered continually.
hey google. before you start talking pretty and posturing, how about releasing your mac version of chrome already. asses
Score: 0
|i think people do have the choice to install any browser they want. but the microsoft's inclusion of the i.e. browser as a default in the o.s. is justified.
though many view the ie as something to be entertained with, it is actually a vital tool and utility that all operating system users should be gauranteed to have.
besides, if i recall each google software also installs a slew of google software that userx should not have to decide to install them or not. any user should simply be able to download and install individual programs if they want.
if i also recall the google toolbar and other features like auto update is nothing more than spyware and installs whether the users want it or not.
Score: 0
|"Google thus officially joins Opera, whose CEO, Jon S. von Tetzchner, in an interview with Betanews Monday, made clear in no uncertain terms that the Norweigian browser maker would not be satisfied until Windows openly offers its users a menu of alternatives during setup."
"We have not yet been able to see the planned new features of Internet Explorer but are looking forward to examining them when they are released. The Internet was founded on choice and openness and this requires a level playing field with multiple options for accessing it. From the moment a computer is turned on, people should be able to access a range of browsers easily and quickly," the spokesperson stated.'
LOL, They have thier heads so far up thier butts. That's the last thing I want bugging me.
Score: 0
|Crybaby cry, Google. You get as much say in MSFT's affairs as they get in yours (which I know is going to earn me another whack from PC_Tool . It's okay brother, I respect your opinions). How likely would it be if Google developed their own OS and didn't give folks the choice to use IE (why they would I don't know, I'm just posing as "what if"). They wouldn't. Not without a lot of pissing and moaning from MSFT. IMO, I think Google should just STFU and do what they do and stay out of others' affairs. Ditto for MSFT who has yet to offer any kind of decent search engine of their own. Live together, die alone.
Score: 0
|This is like when Google classified Real Player as spyware/adware, and all the while were distributing Google browser toolbar with the player. Screw you google. Yea that felt good. Ahhh.
What's wrong with Fileforum BTW? Hasn't posted new stuff in a few days.
Score: -2
|* launches global web icon
- please choose which browser to use for this session (Google, Mozilla, Safari, Opera, Maxthon, IE / lists features, star rated / manipulated
- please choose which search engine as your default for this session (Google, Yahoo, Live, Ask, Lycos)
yeah, that otta go over well, are people that work for google morons? i'm starting to think so
Score: 1
|This is BS...
Microsoft should just not package IE at all with they're OS... then well see what Opera and Google have to say when the end users can't download they're damn browsers at all unless they go to a friends house.
people that don't like IE or want other features go download a different borwser, people that don't care or don't need other features use IE it's not rocket science, it's called CHOICE as Opera's CEO put it. how about we take away IE and then there's nothing to use to make that Choice with. sounds like a good idea to me.
Score: 0
|And how exactly would they keep that list up to date? Sure, when you do an install, is asks if you want to download the latest setup files, but that only works if you are upgrading a system that is already successfully connected to the internet!
Score: 0
|Score: 0
|"not only should Windows users be given the option to choose their browsers during setup, but to do so every time they turn their machines on."
*laughing*
Right....that won't annoy anyone.
Hey, Google: We do have this already. There's this thing called the "internet"...which is literally chock full of nifty browsers for every use, mindset, and intent. Using this "internet", we can choose, at *any* time what browser we want to use.
Kewl, huh?
Focus on making yours better and maybe I'll start using it more often. :)
Hey...where's Blabby??
Score: 2
|"not only should Windows users be given the option to choose their browsers during setup, but to do so every time they turn their machines on."
*laughing*
Right....that won't annoy anyone.
Hey, Google: We do have this already. There's this thing called the "internet"...which is literally chock full of nifty browsers for every use, mindset, and intent. Using this "internet", we can choose, at *any* time what browser we want to use.
Kewl, huh?
Focus on making yours better and maybe I'll start using it more often. :)
^^^was exactly what I was going to type.....
Score: 2
|HAHAHAA!!!!! Go, Tool! I don't even have to rant anymore - 99% of the time you say what I'm thinking anyway.
Score: 0
|If the EU has nothing else to do but fight Google & Opera's battles, they have real problems. A waste of taxpayer's money. Twenty five years from now, people will be laughing at them.
The statement from the Google spokesman is the most rediculous thing I've heard. Who wants to choose their browser every time they boot up? Who needs an extra question before you log in? It's a joke. People will stick with one browser 99% of the time.
Score: 1
|Wow...didn't think I'd say this...but Google, STOP WHINING!!! Improve Chrome's CSS and third-party/plug-in support before bothering to push your BETA BROWSER!
Score: 0
|Which browser would you like to use today?
> [...] but to do so every time they turn their machines on.
I do hope that that "feature" will never come! Could there be anything more annoying?
Score: 1
|"Could there be anything more annoying?"
Sadly, yes - and it's all Google. Allow me to elaborate on the 'default browser' issue on the G1 (with Google). Imagine clicking on a link in a web browser and immediately getting a pop-up that asks, in effect, "which browser do you want to follow this link with?" Every link, every time. Yes, you can set a 'default' so it stops pestering you, but that means that you can basically only ever use one browser since the 'default' is determined and obeyed when clicking a link inside the browser (not when launching the browser, etc.). Basically it amounts to 'no choice' since no matter what browser you launch all links will launch your 'default' browser if you have one set. Clearly Google doesn't get it at all - if MS had done something this obnoxiously stupid...well you get the idea.
Score: 0
|An open letter to Google:
Worry less about MS and others and focus on your products. Android, as it is configured for the G1, doesn't have the polish of a company qualified to criticize another company's OS offerings. No long press 'e-mail' option in the contact list, no way to initiate a call from an SMS, even though the SMS came from a phone number (not even if the sender is in Contacts). The back hard-button is sometimes back, sometimes exit - it sure is fun to exit a program when trying to go back (the expected functionality of this should have been thought out better and more clearly defined or even locked down - as it is, the user experience is frustrating). No 3G/2G while in a call (is this a hardware limitation, or another multitouch thing?) Probably two of the most glaring issues are with the web browser. First, if I click a link in the browser the last thing I want is to be prompted for which browser I want to follow the link with - how about just sticking with browser I launched (you know, like every other OS on the planet), is that too much to ask? Second, what's with the lack of a back button in the browser? Google, for the love all things 'not evil' please, focus on getting your store in order before throwing rocks at others' storefronts. I'm tired of pressing Menu/More/Back. And I'm still waiting for the 'critical' browser security patch - don't wait for T-Mobile - put a patched version on Android Market. I'm amazed and dumbfounded that Google is complaining about (or even thinking about) the browser choices in someone else's OS while your semi-captive G1 audience gets to suffer an apparent complete lack of interest on your part. The fixes are already in the code tree, as verified by none other than Google. How is it that the team working on Google Maps Editor has released at least two updates while the browser languishes?
I love my G1 (and have no plans to part with it), but please explain how Google expending ANY time or energy worrying about IE8 in Win7 helps resolve at least the browser security issues that shouldn't exist in the product I paid money for (the sale of which, no doubt, contributed in some small way to Google's income).
If I'm missing something, please set me straight, but Google is coming off (in my eyes) as a hypocritical and disingenuous.
Score: 1
|What Microsoft can fairly do to promote (or let people be aware of) other internet browsers:
when you use Internet Explorer for the first time gives you an MSN homepage. in their tech news area there should appear news about "Google is getting a new version of the software now!" or "New Firefox version is out!". that way users can try other browsers if they like.
Score: -3
|Agree, and while we're at it, let's require USA Today to post the headline and subscription information from the N.Y Times and other papers from around the country on their front page "that way readers can try other papers if they like".
Score: 1
|Urrrm... Is it just me or is everyone missing something that's been the de-facto standard for a long time:
When you install a browser (newsreader, email client...) and run it, it checks to see if it's the default and, if not, asks if you want to make it the default.
It also asks you whether you want to be annoyed by the prompt again. You can also set most of these apps to prompt again even _after_ you've said don't bloody annoy me again!
I for one choose which browser I want to use, and set it as my default. If I want to use another browser, I can install/run as required.
If google wants to force this issue on the basis of Microsoft's dominant install base, then I'd expect to see a page on google (being the dominant SE out there) that asks if I'd prefer to use a competitor's engine _every time I hit their site_. Sounds really dumb doesn't it?
Just my 2 cents...
Score: 0
|apparently googles solution, doesn't apply to a service or product other than the browser :)
Score: 2
|Come-on....please. That would be so irritating to have a windows pop-up every time I turn on m computer asking which browser I want to install or use as my default browser. People would for sure switch to apple if that s**t actually happened. I use Google allot for just their search feature. I also noticed that those Google employees don't even care who you are...they just want more market share to fill their "Black Hole" of "GREED".
Score: 0
|Oh boo hoo hoo, I want Internet Explorer 4.0
Boo hoo hoo, I want Netscape 3 Gold
Pout, sniff, whimper, I want Neo Planet
Oh wait a minute, Do I have an internet connection? no I don't.
Now what do I do?
I want MSN
I want AOL
I want I want I want!
Good grief ! All these companies, stop the insanity already!
Score: 0
|Therefore, every time I want to do a search, I should hit a generic search button and it gives me the option of which search engine I want to use, every time - tit-for-tat. After all, Googles' ad business is approaching monopolistic levels.
Score: 1
|I want my browser on the list. I wrote it myself. It's called SlyCooperExplorer. Anyone know the link to sign up for the 'Let Microsoft promote your software that you make money off of too but just whine and b**** about IE when in fact I should not write applications for MS if I don't like how they operate' promotion? Please post!
Score: 1
|I agree with the statement made by Canoro below, have an IE light. There does need to be a browser that comes with an OS and having new users choose a browser is impossible. Many users I see don't even utilize the tabbed browser part, they just open another window. It is difficult for people to break habits.
Providing them with an IE light (not sure what features would be left out, but maybe tabs, web slices anyway) would give them access to the net and basic browsing. There could be a page that loads on first use alerting the user to alternatives including upgrading IE.
Having the user choose each time Windows starts is ridiculous and no need to add this to install since as stated previously those who use alternative browsers just go and download it immediately after install and those not tech oriented just use the default.
I just feel the browser can't be separated as much as a media player could be for example.
Face it Google/Opera, people will use your product if you give them a good reason to do so. Apparently you haven't done a good job of getting the word out your products are useful, either that or they aren't useful to the majority of people.
Score: 1
|I simply don't think it's a good plan to include software on the windows disk that microsoft doesn't own or license/have licensing agreements to place it on the disk - and that they don't have any control over updates and such for it through windows update. I do like their idea though, giving the end user more options without the need for hacks (though removal should be complete, not just disable.)
Just like I read earlier on google killing the sms app for iphone, there is no reason to back someone else into a corner to pay for your apps and any potential problems with them.
Score: 0
|i want to pick one browser one time... if i have to pick each time i start my computer... i'll give up on comps and burn mine while singing that camp fire song.... and than i'll make love in the ashes
Score: 0
|*laughing*
TMI, man...TMI.
Score: -2
|While Google's current browser is a bit clunky, I generally love their products and their ingenuity. I'm optimisticly hopeful they will improve their browser in future versions. But why are all these companies whining so much about Microsoft and IE? Make your own operating system to compete. I would LOVE to see a well-funded, well-supported, popular alternative.
Score: 0
|apparently they want Microsoft to do their work for them
Score: 0
|*Add exact same response to Opera article here*
Score: 1
|I assume that when android comes out for the netbook this christmas that when you first turn it on (or first try to surf the internet) it will ask you which browser you want to install, IE, Chrome, Safari, Opera, Firefox, or whatever other browsers are out there. When you first try to play music, it will ask if you want to use iTunes, WMP, WinAmp, BSPlayer or whatever else there is. And according to the article, Google thinks it should do this every time you try to use that kind of file.
Score: 0
|"but to do so every time they turn their machines on" What a novelty! Just as they started supporting in end-of-lifed XP..? A 'spokesperson' shooting in its own foot trying to avoid the next round of Google layoffs with uneducated blah?
Score: 0
|What rubbish, google can't even produce a good browser.. I would dislike set-up taking longer than necessary just to choice what browsers I want, and google seem dumb - who would want to use a dated browser just to have to install an updated one, lets face it the ridiculous thing google call chrome is updated nearly every week!
Google should keep out of the browser business - an improve search results.. Shame on google!
Score: 0
|I disagree that we shouldn't have an internet browser installed in an operating system if an internet connection is available. many times internet explorer has saved me after a windows install to look for drivers. or get an antivirus right away, or update it. an internet browser is essential. now, Microsoft have no obligation to promote for free products of other companies. like adding them to the Windows installation, unless of course, Google or Firefox or Opera would pay an amount to have it there. but then the users would have to sign 2 agreements: 1 to Microsoft and 1 to the other company providing the browser.
This is what should happen: the internet browser that should be provided in the installation of the operating system should be basic. like the comparison between Windows Messenger and Live Messenger, Wordpad with Word. an Internet Explorer Light should be installed. if the user wants to get an Internet Explorer Full they can download it from Microsoft. Internet Explorer can't be sell now because the other internet browser companies are giving them for free. because of this now you can't do an amazing internet browser and sell it.
Score: 0
|To be honest, what they are asking for here is not that Windows be installed with no browser, but that the user be given a choice prior to using windows (every time?!?) which browser they'd like to use.
It's still ridiculous...just for completely different reasons.
Score: 0
|C'mon, seriously? The first thing I do when I install windows is download firefox...it would **** me off to have to wait through a "select your browser" menu every time I turned on my comp. Computer enthusiasts already have their favorite browser, and download it as soon as they can. User with lack of computer experience use the first thing they are presented with...giving them a menu of options to choose from would just confuse them. This entire thing from Opera and Google is pointless.
Score: 0
|How about Apple & Linux, if MSFT is forced to do this, then Apple and Linux should be forced as well
Score: 0
|Clearly, the Google spokesperson never used Windows.
If they did, they would know that the capability to add or remove Windows features is accessible via the Control Panel AT ANY TIME (and has been, since at least Windows 95). IE in Windows 7 will use this mechanism, so it will be capable of being removed (or re-instated) at any time, not just after initial installation of Windows 7.
(It won't be offered as a choice DURING initial installation, because users don't want setup being made more complex. And for the Google suggestion that every time you boot your machine, you have to choose to keep or remove IE is even worse!)
Ridiculous.
Score: 1
|oh come on g-o-o-g-l-e...!
as i recall, the internet was not founded on "choice" or "openess".
the problem with the belief that there is choice and openess is that freeware makers like yourself and others are not "open" to revealing their freeware is engineered to be marketing tools and
are not providing the "choice" to consumers to opt out from installing the spyware.
Score: 0
|i laugh when i hear Google and Openness together, now YouTube geo restricts and censors sh*t tons of content, along with covertly tracking your every move online and holding your data hostage
Google aren't the 'good guys' as many once thought, thankfully more people are starting to think differently of them
Score: 0
|better get your memory checked then DatabaseBen, as you are wrong.
Score: 0
|And why do you think Google pulls stuff from YouTube and geo-restricts some content? There is not much Google or any other site can do when the MAFIAA lawyers call up and say...here are links to pirated material on your site, take it down. Or if a MAFIAA member gives them rights to content and says only people in Canada should be allowed to see it.
In your world they would say..."sod off you pigs, we dont want your content. Go to one of our competitors and let them get the viewers." Yeah, that would make sense.
I have no idea how Google holds your data hostage. I can download my Google docs anytime i want in many formats including the truely open: ODF formats. How about Microsoft Office documents on your own machine held up in a proprietary, patent encombered format. Better keep paying Microsoft money or else your data will be lost.
Score: 0
|they were doing fine without them in the first place
Score: 0
|Wow...how about this.
Why not install every browser, Media player, word processor, text editor, picture editing software, movie creation software, torrent software, etc known to man and let the user uninstall everything they "don’t," want.
Why is it the OS mfg's responsibility to inform the user of all web browsers available?
Ubuntu, OSX, UNIX, how many of them are being asked to present various web browsers to their users at first Boot / Setup?
Since MS is the OS Mfg, isn't it their privilege and right to have their browser installed by default? Especially if they're not charging for it?
They're not stopping or discouraging anyone from downloading any other browser of their choice and installing it and setting it as the default. They're now even allowing users to uninstall their own browser if desired. Isn't that enough?
Since when is it the job of the OS Mfg (any OS Mfg,) to do marketing and sales for their competition's software?
Score: 3
|yeah, i want WMP, VLC, WINAMP, Quicktime (Windows really needs that) ... "we need choice dammit" Google, Mozilla, Opera and soon Apple will be known as a pack of whiners, at least by users such as myself
"Since when is it the job of the OS Mfg (any OS Mfg,) to do marketing and sales for their competition's software?" i have no idea but always remember its Google, and the like who think this is how to get their product out there
/firefox user
Score: 1
|The point many people are missing is that Windows has roughly 90% market share. That is why it is being scrutinized more than OS X and Linux. If OS X and Linux had 90% market share, they would be scrutinized as well.
Score: -1
|point being? Windows OS itself has an 89% market share, now don't quote me on the numbers... so should MS promote Apple and OS X? all flavors of Linux, should MS be punished for their success in the overall PC market, their deals with hardware vendors, etc
MS makes its own browser, has the right to bundle it with their OS as default, as Apple does with Safari as default, as many Linix distros do with Firefox
Firefox was made available in 2004, yeah... you read that right, IE? 1995, Chrome and Safari for Windows? lol well it wasn't too long ago those did not exist, yet they want their cut of the pie badly now don't they
Score: 1
|@artfuldodga
Web browsers are the gateway to global internet commerce, so it is important that no single company has undue influence (control?) over the technology. IE's defacto distribution with Windows, (and its roughly 90% market share) gives IE an advantage that no other browser has. This is why this is an important issue.
Score: -1
|i see your point i just don't agree
Score: 1
|But, to say that Microsoft has to remove IE from its operating system bundle would be unfair to Microsoft because Apple still packages OS X with Safari. I can't justify having one vendor to be the execption to the whole "software bundling" tactic that many vendors already use to promote usage of various software, and with that I think that either ALL OS vendors be restricted to not allowing internet browser bundling, or the case should be dropped.
As for Microsoft's OS market share in relation to Microsoft's distribution of IE, I find it unfair to punish one company for the better advantage to distribute its products based on soley the (excellent) business decisions that have lead to the current majority market share of Windows operating system. However, I do agree that IE should allow the ability to completely uninstall from the operating system so that the user can ultimately choose either to have IE or not. The same idea should go with all OS vendors.
Score: 0
|uh, we can... i have firefox and chromium on 7048 RIGHT now and IE disabled, what more could i want, nothing in Windows is stopping me
i can tell you what i don't want, is a popup asking me which of these 6-7-10? browsers i want to use, if i were a typical user i'd be confused, and have no idea about any of these other browsers, nor their features or what they offer, which is better etc
having users blindly choosing browsers does not help the market or the quality of a browser. and who chooses which browser becomes listed? maybe Maxthon should be in the mix, what about future browsers?
Score: 0
|