Opera CEO: IE8 Changes “Not Enough”
So I came across THIS article today that pretty much states that Opera’s CEO is not happy with Microsoft making Internet Explorer 8 a removable component in Windows 7. So that got me to thinking, what exactly DOES this guy want? And then it hit me. He wants to see Microsoft integrate his browser, and possibly others into Windows.
I can say right now that the above would NEVER happen. Microsoft would rather withdraw from the EU market then include competitor’s products in Windows. And there are many valid reasons for this, a couple of which I will outline below:
Support Issues
This is perhaps the single biggest issue. The fact is, Microsoft has a responsibility to support everything that they include in box with Windows. If Microsoft were to box Opera or any other browser with Windows, and said browser causes crashes or other unforseen issues, users will hold MICROSOFT responsible because it “came with Windows, so it must be Microsoft’s fault”. The only way around this would be to sub out the support to the browser developers, but that is complex and puts an unfair burden on Microsoft because they will still have to field calls from users who don’t know any better.
Confusion
This point could be argued but I believe that if the OS were to come pre-boxed with multiple web browsers, users would become confused. In my experiences in the field most users access the internet with “the blue e”. No, I’m not making that up, people actually have said that to me. If there are more choices one of two things could happen. Either people will continue to use IE, or some may become confused and ask why there is more than one Internet on their computer (yes they will probably ask it like that too).
The bottom line though, is that the reasons for not integrating competing browsers into Internet explorer are plentiful and range the whole spectrum, from technical issues right down to legality and support issues. I would recommend that competing browser companies bide their time and accept that IE is removable as a good thing. Most users will switch away from IE once they see how bad IE8 is and just how badly it breaks the web. This will be a good thing for people like Mozilla, Google, and hey, maybe some people will use Opera too.
Anyway just wanted to write a little blurb about this. Feel free to comment with your opinions and/or questions.
16 Responses to 'Opera CEO: IE8 Changes “Not Enough”'
Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Opera CEO: IE8 Changes “Not Enough”'.
-
Well said. Having worked in technical support, I know all too well what it’s like trying to support every browser under the sun — which is why we were limited to troubleshooting browser issues with Internet Explorer only. Not only would Microsoft be accountable for any issues that occur with the bundled browsers, but they would spend a lot of money and time pulling people for training on the different browsers included in-box, each browser having a different troubleshooting path…. it would just be too much of a pain to do.
I think the changes that Microsoft have made since Windows XP Service Pack 1 (with “Program Access and Defaults”) have been more than fair towards the EU and ISVs in terms of “removing” Internet Explorer from the operating system experience, mind you for the most part it just hides it, but with Windows Vista and Windows 7 becoming more and more modular, I wouldn’t be too surprised if we see the ability to add/remove each Windows feature/in-box program by the time Windows 8 rolls around.
-
March 10, 2009 at 6:06 am
Panda X:
Opera. I roll my eyes at them.
-
March 10, 2009 at 7:33 am
mario:
The best is to not include any browser, the people will choose which browser likes to install, better, the new computers comes with no Os and the people will ask to the dealer (paying for the service) if they likes to install Linux or Microsoft or other. Why to pay obligatory for Windows if you know that will install Linux after? That’s not monopoly and will be the next step of EU.
-
March 10, 2009 at 8:18 am
Thanks for the mention, Chris. In a situation like this, I try to see the issue from both sides. If I were the developer of a shopping mall which also happened to be the home of a Bargain Basement Bonanza supermart on the ground floor where everyone enters, I’d be a fool to expect anyone to rent space on the upper floors knowing that the purpose of my own business would be to undercut my own tenants. If some sporting goods specialty store were to say my methods were unfair, and I were to respond, “But I can’t get rid of sporting goods just to suit one tenant — it’s part of _the foundation of my business_ ” I’d never be able to run a mall…unless I just happened to become the only shopping mall in the world, through some evil, dastardly plan.
On the other hand, if you’re a tenant in a shopping mall, your business is to find some way to attract customers. And if all things truly _are_ equal, then there are ways that a specialty store can outperform the Bargain Basement Bonanza. It innovates, it introduces quality, it provides service, it holds sales, it plans promotions…things for which customers are willing to invest a premium. If a specialty store doesn’t do any of these things, then it can’t go whining when it chooses to do business in the same mall. And if your argument is that the mall owner is unfair, and that in a fair world, the bargain basements and the specialty stores would all be doled out across the landscape in equal parcels…you soon realize the world doesn’t work that way. Customers flock to malls because they _are_ big, centralized, and convenient.
End of metaphor: Customers flock to Windows because it is big, centralized, and convenient — if it didn’t bundle a Web browser, in a sense, it wouldn’t be doing its job. So if Opera or anyone wants to compete, it needs to innovate…which it does to a certain extent. But producing a competitive Web browser is not a choice that was inflicted or enforced upon any IE competitor. A competitor needs to either compete or sit back and whine.
-Scott Fulton, Managing Editor, Betanews
-
What I see them asking for here is some sort of menu during setup to choose a browser. That’s ridiculous. The tech savvy people already have a favorite browser, and download and install it as soon as they get the OS installed. The less-savvy users just use the first thing available to them. Honestly, I think that most of them are used to IE, and giving them a menu would just end up with more confusion and calls to customer service. If Opera wants to be a bundled browser so bad, maybe they should go make their own OS. Microsoft makes Windows, and should have final say on what does or doesn’t go into it. That’s how things are supposed to work in the real world.
/Firefox user
-
March 11, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Google have officially gone mad, Opera close behind » Kristan Kenney’s Digital Life:
[...] further reading on this issue, I would recommend taking a look at Chris Holmes’ article — it helps explain this a bit [...]
-
Chris, your theory sounds plausible, but I’m going to chuck another idea in the mix: attention.
Right now, I think Opera just wants to be heard, even if they end up collectively sounding like a flamboyant lunatic. It still brings hits, and with it, a few extra downloads.
-
March 12, 2009 at 2:07 pm
I have been using Opera for about 4 years, and I absolutely love it, and even I agree with this article. Having IE8 removable for me is more than enough as long as MS make it more than clear to the average layman that this can be done. Personally I never remove IE from Windows as I actually still have some limited use for it, and I also agree that there is no way they should bundle software they don’t either make, or license in Windows, if they can get Opera and Mozilla to front the cost then by all means, but otherwise I think things should stay as they are.
-
March 14, 2009 at 8:00 am
I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100%, but that’s just my opinion, which indeed could be very wrong.
p.s. You have a very good template . Where did you find it? -
March 19, 2009 at 7:51 pm
John Doe:
I use Opera, Firefox, and Internet Explorer and I customize each one. I find it helps to have a range of browsers as each respond to the sloppy coding of moronic programmers differently. They all have their good points and bad and each will not display all pages equally or perform each operation with equal speed. This is straight across the board and goes without saying for all these crappy browsers. Let’s not even discuss the problems or vulnerablilities with flash, PDF, or office file content. At this stage in game I believe all programmers and their bosses should be rounded up an disposed of by firing squad.
-
March 23, 2009 at 6:54 am
Mike:
Bryant, Panda X you need some kind of education for yourself.
Opera is from far more advanced than this sloppy product of Microsoft (meaning IE). -
April 22, 2009 at 2:05 pm
analytik:
Chris, while your points are valid, you’re wrong in one thing: Microsoft would NEVER withdraw from the EU market just because of some Opera; whether for the “support” or “confusion” reasons.
The opposite is true – Microsoft would give away free copies of Windows just to keep the market share. But of course, that’s only hypothetical situation, so let’s not go into that.
While Opera is great in its support of latest web standards – HTML5, CSS3, I agree that it’s more of a publicity stunt than a serious request. I wouldn’t mind if Opera, Firefox and Chrome would all be included on Windows installation disk as an option, with some kind of strong message that they’re unsupported 3rd party apps.
Not including any browser at all doesn’t make sense – the problem doesn’t lie in OEM, they could have always hidden the IE icon and install X as a default browser – however, retail copies would suffer.
-
May 25, 2009 at 10:34 am
Jim:
I think what Opera wants is to make Microsoft build compatible web apps. And for them to stop purposely breaking there website on Opera browsers.
-
[...] further reading on this issue, I would recommend taking a look at Chris Holmes’ article — it helps explain this a bit [...]
-
June 1, 2009 at 6:29 am
Aavo:
Like Jim said above, the problem is more in the way Microsoft tried to use the IE as a lever to pull people off competing products which would allow other competing products to be used.
IE was made to render things differently from the w3c specs on purpose, it seems. The logic seems to be, that by using monopoly in OS market, the bundled IE also enjoys monopoly and as a result web pages are created primarily to work with IE. The result of this is locking people to use IE and hence also use Windows as the OS.
Imagine if IE would be fully compliant with w3c — web pages, even if created with and for IE, would work flawlessly also with Opera and Firefox, and as a result people would have the freedom to choose Linux as the OS instead. -
June 14, 2010 at 10:29 am
I really enjoy what you write here,very refreshing and smart. One problem though, I’m running Firefox in Fedora and sections of the layout pieces are a little broken. I understand it really is not a common set up, but it’s always something to keep an eye on. I hope this will help and continue to keep up the high quality writing.
March 10, 2009 at 3:39 am
Kristan Kenney: