As one of Windows 8’s biggest evangelists, I’m in shock. I’ve been reviewing comments by Google and Mozilla, both of which say Microsoft is planning a purge of full-functioned, third-party browsers from Windows 8 RT.
To be clear, Microsoft has officially been relatively quiet about its plans, so we only have the testimony of the world’s two largest third-party Windows browser makers – Mozilla and Google -- on this bewildering development. And the extent of the limitations are unclear. Google suggests it applies to Windows 8 in general (seemingly covering x86 PCs), while Mozilla only mentions a Windows 8 RT (on ARM).
What is clear is that Microsoft appears to be denying browser makers the rights to make or distribute a “Classic” desktop-style browser. At the same time, it’s allowing companies to make only a crippled version of their browsers in Metro.
By denying third parties access to certain useful APIs, Microsoft is allegedly ensuring that its rivals cannot provide the same sort of
“sandbox superuser” privileges that Metro Internet Explorer can.
Potentially one way Microsoft may be doing this is by disallowing them to utilize non-approved plug-ins/extensions, a key selling point for Mozilla and Google's browsers in the past.
Google and Mozilla have both dropped not-so-subtle legal threats in various interviews and blogs. If Microsoft persists in this approach, the lawsuits will come, I can guarantee you that.
Now, I realize the idea of a walled-garden approach -- permitting some applications and banning/limiting others -- is hardly new to the tablet space. Apple bans most third-party browsers (notable exception: Opera Mini) from its iPad and iPhone. And it bans most third-party email and messaging clients. Google had to move mountains to convince Apple to allow Google Voice inside its mobile walls.
But it’s impossible to write this off as simply another walled-garden move.
First, we’re talking about the browser, users’ fundamental gateway to the Internet and a core pillar of modern society. Banning messaging clients is troubling. Banning browsers (or crippling them via API denial) is intolerable.
Second, these changes are expected to apply to at least some laptops under Metro UI. Banning or crippling third-party PC browsers is without precedent in recent history.
And, yes, Microsoft does have a history of such tactics. No one can deny that Microsoft Office and Internet Explorer gained their dominant positions via operating system bundling and the shutting out of third-party alternatives via API denial.
Microsoft should know better. It’s been lashed by antitrust litigation in the US and Europe, and it has agreed to some pretty serious concessions. It has promised to behave itself, and it has paid almost $2 billion to date in fines in the European market alone.
Yes, Microsoft is allowing (by all accounts) crippled Metro UI versions of its browsers, but that doesn’t make the ban less of a defiant antitrust violation -- or any less crazy. Windows 8 is clearly being designed to funnel users toward Metro UI.
Some users hate Metro UI. I love it -- this is an extremely beautiful, intuitive, fast, modern interface. But regardless of your feelings on Metro UI, it’s clear that Windows 8’s core is this ambitious new interface.
I debated using the title “Has Microsoft Lost Its Mind?” for this piece. It is pure, unadulterated insanity for Microsoft even to consider this ban. Not only is it a PR disaster in the making, but it’s utterly suicidal from a legal perspective. I can only imagine EU regulators salivating about what new highs their fines against the stubborn OS maker could reach. Perhaps Microsoft will be helping to finance Greece’s financial recovery, unwittingly, by its sheer stupidity.
I have no doubt that Microsoft will retreat from such plans. The question is whether it will walk away under its own free will, or whether it will do so with its arm twisted behind its back and bruised by new fines. One should not underestimate the tremendous PR damage this has already done.
I’m a Windows 8 believer. But color me a bit disenchanted by this (in my opinion) shockingly stupid move.
Well, thats true... trust that your client is dumb/ignorant enough that it won't know the difference. Either way, I think they are losing the battle because people are getting more -tech savvy.
Maybe I'm just older, but I was around for when Microsoft attempted to do the browser lock-in. The industry has changed and fragmented since then, we have multiple development platforms again with all the different tablets and phones, and so they think they can get away with it.
And who knows, maybe they can. But will they get the critical mass of developers they need to make apps for Windows 8? Or will the entire computer industry just fragment? I've wondered how much the Microsoft lawsuit ended up delaying the development of the computer industry.
I know I'll hang onto my Windows 7 64-bit until they pry my cold, dead hands off it, if this happens.
Anyone who thinks they'd get away with a closed ecosystem is clearly not understanding the future....don't they understand what Ray Ozzie warned them about?
Nicole, your idealism and a certain naive hope are showing. I can recognize the symptoms because I share the same flaws; actually I like to think of them as strengths but that does not seem to be the common perception...
It would be great to see Microsoft change its behavior and really accept an open-platform approach. I think it would be a good move for them, not only from a PR standpoint but because they'd actully get more sales with a more adaptable system. Not to mention they'd save a bundle in legal fees--win or lose, lawsuits are expensive.
@Jason Mick: "a smaller rebel product is always going to seem "cooler" and will suffer less malware because it isn't worth the time to hack. "
I wouldn't call any of Apple's products 'smaller rebel products'. I've long understood that the main reason why Apple's products suffer less malware is due to their smaller exposure, but I don't think that's the case anymore and that they're long due for a some publicized big scary security stories.
"However, other Microsoft products like the Office suite are good enough to be almost above criticism in terms of implementation."
I strongly disagree. I use Excel on a regular basis and curse it out almost as regularly for keeping some archaic elements in it and it's endless "Are you sure?" questions that just remind me that Microsoft thinks I'm an idiot. Word is still irritating, although to its credit less so in recent releases.
"So I think the question is less who does proprietary better -- Microsoft or Apple -- it's more the question of what the rammifications to the tech industry will be of locking out substantial branches of third party software development."
Again, I strong disagree despite the fact that Apple products have the same nasty control-freak elements as Microsoft's. You can't just look at tech elements when it comes to proprietary because it's implementation is not just tech issue. Strong proprietary has everything to do with the person trusting your brand to be the best. If the user thinks you're sub-par, then they'll think you're sub-par AND too arrogant to admit it. If the user thinks you are the best, then even if you're not they'll stick with you due to placebo effect. This means that a proprietary product has to perform well, look great, and make the user feel good -- and Microsoft's reputation is such that the first two elements are iffy and almost always fails the last one. Office has always performed pretty well but even the latest version is still condescending.
Even ignoring the fact that being proprietary goes against the PC culture, Microsoft simply doesn't stand a chance of pulling it off until they show they really respect their market.
In Microsoft's defense, I would say a number of the core apps in Windows Phone 7.5 are better than their iOS 5 equivalents.
Microsoft biggest issue in terms of proprietary product has long been size and marketing.
Size is an issue as it's hard to make a lumbering market share behemoth seem trendy or cool, and the high profile raises inherent security risks, no matter how sound your security approach is. The reverse also holds true -- a smaller rebel product is always going to seem "cooler" and will suffer less malware because it isn't worth the time to hack. In that regard size makes marketing easy for a company that has long had little market share (Apple) and tough for a company that has long had lots of market share (Microsoft).
That's not to say the Microsoft cannon hasn't fired some duds. Windows Mobile utterly failed to advance the mobile experience in later builds and overstayed its welcome. iOS's rise was fueled in part not just because it was so cleanly presented, but because Windows Mobile and RIM's offerings were so archaic.
Likewise Internet Explorer left much to be desired in terms of speed and standards support. IE 9 was a decent effort, but it still trails Chrome/Firefox in speed and usability.
However, other Microsoft products like the Office suite are good enough to be almost above criticism in terms of implementation. Office (in my experience) is far more stable, full-featured, good looking, and fast than Open Office or other alternatives. Yes, OOo & LibreOffice are significantly better in recent builds, but that doesn't change the fact that Microsoft makes the best app in this space.
Regardless, of whether it has the best slution or the worst solution, though, it seems quite simply anticompetitive to move things in a more proprietary direction, a la following in Apple's line.
So I think the question is less who does proprietary better -- Microsoft or Apple -- it's more the question of what the rammifications to the tech industry will be of locking out substantial branches of third party software development.
@The Dream Chaser: Sadly you're right there. Average users are the only reason why IE is even in use. I can't get my mom to switch browsers even though I've already installed alternatives on her system. Although I'd like to point out something else -- the people who like their computing easy tend to just buy Apple products. Not everyone mind you, but if you only need a computer for 4 things, why bother with something like a PC?
The main problem with Microsoft copying Apple's practices (legal issues aside) is the fact that Apple already does it better. They're going to lose all their advantages in exchange for being a 2nd best mimic of Apple, and that will cost them. I have no confidence in their ability to compete with Apple as they simply don't have the right corporate mindset.
If you really want a shock do what I have been doing the past several months. Completely shun-renounce the Internet and all obsessions with it. Go out and observe the world-public. The average consumer could care less about all this stuff we tech people obsess with. They want to upload a pic from their mobile to Facebook, use email, play a crossword puzzle on line, or yap with friends. Microsoft knows this so will dumb down products to so cheap and easy a chimpanzee could use it. Everything else will fade away into the background.
The first struggle wth Internet Explorer was a strange one to me at first too. I didn't fully understand why Microsoft was so interested in keeping users of a utility program like a web browser. I would suspect the default homepage full of Microsoft and MSNBC content is kinda of a big deal for the overal brand appeal. Microsoft wants its users to use everything Microsoft. Bing is also the default search engine in Internet Explorer. There must be a giant chunk of users who may not even know they can switch the search engine. I would imagine this is pretty sweet for Microsoft since they sell ads in search just like Google.
I've never understood the browser wars... why is there so much interest in what browser a person uses? MSFT is selling the Windows license, what do they care what browser those users use?
The ThinkerNet does not reflect the views of TechWeb. The ThinkerNet is an informal means of communication to members and visitors of the Internet Evolution site. Individual authors are chosen by Internet Evolution to blog. Neither Internet Evolution nor TechWeb assume responsibility for comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and ThinkerNet bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
Whether you’re an engineering firm that uses CAD for parts design, or an e-business that leverages Photoshop for user-interface graphics, you likely require a modest graphics-processing unit. In the old days, this was a daunting hurdle to innovation, but today, the situation has improved thanks to technologies like NVIDIA’s GRID and Microsoft’s RemoteFX. Such virtualized graphics protocols allow you to load-balance graphics-intensive workloads from virtual desktops on a server-side graphics card.
Take a trip down memory lane and imagine, if you will, a system-on-a-chip with Apple IIe-like specs -- 4KB of RAM and 32KB of flash. Add some modern niceties like an ARM Cortex-M0+ 32-bit pipeline, 12-bit DAC, and low-power UART, and you have Freescale's recently unveiled Kinetis KL02, which the company calls "the world's smallest ARM Powered MCU."
Recent reports from the NPD, IDC, and Gartner suggest the end is nigh for ye olde personal computer. They imply that 2017 will be the magic year tablet sales will surpass PC purchases.
From “feeling blue” to the “blue screen of death,” the color blue has a number of negative associations. So it might seem an odd moniker for Microsoft to choose as the code name for its new operating system. But that’s exactly what the world’s top operating system maker has done.
The decision could discourage innovators looking to the past, and require companies to build from the ground up, leading to a new generation of stagnation in the IT world.
Apple is falling further behind in the smartphone space but it looks as if Google is falling behind in the tablet world, and that may be the most important device in the mobile market. But there's still time for Google to catch up.
Nicole and Kim have heard the news that Google's new mobile OS, "Jelly Bean," has a voice assistant that's poised to defeat their precious Siri. It's time for another test!
Verizon's one-data-plan-for-all-devices could revolutionize mobile data by making it practical to have multiple devices share a plan, and thus encourage users to cellular-equip all their portable appliances.
Yahoo's problems may be due to bad management in part, but they're also due to the fad nature of online advertising. It's easy to make costly mistakes here. Google and Facebook should beware.
New York's Metropolitan Transit Authority is conducting a pilot test of digital kiosks to guide subway users to where they want to go more efficiently and at lower cost.
The whole Amazon.reader debate is a double-stupid. It's stupid to think that there's any e-book buyer who doesn't know Amazon's URL, and it was stupider to let ICANN launch the whole free-form TLD initiative to start with.
While NFC's original goal was to enhance mobile commerce applications, it is finding its way into a number of other uses, which is creating both opportunity as well as challenges for IT departments.
Enterprises would like to move to cloud computing but are hesitant because they are concerned about providers’ ability to secure company data. Here are some tips that help to ensure that if breaches occur, the business is not left holding the bag.
Edmunds separates customers into segments based on the info it collects on its site and from partners, and uses that to push out custom content, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
The automotive website uses propensity modeling to target ads and customer registration forms, said Brian Baron, director of business analytics for Edmunds.com, at Predictive Analytics Innovation Summit.
Expert Integrated Systems: Changing the Experience & Economics of IT In this e-book, we take an in-depth look at these expert integrated systems -- what they are, how they work, and how they have the potential to help CIOs achieve dramatic savings while restoring IT's role as business innovator. READ THIS eBOOK
your weekly update of news, analysis, and
opinion from Internet Evolution - FREE! REGISTER HERE
Wanted! Site Moderators Internet Evolution is looking for a handful of readers to help moderate the message boards on our site – as well as engaging in high-IQ conversation with the industry mavens on our thinkerNet blogosphere. The job comes with various perks, bags of kudos, and GIANT bragging rights. Interested?
To save this item to your list of favorite Internet Evolution content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
M2M: Rise of the Machines? Not Yet David Weldon In the 1970 science fiction thriller Colossus: The Forbin Project, two giant supercomputers from the United States and Soviet Union secretly join forces to take control of the collective nuclear might of the two countries. In the film, the two machines discover each other's existence, communicate back-and-forth, share their collective data, and cut their human creators out of the process. It is the ultimate example of machine-to-machine communications, or M2M. CLICK FOR MORE
M2M: Rise of the Machines? Not Yet David Weldon In the 1970 science fiction thriller Colossus: The Forbin Project, two giant supercomputers from the United States and Soviet Union secretly join forces to take control of the collective nuclear might of the two countries. In the film, the two machines discover each other's existence, communicate back-and-forth, share their collective data, and cut their human creators out of the process. It is the ultimate example of machine-to-machine communications, or M2M. CLICK FOR MORE
Email This
