Safari for Windows Receives Prominent Placement on Microsoft's European 'Browser Ballot'

[elppa]

This is stupid. Only one browser can be shown in that first spot. If it were Firefox, then Apple would be bitching.

No, they would have said nothing. I don't think they're remotely concerned about this browser ballot thing in general. It's not Apple's style to go complaining to regulators.

This whole thing was initialised by Opera. I bet whoever decided the ordering put much less thought into it than all those analysing their decision. You either do alphabetical by browser, or alphabetical by vendor.

Why is this on the main page?

Cause it's Windows related. All Mac only stories head to page 2 now.

 

[birch25]

Jenny Boriss should stop whining. Safari is the fastest browser in the world (currently) and the most secure. It renders pages much more elegantly than Firefox. Funny how only Firefox complains and Google/Opera don't complain.

Firefox is only good for plugins, the page rendering and other performance benchmarks rank it 3rd place after Apple and Google.

Safari is NOT only good for Macintosh computers. It's just as good on Windows. Safari 4.x is the ONLY browser in the world that passes the Acid3 test, Windows and Mac. While it's not the only indicator of web standard compliance, it does cover the vast majority that people actually encounter on the web.

For the record, Firefox and Chrome (and even IE, for that matter) render most web pages just fine. Standards compliance is great and all browsers should work towards them but just because Safari scores highest on the Acid 3 test doesn't mean the other browsers are unusable. Actually, even on OSX, there are times when a page doesn't render right in Safari (my default browser) and I have to open up Firefox to see the page.

Also, Safari 4 on Windows pales in comparison to both Chrome and Firefox.

 

[OllyW]

Safari for iPhone? Apple has a large smartphone marketshare.

But nowhere near a monopoly share. Windows has 90% of the OS market, while the iPhone had 14% of smartphone sales in Q2.

 

[Frisco]

No one on a PC even knows that Safari is a browser. I guess 1% of the World would know it's a browser. And a bad one at that. Firefox for me.

 

[AllieNeko]

"I can imagine no possible reason why someone would want Safari on a PC"

The option to use Apple font rendering (FAR more accurate and easier on the eyes than ClearType) is the biggie IMHO.

Sadly, in Safari 4 Apple turned this feature off by default which makes me worried they'll remove it entirely.

 

[0098386]

Isn't Microsoft Exchange first on the list of email providers on the iPod Touch?

 

[xUKHCx]

^Yeah it is. Microsoft Exchange, mobile me, google mail, yahoo mail, aol, other.

Exchange support is a reasonably big feature/selling/advertising point where as an internet browser on a desktop machine really isn't.

 

[bunty]

Safari and opera are on the ends and IE is centered and prominent ...

The center position is the one that most people will choose. It's simple Bell Curve "normal distribution"...no wonder Microsoft is proposing this design.

http://pierianpuddle.blogspot.com/2008/04/mysteries-of-bell-curve-revealed.html

And interesting to read different interpretations on it.

 

[Claustin]

Wow. Can't believe I'm saying this but good job Microsoft. Great idea. On the other hand Jenny is being a whiney little beeotch. When I look at that screen my eye is actually drawn more to chrome than anything else due to the bright colors. It's not like it's a text list in order of 1 to 6.

 

[Neotyguy40]

Come ON! Can anyone tell me why the order matters? Most people that have FireFox will STAY with FF, because it's just a preference.

Most people who use IE8 only use it because it was the default browser, I wouldn't be complaining about the order, but rather what it says.

The Safari button says 'Free for Mac+Pc', which will make people think the others may cost some cash.

I think this is pretty good for Safari, but I doubt Apple cares about the browser market share...

 

[amorya]

FUD. Safari cannot be removed, like IE cannot be removed. You can remove the .app, just like you can remove the IE .exe, but you cannot remove webkit just like you can't remove the IE engine as they are used by the core OS for other things.

OSX and IE are setup quite the same in this regard.

If you remove safari app, there isn't (that I'm aware of) anywhere in the OS where you can type in a URL and get a webpage.

The problem was when Microsoft melded IE and Windows Explorer: if you typed a URL into the location field of Windows Explorer, it turned into IE and loaded the website. Even if you'd deleted the IE exe. That's the problem: nothing to do with shipping a rendering engine, but because it was a user facing feature for browsing websites that was unfair to other manufacturers of browsers.

 

[amorya]

So technically Apple selling their computers with only Mac OSX on it is illegal in europe, because Apple has the monopoly on Macs, and no other OS's even have a chance

Seriously, that's a stupid law.

No. Saying a company has a monopoly on its own product is obvious and irrelevant.

Firstly, monopolies are not illegal. Misuse of monopoly status is.

Secondly, monopoly status is per product category, not per brand. You can have a monopoly on hamburgers, but not on big macs.

Amorya

 

[jgbhardy]

Does the Euro version of Mac OS X have this too or is Europe ok with Apple including Safari?

There is a difference in the way Apple includes Safari and the way Microsoft includes IE.
Have you ever tried uninstalling IE on a windows machine, I could not actually do it. Microsoft actually includes IE into some of the system. Safari on OS X is different, the system doesn't need Safari and you can easily uninstall it.

 

[Jelite]

This

Safari and opera are on the ends and IE is centered and prominent ...

And this

Jenny is a douche.

 

[Maserati7200]

No. Saying a company has a monopoly on its own product is obvious and irrelevant.

Firstly, monopolies are not illegal. Misuse of monopoly status is.

Secondly, monopoly status is per product category, not per brand. You can have a monopoly on hamburgers, but not on big macs.

Amorya

Is your sarcasm detector broken?

 

[kurosov]

So it's unfair having a more popular browser first yet also having a browser with 'little market share' first?

aka list it as firefox | firefox | firefox | firefox | firefox

 

[jgbhardy]

Only in Europe can a court come to such a retarded conclusion that including your software on YOUR software is anti-competitive. People have a choice either way, does Windows prevent people from downloading other browsers? This also adds to Windows history of confusion and user aggravation in Europe because some people don't care they just want to turn it on and have it work, not everyone is computer savvy enough to choose a browser or to even care

Honestly I just can't believe the ignorance of some people.
How is clicking an option using the ballot computer savvy? Surely having to download the browser and install it yourself would be more computer savvy If you can't select an option from a panel on installation, why are you using a computer!
You obviously don't understand the point of how Microsoft is implementing IE as anti competitive. Its not just including your own software, its about Microsoft using their monopoly in one market to gain a monopoly in another.

Honestly some people.

 

[SactoGuy18]

I can say that you just can't please those people in Europe.

Anyway, for Windows 7 users, the more experienced users will mostly gravitate towards Firefox 3.5.3. Not the fastest browser, but Firefox 3.5.3 has WAY more third-party add-on support than other web browsers and displays most web pages very accurately, too.

 

[GSMiller]

The Firefox people are just cranky that their browser is still placed after Internet Explorer.

I think it's quite brilliant on Microsoft's part, because:

A) It keeps people off their back who claim they're giving IE an unfair advantage
B) They're listing a virtually unknown product in the World of Windows first, which will more than likely leave few people choosing it anyway.

 

[AidenShaw]

Is your sarcasm detector broken?

No - it probably uses WebKit so that it doesn't render sarcasm properly....


</sarcasm>

 

[cumanzor]

Safari for iPhone? Apple has a large smartphone marketshare.

RIM is still on top. But this is interesting, how come no one has complained? After all, Apple ACTIVELY rejects any web browser app for the iPhone.

 

[KnightWRX]

RIM is still on top. But this is interesting, how come no one has complained? After all, Apple ACTIVELY rejects any web browser app for the iPhone.

No one complained because Apple doesn't have control over the smartphone market. If you want another browser, go to the competition, which is very healthy.

And RIM isn't on top, Symbian is.

 

[fswmacguy]

It's almost like Microsoft wants to lose market share.

 

[jaw04005]

There is a difference in the way Apple includes Safari and the way Microsoft includes IE.
Have you ever tried uninstalling IE on a windows machine, I could not actually do it. Microsoft actually includes IE into some of the system. Safari on OS X is different, the system doesn't need Safari and you can easily uninstall it.

And what’s the difference in Apple including WebKit, the foundation for Safari, which renders the iTunes Store, Apple Help, Mail’s HTML, etc?

You can’t uninstall WebKit either.

Internet Explorer 8 within Windows 7 has the ability to be completely remove it from the system, but the EU wasn’t impressed by that.

I’ve increasingly come to the conclusion that governmental bodies such as the EU and to a lesser extent the U.S. Justice Department have actually harmed consumers in their pursuit against Microsoft.

Internet Explorer 4 for Windows 95 was the first browser by Microsoft to be integrated with Windows. It was revolutionary at the time. It was mainstream consumers first exposure to the idea of desktop widgets with Active Desktop. It allowed Microsoft to do a lot in terms of file browsing (forward, back, URL bar, etc) and presenting your data (GIF and JPEG-based graphs and charts, etc). If you remember back then, it was almost like getting an entirely new operating system — for free.

They took it a step further in Windows 98 by introducing Windows Update, which was based on IE 5. For the first time in a consumer operating system, it was actually easy to patch your OS and software. Keep in mind, Apple didn’t introduce Software Update until Mac OS 9.

While Microsoft’s antics with Netscape were likely illegal, people didn’t quit using Netscape because Microsoft bundled Internet Explorer. They quit using Netscape because it fell behind Internet Explorer. Even Steve Jobs admitted Internet Explorer on the Mac was better than Netscape (see Macworld keynote, 1997).

As a consumer, I like bundled features in my operating system. It would be a sad day in the Mac world if Apple was forced to remove Safari, Address Book, iCal, Image Capture, QuickTime, Mail, Photobooth, etc from Mac OS X. Not to mention, all the great iLife software that ships with each Mac.

Microsoft has made a lot of concessions with Windows 7. There’s no more Windows Mail, Movie Maker, Photo Gallery or built-in Internet browser. Yes, you can still download their successors at live.com, but that’s not going to stop consumers from getting their Windows 7 PC and wondering “What the hell?”

 

[AidenShaw]

I’ve increasingly come to the conclusion that governmental bodies such as the EU and to a lesser extent the U.S. Justice Department have actually harmed consumers in their pursuit against Microsoft.

+2^40