Windows on ARM Users Need Browser Choice Too

Sign of things to come with Win8 (MS back to old tricks)

It’s reported that Windows RT (the name Microsoft has given to Windows running on the ARM processor) will have two environments, a Windows Classic environment and a Metro environment for apps. However, Windows on ARM prohibits any browser except for Internet Explorer from running in the privileged “Windows Classic” environment.
http://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2012/05/09/windows-on-arm-users-need-browser-choice-too/

Worse than that … Microsoft’s Windows Hardware Certification Requirements for Windows 8 states “Disabling Secure [Boot] must not be possible on ARM systems.”

So effectively … MS are blocking the installation of any other OS on ARM devices that ship with Win8

See here:

Yeah, I have seen that, but it did not touch me that much.
How many people would want to replace their OS compared with how many would want to have a browser other than IE?
Perhaps this browser locking in is more important.
For me personally Firefox was the turning point, that is when I started to look elsewhere.

You’re right … the browser thing will impact more people, and is extremely underhanded … not to mention probably illegal, at least if they want to sell them in the EU.

But I sure as hell would want to replace Win8 as soon as I bought an ARM device with Win8 … and an awful lot of them may come with Win8 pre-installed :wink:

Although I’d not buy one with Win8 in the first place … some will get caught out with this.

I think Microsoft have realised that Linux and even Mac OS are poking their heads through the nice money making bubble Gates had created. They want to stop people looking elsewhere by disabling the possibility.

I know plenty of people who have moved to Firefox/Chrome/etc because they can, not because they understand why. If they didn’t have the choice they would just stay the ignorant fools most people are.

//glitch

It’s funny because Canonical have said 5% of all computers next year WILL ship with Ubuntu 12.04. Looks like Microsoft has a bit of catching up to do.

I’ll believe that when I see it.

I have read somewhere that the EU ruling does not apply to new platforms (ARM).

But I sure as hell would want to replace Win8 as soon as I bought an ARM device with Win8 .. and an awful lot of them may come with Win8 pre-installed ;)
Unless ARM suddenly makes inroads into the desktop/laptop market then I would not even consider a tablet(like) device with or without Win8.

[Edit]
It seems that this is even more complicated:

On ARM-powered devices running Windows 8, third-party developers will only have access to the Metro APIs, so they won't be able to run any existing desktop app, including Firefox, Chrome, Photoshop and what have you, even if they have a Metro UI version.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Mozilla-Warns-About-Microsoft-Blocking-Firefox-on-ARM-Devices-268691.shtml?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter :o
I have read somewhere that the EU ruling does not apply to new platforms (ARM).

It may not fall within the scope of the present ruling … but it would most certainly be considered a new case of anti-competitive behaviour by the EU … now whether that would lead to a new anti trust case is anyone’s guess … but it looks like M$ are willing to roll the dice

It may not fall within the scope of the present ruling .. but it would most certainly be considered a new case of anti-competitive behaviour by the EU
It looks like the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee plans to examine allegations that Microsoft is giving its own Internet Explorer Web browser preferential treatment. http://www.technewsworld.com/story/75119.html

Very interesting article :slight_smile:

If I’m understanding this correctly (and remember I’m no “legal eagle”) US anti-trust law is unlikely to cover this as Microsoft can claim they don’t have “Monopoly Power” in that market sector.

EU law differs slightly

EU “Competition Law”:

contains a section covering “Anti Competitive Practices”:

which can cover “Protectionism” (which give firms insulation from competitive forces)

That said, that Wikipedia page also states:

It is usually difficult to practice anti-competitive practices unless the parties involved have significant market power or government backing.

So it looks like the M$ lawyers may be earning their keep on this one … at least until/unless they gain significant market share.

I suppose it all boils down to whether M$ can argue they don’t have significant market share in that sector … or if the EU would consider their past record, and their OS market share as a whole.

My guess is they’ll get away with it this time ::slight_smile:

My guess is they'll get away with it this time ::)
Lets hope not. If they do then there will be no stopping them trying other things too. :-\