SuperSite Blog

Let's keep the comments on topic, please.

I really do feel bad for the citizens of Europe being given versions of Windows 7 that nobody really wants. I've read a lot about how nobody in Europe really wants the E, N, and how South Koreans could care less for the K editions. I'm just glad in the U.S. we'll get our versions of Windows 7, with a browser and the option to remove it.

M apologies to rrode74@live.com. I couldn't respond to your comment because of sleep and work. I will say that there are people still complaining about lackluster or unavailable drivers in the Windows 7 RC. Many of them do on the Engineering Windows 7 Blog. Much of the work on drivers is far from finished. There are many devices and machines that need updated drivers. So please, don't assume that  because of the stellar beta/RC so far, that everything is done.

hmmm understand...

Maybe you could clarify something for me here Paul. I’m in the UK, when I purchase 100+ seats of Windows 7 next year (which I’ve already have a budget for) am I going to be forced to purchase the “E” version?

My enterprise is a non-profit organisation and we’re almost entirely a Microsoft house (we pay peanuts for MS software). We run numerous .NET applications which rely on specific ActiveX controls. I need IE on the desktop - any other browser is useless to us - so I need the “E” edition like a hole in the head!

Am I going to be able to purchase another version in the UK legally or am I forced to “circumvent” this in order to remove a (wholly unnecessary) extra installation step in order to deploy Windows 7.

Yes Europe do stupid legislation about IE in Windows... Its pain in the DOP!

Blackes7 : I think you will ! You will just have to install IE separatly

"Am I going to be able to purchase another version in the UK legally or am I forced to “circumvent” this in order to remove a (wholly unnecessary) extra installation step in order to deploy Windows 7."

I'd suggest acquainting yourself with the IEAK so that when you script an install, IE8 will be included in the script with an unattended, customized installation.

Once you generalize and capture the deployment image, you'll have an IE8-integrated version of Windows 7 that you can deploy with ImageX, WDS, MDT, or SCCM.  You could even stick the installation (or just the configuration script and use it with a bootable install DVD) on a USB thumbdrive and install from there.

When you're dealing with 100+ seats, you don't want to be installing from the DVD.  Prepare your installation images ahead of time, use corporate deployment technologies (all of the ones I listed are free except for SCCM), and save yourself the headache.

Quick question:

How does the E version affect in-place upgrades?

i.e.:

1)  Can you do an in-place upgrade with an E version?

2)  If you have Vista with IE8, will 7E preserve the IE8 installation, or remove it?

3)  If you have Vista with IE7, what happens?

4)  If you have Vista with any other browser, what happens?

It's pretty much a no-brainer i.e. download and then burn to CD/DVD-R a copy of IE 8 beforehand, and install it afterwards.

UK residents can click here:

TinyURL:

http://tinyurl.com/cgh4tg

Full URL:

www.microsoft.com/.../details.aspx

I also would imagine that U.K. computer magazines will have a copy of IE 8 available in the attached CD/DVD.

There is no reason Microsoft couldn't do a CD give-away in some popular magazine or better yet with newspapers in the U.K. as well.

Moreso, if it is that much of a bother, just ask some guy at the U.K. equivalent of Canada Computers to slap on a copy.

What they hay, I will do it .. for 5 bucks or maybe even free if you promise to subscribe to my Youtube video channel  - just send me your U.K. computer and I will put IE 8 on it for you. But you have to pay for shipping and handling etc. that's fair.

Paul:

"In step two, there is a link to the Internet Explorer 8 page on Microsoft.com (UK). This suggests strongly, then, that the normally downloadable version of IE 8 will install fine on Windows 7 E. I will have to test this."

Or it could strongly suggest that there'll be a specific download link for IE8 when it's made available (probably when it's on MSDN at the end of the month?).

Another quick question (at this to the list):

5)  Can you remove IE8 from 7E after installing it?

Waethorn:

1)  Can you do an in-place upgrade with an E version?

No.

2)  If you have Vista with IE8, will 7E preserve the IE8 installation, or remove it?

No, cos you have to do a clean install.

3)  If you have Vista with IE7, what happens?

Vista goes, along with IE7 cos you have to do a clean install.

4)  If you have Vista with any other browser, what happens?

It all goes, along with the other browser cos you have to do a clean install.

Microsoft have stated that it'll be the end of the year before they have worked out a way of doing an in-place upgrade for Vista that will take IE out.

Waethorn: Thanks for the heads-up. I'll deploy it with IE no problem using RIS and Systems Centre. I'm just miffed that I have to mess about like this because a group of EU toss-pots want to kick up a stick about a complete non-issue! Grrr.

5)  Can you remove IE8 from 7E after installing it?

Waethorn, more than likely yes.

As for those who have posted up a Vista and Server 2008 IE link, I doubt that'll be good enough to get it on 7.  It wouldn't surprise me if there has to be a specific build for 7, especially as it'll have to add stuff that'll allow its removal completely from that "Programs and Features" area of the Control Panel (which you can't do with Vista,or it's not the same I don't think?).

" 5)  Can you remove IE8 from 7E after installing it?"

yes.

Silly Eu, silly Neelie failed as politician in the Netherlands, but hey you can always be a comisisoner at the European Union.

The thing that worries me is correct functionality, did they only remove the ie.exe and related files, or is there more to it. In any case thanks to the EU, european citizens now get a somewhat crippled version of the OS, of course the good news is that it will be the full version at upgrade pricing.

Pingback from  Windows 7 Blog » Microsoft documents how Windows 7 E customers can get a browser

@realtestman:

So E "Upgrade" versions have basically the same bits as what's on a Full version, aside from the product key acceptance, and license restrictions?

How do you install an E Upgrade version?  Do you need to start the upgrade from within Windows?

How does that work exactly?  I'm guessing the installation has to be completely rearchitected because you could previously only do a clean install after booting off the disc.  If you launched the install from Windows, it would only give you the in-place upgrade option.

I guess this relates to non-E versions as well.  They say you have to have a previous installation of Windows to use upgrade media.  Will the upgrade media allow you to boot off it and do a custom install move the files to Windows.old as it does with a Win 7 RC to RTM upgrade?  How about for E versions?

I thought I read somwhere that there was going to be IE 8 install discs.  Was that just rumor?

Another question:

6)  Will IE8 be offered via Microsoft Update as it is today for Vista?

Waethorn: "Will the upgrade media allow you to boot off it and do a custom install move the files to Windows.old as it does with a Win 7 RC to RTM upgrade?"

From what I understand, you have to start the install from within a valid copy of Windows.

Let them eat cake.

"I've read a lot about how nobody in Europe really wants the E, N, and how South Koreans could care less for the K editions."

Can you share a couple of those links with us?

"From what I understand, you have to start the install from within a valid copy of Windows."

How can you possibly do a clean install as realtestman predicts from within a currently-running Windows version?

While I understand the frat-boy satisfaction of sticking it to the EU, I'm wondering if Microsoft couldn't have offered users who paid for their software a pop-up window asking which browser they would like to include in their install? The choices could have been the top three or four, with IE 8 on the list.

This would seemed to have been more user-friendly.

Pingback from  Microsoft documents how Windows 7 E customers can get a browser | The Software Nook

"So E "Upgrade" versions have basically the same bits as what's on a Full version, aside from the product key acceptance, and license restrictions?

How do you install an E Upgrade version?  Do you need to start the upgrade from within Windows?

How does that work exactly?  I'm guessing the installation has to be completely rearchitected because you could previously only do a clean install after booting off the disc.  If you launched the install from Windows, it would only give you the in-place upgrade option.

I guess this relates to non-E versions as well.  They say you have to have a previous installation of Windows to use upgrade media.  Will the upgrade media allow you to boot off it and do a custom install move the files to Windows.old as it does with a Win 7 RC to RTM upgrade?  How about for E versions?"

There is no E upgrade version.  What is on offer till the end of the year is the full version at upgrade prices (until Microsoft has come up with workable upgrade E media).

Paul posted up how it's all done on normal Windows 7 and Windows 7 E weeks ago.  Check the Windows 7 section.

"Microsoft couldn't have offered users who paid for their software a pop-up window asking which browser they would like to include in their install?"

See if you can buy a Hyundai engine from a GM dealership.  There's your answer.

"How can you possibly do a clean install as realtestman predicts from within a currently-running Windows version"

It'll warn you you'll have to do a clean install.  Paul Thurrott posted up the screenshots (for XP admittedly but surely it'd be the same with Vista too, when using E media), check his Windows 7 section.

Pingback from  How to install a browser in Windows 7 E | ithinkdifferent

"While I understand the frat-boy satisfaction of sticking it to the EU, I'm wondering if Microsoft couldn't have offered users who paid for their software a pop-up window asking which browser they would like to include in their install? The choices could have been the top three or four, with IE 8 on the list.

This would seemed to have been more user-friendly."

Cos there would've been a ton of variables, not limited to which browser would be in this list, what versions, why make setup of Windows complicated, etc.  It's not as if you can't already install another browser.

Yes Microsoft could have offered a screen at which you can choose a browser, in fact that was the demand of the EC, of course they denied that.

I would be surprised if Microsoft doesn't offer ie8 through Windows Update, that would be the easiest solution.

@chipwinter:

Why should Microsoft distribute other company's browsers? Should they be obligated to include download links for things like Open Office when installing MS Office also? I doubt that Mac OS/X gives you the choice to install IE when installing it.

How about simply giving EU consumers the option to choose between Windows 7 with or without IE8 when they make their purchase instead?

Pingback from  How to install a browser in Windows 7 E | Windows Seven 7

Yet another example of how laws, copyrights, patents, greed etc. keeps technology from evolving to its greatest/easiest potential for the paying customer.

Sadly, I think that in our civilization, we're on a path of destruction and we've reached a point of no return. We are at a point in time where technology needs to evolve at amazing speed to match the grand economic, security and environmental issues humankind is facing. Sadly, the way the system works wont allow for this to happen(and we'll all die in 70 years time, IMHO).

Drama aside, keeping the one major OS that NORMAL PEOPLE use from including a browser from the get go in 2009 when the net is as important as electricity = insanity. That this is ACTUALLY HAPPENING and not just crazy talk = sign that technology is doomed to evolve too slowly to suit our present and future needs.

And it is sad in every aspect of tech too. Can you imagine how easy computers and devices would be to use today if companies had a limit of 3 patents each?

All very depressing...

Pingback from  Would You Buy A Car Without An Engine? «  Fran??ois Schiettecatte’s Blog

"Paul Thurrott posted up the screenshots (for XP admittedly but surely it'd be the same with Vista too, when using E media)"

No, and stop calling me Shirley.

We already know that XP has no in-place upgrade path.  That's a given.

The only part about upgrades that Paul posted was this (which you also stated):

"Until it can work out the details, people in the EU who purchase Windows 7 will get only the Full version, and not the Upgrade version, but they will acquire this product at the Upgrade prices. The reason is simple: Microsoft has yet to figure out a way to upgrade a copy of Windows Vista with IE 7 or 8 installed to a copy of Windows 7 in which IE cannot exist. They say they expect to have a solution by the end of the year."

That answers some questions, but not all.

This also answers another question:

Full versions can't be used for in-place upgrades, according to Paul's statement.  I would bet this applies to all versions, not specifically the E ones.

According to Paul, these are NOT real upgrade versions either, so it sounds like you DON'T launch the install from Windows.  Since they're clean installations, you could boot off the disc and install as normal.  You can't do a clean install when launching the installation from within Windows.  The installer tells you that you have to boot off the disc.

So the E versions actually have a leg-up on the regular North American versions in that you can (at least for now) do a clean install from upgrade media.  When Microsoft figures out a way to do an in-place upgrade, I'd expect that the existing SKU's of discs will be replaced with new ones that don't allow clean installations though.

I guess the only remaining question is how Microsoft is going to check license compliancy if these are just full versions labeled as upgrades.  I don't imagine they had enough time to implement a legacy activation and validation status check from within the Windows PE build that's included (and because there won't be full network services enabled in the PE, it's pretty much a no-go), so I'm guessing there is none.  If that's so, there isn't much stopping someone from buying an E "Upgrade" and just installing it on a clean hard drive, aside from the legality issue.

"Why should Microsoft distribute other company's browsers? Should they be obligated to include download links for things like Open Office when installing MS Office also? I doubt that Mac OS/X gives you the choice to install IE when installing it."

Should Microsoft be obligated to include the Mach kernel in their OS?  How about the Aqua shell?  How about a download link to iLife instead of Windows Live Essentials?

Pingback from  Microsoft documents how Windows 7 E customers can get a browser | Windows Seven 7

@weathorn

As far as I understood, in Europe until at least the end of the year, all version of Win7 are full versions at upgrade pricing.

"As far as I understood, in Europe until at least the end of the year, all version of Win7 are full versions at upgrade pricing."

That's what I understood from Paul's writeup.

So you're missing a browser but you get a cheap full version.  Why the complaints?

About a selection screen.

Well, EU wants it both ways after the fact. They told Microsoft to get rid of Windows Media Player . They also bi*ched about the bundling of IE.

So Microsoft precluded their lawsuit and called them on their word. MS didn't include IE with European versions of Windows 7.

It is not frat-boy satisfaction - it is avoiding lawsuits and accusations against bundling with the operating system. They also took out the email and news client, the movie maker, the instant messenger, and the automatic camera stuff .. and even the basic calendar.

The reason why Euros are reacting is because now that they have the cupboard they ordered they are finding it a bit bare. Hey, they realize, it might even put them in a slightly disadvantageous position always beating up on one company.

Now of course, they might be changing their tune and are discussing settlement rather than penalties. 'Hope they come to their senses and lay off.

Furthermore: Why on earth should one company be forced to peddle another's wares? It doesn't make sense for Microsoft to provide some selection screen for its competitors, especially when OSX and RedHat provide no such thing. Selection my ars^e. If you want Opera - download it an install it yourself - or buy a copy from your local computer store - or order a CD from Opera - so long as the platform remains open it's not Microsoft's business.

Waethorn: "How can you possibly do a clean install as realtestman predicts from within a currently-running Windows version?"

You put in the disc, go through some prompts, when the installer reboots you choose "Custom".

Vista works this way currently, I think.

Pingback from  How to install a browser in Windows 7 E | Windows Seven 7

Good move Microsoft. Hope this will satisfy the EU policy makers.

Now it is time to examine Google. How can Google ship a browser bundled with their own OS (i.e. Chrome OS)? That's not fair, the same policy should be applied, i.e. Google should either ship a browser without an OS (Yes, just Chrome) or ship a browser with multiple OSes (Chrome OS or, Windows...) for EU customers to choose from when they pick up a system.

"You put in the disc, go through some prompts, when the installer reboots you choose "Custom"."

That's a clean install then.

Vista Upgrades can't do that either.

If you try to boot off an Vista Upgrade disc, the only option you have is to install a trial copy first (don't specify a product key).  Once the install is complete, you launch Setup from within Windows, and enter your Upgrade product key.  It proceeds with an in-place upgrade over top of a clean (but trial) copy of Windows Vista, which is the same thing.

Windows 7 doesn't have the option of doing an "upgrade" install by installing over top of a trial AFAIK.

To summarize, this is what is known about Vista and 7 [E] versions from as many reputable online sources as I can find points from:

1)  Vista upgrade versions can only be used to perform in-place upgrades when Setup is launched in Windows.

2)  Vista upgrade versions can install a trial copy on a clean computer by booting off the disc.  You can then "upgrade" the same OS by launching Setup from within Windows, but you MUST enter your upgrade product key immediately, because upgrade keys are only accepted if Windows Setup is launched from within Windows.  This is how you "clean" install with Vista upgrade media.

3)  Vista full versions can be installed cleanly by booting off the disc.  You can install a trial and enter a product key later if you like, but you have to choose the right version of Vista that you bought.  You don't have to reinstall over top of a trial though.

(Note:  I dunno if you can do an "Upgrade" with a full version - never bothered to check.  Someone please confirm this.)

4)  Regular Windows 7 upgrades require a fully-licensed, fully-activated version of Windows to be installed.

5)  Windows 7 E versions are all full versions, even upgrade packages.  Windows 7 E versions don't allow for in-place upgrades.

6)  You can do an in-place upgrade of Windows 7 RC to RTM, but it's not supported.

7)  You can do in in-place upgrade of Windows Vista to Windows 7.

8)  You can't do an in-place upgrade of Windows XP to Windows 7, but it meets the upgrade license requirements.

9)  You can no longer install a clean trial copy and "upgrade" by installing over top with Windows 7.

Ok, given point 5, and my assumption about full versions of Vista not allowing in-place upgrades in point 3, I'll make the assumption that ALL Windows 7 full versions DON'T allow in-place upgrades.

Likewise, Upgrade versions don't allow clean installs.

....

One question that keeps stinging my brain about this all is how an Upgrade version installs cleanly when the user has Windows XP....

How does THAT work?!

You have to launch Windows Setup from within Windows.  Granted.  Windows checks the license activation (?).  Then what?  Setup copies Windows PE boot files and it continues from Windows PE after a reboot and moves all your stuff into Windows.old??  IHNI, just asking.

Why couldn't they do this with Windows 7 E upgrades?

@de Silentio:

"You put in the disc, go through some prompts, when the installer reboots you choose "Custom"."

You don't need to launch Setup from within Windows to do that though.

AFAIK, you can't do that with an upgrade version either, although I've never tried.

Heran is right on this! Microsoft made a good move... Lets talk about Chrome OS now!!!

Waethorn: "AFAIK, you can't do that with an upgrade version either, although I've never tried."

You have to be able to upgrade and do a clean install from within Windows, otherwise upgrades from XP and 2000 would not work.  Correct?

Or,

1. Buy a Mac.

2. Install VMWare.

3. Use VMWare Transporter and an ethernet cable to bring over your old Windows installation. Lock, stock and barrel. All settings, all documents, everything.

4. Sell your old PC.

5. Gradually transition to OS X, using VMWare as needed along the way to run old apps.

6. Live happily ever after.

Does Microsoft have a death wish or just stupid, arrogant leadership?

All I can hope for is - that Certified/Gold partners (including company I work for) will have access to all versions like they had so far. This would mean that despite living in country that's being aimed at being an "E" country, I would have access to "normal" version.

Anyway, like all other people - I agree that this is a HUGE MORONIC thing.. but hey.. it's still better than solution offered by chuck in post just before mine.. :P

@chuckb84

LOL, Microsoft isn't to blame here, it's the EC, but Apple will find out about them soon enough. Interesting times, PearC rings a bell, that's a company in Europe that sells normal priced hardware that runs OSX, now the minute Apple is going to face that company in court, they might find that in Europe their monopolistic EULA is void.

At least then OSX fans don't have to buy Apple's overpriced hardware :)

If you happen to live in the EU:

www.pearc.de

Now regarding your suggestions, quite a costly solution to overcome a browserless OS, don't you think ?

Let it be shown that chuck delivered the first punch here.  And we were moving along so well...

"Does Microsoft have a death wish or just stupid, arrogant leadership?"

Chuck, this might be a "stupid" question, but you do realize that this isn't Microsofts doing, right?  Even the most incompetent of leadership would realize that not including a browser is just insane.

What are they supposed to do?  They could fight the EU, delay 7 from being released, and grow ill will among the EU, and further raise the ire of Mac fans.  Or, they could comply with the draconian wishes of the EU, giving them what they want.  And of course the ire of Mac fans will be just as strong.

And who has most likely lined the pockets of EU bureaucrats that make these decisions?  I'm pretty sure you can find Google on that list, and Apple might be on it too.

"I doubt that Mac OS/X gives you the choice to install IE when installing it."

That could be because Microsoft doesn't make a version of IE for the Mac.

It's interesting that you say that, though, because at one point, Microsoft Internet Explorer was the only non-Apple program whose icon was installed by default in the Dock of all new Macs. That was before MS let IE for the Mac languish, and Apple was basically forced to write Safari.

I'm a Firefox user and what Internet Explorer 6 did to the standards support of HTML is still very fresh in my mind.

BUT! (Don't lynch me yet)

It's occurred to me that if the Europe version (which we'll get in the UK) doesn't have IE, there is no easy way out of the box to download and install a web browser, whether that's Safari, Chrome, Internet Explorer itself, Firefox, or whatever floats your boat.

As much as I was initially for not having IE bundled into Windows, I can see now how much of a pain it will be to NOT have it -- as there is no obvious way to the average person can install a web browser, which is pretty major as problems go.

Even though the UK is in Europe, I'm no big fan of the EU and the better option would have surely been, fine, include Internet Explorer with Windows, but when you uninstall it, make it completely uninstall -- but only at the user's discretion.

Will there be an option in Add/Remove Programs (or whatever it's now called, I use Vista a home but XP at work and old habits die hard) option to install IE from the DVD?

"Even though the UK is in Europe, I'm no big fan of the EU and the better option would have surely been, fine, include Internet Explorer with Windows, but when you uninstall it, make it completely uninstall -- but only at the user's discretion."

Funny that cos that's what it does in Windows 7, at least for the non-EU versions.  It's in the dialog that lists Windows features that you can select or deselect.  For EU versions, it's anybody's guess but the word is that once you have installed IE, it lets you uninstall using the same dialog.

Sorry Paul, gotta go OT, but you'll like this.

Wae IE 8 works great with GE Centricity using compatibilty mode. It's faster too! Wae to go Microsoft! Get it, 'Wae' to go instead of 'way' to go?

Thanks,

Doc

"You have to be able to upgrade and do a clean install from within Windows, otherwise upgrades from XP and 2000 would not work."

You can't do a clean install in Windows though - you have to boot off the disc for that.  You can only do upgrades while running setup IN Windows.

For Windows Vista, they let you do trial installs.  That option isn't available in Windows 7.  Neither is doing in-place upgrades of XP.

In that particular statement you reference, I was specifically taking about Windows Vista.  I get that portions of the installation options have changed in Windows 7 - what I want to know is exactly what options.

" Use VMWare Transporter and an ethernet cable to bring over your old Windows installation. Lock, stock and barrel. All settings, all documents, everything."

And ZERO activation.  Good luck getting that migrated.  Activation will break when you move it to a virtual machine, and Microsoft won't accept virtualization as an acceptable alternative to hardware.  A virtualization is a new machine, and you need special licensing requirements to migrate to different hardware (retail full versions are the only consumer SKU that allow that, otherwise you need software assurance).

"It's interesting that you say that, though, because at one point, Microsoft Internet Explorer was the only non-Apple program whose icon was installed by default in the Dock of all new Macs. That was before MS let IE for the Mac languish, and Apple was basically forced to write Safari."

Oh, you mean when Microsoft, the biggest software company in the world, announced that they committed to offer the most popular productivity software in the world, Office, to a platform that wasn't their own, thereby allowing users of said alternative platform at least close to the same amount of productivity that users of their own platform had, and legitimizing the alternative platform in the eyes of the computer industry, when the industry had let them falter?

Ya, poor Apple.

Dipsh!t,

I didn't really mean it as a punch. I am mainly incredulous over all this....

"Does Microsoft have a death wish or just stupid, arrogant leadership?"

Chuck, this might be a "stupid" question, but you do realize that this isn't Microsofts doing, right?  Even the most incompetent of leadership would realize that not including a browser is just insane.

What are they supposed to do?  They could fight the EU, delay 7 from being released, and grow ill will among the EU, and further raise the ire of Mac fans.  Or, they could comply with the draconian wishes of the EU, giving them what they want.  And of course the ire of Mac fans will be just as strong."

I believe the EU objected to the bundling of IE and no other browser. They requested a means for users to choose a browser on first launch of the OS or for them to be included with Windows. Microsoft responded with the "no browser at all" option. (I may have some of this wrong, but this is how I understand it. If there is something "draconian" in this, I fail to see it.)

So, rather than provide a choice as the EU requested (and remember, everyone here is all for choice, right?), Microsoft responded with a "Pick up my toys, go home and refuse to play in the sandbox" no-browser "solution". So, yes, I find that stupid and arrogant. Here's why:

As many have pointed out, this is a non-issue for nearly everyone. Most people buy Windows pre-installed on a computer that they purchase. A few people upgrade and nearly all of those will have the technical savvy to work around this problem, by whatever means-----and it is easy to think of multiple solutions that are fairly simple.

However, the flat out refusal to include other browsers, or even a means to choose one on first launch is totally arrogant. It is an obvious "my way or the highway", cut the baby in half "solution". It complies with the EU in a  manner that is an obvious non-starter and that is completely at odds with what the EU was trying to do. Microsoft thinks it doesn't have to comply with what the EU wanted because of this cutesy circumvention.

Among other things, I think this totally undercuts Paul's frequent contention that Microsoft has changed from the bad old company into one that gets it. They don't; they're still just the same.

Two final points. First, all this squabbling over a BROWSER? Hell, they're all FREE these days, and all of them more or less do the same things operating with more or less the same standards. Is a fight like this worth it? Why? I hope the EU fines them another 1B Euros. Microsoft deserves it.

Second, to forestall the comments about Safari being bundled with OS X. I have no problem at all with the EU mandating the inclusion of 5 or 6 browsers! It's a total non-issue.

I essentially meant the process of migrating to a Mac as a joke to illustrate how absurdly complex this is becoming from a Windows users point of view.

@Doc:

Good to hear.

Does it work in native mode at all?

Just curious.

Since it's a web app, I'm guessing you haven't had any reason to test it on the x64 version of Windows and/or IE.  The 32-bit version of IE is the default on 64-bit Windows due to compatibility issues of plugins anyway, so users won't see any real difference.  There is a 64-bit version of IE too though, and plugins usually have to be recompiled to work correctly in it.

@all:

Which, if any, browser makers have built their browsers in native Windows x64 code?

"A virtualization is a new machine"

Should say "virtualization environment".

Comparing Microsoft with Apple is silly...

Comparing Windows with MacOX is silly too...

Comparing MacOS installation and upgrade software with Windows Installation and upgrade software is silly too...

Comparing a Honda with a Toyota is silly...

Is there something wrong here???

Pingback from  Computers ! » Microsoft documents how Windows 7 E customers can get a browser

"Will there be an option in Add/Remove Programs (or whatever it's now called, I use Vista a home but XP at work and old habits die hard) option to install IE from the DVD?"

No.  It's not included on the disc.

There has been talk (rumours?) that Microsoft may have some kind of CD available later.

I'd like to just see them offer it via Microsoft Update as an optional update as it does for Silverlight, the Office Live plugin, Windows Live Essentials, and the Vista Ultimate Extras.

Waethorn,

" Use VMWare Transporter and an ethernet cable to bring over your old Windows installation. Lock, stock and barrel. All settings, all documents, everything."

And ZERO activation.  Good luck getting that migrated.  Activation will break when you move it to a virtual machine, and Microsoft won't accept virtualization as an acceptable alternative to hardware.  A virtualization is a new machine, and you need special licensing requirements to migrate to different hardware (retail full versions are the only consumer SKU that allow that, otherwise you need software assurance)."

XP activated just fine with VMWare. Windows 7 also, the public beta.

However, you are quite right that Microsoft uses ridiculous licensing requirements to needlessly handicap its customers. I wish they wouldn't do that.

Again, I don't really expect many people to view this move to a Mac process as a "solution", but it doesn't look that much more complicated than what Microsoft wants to inflict on some of their loyal customers.

I said they have stupid, arrogant leadership, and I stand by that. Did you manage to get any of the Win7 upgrades before they "sold out"?

Chuck, please tell me Apple pays you to do this kind of marketing. Everytime Paul has an article that says something negative about Windows 7, you use it as an opportunity to sell OS X. You sound like an infomercial for Apple most of the time.

Worked in native mode but one glitch is that it did not show all the image files in the left column, which allows us to choose the ones we want to display. The down arrow goes to the next file, but choosing compatibilty view fixes it. It's actually much faster too!

Thanks for the tip. I'll pass it on.

"Second, to forestall the comments about Safari being bundled with OS X. I have no problem at all with the EU mandating the inclusion of 5 or 6 browsers! It's a total non-issue."

When is it right for an organization to force competition to a market leader that has already made it there, just for the sake of some that couldn't compete in the same open market?

What I'm referring to, of course, is the EU's possible mandate to include competitors browsers.

To my knowledge, there are no laws to protect a market leader against unfair competition from a challenger, but the EU is imposing that upon Microsoft.

The EC\EU need their heads read for this silliness but as Paul and others have posted there are workarounds. It seems ridiculous that Windows users in Europe are going to be penalised with a half baked version of Windows 7.

@chuck:

XP OEM licenses aren't transferable.  (unless you buy Software Assurance as an add-on, but I'm not dwelling on that)

XP Retail full version licenses are transferable, but only if you don't use it on the previous computer.

XP Retail upgrade licenses technically are too, but it entirely depends on what the previous OS license includes.  An "upgrade" is not a full license - it's just a "license" to use the new bits on top of a previous full version license.  So the previous version would have to include transfer rights (ie. it would have to be a retail full version).

If you try to move an XP OEM license that was running on hardware into a virtualization environment, it's not a valid license.  An OEM could include an OEM license to run a VM, but you'd also have to have a separate host OS license too.  Also, the OEM license restriction specifically states that you can't transfer it.  After talking with Microsoft Partner Support on this, they state that OEM licenses aren't transferable to other HARDWARE.  That includes the HARDWARE that the VM environment is running on.  The reason for this is because the OEM supplied the VM license to run on their hardware (physical hardware, not the emulated hardware of the VM environment), and they provide support for it, so transferring it would break the support chain and Microsoft doesn't allow that with OEM licensing.

If you want to be able to move stuff back and forth between machines (virtual or not), it's probably because you are into IT, and you'll likely have, or work for a company that has, a volume license agreement.  Otherwise you should use trial software in a VM, or get a product that includes VM licensing out of the box (Server 2008 does, to varying degrees depending on the edition, and so does 7 Ultimate).

7 Professional includes VM licensing, but only the license of XP to run in XP Mode.  It doesn't include a license to run a second copy of 7 Pro inside a VM.

I would say that the XP license that ships with XP Mode likely doesn't qualify for downgrade licensing either, but that's just a guess.

@chuck:

It is not for Microsoft to provide this kind of choice. It is for OEMs. Microsoft has done the right thing by taking out the browser. The OEMs can decide to add one and ship it to users, so they won't see the difference. If you didn't hate Microsoft as much as you do, you would be able to see this. Why stop with a browser. Why not have five media players for users to choose from? And five notepad type applications, five Wordpad-like applications. The list could go on and on. The EC could fine MS $1bn for each one of these. You're looking at this only from the angle of increasing Mac marketshare. (Again, I hope you get paid for this.)

@chuckb84

"It complies with the EU in a  manner that is an obvious non-starter"

No, it completely complies with the EU's demand that Microsoft not engage in the 'monopolistic practice' of bundling the browser with the operating system.

"However, the flat out refusal to include other browsers, or even a means to choose one on first launch is totally arrogant."

No it's not. Microsoft doesn't want to be put in the position of supporting competitors' products. It is completely unfair to think they should have to. If bundling is a problem for the EU, then Microsoft should stop bundling. But to expect them to support every dirty product out there is ridiculous. There are perhaps hundreds of competing browsers - tucows.com lists 138 and who knows how many have backdoors? There's just no way.

"and that is completely at odds with what the EU was trying to do."

Well yes, the EU Commission was/is trying to bilk Microsoft out of billions!

Notice though that they have changed their tune. Microsoft is in compliance now (the cash cow has no reason producing milk) so now they want to 'discuss'  rather than demand. Hm. They're probably looking for something, anything .. lol

". I hope the EU fines them another 1B Euros. Microsoft deserves it."

Why? They are in compliance. As a matter of fact, they've gone beyond and stripped the email and newsgroup client out of Windows, the instant messenger is out, so is the basic calendar - the movie maker is gone, even the automatic video import is gone - one can't import video with an out-of-the-box version of Windows 7. I'd like to see all that applied to OSX and Linux distros lol.

Microsoft has gone beyond fair and beyond compliance. It is really time to leave them alone.

This is all sad. The experience of using a computer has just been stripped for the sake of illogical outdated perceived inequity. There are so many browsers that one can choose to use or not use, with imediate access. MS created a system for the consumer to utilize and enjoy, but it's now diminshed in  Europe. Maybe many years ago they would have an advantage by bundling, but now with the web, we have many choices. Truly sad for the europeans.

Waethorn, I did the research this time instead of just telling you.  Paul covered this in an earlier post.  Here is what he said:

1. A qualifying Windows operating system must be installed.

2. The qualifying Windows operating system must have a genuine license (product key) and it must be activated.

3. To upgrade, boot to the qualifying Windows desktop, insert the Windows 7 Upgrade disc in the DVD drive.

4. When the setup menu appears, select Custom (advanced) to initiate a clean install procedure.

Here's the link: community.winsupersite.com/.../clean-install-with-windows-7-upgrade-media-how-does-that-work-exactly.aspx

Microsoft should be free to bundle anything they want with Windows. The EU and their socialist theft machine is utter nonsense.  Anti-trust is just a tool for certain companies with political clout to compete in the courtroom instead of in the market.

John,

In this case, I sort of agree with you. Opera has been non-competative in the browser space for over a decade. It seems more like the EU is busy protecting their businesses instead of truely fostering competition. The question is now, where does the EU go from here? They could easily turn around and force Apple to unbundle iTunes from Macs in Europe. Or force unpopular apps on to machines, adding layers of bloat to any OS in Europe. The question also becomes where does the EU stop? I just wish the EU voters would vote somebody in their assemblies to stop this nonsense.

John, I totally agree with you.

Chuck, saucy beat me to it, but providing other browser choices with Windows is just stupid, and would suddenly make MS responsible for the upkeep and certification of all of those browsers.  And how do you choose which browsers to include?  Obviously, Firefox.  What about Chrome, Safari, Opera?  And then what about the other browsers.  So when one of these has a security hole, guess who is holding the ball and is now responsible for that apps upkeep?  And I can GUARANTEE that MS will be blamed by Mac fans when one of those browsers has a security hole.  RJ will be gleeful.

And since the EU doesn't want you to include a bundled browser, you can't very well download one, so they have to keep insecure versions of those browsers on the disc.

Additionally, where is your ire towards Apple, if you feel so strongly about this?  Shouldn't Apple, by using the same reasoning, offer alternative browsers and not bundle Safari?  And isn't the bundling of iLife on some Mac's also constitute the same problem, and couldn't competitors, from MS to even Google, complain about the same bundling?  It's a slippery slope my friend.  

Since anti-competitive legislation is supposed to be about helping the consumer, how are they really helped in this situation?

"I just wish the EU voters would vote somebody in their assemblies to stop this nonsense."

You and me both, unfortunately we as European voters haven't got that much influence, European commissioners aren't voted directly.

Dipsh!t.

I'm not saying I disagree with most of your points, but saying, "Shouldn't Apple have to do the same thing if MS does?" is meaningless because Apple does not have a monopoly on the OS space.

Apple has not been convicted for abusing a monopoly position (that it currently doesn't have) in the OS space to push out (or at least try to push out) competition in the browser market.

Until Apple has been convicted of those things....or, let's even say, has the POWER to do those things, saying something like, "if MS does it, Apple should need to also" is meaningless.

Now.....in my opinion, FORCING MS to offer other competing browsers is a stupid idea.

Not supplying any browser though is also a stupid idea...but one that the EU was kind of asking for.

@panache1023

"Apple has not been convicted for abusing a monopoly position"

Yeah, who's being payed off? The silence is deafening .. because if you want an example of a monopolized platform, it's the Apple Compatible Platform.

Saucy,

Unless you are going to PROVE that there are payoffs, please lay off the ridiculous accusations...it just sounds dumb.

But also...please explain what the "Apple Compatible Platform" even means?

I still think not including a browser option for customers who purchased Windows is quite user-unfriendly.

It seems that Microsoft's "solution" to satisfy the EU puts their business interests first and not their customers, which I think is wrong-headed.

Lotsa

"It's interesting that you say that, though, because at one point, Microsoft Internet Explorer was the only non-Apple program whose icon was installed by default in the Dock of all new Macs. That was before MS let IE for the Mac languish, and Apple was basically forced to write Safari."

While it's interesting in a creative writing kind of way, it's also completely inaccurate.

Here's what really happened.

Back in the late 1990s when Apple was near bankrupt and their market share had dropped to the point that almost every software company had announced that they were dropping Apple support, Apple bundled Netscape Navigator with their OS.

As part of the rescue deal that Microsoft made to save Apple in 1997, Apple agreed to add IE as a bundled browser for five years. That went with Microsoft agreeing that they would continue producing Office for Mac. That was the key event that finally added some confidence that Apple would survive and that it wasn't suicidal to bother developing for their tiny user base.

During the five years of the agreement, Microsoft developed multiple versions of IE for the Mac supporting Apple's OS from versions 8.1 through 10.3 while Navigator gradually disappeared.

Once the five year agreement expired in 2002, Apple developed their own browser and released Safari 1.0 in 2003. Starting with OS X 10.3 (the first version of Mac OS that came out after Safari was announced), Safari became the default browser. Starting with OS X 10.4, IE was dropped from the Apple distribution and Safari was the only browser available from Apple.

Vista's updater offers IE 8, but does not seem to use IE 7 to check or DL, so theoretically, if I'm correct about this, E users could DL from the updater?

So Mike..

What part of what Lotsa's statement was "creative writing"?

The "languishing" part?!  LOL

Nothing you said other than contradicting the languishing comment differs from what he originally said.

Why would Apple include IE as part of the default installation when MS said they were no longer be developing the browser?

Pingback from  Microsoft documents how Windows 7 E customers can get a browser | Everything Microsoft