[Mortikus]

More like 79% of internet users are using IE in one of its forms. This is down from 94% in early 2004.
You also have to understand, as all statistics these numbers can be misleading because of the concept one may think of when considering who the users are. There are millions of business computers active at any given moment, and 99% (I'm guessing) of those are using IE with the exception of some computer guru's that have administrative rights on their work computers and love their 'non-IE' browsers.

www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stattrends.htm

Mort

[macosxp]

I think you make a very good point. The same thing goes with Mac OS X, you know, as well. From all the blog sitemeter stats I've seen around, the Mac market share is like 12 percent, not 6 percent. According to ChagneWave, about a third of consumers now intend to buy macs, while only about 7 percent of businesses do. (Both these numbers are way up from a couple years ago, though.)

[noise]

That's just misinformation. Depending on who you ask, Firefox has about 15% market share as of October 2007 (see wikipedia). Irrespective, it's not 70%.

[CMiner]

Macosxp makes a good point: An uninstall option for IE would be great. It would leave a default browser that is ready to go as soon as Windows is loaded and turned on (Which is what 70% of users want, and what 100% of users need), thereby able to surf the web or download an alternate browser as they see fit. The uninstall option would be great for those who didn't want to use IE anymore. However, as others have noted, a lot of windows functionality is tied to IE. I liken complaints about this to complaining that a car company should be sued because the function of the car is tied to that models gear shift or something. The car (or operating system and software) was built with functionality depending on certain constants. That's the way all software development works. If you pull out a constant, you lose some functionality.

Also, in regards to all these statistics being thrown around (Including my own), I offer this quote: "69% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[ashwinipn]

I don't say whether there should be an integration of web browser in OS or not. But I am in favor of users' choice. The choice of web browser does not become a problem till Windows XP's era, although because of Microsoft not following industry standards, one ends up using extension/add-on of IE tab into other browsers like Firefox. But recently I have experienced problems in Windows Vista. I use Firefox, Opera, Safari, etc. browsers for different purposes with Firefox as a default browser. Ideally, when I click on a link or try updating any software, Firefox should open. But it does not happen and IE opens up. This is clearly violation of laws that are related to fair competition and trade practices. In addition, I use iTunes as default for music files. But any click on the link of a music file opens windows media player. Although the player is good, but this deprives me from using a program I want. This kind of practices should be checked and user should have the right of selection.

[macosxp]

You mean there isn't the "Program access and defaults" you find in Windows XP and other operating systems which determines what links open, etc? What about having movie files open in iTuens? Aren't you able to select something like "Always open with..." like in XP? If not, that is VERY wrong.

[nobodymk2]

I don't like suits where they claim Microsoft is "stifling competition by tying IE to Windows" How are we supposed to download another browser without a browser to begin with? I don't understand. However, I do agree with "hindering interoperability by not following accepted standards with IE", as IE 6 didn't even support semitransparent pixels on .png images. Although there is NO W3C standard for Transparency, since when did IE follow W3C standards? I'm tired of "IE only" and THAT should be a violation of anti-trust law. To all other comment posters: You seem to like "IE Only" or it doesn't bother you. Especially when someone or something official, like Dell or ATI requires you to use IE to get your driver. I once deleted IE from my system.

[Somnulus]

That's funny, because I had the same exact problems with my site trying to run it on my Ubuntu laptop using Opera as I did in Windows with Opera.
FireFox
performed perfectly in both OSs, just as expected... particularly as it is
installed with Ubuntu.

Opera is not. That should tell you something
right there. Why is that? What OS installs Opera by default? I know that the Nintendo DS and the Wii use it, but other than that?

I think it is hilarious that you state that Opera's
functionality is far above IE and FireFox and yet, the latter browsers both performed
exactly as required, with FireFox handling my site perfectly in both
Windows and Ubuntu, whereas Opera failed.

I could understand
your rationale about Microsoft's source code if you were only referring
to IE working properly; but what exactly is Opera's excuse when FireFox
performs properly as well? That FireFox is actually part of Microsoft?

Or
is the actual reason that FireFox handled my site properly in two separate OSs and Opera did not was because FireFox is actually a superior browser?

Apparently I'm not the only one who thinks so, as Opera is the fourth most popular web browser for PCs after IE, FireFox and Safari.

Who knows, perhaps I just got the most bugged version of Opera that has ever been produced.

I just know that singular week-long negative experience trying to get my site working with Opera was enough for me to decide not to make any further purposeful attempts to consider it for future specific multi-browser development. If it works with Opera, it works. If it doesn't, it doesn't.

[rkinne01]

Microsoft can't win here, at all! Lets say that Opera wins this suit..now Vista has to ship with 2 browsers? Would that mean that MS would have to include mutiple media players? How many DVD authoring suites would they have to include? People complain now that the MS systems contain too much bloatware, what happens when they are forced to include all this extra content?

Opera needs to do a better job of marketing its product, plain and simple. I would also tell Opera(awful name by the way), to consider using MS standards! Say what you will about IE but it works, it may not be the most innovative or prettiest but it takes you where you need to go.

[Drumstix42]

If the average user doesn't know that they can freely download another browser, how will they ever even get to the internet without Internet Explorer being bundled with the OS?

[nobodymk2]

If you ever coded for the web, it's very annoying to have two separate standards: one IE standard, and one W3C standard. It's also annoying, but most users don't notice, as 55% use IE 6 or IE 7 according to the W3C statistics
W3C Browser Statistics to see "IE only" site functionality almost everywhere. I don't care what browser you include with your software, as long as it doesn't block me from anything (client side net neutrality isn't really an issue) I could download another one. What's more important in this case is that the browser doesn't conform to W3C standards, forcing web developers to code towards it, and forcing users to use it.

Then again the W3C seems to be lacking on standards. Where's our vector standard? (.svg) Where's our "lossless" compressed animated file with transparency and semi-transparent pixels? (.mng, which are animated .png images) Are browsers supposed to support semi-transparent pixels (IE seems not to) in .png images? Are browsers supposed to support transparency?

And OS-support, why should any site be only for one OS? Why shouldn't Mac users be able to print shipping labels from the USPS website, which happens to be a government agency? It sickens me that even US government agencies are forced to code towards Windows and IE.

[ashwinipn]

As I told, till Win XP it works. But when it comes to Windows Vista it does not. For example, If I open Firefox on my own and not by clicking on a link (which subsequently opens IE), and use the firefox to download an audio file, say voice mail to listen to,... Firefox window of download has options of "open with" and "save to disk". In "open with" option, I see iTunes as default, but the audio file subsequently opens up with the Windows Media Player. Otherwise, both default programs (Firefox and iTunes) work fine when I start them.

Another thing, when I use IE tab extension in Firefox for the sites that are not fully compatible with Firefox, I end up leaving myself completely unsafe as the security features of Firefox does not work when using extension as it simply calls internetexplorer.exe from Program files and opens it in Firefox browser. I came to know about this when I was trying some transaction with a secured site. The site refused the transaction due to security reasons.

[lithium]

this does level the playing field. but how can they claim this is for the consumer? according to this opera wants either IE to not be packaged with windows in which case it will be extremely difficult to get on the net or the other option is 'alternatives' packaged with windows.
This means either that windows system requirements will become 400GB of hard disk space (everyone will want their alternatives packaged) or we will now have so many options in the windows installer that it will be even more of a pain in the butt to install. Either of these including 'alternatives' with windows mean that the installer now has about 15 dvd's to install windows... I'm not exactly a fan of windows. I use xp to play online games but thats it. Everything else i use Ubuntu for and i must say Vista is just a pain. But even i can see that opera is being completely stupid how can they claim in any way shape or form that this is for the consumers??? I dont mean any offence to opera but all i can make of this is them going out of there way to make it more difficult for consumers and trying to make things more difficult for microsoft. (microsoft is already going to have enough difficulties with vista give them a break ::8}) )

[bigeyes150]

I agree with CMiner its not hard to get or use another browser onto microsoft window I'm also reading this articles using firefox

[rgreen4]

Actually, I think Opera's problem is not with IE, but with Firefox. I someone is looking for an alternative to IE, the first name to up is Firefox which fills that bill quickly, efficiently and easily. With Firefox, who needs or wants Opera.

Besides, If HP, Dell, or anybody else in the business wanted to put an alternative on the machines, there is nothing to prevent them from doing so, but I don't think we will see it, as no one wants more crap on the machines. I would keep Firefox and ditch Opera. I use both Firefox and IE7. IE7 for the internet sites and downloading files, and Firefox for general browsing.