By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 24 February 2010
Edit Thread
JerCotter7 said:
Kasz216 said:
JerCotter7 said:
So there was a case because MS gave there IE for free? That is stupid. What about notepad? I can download a better one. What about apple and safari?

Apple Safari isn't considered a monopoly by europe because Macintoshes are unpopular and hardly anybody uses them.

Europe was upset that Microsoft gave away IE for free rather then building a program into windows that also advertised competitors browsers which you can install.

 

Which, even if you do see it as a problem isn't quite the same scale as altering search data.  Search engine nuetrality is really something that should be enforced via law.

I don't see how giving people the choice will change anything. People who don't like IE will continue to not use it and people that rarely use computers will continue to click IE as their browser.

I also don't see altering search data to be that bad. Same kind of thing as IE but I can see why people would get more upset by it. If you had to pay for the search engine then I can see how altering it would be bad. But when it is free to use I don't see what's so bad about it.

The general hope is that instead of just going with IE that people who rarely use computers will make a random choice based on whatever name sounds best.

So instead of having a browser of decent quality that does everything they need they may get a great browser, decent browser or shitty browser based on their preference in names.


As for the search data thing... I think the problem lies largely in four areas.

One, nobody pays for search data.

Two, while nobody pays for it... it's BIG money.

Three, abusing companies aren't always going to be caught by the average consumer, because well they can alter the data that states they are altering the data.

Four, it can become a "protection" rackett.  Want your product to be high in our lists?  Well you should pay us then.