Internet Explorer - Ch. 57 - In Memory of Netscape

[MangaDex]

 

[Septem]

Its also super illegal. So there's that.

 

[MGJerry]

Bruh, then people would just switch to either Apple (or Linux) you smart***

Edit: no bad intention behind this comment, my friend said it would be funny to say this

 

[AnacondaHL]

What? LMAO Microsoft already attempted this and had to pay $$$$$ kicking and screaming to not do this

 

[Yanagi]

@Septem Apple kind of does it with their iOS. Essentially all other browsers are the lesser version of Safari redressed.

 

[Septem]

@Yanagi, I had to check on how they get around this in the UK, you can install other browsers like firefox on iOS, just fine. Otherwise they would be in trouble with a ruling that MicroSoft was forced agains some time ago with IE browser.

 

[Kamelpov]

More like post a picture anti-trust law. Explorer tried and failed.

 

[NeoDark]

@Septem
It's just Apple doesn't control most of the mobile market (thus technically not a monopoly in a weird sense) so that's why no one has really gone after them. But yeah what Yanagi said was technically correct. Sure you can install "Firefox" or other browsers on Android but the reality is those "browsers" are all actually Safari Webkit. It's why Yanagi called them a lesser version of Safari because that's what they really are. Just a reskin of Safari. It's not actually Firefox or Chrome. For example for all other versions of Firefox, it is powered by what Firefox calls the Gecko engine. This goes for Windows, Android, etc. But because of Apple's rules even the iOS one is powered by WebKit. It's why you can install the very same add-ons that you would on the Windows version of Firefox on the Android versions but not on iOS. Honestly I feel like the way Apple does it is even worse than what Microsoft did back in the day because at least Microsoft let everyone do their own thing but Apple here forces everyone to be the same and most users aren't even aware of it.

 

[art17]

So, when will IE (edge) will absorb cromium to become the ultimate beast?

 

[Me]

@AnacondaHL: Microsoft never tried actively blocking competing browsers.
They just packed their own in, comfortable in the knowledge that most people don't actually care and just use the browser on their system.
...
Then marketing got involved. That's what broke Internet Explorer, and what keeps Edge down.

 

[Owyn]

Meanwhile Chrome now controls over 90% of PCs

 

[marlleyjwilson]

can't wait the chromium evolution

 

[Dagger]

Firefox and Chromium are the best anyway.

 

[AnacondaHL]

@Me ok, I guess I'll out myself as boomer AF, but I do remember what it felt like to use Windows in the 90s, and the 2001 United Stats vs Microsoft lawsuit, and no, it was more than just "packed their own in". Manufacturers were specifically prohibited from putting any other browser icon on the default desktop than IE. And back then Windows was so integrated with IE that Microsoft actually thought it was a **benefit** to prove in court just how parasitic the browser was.

And finally, the case revealed all the ways Microsoft abused their monopoly power and pressured Netscape to stop developing Navigator, actively withheld the APIs needed to release with Windows 95. The story repeats with Sun Java, Apple, Lotus, Linux, etc. Obviously Windows on the customer-facing side didn't explicitly prohibit the installation and use of the software, but just one step into the background and it was pretty clear that every action taken was to manipulate the situation to be just that.

 

[smashman42]

@marlleyjwilson wonder how they'll frame that in this story - Chrome taking over IE/Edge-chan, or IE/Edge using Chrome's own power against her?

 

[smashman42]

@AnacondaHL it was more the licensing and marketing BS than the OS itself, yeah?

I was a lowly system builder gimp in those days & as I remember it, 95c was just 95b with the USB patch and IE included, other underlying version numbers were identical. We sold to mostly SMEs or government, so they'd generally have their own SOE to install so alternate browsers and the like were kinda not our problem to even think about, and half the govt departments at the time were running 3.11. I didn't even get dial up at home until 98 with its built in interweb sharing was a thing so it was slightly before my time/above my pay grade stuff. Edit: late Gen X if we're outing our ages

 

[AnacondaHL]

@smashman42 no they straight up were shown to have commit antitrust and unlawful monopolization. Back then talking about IE WAS talking about the Windows OS, as one could not function without the other. It officially started with Windows 98, almost directly as a response to Netscape Navigator's sudden rise out of nowhere as a browser competitor. It went beyond marketing, it was technical. You could not uninstall IE and use another browser.

Netscape Navigator died to take down Microsoft, and we thankfully have Firefox today because of that.

 

[Beregorn]

@smashman42
Assuming they will ever adress the fact, it will obviously be the second, since in this dystopian universe IE represents everything good and noble, while Google is the evil incarnated...

 

[smashman42]

@AnacondaHL

Ah, I thought it was about 95 with IE being bundled with version c, 98 makes waaay more sense. Stupid Wiki article I skimmed was talking about 95, unless there was another antitrust case about it as well?

 

[AncientWatcher]

So, anti-trust laws wrecked Microsoft's shitty attempt at monopolization? Good. I wish the government take Microsoft to court again for their bullshit.