If you had actually read Greg’s post, you would know that the typo comes from the BBC’s original report: “Microsoft ships IE7 without browser”

And if you actually read this blog with any regularity, you would know that Greg has a great deal of technical knowledge when it comes to personal computers. Would you care to make a relevant comment next time?

I like the fact that Ubuntu comes with Firefox as the default browser, but I also make use of Epiphany, the default browser for Gnome. The Safari version for Windows works under wine if you jump through a few extra hoops during install.

I’m still waiting to see a really great rendering engine. I do like Safari’s support of more CSS3. Upcoming Firefox releases promise more of this, but it still lags behind.

Also, Safari’s HTML renderer (which by the way is based off of KHTML, KDE / Konqueror’s open-source renderer) is not tied into the operating system the way that IE’s is. Microsoft made a design choice to reuse the HTML renderer for a ton of other features like their Windows Explorer. While that’s a valid choice, it’s technically tying the core of their browser to the OS so that the browser itself is essentially a way to store bookmarks and load add-ons on top of the existing OS. This is anticompetitive by its very nature, because even if you rid yourself of the browser, the rendering engine (and all its flaws) is still part of the core of the OS. Tangentially, tying the OS to the rendering engine gives the rendering engine far more ability to compromise your system than it, by rights, ever should. This is the real reason most spyware targets Windows vectors — integration is putting all your eggs in one basket so someone with a hammer can more easily smash all the eggs at once.

I love when bloggers who don’t know a mouse from their own ass write about technology matters. The euro version of windows7 will ship without the IE8 BROWSER. The underlying rendering engine that is intergrated into windows explorer is still there.

Also, they might get around the whole “pre-bundled” thing by including the installer cabs on the Windows install, but not installing it explicitly until you choose the defaults in the opening screen. In fact, it might just give you the options between “install IE 8” and “don’t install a web browser”, unless the OEM includes installs for Firefox or co-branded proprietary OEM nonsense.

That would still require a network connection.

I contend that they should go all the way, rip off Ubuntu’s biggest advantage, and ship Windows with nothing but a repository manager; and that repository manager include the ability to download a number of common alternatives off the bat. Maintain an “official Windows Web Installer” where anyone can submit applications to meet their “rigorous” standards before they let the application into their official repository.

It’s hard to tell from the article if this is what the ruling does, and if it doesn’t do this why not. But I get the feeling that MS is going to sell boxed versions without a browser than use that somewhat absurd scenario to claim that the EU is making them ship a broken OS.