Support NeoGAF

[DaGwaphics]

They did not have.
They were forced to launch a EU exclusive version of Windows XP with these options.
Late they where forced to change in US too.

Just to be clear it is not the default app to open HTML files but the default option as browser in the system.

You could choose your own default browser in Windows 98, Start > Settings > Folder Options > File Types > Html

Obviously when you booted a clean system with just IE installed IE was the default, but you always had the freedom to change that when an alternative was installed. OEMs weren't allowed to preset this to something else, the user had to do it, which regulators understandably took issue with.

 

[Mithos]

How the hell is the average person supposed to download chrome without IE?


A Computer sold without a bowser is a brick to 99% of people

They did not strip the browser out of the OS, they just couldn't decide for you that IE should be the default browser.
So during the time they were force to (2009-2014)

A popup were shown and you could pick which browser you wanted to install and use as the default.

 

[ethomaz]

You could choose your own default browser in Windows 98, Start > Settings > Folder Options > File Types > Html

Obviously when you booted a clean system with just IE installed IE was the default, but you always had the freedom to change that when an alternative was installed. OEMs weren't allowed to preset this to something else, the user had to do it, which regulators understandably took issue with.

That is the default app to open a file.

The Windows system used the IE as default... that changed in XP due regulations in EU and US.
You did not have the freedon.

 

[DaGwaphics]

That is the default app to open a file.

The Windows system used the IE as default... that changed in a updated in XP due regulations in EU and US.
You did not have the freedon.

Setting the app that opens when a hyperlink is clicked basically sets the default browser. Are you talking about system apps, like the help files? What other situation besides opening a hyperlink are you using the browser without opening it first?

 

[ethomaz]

Setting the app that opens when a hyperlink is clicked basically sets the default browser. Are you talking about system apps, like the help files? What other situation besides opening a hyperlink are you using the browser without opening it first?

Nope... it just set the app that will open a file that type of tile (html, htm, etc).

For link it will always open Internet Explorer on Windows 98... there is no option to change that... you have to copy/past the link to open in another browser.

Edit - XP had the option... windows 98 not.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Nope... it just set the app that will open a file that type of tile (html, htm, etc).

For link it will always open Internet Explorer on XP at launch... same for Windows 98... there is no option to change that... you have to copy/past the link to open in another browser.

Loading a copy of 98 in a VM as we speak to test. LOL

 

[ethomaz]

Loading a copy of 98 in a VM as we speak to test. LOL

It is like I said lol
I used Windows 98 when the antitrust started.... and I used Netscape.
You are just confusion options.

Edit

This options (and not just choose the app to open a extension) didn't exists before Windows XP.
MS was forced to add it to Browswer, Media Player and Email.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Seems like a browser is an extremely important program on a computer, not having one would stop you from having the ability to download a different one. I'm glad the US didn't implement some weird policy where MS had to provide a hand up to their competition like the EU did, that was extreme.

It prevents monopoly abuse.

I still remember when the web was built for ie and anyone else would have a bar web experience. That had to end. IE wasn’t superior, it was just defaulted on consumers.

 

[namekuseijin]

have both lost already?

 

[ethomaz]

have both lost already?

Well there more two weeks I believe for that Trial phase.

 

[DaGwaphics]

It is like I said lol
I used Windows 98 when the antitrust started.... and I used Netscape.
You are just confusion options.

Edit

This options (and not just choose the app to open a extension) didn't exists before Windows XP.
MS was forced to add it to Browswer, Media Player and Email.

When I figure out how to capture a video of this VM screen, I've got something to show you. LOL

 

[ethomaz]

When I figure out how to capture a video of this VM screen, I've got something to show you. LOL

You just record the screen of the host.

 

[DaGwaphics]

You just record the screen of the host.

Anyone know a public website offhand that doesn't require https (Netscape doesn't support current protocols correctly)? I was using a personal one, but I don't want to post that. LOL

Edit: Nevermind, http://neverssl.com/ it is.

 

[ethomaz]

Anyone know a public website offhand that doesn't require https (Netscape doesn't support current protocols correctly)? I was using a personal one, but I don't want to post that. LOL

I believe it is not Netscape doesn't support https but the crypto used have incompatibilities.
You can try to turn off Enable TLS.

 

[DaGwaphics]

I believe it is not Netscape doesn't support https but the crypto used have incompatibilities.
You can try to turn off Enable TLS.

I just went with neverssl. I tried all the TLS options available, most websites limit to just TLS 1.2 and 1.3. Those just aren't supported on Win98 and Netscape, not sure if it's an OS issue or the browser itself. The browser is older than TLS 1.2, so I figure it just doesn't know how to handle that.

 

[DaGwaphics]

LOL I did forget that the default browser was based on a system registry setting. All the browsers, including IE, had built in scripts to set this for themselves. This version of Netscape is much newer than the OS, I might try with an older version later. Maybe Netscape forgot the "make default" hook in an early version and that is what gave you trouble back in the day.

 

[ethomaz]

LOL I did forget that the default browser was based on a system registry setting. All the browsers, including IE, had built in scripts to set this for themselves. This version of Netscape is much newer than the OS, I might try with an older version later. Maybe Netscape forgot the "make default" hook in an early version and that is what gave you trouble back in the day.

Via register you can change it indeed.

I did a bit more research and the option to change the defults Apps was introduced in Windows XP after the lawsuit started.

 

[IntentionalPun]

Via register you can change it indeed.

That's how literally all windows settings back then (and most now) are changed. Either by hand, or by a UI.

 

[ethomaz]

That's how literally all windows settings back then (and most now) are changed. Either by hand, or by a UI.

The difference is... you didn't have a UI to do that.
Today you have.

Deal with register is just for advanced users.
That was the point of the lawsite between MS and Netscape... EU made MS even put a big opening page in IE that allowed both download and set to default the browser you wanted.

In late versions of Windows they added the option to change the Default Browser, Medica player and Email.

There were another issue... you couldn't uninstall the IE... MS said it was used internally by the Core of the Windows so they reached a deal with EU to have a Hideen option (all links and references for IE become hidden but the IE is there internally).

 

[reksveks]

We are starting day 5 as we ended day 4, talking about what is a game

 

[IntentionalPun]

The difference is... you didn't have a UI to do that.
Today you have.

Deal with register is just for advanced users.
That was the point of the lawsite between MS and Netscape... EU made MS even put a big opening page in IE that allowed both download and set to default the browser you wanted.

In late versions of Windows they added the option to change the Default Browser, Medica player and Email.

Netscape, like any Windows software, could have made that UI..and they did.

It was never not possible.

The UI was about what was the default set during installation; MS was forced to have the installs of other browsers ready, and have that UI w/ them in random order for the user to select.

Before that, it was never impossible to set default browser.. and browsers gave you the option when you launched them.

 

[ethomaz]

Netscape, like any Windows software, could have made that UI..and they did.

It was never not possible.

So the lawsuit was faked lol.

 

[IntentionalPun]

So the lawsuit was faked lol.

No, you just don't understand what it was about.

Read my edit.

It was about what the default was when you installed windows, not about it being impossible to change the default after.

 

[ethomaz]

We are starting day 5 as we ended day 4, talking about what is a game

It is because there are differences.

A Game Store App will sells games that are different executable that Apple can't control.
A Game like Roblox (or Dreams, LittleBigPlane, Minecract) sells a single game executable and people created content via scripts that run over that executable.

The new added content in these games can't malicious harm the iOS but games brought via another store can... because it is an idependent game.

Epic wants to say that the games created on Dreams for example is like standalone games but they are not.... games on Dreams are limited and executed inside it own Sandbox.... you can't acess the actual hardware/OS directly.

 

[ethomaz]

BTW I agree with Apple.

Running community games inside a Sandbox is not like running community games direct on iOS.
The second case needs Apple review while the first one just the Sandbox review.

If you allow another Store in their selling games in their system without reviewing all these games then it is a big security opening.

But some guys will try to say but I can install anything i wanted in my device... well not in a closed system... you can in open systems... and that is why a lot of users choose iOS over Android.

 

[reksveks]

It is because there are differences.

A Game Store App will sells games that are different executable that Apple can't control.
A Game like Roblox (or Dreams, LittleBigPlane, Minecract) sells a single game executable and people created content via scripts that run over that executable.

The new added content in these games can't malicious harm the iOS but games brought via another store can... because it is an idependent game.

Epic wants to say that the games created on Dreams for example is like standalone games but they are not.... games on Dreams are limited and executed inside it own Sandbox.... you can't acess the actual hardware/OS directly.

But why is there a problem with remote streaming apps?

 

[ethomaz]

But why is there a problem with remote streaming apps?

That is another review category I believe... they didn't talk about that.

 

[reksveks]

That is another review category I believe... they didn't talk about that.

Think its that rule that's mostly likely to get to 'nuked' if anything out of this case.

 

[ethomaz]

 

[ethomaz]

Think its that review category that's mostly likely to get to nuked

Yeap that is one the most related with users that go on forums like GAF.
But I believe that is a MS vs Apple things and it won't be discussed in a Epic vs Apple lawsuit.

If Epic had a stream service peharps.

 

[ethomaz]

 

[ethomaz]

BAN! That is how they banned Fortnite.



More rejections.






Ohhh they do binary analysis with specialized tools and manual analisis (the reviewers using the app).

 

[ethomaz]

 

[ethomaz]

I really wanted to see the Judge asking how is the EGS review process lol

 

[reksveks]

Yeap that is one the most related with users that go on forums like GAF.
But I believe that is a MS vs Apple things and it won't be discussed in a Epic vs Apple lawsuit.

It was raised in the Microsoft expert testimony already I think (last 4 days has been a storm) just to show the arbitrary nature of the rules and she mentioned Apple Arcade as well.

Definitely was, cause they were talking about web apps vs native app.

 

[DaGwaphics]

But why is there a problem with remote streaming apps?

I think the remote streaming apps violate Apple's billing practices, in their opinion. Say Epic allowed Fortnite on there and it is streaming to an iPhone while running on an Xbox in a DC somewhere. I'd assume that MTX in that scenario would be running through Xbox and not Apple, which they have a problem with. That definitely is a grayer area, since they allow the streaming of individual shows on Netflix even when Apple sells those shows as individual episodes. But, I guess there is no ability for a Netflix user to purchase specific content from Netflix, so that is their distinction.

 

[IntentionalPun]

But why is there a problem with remote streaming apps?

Because it cuts into the largest portion of Apple's revenue, selling games and MTX.

Which is exactly the goal of those creating streaming services.

 

[reksveks]

Because it cuts into the largest portion of Apple's revenue, selling games and MTX.

Which is exactly the goal of those creating streaming services.

I know that but meant on a user safety/experience level, trying to figure out what excuse apple has.

 

[ethomaz]

We entered in the weird domain of the weird apps that got approved by human mistakes lol

 

[IntentionalPun]

I know that but meant on a user safety/experience level, trying to figure out what excuse apple has.

I think they only argument is the content isn’t reviewed to fit their guidelines.

But we all know what it’s about.

 

[reksveks]

The gift that keeps giving.

Would be funny in a way if this takes down Roblox. Not for the hard working employees.

 

[Edgelord79]

Lets see what happens

Lol Apple.

 

[ethomaz]

The gift that keeps giving.

Would be funny in a way if this takes down Roblox. Not for the hard working employees.

I explained early the different between Roblox game and a Game Store for Apple.

Roblox experiences are inside the Roblox sandbox... it is just like Dreams or LittleBigPlanet.
A Game Store will add actual game runtimes to iOS without Apple review.

 

[ethomaz]

A break.
It now in the Apple turn to question the Epic Store.

And yes there is some recent dirt being washed like the Epic x uPlay issue.

 

[LordBlodgett]

I think the remote streaming apps violate Apple's billing practices, in their opinion. Say Epic allowed Fortnite on there and it is streaming to an iPhone while running on an Xbox in a DC somewhere. I'd assume that MTX in that scenario would be running through Xbox and not Apple, which they have a problem with. That definitely is a grayer area, since they allow the streaming of individual shows on Netflix even when Apple sells those shows as individual episodes. But, I guess there is no ability for a Netflix user to purchase specific content from Netflix, so that is their distinction.

Because it cuts into the largest portion of Apple's revenue, selling games and MTX.

Which is exactly the goal of those creating streaming services.

The problem Apple is going to run into is that they have been picking or choosing which categories and apps are allowed to violate their billing practices. I can, for example, buy or rent movies and TV shows from within my Amazon Prime app, but with Vudu I cannot buy or rent in the app, just watch anything I own or rented from their website. I can use any of the streaming apps (Netflix, Hulu, HBO, etc) without any review from Apple. For the gaming category streaming is a no-go except for Apple Arcade, and no games are allowed to offer purchases or rentals directly in the app. It is this type of gatekeeping of specific types of content that will continue to give Apple a hard time in this case, and likely in the EU ant-trust decision as well

 

[IntentionalPun]

The problem Apple is going to run into is that they have been picking or choosing which categories and apps are allowed to violate their billing practices. I can, for example, buy or rent movies and TV shows from within my Amazon Prime app, but with Vudu I cannot buy or rent in the app, just watch anything I own or rented from their website. I can use any of the streaming apps (Netflix, Hulu, HBO, etc) without any review from Apple. For the gaming category streaming is a no-go except for Apple Arcade, and no games are allowed to offer purchases or rentals directly in the app. It is this type of gatekeeping of specific types of content that will continue to give Apple a hard time in this case, and likely in the EU ant-trust decision as well

Sure; it's a bunch of BS. The real reason is money.

 

[DaGwaphics]

The problem Apple is going to run into is that they have been picking or choosing which categories and apps are allowed to violate their billing practices. I can, for example, buy or rent movies and TV shows from within my Amazon Prime app, but with Vudu I cannot buy or rent in the app, just watch anything I own or rented from their website. I can use any of the streaming apps (Netflix, Hulu, HBO, etc) without any review from Apple. For the gaming category streaming is a no-go except for Apple Arcade, and no games are allowed to offer purchases or rentals directly in the app. It is this type of gatekeeping of specific types of content that will continue to give Apple a hard time in this case, and likely in the EU ant-trust decision as well

It will be interesting to see what kind of a case Spotify can bring specifically. They claim that Apple has been treating them poorly since they dropped the option to allow premium signups from within the app. I wonder what kind of examples/evidence they have of that?

 

[ShinraMiddleMananger]

Wheel of Fortune before and after
Tim
Sweeny
Todd

It's coming

 

[reksveks]

It will be interesting to see what kind of a case Spotify can bring specifically. They claim that Apple has been treating them poorly since they dropped the option to allow premium signups from within the app. I wonder what kind of examples/evidence they have of that?

The EU have latched to the two main ones
- too high a fee
- the fact some streaming service can't mention that you can sign up outside the app

Press corner

Highlights, press releases and speeches

ec.europa.eu

Probably will mention homepod support

 

[DaGwaphics]

The EU have latched to the two main ones
- too high a fee
- the fact some streaming service can't mention that you can sign up outside the app

Press corner

Highlights, press releases and speeches

ec.europa.eu

Probably will mention homepod support

Any rulings directly regarding the % of the fees or ability for vendors to dodge the fees/side step the gate would be extremely problematic to a lot of industries. Console gaming being the obvious one, but I can see the security monitoring market being smacked good as well.

If the end result is more about them being forced to apply rules more consistently etc, that wouldn't shake things up so bad.