Microsoft plans to boot Chrome, Mozilla off of Windows tablets

Microsoft plans to boot Chrome, Mozilla off of Windows tablets
Remember Google’s announcement two months ago that it would be building a Metro-friendly version of Chrome for Windows 8 tablets? Mozilla, creator of the popular Firefox browser, made similar plans, but it turns out that Microsoft doesn’t care much for the idea. While anyone can make a browser that will run on Windows 8 for PCs (that will be the split-personality version that has both a Metro and a more traditional desktop UI), it turns out that Microsoft isn’t making the APIs available that would be needed to make a browser for Windows RT, the version that will run on tablets.

The move creates a bit of cognitive dissonance, since Microsoft was charged with anti-competitive violations by the Department of Justice specifically over their attempt to lock Windows customers into Internet Explorer by giving it away for free on every PC (for those of you who don’t remember, that’s what helped to kill Netscape, whose demise helped spur the advent of Mozilla’s Firefox).

Of course Microsoft controlled more than 90% of the PC market at the time, while Windows 7 has less than 2% of the smartphone market in the U.S., and they’ll have no serious presence in tablets until the launch of Windows RT later this year. Still, if Microsoft finds success as the market shifts away from PCs to mobile devices, they could potentially lock a lot of people into Internet Explorer, a feat they have not been able to accomplish the last few years as their once-commanding market position has been eroded by competing browsers.

Google and Mozilla have both called foul. They won't be the only ones complaining for long - it turns out that Microsoft won't be allowing competing media players on their tablets either. Perhaps one or several of the affected companies will file a grievance with the DoJ, but until such time as Windows 8 tablets start to win significant market share, we doubt we'll see much action from the government. Still, it’s an interesting about-face from Microsoft's PC days – it appears their tablets will live in even more of a walled garden than Apple’s iPad.

source: ZDNet via 9to5Google



1. Droid4Life unregistered

That is ridiculous. I am using Chrome to read this post. This will last until Microsoft bans Safari and Apple sues them.

28. dirtydirty00

Posts: 428; Member since: Jan 21, 2011

ive never used safari in my life besides the few unfortunate times ive had to deal with using a macintosh. why on earth would i want to use safari?

34. Whateverman

Posts: 3295; Member since: May 17, 2009

To be fair, Safari is a great browser. But then came Chrome and it just kicked the crap out of it. I haven't used Safari on my Mac at all since downloading Chrome almost a year ago.

43. blinkdagger

Posts: 81; Member since: May 04, 2012

well too bad, google chrome going to shut the door to mac os x.

46. blinkdagger

Posts: 81; Member since: May 04, 2012

forgot to mention, only 10.5(leopard)

88. Whateverman

Posts: 3295; Member since: May 17, 2009

I'm running 10.6 so I'm good.

110. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

They're not offering it for anything pre-10.6 because of the security holes

117. akshaye.shenoi

Posts: 24; Member since: Apr 16, 2012

Safari is a great browser. So is chrome. But on a Mac, Safari makes the most of the multitouch gestures on the trackpad and the experience is just too great. Zooming in is just like how you would zoom in on your smartphone, the pinch gesture. Swiping through pages just using two fingers is awesome too. There are many more features. Don't hate a comment now just coz its 'made by Apple'.

93. shayan

Posts: 159; Member since: Sep 09, 2010

actually thats ridiculous because the only thing a windows tablet can offer now, is the applications. not small apps. windows is familiar for developers and it shouldent be hard making your application work with windows RT. but if microsoft is stupid enough to kick the compitition out, the will never be able to compete with iOS and android in tablet world...

97. enigmatikexile

Posts: 1; Member since: May 11, 2012

This article isn't telling the whole story properly. Windows RT will allow Firefox and Chrome to run in the Metro instance with all required APIs. Mozilla and Google are referring to not being able to create their programs in the Desktop instance WITHIN WinRT. These are two separate things. NOBODY has been given the rights to tinker with the Desktop instance on WinRT. But there's absolutely nothing stopping them from developing for the platform within the Metro instance, which seems to be the main purpose of WinRT anyway. Moreover, the anti-competitive argument doesn't stand when Microsoft doesn't hold any marketshare in the domain. This whole ordeal is a non-issue.

109. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

What an excellent comment!

107. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

I didn't even know Safari was available for non-apple stuff. Then again, I'd never think anyone would want to install it on anything, since it's such an awful browser with relatively gaping security holes. IE9/10, Firefox, Chrome, or Opera are just fine (for computers)

2. legospace9876 unregistered

Windows RT. No Windows 8 RT.

3. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

Welp, never using a Windows 8 tablet then. Explorer's suck streak extends almost to the ten year mark now.

59. metoyou

Posts: 279; Member since: Oct 19, 2011

Bing anyone?:)

118. akshaye.shenoi

Posts: 24; Member since: Apr 16, 2012

Only Bing i know is Chandler Bing. :P

108. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

@Sniggly have you tried it recently? Especially IE10? I've found it to be faster than Firefox and Chrome (I was surprised at that), more secure than those two and Opera, and the other functionality out of the box it brings is a welcome change to all the add-ons I had to put onto Firefox to make it do what I wanted

4. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009

Sweet companies to to fight back against Google's anti competitive practices.

5. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

You have got to be s**tting me. The whole article is about Microsoft being anti competitive, and somehow you translated that into Google being anti competitive? Taco, I mean this very sincerely. I'm not even making fun of you or trying to be a jerk. You need, need, NEED to get your reading comprehension tested.

9. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009

Windows has none of the tablet market so they can block stuff if they want. Read up on google fudging search results. Also Google gives away products for free which is also anti competitive. It's called predatory pricing. How can Tom Tom compete with that for example. I'm sick of Google.

12. troybuilt

Posts: 155; Member since: Dec 16, 2011

HAHA. You'd rather pay for the services instead of getting the same quality for free? You're the first person to say this in American History.

24. poojaroy

Posts: 52; Member since: Apr 29, 2012

haaaaa very right ,he s an ass lol

81. InspectorGadget80 unregistered

you forget to add ass hole poojaroy.

14. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

Are you really, truly, pissed off at Google for creating great services and giving them away for free? That's not anti competitive. That's ultra competitive. Anti competitive is manipulating patent and copyright laws all the time to get anyone who could possibly interfere with your market position, branding, etc. banned from the market. Oh wait, that's what APPLE does. Imagine that.

16. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009

It's called predatory pricing. They undercut the competition and drive them out of business.

20. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

"In business and economics, predatory pricing is the practice of selling a product or service at a very low price, intending to drive competitors out of the market, or create barriers to entry for potential new competitors. If competitors or potential competitors cannot sustain equal or lower prices without losing money, they go out of business or choose not to enter the business. The predatory merchant then has fewer competitors or is even a de facto monopoly, and hypothetically could then raise prices above what the market would otherwise bear." The kicker is at the end; it's only predatory pricing if the intent is to kill competition and create a monopoly so the company can then raise prices to the point of gouging. However, when has Google ever, EVER done that? They've dominated search for a decade, and it's still free. Their ENTIRE BUSINESS MODEL is to offer as much as they can for free and make money off selling ads instead. To complete the definition of predatory pricing, as you put it, would kill their entire business and they would implode. Today is just not a good day for you, Taco.

40. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009 Bottin Cartographes first filed a complaint in 2009, and argued that Google was damaging its business by running Maps at a loss until it controlled the market. "Google is ruining the market, they offer something that costs them. They want to crowd out the competition to gain a monopoly position in targeted internet advertising." That's Google for you with the Orwellian gimmick "Don't be evil"

48. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

That's the claim by a company suing Google, of course they're going to dress it up as predatory. Unfortunately, they don't understand Google's business model. If anything, one can accuse Google of simply being too good at what it does.

27. poojaroy

Posts: 52; Member since: Apr 29, 2012

taco u r dum ass,i think something is missing frm ur mind hmm i guess ...brain lol

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.