I would argue that it is in the consumer's interest to have a browser operate seamlessly as part of the system - for those consumers who use browsers. But a fully integrated browser should not be available solely to users of the Internet Explorer. Microsoft should make available its code to Netscape or any other browser developer so that the browser can be incorporated into the system.
Art, why stop there? Why not require that the windowing system be a component that other vendors can swap in? Or the file system? And shouldn't a word processor be seamlessly integrated with the OS? And a spreadsheet? Shouldn't every application be seamlessly integrated?
Integration of the browser was a natural step in the evolution of a sophisticated consumer OS like Windows. You use an OS to open up and look at files 'n' stuff, and the "'n' stuff" part nowadays includes HTML documents (and it's starting to include listening to MP3s, watching ripped DVDs converted to VCDs, and so on). For a while, Netscape filled this need -- they made an HTML viewer, but it didn't really make any sense to have to open an application just to view something as ubiquitous as a web page.
Companies like Netscape go out of business all the time. They build cool new features that the current system software doesn't have yet and they make some money. But then the next version of the OS comes out and it includes the feature. Either the company had better come up with a second trick, or it's done for.
I don't think you and I totally disagree, but I have never understood why people focus on MSFT's integration of the browser, as if a browser were something special. I bet if you ask your average computer user, he or she has NO IDEA what browser he or she is using (I've even heard a person say she had Windows 97 on her Macintosh!). But that's how it should be. Looking at a web page is just like clicking on a folder and seeing what's inside. Who cares whether you're running Netscape, IE, Opera, or Lynx? |
