I mentioned this to them several times during Beta on my surveys. But I guess they didn't have time to fix it.

Yeah--I hope Bioware doesn't tank because of this. I do think the people that were responsible for making the decision to rip off WoW should have a performance review, so to say.

Exactly! I was starting to wonder if I was the only one that noticed that SWTOR had much less polish than WoW. I feel if they were going to spend all that money, they shouldn't have just re-invented the wheel, but made it square this time.

I had the same experience. I actually got quite bored before I even got to level 10. I played SWG for a while and I thought it brought a lot more new ideas to the table than SWTOR does. I especially enjoyed the cities, housing, mining, non-combat professions, multiple professions, etc. I liked being an architect during the day, and kicking butt as a Sword Master by night. I missed a lot of that in WoW. I had some hope for SWTOR, but it is just WoW with lasers. But it's actually not as polished WoW. Blizzard has had years to perfect their game. Bioware needed to come to the table with something new and innovative to get my attention. And they failed.

Oh don't be silly. "Default" may mean anything, from the "first on the list" to the "one with bold lettering" to the "one with a fancy 32bit icon." The point is people will choose whatever the convenient one is. How do we decide what the convenient one is?

I did read the article. The EU wants users to be able to choose between internet browsers, and one suggestion was to have a ballot screen. My point is that people can achieve the same effect on their own. Windows does not stop anyone from installing a competing internet browser.

How the heck is a ballot going to tell anyone anything? Whatever the default is is what will be selected most of the time. Windows includes an internet browser so you can go figure out what internet browser you want by reading reviews or whatnot. If you don't know how to do that, you don't care about doing that, and IE is good enough for you.

No one is qualified to write those pros and cons. Everybody will have a bias. If Microsoft writes it, there's an obvious bias. If the EU writes it, there's an obvious bias towards ignorance.

If anyone writes it at all, someone will be able to take fault with it. One company or the other will wonder why then ended up getting the pros and cons they did.

Windows ships with an internet browser that lets any user download the internet browser they choose. They can read the reviews they want, from sources they trust. Nothing in Windows stops users from doing this. IE doesn't crash when you go to download Firefox.

With changing software, pros and cons may shift over time. Does Microsoft have to update its installer? There is no way the EU can pull this off and make any sense at the same time.

"Microsoft will be obliged to design Windows in a way that allows users "to choose which competing web browser(s) instead of, or in addition to, Internet Explorer they want to install and which one they want to have as default..." What part of Windows doesn't allow users to choose a competing web browser? They even include a web browser so you can go and download the competing web browsers. How nice is that.

Most people will not notice a difference between any of the internets.