Ah, we get to "what do words mean" thing now? Fine, how about telling me how having a system library perform things is less secure design than having every application implement things themselves? I thought this "integration" was what bugged you about IE? Are you also annoyed about "integration" of zlib into linux, and how it made unmeasurable amount of applications insecure when a hole was found? Are you perhaps annoyed about how opengl is "integrated" into systems, too? I suspect not. Why only IE?
Regarding my quick stab, I was referring to "why not rely on the open source model and give everybody the benefit of the "best" way to do something" and how it completely ignores the issue of libraries. Once applications is written against a library, it needs a rewrite to work against a new solution if a "better" one comes around. Also, availability of an implementation to link/work against doesn't require open source in any way. Any advantages that opensource have are also available to proprietary solutions, as long as you have right to link against them. Microsoft is providing apis which are good, and people are free to use them or free to use "open" alternatives. I recall this wasn't the first time you've purposedly narrowed your views to favor your point of view, while ignoring a broader view. I might be guilty of the same too in some posts though, not sure. It just annoyed me quite a bit here as we seem to be talking about completely different things which only touch each other slightly.