Perhaps the next time Brad Smith heads to Brussels, it will be for a vacation.
After years of wrangling with Microsoft, the European Commission announced an accord with the software giant Wednesday on several fronts that seems poised to put an end to its antitrust concerns with Redmond.
Brad Smith
(Credit: Microsoft)In the wake of the announcement, I spoke to Smith, Microsoft's general counsel, about the decision, what it means for the future of Windows, and whether the company sees its spot on the antitrust hot seat now being taken up by other companies, including Google.
Here's an edited transcript of our conversation:
Q: Is this really it as far as Europe is concerned?
Smith: This is definitely a major milestone for Microsoft. Today's announcement reflects a broad set of agreements that really address a wide array of issues. At the same time, we obviously need to keep our eye on the ball. Antitrust issues will continue to be important for us, just as they are going to continue to be important for a number of other leaders in our industry. We're going to have to do an excellent job implementing these agreement. We are going to have to do an excellent job addressing any new issues that arise in the future. Having said all that, I also think it is fair to say, as Commissioner [Neelie] Kroes did when she spoke in Brussels, this does represent the closing of one chapter and gives us the opportunity to open a new chapter. We're definitely enthused about that opportunity and we're committed to ensuring the next chapter is a positive and constructive one.
One of the things that Steve Ballmer talks a lot about in terms of antitrust issues is getting legal clarity on what one can and can't do. Do you feel like you now have that understanding with the EU?
Smith: I think this gives us a great deal more clarity. I think it gives the industry as a whole more clarity. It's perhaps most helpful in the area of interoperability because it really implements a new framework. It applies to a broad array of Microsoft products--Windows, Windows Server, Exchange, SharePoint--and for all of these products it has certain principles that we have to adhere to. It addresses the way we implement file formats.
At the same time, no advance on any single day can ever answer all questions for all companies for all time.
Essentially the EU has said through its very objections that you can't put a media player in Windows and you can't put a browser in Windows. What do you feel Microsoft can include in future versions?
Smith: There are two things to think about. First is what gets included in Windows, and second, what's the right way to address something that is included.
Our basic approach is to include in Windows, software that has APIs (application programming interfaces) that will be beneficial for other applications to call on and use. The browser is definitely an example of that. It's quite probably even more important in that role today than it was, say, when the browser issues first arose in the 1990s. The media player plays a similar role in terms of some broad APIs that are used by a wide variety of other applications.
There are other things that we have put in Windows in the past that don't necessarily involve the same role. A good example of that is Windows Live Messenger. We had Windows Messenger in Windows XP. It's not in Windows Vista or Windows 7 We're trying to make thoughtful decisions about what is included.
Then the second question that arises is how do things get included. How do we document APIs that our browser is using so that other browsers can use them as well? That's part of the U.S. consent decree.
How do we ensure that [computer makers] have flexibility to offer competing choices? How do we ensure that consumers are aware of competing choices and can use them if they wish. That latter part is an area where different governments have chosen different approaches at different times. The U.S. Department of Justice chose one approach in its consent decree. The Korean Fair Trade Commission chose a second approach. The European Commission in the media player case in 2004 chose a third approach. Today's announcement on the browser reflects the European Commission choosing a fourth approach.
Some people have the opinion that as a result of these different antitrust issues, Microsoft really finds itself with one hand tied behind its back as it competes in the battles of today. Do you believe Microsoft in the current antitrust environment competes on an even footing with some of the other Internet giants?
Smith: I do believe it is very important for all technology leaders in our industry to follow the same laws and obey the same rules. The rules don't necessarily apply in the same way when a company has a small market share as it does when a company has a large market share. But there are a number of companies that have large market shares for very important products. We've taken a number of steps to get into line with new legal rules in this field. The law has evolved and we've needed to evolve to address these new obligations.
We do believe our competitors need to play by the same rules. They've often been at the forefront of asking regulators to evolve the law in new directions. Now that the regulators have done so, we believe they need to pay attention as well.
Do you anticipate a period of time over the next few years where Microsoft is more likely to be the subject of antitrust inquiries or the company on the other side of the table for a change?
Smith: I think that we have addressed a very wide array of issues. Perhaps, in part because we were the first company to have to go through these inquiries, at least since the dawn of the PC era. We've probably had to go farther and sooner than other companies have had to do. We're now in an era where a different company seems to be in the headlines for competition law issues, if not every day, at least every month.
I think that what we are going to see in the next decade is this field of law being applied to a wide number of technology leaders that have high market share. We're going to see that, not only in Washington and Brussels, but we're likely to see that in more countries around the world simply because the global economy has evolved.
Have you expressed concerns specifically to Europe or Washington, D.C., about some of Google's behaviors?
Smith: We were very transparent last year when Google entered into its agreement with Yahoo. We felt that that was an illegal agreement that Google had entered into for the sole purpose of preventing Microsoft from becoming a more successful competitor, together with Yahoo, in the search space.
It was only when the Department of Justice informed the parties that it was on the verge of filing suit that Google decided to drop that agreement. We have not been shy about raising concerns when we have them.
It was only a couple hours after you guys settled with Brussels that we heard from D.C. with regards to Intel. When you initially heard that the FTC was filing suit against Intel, did you have feelings of empathy toward what their lawyers are going through, or what were your initial reactions?
Smith: I obviously know from a lot of firsthand experience the challenges that arise when a company needs to address these kinds of issues. Our road was a long one and it had its share of difficult moments. Antitrust issues are never easy for company to address.
This isn't a case where Microsoft has taken a public stance or even voiced to the regulators a position, is it?
Smith: We have not taken any public or nonpublic positions on the issues.
Are you guys looking to reach an agreement with Plurk? You guys said that you used code you shouldn't have? I'm curious if you are trying to negotiate some sort of settlement with them?
Smith: I wouldn't want to say anything that goes beyond the public statement we put out.
It does seem when I look at any particular issue with regards to the Internet, Microsoft tends to have a much more cautious approach. It seems like it is tough to compete when others are bundling more than you.
Smith: I think our goal is to be thoughtful but also fast-moving. As we look at the Internet today, it is increasingly a regulated space. That wasn't the case a decade ago. I think a thoughtful company needs to really think through how its products and services are going to comply with the regulations that are going to be enforced or likely to be applied in many different countries around the world. At the same time, one cannot let that get in the way of moving forward quickly. I think it's striking that balance that is really quite important. One needs to move fast. One shouldn't move faster than speed of thought and yet one shouldn't be so thoughtful that one simply analyzes problems and fails to solve them.
Do you think Microsoft has erred a little too much on side of caution in recent years?
Smith: I don't know that we've erred too much on the side of caution, but I do think it's extremely important we move quickly. This is a very dynamic space it is certain to remain a very dynamic space. Customers are interested in deploying new products and services, whether it is on the client, on the server, or on the cloud. The real key is to develop the capability to be both thoughtful and fast moving.
Microsoft said on Tuesday that a blogging application posted to its MSN China site did in fact copy code from a rival.
Microblogging site Plurk lashed out at Microsoft on Monday saying that the Juku application stole its user interface and code. Microsoft said on Monday that it was investigating the matter and suspended the Juku service on Monday night.
Microsoft has said a third party and not it or its Chinese joint venture partner wrote the Juku program.
"The vendor has now acknowledged that a portion of the code they provided was indeed copied," Microsoft said in a statement. "This was in clear violation of the vendor's contract with the MSN China joint venture, and equally inconsistent with Microsoft's policies respecting intellectual property."
Microsoft said it is now suspending access to the Juku beta "indefinitely."
"We are obviously very disappointed, but we assume responsibility for this situation," Microsoft said. "We apologize to Plurk and we will be reaching out to them directly to explain what happened and the steps we have taken to resolve the situation."
Plurk has not said what, if any, action it will take against Microsoft. In a blog posting on Monday, it said it is still evaluating its options.
"We're still in shock asking why Microsoft would even stoop to this level of willfully plagiarizing a young and innovative upstart's work rather than reach out to us or innovate on their own terms," Plurk said in the blog.
It's the second time in recent weeks that Microsoft has been accused of lifting code. It was forced to pull a Windows 7 download tool after that product was found to contain open-source code. Microsoft blamed a third-party vendor in that case as well.
The company also said it and its Chinese joint venture "will be taking a look at our practices around applications code provided by third-party vendors."
Plurk accuses Microsoft China of ripping off its design and code to create its Juku microblogging service.
(Credit: Plurk)Microsoft said late Monday that is suspending access to an MSN China microblogging site amid allegations the service is based on code swiped from a rival.
Canadian start-up Plurk lashed out at Microsoft earlier on Monday, saying that 80 percent of the code for Juku appeared to be lifted directly from its service.
Microsoft reiterated late Monday that it is investigating the matter but issued a statement saying it was pulling down the Juku feature while it looks into things.
"Earlier today, questions arose over a feature developed by a third-party vendor for our MSN China joint venture," Microsoft said in a statement. "Because questions have been raised about the code base comprising the service, MSN China will be suspending access to the Juku beta feature temporarily while we investigate the matter fully."
Microsoft added that the investigation was slowed by the fact that when questions were first raised it was the middle of the night in China.
"Now that the day has begun in China, our teams are working hard to track down the information," Microsoft said.
The company also confirmed what a source previously told CNET, namely that Microsoft's MSN China joint venture "contracted with an independent vendor" to create the MSN Juku feature, which debuted last month and is still in beta.
Earlier on Monday, Microsoft said it was investigating the issue.
For its part, Plurk said it is still trying to decide how to handle things.
"We're not entirely sure but we are exploring our options," Plurk said in its blog posting. "We have been seeking advice from respected colleagues, responding to press inquiries and gathering facts on the timeline of events and parties involved here to understand why and how this took place."
It's the second time in recent weeks that Microsoft has been accused of lifting other's work in its products. Last month, the company was forced to pull down a tool for loading Windows 7 onto Netbooks after allegations that the product improperly included open-source code. Microsoft later apologized and last week re-released the tool under the GPL open-source license. Microsoft also blamed a third-party vendor in that case.
Plurk accuses Microsoft China of ripping off its design and code to create its Juku microblogging service.
(Credit: Plurk)Microsoft said on Monday afternoon that it's investigating allegations that a recently launched microblogging site in China lifts the code and interface of a start-up's rival service.
"Microsoft takes intellectual property seriously, and we are currently investigating these allegations," company spokesman Mark Murray said in a statement. "It may take some time due to the time zone differences with Beijing."
Earlier on Monday, Canada's Plurk went public with charges that Microsoft's Juku service "rips off" the look and feel of its microblogging service and also appears to use more than 80 percent of the same code, all without permission.
"Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but blatant theft of code, design, and UI elements is just not cool, especially when the infringing party is the biggest software company in the world," Plurk said on its blog.
Plurk said it is still evaluating what to do in the case.
"We're not entirely sure but we are exploring our options," Plurk said. We have been seeking advice from respected colleagues, responding to press inquiries and gathering facts on the timeline of events and parties involved here to understand why and how this took place.
It's the second time in recent weeks that Microsoft has been accused of lifting other's work in its products. Last month, the company was forced to pull down a tool for loading Windows 7 onto Netbooks after allegations that the product improperly included open-source code. Microsoft later apologized and last week re-released the tool under the GPL open-source license.
Update, 5:50 p.m. PT: A few more details are starting to trickle in.
According to a source familiar with the situation, the Juku application was created for MSN China, which is a joint venture between Microsoft and a Chinese company. However, the source says the application was not designed by Microsoft or the joint venture, but rather by a third-party Chinese vendor hired for the task.
If that sounds a bit familiar, Microsoft also blamed a vendor for the Windows 7 download tool that contained GPL code. Contracting with vendors is typical, and Microsoft typically requires that the third party provide legal guarantees that the code is free of any intellectual property infringement.
As of this point, the Juku program continues to run on the MSN China site.
Plurk accuses Microsoft China of ripping off its design and code to create its Juku microblogging service.
(Credit: Plurk)Microsoft on Thursday said it has started licensing the technology behind another flash memory format.
.JPG){kind=logo}
The company announced a program to license out the Extended File Allocation Table (exFAT) format, which is an updated version of the file allocation table format. Microsoft also licenses out that format, though its patents there have been the subject of contention, particularly since many distributions of Linux include the FAT formats.
The newer format, exFAT, can work on far larger-capacity devices than its predecessor--256 terabytes, as opposed to 32GB for FAT. It also allows for faster file saves on Secure Digital Extended Capacity cards and is more extensible than its predecessor, Microsoft said.
"There has been an explosion in the use of rich audio and video files," David Kaefer, general manager of Intellectual Property Licensing at Microsoft, said in a statement. "ExFAT is an ideal file system that delivers fast and reliable use of audio and video files."
Kaefer added that exFAT is an important technology in Windows 7. "Now that we are licensing this technology broadly to the industry, we want to encourage and support partners to build products that also contain this technology."
Sony, Canon, and Sanyo have already signed up to license the format, Microsoft said.
For certain device categories, such as cameras, camcorders, and digital photo frames, Microsoft is charging a flat $300,000 license fee, while companies that want to use the format in devices such as phones, PCs, and networks will have to pay a volume-based license fee.
Microsoft has been on a push to license out more of its intellectual property since December 2003.
Because of its ties to Linux, the licensing of the FAT technology has been among Microsoft's more controversial moves, resulting in significant efforts to have Microsoft's patents declared invalid.
The patents related to the FAT formats were among those Microsoft included in its suit against TomTom. The two sides later settled the patent dispute.
Windows 7 isn't just getting good reviews, it's also selling well, CEO Steve Ballmer told shareholders Thursday.
Delivering opening remarks at Microsoft's shareholder meeting, Ballmer said that Windows 7 was off to a "fantastic start."
"We've already sold twice as many units as any OS in a comparable time frame," Ballmer said. "Windows 7 is simply the best PC operating system that we or anyone else has ever built."
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer delivers a point at the company's Worldwide Partner Conference in July.
(Credit: Microsoft )By last week, Windows 7 accounted for 4 percent of Web-accessing devices, according to Net Applications; it took Vista more than seven months to reach that level.
Addressing the overall economy, Ballmer reiterated that things seem to have stabilized.
"The economy has, at least for now, leveled off," he said.
The meeting is still going on and has just entered the question-and-answer session and I'll update this post if anything interesting comes up. So far, though, it's been mostly about local and legislative matters, rather than technological issues.
Microsoft vs. Apple
There was one fun one from a shareholder who noted that young people tend to gravitate toward Macs and that Apple seems to be outmarketing Microsoft.
"You've got a real bad image out there," the shareholder said. "You sure don't have that younger generation."
Ballmer acknowledged that there are "certainly always opportunities for improvement."
"We all watch television," he said.
That said, Ballmer noted that "96 times out of 100, worldwide, people choose a PC with Windows."
He added that even in the toughest market--the high end of the U.S. consumer market--Windows is chosen 83 times out of 100.
"That doesn't let us rest on our laurels," Ballmer said. "Apple has picked up a couple tenths of a percent of market share."
But those couple tenths matter, he agreed. He said the downturn in the economy has actually bolstered Windows' competitive position. "People understand that Macintoshes are quite a bit more expensive."
Another questioner asked why Microsoft can't better compete against Apple's iPhone and other smartphones.
"Certainly our objective is to have the leading position," Ballmer said. "I think we have a lot of opportunity to improve...Undoubtedly we've got our work cut out for us."
He did say that Microsoft has put a lot of smart people on the task.
"We've got our heads down to do our best," Ballmer said.
Microsoft has halted distribution of its Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool after questions were raised as to whether the software utility makes improper use of open-source code. The tool is designed to help owners of Windows XP-based Netbooks get Windows 7 onto their machines.
(Credit: Microsoft)
Microsoft has halted distribution of a tool aimed at making it easier to put Windows 7 on Netbooks amid allegations that the utility makes improper use of open-source code.
The software maker said on Tuesday that it has pulled down the Windows USB/DVD Tool while it investigates the issue, which was raised last week by Windows blogger Rafael Rivera on his Within Windows blog.
_270x48.JPG){kind=logo}
In his blog post, Rivera said Microsoft appears to use code from a tool called ImageMaster that is licensed under the GPLv2 open-source license. The General Public License, like other open-source licenses, allows code to be freely used by others, but has its own set of terms and conditions, such as sharing any modifications made to the code.
Microsoft confirmed it has launched a review of the matter and taken the utility off its online Microsoft Store until that inquiry has been completed.
"Microsoft is looking into this issue and is taking down the (Windows 7 updating) tool from the Microsoft Store site until its review is complete," the company said in a statement. "We apologize to our customers for any inconvenience."
Though somewhat arcane, the utility is important because it solves a technical challenge in upgrading the operating system on Netbooks and other PCs without an optical drive.
Microsoft had been exploring for months different ways of trying to help users of Windows XP-based Netbooks move to Windows 7. The tool, which was released last month alongside Windows 7, allows users to take a downloadable copy of the operating system and create a bootable drive.
The issue is also a thorn in Microsoft's efforts to show that it can play nice with the open-source community. As ZDNet blogger Mary Jo Foley notes, this isn't the first time Microsoft has been accused of misusing GPL code.
The latest dust-up comes as Microsoft is celebrating the third anniversary of its deal with Novell, one of Microsoft's biggest--and most controversial--efforts to blend its world with the open-source world.
Under that deal, Microsoft agreed not to sue Novell customers for their use of its Linux distributions.
Microsoft has also released a number of products under various open-source licenses itself, though typically not under the GPL, which it sees as one of the more restrictive licenses. Redmond has been particularly critical of terms in version 3 of the GPL.
The software maker did release a few Linux drivers under GPLv2, although it appears its hand may have been forced there. Some have suggested the drivers contained GPL code, meaning that they would have necessarily needed to be released back under the GPL.
Microsoft has taken a number of different approaches to open-source software, particularly Linux. The software maker has at times accepted the notion of a heterogeneous world where Linux and Windows co-exist, pledging to do better to make sure IT administrators can manage mixed environments.
At other times, Microsoft executives have lashed out, painting open-source software as violating hundreds of Microsoft patents. In its lawsuit against TomTom earlier this year, Microsoft for the first time made those accusations in court, alleging that TomTom's implementation of Linux in its GPS systems infringed on Microsoft patents. The two companies quickly settled the matter, although terms were not disclosed.
It was only a matter of time, but the T-Mobile Sidekick issue has now spilled over to the courthouse.
A number of lawsuits have been filed, including two filed in federal court in Northern California on Wednesday that allege both negligence and false claims on the part of Microsoft and T-Mobile.
T-Mobile Sidekick LX
(Credit: CNET)The suits come amid a massive outage of the service that powers the Sidekick, which has hampered data service since early this month and left many users without access to their calendars, address books, and other information. At one point, Microsoft and T-Mobile indicated that any data not yet recovered was probably lost permanently, however the companies said Monday that they were more optimistic about being able to bring back users' information.
One suit, filed on behalf of a Bakersfield, Calif., man "and all others similarly situated" charges that, among other things, Microsoft and Danger failed to use reasonable care in handling Sidekick owners data and that the Sidekick was falsely advertised. That suit seeks monetary damages as well as an order requiring the companies to fix the Sidekicks and service or offer a full refund.
"T-Mobile and its service providers ought to have been more careful the use of backup technology and policies to prevent such data loss" said Ira P. Rothken, an attorney working on that case. "We are hopeful that T-Mobile and the rest of the defendants will do the right thing, use this as an opportunity to redesign the system as a new standard for cloud computing storage, and provide full compensation for the data loss."
Another suit, filed on behalf of Maureen Thompson "and all others similarly situated" seeks unspecified damages for Thompson and others who have lost data as a result of the recent Sidekick problems.
According to her lawyer, Thompson owns a Sidekick used primarily by her daughter, an aspiring model, singer, and songwriter who used her Sidekick to store personal and business contacts, appointments, and even irreplaceable song lyrics not stored anywhere else. The lawyer said that Thompson bought the device "primarily because T-Mobile promised that any data would be protected and available no matter what happened to the phone."
"T-Mobile's initial efforts to reimburse Sidekick users are a step in the right direction, but fail to sufficiently compensate Sidekick users for this disastrous loss of data," Thompson attorney Jay Edelson said in a statement. "T-Mobile and Microsoft promised to safeguard the most important data their customers possess and then apparently failed to follow even the most basic data protection principles. What they did is unthinkable in this day and age."
In that lawsuit, Thompson's lawyers argue why the outage of the Sidekick was particularly devastating, noting the device's cloud-based architecture in which the primary copy of the data is stored, not on the devices, but on servers operated by Microsoft's Danger unit.
"Further complicating the data loss is the fact that Sidekicks, unlike iPhones, BlackBerrys and other smartphones, are not designed to sync locally with a user's personal computer without additional software and hardware," the suit states. "This means that most users were not able to backup their data locally, but were encouraged and required to rely on Microsoft/Danger."
Microsoft declined to comment on the lawsuit, but, a representative said on Wednesday that the company is "obviously very sorry for the inconvenience that this situation has caused Sidekick users, and we are working around the clock in an effort to recover and restore the data for any affected users. While it is still too early to say for sure, we announced on Monday that our engineering teams were increasingly optimistic."
For its part, T-Mobile said in a statement that it "does not comment on pending litigation."
"We are focused on helping our Sidekick customers recover from this recent service disruption and are continuing to support Microsoft's ongoing efforts to address and resolve the Danger platform issues," the company said.
T-Mobile has halted sales of the Sidekick amid the ongoing issues.
Microsoft's top lawyer said that a tentative agreement with Brussels announced earlier Wednesday could potentially allow the software maker to move out of the regulatory crosshairs, perhaps paving the way for regulators to shift their attention elsewhere.
"It's important for us to get closure in Europe on issues that have obviously been controversial for over a decade," General Counsel Brad Smith said in an interview. "Today's decision takes us an important step closer to doing that."
Smith
(Credit: Microsoft)Microsoft initially took a much different approach to the European Commission's assertion that the inclusion of a browser in Windows violated antitrust law. The company had initially proposed just stripping out the browser from Windows 7 entirely, leaving users the prospect of trying to get a browser on their own. The software maker eventually backed down after indications that that approach was unlikely to fly.
While not final, Microsoft's moves would appear to resolve all of its outstanding regulatory issues with the Commission and were greeted warmly by regulators on Wednesday.
Although most of the early attention focused on the agreement around a browser "ballot screen," Microsoft also announced on Wednesday an agreement around product interoperability. Under that deal, a 10-year commitment by Microsoft, the software maker agrees to publish communication protocols and adopt certain standards as part of Windows, Windows Server, Office and other high market share products. Companies could also purchase for 5,000 euros a warranty that would subject Microsoft to court oversight and monetary penalties if it doesn't live up to its commitments.
Smith said that the approach Microsoft took with regard to interoperability was designed to adopt methods that Nellie Kroes, commissioner for competition, had outlined in a speech last year for how companies with high market share products should behave.
"I actually think this in effect implements the model that the Commission has been advocating," Smith said. Moreover, he said it is a model that other software companies should pay attention to, he said, noting that there are lots of companies that have high market share. He noted that Google has 78 percent of the paid search market and IBM has 100 percent of the mainframe market, while Adobe also has dominant positions in certain areas, such as Photoshop.
"It is important we believe to create a level legal and regulatory playing field," Smith said. "Everyone that has a high market share needs to respect the same set of rules. I think a number of these rules are likely to be applicable to other companies and other products."
Settling now with Brussels also could help Microsoft in its effort to win approval for its search deal with Yahoo, Smith said.
"This certainly isn't going to hurt when it comes to the Yahoo-Microsoft agreement," he said. "It's not necessarily going to make a huge difference. We didn't feel a particular step was needed to help it along."
Microsoft is in the process of trying to ascertain whether the deal needs approval from Brussels or from individual European antitrust authorities. It also needs approval from U.S. regulators, who have asked for more information on the deal.
European Union regulators said Wednesday that Microsoft can go ahead and start using its latest proposed "ballot screen," which will let new users of Windows choose which browser--or browsers--they wish to use.
The decision to let Microsoft "market test" the latest version would seem to mark the wrapping up of the latest antitrust skirmish with Brussels.
More than a decade after Microsoft first started including a browser with Windows, regulators said earlier this year that they had reached the preliminary view that such an inclusion violated European antitrust law.
In response, Microsoft initially said it would ship Windows 7 in Europe without a browser at all, seemingly challenging the logic of the decision by the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU. However, amid indications that such a move would not fly, Microsoft in July offered a proposal that more closely matched what regulators and competitors wanted--a ballot screen that lets users choose which browser or browsers they wish to install.
Since then Microsoft, regulators, and competitors have been going back and forth about how that screen would look and operate.
"The improvements that Microsoft has made to its proposal since July would ensure that consumers could make a free and fully informed choice of web browser," Europe's antitrust authority said in a statement. Among the changes since Microsoft's July proposal is the agreement by Microsoft to add more information before users select a browser. Microsoft will now first present users with a screen explaining what a browser is and will then offer "Tell me more" buttons for each browser.
Under the revised proposal, Microsoft would, through Windows Update, make available for five years in the European Economic Area a screen allowing users of Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Windows 7 to choose which Web browsers they want to install. PC makers will also be able to install competing Web browsers and, if they choose, set those as the default browser and disable Microsoft's Internet Explorer.
"The Commission's preliminary view is that Microsoft's commitments would address these competition concerns and is market testing Microsoft's proposal in light of these requirements," The EC said in its statement.
For its part, Microsoft said it welcomed the European Commission's decision.
"For Microsoft, today's decision is a significant step toward closing a decade-long chapter of competition law concerns in Europe," general counsel Brad Smith said in a statement.
Update: Smith also spoke to CNET about the deal and its potential impact on others in the industry. Click here to read that interview.
