Opera, Microsoft, and competition: A plea for an end to the whining

Opera has launched a complaint against Microsoft with the regulation-happy European Commission, charging Microsoft with (gasp!) beating it mercilessly in the market. Opera failed to mention that other browsers like Firefox are doing just fine. Instead, it wants to turn its failure to be relevant into a case of victimhood.

My heart bleeds for Opera.

I have no love for Microsoft. I think that's clear from my writings. But I respect it as a competitor and despise companies that ask governments to rectify their own inability to build products that anyone wants.

Opera disagrees, insisting:

In its complaint to the European Commission, Opera said Microsoft hurts it and other makers of browsers because the protocols it uses in its Internet Explorer deviate from the standard protocols that define how Web sites work with browsers.

Because Internet Explorer is distributed with the ubiquitous Windows operating system, it has an insurmountable edge in market share, the complaint said. That forces Web-site owners to design their sites for Internet Explorer's particularities instead of the standard protocols, Opera said. That leaves alternative browsers, which Opera said adhere to the standards, at a disadvantage.

With all due respect to Opera, though there are sites that only seem to understand Internet Explorer (written by developers who barely deserve to carry that title, since all they seem to know how to do is piece together applications using Microsoft's tinkertoy tools), the number is so few as to be almost meaningless. I can't remember the last time I used one. In fact, if anything I've been forced into using Firefox because CNET only works with it (instead of my preferred Safari browser).

Such is life. Get on with it.

Mary Jo Foley is right: trying to set web standards through litigation like this is ill-advised and will likely result in consequence no one, including Opera, wants.

This isn't a case of Microsoft against Opera. It's a case of Microsoft against the industry, with equally powerful players (like Google) on the other side. Google doesn't need the EC to help it out. It has something called competition going for it. Regulation is a distraction.

Could it be that Opera emasculated its own efforts long ago by trying to sell a browser into a market that had decided that browsers are free? It changed this policy, but perhaps it would have been relevant had it not waited so long. Opera provides a good browser but, let's face it, there is no room in the market for a small independent browser. It's either community-based (Firefox) or corporate-based with a strong base offering (Apple, Microsoft).

Opera doesn't need the EC to wring a few Euros out of Microsoft for it. It should focus on competing for customers, not on regulating its way into relevance.

[andyw2112]

Matt, I think you miss the point. This is just a business equation for Opera. Every website needs to test it self against the standard set of most common browsers before they release for production. Certainly various version of IE are at the top of that list. Opera can certainly make a business decision (a) do I dedicated resources the track changes that MS makes or (B) maybe by spending some money on lawyers, they can try to force some level of standard compliance and cut thier cost for non-standard feature development by 50% (or what ever it is) .

[qwerty75]

MS is unfairly leveraging its illegal monopoly.

However, the reason Opera isn't as popular as it should be is that it started out as non-free. For that reason few people tried it. Thew one thing that software companies don't seem to understand is that a piece of software really only has one change to succeed.

The reason IE is "successful" is not because it is a quality browser, but because MS forced out the competition, forced OEM's to not pre-install anything else, and continued to leverage its monopoly. They have never paid for these illegal and unethical practices, so Opera has every right to try to make MS responsible for its actions.

[Christopera]

Funny, Opera seems to work perfectly on the CNET site. As a web developer I would often like to sue MS just for the painful hours of adjusting it takes to get sites to work on their browsers. Safari's compatability has also been much better than IE. So if FF, Opera, and Safari can do it why can't IE? I think it is about time that somebody gives them some stick over the situation.

[LilBambi]

Sure for the majority of people, most browsers will work fine. But any medical facility, doctor's office, hospital, etc. have systems built generally exclusively for Internet Explorer. Anyone in the medical field would be stuck in IE land, and more specifically the Windows World in order to get to their programs. All of these types of sites are built for IE in things like Visual Studio. Only parts of many of the pages will work with other browsers if it all. Do you want YOUR doctor looking at your records online through Internet Explorer ....shudder!

[plings]

"Opera failed to mention that other browsers like Firefox are doing just fine."

Just fine?

After a DECADE and billions of dollars spent, IE still has more than 80% market share globally.

"I have no love for Microsoft. I think that's clear from my writings. But I respect it as a competitor"

It's too bad that Microsoft abuses its position to prevent competition, then. How can you compete with a browser which is bundled with the dominant desktop OS, and which is still required on many sites to this day?