Comments on: Opera executive praises EU move

In an interview, Christen Krogh, the top developer of the browser, says the European Union is right to protect consumer choice in its latest move against Microsoft.

[forever4now]

The issue, as someone described it in another article, is that Microsoft expressly forbids OEMs from installing another browser on the desktop. If this is true, then there definitely IS an issue.

MSFT should be forced to unbundle IE from Windows and allow OEMs to install whatever default browser they want. This decision could be based on regional preferences or negotiated deals with browser vendors (like they do with anti-virus software, etc.).

The same should apply to media players. The OEMs should be able to install WMP, or any other player.

[dhavleak]

Actually that's not true.

MS does not, (and since the US DOJ ruling, cannot) place such restrictions on OEMs.

In other words, it's been almost a decade since MS had that luxury. Even prior to that MS didn't stop OEMs from including other browsers. They did stop OEMs from offering other OS options (but again, the US DOJ stopped that a while ago).

[dhavleak]

btw:

MS supplies versions of windows stripped of Media Player in Europe and Korea because of antitrust rulings there. Guess what -- nobody buys them!

There's nothing about windows that prevents OEMs from adding browsers/players.
There's nothing about windows that prevents customers from adding browsers/players.

[bershi]

Yes, this is a rare case where government intervention is necessary on the web. We cannot allow a dinosaur to stop the web from progressing. Microsoft's grip on the browser "market" has enabled them to veto new standards from being used. If users had a real choice, they would not pick IE and we could make progress again.

I was saddened when the US gov dropped their case. EU have now picked up the challenge and I wish them well.

Part of the fine that Microsoft must pay should be spent on writing difficult test cases for web standards so that we can make sure that *all* browsers comply.

[iphonedied]

Government intervention is a joke. Politicians always make matters worse, they ruin a free economy. Don't like Windows or Microsoft? Don't buy their crap!

Written using Firefox running on top of Ubuntu Linux.

BTW, we have well over 100 senior citizens in a senior care center in my town using Ubuntu and Firefox. I set up the environment and administration takes a whopping 1 hr/month for 32 PCs. I overheard a teenager visiting his grandmother last month remark "Wow! Gram's got a butta 'puter! Dad, your Mac is toast!" (I am guessing that meant nice computer and Dad's Mac isn't worth beans.

Bottom line is, nobody is forcing anyone to use IE. If you want to be a Lemming, fine. But for godsakes, keep your stinkin government out of it!

[ZetaZeta_]

Isn't Google currently working with Dell to put Chrome on their machines? Why wouldn't they be able to install what they want? They install Google Desktop when Windows Search 4.0 exists, etc.

[Mark_Anderson]

This would be relevant if Opera weren't fourth (or is it fifth) choice in browser preference by a wide margin.

I mean what next? Are they going to complain about Apple bundling Safari with OS X or Ubuntu being bundled with Firefox?

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

[plings]

Mark_Anderson, it is you who are "stupid stupid stupid".

Whether Microsoft has broken the law or not does not depend upon Opera's market position. Microsoft did break the law, so they are to blame for this, not Opera.

Neither Apple nor Mozilla have monopolies and they are not breaking the law, so there is no reason to complain about them. Please educate yourself before spewing nonsense.

Opera is the browser of choice for mobile phones, by the way, a market with actual competition.

[Mark_Anderson]

Really?

According to the EU MS are breaking the law by bundling a browser that enables you to download another browser of your choice. Can you please tell me how this is different to OS X bundling Safari or Ubuntu bundling Firefoix?

I use Opera on a Samsung Omnia which runs Opera and it's great but let's face it - Opera are a distant third or fourth and the alternative choice of browser on desktops is Firefox which has accumulated a 25-30% share in Europe despite the fact it has to be downloaded in most instances.

So what the EU are doing is stating that we should stop allowing MS to bundle IE in to Windows so people can choose the browser they want, download it and use it.

Brilliant! I'm glad my tax Euros are being so well spent!

[jrfree]

It is high time someone knocked the EU down off their high horse. If they don't like what MS does, then they don't have to buy the product. If Opera and the rest want to whine and cry, then why don't they spend the billions in development and produce their own operating system. With the internet becoming more and more a part of everyday computing, it is Microsoft's right to put whatever they want as part of their product. I disagreed with the EU's judgement on the whole media player thing, and I disagree with this. Any developer is certainly free to put out their own product that will work with whatever operating system they choose. That is the nature of free enterprise, and it is not Microsoft's 'fault' that they have such a large market share, it is a measure of their success. The EU has no right whatsoever to dictate terms, and although Microsoft won't do it due to obvious financial implications, it would be great to see them say 'fine, from this day forward we won't sell or support any Windows OS in the EU, have fun on your Macs and Linux boxes!' All this malarky about competition and consumer choice in the market is a ploy by companies that produce products like Opera to increase their own profits at Microsoft's expense. If such a judgement is handed down, then MS should lock down their code and start charging companies like Opera for access to the API's to make their software work on Windows - after all it IS Microsoft's product that is the platform, and it is they who have spent the time and money in the first place.

[reate]

It's high time someone took on Microsoft. They weaseled their way out of the US governments case -- probably by contributing to George W Bush's campaign. It's not that easy to buy off the EU.

[dhavleak]

[double take] It's high time someone took on Microsoft? [/double take]

1. EU and Korea force MS to offer Windows versions in their areas without Media Player in it. *Nobody* buys these versions. Yet MS has to take the costs to make them available.

2. EU fined MS $794 million in 2004 over the media player bundling, and documentation of protocols/apis.

3. In Dec. 2005 the EU started fining MS $2million per day for not providing protocol and api documentation. MS had already provided EU with the documentation, but the EU claimed that it was not sufficient.

4. On July 12th 2006, the EU fined MS an additional $450 million for the same reason, and threatened to raise the fine to $4.8 million by July 31st if MS did not comply. That's 19 days, FYI.

5. On September 2007, the EU turned down MS's appeal, and also ruled that MS would have to foot 80% of MS's legal bills.

6. On Feb 2008, the EU fined MS $1.44 Billion (with a 'B' this time - pls note) for non-compliance with the March 2004 ruling.

7. Now, Opera has sued MS and is about to be gifted a nice pay day check courtsey of the EU.

btw -- this non-compliance that the EU keeps complaining about? First they said the documentation wasn't sufficient. So MS went over everything, and added detail where requested etc. Then they said the documentation (of protocols and APIs) was not in the right format. So MS worked with them to figure out what format they should provide it in, and then reworked all the documentation. This *reeks* of dishonesty on the EU's part -- if they were really so interested in the documentation, they would have worked simultaneously with MS and would have been pointing out flaws during the process instead of after. You don't need 20,000 pages of documentation to specify the format you want.

You can draw your own conclusions... I for one think it's high time someone cut MS some slack..

[bershi]

@dhavleak

Opera hasn't sued Microsoft -- EU has sued (or indicated that they will one day)

Opera stands up for web standards and has nothing to gain financially.

The best they can hope for is that the distribution model for browsers changes from monopolistic force-feeding to free choice.

Personally, I favor free choice.

[dhavleak]

@bershi --

* Opera hasn't sued Microsoft -- EU has sued (or indicated that they will one day)
>> Opera filed an antitrust complaint with the EU

* Opera stands up for web standards and has nothing to gain financially.
>> Opera claims it has lost countless sales due to IE being bundled in Windows. That's financial motive by any yardstick.

* The best they can hope for is that the distribution model for browsers changes from monopolistic force-feeding to free choice.
>> Free choice already exists. Nothing stopping OEMs from pre-installing a different default browser. Nothing preventing OEMs from offering a choice at first boot. Nothing preventing users from installing a different browser and making it the default. Nothing but choices.

* Personally, I favor free choice.
>> It's me who favors free choice. You are projecting your dislike of IE on everyone else.

[plings]

dhavleak:

Filing an antitrust complaint is the equivalent of reporting a crime. Opera reported a crime to the EU. It is Microsoft which broke the law.

Whether Opera has financial motives or not is irrelevant. What's relevant is whether Microsoft broke the law or not, which they did.

OEMs have in fact been sopped from pre-installing a different browser by Microsoft, which has forced them to keep IE.

That users can install a different browser doesn't change the fact that Microsoft broke the law.

This is not about disliking IE. This is about Microsoft breaking the law.

[dhavleak]

@ plings --

"Filing an antitrust complaint is the equivalent of reporting a crime."
>> Filing an antitrust complaint is actually more like suing someone in civil court.

"Whether Opera has financial motives or not is irrelevant."
>> How so? Financial motivation is a key factor in filing the case.

"What's relevant is whether Microsoft broke the law or not, which they did."
>> Not true. I'll refute this point towards the end of this post.

"OEMs have in fact been sopped from pre-installing a different browser by Microsoft, which has forced them to keep IE."
>> Not true. Your repeating it doesn't make it so.

"That users can install a different browser doesn't change the fact that Microsoft broke the law."
>> The fact that users and OEMs can install different browsers means that choice exists -- i.e. MS did not break the law.

"This is not about disliking IE. This is about Microsoft breaking the law."
>> This is all about disliking MS and disliking IE, and the EU treating MS as a cash cow. You can keep repeating that 'breaking the law' nonsense as many times as you want -- but that doesn't make it true. This is also about the EU trying to limit the dependence on a US company in European IT. It's 100% politics, 0% ethics, 0% technology.

About the breaking the law point you keep harping on about:
1. A browser is an integral part of an OS because users need browsers to 'run' online applications (webmail, online banking, social networking, photo sharing etc.). They have an expectation that any OS enable this straight out of the box. The classic computer science definition of an OS cannot apply to the market.
2. Choice exists:
- OEM can pre-install a different browser, set it as default, hide IE icons, etc.
- OEM can offer choice of browsers on first-boot
- Users can always install other browsers and set as default.

Hence, MS is well within it's rights to include IE in Windows -- so it broke no law.

[eudefender]

@dhavleak
"1. EU and Korea force MS to offer Windows versions in their areas without Media Player in it. *Nobody* buys these versions. Yet MS has to take the costs to make them available."

Microsoft riddicules the competition authorities by slavish compliance. Nobody will ever get them a second chance to do that.

"2. EU fined MS $794 million in 2004 over the media player bundling, and documentation of protocols/apis.
3. In Dec. 2005 the EU started fining MS $2million per day for not providing protocol and api documentation. MS had already provided EU with the documentation, but the EU claimed that it was not sufficient."

This is what the investigation concluded, what an independent expert appointed by Microsoft concluded. This is also what the competitors said. Microsoft delivered useless documentation for interoperability. It did not provide the information it was ordered to provide.

"4. On July 12th 2006, the EU fined MS an additional $450 million for the same reason, and threatened to raise the fine to $4.8 million by July 31st if MS did not comply. That's 19 days, FYI."

Because still no compliance.

"5. On September 2007, the EU turned down MS's appeal, and also ruled that MS would have to foot 80% of MS's legal bills."

Not the EU, the court of first instance blew the MS lawsuit against the Commision away because it was baseless. They were right on the fact that Microsoft had no right to appoint the expert that delivered the opinion. Thus 80%, not 100%.

Microsoft decided not to appeal and the Commission reached a dinner deal with Ballmer and even bowed in to the baseless charge of "trade secrets" in interface documentation.

"6. On Feb 2008, the EU fined MS $1.44 Billion (with a 'B' this time - pls note) for non-compliance with the March 2004 ruling."

A settlement for continued non-compliance. Pocket money for Microsoft.

"7. Now, Opera has sued MS and is about to be gifted a nice pay day check courtsey of the EU."

Opera filed a competition complaint in 2007. Now there is a statement of objections to which Microsoft has the right of a hearing and a right to respond. Instead we will see the political bullying against competition authorities once again,

As tying is illegal the legal facts and the court precedence speak in favour of the Norwegian company. The authority is like a court, one complains the Commission investigates, investigates the case, hear the party and its arguments and issues a ruling. Every market player expects you to comply. Microsoft was the first company that refused to comply, a novelty in competition enforcement in the EU. If you fail to comply with the ruling you get punished.

If you are sentenced by a judge to two weeks of community work for a crime and you don't comply with the ruling, the court will issue an arrest warrant. It is similar in the competition case despite that the means of criminal enforcement are not available.

[FilledOut]

To appease Opera, Microsoft if forced to unbundle IE, should just bundle FireFox, or maybe Mosaic, but not Opera as one of two or three choose from browsers. Oh well, time to remove the handheld Opera browser and get a fox.

[reate]

Opera's strong position in the mobile market -- hey, Opera mini is a champion -- shows what they could have done if allowed to compete fairly on the desktop.

[dhavleak]

Quite the opposite, my furry friend -- it is irrefutable proof that bundling is does not stifle competition.

There is not a single smart phone OS that does not ship with a browser bundled on it. Not a single one. And no -- Opera Mini and Opera Mobile are not part of any of those OSes. Yet, Opera manage to do well in the mobile realm. Ergo, bundling does not hurt them.

You know what does hurt them? There is nothing compelling about Opera on the desktop that causes users to install their browser. Don't get me wrong -- Opera is a fine browser -- I like it a lot. But what does it do that would make somebody seek it out? Absolutely nothing.

[bershi]

@dhavleak

Of course bundling harms competition.

IE would have far fewer users if it hadn't been for bundling.

Would you willfully have downloaded IE (30MB?) and rebooted your machined to use a sub-standard browsers. Few people would.

[tm_anon]

@reate
Opera has a fair competition with Firefox, Flock, Chrome and any browser that is not IE. Opera has less users than any of the browsers I named.

@dhavleak
Two problems with your argument.
1)Most IT departments control what is and is not able to be installed on a companies machines, this includes the browser.
2)By bundling IE into MS, the IT department has no need to go out and find another browser which may in fact be better than IE.

That's just one example of why bundling can and does stifle competition. It's not the fault of the IT department, they're simply trying to protect company assets. If given a choice of browsers on installation, they'd most likely do some research to decide on the best candidate and then install that one before locking down the computer.

[cwlqwp]

@ tm_anon

i've been at several companies where the IT departments just install firefox on all of the computers it really isn't that hard for them to do.

[plings]

dhavleak:

Bundling alone does indeed NOT stifle competition. However, Microsoft's illegal abuse of its monopoly power DOES.

Opera on the desktop is smaller, faster, more secure, and has more features that are better integrated into a complete package, and blah blah blah. Just because YOU don't like it or see a reason to use it doesn't mean that no one does.

[plings]

tm_anon:

Opera has more users than Chrome. GOogle says Chrome has 10 million users, while Opera has more than 30 million users.

Opera has more users than Flock as well.

Your comparison fails for the other two browsers, though. Opera is the only independent browser. The others are either backed and funded by huge corporations (Mozilla) or use browsers as a loss leader (Chrome).

[dhavleak]

@blings -- you make a huge logical mistake here:

The different business models for Flock/FF/Opera/Chrome actually invalidate Opera's case. They simply prove that Opera has not figured out a viable way of monetizing their product -- and that is nobody's fault but Opera's.

[mlclark2]

am i missing something? an average american buys a new pc, goes home, and it has NO browser on it at all..... how does this work? how is the average pc user supposed to figure out FIRST how to connect to the net, SECOND how to download a different browser like opera or firefox with one not pre-installed? it's not like microsoft prevents you from using IE to download and install a competing browser... this seems totally retarded.

disclaimer: i'm a mac user, and as soon as i got the computer i downloaded firefox via safari. so who the heck cares what browser comes pre-installed? anything that gets me back to my browser of choice is just fine.

[forever4now]

I think the key issue is that Microsoft forbids OEMs from installing another browser on the desktop. If this was not the case, you would get a PC with whatever browser the PC vendor decides to install on it (IE, Firefox, Chrome, Opera, ...). If you don't like the one that is installed, you could download a different browser and uninstall the one they provided.

In the case of IE, you can't uninstall it, so it stays on your PC occupying disk space even if you never use it.

[reate]

Downloading and installing other browsers is a hassle and Microsoft knows it. Their substandard browser leads users to Microsoft's own sites and technologies. Its poor support for standards makes sure the web never develops into something that can compete with Silverlight.

[cwlqwp]

@forever4now
Microsoft does not forbid OEMs from installing another browser

and if you look up IE or how to uninstall it you'll realize why they made it so you cant uninstall it easily (though it can be done, but you should read the full page of warnings that accompany all the instructions on how to do it that i saw). It is integrated deeply into thee operating system and without it installed many parts of windows will not run properly.
fyi

[celticbrewer]

I'm with you, clark. There has to be a browser installed to at least go download a different browser. The first thing I do when installing windows is download firefox. The last thing we need is for machines to come pre-loaded with more crap like Opera that no one wants. There's a fine balance between providing necessary tools and adding bloatware & 60 day trials of junk utilities.

[plings]

mlclark2:

"an average american buys a new pc, goes home, and it has NO browser on it at all..... how does this work?"

OEMs will preinstall a browser.


cwlqwp: Microsoft DOES forbid OEMs from installing another browser. And it CAN be uninstalled, as demonstrated in the trial in the US. If MS has tied it even more tightly into the OS after that, it's Microsoft's own fault. Furthermore, you can leave the engine for other applications, but remove the parts that make up the rest of IE.


celticbrewer: Machines will not come preloaded with multiple browsers. Machines will come preloaded with one single browser -- the one OEMs choose to install. Your argument is a straw man.

[JasonCe]

Next thing you know, some idiot utility app vendor will blame Microsoft for shipping Notepad/Wordpad and Calculator with Windows.

Wake up. It's the 21st century. Web browsers are an integral part of any connected device. Just like calculators and shells.

It is also quite funny that these "consumer advocates" do not complain about Apple bundling Safari with OSX and countless other operating systems (not just PCs, including mobile devices like smartphones) bundled with their own choice of browser.

It is about grabbing some more money from Microsoft and giving EU software industry unfair competitive advantage. DEFINITELY NOT about consumers...

[seven7dust]

well no one can complain about Apple because
they make both the hardware and the software !
So they can choose wat software to add and remove without barriers and EU rulings !
one of the many benefits of a closed system !

but ya the EU is clueless about computers ! and should not get involved !
I bet you someone is paying for this to happen !

[reate]

Browsers are the most important application of the 21st century and you shouldn't be allowed to use a monopoly from the previous century to control the browser market. EU is focusing on what matters here: who will control the web and web standards in the future. Their case is just.

[dhavleak]

@ seven dust: care to explain a bit further why it's ok in Apple's case? I don't understand why being "more closed" makes it completely ok?

[seven7dust]

@dhavleak
It's because Apple is a OEM , meaning they make their own computers
So they choose wat Browser or other software thats pre-installed on the machines
there's no third party involved, So Apple have complete control on everything
it's also why you Don't see n e pre-insalled crapware on their machines

many people look down on closed systems, But they have many potential benefits !

[bershi]

@dhavleak

Apple isn't a monopoly, as per antitrust law.

[iphonedied]

@ bershi,
Microsoft is not a monopoly. We have a free market, anyone can choose. Monopolies only exist when EVIL GOVERNMENT gets in the middle. I don't run MSoft on anything in my home. 7 systems running Ubuntu, 3 RedHat Enterprise and 1 Sun.

So knock off the government loving double-speak. I hate Microsoft, but they have no monopoly. I hate Apple, but they have no monopoly. I hate all government even more, and they have a monopoly. I hate the EU more than any government body on Earth ('cept the frigging triple corrupt UN) and try to get them to cough up their power. Ain't gonna happen without lots of munitions and millions rioting in the streets. Now THAT is a stinkin monopoly!

[dhavleak]

@ bershi: "Apple isn't a monopoly, as per antitrust law."
>>> So a particular offense is acceptable at 10% market share but unacceptable at 90% market share? As Apple's grows, at what % market share do you recommend they be told that they should not bundle Safari any more, and why?

@seven7dust: "It's because Apple is a OEM , meaning they make their own computers. So they choose what Browser or other software thats pre-installed on the machines. there's no third party involved, So Apple have complete control on everything"
>>> You forgot to explain why this is okay. You confirmed my point about Apple's model offering no choice -- but did not explain why it's ok.

"it's also why you Don't see n e pre-insalled crapware on their machines. many people look down on closed systems, But they have many potential benefits !"
>>> Yes, it works extremely well for them -- no denying that. As Apple continues to see success, and the EU continues to fine MS, Apple's share may eventually rise beyond MS's. At what point along the way should we stop celebrating their closed approach? Or perhaps we should just have consistent rules that apply to all players irrespective of market share?

[plings]

@JasonCe: If it can be shown that MS has broken the law with Notepad/Wordpad, go ahead. They broke the law in the browser market. Browsers are an integral part, and OEMs will supply the browser rather than Microsoft. The Apple comparison completely misses the point since Apple is not a monopolist. Finally, Opera will not make a single dime from this.

[plings]

@dhavleak: I notice that you continue to spread your ignorance.

1: Indeed, monopolist have to play by different rules. If you have 90% of the market, you can't do what you could when you had 10%.

2: It's OK for Apple because Apple is not a monopolist

3: Various governments are already looking at Apple, so don't you worry about that.

[eadeguzman]

The EU was very happy with the fine they accepted from Microsoft... So they are trying to juice Microsoft some more.

Watch out Google, Apple! (I believe many US companies now are on trial by the EU.)

[reate]

The fine was insignificant, both for Microsoft and the EU. Further, it wasn't very effective. What the EU should demand is that Microsoft start shipping standards-compliant browsers: having Opera AND Firefox would be nice on the Windows desktop when you start up a new machine.

[ranpha]

@reate

Firefox and Opera are not full standard-compliant, just like Internet Explorer. Both of them are more compliant of course, but there are no browser in this planet that has implemented all the specs in CSS3 and HTML4/XHTML1.1.

You seem to know a browser that is fully standard-compliant, care to enlighten us here readers of CNet?

[bershi]

@ranpha

Look at the various browsers' approach to the famed Acid tests. Safari and Opera fight to comply first, Mozilla follow up when their shipping schedule allows, and Micrsoft must be dragged by their feet only after thousands of people in the web standards community scream and shout for years.

Please EU, make sure Microsoft complies. There's no point in them driving on the left side and everyone else driving on the right.

[cwlqwp]

eadeguzman is right

The EU is probably running out of tax revenue and decided that it could grab some quick cash by suing foreign companies.

[dhavleak]

@ reate -- "Having Opera AND Firefox would be nice on the Windows desktop when you start up a new machine."

Safari runs on Windows as well. Next, Apple will sue MS, Mozilla, and Opera for colluding to stifle Safari sales. When MS buckles and adds Safari, AT&T will sue because their browser (Pogo) is at a disadvantage. When MS buckles and adds Pogo, Flock will sue because they are at a disadvantage...

On first-boot you will have to select your default browser. At some point the list will become so large -- some browser maker will sue MS because their browser appears on the *second page* of options -- so they have a very low probability of being selected..

[plings]

@dhavleak: Your ignorance is astounding.

Opera did not sue Microsoft. Opera reported to the EU that MS was breaking the law.

There is no need to preinstall multiple browsers. The OEM you buy the computer from will install a single browser of his choice.

[Hunnter2k3]

People have been wondering on here and the other article how to get another browser if they don't have one in the first place.

There are a few options they could do:
1) Have a list of web browsers, which when clicked will download using FTP of wget
2) Have other browsers "lite" versions pre-installed with them
3) Cut down IE to a bare-bones shell (maybe even use an open source renderer), get rid of the kernel link and replace that with a more secure version for network browsing.
Also have a version for those who still require usage of ActiveX and custom IE interfaces.

I'm liking 3 myself. Microsoft really need to focus on doing other things, their browser is so outdated, the speed in IE7 is quite terrible, as well as the GUI.
They really should just give up with this one... it is too much of a hassle, they just can't keep up. (or won't, almost as if they are trolling the entire web community)

[forever4now]

You would always get a browser. It just might not be IE.

[dhavleak]

@ Hunnter2k3

Great list of options -- these are so sensible -- now I'll have to educate my grandparents on all these choices so they can make the right one. I can see that you're really concerned about the consumer there..

Get real dude. Most computer users don't care about these politics. They just want a functioning computer with minimal effort possible.

[plings]

@dhavleak:

The obvious answer is that OEMs will preinstall the browser of their choice.

[bershi]

One of the first things that the newly elected president George W Bush did was to cancel case that US government had against MS. This was obviously a political favor towards a contributor. It's good that the EU takes on the case. Browsers are getting ever more important and Microsoft should not get away with using monopolies established in the previous century to retain control of the web.

[eadeguzman]

Nobody has control of the web. No one will. If anybody has an semblance of control over the web, it would not be Microsoft, it would be Google.

The browser is so overrated. IE has always been there, so how did Google take the search crown?

The US government should protest this. It's outrageous.

[reate]

Yes, and they've used that control to prevent web standards to take hold. Very sad for the SVG specification which is supported by all browsers but IE. As a result, SVG doesn't see any use on the web.

[iphonedied]

@ bershi, You really need to get a grip on reality. I don't like GW but I hate government even more. GW didn't "cancel the case against MS" Sheez, you think people will believe it just because you wrote it?

Anyone, just Google Microsoft Anti-Trust Department Justice and you will see the truth.

Bershi, I suggest that you move to China since you love evil government control so much. In the meantime, I am going to fight like heck in the USA to cut the evil choke of government from every party.

Written on the open standards free browser Firefox, running on top of the open standards free OS Ubuntu.

What do you bet that you use Apple, from the evil empire of the tyrant Steve Jobs? Love that control over you, don't you? :-{P

[applehazelnut]

Um... So is Apple going to get hit by a lawsuit by including Safari with Mac OS X too?!?

AND TO THE MORE OBVIOUS POINT:

So um... If you don't include a web browser with your operating system (like how ubuntu has firefox), how exactly are you going to get on the internet to download Opera? BY MAGIC!!!!! Because everyone has Internet Protocol built into their brains.

I always knew Europeans where magical little elves. :)

[seven7dust]

Since Apple is a OEM they can do wat ever they want !

but MS should seriously screw the EU and stop selling windows there
that would be a sight to see !

[reate]

Europe is doing the right thing here. While the US government gave up its case when Bush came to power, the EU takes on Microsoft. They should have done it before, but it's not too late. This web thing is going to be around for a while.

[plings]

@applehazelnut

Apple is not a monopolist. Microsoft is. Monopolists have to play by different rules.

A browser will be included with all new PCs. The OEM will pre-install one for you.

[Lenter101]

I have Windows Vista on 3 computers and it has worked beautifully. I also have IE 8, Firefox and Google Chrome on all 3 computers. I downloaded Firefox and Google Chrome with IE 7, which came with Vista. I can't believe that the evil empire allowed me to do that. Surely, an organization, obsessed with monopolizing the OS and especially, the browser market, would not allow someone to download and install a competitors product with their software....would they?

Well, duh, they do and it was simple to do.

The Europeans are going to the well one time too many and risk a serious backlash from Americans over this abuse of power. Be careful EU comission, you may awaken a sleeping giant.

[bershi]

Personally, I'm happy that someone finally steps up to the challenge. We shouldn't let any giants terrorize us.

Microsoft has polluted the web long enough and need to clean up their act.

[tm_anon]

@Lentor101
Try uninstalling IE completely so that no trace is left on your machine. If you can do that without harming your OS, I'll agree to your point. If not, you have no point. With Ubuntu I can completely uninstall Firefox so that zero traces are left on my machine if I so choose. With Apple, you can completely uninstall Safari if you so choose. With Windows, if you try and uninstall IE you get warnings that this will destabilize your OS. They don't mind you using another browser as long as theirs is still around.

[cwlqwp]

@tm_anon

follow this link for instructions, it's in the second section (the first is just how to set another default browser)
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Uninstalling_Internet_Explorer

[plings]

@Lenter101

You are an ignorant fool.

Remember the antitrust case against Microsoft in the US?

That you personally can install another browser does not change the fact that Microsoft broke the law.

[jctrips]

the EU is simply reminding us why our ancestors left these socialistic states (countries). They simply cannot hang with americans so they stick their little whining fingers into something they are too incompetent and afraid to do themselves.

Let me bite off the hands that feed me.

[reate]

The EU is using antitrust law, one of the cornerstones of capitalism.

[cwlqwp]

err antitrust law marked the beginning the socialistic tendencies of the US

[plings]

@jctrips

Ignorant fool.

The EU is using antitrust laws, which also exist in the US.

In fact, a similar suit was brought against MS in the US.

But I guess it's only bad if those evil liberal commie Europeans do it :D

[SkateNY]

Eff Microsoft. They continue to throw their weight around as though they're a big player in a conintually shrinking game. Good for you, EU. Make them be accountable, just as every other individual in the world should be. So many Microsoft apologists posting here about how it's not Microsoft's fault that they created this situation. Bullsh#t. They made their bed, and they pay high-priced lawyers to prevent them from not sleeping in it.

Sorry to tell you MSFT investors, but the days of 20% returns are long gone, and they have been for a long time. Making excuses for you multinational conglomerate will not change their sad story.

Move on. Grow up. Do something different.

Oh, wait. You're a Microsoft acolyte. You don't know how to do something different, with the possible exception of making something called a "Zune." Good try, but not good enough.

[tadror]

I am happy that microsoft lost this one, their tyranny and greed are appalling BUT!!! and it's a BIG but...

I am definitely not going to cry over netscape, which were even more of an *******! I remember that during my first years of surfing the internet (before Microsoft, bless their souls, came out with their IE), Netscape browsers SOLD their browser for hard cash. And at the time I did not have the NIS 50.00 required to buy a Netscape browser, and I don't remember how I surfed, but the point is that IE was the first FREE of charge browser - both OPERA and NETSCAPE were available ONLY for purchase.

Today, I surf with both OPERA and IE, since both have their pros and cons.

[selytch]

What I don't get, is why MSFT would not improve it's IE? It sucks compared to any competition (does not matter firefox/opera/safari/chrome). It still does not support web standards. Have you tried acid3 on the new IE8beta? There rules, and there are M$ rules... I'm sick of sites exploiting IE "features" (i.e. bugs), not compatible with anything else, not even next version of IE....

[ranpha]

ACID3 compliance does not mean a browser is standard-compliant. It just mean that a browser can do certain things correctly.

[reate]

Microsoft isn't improving IE because they don't want standards to succeed. They'd rather have you use Silverlight than HTML5 and CSS3.

[bershi]

As a libertarian, I view government intervention with a sceptical eye. However, some basic rules must be laid down in our society. We must all derive on the same side of the road. Micrsoft has been driving on the wrong side for years and lots of accidents have happened. There must be a basic set of standards on the internet to avoid digital accidents (which materializes a time and frustraion for users).

Therefore, I welcome EUs intervention in this case.

[LordFlashHeart]

Windows is MS's software and they can put whatever features they want into it. Don't buy it if you don't like it. If everyone wants a level playing field, Lets also sue apple to get them to unbundle safari from their os or sue Google to get them to unbundle Google ad sense ads from showing up when we search so we can choose an ad provider we prefer. Let's also sue Saturn to unbundle their crappy engines from their cars as I prefer to have a Ferrari engine in my Saturn car. Lets also sue MS to unbundle notepad from their OS because everyone should be using ultraedit instead and no one will buy it if they have a free one already installed.

It's always MS's fault other companies can't sell or give away their "superior" products to all the people of the world

[iphonedied]

@bershi,
Libertarian my arse! ROTFLMAO @ U! You dictator loving government hugging wanna be controlled freak.

[J_J_Phellis]

@iphonedied

You seem to be highly frustrated by your government. My sympathies.

I do think it's compatible with libertarian views to support a basic set of rules, a foundation that establishes a level playing field.

A private monopoly like Microsoft is certainly not able to do so.

[bershi]

[sensi2]

Muhahahaha, I am always amazed at the misplaced 'patriotism', the usual reactionary whining of some of our American friends as soon the EU moves in to help ensure that fair competition which was always mistreated by Microsoft...

Windows should come with an array of browsers (IE, firefox, opera, safari, etc), and just ask which one to install at first use, Microsoft must provide to others browsers vendors all the relevant api & doc in order to allow their product to integrate themselves as IE is allowed to do within Windows. I should simply be able to completely remove IE from Windows.

[cwlqwp]

Your comment shows that you know nothing about how internet explorer works with windows and why it is necessary to have it installed on a computer running windows, you should look it up before you post such useless ideas.

[NicoVanDamus]

Microsoft is an American company, and most Americans can use Google to find a link to download Firefox, or Chrome, or Konqueror, or even the inferior and chronicly bug infested Opera browser - so is there is a knowledge barrier for Europeans to successfully do the same?

I dont follow the argument here. The EU is claiming that because Microsoft sells a product successfully, and because people in Europe buy this product because they enjoy using it, that it now must be dismantled?

That would be like a bunch of Americans showing up at an Italian Barilla pasta processing facility to demand that they use 50% imported ingredients from AMERICA because in Italy, they make thier pasta using only Italian ingredients. Does that make sense to you?

Should sausage makers in Germany now be required to import pigs from America so that its not an entirely German sausage? Maybe people like the fact that German food taste's uniquely German, and maybe some people purposely go out of thier way to buy Barilla pasta because it tastes better! And you know what? Maybe people in Europe purposefully buy Microsoft products because thats what they want!

Wow!!

Is this criminal thinking? Is the EU going to muzzle me now because I'm speaking with a FREE mind!?!?

Don't let your government tell you what to buy - YOU make that choice yourself.

[ZetaZeta_]

Stop thinking of IE as a browser. Think of it as the libraries and engines used for the Microsoft OS to use the Internet.
Oh, and you also happen to be able to browse with it, perfect for retrieving something that browses better.

[plings]

"Should sausage makers in Germany now be required to import pigs from America so that its not an entirely German sausage?"

Yet another comment that shows that this individual is completely ignorant of antitrust laws.

[iphonedied]

Awwww! Poor little Opera can't compete because users are too stupid to click one link and download their browser to install it.

Hogwash! I am no Microsoftie apologist, I don't even use their crappy browser. This is another attempt by a weak Western European cannot compete in a free economy company.

Get lost Opera! You had an OK browser 7 years ago, but have been passed up by the vastly superior Mozilla and Chrome browsers.

Written using Firefox running on top of Ubuntu Linux.

[plings]

@iphonedied:

Nice one.

Did you know that Microsoft logged antitrust complaints against Google in the US and EU?

Did you know that Google logged antitrust complaints against Microsoft in the US and EU?

Guess both of them are weak American cannot compete in a free economy companies then, by your logic!

[eudefender]

Competition laws are simple. When you are a monopolist you may not tie products.

Two scenarions:
a) IE comes preinstalled with Windows and some users download an additional browser. This results in a 70% market share for IE.
b) Users of windows or their OEM can select what browser to install while Microsoft may keep the essential IE libraries in the system.

Honestly, what would be the market share of IE if the market would decide which browser comes preinstalled

I assume that there is no pressure on OEMs not to include another browser as default. Maybe the Commission has actually evidence for that. You may wonder why it doesn't happen that your computer comes with FF preinstalled.

[v0dkacomradwe]

I have to agree with the anti-EU comments. You have to wonder how much is reality, and how much is hype. How much is legal recourse, versus economic terrorism and "entitlement" being attampted via the EU legal system. Don't know how many of you out there would agree with me, but I've had the feeling that this EU vs Microsoft thing isn't about the EU vs Microsoft at all...it's about the EU vs the US. Who does it really benefit when they claim ALL those millions or billions of dollars from Microsoft? The citizens of EU countries (not likely)? The tech companies in and having interests in (or "deals" with) EU countries? Maybe... The EU's pocketbook (probably)? If the EU needs money, I say go earn it and stop stealing from one of the most successful companies in the world. I too have to agree with alot of comments that Microsoft is getting a bad rap...it's like it's the "in thing" to tear down Microsoft...well they got the way they did for a reason...maybe all you people out there trying to paint a bad picture of Microsoft and hoist the penguin-sized Linux banners and the Apple flags ought to take a lesson from their success. Yeah you are the same weenies who championed Apple, who's going down the tubes, and Google who you said was going to be the web's answer to Microsoft...and they've turned out to be in some cases about 100x worse than any perceived or real evil that Microsoft has perpetrated! Sure Microsoft has done some things they shouldn't have done, and they've paid for that as they should! BMW and Mercedes are still in business, but they were HUGELY involved in the Nazi war effort. I find that offensive...maybe I should sue the EU, or just Germany? Gimme a greak Europe, go earn your money and stop stealing ours.

[cwlqwp]

i agree completely with just about everything you stated.

the only thing it think is different is that the EU is using the money to fill in for shortfalls from their tax revenue because the economies of member countries tend to be pretty weak. Their probably worried about making up for next years tax revenue losses from the economy and decided to sue microsoft to make up for some of it.

[J_J_Phellis]

Are things really that bad in the US? That the nation has to identify itself and be proud of Mircrosoft? That's like Italy being proud of the mafia.

[plings]

Bad EU.

BAD EU.

Enforcing their own laws?

COMMIES!

Never mind the fact that the US courts took MS to task for the EXACT same thing (violating antitrust laws).

GO AMERICA! BOO FACTS!

[saintseminole]

I don't see the problem. Maybe computers are different in Europe, but I thought we all had the choice to use whatever browser we wanted to. I've always used Windows computers, but I haven't used IE in years. Microsoft could not and DID not prevent me from installing Firefox, Opera, and others over the years.

Again, can someone explain what the issue is here?

[NicoVanDamus]

The issue is that the ruling oligarchy of the EU need reasons to justify thier bloated bureucracy.

[plings]

@NicoVanDamus

So how do you explain away the fact that the exact same kind of case was brought up in the US?